• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.95-105
• /
• 2009

Chemical Ranking and Scoring (CRS) system is a useful tool to screen priority chemicals of large body of substances. The relative ranking of chemicals based on CRS system has served as a decision-making support tools. Exposure potential and toxicity are significant parameters in CRS system, and there are differences in evaluating those parameters in each CRS system. In this study, the parameters of exposure potential, human toxicity, and ecotoxicity were extensively compared. In addition the scoring methods in each parameter were analyzed. The CRS systems considered in this study include the CHEMS-1 (Chemical Hazard Evaluation for Management Strategies), SCRAM (Scoring and Ranking Assessment Model), EURAM (European Union Risk Ranking Method), ARET (Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics), and CRS-Korea. An comparative analysis of the several CRS systems is presented based on their assessment parameters and scoring methods.

• 한국지하수토양환경학회지:지하수토양환경
• /
• 제13권6호
• /
• pp.62-71
• /
• 2008

환경에는 매우 다양한 유해화학물질이 존재하며 지속적으로 새로운 화학물질이 개발되고 다시 환경 중으로 유출되고 있다. 화학물질의 관리나 규제를 위해서는 우선관리대상 오염물질(Priority Contaminants)을 결정해야 하는데, 이를 위한 과학적이고 정량적인 방법론으로는 우선순위선정(Chemical Ranking and Scoring; CRS)기법이 대표적이다. CRS기법에는 개발목적에 따라 다양한 평가인자들이 적용되는데 본 연구에서는 토양매체에서의 우선순위물질 선정시 필요한 인자를 제시하기 위해 다양한 CRS기법을 비교분석하여 토양특성을 고려할 수 있는 평가인자를 제시하였다. 연구대상 CRS는 국외에서 개발된 CHEMS-1, EURAM, SCRAM, ARET와 국내에서 개발된 CRS-Korea 및 그 외 기타 관련연구들이다. 기존에 개발된 CRS에 적용된 평가인자들을 비교분석한 결과 노출과 독성을 고려하여 우선순위물질을 선정하는데, 주로 화학물질의 잔류성, 생물축적성, 배출량 등을 공통적인 노출인자로 적용하고 있었고 독성인자로는 인체와 환경독성을 고려하고 있다. 본 연구에서는 토양매체의 우선순위물질선정을 위하여 이러한 CRS기법들이 공통적으로 적용하고 있는 인자들 이외에 토양매체의 특성을 고려할 수 있는 토양배출량, 토양오염 사고사건사례, 선진국의 규제국가수 등을 평가인자로 제안하였으며, 지하수매체와의 연계성을 위하여 지하수이동성 인자를 새로이 추가하였다. 본 연구결과는 CRS기법을 비교분석하여 토양에서의 유해화학물질 우선순위 선정시 고려되어야할 평가인자를 제안한 연구로 토양에 대한 CRS기법개발을 위한 기반연구로 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• 제18권3호
• /
• pp.183-191
• /
• 2003

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.

• 한국지하수토양환경학회지:지하수토양환경
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.16-25
• /
• 2013

The Korean groundwater law regulates 20 groundwater contamination parameters, including 14 specific harmful substances. Expanding the number of groundwater quality standards are needed to cope with recent groundwater quality deterioration due to the use of various chemicals. Chemical ranking and scoring system (CRS) is a scientific tool to sort priority chemicals by considering exposure and toxicity potentials. In this study, we developed a CRS for scoring and ranking of possible groundwater pollutants and screened priority substances to be later considered in the Korean standard expansion. Chemical Ranking Of groundWater pollutaNts (CROWN) incorporates important parameters consisting of exposure potential, human and water ecotoxicity, interests, and certainty. Furthermore, CROWN additionally evaluated existence of other media standards to consider impacts by contamination of other media. The 197 substances that were common to 9 countries were selected first. CROWN evaluated and ranked each chemical, and finally suggested priority substances. Suggested priority substances were classified into two groups according to the groundwater use purposes: drinking and non-drinking. The priority substances were further classified into $1^{st}$ and $2^{nd}$ group priorities. The $1^{st}$ group consists of 75 substances, including the all the Korean groundwater standard parameters. CROWN will be used in selecting groundwater pollutants for possible inclusion in the Korean standard expansion.

• 한국환경보건학회지
• /
• 제44권1호
• /
• pp.76-89
• /
• 2018

Background: Exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) has been considered one of the main causes of a range of endocrine diseases in modern society. An EDC priority list considering exposure, toxicity, and societal concern should be established for EDC management. Methods: The chemical ranking and scoring (CRS) system for EDCs was based on exposure, toxicity,and societal concern. The exposure score system was based on usage, circulation volume, bioaccumulation, and detection in consumer products. The toxicity score system was based on carcinogenicity and reproductive and developmental toxicity. The societal concern score system was based on domestic or international regulations and mass media reports. Results: A total of 165 EDCs were considered in the CRS system. The top-five priority EDCs were Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), Benzene, Bisphenol A, Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) and Trichloroethylene. Phthalates, bisphenols and parabens were identified as priority chemical groups. Conclusion: We developed a CRS system for EDCs to identify priority EDCs for management. This will be a foundation to provide an EDC management plan based on scientific decision-making.

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제32권3호
• /
• pp.253-267
• /
• 2022

Objectives: This study was performed to check whether the CRS (Chemical Ranking and Scoring) system is appropriate as a method to determine substances as candidates for substances subject to permission and to apply this system to the selection of candidates for substances subject to permission. Methods: A risk score was obtained by multiplying the hazard score and the exposure score and then ranking them. The hazard sub-indicators are carcinogenicity, germ cell mutagenicity, reproductive toxicity, specific target organ toxicity-repeated exposure, respiratory sensitization and endocrine disrupting chemicals. Exposure sub-indicators are persistence, bioaccumulation and emission volume. Sensitivity analysis was performed for missing values. Correlation analysis and multivariable linear regression analysis were performed among hazard, exposure and risk in order to confirm that CRS was an appropriate method. Results: As a result of the sensitivity analysis on missing values, it was confirmed that the effect on the risk ranking was not sensitive. Correlation and regression analysis confirmed that exposure had a greater effect on risk than hazard. Conclusions: The CRS system, which derives a risk score using a hazard and exposure score, is judged to be appropriate as a method for the selection of preliminary of candidates for substances subject to permission. Benzene, cadmium, nickel, and cobalt were selected as priority candidates for substances subject to permission.

• 한국물환경학회지
• /
• 제27권6호
• /
• pp.804-812
• /
• 2011

To prevent the overflow of various harmful chemicals, it is necessary to modify the chemical management system with an expansion to institutionally regulated substances. This modification should be preceded by selection of the priority chemicals, with a diverse chemical ranking system (CRS) applied to select the chemicals in developed countries. In Korea, a systematic CRS was used in a project related to soil and groundwater, however, it is inadequate to compare soil and groundwater CRS to that of surfacewater. In this study, a priority chemical ranking system for surfacewater was proposed through the analysis of international and domestic CRS cases. This was then applied to 161 chemicals to derive the priority list of harmful chemicals. As a result, Chemical RAnking of surFacewater polluTants (CRAFT) is presented for the protection of human health and the aquatic ecosystem from surfacewater pollutants. The components of CRAFT are the human health toxicity, aquatic ecosystem toxicity and reliability assessment factors. Three lists were derived from the 161 priority harmful chemicals for the protection of human health, aquatic ecosystem or both. It is expected that this result can be useful to prioritize harmful chemicals for the protection of human health and the aquatic ecosystem from Korean surfacewater.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• 제25권1호
• /
• pp.41-55
• /
• 2010

The aims of this study were to develop the suitable "system software" in chemical ranking and scoring (CRS) for the food hazardous chemicals associated with environmental emission and to suggest the priority lists of food contamination by environmental-origined pollutants. Study materials were selected with reference to the priority pollutants list for environment and food management from domestic and foreign research and the number of study materials is 103 pollutants (18 heavy metals, 10 PBTs, 10 EDs, and 65 organic compounds). The Food-CRS-Korea system consisted of the environmental fate model via multimedia, transfer environment to food model, and health risk assessment by contaminated food intake. We have established that health risks of excess cancer risks, hazard quotients (HQs) by chronic toxicity and HQs by reproductive toxicity convert to score, respectively. The creditable scoring system was designed to consider uncertainty of quantitative risk assessment based on VOI (Value-Of-Information). The predictability of the Food-CRS-Korea model was evaluated by comparing the presumable values and the measured ones of the environmental media and foodstuffs. The priority lists based on emissions with background-level-correction are 15 pollutants such as arsenic, cadmium, and etc. The priority lists based on environmental monitoring date are 17 pollutants including DEHP, TCDD, and so on. Consequently, we suggested the priority lists of 13 pollutants by considering the several emission and exposure scenarios. According to the Food-CRS-Korea system, arsenics, cadmium, chromes, DEHP, leads, and nickels have high health risk rates and reliable grades.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• 제20권2호
• /
• pp.109-121
• /
• 2005

A chemical ranking and scoring (CRS-Korea) system was developed and proposed to use as the first step to prioritize the toxic chemicals for the purpose of monitoring and detailed risk assessment that might follow as necessary. The CRS-Korea system takes a basic concept of risk assessment (both human health risk and ecological risk) in that risk score is determined by the product of toxicity score and exposure score. Included in the toxicity category are acute toxicity, chronic/sub -chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity, and other toxicity. The exposure category consists of quantity released to the environment, bioconcentration, and persistence. A consistent scheme and a comprehensive chemical data base are offered in the CRS-Korea system to calculate a score for the each component in the two categories by using specific physicochemical, fate, and toxic properties and the quantity of the chemical used. The toxicity score is obtained by adding up all the individual scores for the components in the toxicity category. The exposure score is determined by multiplication of the score of the quantity released with the sum of persistent score and bioconcentration score. Equal weight is given to the toxicity score and the exposure score. As the CRS-Korea system was applied to identify 50 national priority chemicals, it was found that significant data gap exists on toxicity and fate properties and that the uncertainty associated with estimating the quantify released to the environment is notably high. The proposed CRS system is only a screening tool in the first step toward the priority setting and should be used with expert judgement and other considerations necessary.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• 제20권4호통권51호
• /
• pp.311-325
• /
• 2005

A chemical ranking and scoring system, CRS - Korea, has recently been developed and proposed to use to prioritize on a screening level the toxic chemicals for monitoring and risk assessment. As CRS-Korea requires rigorous assessments prior to its wide application, an assessment was conducted in this study by examining the contribution of individual parameter score to the final chemical score or ranking. The sensitivity of the system to the default values for various parameters of missing data was also tested. The chemical ranking/score was round to depend primarily on the score of a single parameter, i. e., the chemical release, while toxicity scores show little correlation with the priority Further analysis indicated that the dominating effect of the chemical release results from i) its multiplicative relationship with the other two exposure parameters (biodegradation and persistent) and ii) the fact that a maximum score of 10 was assigned to the chemical release parameter while 5 was assigned for all others. AE the fraction of the data that are missing exceeded $70\%$ for various toxicity parameters at compared to less than $10\%$ for exposure parameters, the sensitivity of the ranking to the default value was not significant (rank correlation coefficient = 0.98) for toxicity parameters. Bated on this assessment, an improved CRS system (CRS - Korea II) was proposed in which the impact of the chemical release was properly adjusted by changing the multiplicative relationship to additive one and the maximum score to 5. Chemical priority was derived for each of 16 provinces by using CRS-Korea II. The chemical priority was found to significantly vary among the provinces. It was concluded that not only the national chemical priority but the local chemical priority should be taken into account in setting the nationwide chemical monitoring and risk assessment strategy.