1. The use of the GEMAS data for compliance with European Chemicals Legislation Ilse Schoeters, Rio Tinto Koen Oorts, Arche EuroGeoSurveys Workshop FAO, Rome, 5 December 2013

2. Outline European Chemical legislation – background Assessing risks to soil organisms – method and data requirements Use of GEMAS data for risk assessment of metals in soil 2

3. European Chemical legislation - background Chemicals produced and imported in the EU Risk assessment to health and environment Scale: local, regional and continental Method: EU guidance documents Who? ESR: Member States REACH: producers/importers No registration – no market ESR 1993 REACH 2006 ESR: Existing Substances Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 REACH: Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (EC) No 1907/2006 3

4. PEC Predicted Exposure Concentration Monitoring Modelling PNEC Predicted No Effect Concentration Assessing risks to soil organisms – method Continental, regional, local scale 4

5. Issues for metals 1.Natural background & Spatial variation 2.Toxicity is a function of soil properties & Spatial variation 5 (From Salminen et al., 2005, Fig. et al., 2009, p.206)

6. Soil compartment – data requirements Metal concentrations in soil Soil properties influencing bio-availability and toxicity of metals pH, Organic Carbon, clay, effective Cationic Exchange Capacity (eCEC) Soil uses: agricultural soil, grazing land soil natural soil Top soil, e.g., 0-10 cm grazing land soil, 0-20 cm agricultural soil Preferable Geo-referenced 6

7. Available soil monitoring data in 2008 (1) Many data not geo-referenced Statistical data - Raw data not available/accessible Combination of local, regional, continental data Different sampling methods, analytical methods Different sampling densities  Bias towards data intensive countries/regions 7

8. Available soil monitoring data in 2008 (2) 8 Smith, 2004

9. GEMAS data – the solution Equal coverage of EU member states Harmonised sampling method Harmonised analytical method Data collected according to REACH needs Top 10 cm grazing land Top 20 cm arable land Aqua regia – metal concentrations Geo-referenced Coupled data  Accurate risk assessment at local, regional and continental scale 9

10. 10 Thank you for your attention and Koen Oorts will continue with the Risk Assessment

11. 11 Use of GEMAS data for risk assessment of metals in soil Koen Oorts, Arche Ilse Schoeters, Rio Tinto EuroGeoSurveys Workshop FAO, Rome, 5 December, 2013

12. 12 Risk assessment of metals ExposureEffects MetalAbiotic factor CoeCEC CueCEC, pH, Organic carbon and clay NieCEC ZneCEC, pH and background Zn PbeCEC MoClay and pH (From Reimann et al., 2014, Fig. 11.63.5, p.465)

13. 13 Risk assessment of metals

14. 14 GEMAS PEC = Predicted Environmental Concentration PNEC = Predicted No Effect Concentration RCR = Risk Characterisation Ratio, i.e. PEC/PNEC RWC = Reasonable Worst Case Distribution of RCR for all individual points Coupled PEC and PNEC data? PEC and PNEC data? Data geo- referenced ? Distribution of RCR based on overlay of interpolated PEC and PNEC maps Distribution of RCR based on overlay of interpolated PEC and PNEC maps Probability distribution of RCR based on Monte Carlo analysis of distribution of PEC and PNEC Comparison of RWC PEC with RWC PNEC Yes No Uncertainty Worst-case assumptions Data available Risk assessment of metals

15. 15 Calculation of soil-specific toxicity thresholds Species or processAbiotic factor PlantseCEC InvertebrateseCEC NitrificationeCEC Glucose respirationOrganic C and clay Plant residue mineralisationpH and eCEC Reference: scenario for which threshold values must be derived Test: abiotic factors of the soil in which the NOEC or EC10 was derived Slope: slope of regression equation between log ECx and log soil properties Normalisation of all toxicity data to site-specific soil properties

16. 16 Calculation of soil-specific toxicity thresholds More information: Smolders et al., 2009. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 28: 1633–1642 HC5 is basis for Predicted No Effect Concentration (PNEC) Construction of species sensitivity distribution 0.05 (From Oorts and Schoeters, 2014, Fig. 12.5, p.193)

17. 17 Agricultural soil (A p ) 0-20 cm Grazing land soil (Gr) 0-10 cm Effects: Cu PNEC distribution across Europe Cu soil PNEC values are highly variable at the regional scale: 200 mg Cu/kg (From Oorts and Schoeters, 2014, Fig. 12.6, p.195)

18. 18 Risk characterisation of Cu in European soil Risk characterisation ratio (RCR) ExposureEffects

19. 19 Agricultural soil (A p ) 0-20 cm Grazing land soil (Gr) 0-10 cm Risk characterisation of Cu in European soil Only few, isolated sites predicted at risk (i.e., RCR >1): 1.6% and 1.3% of sites for Agricultural and Grazing land, respectively. (From Oorts and Schoeters, 2014, Fig. 12.7, p.198)

20. 20 Risk assessment of Mo in agricultural soil (From Reimann et al., 2014, Fig. 11.36.5, p.309)(PNEC Mo & RCR Mo from Oorts and Schoeters, 2014, Fig. 12.6, p.196 & Fig. 12.7, p.199, respectively)

21. 21 Regional risk characterisation in soil  No risks identified for Cu and Mo in soil at the regional and continental scale EU-27Country-specific Cu, Agricultural soil0.430.12 (Lithuania) – 0.91 (FYROM) Cu, Grassland0.380.11 (Estonia and Lithuania) - 0.82 (Montenegro) Mo, Agricultural soil0.060.015 (Poland) – 0.36 (Cyprus) Mo, Grassland0.060.003 (Switzerland) - 0.15 (Cyprus) 90 th percentile of RCR for Cu and Mo in European soil:

22. 22 GEMAS: RWC RCR Cu in Ap soil = 0.37 GEMAS: RWC RCR Cu in Ap soil = 0.37 PEC = Predicted Environmental Concentration PNEC = Predicted No Effect Concentration RCR = Risk Characterisation Ratio, i.e. PEC/PNEC RWC = Reasonable Worst Case Distribution of RCR for all individual points Coupled PEC and PNEC data? PEC and PNEC data? Data geo- reference d? Distribution of RCR based on overlay of interpolated PEC and PNEC maps Distribution of RCR based on overlay of interpolated PEC and PNEC maps Probability distribution of RCR based on Monte Carlo analysis of distribution of PEC and PNEC Comparison of RWC PEC with RWC PNEC Yes No Uncertainty Worst-case assumptions Data available Advantage GEMAS data set RWC RCR Cu in Ap soil = 0.90 (= 90 th percentile exposure / 10 th percentile effects) RWC RCR Cu in Ap soil = 0.90 (= 90 th percentile exposure / 10 th percentile effects)

23. 23 Essential elements (From sesl Australia, Interpreting a plant analysis, Fig. 1, http://www.sesl.com.au/fertileminds/200801/Interpreting.php) http://www.sesl.com.au/fertileminds/200801/Interpreting.php

24. 24 Deficiency: example for Cu Total area of soil likely to cause copper deficiency in crops in Europe estimated at 12 - 123 Mha (Alloway, 2005) Cereals (wheat and oat) sensitive to Cu deficiency Most diagnostic criteria based on extracts (DTPA, EDTA, HCl, acid ammonium acetate, …) Indications for low available copper: –Low total Cu –Calcareous soil (e.g., Calcisol, Rendzina) –Organic soil (e.g., Histosol) –Coarse-textured soil (e.g., Podzol, Arenosol)

25. 25 Cu deficient soil: potential use of GEMAS Assessment of areas potentially at risk Assessment of Cu deficiency based on Cu availability indices for toxicity: –RCR: 19% of Ap samples with RCR<0.1 –Cu/eCEC: 7% of Ap samples with Cu/eCEC <1% Criterion% Ap samples at risk <7 mg Cu/kg20% pH >726% Organic carbon >20%1% Sand >65%20% Factor 10? (From Reimann et al., 2014, Fig. 11.5.5, p.130)

26. 26 Conclusions: GEMAS data = the solution! EU 27 covered (except Malta and Romania) Harmonised data: –sampling depth –sampling density –land use –analytical methods Data for metal concentrations and soil properties affecting metal bioavailability  Accurate risk assessment at local, regional and continental scale in Europe  Worst-case assumptions avoided  Data allow for directly comparable country-specific regional risk characterisation  Other potential applications: assessment of deficient soil,...

27. 27 GEMAS atlas For more information see: Part A – Chapter 2: REACH and GEMAS by Violaine Verougstraete, Ilse Schoeters Part B – Chapter 12: Use of monitoring data for risk assessment of metals in soil under the European REACH regulation by Koen Oorts, Ilse Schoeters

28. 28 Thank you for your attention References

29. REFERENCES SLIDE 5: Salminen, R. (Chief-editor), Batista, M.J., Bidovec, M., Demetriades, A., De Vivo, B., De Vos, W., Duris, M., Gilucis, A., Gregorauskiene, V., Halamic, J., Heitzmann, P., Lima, A., Jordan, G., Klaver, G., Klein, P., Lis, J., Locutura, J., Marsina, K., Mazreku, A., O’Connor, P.J., Olsson S.Å., Ottesen, R.T., Petersell, V., Plant, J.A., Reeder, S., Salpeteur, I., Sandström, H., Siewers, U., Steenfelt, A. & Tarvainen, T. (Editors), 2005. FOREGS Geochemical Atlas of Europe, Part 1: Background Information, Methodology and Maps. Geological Survey of Finland, Espoo, 526 pp., 36 figures, 362 maps, http://weppi.gtk.fi/publ/foregsatlas/. http://weppi.gtk.fi/publ/foregsatlas/ SLIDE 8: Smith C, 2004. Determination of the Spatial Distribution of Soil Bioavailability Parameters in the European Union – Final Report by Parametrix for the European Copper Institute (Internal Report): Map pH data: Figure 4, p18;Map Cu data: Figure 4, p18; Map OM data: Figure 6, p20; Map Clay data: Figure 8, p22. SLIDES 11, 19 (Mo in Ap), 24: Reimann, C., Demetriades, A., Birke, M., Filzmoser P., O’Connor, P., Halamic, J., Ladenberger, A. & the GEMAS Project Team, 2014. Distribution of elements/parameters in agricultural and grazing land soil of Europe. Chapter 11 In: C. Reimann, M. Birke, A. Demetriades, P. Filzmoser & P. O’Connor (Editors), Chemistry of Europe's agricultural soils – Part A : Methodology and interpretation of the GEMAS data set. Geologisches Jahrbuch (Reihe B 102), Schweizerbarth, 101-472. SLIDES 15, 16, 18, 19 (PNEC Mo & RCR Mo): Oorts, K. & Schoeters, I., 2014. Use of monitoring data for risk assessment of metals in soil under the European REACH regulation. Chapter 12 In: C. Reimann, M. Birke, A. Demetriades, P. Filzmoser & P. O’Connor (Editors), Chemistry of Europe's agricultural soils – Part B: General background information and further analysis of the GEMAS data set. Geologisches Jahrbuch (Reihe B 103), Schweizerbarth, 189-202. SLIDES 15 cited reference: Smolders, E., Oorts, K., van Sprang, P., Schoeters, I., Janssen, C.R., McGrath, S. & Mclaughlin, M.J., 2009. Toxicity of trace metals in soil as affected by soil type and aging after contamination: Using calibrated bioavailability models to set ecological soil standards. Environmental Toxicology and Chemisry, 28(8), 1633-1642. SLIDES 22 & 24: Source: SESL Australia, Interpreting a plant analysis, Fig. 1, http://www.sesl.com.au/fertileminds/200801/Interpreting.php http://www.sesl.com.au/fertileminds/200801/Interpreting.php SLIDE 23 cited reference: Alloway, B.J., 2005. Bioavailability of elements in soil. Chapter 14 In: O. Selinus, B. Alloway, J.A. Centeno, R.B. Finkelman, R. Fuge, U. Lindh & P. Smedley (Editors), Essentials of medical geology: Impacts of the natural environment on public health. Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam, 347-372.