The evaluation of a chemical substance's persistence is key to understanding its environmental fate, exposure concentration, and, ultimately, environmental risk. Traditional biodegradation test methods were developed many years ago for soluble, nonvolatile, single-constituent test substances, which do not represent the wide range of manufactured chemical substances. In addition, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) screening and simulation test methods do not fully reflect the environmental conditions into which substances are released and, therefore, estimates of chemical degradation half-lives can be very uncertain and may misrepresent real environmental processes. In this paper, we address the challenges and limitations facing current test methods and the scientific advances that are helping to both understand and provide solutions to them. Some of these advancements include the following: (1) robust methods that provide a deeper understanding of microbial composition, diversity, and abundance to ensure consistency and/or interpret variability between tests; (2) benchmarking tools and reference substances that aid in persistence evaluations through comparison against substances with well-quantified degradation profiles; (3) analytical methods that allow quantification for parent and metabolites at environmentally relevant concentrations, and inform on test substance bioavailability, biochemical pathways, rates of primary versus overall degradation, and rates of metabolite formation and decay; (4) modeling tools that predict the likelihood of microbial biotransformation, as well as biochemical pathways; and (5) modeling approaches that allow for derivation of more generally applicable biotransformation rate constants, by accounting for physical and/or chemical processes and test system design when evaluating test data. We also identify that, while such advancements could improve the certainty and accuracy of persistence assessments, the mechanisms and processes by which they are translated into regulatory practice and development of new OECD test guidelines need improving and accelerating. Where uncertainty remains, holistic weight of evidence approaches may be required to accurately assess the persistence of chemicals. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;1-34.

No abstract

In order to protect European Union (EU) drinking water resources from chemical contamination, criteria for identifying persistent, mobile, and toxic (PMT) chemicals and very persistent and very mobile (vPvM) chemicals under the EU REACH Regulation were proposed by the German Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt-UBA). Additionally, new hazard classes for PMT and vPvM substances in the revised EU classification, labeling, and packaging (CLP Regulation) are intended. Therefore, a reliable approach in the identification of potential drinking water resource contaminants is needed. The scientific basis of the property-based PMT/vPvM criteria, focusing on mobility, which dictates the migration of chemical drinking water sources, was evaluated, and a critical analysis of the deviation of sorption metrics from simple behavior was carried out. Based on our evaluation, a K oc may be used for nonionic substances on a screening level only, requiring a higher tier assessment. It is considered inappropriate for hydrophilic and ionizable chemicals, particularly for soils with low organic carbon contents. The nonextractable residue formation is complex and not well understood but remains significant in limiting the mobility of chemicals through soils and sediments. In order to inform the EU commission's work on the introduction of new hazard classes for PMT and vPvM substances into the European legislation, the derivation of a tiered approach is proposed, which utilizes the weight of evidence available, with adoption of appropriate higher tier models commensurate with the nature of the substance and the data available. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;00:1-17.

No abstract