SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Alberta Environment. 2010a. Alberta Tier 1 Soil and Groundwater Remediation Guidelines.
  • Alberta Environment. 2010b. Alberta Tier 2 Soil and Groundwater Remediation Guidelines.
  • [CCME] Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 1996a. A framework for ecological risk assessment: General guidance. Winnipeg, MB: CCME.
  • [CCME] Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 1996b. Guidance manual for developing site-specific soil quality remediation objectives for contaminated sites in Canada. Winnipeg, MB: CCME.
  • [CCME] Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 1999. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, updated 2012. Winnipeg, MB: CCME.
  • [CCME] Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2006. A protocol for the derivation of environmental and human health soil quality guidelines. Winnipeg, MB: CCME.
  • [CCME] Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2007. A protocol for the derivation of water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life. Winnipeg, MB: CCME.
  • Chapman PF, Crane M, Wiles J, Noppert F, McIndoe E. 1996. Improving the quality of statistics in regulatory ecotoxicity tests. Ecotoxicology 5:169186.
  • Checkai R, Van Genderen E, Sousa JP, Stephenson G, Smolders E. Deriving site-specific clean-up criteria to protect ecological receptors (plants and soil invertebrates) exposed to soil contaminants via the direct contact exposure pathway. Integr Environ Assess Manag (this issue).
  • de Bruijn JHM, Hof M. 1997. How to measure no effect, part IV: How acceptable is the ECx from an environmental policy point of view? Environmetrics 8:263267.
  • [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2008. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.10: Characterisation of dose [concentration]-response for environment, May 2008.
  • [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2012. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment, Chapter R.7c: Endpoint specific guidance, May 2008.
  • Environment Canada. 2010a. Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) ecological risk assessment guidance module 1: Toxicity test selection and interpretation. Report to Environment Canada. Vancouver, BC.
  • Environment Canada. 2010b. FCSAP ecological risk assessment guidance module 2: Selection or development of site-specific toxicity reference values. Report to Environment Canada. Vancouver, BC.
  • Environment Canada. 2012. FCSAP ecological risk assessment guidance module 3: Standardization of wildlife receptor characteristics. Report to Environment Canada. Vancouver, BC.
  • Government of British Columbia. 2011. Environmental Management Act Contaminated Sites Regulation. B.C. Reg. 375/96, (Schedule 10). Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Hamon RE, McLaughlin MJ, Gilkes RJ, Rate AW, Zarcinas B, Robertson A, Cozens G, Radford N, Bettenay L. 2004. Geochemical indices allow estimation of heavy metal background concentrations in soils. Global Biogeochem Cycle 18:GB1014. doi: 10.1029/2003GB002063
  • Heemsbergen DA, Warne MStJ, Broos K, Bell M, Nash D, McLaughlin MJ, Whatmuff M, Barry G, Pritchard D, Penney N. 2009. Application of phytotoxicity data to a new Australian soil quality guideline framework for biosolids. Sci Total Environ 407:25462556.
  • Kuperman R, Siciliano S, Roembke J, Oorts K. Deriving site-specific soil clean-up values using soil microbial process. Integr Environ Assess Manag (this issue).
  • Mayfield DB, Johnson MS, Burris JA, Fairbrother A. Furthering the development of predictive toxicity reference values for the development of soil cleanup values. Integr Environ Assess Manag (this issue).
  • [NEPC] National Environment Protection Council. 2009. The Australian methodology to derive ecological investigation levels in contaminated soils. Heemsbergen D, Warne M, McLaughlin M, Kookana R. CSIRO Land and Water Science Report 43/09, October.
  • [NEPC] National Environment Protection Council. 2011a. National environment protection (assessment of site contamination) Schedule B5b. Guideline on methodology to derive ecological investigation levels in contaminated soils. Adelaide, Australia: NEPC. 87 p.
  • [NEPC] National Environment Protection Council. 2011b. National environment protection (assessment of site contamination) Schedule B5c. Guideline on soil quality guidelines for arsenic, chromium (III), copper, DDT, lead, naphthalene, nickel and zinc. Adelaide, Australia: NEPC. 177 p.
  • Ontario Ministry of Environment. 2011. Soil, ground water and sediment standards for use under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Revised version, April 15.
  • Posthuma L, Suter GW, Traas T. 2002. Species sensitivity distributions in ecotoxicology. Boca Raton (FL): Lewis Publishers. 616 p.
  • [REACH] Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals. 2006. Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC.
  • Sample BE, Schlekat C, Spurgeon DJ, Menzie C, Rauscher J, Adams W. Recommendations to improve wildlife exposure estimation for development of soil screening and cleanup values. Integr Environ Assess Manag (this issue).
  • Smolders E, Oorts K, Van Spring P, Schoeters I, Jannsen CR, McGrath SP, McLaughlin MJ. 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. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:16331642.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Wildlife exposure factors handbook, Volume I of II. USEPA Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-93/187.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Ecological risk assessment guidance for Superfund, process for designing and conducting ecological risk assessments, interim final: USEPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC. OSWER 9285.7-25, PB97-963211, EPA 540-R-97-006.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. USEPA Office of the Science Advisor, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC. EPA/630/R-95/002F.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Guidance for developing ecological soil screening levels. USEPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC. OSWER Directive 9285.7-55, Revised Feb 2005.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Framework for metals risk assessment: USEPA Office of the Science Advisor, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC. EPA 120/R-07/001.
  • van Gestel CAM, Borgman E, Verweij RA, Ortiz MD. 2011. The influence of soil properties on the toxicity of molybdenum to three species of soil invertebrates. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 74:19.
  • Warne MStJ. 2001. Derivation of the ANZECC and ARMCANZ water quality guidelines for toxicants. Australasian J Ecotoxicol 7:123136.
  • Wentsel R, Fairbrother A. Next steps in the development of ecological soil clean-up values for metals. Integr Environ Assess Manag (this issue).