BackgroundThe critical values for heavy metal fluxes for protecting the human health and ecosystem’s integrity in Germany, especially the Federal Immission Control Act (BImSchG in Gesetz zum Schutz vor schädlichen Umwelteinwirkungen durch Luftverunreinigungen, Geräusche, Erschütterungen und ähnliche Vorgänge (Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetz-BImSchG), 1974/2020) with its implementing ordinances (especially the 39th BImSchV in Neununddreißigste Verordnung zur Durchführung des Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetzes Verordnung über Luftqualitätsstandards und Emissionshöchstmengen vom 2. August 2010, zuletzt geändert durch Art. 2 V v. 18.7.2018 I 1222, 2010, 2018), the Federal Soil Protection Ordinance (BBodSchV in Bundes-Bodenschutz- und Altlastenverordnung (BBodSchV) (GBBl. I S. 1554 vom 12. Juli 1999, zuletzt durch Artikel 3 Absatz 4 der Verordnung vom 27. September 2017 (BGBl. I S. 3465) ge-ändert, 1999/2015) and the Technical Instructions on Air Quality Control (Luft in Erste Allgemeine Verwaltungsvorschrift zum Bundes–Immissionsschutzgesetz (Technische Anleitung zur Reinhaltung der Luft – TA Luft), 2002), were analysed, assessed with regard to the possibilities and applicability of the risk assessment, and were prepared for evaluation in comparison to the respective atmospheric deposition modelled with the chemical transport model LOTOS-EUROS. For a comparison of the critical values, the critical loads for cadmium, lead and mercury inputs were updated for Germany on a scale of 1:1 Mio, and critical loads for additional heavy metals (arsenic, copper, zinc, chromium and nickel) were computed, respectively. Due to the methodological differences of their derivation, the critical values of the individual regulations are only conditionally comparable to one another and to the critical loads. Sometimes major differences exist due to different levels of protection, various protective goods and the effect relationship. Only with the critical load calculations, inputs and outputs can be balanced.ResultsFor two unregulated metals (thallium and vanadium) a preliminary rough estimate of the risk of inputs in the receptors was provided as a calculated balance for in- and acceptable outputs. The uncertainty analysis shows, that the highest deviations occurred in the metal contents in plants used to calculate the output through the harvesting of the biomass. The critical load calculation has the highest sensitivity to changes in the pH value. The critical loads for heavy metal fluxes for protecting the human health (CL(M)drink) and ecosystem’s integrity CL(M)eco) for arsenic, nickel, zinc and chromium were not exceeded in Germany for 2009–2011. CL(M)drink and CL(M)eco are exceeded by Hg and Pb inputs, especially in the low rainfall regions of Germany (Brandenburg, lowlands of Saxony-Anhalt, Leipzig Bay, Ruhr valley) with wood vegetation; in addition CL(Cu)eco is exceeded by copper deposition 2010 in the area surrounding Berlin and in the Ruhr valley. The critical loads for cadmium for the protection of drinking water CL(Cd)drink and for the protection of human food from wheat products CL(Cd)food are not exceeded in the German data set due to atmospheric deposition in 2010, but in the worst-case scenario the maximum atmospheric deposition in 2010 could exceeded the lowest CL(Cd)drink and CL(Cd)food.ConclusionsThat assessment of risks was based on deposition from the atmosphere, which represents only a fraction of the inputs compared to the inputs from the use of fertilisers and other sources. This study suggests the conclusive recommendation to methodically deepen and broaden the assessment and evaluation of atmospheric deposition. This is especially true for the spatial validation and specification of exposure for ecosystem types.