PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
¦¦¦¦HjyHK united States	Office of Chemical Safety and
Li|	Environmental Protection Agency	Pollution Prevention
Risk Evaluation for
1,4-Dioxane
Systematic Review Supplemental File:
Data Quality Evaluation of Environmental Fate and
Transport Studies
CASRN: 123-91-1
June 2019
1

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Table of Contents
Kelley, S. L., Aitchison, E. W., Deshpande, M., Schnoor, J. L., Alvarez, P. J. J Biodegradation
of 1,4-dioxane in planted and unplanted soil: Effect of bioaugmentation with Amycolata
sp CB1190. Water Research. 2001. 35:3791-3800. HERO ID: 1462050	3
Boethling, R. S. and D. Mackay (2000). Handbook of property estimation methods for
chemicals: Environmental and health sciences. Boca Raton, FL, Lewis. HERO ID: 196353
	6
U.S, EPA. 2012. Estimation Programs Interface Suite™ for Microsoft® Windows, version
4.11. HERO ID: 2347246	8
Lyman, W., W. Reehl, and D. Ronsenblatt. 1982. Handbook of Chemical Property
Estimation Methods (Ch 8, P 8-4). HERO ID: 4795691	11
2

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Study
Reference:
Kelley, S. L., Aitchison, E. W., Deshpande, M., Schnoor, J. L., Alvarez, P. J. J
Biodegradation of 1,4-dioxane in planted and unplanted soil: Effect of
bioaugmentation with Amycolata sp CB1190. Water Research. 2001. 35:3791-3800.
HERO ID: 1462050
Domain
Metric
Qualitative
Determination
[i.e., High,
Medium, Low,
Unacceptable,
or Not rated]
Comments
Metric
Score
Metric
Weighting
Factor
Weighted
Score
Test
Substance
1. Test
substance
identity
High
The test substance
was identified by
chemical name.
1
2
2
2. Test
substance
purity
Medium
The source and
purity of 1,4-
dioxane were not
reported under
materials and
methods; a brief
description (p.
3797) of the tracer
material was
reported.
2
1
2
Test Design
3. Study
Controls
Medium
Reference
substance was not
reported but some
experimental
controls were run
with the test
material.
2
2
4
4. Test
Substance
stability
Medium
Details regarding
this metric were
not reported but
this does not limit
the interpretation
of the results.
2
1
2
Test
Conditions
5. Test
Method
Suitability
High
The test method
was suitable for
the test substance.
1
1
1
6. Testing
Conditions
Medium
Some testing
conditions (soil
details) were not
provided;
however, the
omissions were
not likely to have
had a substantial
impact on the
study results.
2
2
4
7. Testing
Consistency
High
No inconsistencies
were reported or
identified.
1
1
1
8. System
Type and
Design
High
System design was
reported and
appropriate.
1
1
1
3

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Test
Organisms
9. Test
Organism
Degradation
High
Pure culture test
organism
described.
1
2
2
10. Test
Organism
Partitioning
Not rated (NR)
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type.
NR
NR
NR
Outcome
Assessment
11. Outcome
Assessment
Methodology
Medium
The experiment
with hybrid poplar
trees evaluated
dioxane removal
by
evapotranspiration
and
biodegradation
and may not be
relevant to typical
environmental
conditions.
2
1
2
12. Sampling
Methods
Medium
The experiment
with
hybrid poplar
trees
evaluated dioxane
removal by
evapotranspiration
and
biodegradation
and
may not be
relevant to
typical
environmental
conditions.
2
1
2
Confounding/
Variable
Control
13.
Confounding
Variables
Low
49-67% total
recovery was
reported; the
authors indicated
that the remaining
51-33% may have
leaked from the
system.
3
1
3
14.
Outcomes
Unrelated to
Exposure
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type.
NR
NR
NR
Data
Presentation
and Analysis
15. Data
Reporting
Medium
Some information
was not reported
(i.e., mass
balance);
however, these
omissions were
not likely to have
had a substantial
impact on the
study results.
2
2
4
4

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

16.
Statistical
Methods and
Kinetic
Calculations
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type.
NR
NR
NR
Other
17.
Verification
or
Plausibility
of Results
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type.
NR
NR
NR
18. QSAR
Models
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type.
NR
NR
NR



Sum of scores:
22
18
30
II i^li
Medium
l.ow
Overall Score =
Sum of Weighted
Scores/Sum of
Metric
Weighting
Factors:
1.67
Overall
Score
(Rounded):
1.7
>1 and <1.7
¦ 1.7 ;ind
¦-2.A
'¦2,'A ;ind o


Overall
Quality
Level:
Medium
5

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Study
Reference:
Boethling, R. S. and D. Mackay (2000). Handbook of property estimation methods
for chemicals: Environmental and health sciences. Boca Raton, FL, Lewis. HERO ID:
196353
Domain
Metric
Qualitative
Determination
[i.e., High,
Medium, Low,
Unacceptable,
or Not rated]
Comments
Metric
Score
Metric
Weighting
Factor
Weighted
Score
Test
Substance
1. Test
substance
identity
High
The test substance
was identified by
chemical name.
1
2
2
2. Test
substance
purity
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test Design
3. Study
Controls
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
4. Test
Substance
stability
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test
Conditions
5. Test
Method
Suitability
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
6. Testing
Conditions
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
7. Testing
Consistency
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
8. System
Type and
Design
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test
Organisms
9. Test
Organism
Degradation
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
10. Test
Organism
Partitioning
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Outcome
Assessment
11. Outcome
Assessment
Methodology
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
12. Sampling
Methods
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Confounding/
Variable
Control
13.
Confounding
Variables
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
14.
Outcomes
Unrelated to
Exposure
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Data
Presentation
and Analysis
15. Data
Reporting
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
6

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

16.






Statistical

The metric is not




Methods and
Not rated
applicable to this
NR
NR
NR

Kinetic
Calculations

study type (SAR).




17.






Verification

The metric is not




or
Not rated
applicable to this
NR
NR
NR

Plausibility
of Results

study type (SAR).






Discusses






mechanisms and






QSAR models for



Other


hydrolysis such
as HYDROWIN




18. QSAR
Models
High
1.67 which has a
defined,
unambiguous
endpoint and
model
performance is
known.
1
1
1



Sum of scores:
2
3
3



Overall Score =






Sum of






Weighted

Overall

lli»h
Medium
Low
Scores/Sum of
Metric
Weighting
Factors:
1
Score
(Rounded):
1

¦ 1.7 ;ind
¦¦¦2/A



Overall

¦ 1 ;ind ¦: 1.7
¦ -2.'A ;ind o


Quality
High




Level:

7

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Study
Reference:
U.S, EPA. 2012. Estimation Programs Interface Suite™ for Microsoft® Windows,
version 4.11. HERO ID: 2347246
Domain
Metric
Qualitative
Determination
[i.e., High,
Medium, Low,
Unacceptable,
or Not rated]
Comments
Metric
Score
Metric
Weighting
Factor
Weighted
Score
Test
Substance
1. Test
substance
identity
High
The test substance
was identified by
chemical name.
1
2
2
2. Test
substance
purity
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test Design
3. Study
Controls
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
4. Test
Substance
stability
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test
Conditions
5. Test
Method
Suitability
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
6. Testing
Conditions
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
7. Testing
Consistency
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
8. System
Type and
Design
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test
Organisms
9. Test
Organism
Degradation
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
10. Test
Organism
Partitioning
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Outcome
Assessment
11. Outcome
Assessment
Methodology
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
12. Sampling
Methods
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Confounding/
Variable
Control
13.
Confounding
Variables
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
14.
Outcomes
Unrelated to
Exposure
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Data
Presentation
and Analysis
15. Data
Reporting
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
8

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

16.
Statistical
Methods and
Kinetic
Calculations
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR

17.

The metric is not




Verification

applicable to this




or
Not rated
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR

Plausibility






of Results





Other
18. QSAR
Models
High
The models in EPI
Suite™ have
defined endpoints.
Chemical domain
and performance
statistics for each
model are known,
and unambiguous
algorithms are
available in the EPI
Suite™
documentation
and/or cited
references to
establish their
scientific validity.
Many EPI SuiteTM
models have
correlation
coefficients >0.7,
cross-validated
correlation
coefficients >0.5,
and standard error
values <0.3;
however,
correlation
coefficients (r2,
q2) for the
regressions of
some
environmental
fate models (i.e.
BIOWIN) are
lower, as
expected,
compared to
regressions which
have
specific
experimental
values such as
water
solubility or log
Kow
(octanol-water
partition
coefficient).
1
1
1
9

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE



Sum of scores:
2
3
3
II tell
Medium
l.ow
Overall Score =
Sum of Weighted
Scores/Sum of
Metric
Weighting
Factors:
1
Overall
Score
(Rounded):
1
>1 and <1.7
¦ 1.7 ;ind
-¦2:a
¦¦¦2,'A ;ind ''3


Overall
Quality
Level:
High
10

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Study
Reference:
Lyman, W., W. Reehl, and D. Ronsenblatt. 1982. Handbook of Chemical Property
Estimation Methods fCh 8, P 8-4). HERO ID: 4795691
Domain
Metric
Qualitative
Determination
[i.e., High,
Medium, Low,
Unacceptable,
or Not rated]
Comments
Metric
Score
Metric
Weighting
Factor
Weighted
Score
Test
Substance
1. Test
substance
identity
High
The test
substance was
identified by
chemical name.
1
2
2
2. Test
substance
purity
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test Design
3. Study
Controls
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
4. Test
Substance
stability
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test
Conditions
5. Test
Method
Suitability
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
6. Testing
Conditions
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
7. Testing
Consistency
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
8. System
Type and
Design
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Test
Organisms
9. Test
Organism
Degradation
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
10. Test
Organism
Partitioning
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Outcome
Assessment
11. Outcome
Assessment
Methodology
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
12. Sampling
Methods
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Confounding/
Variable
Control
13.
Confounding
Variables
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
14.
Outcomes
Unrelated to
Exposure
Not rated
The metric is not
applicable to this
study type (SAR).
NR
NR
NR
Data
15. Data
High
This metric met
1
2
2
11

-------
PEER REVIEW DRAFT, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Presentation
Reporting

the criteria for



and Analysis


high confidence
as expected for
this type of study.




16.






Statistical

The metric is not




Methods and
Not rated
applicable to this
NR
NR
NR

Kinetic
Calculations

study type (SAR).




17.






Verification

The metric is not




or
Not rated
applicable to this
NR
NR
NR

Plausibility
of Results

study type (SAR).



Other


The study data
were based on a




18. QSAR
Models
High
SAR for a
compound with a
known chemical
structure.
1
1
1



Sum of scores:
3
5
5



Overall Score =






Sum of






Weighted

Overall

II i^li
Medium
Low
Scores/Sum of
Metric
Weighting
Factors:
1
Score
(Rounded):
1

-¦1.7 ;ind
¦¦¦2/A



Overall

>1 nnd <1.7
¦ -2.'A ;ind --'A


Quality
Level:
High
12

-------