Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2013C00288:reg:20:p12
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2013C00288
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 20 (pt 12/14)
Character Range: 1325760–1328664

nematode, mollusca, protozoa
    * hexapoda, myriapoda, chelicerata, tardigrada
    * microbial and fungal functional end points.
These groupings are based on the basic body design of the organisms and the likely exposure route of organisms to the contaminant; that is, being exposed by the direct environment or through food. The following four derivation steps are listed in order of descending order of preference:
    1. If normalisation relationships for all four taxonomic groupings are available and each grouping meets the minimum data requirements to use the SSD approach, derive a set of soil-specific ACL values for each grouping and then the lowest ACL for the soil in question is adopted.
    2. If normalisation relationships for all four taxonomic groupings are available but at least one grouping does not meet the minimum data requirements to use the SSD approach, apply the normalisation relationships and combine all the data in one SSD calculation. Then use the normalisation relationships to derive a set of ACLs for each taxonomic grouping and the lowest ACL for the soil in question is adopted.
    3. If normalisation relationships are available for some groupings then apply them to the appropriate data and combine all the data (including the non-normalised toxicity data) in one SSD calculation. Then use the normalisation relationships to derive a set of ACLs for each grouping of organisms that have a normalisation relationship and the lowest ACL for the soil in question is adopted.
    4. If normalisation relationships are not available, then pool all data and derive one generic ACL.
The above steps are used to standardise the derivation of realistic EILs that are protective but at the same time ensure that the EILs do not become too conservative.

If the toxicity data shows a significant relationship with specific soil characteristics; for example, soil pH, organic carbon or clay content, cation exchange capacity (CEC), soil-specific ACL values can be calculated using those relationships. The toxicity data is first normalised to the reference Australian soil using the methods described above, and the ACL value derived using the SSD approach is valid for the Australian reference soil. Using the normalisation relationships, ACL values can then be calculated for different soil types. For example, if toxicity data showed a relationship with pH, different ACL values can be calculated for a range of soil pH conditions.

The lack of normalisation equations for soils from Australia can be overcome by using normalisation relationships developed with soils from other countries, particularly Europe and America. However, these normalisation relationships should only be used when they are derived from soils similar to Australian soils and/or their validity for Australian soils has been assessed and found suitable. The importance of this was shown by a study