Volume 11, Issue 2 p. 242-255
Health & Ecological Risk Assessment

Chemical assessment state of the science: Evaluation of 32 decision-support tools used to screen and prioritize chemicals

Alison M Gauthier,

Alison M Gauthier

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, San Francisco, California, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Mai Fung,

Mai Fung

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, San Francisco, California, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Julie Panko,

Julie Panko

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Tony Kingsbury,

Tony Kingsbury

TKingsbury, LLC, San Ramon, California, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Angela L Perez,

Angela L Perez

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, San Francisco, California, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Kristen Hitchcock,

Kristen Hitchcock

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Tyler Ferracini,

Tyler Ferracini

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Boulder, Colorado, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Jennifer Sahmel,

Jennifer Sahmel

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Boulder, Colorado, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Amber Banducci,

Amber Banducci

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Boulder, Colorado, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Megan Jacobsen,

Megan Jacobsen

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Boulder, Colorado, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Anders Abelmann,

Anders Abelmann

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Chicago, Illinois, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Erin Shay,

Erin Shay

Cardno ChemRisk, LLC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 06 November 2014
Citations: 25

Address correspondence to: mai.fung@cardno.com

ABSTRACT

The last decade has seen an increased focus on evaluating the safety and sustainability of chemicals in consumer and industrial products. In order to effectively and accurately evaluate safety and sustainability, tools are needed to characterize hazard, exposure, and risk pertaining to products and processes. Because many of these tools will be used to identify problematic chemistries, and because many have potential applications in various steps of an alternatives analysis, the limitations and capabilities of available tools should be understood by users so that, ultimately, potential chemical risk is accurately reflected. In our study, we examined 32 chemical characterization tools from government, industry, academia, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The tools we studied were diverse, and varied widely in their scope and assessment. As such, they were separated into five categories for comparison: 1) Screening and Prioritization; 2) Database Utilization; 3) Hazard Assessment; 4) Exposure and Risk Assessment; and 5) Certification and Labeling. Each tool was scored based on our weighted set of criteria, and then compared to other tools in the same category. Ten tools received a high score in one or more categories; 24 tools received a medium score in one or more categories, and five tools received a low score in one or more categories. Although some tools were placed into more than one category, no tool encompassed all five of the assessment categories. Though many of the tools evaluated may be useful for providing guidance for hazards – and, in some cases, exposure – few tools characterize risk. To our knowledge, this study is the first to critically evaluate a large set of chemical assessment tools and provide an understanding of their strengths and limitations. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2015;11:242–255. © 2014 SETAC