1. Japanese case of soil contamination countermeasures By Mr. Toshihiko Kasai Director, General Affairs Division, National Institute for Environmental Studies Former Director, Soil Contamination Countermeasures Division Ministry of the Environment of Japan

2. Measures against Illegal Dumping, etc within the Waste Disposal and Public Cleansing Act and other Acts ○ 1971: Enforcement of Waste Disposal and Public Cleansing Act Introduction of notification system for waste treatment companies (treatment facility construction standard, and institution of maintenance and management standard) Introduction of a system for prefectural and city governments to issue countermeasure orders when there are cases of illegal dumping, etc Introduction of a subrogation system (if polluters have no financial ability to conduct countermeasures) ○ 1990: Case of illegal dumping in Teshima, Kagawa Pref. is raised as a major problem ○ 1991: Introduction of a license system for waste treatment facilities over a certain size (regarding landfills, all are placed under the system regardless of the size) ○ 1998: If polluters are unknown or absent, and prefectural governors execute countermeasures by subrogation, the expenses are covered by a fund from the Waste Disposal and Public Cleansing Act (fee is based on fund (public: private =1:2), and when polluters are later identified, the expenses are billed to them) ○ 2002: establishment of the Act on Special Measures for Specific Industrial Wastes (in the case of illegal disposal done before 16 June, 1998, if subrogation is implemented by governors, financial support is provided via government subsidies or special cases of local debt) ○ 2005: (Trinitarianism reform) for cases with ministerial approval after 2006, the provision of government subsidies under the Act on Special Measures for Specific Industrial Wastes are terminated. In Special Measures for local debt issues, appropriation rate is raised to 90% ○ 2009: For pre-2005 cases under the Act on Special Measures for Specific Industrial Wastes, the government has been providing subsidies directly since 2008

3. Institutions for Removing hazards caused by Inappropriate Disposal of Industrial Waste Inappropriate Disposal such as Illegal Dumping, 【 This approach violates the disposal standard of Waste Disposal and Public Cleansing Act (Para.1, of Article.12, or Para.1, of Article 12- 2) 】 Risk of damaging the living environment Orders from Prefectural governors (for removing trouble caused by inappropriate disposal) 【 Article.19-5: disposal businesses, and waste emitters who have violated commission standards etc 】 【 Article.19-6: waste emitters who have not followed their caution duties, etc 】 【 Illegal disposal before 16 June, 1998 】 →Support under the Act on Special Measures for Specific Industrial Wastes Special case of local debt Frequency of appropriation for local debt: 90 ％ Frequency of inclusion for tax allocation: 50 ％ 【 Illegal disposal after 17 June, 1998 】 →Support under the Waste Disposal and Public Cleansing Act Proportion of support: 3/4 Special Measures for Local Allocation Tax 80% of inclusion for obligation costs from prefectures Fund by the Center for the Promotion of Appropriate Disposal of Industrial Waste Financial support by “promotion fund for appropriate disposal of industrial waste” Countermeasures taken by polluters Surrogate execution by Prefectures or cities (at the discretion of governors. Reimbursement requested to polluters) 【 Article.19-8 】 Drawing up an implementation plan based on the Act on Special Measures for Specific Industrial Wastes (When polluters do not take countermeasures) （ support to costs incurred by Prefectures and others ） ※ In general polluters have to remove the hazards caused by inappropriate disposal of industrial waste ※ When Prefectures, and others are in charge of administrative subrogation, its costs should be billed to the polluter ※ If polluters have little financial capacity, they can receive financial support from the Center for Promoting Appropriate Disposal of Industrial Waste. However, funds reimbursed by polluters will be returned to the fund maintained by the Center.

4. ◇ Financial Support Scheme １． Fund Scheme under the Act on Special Measures for Specific Industrial Waste 【 Illegal dumping before 16 June, 1998 】 Japa n Fund from the Center for Promoting Appropriate Disposal Support Prefectures, and others Cooperation Request Financial Support (1/2 or 1/3) Orders to remove hazards (Cases where disposers are unknown, or they are short of financial means) (municipal bond) Subsidies from fund （ hazardous ： 1/2, others ： 1/3 ） General bond for single project funding (subsidy shares up to: 70%) General Municipal funds 30% (subsidies to redemptions of principal and interest up to: 50%) Special Municipal Bond ＜ Prefectures, and large cities ＞ Subsidies from fund （ hazardous ： 1/2, others ： 1/3 ） General bond for single project funding (subsidy shares up to : 75%) General Municipal funds 25% (subsidies to redemptions of principal and interest up to : 50%) ＜ Cities ＞ Special Municipal Bond Subsidies from fund transferred as tax revenue sources (note) Since April 2006, “Trinitarianism reform” was established. Subsidies of countermeasures case for restoring to original state is excluded from those that transfer as tax revenue sources. Also, special measures of debt issues is increasing to 90%. Furthermore, some cases implemented until March, 2005, can get subsidies partly from government directly. General bond for single project funding (subsidy shares up to: 90%) General Municipal funds 10% (subsidies to redemptions of principal and interest up to :50%) Special Municipal Bond ＜ Prefectures, large cities and cities ＞ ○Financial support Scheme after Year 2006

5. ２． Fund Scheme based on Wastes Disposal and Public Cleansing Act 【 Illegal dumping waste implemented after June, 1998 】 Japan Fund (the Center for Promoting Appropriate Disposal of Industrial Waste ） Support Industry ＊ Industry : State : Prefecture, and others = ２：１：１ ＊ Compare with quantity of prefectural burden is (1/4), proceeding of special transportation is (frequency of inclusion: 0.8) Prefectures, and others Proceeding for cleaning up troubles caused by illegal disposal, etc （ If people who are dumping waste are unclear, and shortage of finance ） Cooperation Request Financial Support Donation (3/4)(1/4)

6. How soil contamination creates health risks ⑥ (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1.Direct ingestion of contaminated soil (including soil particulate) 2.Dermal absorption 3.Ingestion of groundwater contaminated by hazardous substances eluted from contaminated soil 4.Inhalation of hazardous substances emitted from contaminated soil to atmosphere 5.Discharge of soil containing hazardous substances to municipal waterways → accumulation in aquatic ecology → ingestion by human beings 6.Accumulation of hazardous substances in crops and livestock raised on contaminated land → ingestion by human beings eating breathing eating drinking breathing eating Public waters Groundwater fish Farm products evaporation contact Contaminated soil

7. Contaminated Agricultural Land ・ 1880’s ～ 1970s’ Mineral Poison Damage of Ashio Copper Mine, Tochigi Pref. in Watarase River (Damages on rice growth, etc) ・ 1910’s ～ 1970’s “Itai-Itai Disease” of Jinzu River Basin in Toyama Pref., etc ・ 1920’s ～ 1960’s Mineral Pollution from Toroku Mine in Miyazaki Pref. (Damage: arsenic poisoning, and rice growth, etc) ↓ In 1970, Contaminated Agricultural Land Countermeasures Act was legislated by the Diet The origin of Act related to Soil contamination in Japan （ at the same time, the Diet established “Water Quality Pollution Control Act” and “Wastes Disposal and Public Cleansing Act.” The Diet was called “Public Hazard Diet” 7

8. Contamination in Urban areas （ 1 ） ・ In 1975, Soil contamination caused by hexavalent Chromium from chemical factories ・ In 1980’s, Underground water pollution caused by trichloroethylene, etc becomes a social issue ・ In 1986, Drawing up of “Draft Countermeasures Policy related to Soil contamination in Urban cities” ・ In 1991, Establishment of “Environmental Standard (Soil Environmental Standard) related to Soil contamination” ・ In 1994, Drawing up of “Policy on Soil Contamination Research and Countermeasures related to heavy-metal, etc” and “Draft Policy on Soil and Groundwater Pollution Research and Countermeasures related to organochlorine chemical compound” 8 Legal system of soil contamination countermeasures is not consolidated as a whole, but countermeasures based on policies, that are related to research and measures for cleaning up of soil contaminations, through administrative training is promoted

9. “Stocked pollution”; the negative impacts from harmful substances are accumulated inside soils over a long period Contaminated soil area; private land (private property) Depending on the land-use, contaminated lands may not entail any health impacts ↓ Numerous issues to be better understood and synthesised = difficulty to set legislations Problems of Soil Contamination 9

10. Soil Contamination caused by Dioxins The end of 1990’s: High concentrations of dioxins are detected from soils (around waste incinerators). Soil contamination caused by dioxins became a social issue ↓ In 1999, Act on Special Measures against Dioxins is instituted Comprehensive Countermeasures; not only for soil contamination countermeasures, but also on dioxin emissions and disposal process of dust and ash from waste incinerators In the framework of environmental standard, it was the first time that risk assessments were implemented with regards to the direct intake of polluted soil 10

11. Cases of soil contamination discovery were increasing The rules for investigation and countermeasures were not specified Concerns about health damage from soil contamination Act on Special Measures against Dioxins was established in 1999, but there were no regulations on other substances ↓ In 2002, Soil Contamination Countermeasures Act was established at the regular Diet session （ In 2009, amendment of Soil Contamination Countermeasures Act at regular Diet session ） 11 Contamination in Urban areas （ 2 ）

12. Designated hazardous substances （ Article 2 of the Law ） Designation standard （ Article 5 of the Law ） Reference: Soil Environment Standard （ except for copper ） Soil Concentration Standard ＜ Risk for direct ingestion ＞ Soil Leachate Standard ＜ Risk of ingestion from groundwater etc. ＞ Carbon Tetrachloride Class 1 (VOC) ≤ 0.002mg / L １，２－ Dichloroethane ≤ 0.004mg / L １，１－ Dichloroethylene ≤ 0.02mg / L cis －１，２－ Dichloroethylene ≤ 0.04mg / L １，３－ Dichloropropene ≤ 0.002mg / L Dichloromethane ≤ 0.02mg / L Tetrachloroethylene ≤ 0.01mg / L １，１，１－ Trichloroethane ≤ 1mg / L １，１，２－ Trichloroethane ≤ 0.006mg / L Trichloroethylene ≤ 0.03mg / L Benzene ≤ 0.01mg / L Cadmium and its compound Class 2 (Heavy metal etc.) ≤ 150mg / kg≤ 0.01mg / L ≤ 0.01mg / L, and ≤ 1mg / 1kg rice on agricultural field Hexavalent Chromium compounds ≤ 250mg / kg≤ 0.05mg / L Cyanides compounds As isolated cyanides ≤ 50mg / kg Less than detection limit Total Mercury and its compounds ≤ 15mg / kg ≤ 0.0005mg / L Alkyl Mercury Less than detection limit Selenium and its compounds ≤ 150mg / kg≤ 0.01mg / L Lead and its compounds ≤ 150mg / kg≤ 0.01mg / L Arsenic and its compounds≤ 150mg / kg≤ 0.01mg / L ≤ 0.01mg / L and ≤ 15mg / kg soil on rice field Fluorine and its compounds ≤ 4000mg / kg≤ 0.8mg / L Boron and its compounds ≤ 4000mg / kg≤ 1mg / L Simazine Class 3 (Agrochemical s and PCBs) ≤ 0.003mg / L Thiuram ≤ 0.006mg / L Thiobencarb ≤ 0.02mg / L PCB Less than detection limit Organic phosphorus compounds Less than detection limit Target substances and standards

13. Cement factory Final Disposal Designated treatment facility 990000 ｔ 4100 00 ｔ According to surveys with treatment facilities, the total order is 670000 t and 5000 t from the designated area. 100000 ｔ 1220000 ｔ Landfill 540000 ｔ 22100 00 ｔ 80000 ｔ Contaminated soil needing treatment Legally ordered treatment Cement factory reception amount 2100,000 t (according to the Cement Association) ＊ In-country General Constructions Answered the surveys ９． The flow of contaminated soil Non designated treatment facility 60000 t 1200 00 ｔ Generated contaminated soil around 3000,000 t 6000 0 ｔ 177000 0 ｔ Amount of soil emitted from the registered contamination sites Voluntary treatment 13000 0 ｔ 129000 0 ｔ （出典）「平成 18 年度汚染土不適正処理に関する実態 調査」 （財）産業廃棄物処理事業振興財団 （ Estimates 2005 ）

14. １０． Inappropriate treatment of contaminated soil ① Hexavalent chromium contaminated soil was abandoned ( July 2006) Hexavalent chromium was detected from the soil dumping site and despite the municipal request to rehabilitate the area, nothing was done. Now the buyer of the land is dealing with the soil contamination countermeasures ② Mercury contaminated soil (November 2003) Mercury contamination occurred at a thermometre manufacturing centre. The soil was planned to be treated at appropriate facilities but in reality was transported elsewhere to undergo the melting process. ③ Arsenic-contaminated soil (October 2003) Arsenic exceeding the standards was detected in a soil storage mound. According to the data from the regional governments, there are many cases of inappropriate treatment of contaminated soil as can be seen in the following: Contaminated soil １５, ０００ The manufacturers had planned to treat 250m2

15. In order to implement the Soil Contamination Countermeasures Act, and to protect human health, measures for investigating situations of soil contamination, and countermeasures for combating human health damages are instituted Purpose ②形質変更時要届出区域（第１１条） Zone designation ・ Regulation on transporting contaminated soil from zones ① and ② (pre-notification, plan change orders, and countermeasure orders for transfers which do not follow the transport standards) ・ Duty to deliver and preserve manifests related to soil contamination ・ Permit institutions for disposal services of soil contamination Regulation for transporting contaminated soil Institution Land owners can request that their own lands be designated by prefectural and city governments when contamination is found through voluntary investigation (Article. 14) Investigation Land owners, etc (proprietors, managers and occupants) ask specific research institutes to implement research and the results are reported to governors of prefectural and city governments Because this zone has the potential to cause human health impacts, countermeasures are needed such as removal of contaminations →Prefectural governors and city governments indicate measures for removing contaminations, etc (Article. 7) →Prohibition to change the land characteristics (Article. 9) Because this zone has no potential to cause human health impacts, measures to remove contaminations are not needed (this includes zones where intake routes have been blocked) →Plan notification is necessary when characteristics of soil are going to be changed (Article. 12) ① Designated Zone for countermeasures(Article. 6) When intake routes of contaminants have been blocked ※ Amendment of Soil Contamination Countermeasures Act is executed since 1 April. 2010 ※ Contents of the amendment are shown in underlined sections When contamination removal has been completed, the designation is withdrawn 【 When soil contamination levels do not match the standards 】 ・ When closing down specific facilities which use harmful substances (Article.3) ・ When prefectural and city governments receive notification on changes in land characteristics for an area of over 3,000 ㎡, and suspect soil contamination in this area (Article.4) ・ When prefectural and city governments are concerned that human health would be damaged by soil contamination ② Notification Zone for Changing Land Characteristics (Article.11) ３． Concept of Soil Contamination Countermeasures Act after amendment 15

16. １１． Financial support from the Soil Contamination Countermeasures Fund ＜ the targets for the fund ＞ According to Article ７, the recipient of the countermeasures fund must have received the order to treat the site, and must fit the financial profile as determined in the name of the Minister of the Environment. ＜ Support Fund Scheme ＞ Government support Non-Government support Support Fund Prefectural support Landowner Numbers show proportion of support when considering that the total cost is 1 support Designated supporting body

17. Outline of Law on Soil Contamination Prevention in Farmland Potentially Contaminated sites Designation of areas Establishment of plans Remedial measures operation Release of designation Control on a gradual basis (survey of remediation areas) Control on a gradual basis (survey of deregistered areas) Registration of Special Areas Deregistration of Special areas Admonishment Polluting enterprises Law on Operator’s responsibility for Operation Cost of Contamination Prevention Law on special measures of national financial administration for contamination prevention Subsidy (55%of total operation cost; 45% = cost burden of enterprise) State Cost burden Proclamation in 1970 Control on a Gradual basis (Detailed survey)

18. Areas with standard exceedances (public access possible) Continued Monitoring Article 26 (prefectural governors) Procedure for prefectural governors Hearings with Environment Council etc. Hearings with municipal mayors Procedure for prefectural governors Hearings with municipal mayors Public hearings Agreement with the Environment Minister Designated areas (Designation of control measures for dioxin-related soil contamination; Article 29, prefectural governors) Establishment of plans (Establishment of remediation plans for dioxin-related soil contamination; Article 29, prefectural governors) Remediation (i.e. removal of contaminated soil) Subsidies from the Ministry of Environment De-registration of designation (De-registration under the Dioxin Special Measures Law; Article 30, prefectural governors) Bank raising of grant rate (Law on special measures of national financial administration for contamination prevention) Cost burden estimation (Law on Operator’s responsibility for Cost of Contamination Prevention) Operator’s responsibility applicable if causality is scientifically clear. 8 System for remediation of soil contamination based on the “Dioxin Special Measures Law” Proclamation 1999 Procedure for prefectural Governors Hearings with the Environment Council etc. Hearings with municipal mayors