• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• 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.

• 한국환경농학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2009.07a
• /
• pp.344-344
• /
• 2009

• Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment
• /
• v.13 no.6
• /
• pp.62-71
• /
• 2008

Soil quality standards (SQS) are necessary to protect the human health and soil biota from the exposure to soil pollutants. The current SQS in Korea contain only sixteen substances, and it is scheduled to expand the number of substances. Chemical ranking and scoring (CRS) system is very effective to screen the priority chemicals for the future SQS in terms of their toxicity and exposure potential. In this study, several CRS systems were extensively compared to propose the assessment factors that required for the screening of soil pollutants 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), CRSKorea, and other systems. The additional assessment factors of CRS suitable for soil pollutants were suggested. We suggest soil adsorption factor as an appropriate factor of CRS system to consider chemical transport from soil to groundwater. Other factors such as soil emission rate and cases of accident of soil pollutants were included. These results were reflected to screen the priority chemicals in Korea, as a part of the project entitled ‘Setting the Priority of Soil Contaminants'.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Environmental Health Sciences
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Korean Society on Water Environment
• /
• v.27 no.6
• /
• 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
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.81-91
• /
• 2004

Although it is suggested that risk -based management plan is needed to manage air pollution effectively, we have no resources enough to evaluate all aspects of substances and set priorities. So we need to develop a logical and easy risk-based priority setting method. However, it if impossible that only one generic system that is consistent with all the use is developed. In this study, we proposed a human health risk based priority-setting method for hazardous air pollutants, and ranked priorities for this method. First of all, after investigating previous chemical ranking and scoring systems, we chose appropriate indicators and logics to goal of this study and made a chemical priority ranking method using these. As results, final scores in priority ranking method were derived for 25 substances, and ethylene oxide, acrylonitrile and vinyl chloride were included in high ranks. In addition, same substances were highly ranked when using default values like when using no default, but the scores of hydrofluoric acid and ryan and compounds were sensitive to default values. This study could be important that priorities were set including toxicity type and quality and local inherent exposure conditions and we can set area-specific management guidelines and survey plans as a screening tool.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• v.20 no.2 s.49
• /
• 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.