Comparisons of Chemical Ranking and Scoring Methods

화학물질 우선순위 선정 기법에 대한 비교 분석

  • 김예신 (연세대학교 환경공해연구소) ;
  • 박화성 (연세대학교 환경공해연구소) ;
  • 이동수 (서울대학교 환경대학원) ;
  • 신동천 (연세대학교 의과대학 예방의학교실)
  • Published : 2003.09.01

Abstract

Although the variety and quantities of chemicals used have been increasing, no management strategies have been developed for these chemicals in our country. Therefore, it is important to identify the hazardous characteristics of chemicals and establish reasonable and effective management plans for them. However, because insufficient resources are available to evaluate all aspects of many varieties of chemicals, studies on suitable chemical ranking and scoring (CRS) system should be performed to ensure effective screening of priority chemicals.. In addition, because most CRS systems have their own goals, it is impossible for only one generic system to be consistent with all the uses that have been developed. Therefore, priority systems should be developed with specific and clearly defined purposes in our nation. In this study, we investigated and discussed exist-ing CRS systems, and proposed several elements and principles when designing CRS systems. First of all, the system should have clearly defined goals, keep neutral, and employ simple methods. In addition, researchers need to perform sensitivity analysis to find the main variables responsible for uncertainties and use the tiered approach to compose the effective management strategies for chemicals.

Keywords

References

  1. 국립환경연구원. 화학물질 관리 체계 개선을 위한 기반 연구, 1996
  2. 국립환경연구원. 화학물질의 환경 위해성 평가 연구, 1991
  3. 한국화학연구소. 환경오염물질의 위험성확인 및 독성평가에 관한 연구. 환경부, 1995
  4. 환경부. 화학물질 배출량조사 지침, 2003
  5. 환경부. 환경백서, 2002
  6. 환경부. 유해화학물질관리 기본계획, 2000
  7. ECB (European Chemical Bureau). http://ecb.jrc.it, 2003
  8. Environment Canada. The ARET substance selection process and guideline, 1994
  9. ICF. Preliminary survey of chemical exposure screening method (Briefing report), 1994
  10. Erin MS, Shane AS, John PG et al. SCRAM : A Scoring and Ranking System for Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Substances for the North American Great Lakes-Part I : Structure of the Scoring and Ranking System, Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2000; 7(1): 1-11 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02987640
  11. Gary AD, Mary BS, Sheila J. Comparative evaluation of chemical ranking and scoring methodologies, US EPA, 1994
  12. Hansen BG, Haelst AL et al. Priority setting for existing chemicals; The European Union risk ranking method, Environmental Toxicity and chemistry 1999; 18: 772-779 https://doi.org/10.1897/1551-5028(1999)018<0772:PSFECE>2.3.CO;2
  13. Heriot Watt university. Examples of the application of data to hazard and risk assessment, 2003
  14. Mary BS and Adam CS. Chemical ranking and scoring : Guidelines for relative assessment of chemicals, SETAC press, 1997a
  15. Mary BS, Gary AD, Lori EK, Terry WS, John EB, Sheila LJ and Emma LG. A screening method for ranking and scoring chemicals by potential human health and environmental impacts, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 1997b; 16(2): 372-383 https://doi.org/10.1897/1551-5028(1997)016<0372:ASMFRA>2.3.CO;2
  16. Rachel RM, Cheryl LS, Shari AB et al. SCRAM: A Scoring and Ranking System for persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic Substances for the north american great lakes resulting chemical scores and rankings, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 2002; 8(3): 537-557
  17. US EPA. Chemical Screening Report for the RCRA PBT List Docket, 1998
  18. US EPA. Comparative evaluation of chemical ranking and scoring methodology, 1994a
  19. US EPA. Chemical hazard evaluation for management strategies; A method for ranking and scoring chemicals by potential human health and environmental impacts, 1994b