|
|
xiii | |
|
|
xv | |
Acknowledgments |
|
xvii | |
About the Editors |
|
xix | |
Workshop Participants |
|
xxi | |
|
|
1 | (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 | (1) |
|
1.2 Workshop Objectives and Topics |
|
|
2 | (3) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
Chapter 2 Setting Environmental Standards within a Socioeconomic Context |
|
|
5 | (26) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
2.2 Social and Economic Context |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
2.2.2 Social Aspects of Standard Setting |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
2.3 Typological Issues in Understanding Standards |
|
|
6 | (5) |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
2.3.2 Why Does Terminology Matter? |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
2.3.3 Why Are Different Types of Standards Necessary? |
|
|
8 | (1) |
|
2.3.3.1 Standards for Different Purposes |
|
|
8 | (1) |
|
2.3.3.2 Selecting the Right Standard for the Job |
|
|
8 | (3) |
|
2.4 Framework for Deriving a New Standard |
|
|
11 | (17) |
|
2.4.1 Problem Formulation |
|
|
12 | (1) |
|
2.4.1.1 Why Is a Standard Needed? |
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
2.4.1.2 Who Needs to Be Involved? |
|
|
13 | (2) |
|
|
15 | (1) |
|
2.4.1.4 Social and Economic Questions |
|
|
16 | (1) |
|
2.4.1.5 Stakeholder Analyses |
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
2.4.1.6 Check Rejection Criteria |
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
2.4.2 Developing a Specification |
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
|
19 | (1) |
|
2.4.2.2 Form of the Standard |
|
|
19 | (1) |
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
2.4.2.4 Consideration of Costs and Benefits |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
2.4.3 Deriving a Standard |
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
2.4.3.1 Integrating Scientific, Social, and Economic Factors |
|
|
23 | (1) |
|
2.4.3.2 Understanding the Relationship between Exposure and Effects |
|
|
23 | (2) |
|
2.4.4 Implementation of Standards |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
2.4.4.1 Meeting a Standard |
|
|
26 | (1) |
|
2.4.4.2 Allowing Flexibility |
|
|
26 | (1) |
|
2.4.4.3 Taking Socioeconomic Factors into Account |
|
|
27 | (1) |
|
2.4.4.4 Importance of Feedback |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
|
29 | (2) |
|
Chapter 3 How Should an Environmental Standard Be Implemented? |
|
|
31 | (16) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
3.2 Types and Uses of Standards |
|
|
31 | (5) |
|
3.3 Essential Features that Allow Implementation of a Standard |
|
|
36 | (7) |
|
3.3.1 Using Standards to Guide Decision Making |
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
3.3.1.1 Absolute Limits versus Ideal Standards |
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
|
38 | (3) |
|
3.3.3 Application of Ideal Standards to Other Media |
|
|
41 | (2) |
|
3.4 Other Implementation Issues |
|
|
43 | (4) |
|
3.4.1 Geographical Scope of Standards |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
3.4.3 Forcing Technological Innovation |
|
|
44 | (1) |
|
3.4.4 Verification and Review of Standards |
|
|
44 | (1) |
|
3.4.5 Implementation Analysis Report |
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
Chapter 4 Water and Sediment EQS Derivation and Application |
|
|
47 | (58) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 | (3) |
|
4.2 Specification and Recording of EQS Derivation Procedures |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
4.3 Selection and Evaluation of Data for Deriving Water and Sediment EQSs |
|
|
51 | (10) |
|
4.3.1 Selection and Prioritization of Substances for EQS Setting |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
4.3.2.1 Species Selection |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
|
51 | (3) |
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
4.3.2.4 Sediment-Dwelling Organisms |
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
4.3.4 Data Requirements of Different EQS Assessment Methods |
|
|
55 | (6) |
|
4.3.5 Use of Toxic Body Burdens for Assessing Sediment Toxicity |
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
|
61 | (7) |
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
4.4.1.1 Standard Test Species Approach |
|
|
62 | (2) |
|
4.4.1.2 Species Sensitivity Distributions |
|
|
64 | (2) |
|
4.4.1.3 Predictions from Model Ecosystem (Microcosm and Mesocosm) Data |
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
4.4.2 Selection of the Most Appropriate PNEC or EQS Derivation Method |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
4.4.3 Corrections for Bioavailability |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
4.5 Short- (MAC) and Long-Term (AA) EQSs and Implications of Exceedance |
|
|
68 | (1) |
|
4.6 Marine and Freshwater EQS Derivation |
|
|
69 | (3) |
|
4.6.1 Need for Separate Marine and Freshwater Standards |
|
|
69 | (3) |
|
4.6.2 Marine Toxicity Data Requirements |
|
|
72 | (1) |
|
4.6.3 Substitution of Freshwater for Marine Data (and Vice Versa) |
|
|
72 | (1) |
|
4.7 Use of Microcosm, Mesocosm, and Field Data |
|
|
72 | (2) |
|
4.7.1 Introduction to Microcosm and Mesocosm Tests |
|
|
72 | (1) |
|
4.7.2 Use of Microcosm, Mesocosm, and Field Studies for EQS Setting |
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
4.7.2.1 Use of Existing Studies |
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
4.7.2.2 Use of New Microcosm and Mesocosm Studies |
|
|
74 | (1) |
|
4.8 Calculated Estimates of Toxicity |
|
|
74 | (2) |
|
4.9 Background Contamination by Naturally Occurring Substances |
|
|
76 | (3) |
|
|
76 | (1) |
|
4.9.1.1 Identifying Background Concentrations |
|
|
76 | (2) |
|
4.9.1.2 Modifying Metal EQSs to Account for Background |
|
|
78 | (1) |
|
|
78 | (1) |
|
4.10 Protection of the Human and Wildlife Food Chains from Aquatic Contaminants |
|
|
79 | (3) |
|
4.10.1 Protection of the Food Chain --- Humans and Wildlife |
|
|
79 | (1) |
|
|
79 | (1) |
|
|
80 | (1) |
|
4.10.2 Protection of Drinking Water |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
4.10.3 Protection of Recreational Water |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
4.11 Consideration of Carcinogenicity, Mutagenicity, and Reproductive Toxicity, Including Endocrine Disruption |
|
|
82 | (5) |
|
4.11.1 Background to Carcinogenicity, Mutagenicity, and Reproductive Toxicity |
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
4.11.2 Carcinogens, Mutagens, and Aquatic Organisms |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
4.11.2.1 Population Perspective |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
4.11.2.2 Deriving PNECs for Genotoxins |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
4.11.2.3 Genotoxicity Assessment Methods |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
4.11.3 Reproductive Toxins, Endocrine Disrupters, and Aquatic Organisms |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
4.11.3.1 Population Perspective |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
4.11.3.2 Reproductive Toxicity and PNEC Derivation |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
4.11.3.3 Reproductive and Sexual Development Toxicity Assessment Tools |
|
|
85 | (2) |
|
4.12 Validation, Implementation, and Review of Aquatic EQSs |
|
|
87 | (5) |
|
4.12.1 Validation of Aquatic EQSs |
|
|
87 | (1) |
|
4.12.1.1 Validation of Correct Derivation |
|
|
87 | (1) |
|
4.12.1.2 Validation of EQS in the Field |
|
|
87 | (1) |
|
4.12.2 Validation Procedures |
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
4.12.3 Use of Microcosm, Mesocosm, and Field Studies for Validation Purposes |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
4.12.4 Criteria for Triggering a Review of an Established EQS |
|
|
90 | (2) |
|
|
92 | (2) |
|
|
94 | (11) |
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
|
95 | (10) |
|
Chapter 5 Derivation and Use of Environmental Quality and Human Health Standards for Chemical Substances in Groundwater and Soil |
|
|
105 | (22) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.1 Introduction and Scope |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
5.2 Starting Point for the Development of a Terrestrial or Groundwater Standard |
|
|
106 | (3) |
|
5.3 Further Considerations in Soil Quality Standard Setting |
|
|
109 | (1) |
|
|
109 | (1) |
|
5.5 Exposure Models --- Use in Standard Setting |
|
|
110 | (3) |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
5.7 Relevance and Reliability of Data |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
5.7.1 Selection of Data prior to Standard Setting for Data-Rich Substances |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
5.7.2 Use of Surrogate Data for Data-Poor Substances |
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
5.8 Assessment Factors --- Extrapolation and Soil Quality Standard Derivation |
|
|
115 | (2) |
|
5.9 Availability and Bioavailability |
|
|
117 | (2) |
|
5.9.1 Ecological Risk Assessment |
|
|
117 | (1) |
|
5.9.2 Human Health Risk Assessment |
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
5.10 Background Concentrations |
|
|
119 | (3) |
|
5.10.1 Added Soil Quality Standard Approach |
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
5.10.2 Refinement of the Total Soil Quality Standard Approach |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
5.10.2.2 Correcting the Quality Standard for Differences in Chemical Availability |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
5.10.2.3 Correcting the Quality Standard for Differences in Bioavailability |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
5.11 Verification of the Standard |
|
|
122 | (2) |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
|
124 | (3) |
|
|
125 | (1) |
|
|
125 | (2) |
|
Chapter 6 Workshop Conclusions and Recommendations |
|
|
127 | (6) |
|
|
|
Index |
|
133 | |