Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment (한국지하수토양환경학회지:지하수토양환경)

Korean Society of Soil and Groundwater Environment (한국지하수토양환경학회)
권호 표지

Role and Contaminant Selection Methods of Soil Quality Standards in Developed Countries

선진국 토양오염 기준의 역할과 기준항목 설정방법

  • Jeong, Seung-Woo (Department of Environmental Engineering, Kunsan National University) ;
  • An, Youn-Joo (Department of Environmental Science, Konkuk University) ;
  • Kim, Tae-Seung (Soil and Groundwater Divison. National Institute of Environmental Research)
  • 정승우 (군산대학교 환경공학과) ;
  • 안윤주 (건국대학교 환경과학과) ;
  • 김태승 (국립환경과학원 토양지하수연구과)
  • Published : 2009.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Many countries have recently established legal regulations and soil quality standards for soil protection, This study investigated the role of soil quality standards in soil protection policy and methods of selecting standard substances from various types of chemicals. In most countries, soil quality standards act as guidance for further detail surveyor risk assessment from comparing soil concentration with the soil quality standards. Soil quality standards of Switzerland, Demark and Japan were used as enforcement tools. Priority substances for the standards were first selected from frequently detected chemicals in contaminated sites. Those substances were extensively evaluated for toxic effects, exposure potential and availability in chemical analysis.

세계 각국은 토양환경의 효율적인 관리를 위하여 각국의 상황에 적합한 토양오염기준을 운영하고 있다. 본 총설은 각국의 토양환경관리 정책에서 토양오염기준의 역할과 토양오염기준 항목을 설정하는 방법에 대해 체계적으로 분석하여 시사점을 도출하고자 하였다. 대부분의 토양기준은 토양오염여부를 일차적으로 판단하기 위한 Guideling 역할을 수행하고 있었으며, 기준치가 오염여부 판단과 관련 행정명령의 지표인 Standard로 활용하고 있는 나라는 스위스, 덴마크, 일본 등이었다. 네덜란드는 Guideline과 Standard를 혼용하고 있었다. 토양오염기준 물질선정은 현장에서 검출빈도수가 높은 토양오염물질을 중심으로 이루어졌으며 독성, 노출, 분석의 용이성, 독성자료의 가용성 등 다양한 인자를 복합적으로 고려하여 선정되었다. 각 나라는 자국의 토양환경정책 및 기준 설정에 있어 자국의 상황을 고려한 특징을 가지고 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 국립환경과학원, 2007, 우선관리대상 토양오염물질 선정 연구. 선정기법 및 적용성 연구
  2. 환경부, 토양보전 기본계획 수립 연구, 2005
  3. ATSDR, 2005, 2005 CERCLA Priority List of Hazardous Substances That Will Be The Subject of Toxicological Profiles and Support Document, Division of Toxicology, Washington DC., USA
  4. Bbodschv, 1999, Federal Soil Protection And Contaminated Sites Ordinance, Germany
  5. California State, 2005, Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, California, USA
  6. CCME, 2003, Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Manitoba, Canada
  7. DEFRA, 2002a, Assessment of Risks to Human Health from Land Contamination: An Overview of the Development of Soil Guideline Values and Related Research, UK
  8. DEFRA, 2002b, Note on The Withdrawal of ICRCL Trigger Values, CLAN 3/02
  9. DEFRA, 2004, The First Soil Action Plan for England: 2004-2006-London, UK
  10. DEFRA, 2006, First Soil Action Plan for England: 2004-2006-Second Annual Report, London, UK
  11. Delaware State, Identification And Listing of Hazardous Waste, Delaware, USA
  12. DEPA, 2002, Guidelines on Remediation of Contaminated Sites, Danish Environmental Protection Agency
  13. Department of the Environment, 1995-96, Industry Profiles. Available for 47 different industrial activities from The Stationery Office, PO Box 29, Norwich NR3 lGN., U.K.
  14. Department of the Environment, 1991-95, Environmental Hazard Assessment for a Range of Substances, Reports TSD/1 to 24, Toxic Substances Division. U.K.
  15. EA 2002, Assessment of Risks to Human Health From Land Contamination: An Overview of the Development of Soil Guideline Values and Related Research, CLR 7., U.K.
  16. Florida State, 1998, Guidelines For The Management Of Recovered Screen Material From C&D Debris Recycling Facilities In Florida, Florida, USA
  17. Illinois EPA, 2007, Soil Remediation Objectivesa For Industrial/Commercial Properties/Residential Properties, Illinois, USA
  18. Interdepartmental Committee on the Redevelopment of Contaminated Land, 1987 Guidance on the Assessment and Redevelopment of Contaminated Land, ICRCL Guidance Note 59/83, 2nd edn., U.K.
  19. Lewis R.J., 1992, Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, 8th edn, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, USA
  20. Louisiana State, 2003, Underground Storage Tank Closure/Change-In-Service Guidance Document, Department of Environmental Quality, Louisiana, USA
  21. Maryland State, 2000, State of Maryland Department of The Environment Cleanup Standards For Soil And Groundwater, Maryland, USA
  22. Massachusetts State, 2006, Final Amendments Massachusetts Contingency Plan, 310 Cmr 40.0000, Massachusetts, USA
  23. MDNR, 2001, Clean up Levels for Missouri-Tier 1 Soil and Groundwater Cleanup Standards, Missouri Department of Natural Resources
  24. Ministry Of The Environment Government of Japan, 2005, Soil Contamination Countermeasures, Japan
  25. Mississippi State, 2002, Department of Environmental Quality Risk Evaluation Procedures For Voluntary Cleanup And Redevelopment Of Brownfield Sites, USA
  26. NEPC, 1999, Schedule B(I) Guideline On The Investigation Levels F or Soil And Groundwater, Australia
  27. New Jersey State, 1999, Soil Cleanup Criteria, New Jersey, USA
  28. New York State, 2006, Development of Soil Cleanup Objectives Technical Support Document, New York State Department of Health, USA
  29. Oregon State, 1998, Guidance For Ecological Risk Assessment: Levels I, Ii, Iii, Iv, Oregon, USA
  30. SAEFL, 1998, Derivation of trigger and clean up values for inorganic pollutants in the sol, Switzerland
  31. SFT, 1999, Guidelines For The Risk Assessment Of Contaminated Sites, Norway
  32. Texas State, 2001, Guidance For Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments At Remediation Sites In Texas, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, USA
  33. USEPA, 1996, Soil Screening Guidance : User’s Guide, Washington DC, USA
  34. Virginia State, 2006, Universal Treatment Standards, Depatment of Environmental Quality, Virginia, USA
  35. VROM, 2000, Circular On Target Values And Intervention Values For Soil Remediation (Ministerie Van Volkshuisvesting. Ruimtelijke Ordening En Milieubeheer)