Ecotoxicity standards

As expected, the manganese content of the slag increased, but this was not deleterious and the leachability of the slag did not increase. A waste is considered toxic when a leachate shows a value for the ecotoxicity standard, EC50, of greater than, or equal to,... 

Ecotoxicity assessment of water samples was carried out, in parallel to chemical analysis, using three standardized bioassays based on the micro-crustacean Daphnia magna, the algae Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata, and the bioluminescent bacteria Vibrio fischeri. 

The ISO protocol for the biochemical response EROD (ISO 23893-2/AWI) as a recent example of a bioanalytical (biomarker) [49,50] method standardised under ISO for fish needs harmonisation with the other test systems and between the laboratories (users) before implementation. Use of biomarkers (biochemical responses) in multi-arrays for environmental monitoring according to Hansen et al. [50] is complementary to chemical analysis since they can alert for the presence of ecotoxic compounds. Bringing into the WFD, the effect-related approaches concerning bioassays and biomarkers are only relevant in the context of the QN of environmental relevant substances and the good chemical status. But it is rather difficult to transfer the monitored biochemical responses or biomarkers into an operational effect-related standard. They serve as the basis for environmental protection against hazardous substances. In relation to... 

The United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) includes an internationally standardized guidance procedure on Transformation/Dissolution Protocol (T/DP) for metals and sparingly soluble metal compounds (United Nations, 2007), recently validated by the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). To establish the acute aquatic hazard classification level of a metal-bearing substance under the GHS, data from the T/DP are compared with an acute ecotoxicity reference value (ERV) derived under conditions similar to those of the T/DP. 

Europe s controversy over soft PVC toys looks set to continue after EU health experts rejected the best available method for assessing the dangers to children. The so-called Dutch migration test was designed to mimic the way phthalate softeners leak out of PVC when it is sucked or chewed. Manufacturers had hoped the EU s Scientific Committee for Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment would accept the method as a standard test for phthalate migration, allowing it to be used across the EU, but the committee ruled that the Dutch test was unreliable. It also rejected a similar test developed in the UK, and issued a list of changes that would have to be made before either... 

Standardized ecotoxicity tests (bioassays) have been developed and optimized over the last few years and encompass the effects on bacteria, daphnia and fish (DIN 38 412, parts 30, 31 and 34). These tests are designed to assess the toxicity on aquatic organisms. They are quick to perform, easy to handle and comparatively inexpensive, with the goal of allowing the toxicity of a complex water matrix to be estimated. However, they use pre-concentration steps so that it is possible that not all byproducts are recovered (which itself is hard to prove). 

The added SQS approach assumes that only the anthropogenic added fraction of a natural element in the soil should be managed (Crommentuijn et al. 1997). The added quality standard is derived using ecotoxicity data obtained by subtracting the background values from the ecotoxicity value [EC(D)x] of the tested soils. 

If a quality standard is derived by applying an AF of 10 or 100 on the lowest eco-toxicity value, additional ecotoxicity data could be collected sufficient to develop an SSD (OECD 1992) on which no, or a lower, AF is applied. The main underlying assumptions of the SSD approach are as follows ... 

At the end of Section 5.2 we concluded that in order to make a well-informed risk management of chemicals possible, REACH would have to provide us with the minimal information necessary for determining whether a substance is classifiable with respect to the standard criteria for endpoints such as acute toxicity, irritation, sensitization, carcinogenicity, and ecotoxicity. We can now answer the question whether this is achieved for substances produced in yearly volumes above 10 t by at least one producer it will be achieved by the year 2018 for most of these endpoints (but not for carcinogenicity). 

The OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals is a collection of standard methods used by professionals in governments, industry, academic institutions, and independent laboratories for safety testing of chemical substances. They cover tests for physical-chemical properties, effects on biotic systems (ecotoxicity), environmental fate (degradation/ accumulation), and health effects (toxicity) (see Table 1). The Test Guidelines are systematically updated to respond to scientific progress or to address new needs identified by member countries. They are published in two loose-leaf binders, and are also available in a CD-ROM version. 

The results gained with the ecotoxicity tests are presented in Table 5.2.4. With its standard application times, Microtox test showed positive results (inhibition 9.8%) only for PAHs, (RM14) after 15 min, which means that this tests is not sensitive to the presence of pesticides at the tests concentration ranges. The Daphnia test detected the presence of both target compound groups, however, only with 48 h of tests time. It proved more sensitive to present concentration of pesticides than PAHs. The Tham-nocephalus test was the most sensitive out of the applied ones for pesticides, but did not react at all to the PAH concentration of RM14. 

Another important characteristic is that of precision. This becomes evident only when repeat measurements are made, because precision refers to the amount of agreement between repeated measurements (the standard deviation around the mean estimate). Precision is subject to both random and systematic errors. In industrial quality control and chemical analysis, Shewhart Control Charts provide a means of assessing the precision of repeat measurements but these approaches are rarely used in ecotoxicity testing. The effect is that we generally understand little about either the accuracy or the precision of most bioassays. 

Eco-efficiency analysis can be expanded to include an assessment of the social dimension of the sustainabUity-analysis (SEEbalance methodology) [24]. In this way, it is possible to obtain an integrated assessment of economic, ecological and social aspects of products and processes, and introduce the ecotoxicity evaluation model as a standard tool to the environmental dimension of the analysis. 

At EU level the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment (CSTEE) has established standard protocols for the extraction of phthalates from plasticized PVC toys. In 1999 the European Commission banned the use of DEHP in PVC toys and other easily mouthed items intended for children under 3 years of age as a precaution against the uncertain impact of phthalates on young children [127]. 

Ecotoxicity can only be measured by the application of biological methods, whereas chemical analysis determines concentrations of defined chemicals that may be used to deduce toxic effects. All concentration levels such as screening values, guideline values, threshold concentrations, benchmark concentrations and trigger values used for the assessment of contaminated media (water, soil, sediments, etc.) should ideally be derived from the observation of biological effects. Comparing pollutant concentrations with these usually conservative standard values is a common practice in the preliminary assessment of contaminated sites. The integration of further information, such as ecotoxicity data from the site, can improve the risk assessment process and enable a more reliable prediction of environmental threats. 

The answer to this question is yes For example, EMs are useful for extrapolating recovery processes and identifying the ecological relevance of effects observed in standard lab tests, in particular for birds and mammals. However, care must be taken not to model only species that are used in generation of standard ecotox endpoints because these are often chosen for their ease of culture rather than for the representativeness of their life histories. It is important to include vulnerable species in order to get a representative picture of the effects of pesticides on nontarget organisms (Chapter 4). 

The information required for a notification is the chemical identity, amount manufactured or imported, use, physico-chemical properties, ecotoxicity studies, available mutagenicity studies and animal toxicity, indir t long-term effects on humans and recommendations for disposal and labelling. The data requirements for the notification of new substances are based on the OECD MPD and arc very similar to those in the EC. The minimum information required is listed in Table 34.1. There are no official reduced data requirements for notification of substances to be supplied only in low amounts, although FOEFL will negotiate on a case-by-case basis for certain of the standard tests to be omitted, especially if the substance is to be used in special applications or has special disposal methods which minimise environmental contamination. Studies are to be conducted in compliance with GLP to OECD guidelines or their equivalent. 

---