Expansion of my critique of the ACC tool's persistence and bioaccumulation criteria

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

I want to clarify and expand on the discussion in my last post on ACC’s selection of criteria for persistence (P) and bioaccumulation (B).  The bottom line remains the same:  ACC selected the least conservative values proposed by any authoritative body for these parameters

I want here to give a fuller picture of available P and B criteria.  It should be noted that there can be multiple types of measures of both P and B, but so as not to overly complicate the discussion, and for comparative purposes, I’m focusing here on:

  • Values for transformation half-lives for P
  • Values for fish bioaccumulation factors (BAF) or fish bioconcentration factors (BCF) for B

As a reminder, here’s what ACC proposed for these values:

  • Half-life < 180 days = non-persistent
  • BAF/BCF > 5,000 = bioaccumulative

So how do those compare to cut-offs established by authoritative bodies?

Globally Harmonized System (GHS):

  • For P, GHS doesn’t use transformation half-life values.
  • For B, GHS indicates that a fish BCF < 500 is “considered as indicative of a low level of bioconcentration.”

EPA’s New Chemicals Program (policy for PBTs) and Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) PBT definitions:

  • For P:
    • a half-life > 60 days in water is deemed persistent and triggers imposition of testing requirements and controls via a consent order (if B and T criteria are also met)
    • a half-life > 180 days is deemed highly persistent and triggers a presumptive ban unless demonstrated to be incorrect (if B and T criteria are also met)
  • For B:
    • a fish BAF/BCF > 1,000 is deemed bioaccumulative and triggers imposition of testing requirements and controls via a consent order (if P and T criteria are also met)
    • a fish BAF/BCF > 5,000 is deemed highly bioaccumulative and triggers a presumptive ban unless demonstrated to be incorrect (if P and T criteria are also met)

EPA’s Design for Environment (DfE) Program:  These are the values that I cited in my last post; they were developed by DfE staff in consultation with other EPA experts and consideration of relevant literature.  They were designed to provide greater granularity in P and B rankings to reflect the continuous nature of these chemical properties.

EU REACH Regulation Annex XIII:

  • For P:
    • a half-life > 40 days in fresh water is deemed persistent
    • a half-life > 60 days in fresh water is deemed very persistent (vP)
  • For B:
    • a fish BAF/BCF > 2,000 is deemed bioaccumulative
    • a fish BAF/BCF > 5,000 is deemed very bioaccumulative (vB)

Finally, it’s worth noting that the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) also has criteria to identify P and B for chemicals for which international bans on production and use are warranted (when they also meet toxicity criteria) – which of course goes far beyond mere criteria for prioritizing chemicals for further scrutiny.  Here are the POPs criteria:

  • For P:  a half-life > 60 days in fresh water
  • For B:  a fish BAF/BCF > 5,000

It’s clear that ACC’s P and B cut-off values are those representing the most extreme level of concern for these parameters across a range of authoritative U.S. and international bodies.

 

This entry was posted in Health Policy, TSCA and REACH and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • About this blog

    Science, health, and business experts at Environmental Defense Fund comment on chemical and nanotechnology issues of the day.

    Effective April, 2009, we have expanded the scope of our blog to encompass our work and perspectives on both chemicals and nanomaterials.

    Our work: Chemicals

  • Get blog posts by email

    Subscribe via RSS

  • Categories

  • Filter posts by tags


    • aggregate exposure (9)
    • American Chemistry Council (ACC) (49)
    • arsenic (3)
    • asthma (3)
    • Australia (1)
    • biomonitoring (9)
    • bipartisan (6)
    • bisphenol A (14)
    • BP Oil Disaster (18)
    • Canada (7)
    • carbon nanotubes (24)
    • carcinogen (19)
    • Carcinogenic Mutagenic or Toxic for Reproduction (CMR) (11)
    • CDC (6)
    • Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) (13)
    • chemical identity (30)
    • chemical testing (1)
    • Chicago Tribune (6)
    • children's safety (18)
    • China (10)
    • computational toxicology (9)
    • Confidential Business Information (CBI) (40)
    • conflict of interest (1)
    • consumer products (43)
    • Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) (4)
    • contamination (4)
    • cumulative exposure (4)
    • data requirements (41)
    • diabetes (4)
    • DNA methylation (4)
    • DuPont (11)
    • endocrine disruption (23)
    • epigenetics (3)
    • exposure and hazard (38)
    • FDA (8)
    • flame retardants (17)
    • formaldehyde (13)
    • front group (13)
    • Globally Harmonized System (GHS) (5)
    • Government Accountability Office (5)
    • hazard (5)
    • High Production Volume (HPV) (22)
    • in vitro (13)
    • in vivo (10)
    • industry tactics (38)
    • inhalation (18)
    • IUR/CDR (25)
    • Japan (3)
    • lead (6)
    • mercury (4)
    • methylmercury (2)
    • microbiome (3)
    • nanosilver (6)
    • National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (16)
    • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (7)
    • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) (5)
    • National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) (6)
    • obesity (6)
    • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (3)
    • Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) (3)
    • Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (12)
    • Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) (3)
    • oil dispersant (18)
    • PBDEs (14)
    • Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) (20)
    • pesticides (7)
    • phthalates (14)
    • polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) (5)
    • prenatal (6)
    • prioritization (31)
    • risk assessment (60)
    • Safe Chemicals Act (24)
    • Safer Chemicals Healthy Families (33)
    • Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) (15)
    • Small business (1)
    • South Korea (3)
    • styrene (5)
    • Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) (12)
    • test rule (13)
    • tributyltin (3)
    • trichloroethylene (TCE) (3)
    • Turkey (3)
    • U.S. states (12)
    • vulnerable populations (1)
    • worker safety (21)
  • Archives