Summary of A Protocol For The Derivation of Environmental and Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines (En) PDF

Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines PROTOCOL
for the Protection of Environmental SUMMARY

and Human Health
Summary of
A Protocol for the Derivation of Environmental and Human
Health Soil Quality Guidelines (CCME 2006)
Contents
INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1 Investigation of Contaminant Toxicology ........................................................ 11
Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines....................................................................... 1 Threshold Contaminants.............................................................................. 11
What is the Soil Protocol?................................................................................... 2 Non-threshold Contaminants....................................................................... 12
Guiding Principles............................................................................................... 2 Estimated Daily Intake................................................................................. 12
USE OF CANADIAN SOIL QUALITY GUIDELINES ......................................... 3 Assumptions ...................................................................................................... 12
ENVIRONMENT...................................................................................................... 4 About Exposure Scenarios........................................................................... 12
Level of Ecological Protection and Relevant Endpoints .................................... 4 About Pathways, Receptors, and Land Uses ............................................... 13
Exposure Pathways and Key Receptors According to Land Use ....................... 5 Derivation of Direct Contact Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines ............. 14
Agricultural Land Use ................................................................................... 6 Direct Contact Soil Quality Guidelines for Threshold Substances............. 14
Residential/Parkland Land Use ..................................................................... 6 Direct Contact Soil Quality Guidelines for Non-threshold Substances...... 14
Commercial and Industrial Land Use............................................................ 7 Indirect Soil Contaminant Exposure ........................................................... 15
Derivation of Environmental Soil Quality Guidelines ....................................... 7 Derivation of the Final Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines....................... 15
Soil Quality Guidelines for Soil Contact....................................................... 7 DERIVATION OF THE FINAL SOIL QUALITY GUIDELINES ....................... 16
Developing Soil Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Nutrient and Final Guideline Derivation................................................................................ 16
Energy Cycling .............................................................................................. 9 Provisional Guidelines ...................................................................................... 16
Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for Soil and Food Ingestion ............. 9 Considerations Other Than Toxicity................................................................. 16
Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Freshwater Life10 Evaluation against Plant Nutritional Requirement, Geochemical Background,
Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Livestock and Practical Quantitation Limits...................................................................... 17
Watering and Irrigation Water..................................................................... 10 References ............................................................................................................... 18
Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for Offsite Migration ..................... 10 Appendix A: Evaluation of Groundwater Exposure Pathways .............................. 19
Derivation of the Final Environmental Soil Quality Guidelines ...................... 10 Appendix B: Migration of Contaminated Vapours into Buildings ........................ 21
HUMAN HEALTH................................................................................................. 10 Appendix C: Off-site Migration Check Calculations ............................................ 24
Guiding Principles for Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines ....................... 11 Appendix D: Human Food Consumption Check Calculations............................... 25
INTRODUCTION described in the original version of the soil protocol

(CCME 1996a). The new Canadian soil quality guidelines
In 2006, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the (as they are now called, instead of criteria) have been
Environment (CCME) published a revised and updated derived specifically for protection of the ecological
version of A Protocol for the Derivation of receptors in the environment and/or for the protection of
Environmental and Human Health Soil Quality human health associated with the identified land uses.
Guidelines (CCME 2006). The following is a brief
summary of the revised document. The use and interpretation of the terms guidelines,
objectives, and standards vary among different agencies
and countries. CCME publications about the National
Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines Contaminated Sites Remediation Program prior to 1996
used the term soil criteria. This term has since been
Interim Canadian environmental quality criteria for replaced by guidelines for consistency with other
contaminated sites were established by CCME for defined environmental media (water, sediments, etc.). For the
land uses by adopting existing criteria for soil and water purpose of this document, these terms are defined as
used by various jurisdictions in Canada (see CCME follows:
1991). Many of the interim criteria for soil were based on
professional judgment, and have since been revised based
on current scientific information using the procedures
Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2007
PROTOCOL SUMMARY Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines for the
Protection of Environmental and Human Health
Guidelines - Numerical limits or narrative statements sustaining the current and likely future uses of the site by
recommended to support and maintain designated uses of ecological receptors and humans.
the soil environment.
Objectives - Numerical limits or narrative statements Protecting the Environment

established to protect and maintain designated uses of the
soil environment at a particular site. To protect the terrestrial ecosystem, the derivation
process outlined in the soil protocol considers the adverse
Standards - Guidelines or objectives recognized in effects resulting from direct contact exposure to soil-
enforceable environmental control laws of one or more based contaminants as well as those resulting from
levels of government. ingestion of contaminated soil and food. Indirect
exposure via use of contaminated groundwater for
agricultural purposes and migration to nearby surface
What is the Soil Protocol? water bodies are also considered, as is the migration of
contaminants to more sensitive nearby properties due to
The soil protocol was originally developed by the wind and water erosion. Potential exposure pathways,
Subcommittee on Environmental Quality Guidelines for receptor arrays, and exposure scenarios are assumed for
Contaminated Sites, and subsequently revised and major land uses. Based on these exposure scenarios,
updated by the Soil Quality Guidelines Task Group, to ecological receptors that sustain the primary activities for
provide a method for replacing the interim remediation each land use category are identified.
criteria for soil with scientifically defensible generic
guidelines accounting for both scientific and management A literature review is conducted to determine the
considerations. It provides stakeholders (i.e., the public, environmental fate and behaviour of the contaminant as
industry, and regulatory agencies) with the basic concepts well as its toxicity in soil. A standard procedure is used to
and methods employed in generic guideline development derive an effects-based soil quality guideline for soil-
(CCME 2006). dependent organisms (i.e., invertebrates, plants and
microbes) from acceptable toxicity data. For higher
The guidelines are developed on a substance-by- trophic level consumers (i.e., livestock and terrestrial
substance basis as required after a comprehensive review wildlife), pathways have been identified to derive
of the physical/chemical characteristics, background environmental quality guidelines that consider the
levels in Canadian soils, toxicity, and environmental fate ingestion of contaminated soil and food. Groundwater
and behaviour of each substance. This background pathways are evaluated by modelling the partitioning of
information is presented in a series of guideline- contaminants into soil pore water and subsequent dilution
supporting technical documents available from in a groundwater aquifer; lateral transport is also
Environment Canada, Health Canada and/or CCME. considered in the case of transport to nearby surface
water.
It is recognized that contaminants are likely to occur in
mixtures. However, not enough is known about most
contaminant mixtures at this time to routinely consider Protecting Human Health
them in the guideline derivation process, though some
guidelines have been developed for commonly-occurring Human health soil quality guidelines provide concen-
mixtures of chemicals with closely related physical- trations of contaminants in soil at or below which no
chemical properties and toxicology. appreciable human health risk is expected. To protect
human health, derivation processes for threshold and non-
threshold toxicants (i.e., carcinogens or germ cell
Guiding Principles mutagens) are differentiated, taking into account daily
background exposure from air, water, soil, food, and
Soil is a complex heterogeneous medium consisting of consumer products. Indirect exposure pathways resulting
variable amounts of minerals, organic matter, water, and from contaminated soils, such as contaminated
air that is capable of supporting organisms, including groundwater, contaminated meat, milk, and produce,
plants, bacteria, fungi, protozoans, invertebrates, and infiltration into indoor air, and wind erosion resulting in
other animal life. Ideally, soil at the guideline levels will deposition on neighbouring property are also considered
provide a healthy functioning ecosystem capable of during the derivation of human health guidelines. These
2
Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines for the Protection PROTOCOL SUMMARY
of Environmental and Human Health
indirect exposure pathways are evaluated conservatively

by applying simplified transport and redistribution models Key biological receptors and exposure pathways were
using generic site characteristics in a variety of site identified for each land use to protect soil quality and
conditions. maintain activities performed on these lands. Recognizing
differences in analyzing human health and ecological
Key components of the risk-based generic human health issues, soil quality guidelines for each chemical are
guidelines include an assessment of multimedia developed for both ecological and human receptors. For
background exposure unrelated to contaminated sites and each of the four land uses, to protect both human health
a generic human exposure scenario relevant to each land and the environment, the most protective guideline is
use. In the multimedia exposure assessment, total back- chosen as the soil quality guideline.
ground exposure by all sources (i.e., air, water, food, soil,
and consumer products when appropriate) and all Soil Type
exposure routes (i.e., inhalation, ingestion, and skin
absorption) is estimated. The human health soil quality The protocol recognizes that contaminant fate and
guidelines are established after accounting for this transport, as well as bioavailability, are dependent to
background exposure to ensure that the total tolerable varying degrees on soil texture, moisture content and
contaminant intake is not exceeded. other factors. To minimize the uncertainty in guideline
derivation introduced by soil variability, the protocol
Land Use considers two generic soil types: coarse-textured soils
(sand and gravel), defined as soils with a median grain
Generic guidelines are derived to protect human and key size of 75 microns or greater, and fine-textured soils (silt
ecological receptors that sustain normal activities on four and clay), defined as soils with a median grain size less
land use categories: agricultural, residential/parkland, than 75 microns.
commercial, and industrial. Generic land use scenarios
are envisioned for each category based on how the land is Where there are sufficient data available, separate
used and on how sensitive and dependent the activity is guidelines are developed for both coarse and fine-textured
on the land. Sensitivity to contamination increases among soils.
ecological or human health components most dependent
on land use activities (i.e., agricultural and residential/ USE OF CANADIAN SOIL QUALITY
parkland). GUIDELINES
The definition of each land use accommodates generic Canadian soil quality guidelines derived using the soil
conditions and puts boundaries on the receptors and protocol replace corresponding interim environmental
exposure pathways considered in guideline derivation for quality criteria for contaminated sites (CCME 1991), if
that land use. The four defined land uses are as follows: applicable. This set of guidelines represents clean down
to levels at contaminated sites and not pollute up to
agricultural where the primary activity is growing levels for less contaminated sites. Like the interim
crops or tending livestock and includes agricultural land criteria, these effects-based guidelines are for
providing habitat for resident and transitory wildlife as contaminated site assessment and remediation and should
well as native flora, as well as farm residences; not be used to manage pristine sites or directly evaluate
soil amendments prior to their addition to soil. The new
residential/parkland where the primary activity is
generic guidelines are intended to provide a high level of
residential or recreational activity; parkland is defined as
protection for designated land uses and are considered
a buffer zone between areas of residency and campground
broadly applicable to Canadian soils (CCME 2006).
areas, and excludes wild lands such as national or
provincial parks;
Canada has adopted a three-tiered approach for dealing
commercial where the primary activity is commercial with contaminated site assessment and remediation
(e.g., shopping mall), not residential or manufacturing (Figure 1). The first tier is the direct adoption of Canadian
and does not include zones where food is grown; soil quality guidelines. However, the fact that some sites
might present particular conditions (e.g., high natural
industrial where the primary activity involves the background concentrations, complex mixtures of contam-
production, manufacture, or construction of goods, and inants, or unusual exposure scenarios) must also be
public access to the property is restricted. considered. For these sites, the second tier allows limited
3
modification of Canadian soil quality guidelines by species tests performed in the laboratory (i.e., using
setting site-specific objectives (CCME 1996b). Finally, bioassays). Specific land uses are studied, and guidelines
the third tier uses risk assessment procedures to establish based on the availability of terrestrial toxicity information
remediation objectives at contaminated sites on a site- are developed.
specific basis (CCME 1996c).
Level of Ecological Protection and Relevant

Endpoints
The level of protection provided by the guidelines

ENVIRONMENT depends on the protection goals sought for individual land
use categories. Therefore, for agricultural and
The guideline derivation process focuses on the effects of residential/parkland land uses, it is necessary to achieve a
chemical stressors on the biotic component of a terrestrial level of ecological functioning that sustains the primary
activities associated with these land uses.
Proposed site On commercial and industrial lands, the primary land use
activities are not directly dependent on the need to sustain
a high level of ecological processes. The same key
National classification system ecological receptors and endpoints examined for
agricultural and residential/parkland land uses are also
examined for commercial and industrial land uses.
Generic assessment and
remediation guidelines However, the level of protection for commercial and
(land use based) industrial land uses is reduced to correspond with the
lower protection levels required by these land use
Guidance for the development
categories.
of site-specific objectives
-consider site-specific conditions
Despite the different levels of protection, an important
-are generic guidelines suitable? common principle exists for all land use categories. The
level of ecological protection provided by the soil quality
guidelines ensures that the remediated land has the
Guideline-
based
Site-specific potential to support most activities likely to be associated
approach
approach with each land use.
Generic guidelines Risk assessment
In developing Canadian environmental soil quality
guidelines (SQGE), only the endpoints related to the
Adopt Modify
direct effects of chemical stressors to receptors are
directly (within limits) Develop examined, and these do not account for the indirect
as as site-specific
site-specific objective
effects (e.g., avoidance of polluted food items) that may
site-specific
objective objective occur from sublethal exposures. In terrestrial toxicity
testing, most studies have focused on mortality (LC50) as
a short-term endpoint and on reproduction, growth,
Figure 1. National framework for contaminated site development, behaviour, activity, lesions, physiological
assessment and remediation. changes, respiration, nutrient cycling, contribution to
decomposition, genetic adaptation, and physiological
acclimatization as long-term, sublethal endpoints such as
ecosystem. Specifically, it evaluates the potential for the effective concentration 50 (EC50), no observed effects
adverse effects to occur from exposures to soil-based concentration (NOEC), and lowest observed effects
contaminants at point-of-contact or by indirect means concentration (LOEC) (SECOFASE 1993). In recent
(i.e., food chain transfer, contamination of groundwater or years, more data have become available using regression-
surface water, or offsite migration). Adverse effects data based endpoints (e.g., ECx), including endpoints for low-
may come in a variety of forms, ranging from data level effects such as the EC20 or EC25.
collected in the field (e.g., mesocosm studies) to single
4
Environmental soil quality guidelines rely on sensitive

measurement endpoints for key receptors that act as
predictive sentinel species. Extrapolation to assessment Exposure Pathways and Key Receptors
endpoints is therefore restricted to the population level, According to Land Use
since single species measurements of endpoint data are
used in guideline derivations. Information from labora- The maintenance of primary ecological functions is
tory studies must involve endpoints critical to the usually required for most land use activities (except some
maintenance of a species, such as mortality, reproduction, commercial and industrial processes). The receptor and
and growth, which are required to complete a normal life exposure scenarios for agricultural, residential/parkland,
cycle and to produce viable offspring. Studies showing commercial, and industrial land uses are shown in
damage or visible injury to ornamental plants are also Table 1. Additional land uses are possible, and may be
considered, since the healthy appearance of these plants is specified by CCME or regulatory jurisdictions or
of importance to many property owners. Guidelines are, addressed on a site-specific basis.
when possible, based on long-term toxicity tests
following standard methodologies, rather than less-
sensitive acute exposure tests; uncertainty factors may be
required if short-term tests are used.
Table 1. Receptors and exposure pathways considered in the derivation of environmental soil quality guidelines for defined
land uses.
Land Use
Route of Exposure
Agricultural Residential/ Commercial Industrial
Parkland
Soil Contact Soil Nutrient Cycling Soil Nutrient Cycling Soil Nutrient Cycling Soil Nutrient Cycling
Processes, Processes, Processes, Processes,
Soil Invertebrates, Soil Invertebrates, Soil Invertebrates, Soil Invertebrates,
Crops/Plants, Plants, Plants, Plants,
Livestock/Wildlife Wildlife Wildlife Wildlife
Soil and Food Ingestion Herbivores, Herbivoresa, None None

Secondary and Tertiary Secondary and Tertiary
Consumersa Consumersa
Ingestion of Contaminated
Livestock None None None
Water
Contact with Contaminated Freshwater Life, Crops
Freshwater Life Freshwater Life Freshwater Life
Water (irrigation)
Note: a Herbivores (residential/parkland) and Secondary and Tertiary Consumers (agricultural and residential/parkland) are considered for substances that
bioaccumulate and/or biomagnify
5
Agricultural Land Use biomagnify in the food chain, ingestion by secondary and
tertiary consumers is also evaluated.
Although agricultural land use varies, the development of
Groundwater and surface water exposure pathways are
SQGE must protect key receptors that permit or maintain
evaluated based on groundwater modelling and published
crop growth and livestock production against adverse
water quality guidelines. In the absence of published
effects. Protection must also be offered to resident and
water quality guidelines, target concentrations in
transitory wildlife and native flora because in some areas
groundwater may be derived based on available
(e.g., agroecosystems) this may be the only viable habitat
toxicological data.
for these organisms.
Residential/Parkland Land Use
Sufficient toxicological information exists to consider soil
contact by microbes (and their effect on nutrient cycling),
The development of SQGE for residential/parkland land
soil invertebrates (e.g., decomposers), crops and plants
use, like that for agricultural land use, must ensure that
(e.g., seeds and roots) in the derivation of soil guidelines
the soil is capable of sustaining soil-dependent species
for the protection of crop and plant growth. Root uptake
and does not adversely affect wildlife from direct soil
and accumulation of contaminants by crops grown on site
contact. The soil guidelines must also be protective of
and used as feed or by native flora used as pasture must
freshwater life in nearby surface water bodies. Uptake
also be examined when they relate to livestock and
into the food chain is also considered for substances
wildlife ingestion scenarios. For substances which may
which may biomagnify.
Literature
Search
Toxicological Environmental Fate

Database Database
INFORMATION RETRIEVAL
Evaluate Toxicological Examine Environmental

Database Fate
Guideline Derivation Process
Consider for which land use guideline is being derived
Soil Contact Nutrient & Energy Soil and Food Soil to Groundwater
Procedure Cycling Check Ingestion Procedure Modelling
GUIDELINE DEVELOPMENT
Derive SQGLW
Derive SQGSC Derive SQGNEC Derive SQGI Derive SQGFL
Derive SQGIR
Derive SQGE using lowest of the applicable procedures
Figure 2: Overall Procedure for Deriving Environmental Soil Quality Guidelines

for Agricultural, Residential/Parkland, Commercial and Industrial Land Uses
6
Commercial and Industrial Land Use used to derive an SQGE based on a single class of
organism (e.g., when scientific evidence suggests that a
Commercial and industrial land use SQGE will be derived single organism group is the most threatened).
for direct soil contact by soil-dependent biota and wildlife
and will offer the same level of protection for both land Soil Quality Guidelines for Soil Contact
activities. Consequently, the same SQGE will be provided
for both commercial and industrial land uses. The following section summarizes the methods for
deriving environmental soil quality guidelines that apply
On commercial and industrial lands, activities may not to all four land uses and that are based on soil contact by
rely on key ecological receptors to the same degree as soil-dependent organisms. For more details on these
agricultural and residential/parkland land uses. Therefore, derivation methods, see the soil protocol (CCME 2006). The
SQGE developed for commercial and industrial land use derivation methods for soil quality guidelines for soil
will not offer the same level of protection from adverse contact (SQGSC) are presented in order of preference.
effects as those for agricultural and residential/parkland When minimum data are not available for a particular
land uses. Protection of freshwater life in nearby surface method, a measure of conservatism is added to each
water bodies is considered for the commercial and subsequent method to account for the inherent
industrial guidelines, as is potential migration of uncertainties of deriving guidelines from a less preferable
contaminated soil to more sensitive neighbouring data set. Uncertainty factors may also be applied in some
properties. cases if available toxicity data reflect mainly low
bioavailability conditions. An overview of the derivation
Derivation of Environmental Soil Quality procedure for SQGSC is provided in Figure 3.
Guidelines
Weight of Evidence Method
The general process for deriving SQGE is summarized in
Figure 2. For each contaminant, an extensive literature The weight of evidence method is a modification of an
search of all published and non-proprietary data is approach used for calculating sediment quality guidelines
conducted to obtain information on physical and chemical for the National Status and Trends Program (Long and
properties, sources and emissions, distribution in the Morgan 1990) and an approach proposed by CCME
environment, environmental fate and behaviour, short- and (CCME 1995) for deriving Canadian sediment quality
long-term toxicity, and existing guidelines, standards, and guidelines. These methods use a percentile of the effects
criteria. data set, or combined effects and no effects data set, to
estimate a concentration in the sediment expected to
Because the quality of soil toxicity information is cause no adverse biological effects. The approach was
variable, toxicological data obtained from the literature further refined during the development of the Canada-
are screened to ensure that studies selected will provide Wide Standard for Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil
scientifically verified information. Candidate data are (CCME, 2001), utilizing ECX endpoints instead of effects
screened to determine if they can be used in the derivation and no effects data.
of SQGE. Acceptable data are referred to as selected,
whereas other data are referred to as consulted. All the The preferred approach is to use the 25th percentile of the
information regarding the ecological toxicity data for a compiled EC25 effects-endpoints data distribution (the
specific chemical can be found in the supporting estimated species sensitivity distribution - 25th percentile,
documents available from either the National Guidelines or ESSD25), which is then divided by an uncertainty
and Standards Office of Environment Canada or CCME. factor in order to derive the threshold effects
concentration (TEC) for agricultural and
After compilation, review, and evaluation of the available residential/parkland land uses. The 50th percentile of the
information, selected data fulfilling the minimum EC25 data distribution is selected as the effects
toxicological data requirements specified for each of the concentration low (ECL) for commercial and industrial
procedures are used to derive SQGE. Minimum data land uses.
requirements are designed to ensure guidelines are
derived based on effects data from a variety of organisms The TEC represents the concentration of a contaminant in
(CCME 2006). In situations where there is a strong soil at which only minimal effects on ecological function
weight of evidence to suggest that the minimum data would be observed, and is considered to be an appropriate
requirements do not apply, professional judgment may be level of protection for guidelines for the agricultural and
7
residential/parkland land uses. The ECL represents a

concentration of a contaminant in soil at which only a low Lowest-Observed-Effect Concentration Method
level of adverse effects would be expected to occur in less
than half of the species in the terrestrial community; this When the minimum data requirements for the weight of
is considered to be an appropriate level of protection for evidence method cannot be met, the TEC for agricultural
commercial and industrial land uses. and residential/parkland land uses is derived by
extrapolating from the lowest available LOEC divided by
In the event that EC25 values cannot be determined for a an uncertainty factor (if needed). In this method, the TEC
sufficient number of toxicity studies, but all other data is estimated to be somewhere below the lowest reported
requirements of the weight-of-evidence approach are met LOEC.
(CCME 2006), then the available effects and no
observed effects data can be compiled. The 25th For commercial and industrial land uses, the LOEC
percentile of the combined effects and no observed method is slightly modified in order to account for the
effects data is chosen as the ESSD25, which is divided by lower level of protection. Therefore, the ECL is derived
an uncertainty factor to derive the TEC. The 50th using the geometric mean of the available LOEC data.
percentile of the data distribution of effects and no
observed effects data is selected as the ECL.
Consider under which

land uses procedure applies
Agricultural
Residential / Parkland
Weight
LOEC Method Median Effects Method
Evidence Method
Minimum toxicity and data set Minimum toxicity and data set Minimum toxicity
met and appropriate method? N met and appropriate method? N data set met? N
YE YE YE
Determine lowest Determine lowest Insufficient data to

Estimate ESSD25
LOE LC50 or calculate SQG
Estimate the TEC by applying Estimate the TEC by applying Estimate the TEC by applying Identify Data gaps
safety factor (if needed) safety factor (if needed) safety factor (if needed) and research needs
Calculate SQG SC
Where: ESSD25 = 25th percentile of estimated species sensitivity distribution, TEC = Threshold Effects Concentration
LOEC = Lowest Observed Effect Concentration, LC50 = Median Lethal Concentration. EC50 = Median Effects Concentration.
Figure 3: Procedure for Deriving Soil Quality Guidelines for Soil Contact for Agricultural and Residential/Parkland Land Use
8
Median Effects Method Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for Soil

and Food Ingestion
Alternatively, if the minimum data requirements cannot
be met for the weight of evidence and LOEC methods, The procedure for deriving soil quality guidelines for soil
the TEC for agricultural and residential/parkland land and food ingestion (SQGI) by grazing livestock and
uses is derived by extrapolating from the lowest available wildlife is used for agricultural land use, and, if the
EC50 or LC50 using an uncertainty factor ranging from 5 contaminant may biomagnify, for residential land use.
to 10. In this method, the TEC is estimated in the region This procedure also accounts for the consumption of
of predominantly no effects in the data distribution. contaminated forage via the accumulation of
contaminants in the food chain. Exposure of secondary
The median effects method is not recommended for and tertiary consumers via the food chain is considered
guideline derivation for commercial and industrial land for substances which may biomagnify. Soil type does not
uses. Because uncertainty factors are not applied at the normally affect guidelines developed for this pathway.
point of departure from the effects distribution, the ECL
would therefore be estimated at a level of median effects,
which is contrary to the level of protection desired at the Determining the Daily Threshold Effect Dose
level of the ECL.
The first step in determining the daily threshold effect
dose (DTED) for each applicable trophic level (primary,
Insufficient Data for Soil Contact Guideline secondary and tertiary consumers) is to determine the
Derivation species considered to be most at threat from contaminated
soil and food ingestion. The most threatened species has
If minimum data requirements for the above methods the lowest ratio of reported LOAEL to dry matter
cannot be met, then there is insufficient information to ingestion rate (expressed as food ingested per kg body
develop an SQGSC and, consequently, a final SQGE. Data weight per day), considering a minimum of three studies.
gaps will be identified for further research. It may be If minimum data requirements cannot be met when
possible to develop a provisional SQGE, as discussed determining the DTED, then no SQGI shall be set.
under the Derivation of the Final Soil Quality Guidelines.
The DTED is established by applying an uncertainty
factor to the LOAEL for the most threatened species.
Developing Soil Quality Guidelines for the Information is then gathered on the bioavailability and
Protection of Nutrient and Energy Cycling bioconcentration factor specific to the contaminant. The
information gathered is used to calculate the SQGI as
Soil processes such as decomposition, respiration and detailed in CCME (2006).
organic nutrient cycles are important components of the
ecological function of soil. These processes may be Calculation of Guidelines for Soil and Food
affected by the presence of contaminants, and therefore Ingestion
should be considered in the development of soil quality
guidelines. Soil quality guidelines based on soil and food ingestion
for primary consumers are calculated using the following
CCME (2006) outlines the procedures for determining the equation:
soil quality guideline for the protection of nutrient and
energy cycling (SQGNEC), which are very similar to those 0.75 DTED1C BW1C
SQG1C =
applied for the SQGSC. Since data are expected to be
limited for this pathway, the SQGNEC is incorporated as a
(SIR1C BF ) + (FIR1C BCF1 )
check mechanism; professional judgement should be used
to decide whether the SQGNEC is applied when where
determining the SQGE. DTED1C = daily threshold effects dose for primary
consumer (mgkg-1d-1)
BW1C = body weight of primary consumer (kg)
SIR1C = soil ingestion rate for primary consumer
(kgd-1)
9
FIR1C = food ingestion rate for primary consumer in Appendix C, and applied as a check mechanism for
(kgd-1) commercial and industrial sites.
BF = bioavailability factor for soil
BCF1 = bioconcentration factor in food of primary
consumer (unitless) Derivation of the Final Environmental Soil
Quality Guidelines
Calculations for secondary and tertiary consumers are
performed using similar equations, as detailed in CCME Agricultural Land Use
(2006).
The SQGE for each soil type (coarse-grained and fine-
Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for the grained) is the lowest of the values calculated for all
Protection of Freshwater Life exposure pathways applicable for the contaminant (i.e.,
the lowest of the SQGSC, SQGI, SQGFL, SQGLW and
Contamination present in soil can migrate to groundwater. SQGIR). If there are insufficient data to evaluate all of the
If there are surface water bodies (streams, rivers, lakes, applicable pathways, the SQGE can still be determined so
etc.) nearby, then life in these surface water bodies may long as the SQGSC has been calculated; if the substance is
be affected by the contamination, particularly if there is a known to biomagnify, the SQGI is also required. If data
permeable aquifer connecting the contamination with the are not available to derive the SQGSC (or, for substances
surface water body. The soil quality guideline for the that biomagnify, the SQGI), then no SQGE shall be set,
protection of freshwater life (SQGFL) is calculated using a since it is assumed that these guidelines represent
groundwater dilution and transport model, as detailed in exposures by the most likely critical pathways. In this
CCME (2006). A brief summary of the calculations is situation, data gaps will be identified for further research.
provided in Appendix A. This pathway is applied for all
land uses, and the calculated guideline is independent of Residential/Parkland Land Use
land use, though this pathway may be eliminated on a
site-specific basis if there are no surface water bodies in For contaminants which do not bioaccumulate and/or
the vicinity. biomagnify, the lower of the SQGSC and SQGFL for each
soil type is used as the SQGE for residential/parkland land
Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for the use. For contaminants which bioaccumulate or
Protection of Livestock Watering and Irrigation biomagnify, the lower of the SQGSC, SQGFL and SQGI is
used as the SQGE. The SQGSC is a required pathway, and
Water
the SQGE cannot be set if this pathway cannot be
evaluated. If the substance is known to biomagnify, the
Contamination that migrates to groundwater may affect
SQGI is also required. If no guideline can be set, then data
the water quality in dugouts or water wells used for
gaps will be identified for further research.
livestock watering or crop irrigation. Therefore, soil
quality guidelines for the protection of livestock watering
(SQGLW) and irrigation water (SQGIR) are calculated for
agricultural land use, using the procedure detailed in
Commercial and Industrial Land Use
CCME (2006) and summarized in Appendix A.
The lower of the SQGSC and the SQGFL for each soil type
is used as the SQGE for commercial and industrial land
Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for Offsite use. The guideline may also be modified by the SQGOM-E.
Migration If the SQGSC cannot be determined, no guideline can be
set, and data gaps will be identified for further research.
In deriving soil quality guidelines for commercial and
industrial sites, SQGTG uses an exposure scenario which
considers contact of ecological receptors with on-site soil HUMAN HEALTH
only. However, wind and water erosion of soil and
subsequent deposition can transfer contaminated soil from The steps employed to derive Canadian soil quality
one site to another. In order to ensure that remediated guidelines based on human health are similar to those
commercial and industrial properties do not pose a risk to used for site-specific risk assessment and require that
more sensitive properties nearby, the SQGOM-E is several basic assumptions be made in lieu of site-specific
determined as detailed in CCME (2006) and summarized information. For a specified land use, a generic exposure
10
scenario was defined that details a sensitive receptor most sensitive receptor to the chemical, and the most
(toddler or adult), the reference characteristics of that critical health effect.
receptor (weight, amount of soil and water ingested daily,
exposure duration, etc.), and specific pathways of 5. Guidelines should be reasonable, workable and
exposure. usable. Guidelines are developed by applying
scientifically derived information, backed by professional
Development of human health soil quality guidelines judgement where data gaps occur. Occasionally, defined
(SQGHH) involves consideration of a variety of potential exposure-based procedures produce numerical guidelines
exposure pathways: direct soil exposure (soil ingestion, either far below background levels of contamination
dermal contact with soil, and inhalation of soil occurring naturally in the soil, or below practical
particulate), migration of soil contaminants into quantitation limits. When this occurs, guidelines cannot
groundwater used for drinking water, and volatilization of be below background levels, and provisional guidelines
contaminants into indoor air. Two additional check should be established based on background soil
mechanisms, which may or may not be used to adjust the concentrations.
SQGHH, depending on professional judgement, are also
evaluated: exposure from ingestion of food grown on
contaminated soils, and offsite migration of Investigation of Contaminant Toxicology
contamination via wind and water erosion.
Toxic effects from exposure to environmental contaminants
Input values for exposure variables depend on the may be classified as organ-specific, neurological/
assumptions for each land use scenario, as well as the soil behavioural, reproductive/developmental, immunological,
type (coarse or fine-textured), and are summarized in carcinogenic, and mutagenic. These effects can be
CCME (2006). manifested at the biochemical, cellular, histopathological,
and morphological levels. Effects vary, depending on the
Guiding Principles for Human Health Soil dosage, route of exposure (e.g., ingestion, inhalation, or
Quality Guidelines dermal contact), frequency and/or duration of exposure,
species (and strain in the case of some organisms),
The following guiding principles are retained for the physiological state, sex, and age of the exposed population.
derivation of generic SQGHH protective of human health Toxicological effects from exposure to chemical substances
in Canada. may be brief or prolonged, reversible or irreversible,
immediate or delayed.
1. There should be no appreciable risk to humans
from a contaminated site. For each specified land use, Hazard assessment determines the health effect poten-
there should be no restrictions as to the extent or nature of tially attributable to a contaminant (e.g., carcinogenic,
the interaction with the site. All activities normally hepatotoxic, or teratogenic) and estimates the reference
associated with the intended land use should be free of dose believed to be associated with a defined level of
any appreciable health risk. incidence of that effect in the population. For a threshold
substance, exposure less than the reference dose should
2. Guidelines are based on defined, representative pose a zero probability of incidence of an adverse effect
situations. Deriving numerical guidelines necessitates in the population. For a non-threshold substance (i.e., a
defining specific scenarios within which the exposure carcinogen or a germ cell mutagen), the critical risk-
likely to arise on the site can be predicted with some specific dose is defined for risk levels. If both threshold
degree of certainty. and non-threshold toxicity reference values have been
published, it may be necessary to evaluate both endpoints
3. Guidelines are derived by considering exposure separately, as their relative sensitivity may vary with
through all relevant pathways. The total exposure from different exposure routes and scenarios.
soil, air, water, and food is considered in the development
of guidelines.
Threshold Contaminants
4. A critical human receptor is identified for each
land use. To ensure that the guidelines do not limit the Where possible, a concentration (or dose) of a chemical
application of a site within the intended land use category, substance that does not produce any adverse effect (i.e.,
the defined exposure scenarios are usually based on the NO(A)EL) for the critical endpoint is identified, usually
11
from toxicological studies involving experimental

animals, but sometimes from epidemiological studies of Human exposure to non-threshold toxicants should be
human populations. If a value for the NO(A)EL cannot be reduced to the lowest levels deemed reasonably feasible.
ascertained, a LO(A)EL is used, accounting for the Health Canada has determined the reference dose as the
critical effect. TDI for threshold substances and risk-specific doses
(RSDs) associated with risks of 10-4, 10-5, 10-6, and 10-7
Uncertainty factors are applied to the NO(A)EL or for non-threshold substances. SQGHHs for non-threshold
LO(A)EL to derive a tolerable daily intake (TDI) to substances in Canadian soils are derived with a level of
which a person can be exposed daily over a lifetime risk of both 10-5 and 10 -6 for incremental risk from soil,
without deleterious effect. Ideally, the NO(A)EL is consistent with the risk levels accepted by most Canadian
derived from a lifetime (i.e., chronic) exposure study regulatory jurisdictions.
involving the most sensitive or relevant species or the
most sensitive subpopulation (e.g., developmental
studies) in which the route of administration in animal Estimated Daily Intake
studies is similar to that by which humans are principally
exposed. Relevant species are determined, where Canadians are exposed to background contamination in
possible, based on data on species differences in the air, soil, food, water and, in some cases, consumer
pharmacokinetic parameters or mechanism of action. products, which is quantified by the estimated daily
intake (EDI) for a particular contaminant. The EDI
TDIs are not generally developed on data from acute or estimates exposures via all known or suspected routes
short-term studies unless effects in longer-term studies (inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact). Because
are expected to be similar. Occasionally, TDIs are based background exposure is present at all times, risks posed
on data from subchronic studies in the absence of by a contaminated site must be determined in addition to
available information from adequately designed and this background exposure.
conducted chronic toxicity studies; an additional factor of
uncertainty is included in this case. In some cases, where Where appropriate, information on concentrations of
toxicity studies using the route of exposure by which contaminants in specific localities may also be used to
humans are principally exposed cannot be identified, a estimate background exposure of some high exposure
NO(A)EL or LO(A)EL from a bioassay by another route subgroups in the general population. Relevant data on the
of exposure may be used where appropriate, incor- duration and frequency of exposure as well as on the
porating relevant pharmacokinetic data. behaviour and activity patterns of individuals are also
considered in the development of estimates of
background exposure of the general population.
Non-threshold Contaminants
For non-threshold contaminants (currently restricted to Assumptions

mutagenesis and genotoxic carcinogenesis), some proba-
bility of harm to human health at any level of exposure is About Exposure Scenarios
assumed. Consequently, it is not possible to determine a
dose below which adverse effects do not occur. SQGHHs are based on a chronic exposure scenario (i.e.,
Therefore, mathematical models are used to extrapolate lifetime exposure to a remediated site). This conservative
data on the exposure or doseresponse relationship assumption helps ensure that no limitations will exist within
derived from experimental studies in animal species or the defined land use. Setting soil quality guidelines begins
epidemiological studies (generally in workers) in order to by working backward from the TDI or from the critical
estimate the cancer risk for concentrations to which the RSD for a contaminant through appropriate direct soil
general population is exposed. exposure pathways to a land use generic soil concentration.
Wherever possible, and if considered appropriate by Health The defined exposure scenario used in deriving the
Canada, information on pharmacokinetics, metabolism, and generic soil quality guidelines may not be appropriate for
mechanisms of carcinogenicity and mutagenicity is a particular site to be remediated. In such cases (e.g.,
incorporated into the quantitative estimates of potency camping sites), further guidance to allow modification of
derived, particularly from studies in animals (to provide the generic guidelines within limits, through the setting of
relevant scaling of potency for human populations).
12
site-specific objectives, has been developed and is from remediated soils at the guideline concentration,
presented in CCME (1996b). consistent with the risk levels accepted by most Canadian
regulatory jurisdictions.
Threshold Contaminants
About Pathways, Receptors, and Land Uses
No single medium should deplete the entire TDI or even
the entire residual tolerable daily intake (RTDI). The The physical and chemical properties of a contaminant
RTDI is the difference between the TDI and the EDI will determine its environmental fate and exposure
(RTDI = TDI - EDI). Because people are exposed to five pathways to humans. For example, the dermal exposure
primary media (i.e., air, water, soil, food, and consumer pathway will be of importance for lipophilic
products), 20% of the RTDI is, in the majority of cases, contaminants, which can readily cross the epidermal layer
apportioned to each of these five media. Therefore, 20% of the skin. Similarly, contaminants with a high vapour
of the RTDI accounts for soils when deriving soil pressure, likely to volatilize from soil to air, are extremely
remediation guidelines, allowing for 80% of the important in the respiratory pathway.
remaining tolerable incremental exposure to be reserved
for other media. If defensible contaminant-specific data Soil exposure pathways can result from direct or indirect
demonstrate that a contaminant does not occur in a given exposure to soil. Direct exposure pathways include ingestion
exposure medium, the RTDI may be distributed among of soil/dust, dermal uptake of contaminants in contact with
the applicable media as detailed in CCME (2006). the skin, and inhalation of soil particles into the lungs.
The first step in the derivation of an SQGHH considers all

Non-threshold Contaminants direct soil exposure pathways to obtain a direct human
soil quality guideline (SQGDH).
In theory, low levels of background exposure occur for
many carcinogens. However, the TDI and tolerable The second step in the derivation of an SQGHH is the
incremental exposure cannot be determined for carci- consideration of indirect soil exposure pathways based on
nogens, as some level of risk is assumed to exist at any simplified models using conservative generic input values
level of exposure other than zero. Therefore, Canadian for site-specific characteristics. The following indirect
environmental quality guidelines are derived based on an pathways are considered: contamination of groundwater
incremental risk (above background) of both 10-5 and 10-6 used as potable water (Appendix A), contamination of
Table 2. Receptors and exposure pathways considered in the derivation of human health soil quality guidelines.
Route of Residential/
exposure Agriculture parkland Commercial Industrial
Sensitive receptor Toddler* Toddler* Toddler*
Adult Adult Adult Adult
Exposure period 24 hours per day, 24 hours per day, 10 hours per day, 10 hours per day,
365 days per year 365 days per year 5 days per week, 5 days per week,
48 weeks per year 48 weeks per year
Direct soil exposure Ingestion Ingestion Ingestion Ingestion

pathways Dermal contact Dermal contact Dermal contact Dermal contact
Inhalation Inhalation Inhalation Inhalation
Indirect soil exposure Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater

pathways Indoor air Indoor air Indoor air Indoor air
Produce, meat and milk Backyard produce Off-site migration Off-site migration
ingestion
*
Threshold contaminant.
Non-threshold contaminant.
13
indoor air via volatilization into basements (Appendix B), SIR = soil ingestion rate (kgd-1)
off-site migration of soil/dust (Appendix C), and IRS = soil inhalation rate (kgd-1
contamination of produce, milk, and meat from on site SR = soil dermal contact rate (kgd-1)
(Appendix D). The actual inclusion of each pathway in ET1 = exposure term 1 (unitless) days per week/7 x
the guideline derivation equation is based on the quality weeks per year/52
of the scientific evidence that a pathway is contributing to ET2 = exposure term 2 (unitless) hours per day/24
exposure. For cases where exposure pathways have been
excluded, this decision will be reassessed as new While for most chemicals the three direct contact
scientific data become available. pathways (soil ingestion, dermal contact and particulate
inhalation) are combined, if the mechanisms of toxicity
The choice of sensitive receptors is linked to land use are different and separate toxicity reference values have
considerations, and guidelines are developed for the four been published for oral, dermal and/or inhalation
defined land uses. The most sensitive human receptor is exposures, the pathways may be evaluated separately as
chosen to represent the occupant or user for each land detailed in CCME (2006).
use, and the exposure period (i.e., the frequency, duration,
and intensity of the exposure assumed for the land use) is The soil inhalation rate is defined as the amount of
defined as presented in Table 2. respirable soil particles inhaled in a day. The soil dermal
contact rate is the amount of soil adhering to the skin in a
In the case of non-threshold substances, hazard is day. The soil ingestion rate refers to the amount of soil
necessarily assessed for an adult, as exposure is assumed ingested on a daily basis. Relative absorption factors may
to be continuous over 70 years. However, for threshold be required where the critical toxicity study used in
substances, exposure is averaged over, and TDIs developing the NO(A)EL employed an absorbed dose
measured against, the most sensitive life stage, which is rather than an administered dose, or where the critical
the toddler stage (6 months to 4 years) for all land uses toxicity study has employed a different medium than that
except industrial, where public access is restricted and under investigation. Then soil ingestion, dermal contact,
toddlers are assumed not to be present. and inhalation rates are multiplied by corresponding
relative absorption factors (AF), when these data are
available.
Derivation of Direct Contact Human Health
Soil Quality Guidelines The exposure term is the ratio of the defined exposure
period for each land use to the maximum exposure period
Direct Contact Soil Quality Guidelines for (24 hours per day 365 days per year). Exposure via soil
Threshold Substances ingestion and dermal contact is assumed to occur as a
result of discrete exposure events, and not at a constant
The SQGDH for threshold substances are calculated using rate over the day; therefore the hours per day exposed are
the following equation: not considered for these pathways (only days per year are
considered).
SQGDH = ( TDI - EDI ) SAF BW + BSC Soil type does not normally affect direct contact
[(AFG SIR) + (AFL IRS) + (AFS SR ET2)] ET1 pathways.
where
SQGDH = direct human health soil quality guideline Direct Contact Soil Quality Guidelines for Non-
(mgkg1) threshold Substances
TDI = tolerable daily intake (mgkg-1 bw per day)
EDI = estimated daily intake (multimedia exposure If the chemical is identified as a non-threshold substance,
assessment) (mgkg-1 per day) then the guideline will be derived using a critical RSD
SAF = soil allocation factor (unitless) based on incremental risks from soil exposure of both 10-5
BW = body weight (kg) and 10-6. The use of other critical risk levels can easily be
BSC = background soil concentration (mgkg-1) accommodated at a site-specific objective level. The
AFG = relative absorption factor for gut (unitless) SQGDH for non-threshold substances is established as
AFL = relative absorption factor for lung (unitless) follows:
AFS = relative absorption factor for skin (unitless)
14
necessarily imprecise nature of those models using

SQGDH = RSD BW + BSC conservative point estimates, based on data and
[(AFG SIR) + (AFL IRS) + (AFS SR)] ET professional judgment, for generic input values; as a
result, professional judgement should be used to
where determine whether the SQGHH is adjusted by these
pathways. These two check mechanisms are for the off-
SQGDH = direct human health soil quality guideline site migration of contaminants from commercial and
(mgkg-1) industrial sites to more sensitive neighbouring properties
RSD = risk specific dose (mgkg-1 per day) (Appendix C) and for exposure from ingestion of food
BW = body weight (kg) grown on contaminated soils (Appendix D).
BSC = background soil concentration (mgkg-1)
AFG = relative absorption factor for gut (unitless) If data requirements for one or more applicable pathways
AFL = relative absorption factor for lung (unitless) cannot be met, a provisional guideline can still be
AFS = relative absorption factor for skin (unitless) developed, as discussed under Derivation of the Final Soil
SIR = soil ingestion rate (kgd-1) Quality Guidelines.
IRS = soil inhalation rate (kgd-1)
SR = soil dermal contact rate (kgd-1)
ET = exposure term (unitless) = 1 Derivation of the Final Human Health Soil
Quality Guidelines
The adult is the receptor when considering lifetime cancer
risk. Absorption factors may be required when the critical Agricultural Land Use
toxicity study used in developing the cancer slope factor
has used an absorbed dose rather than an administered The direct human health soil quality guideline (SQGDH) is
dose. Absorption factors may also be required when the calculated, as are the guidelines for indirect exposure to
critical toxicity study employed a different medium in soil contaminants via infiltration of volatile compounds
developing the cancer slope factor than that under into indoor air (SQGIAQ), protection of potable
investigation. Then soil ingestion, dermal contact, and groundwater (SQGPW) and ingestion of produce, meat,
inhalation rates are multiplied by corresponding relative and milk produced on-site (SQGFI). The final SQGHH is
absorption factors (AF), when these data are available. set at the lowest value of the applicable soil quality
The exposure term is the ratio of the defined exposure guidelines. This ensures that the final SQGHH is protective
period for each land use to the maximum exposure period of all these potential contaminant media transfer
(24 hours per day 365 days per year). pathways.
Soil type does not normally affect direct contact Residential/Parkland Land Use
pathways.
The direct human health soil quality guideline (SQGDH) is
Indirect Soil Contaminant Exposure calculated; the SQGIAQ and SQGPW are calculated as well
and the final SQGHH is set at the lowest of the values
The following modelling procedures were developed to generated.
ensure that the final generic soil quality guideline will not
lead to excessive migration of a soil contaminant to For residential properties with backyard gardens, the
another medium, (e.g., air, water, and food). These check mechanisms for contamination of produce grown
indirect exposure pathways and management adjustment on-site is calculated and presented in the contaminant
factors add a level of protectiveness to the generic assessment document for possible use as a site-specific
guidelines, which permits their use at a very broad range objective. If the contaminant biomagnifies, the SQGFI is a
of sites within a land use category, but which may not be required pathway and can therefore adjust the SQGHH.
required or applicable to every site. These pathways are
further discussed in the appendices. The primary indirect
exposure pathways are the migration of soil contaminants Commercial and Industrial Land Uses
into groundwater used as drinking water (Appendix A)
and the volatilization of soil contaminants into indoor air The direct human health soil quality guideline (SQGDH) is
(Appendix B). The other two mechanisms are check calculated; as with residential land use, the SQGIAQ and
mechanisms. The term check mechanisms refers to the SQGPW are also calculated, and the SQGHH is set as the
15
lowest of the values. The procedure for checking off-site provisional, then the SQGF is also considered to be a
migration via wind and water erosion from a commercial provisional guideline.
or industrial site to adjacent more sensitive land use
(SQGOM-HH) is then applied as a check mechanism to The guiding principles for calculating the soil quality
determine the final SQGHH. guidelines are still followed when developing provisional
guidelines. However, since data requirements are relaxed,
the following principles are followed:
DERIVATION OF THE FINAL SOIL QUALITY
GUIDELINES be precautionary; use higher safety factors where
degree of uncertainty is high;
Final Guideline Derivation
keep in mind that provisional environmental soil
The final recommended soil quality guideline (SQGF) quality guidelines for agricultural and
protects both environmental and human health. The lower residential/parkland land uses are intended to
of the two guidelines obtained through the derivation of approximate no appreciable effect levels while
the SQGE and the SQGHH, will be recommended as the those for commercial and industrial land uses
SQGF for each land use category and soil type (if allow for a low level of effects;
applicable), subject to the restrictions discussed in the
section below. An overview of the entire guideline
keep in mind that provisional human health soil
derivation process outlining the major steps leading to
quality guidelines are intended to result in no
derivation of the SQGF, is illustrated in Figure 4.
appreciable risk to humans for all activities
associated with the intended land use;
Provisional Guidelines
In order for a final soil quality guideline to be developed, be consistent with the spirit of the protocol.
guidelines for certain required pathways (see Section 8 in
Part B and Section 6 in Part C of CCME 2006) must be If the provisional SQGF is higher than an existing
calculated, and the data requirements for each of these guideline, such as a 1991 interim soil criterion (if
required pathways must be met. In some cases, though, it applicable), the previously existing guideline is retained
may not be possible to calculate a guideline for a as the SQGF.
particular pathway, or it may not be possible to
completely meet the data requirements for the calculation Considerations Other Than Toxicity
of a pathway.
Contaminants may have adverse effects in addition to
producing toxic responses in human and ecological
However, literature searches often yield data that do not
receptors. These may include aesthetic concerns (e.g.,
meet the requirements of the soil protocol, but still
odours), explosive hazards, free-phase liquid formation,
provide useful toxicity information. Also, toxicity tests
or damage to utilities and infrastructure.
using standard methodologies may produce data that do
not meet the regular quality standards defined by
If there is evidence that a contaminant may cause
toxicologists, due to difficulties in handling and
significant environmental effects beyond toxicity to
evaluating certain substances such as volatile organic
human and ecological receptors, then this evidence is
chemicals in the context of a soil contact test, for
evaluated. A soil quality guideline for management
example.
considerations (SQGM) is developed to reflect any
additional concerns associated with the contaminant.
While acknowledging the need for toxicity and exposure
data of the highest quality, it is considered to be better to There may be considerable uncertainty in the
establish a guideline based on incomplete data than to not development of the SQGM, and for some concerns
establish a risk-based guideline. In these cases, the SQGE associated with contaminants only a qualitative evaluation
and SQGHH are determined, but are designated as may be possible. Therefore, professional judgement is
Provisional Guidelines to reflect the uncertainty and used to determine whether the SQGF should be adjusted
data gaps in the guideline development. A guideline will based on the SQGM.
also be designated as a Provisional Guideline if the EDI
exceeds the TDI. If either the SQGE or SQGHH are
16
Evaluation against Plant Nutritional Where applicable, the SQGF should also be compared to
Requirement, Geochemical Background, an acceptable geochemical background soil concentration to
and Practical Quantitation Limits ensure the final value is not below background levels.
Where the SQGF is below the accepted geochemical
Guidelines should be reasonable, workable, and usable. background soil concentration, the accepted background
Guidelines are developed by applying scientifically concentration replaces the SQGF generated using this soil
derived information, backed by professional judgment protocol.
where data gaps occur. Occasionally, defined exposure-
based procedures produce numerical guidelines that Finally, a candidate SQGF for a given substance should be
conflict either with plant nutritional requirements or checked against the current practical quantitation limit
geochemical background. When a conflict of this type achievable in Canada. Where the candidate SQGF is
occurs, guidelines must be adjusted as described below. below the limit of practical quantitation (generally 5 times
the analytical detection limit), a footnote should be added
Some chemicals (e.g., copper and zinc) considered to the SQGF stating laboratories may not be able to
hazardous at high levels also provide minimum reliably measure concentrations of this magnitude. The
nutritional requirements for the maintenance of plant SQGF should not be adjusted based on the practical
growth at lower levels. The SQGF determined for these quantitation limit, however.
chemicals may fall below the nutritional requirements.
For agricultural and residential/parkland land uses, Because guidelines are based primarily on biological
maintenance of nutritional requirements is critical to effects, and background exposures are, wherever
sustaining the primary activity on these lands (i.e., possible, incorporated into the procedures, it is
growing crops, grass, and trees). Accordingly, the SQGF anticipated that very few candidate SQGF will require
for these land use categories is compared to minimum adjustment. Where any of the three evaluation procedures
plant nutritional requirements. If the SQGF is below described above does result in modification of a candidate
acceptable minimum plant nutritional requirement levels, SQGF, this condition will be noted in the assessment
then insufficient nutritional requirements for plant growth document for the substance.
may result at the value of the SQGF. The SQGE should
therefore default to the soil concentration required for
minimum plant nutrition. This value is not applied to the
commercial or industrial land use categories because it is
anticipated that the resulting SQGF will be above plant
nutritional requirements.
17
Environmental Process Human Health Process
Soil-to-Groundwater Soil Contact Soil Ingestion Nutrient & Offsite Direct Potable Food Offsite
Vapour
Modelling Process Process Energy Cycling Migration Pathways Inhalation Groundwater Consumption Migration
(Agr; Res for Check Check Process Process Process Check Check
biomagnifying) (Com, Ind) (Com, Ind)
Agr Res
SQGFL SQGLW SQGIR SQGSC SQGI SQGDH SQGIAQ SQGPW SQGFI

(Agr) (Agr)
SQGE SQGHH
SQGF
Other Considerations
Management & Agr applies only for agricultural
SQGM
Non-Toxicity
Res applies only for residential/parkland
Considerations
Com applies only for commercial
Ind applies only for industrial
Check against:
- plant nutrient requirements check mechanism
- background concentrations
Figure 4: Overview of Steps Leading to Derivation of a Final Soil Quality Guideline
References . 1996c. A framework for ecological risk assessment: General

guidance. CCME, Winnipeg.
. 2001. Canada-Wide Standard for Petroleum Hydrocarbons
CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1991. (PHC) in Soil: Scientific Rationale. CCME, Winnipeg.
Interim Canadian environmental quality criteria for contaminated sites. . 2006. A protocol for the derivation of environmental and human
CCME, Winnipeg. health soil quality guidelines (2006 revision). CCME, Winnipeg.
. 1995. Protocol for the derivation of Canadian sediment quality Long, E.R., and L.G. Morgan. 1990. The potential for biological effects
guidelines for the protection of aquatic life. CCME EPC-98E. CCME, for sediment-sorbed contaminants tested in the National Status and
Winnipeg. [Reprinted in Canadian environmental quality guidelines, Trends Program. NOS OMA 52. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Chapter 6, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1999, Administration Technical Memorandum. Seattle, WA.
Winnipeg.] SECOFASE (Development, Improvement and Standardisation of Test
. 1996a. A protocol for the derivation of environmental and Systems for Assessing Sublethal Effects of Chemicals on Fauna in the
human health soil quality guidelines. CCME, Winnipeg. Soil Ecosystem). 1993. First Technical Report. Report from a
. 1996b. Guidance manual for developing site-specific soil workshop held in Silkeborg, Denmark, January 1819. H. Lokke and
quality remediation objectives for contaminated sites in Canada. C.A.M. van Gestel (eds.). National Environmental Research Institute,
CCME, Winnipeg. [Reprinted in Canadian environmental quality Silkeborg, Denmark.
guidelines, Chapter 7, Canadian Council of Ministers of the
Environment, 1999, Winnipeg.]
18
Appendix A
Evaluation of Groundwater Exposure Pathways
Soil contamination can lead to groundwater where Ka is the acidity constant for the contaminant.
contamination. Canadian soil quality guidelines are
designed to prevent unacceptable transfers of contami-
nants to groundwater systems. Specifically, the protection Calculation of Soil Quality Guidelines for the
of groundwater beneath a remediated site used for Protection of Groundwater
drinking water by humans or for agricultural purposes
(livestock watering or irrigation water) is considered, as is The groundwater pathways are addressed using a
the protection of freshwater life in nearby surface water groundwater model developed by the British Columbia
bodies hydraulically connected to groundwater beneath
Contaminated Sites Soil Taskgroup (CSST), based on the
the remediated site.
US EPA (1996) Soil Screening Guidance and using
The groundwater pathways are applicable to non- saturated groundwater transport equations developed by
dissociating organic contaminants and to some ionizing Domenico and Robbins (1985). The model is based on
organic compounds provided that sorption of the one-dimensional groundwater flow, and incorporates a
dissociated and non-dissociated forms can be simply variety of mechanisms including dispersion,
described, as in the case of weak organic acids. These biodegradation, adsorption-desorption, and dilution of
pathways are not applicable to metals on a generic basis leachate into groundwater.
because partitioning of metal contaminants between
sorbed and dissolved forms in soils is complex and The groundwater protection guidelines are calculated
affected by many site-specific parameters; potential using the following equations:
effects of metals on groundwater systems should be
evaluated on a site-specific basis. Soil/Leachate Partitioning
Partitioning of Contaminants Between Soil
and Soil Water + H ' a
SQGGW = C L K d + w
b
Partitioning of contaminants between soil and soil water
can be described by the following equation:
SQGGW = soil quality guideline for the protection of
Cs = Kd x Cw1/n groundwater (mgkg-1) (i.e., SQGPW, SQGFL,
SQGIR, SQGLW)
where Cs = concentration in soil CL = allowable leachate concentration at source
Cw = concentration in soil water (mgL-1) calculated below
Kd = distribution coefficient Kd = distribution coefficient (cm3g-1)
n = empirical constant w = water filled porosity (unitless)
H' = dimensionless Henrys Law constant = H x
For most non-dissociating organic compounds, n = 1. For 42.32
these compounds, Kd can be estimated as the product of H = Henrys Law constant (atm-m3mol-1)
the organic carbon partitioning coefficient (Koc) and the a = air-filled porosity (unitless)
organic carbon fraction of the soil (foc). b = soil bulk density in contaminant partitioning
zone (gcm-3)
For certain dissociating organic compounds, such as weak
organic acids, Kd can be estimated as: Mixing Zone Unsaturated/Saturated
Kd = Koc x Foc x Q
where Q is the proportion of the substance in non-ionized
form. Q can be determined from the equilibrium acidity Z K i
expression:
C L = C gw 1 + d H
IX
Q = 1/(1 + Ka/[H+]) CL = allowable chemical concentration in
leachate (mgL-1)
19
Cgw = allowable chemical concentration in KHi

groundwater at the source (mgL-1) calculated v= ; Rf = 1+ b Kd
below ne R f n
Zd = average thickness of mixing zone (m)
calculated below Cw = allowable chemical concentration in water at
KH = hydraulic conductivity in the saturated zone receptor (mgL-1) (i.e., drinking water guideline,
-1
(my ) freshwater life guideline, irrigation water
i = hydraulic gradient (unitless) guideline, livestock watering guideline as
I = infiltration rate (my-1) = precipitation appropriate)
minus runoff and evapotranspiration x = distance from source to receptor (m)
X = length of source parallel to groundwater x,y,z = Cartesian coordinates relating source and
flow (m) receptor (m); y, z assumed to be 0
t = time since contaminant release (years)
Calculation of average thickness of mixing zone: Cgw = allowable chemical concentration in
Z d = r + s ; Zd cannot exceed da groundwater at source (mgL-1)
x = longitudinal dispersivity tensor = 0.1x
r = mixing depth available due to dispersion y = lateral dispersivity tensor = 0.1x
and diffusion (m) = 0.01 X Ls = decay constant (y-1) in saturated zone:
s = mixing depth available due to infiltration
rate and groundwater flow rate (m)
Ls =
t 1 US
(e )
0.693 0.07 d

2.178 XI
2
s = d a 1 e K H id a
d = depth from surface to groundwater surface
(m)
da = depth of unconfined aquifer (m) t1/2S = biodegradation half-life (y)
X = length of source parallel to groundwater v = velocity of contaminant (my-1)
flow (m) KH = hydraulic conductivity in the saturated zone
I = infiltration rate (my-1) = precipitation (my-1)
minus runoff and evapotranspiration i = hydraulic gradient (unitless)
KH = hydraulic conductivity in the saturated zone n = total porosity of soil = 1 - b/2.65 (unitless)
(my-1) ne = effective soil porosity (unitless)
i = hydraulic gradient (unitless) Y = source width (m) perpendicular to
groundwater flow
Rf = retardation factor (unitless)
Saturated Groundwater Zone b = soil bulk density in saturated zone (gcm-3)
Kd = distribution coefficient (cm3g-1) see above
For the SQGPW, SQGLW and SQGIR, Cgw = Cw, since it is
assumed that a water well or dugout could be installed at Further details regarding the application of the
the edge of (or even within) the remediated site. groundwater model are presented in CCME (2006).
Calculation of the SQGFL is based on an assumed 10 m
lateral separation between the remediated soils and a
surface water body. References
C gw x 4 L 2
1 CCME (Canadian Council of the Ministers of Environment). 2006. A

Cw (x, y, z , t ) = exp 1 1 + s x protocol for the derivation of environmental and human health soil
4 2 x v
quality guidelines. CCME, Winnipeg.
Domenico, P.A. and G.A. Robbins. 1985. A New Method of
Contaminant Plume Analysis, Groundwater 23:476-485.
4 Ls x 2
1
US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1996. Soil
x vt1 + y Y / 2
v ( y + Y / 2) Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document, EPA/540/R-
erfc erf erf
2( y x ) 2 2( y x ) 2
95/128.
2( x vt ) 2
1 1 1
20
Appendix B
Migration of Contaminated Vapours into Buildings
Volatile organic compounds can migrate from soil into Partitioning of contaminants into soil gas (see
the basements of buildings. For these compounds, Appendix A of CCME 2006).
inhalation of indoor vapours is often the dominant Diffusion of vapour-phase contaminants through
exposure pathway. soil to the building slab.
Advective flow of soil gas into a building due to
Vapours may be released from soil to the outside air at pressure differences between the building and
the ground surface, in addition to entering buildings. the external atmosphere.
However, since buildings are enclosed spaces (and Diffusion of contaminants through soil-filled
therefore have less air circulation than the outdoors), and cracks in the building foundation.
buildings are often under-pressured due to heating
(resulting in pressure-driven movement of soil gas into Johnson and Ettinger (1991) provided one of the first
the building), migration of vapours into buildings poses a screening level models to assess potential risks posed by
much greater health risk than migration of vapours to the the indoor infiltration of volatile contaminants emanating
outdoors. from soil and/or groundwater, and it has become a widely
accepted work in this area.
Processes involved in the migration of vapours into
buildings include: Guidelines for the protection of indoor air quality can be
calculated using the equations below:
Threshold chemicals:
SQGIAQ = [(TC Ca ){ w + ( KOC )( fOC )( b ) + ( H ' )(a )}(SAF)(DFi)(103 g / kg)] /[(H ' )( b )(ET )(106 cm3 / m3 )] + BSC
Non-threshold chemicals:
SQGIAQ = [(RSC){ w + ( KOC )( fOC )( b ) + ( H ' )(a )}(DFi)(103 g / kg)] /[(H ' )( b )(ET )(106 cm3 / m3 )] + BSC
Where: SQGIAQ = soil quality guideline for the protection of indoor air quality
TC = tolerable concentration or reference concentration (mgm-3)
RSC = risk-specific concentration
Ca = background indoor/outdoor air concentration (mgm-3)
SAF = soil allocation factor (unitless)
BW = body weight (kg)
a = vapour-filled porosity (unitless) = effective porosity (n)
moisture-filled porosity
w = moisture-filled porosity (unitless)
n = soil porosity (unitless)
KOC = organic carbon partition coefficient (mLg-1)
fOC = soil organic carbon fraction in contaminant partitioning zone (g carbon per g soil)
b = soil dry bulk density in contaminant partitioning zone (gcm-3)
H = unitless Henrys Law Constant = H/RT
H = Henrys Law Constant (atmm3mol-1)
R = gas constant (8.2 x 10-5 atmm3mol-1K-1)
T = annual average soil temperature (K)
DFi = dilution factor from soil gas to indoor air (unitless):
see derivation below
ET = exposure term (unitless)
21
Calculation of DF for indoor infiltration pathway:

1
DFi =

DFi = dilution factor from soil gas concentration to indoor air concentration
(unitless)
= attenuation coefficient
= (contaminant vapour concentration in the building)/(vapour concentration at the contaminant source)
10 3
D eff
T Da a 2
n
DTeff = overall effective porous media diffusion coefficient based on vapour-phase concentrations for the
region between the source and foundation (cm2s-1)
Da = pure component molecular diffusivities in air (cm2s-1)
a = vapour-filled porosity (unitless)
n = total soil porosity (unitless)
QB = LBWB H B ( ACH ) (3600 s h)
QB = building ventilation rate (cm3s-1)

LB = building length (cm)
WB = building width (cm)
HB = building height, including basement (cm)
ACH = air exchanges per hour (h-1)
2 P k v X crack
Qsoil =
2( Zcrack )
ln
rcrack
Qsoil = volumetric flow rate of soil gas into the building (cm3s-1)
P = pressure differential (gcm-1s-2)
kv = soil permeability to vapour flow (cm2)
Xcrack = length of idealized cylinder (cm)
= vapour viscosity (gcm-1s-1)
Zcrack = distance below grade to idealized cylinder (cm)
rcrack = radius of idealized cylinder (cm)
DTeff AB Qsoil Lcrack

exp crack
QB LT D Acrack
=
Qsoil Lcrack DTeff AB DTeff AB Qsoil Lcrack
exp crack + + exp crack 1
D Acrack QB LT Qsoil LT D Acrack
22
DTeff = effective porous media diffusion coefficient (cm2s-1)

AB = building area (cm2)
QB B = building ventilation rate (cm3s-1)
LT = distance from contaminant source to foundation (cm)
Qsoil = volumetric flow rate of soil gas into the building (cm3s-1)
Lcrack = thickness of the foundation (cm)
Dcrack = effective vapour-pressure diffusion coefficient through the crack (cm2s-1)
Acrack = area of cracks through which contaminant vapours enter the building (cm2)
References
CCME (Canadian Council of the Ministers of Environment). 2006. A

protocol for the derivation of environmental and human health soil
Johnson, P.C. and R.A. Ettinger. 1991. Heuristic model for predicting
the intrusion rate of contaminant vapours into buildings. Environ. Sci.
Tech. 25: 1445-1452.
23
Appendix C
Off-site Migration Check Calculations
Soil quality guidelines for commercial and industrial sites Reference
consider on-site exposure only. However, wind and water
erosion of soil and subsequent deposition can transfer CCME (Canadian Council of the Ministers of Environment). 2006. A
contaminated soil from one property to another. The off- protocol for the derivation of environmental and human health soil
site migration check has been developed to address the
possibility of subsequent movement of soil from a
commercial or industrial property to a more sensitive
adjacent property (CCME 2006).
The universal soil loss equation and the wind erosion

equation are used to estimate the transfer of soil to an
adjacent property (CCME 2006). It is possible to
calculate the concentration (Ci) in the eroded soil from the
commercial or industrial site that will increase the
contaminant concentration in the receiving soil to equal
the agricultural guideline within a specified period of
time. If the guideline for commercial or industrial sites is
above Ci, then more sensitive land adjacent to a
commercial or industrial property could become
unacceptably contaminated via erosion and off-site
deposition. The following equation has been derived to
allow the calculation of soil quality guidelines for offsite
migration (see CCME 2006 for derivation):
SQGOM = 14.3 SQGA - 13.3 BSC
where
SQGOM = soil quality guideline for offsite migration

(mgkg-1)
SQGA = soil quality guideline for agricultural land use
(mgkg-1)
BSC = background concentration of contaminant in the
receiving soil (mgkg-1)
The environmental soil quality guideline for offsite

migration (SQGOM-E) is calculated using the SQGE for the
agricultural land use; the human health soil quality
guideline for offsite migration (SQGOM-HH) is calculated
using the SQGHH for the agricultural land use.
24
Appendix D
Human Food Consumption Check Calculations
Humans can be indirectly exposed to contaminants in soil
through food chain contamination of produce, meat, and log Bv = 1.59 - 0.58 log Kow
milk. Soil quality guidelines should be adjusted to avoid
an unacceptable contribution to the total daily intake of
contaminants via homegrown produce, meat, and milk Then, the total contaminant intake from food (Tres) for
(CCME 2006). residential/parkland land use must be calculated using the
following equation:
The concentration estimated to occur in food as a result of
soils at the guideline concentration must be less than the Tres = Tf - Ibp + Ip
maximum residue limit (MRL) for each chemical
published under the Food and Drug Act. In addition, the where
total daily intake estimated using the food consumption
check must not exceed the total background exposure Tf = total estimated background intake of contaminants
from food (i.e., estimated daily intake [EDI]) by more from food
than 20% of the difference between the tolerable daily Ibp = background intake of contaminants from produce
intake (TDI) and the EDI, for non-carcinogens. For consumption
carcinogens, the total contaminant intake must not exceed
the risk-specific dose (RSD) for a specified cancer risk. For noncarcinogen contaminants, if Tres > 0.2 (TDI - EDI)
+ Tf , the contaminant exposure from backyard produce
should be evaluated on a site-specific basis since the
Residential Setting percentage of homegrown produce is highly variable. For
carcinogen contaminants, Tres should not exceed the RSD
For residential land use, an estimated 10% of all fruits for the applicable cancer risk level (CCME 2006). The
and vegetables consumed are homegrown whereas neither soil quality guideline should be modified accordingly.
milk nor meat is produced. Thus, human intake of
contaminants resulting from consumption of backyard
produce can be defined as: Agricultural Setting
Ip = {(Ph Pc Bv SQGHH) + [(1 - Ph) Pc Pr]} / For agricultural land use, an estimated 50% of all fruits
BW and vegetables, 50% of the meat, and 100% of the milk
consumed are produced on site. Thus, human intake of
where contaminants resulting from consumption of produce
Ip = total intake of contaminants from produce must be recalculated (Ip) using the 50% value and added
(mgkg-1 per day) to the intake of contaminants resulting from the
Ph = percent of homegrown produce for residential consumption of meat and milk, which can be calculated
land use (10%) as follows:
Pc = produce consumption rate (kgd-1)
Bv
B = bioconcentration factor for produce for meat: Ib = {(M h M c Bp SQGHH) + [(1 - M h)
SQGHH = human health soil quality guideline for M c M r]} / BW
residential/parkland land use (mgkg-1)
Pr = average contaminant concentration in retail where
produce (mgkg-1)
BW = body weight of receptor (toddler for Ib = total intake of contaminants from beef (mgkg-1
noncarcinogens, adult for carcinogens) per day), assumed beef is the major type of
ingested meat originating from grazing animals
When a bioconcentration factor for produce is not Mh = percent of meat home produced
available for a specific contaminant, the following Mc = meat consumption rate (kgd-1)
equation can be used to evaluate Bv for organic Bp B = biotransfer factor for beef
contaminants (Travis and Arms 1988):
25
SQGHH = human health soil quality guideline for Ibp = background intake of contaminants from produce
agricultural land use (mgkg-1) consumption
Mr = average contaminant concentration in retail beef Ibb = background intake of contaminants from meat
(mgkg-1) consumption
BW = body weight of receptor (toddler for Ibm = background intake of contaminants from milk
noncarcinogens, adult for carcinogens) consumption
For noncarcinogen contaminants, Tag should not be
When a biotransfer factor for beef is not available for a greater than 0.2(TDI - EDI) + Tf. For carcinogen
specific contaminant, the following equation can be used contaminants, Tag should not exceed the RSD for the
to evaluate Bp for organic contaminants (Travis and Arms applicable cancer risk level (CCME 2006). Based on the
1988): above intake rates, soil quality guidelines for the food
ingestion pathway can therefore be calculated using the
log Bp = 7.6 + log Kow following equations:
for milk: Im = {(MKh MKc Bm SQGHH) + For threshold chemicals:

[(1 - MKh) MKc MKr]} / BW
where
SQG FI =
(TDI EDI ) BW SAF + BSC
Im = total intake of contaminants from milk (mgkg-1 (Ph Pc Bv ) + (M h M c B p SIRc ) + (MK h MK c Bm SIRc )
per day)
MKh = percent of milk home produced For non-threshold chemicals:
MKc = milk consumption rate (kgd-1)
Bm
B = biotransfer factor for milk
SQGHH = human health soil quality guideline for
agricultural land use (mgkg-1)
MKr = average contaminant concentration in retail
RSD BW
milk (mgkg-1) SQGFI =
(Ph Pc Bv ) + (M h M c B p SIRc ) + (MK h MK c Bm SIRc )
+ BSC
BW = body weight of receptor (toddler for
where:
noncarcinogens, adult for carcinogens)
TDI = tolerable daily intake (mgkg-1 bw per day)
EDI = estimated daily intake (multimedia exposure
When a bioconcentration factor for milk is not available
assessment) (mgkg-1 per day)
for a specific chemical, the following equation can be
RSD = risk-specific dose (mgkg-1 bw per day)
used to evaluate Bm for organic contaminants (Travis and
SAF = soil allocation factor (unitless)
Arms 1988):
log Bm = -8.1 + log Kow
Then, the total contaminant intake from food (Tag) for

References
agricultural land use can be calculated:
CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 2006. A
Tag = Tf - Ibp - Ibb - Ibm + Ip' + Ib + Im protocol for the derivation of environmental and human health soil
where Travis, C.C. and A.D. Arms. 1988. Bioconcentration of organics in beef,
milk and vegetation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 22(3):271274.
Tf = total estimated background intake of contaminants

from food
26
Reference listing:
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2007. Canadian soil quality guidelines for the protection of environmental and
human health: Summary of A Protocol for the Derivation of Environmental and Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines. In: Canadian
environmental quality guidelines, Chapter 7, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1999 (updated 2007), Winnipeg.
For further scientific information, contact: For additional copies, contact:
Environment Canada CCME Documents

National Guidelines and Standards Office Toll Free: (800) 805-3025
351 St. Joseph Blvd. www.ccme.ca
Gatineau, QC K1A 0H3
Phone: (819) 953-1550 Aussi disponible en franais.
Facsimile: (819) 953-0461
E-mail: ceqg-rcqe@ec.gc.ca
Internet: http://www.ec.gc.ca/ceqg-rcqe
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 2007

Excerpt from Publication No. 1299; ISBN 1-896997-34-1
27

Summary of A Protocol For The Derivation of Environmental and Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines (En) PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Summary of A Protocol For The Derivation of Environmental and Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines (En) PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines PROTOCOL

for the Protection of Environmental SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION described in the original version of the soil protocol

Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines

Objectives - Numerical limits or narrative statements Protecting the Environment

indirect exposure pathways are evaluated conservatively

Level of Ecological Protection and Relevant

The level of protection provided by the guidelines

Environmental soil quality guidelines rely on sensitive

Soil and Food Ingestion Herbivores, Herbivoresa, None None

Toxicological Environmental Fate

Evaluate Toxicological Examine Environmental

Guideline Derivation Process

Consider for which land use guideline is being derived

Derive SQGE using lowest of the applicable procedures

Figure 2: Overall Procedure for Deriving Environmental Soil Quality Guidelines

residential/parkland land uses. The ECL represents a

Consider under which

Determine lowest Determine lowest Insufficient data to

Median Effects Method Derivation of Soil Quality Guidelines for Soil

from toxicological studies involving experimental

For non-threshold contaminants (currently restricted to Assumptions

The first step in the derivation of an SQGHH considers all

Direct soil exposure Ingestion Ingestion Ingestion Ingestion

Indirect soil exposure Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater

necessarily imprecise nature of those models using

Environmental Process Human Health Process

SQGFL SQGLW SQGIR SQGSC SQGI SQGDH SQGIAQ SQGPW SQGFI

Figure 4: Overview of Steps Leading to Derivation of a Final Soil Quality Guideline

References . 1996c. A framework for ecological risk assessment: General

Cgw = allowable chemical concentration in KHi

BSC = background soil concentration (mgkg-1)

Calculation of DF for indoor infiltration pathway:

QB = LBWB H B ( ACH ) (3600 s h)

QB = building ventilation rate (cm3s-1)

DTeff AB Qsoil Lcrack

DTeff = effective porous media diffusion coefficient (cm2s-1)

CCME (Canadian Council of the Ministers of Environment). 2006. A

The universal soil loss equation and the wind erosion

SQGOM = 14.3 SQGA - 13.3 BSC

SQGOM = soil quality guideline for offsite migration

The environmental soil quality guideline for offsite

for milk: Im = {(MKh MKc Bm SQGHH) + For threshold chemicals:

Then, the total contaminant intake from food (Tag) for

Tf = total estimated background intake of contaminants

For further scientific information, contact: For additional copies, contact:

Environment Canada CCME Documents

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 2007

S-ar putea să vă placă și