EXP Nº 2934-2004-HC/TC LIMA

We have introduced an approach for human health risk assessment with regard to BWMS, which comprises hazard identification, effects assessment, exposure assessment and risk characterization. Since experience with BWMS is limited each of these steps includes as- sumptions, which still need to be further investigated or validated. Health hazard identifica- tion for example relies on knowledge of the substances, generated by the various BWMS under different environmental conditions. Only about 10 % of all known DBPs are even con- sidered for analysis during system testing. Moreover, it is to be expected that there are unique DBPs for ballast water disinfection. This shows that it is very likely that DBPs with adverse health effects are overlooked leading to incomplete risk assessment. Health effects assessment requires toxicological studies, which are at present only available for a small set of DBPs. Epidemiological studies have recently linked consumption of chlorinated drinking

RCR = Exposure/DNEL or Exposure/DMEL < 1

72 BfR-Wissenschaft

water with bladder cancer (Cantor et al., 2010; Villanueva et al., 2007). Another study showed that swimming in a chlorinated pool for 40 min. produced DNA damage and mutagenic urine (Kogevinas et al., 2010). We therefore recommend to systematically explore whole effluent testing of treated ballast water with in vitro test systems for mammalian toxic- ity, e.g. mutagenicity, cytotoxicity. Human exposure assessment consists of assessing occu- pational exposure as well as exposure of the general public. With regard to crew exposure we have listed work activities for scenario building. Nonetheless, there may be the need for field studies to identify additional exposure sources, work patterns and the range of working hours. A study carried out on behalf of the U.S. Coast Guard observed that there could be peak work shifts during loading, discharging, and tank cleaning ranging from 13–30 h (Astle- ford et al., 1982). The study also noted that in spite of having closed recirculating ventilation systems deckhouses could be infiltrated by vapours through access doors during loading, tank cleaning and ballasting of cargo tanks. The final step of the health risk assessment process is risk characterization. This step combines the quantitative information derived from effects and exposure assessment. Since many DBPs have genotoxic and carcinogenic ef- fects non-threshold effects may be of special concern and should be given special attention.

8.8 Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my colleagues Barbara Werschkun and Thomas Höfer for their contribu- tions to this evaluation, which forms part of the BfR work package in the Ballast Water Op- portunity project in the Interreg North Sea programme and was thus supported by the Re- gional Development Fund of the European Union.

8.9 References

Astleford, W.J., Bass R.L., Buckingham J.C., Magott R.J., 1982. A crew exposure study- phase I, volume II – at sea. Prepared for Department of Transportation, United States Coast Guard. Office of Research and Development. Washinton DC, U.S.A. Report No. CG-D-22-82. Available through National Technical Infromation Service.

Banerji, S., Werschkun, B., Höfer, T., 2012. Assessing the risk of ballast water treatment to human health. Regul. Toxicol. Pharm. 62, 513–522.

Boon, J., Baart, A., Markus, A., van Hattum, B., 2008. Antifoulant model to predict environmental concentrations (MAMPEC V2.0). CEPE – Antifouling Working Group, Brussels, Belgium

Cantor, K.P., Villanueva, C.M., Silverman, D.T., Figueroa, J.D., Real, F.X., Garcia-Closas, M. et al., 2010. Polymorphisms in GST1, GSTZ1, and CYP2E1, disinfection by-products, and risk of bladder cancer in Spain. Environ. Health Perspect. 118,1545–1550.

ECHA, 2008a. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.15: Consumer exposure estimation. European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki, Finland

ECHA, 2008b. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.8: Characterisation of dose [concentration]-response for human health. European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki, Finland

IMO, 2002. The revised GESAMP hazard evaluation procedure for chemical substances carried by ships. GESAMP Reports and Studies, London, UK.

IMO, 2008a. Procedure for Approval of ballast water management systems that make use of active substances (G9). Marine Environmental Protection Committee, London, UK.

IMO, 2008b. Methodology for information gathering and the conduct of work of GESAMP- BWWG. Marine Environmental Protection Committee, London, UK.

IMO, 2010. Hazard evaluation of substances transported by ships. Sub-Committee on Bulk Liquids and Gases, London, UK.

73 BfR-Wissenschaft

Kogevinas, M., Villanueva, C.M., Font-Ribera, L., Liviac, D., Bustamante, M., Espinoza, F. et al., 2010. Genotoxic effects in swimmers exposed to disinfection by-products in indoor swimming pools. Environ. Health Perspect. 118,1531–1537.

Richardson, S.D., Simmons, J.E., Rice, G., 2002. Disinfection by-products: the next generation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 36, 198A–205A.

Richardson, S.D., Plewa, M.J., Wagner, E.D., Schoeny, R., Demarini, D.M., 2007. Occurrence, genotoxicity, and carcinogenicity of regulated and emerging disinfection by- products in drinking water: A review and roadmap for research. Mutat. Res. 636, 178–242. Richardson, S.D., DeMarini, D.M., Kogevinas, M., Fernandez, P., Marco, E., Lourencetti, C. et al., 2010. What’s in the pool? A comprehensive identification of disinfection by-products and assessment of mutagenicity of chlorinated and brominated swimming pool water. En- viron. Health Perspect. 118, 1523–1530.

Rusch, G.M., Garrett, R., Tobin, P., Falke, E., Lu, P.Y., 2002. Drug Chem. Toxicol. 25, 339– 348.

Taylor, C.J., 2006. The effects of biological fouling control at coastal and estuarine power stations. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 53, 30–48.

U.S. EPA, 1992. Dermal Exposure Assessment: Principles and Applications. Office of Research and Development, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Washinton DC, U.S.A

U.S. EPA, 1997. Exposure Factors Handbook. Office of Research and Development, Washington DC, U.S.A

Villanueva, C.M., Cantor, K.P., Grimalt, J.O., Dosemeci, M., Malats, N., Real, F.X., et al., 2007. Bladder cancer and exposure to disinfection byproducts in water through ingestion, bathing, showering and swimming in pools: Findings from the Spanish bladder cancer. Am. J. Epidemiol. 15, 148–156.

Werschkun, B., Sommer, Y., Banerji, S., 2012. Disinfection by-products in ballat water treatment: An evaluation of regulatory data. Water Res. 46, 4884-4901.

Xu, X., Mariano, T.M., Laskin, J.D., Weisel, C.P., 2002. Percutaneous absorption of trihalomethanes, haloacetic acids, and haloketones. Toxicol. Appl.Pharmacol. 184, 19–26. Xu, X., Weisel, C.P., 2003. Inhalation exposure to haloacetic acids and haloketones during

showering. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37, 569–576.

Zipperle, A., van Gils, J., van Hattum, B., Heise, S., 2011. Guidance for a harmonized Emission Scenario Document (ESD) on Ballast Water discharge. Prepared for Umweltbundesamt. Available online: http://www.uba.de/uba-info-medien-e/4114.html (last accessed 16.12.2011).

75 BfR-Wissenschaft

9 Determining the Environmental Risk – Proposal for an Emission Scenario