SENTERNOVEM
SOIL+, EXPERTISE ON SOIL AND SEDIMENTS
NEW RISK-BASED SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS IN
THE NETHERLANDS
Dr. Ton Honders WASCON 2009
THE TEAM
1. MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, SPATIAL
PLANNING AND HOUSING (VROM)
– Marc Pruijn, Herman Walthaus
2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH
AND THE ENVIRONMENT (VROM)
– Johannes Lijzen, Piet Otte, Arjen Wintersen
3. SENTERNOVEM / TASKGROUP SOIL+
MENU
1. NEW LEGISLATION ON SUSTAINABLE LANDMANAGEMENT:
– WHAT HAPPENED TO THE BUILDING MATERIALS DECREE ?
– THE PROCESS FOR IMPROVEMENT
– “FIT FOR USE” PRINCIPLE
2. DERIVATION PROCESS FOR SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS
– TYPES OF RISKS
– DEFINED LANDUSE SCHEMES
– RISK SCENARIO’S
– SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS
3. RISK ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS
4. AN EXAMPLE
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE BUILDING
MATERIALS DECREE (99-07) ?
Dutch soil standards
Lea cha bili ty Concentration Clean soil
Class I reusable soil
Class II reusable soil Non reusable
soil Non reusable soil
CONCENTRATION AND LEACHING STANDARDS FOR BUILDING MATERIALS, SOIL AND (AQUATIC) SEDIMENTS
EVALUATION BUILDING MATERIALS DECREE
1. POOR ENFORCEABILITY 2. RELATIVELY HIGH COSTS
3. LIMITATIONS FOR LOCAL TAILOR-MADE SOLUTIONS 4. UNPRACTICAL HANDLING / SAMPLING
PROCEDURES
5. LEGISLATIVE INCONSISTENCIES
PROBLEM AREAS
NEW SCIENTIFIC INSIGHTS
1. ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS (ECOLOGICAL, HUMAN TOXICOLOGICAL)
2. LEACHING MECHANISMS / LEACHABILITY DATABASES
TOWARDS IMPROVED LEGISLATION
THE PROCESS
03
- POLICY LETTER
• INCREASED REUSE OF SECONDARY MATERIALS • WHILST MAINTAINING SOIL PROTECTION
• IMPROVED WORKABILITY AND LOWER COSTS • BASED ON “FIT FOR USE” AND “STANDSTILL”
04-07- CONSULTATION AND DEVELOPMENT
• ALL STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED (PUBLIC & PRIVATE) • NEW ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS
• NEW RULES FOR APPLICATION OF BUILDING MATERIALS, SOIL AND SEDIMENTS
• QA/QC
“DEMING CIRCLE”
PUTTING LEGISLATION INTO PRACTICE AND
PRACTICE INTO LEGISLATION
POLICY FORMULATION COMMUNICATION IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION 5-10 YRS CYCLE
BASIC PRINCIPLES
“FIT FOR USE”
“ST
AN
DS
TILL”
THE DUTCH SYSTEM
SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT SITE REMEDIATION CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATION INTERVENTION VALUESOIL QUALITY STANDARDS AND
LANDUSE SCHEMES
AGRICULTURE NATURE
NEW SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS
1. BACKGROUND VALUES
2.
“FIT FOR USE”
– WHAT DO WE WANT TO PROTECT ? – DEFINED LANDUSE FUNCTIONS
– FOR EACH LANDUSE FUNCTION DEFINED RISK LEVELS FOR:
• HUMANS • ECOLOGY
• AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
3. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE LEACHING
STANDARDS ?
BACKGROUND VALUES
1. BASELINE SURVEY • 100 SAMPLING LOCATIONS • STRATIFIED SELECTION: • SOIL TYPE • LANDUSE• NO SUSPECTED ANTROPOGENIC CONTAMINATION
• DEPTH:
• TOPSOIL 0-10 cm
• SUBSOIL 50-100 cm
2. CHEMICAL ANALYSIS = 252 COMPOUNDS 3. COSTS = 1.5 MEuro
4. BACKGROUND VALUES
• TOPSOIL DATA
RISK-BASED SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS
PROTECTION OF: 1. HUMAN HEALTH 2. ECOSYSTEMS: • SOIL FUNCTIONAL PROPERTIES • ANIMALS • PLANTS 3. QUALITY OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTSDERIVATION OF SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS
1. POLICY:
– TARGET SPECIES TO PROTECT
– LEVEL OF PROTECTION
2. SCIENCE:
– TOXICITY OF COMPOUNDS
– MODELLING OF EXPOSURE
HUMAN RISKS
1. MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE RISK
– REFERENCE DOSE IN
g per kg Bodyweight per day
– DERIVED FROM EU AND WHO STANDARDS
2. MODELING OF EXPOSURE (CSOIL)
PATHWAYS (CSOIL MODEL):
– INGESTION OF SOIL PARTICLES
– CROP CONSUMPTION
– INHALATION OF INDOOR AIR
– DRINKING WATER
HUMAN RISKS – EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
conc entr ation in SOIL AIR
re prese ntati ve SOIL CONTENT
conc entr ation in P OR E WATER distribution over soil compartments transfer-processes direct exposure indirect exposure tr anspor t t o SOIL SURF AC E tr anspor t t o GROUN DW ATER upt ak e by / dep osit ion on VEGETABLES
dilut ion in IND OOR and OUTD OOR A IR
tr anspor t t o DR INKING WA TER
per meat ion in to DR INKING WA TER
ingest ion , in halat ion , der mal uptake of
SOIL
inhalation, der mal uptake of
AIR
consumpt ion of DR IN KING WATER , der mal contact , inhalation whe n
SHOWER IN G
consumpt ion of (R OOT and LEAF Y)
VEGETABLES
•
BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC
HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT (RIVM)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Concentration in soil (mg/kg) P A F ( p o ten ti ally aff ec ted f rac ti o n ) 1 10HC50 100 1000
ECOLOGICAL RISKS
AGRICULTURAL RISKS
1. BASED ON:
– FOOD QUALITY CRITERIA
– PRODUCT CRITERIA FOR ANIMAL FODDER
– ANIMAL HEALTH
– FYTOTOXICITY
2. GENERALLY BASED ON MEASURED
SOIL PLANT CONCENTRATIONS
AGRICULTURAL RISKS
THE MODEL
Soil crop soil – plant relation Soil crop Soil –plant relation animal consumption Soil ingestion Soil - plant consumptionSoil Crop relation
Animal Organ or productkidney/liver/meat Transposition to
organs
RISK SCENARIO’S
1. DEFINED LANDUSE SCHEMES
2. LEVELS OF PROTECTION OF
DEFINED RISK SCENARIO’S
LANDUSE ECOLOGICAL PROTECTION HUMAN -CROP CONSUMPTION HUMAN – INGESTIONRESIDENCE AVERAGE LIMITED AVERAGE KINDERGARTEN AVERAGE NONE AVERAGE VEGETABLE GARDEN AVERAGE HIGH AVERAGE AGRICULTURE AVERAGE LIMITED AVERAGE
NATURE HIGH NONE LOW
ROADSIDE SHOULDERS
MODERATE NONE LOW
SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS - LEAD
LANDUSE ECOLOGICAL RISKS HUMAN RISKS AGRICULTURAL RISKS NATIONAL VALUE RESIDENCE 214 270 - 210 KINDERGARTEN 214 360 - 210 VEGETABLE GARDEN 214 70 50 50 AGRICULTURE 210 270 50 50 NATURE 50 1800 - 50 ROADSIDE SHOULDERS 515 1800 - 530 INDUSTRY 515 1800 - 530WHAT HAPPENED TO THE LEACHING STANDARDS
FOR “INFRASTRUCTURAL WORKS” > 5000 m3
=> CONCENTRATION
=>
LE
AC
INSTRUMENTS
“SANSCRIT”
RISK TOOLBOX
UNLIMITED APLICATION
CASE STUDY – RISK TOOLBOX
1. CENTRE OF AN OLD TOWN (MAASTRICHT)
2. CONTAMINATION FROM:
– RANDOM GARBAGE DUMP FROM THE MIDDLE AGES – METALLURGICAL AND CERAMIC INDUSTRIES
– FLOODING
3. SEVERAL SOIL QUALITY ZONES BASED ON
CONTAMINATION CONTOURS
HUMAN RISKS
Groe n m et na tuur waa rden Moe stuin Spe elpl aats en Wone n m et tui n Arseen Cadmium Koper Kwik Lood Nikkel Zink 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 R is ic o i n d exHUMAN RISKS –
(EFFECT OF BIO-AVAILABILITY)
Groe n met natuur waa rden Moe stuin Spe elplaa tsen Wone n m et tui n Arseen Cadmium Koper Kwik Lood Nikkel Zink 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 R is ic o i n d exMaastricht_ophoging - humane risico's - P90
Groe n m et na tuur waa rden Moe stui n Spe elpl aats en Wone n m et tui n Arseen Cadmium Koper Kwik Lood Nikkel Zink 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 R is ic o i n d ex
Maastricht_overig - humane risico's - P90 Verminderde beschikbaarheid lood
ECOLOGICAL RISKS
Bebou wing/ indu strie (7) Groe n (6) Moe stuine n (3) Spe elpl aats en (2) Wone n tui n (1) Arseen Cadmium Chroom Koper Kwik Lood Nikkel Zink 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 R is ic o i n d exAGRICULTURAL RISKS
Maastricht_overig - landbouw risico's Inclusief gemeten lood in aardappel
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Zink in snijmais Zink in gras voor Schaap Zink in gras voor Koe Zink in biet Lood in aardappel Cadmium in Vlees van Schaap Cadmium in Vlees van Koe Cadmium in tarwe Cadmium in snijmais Cadmium in sla Cadmium in Nier van Schaap Cadmium in Nier van Koe Cadmium in Melk van Koe Cadmium in Lever van Schaap Cadmium in Lever van Koe Cadmium in gras voor Schaap Cadmium in gras voor Koe Cadmium in biet
SUMMARY
1. POLICY DECISONS ON “FIT FOR USE” PRINCIPLE 2. BASED ON THOROUGH RISK ANALYSIS
– LANDUSE SCHEMES
– LEVELS OF PROTECTION
– ECOLOGICAL, HUMAN AND AGRICULTURAL RISKS
3. SOFTWARE TOOLS AVAILABLE
4. TO ENSURE PROPER PRACTICAL APPLICATION
QUESTIONS ?
FURTHER INFORMATION: • www.vrom.nl • www.rivm.nl • www.bodemplus.nl • [email protected] • www.sanscrit.nl • www.risicotoolboxbodem.nl • [email protected]APPLICATION MATRIX
LANDUSE AGRICULTURE / NATURE RESIDENCE INDUSTRY APPLIED SOIL QUALITY AGRICULTURE / NATUREYES YES YES
RESIDENCE NO YES YES
