
| REACH | Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals |
|
| Informationsportal | Sitemap | Kontakt | Impressum | |
|
Metals in the Environment |
|
Kurzbeschreibung und Folien der Hauptvorträge des Workshops/abstracts and presentations of the workshop Ms. Wiebke Drost (UBA) presented the concepts of the tiered approach taking metal bioavailability into account. It was stated that bioavailability is an important issue, because it would be an improvement for the hazard assessment to know how much of the toxicant is taken up from the different environmental phases. However, it is not clear cut which of the abiotic and biotic parameters determine the bioavailability. The guidance for metal risk assessment under REACH suggests a tiered approach which was briefly introduced. This concept considers the free ionic form of the metals to be the most bioavailable form. Depending on whether a risk has been identified or not, availability of physico-chemical data and availability of a speciation model or Biotic Ligand Model for the metal regarded an adequate tier-level has to be selected . The free metal ion concentration is considered the as the most relevant form for uptake. However apart from geochemical conditions which control free metal concentration, bioavailability is additionally a result of contaminant/particle interaction and can be superimposed by organisms' activity. Hence, the question arises whether this tiered approach indeed reduces the uncertainty or do new uncertainties emerge?
Mr. Joachim Heidemeier (UBA) summarized the requirements and consequences of considering bioavailability in the regulatory content. The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EU) sets out a comprehensive framework for European water management. Aiming at reaching good ecological and chemical status for the European water bodies a water management is organized in river basin districts using a transparent approach with a clear-cut timeframe. Regulations regarding pollution from chemical substances refer to: priority substances and priority hazardous substances (PS and PHS), set out in Annex X, which are of community wide relevance and substances of regional concern, set out in Annex VIII. For the PS and PHS Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) have been stipulated in Directive 2008/105/EU, for the substances of regional concern EQS shall be developed by the member states using a harmonized approach, also stipulated in the WFD. One important step in the management cycle is the status determination of so called “water bodies”, the smallest units covered in the WFD. To that extent, the member states use three comprehensive monitoring networks with different tasks, consisting e.g. of approximately 7000 surface water monitoring stations in Germany. If the assessment of the water body does not show the status “good”, the competent authorities must investigate the causes of the failure and implement measures in order to reach the status “good”. As these measures address the polluter for financing, the status determination must be based on clear and litigable decisions. When drafting regulations for this decision process, scientific sophistication is one among several conflicting objectives e.g. required monitoring efforts and costs, transparency of the decision process or required time for results, which need to be balanced.
Soil Environmental Quality Standards derivation in the context of the Water Framework Directive The Dynamics of Metal Accumulation and Toxicity Relationships (BIMBAM) Experience of Metals Risk Assessments in the Existing Substances Regulation Process: Technical Committee for New and Existing Substances discussions Metal toxicity to macroinvertebrates in mine-affected streams, related to chemical speciation Weitere Dokumente/further documents
|
| Glossar |
| Links |
| Veranstaltungen |
|
Februar 2010 |