Draft Risk Evaluation for Perchloroethylene (Ethene, 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloro) CASRN: 127-18-4 Systematic Review Supplemental File: Data Quality Evaluation of Ecological Hazard Studies April 2020


PEER REVIEW DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

x=,EPA

United States	Office of Chemical Safety and

Environmental Protection Agency	Pollution Prevention

Draft Risk Evaluation for
Perchloroethylene
(Ethene, l,l»2,2-Tetrachloro)

CASRN: 127-18-4

Systematic Review Supplemental File:

Data Quality Evaluation of Ecological Hazard Studies

Ci

ci

ci

CI

NOTICE: This information is distributed solely for the purpose of pre-dissemination peer review under
applicable information quality guidelines. It has not been formally disseminated by EPA. It does not represent
and should not be construed to represent any Agency determination or policy. It is being circulated for review
of its technical accuracy and science policy implications.

April 2020, DRAFT

-------
HERO
ID

7508

12017
12017
18050

18064

18110

32169

42313

48608

58126

64580

Table of Contents

Data Type

Reference

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Leblanc, G. A.. 1980. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to water flea (Daph-
nia magna). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 24:684-
691

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Other; Terrestrial;

Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Broderius, S.,Kahl, M.. 1985. Acute toxicity of organic chemical mixtures to
the fathead minnow. Aquatic Toxicology 6:307-322

Broderius, S.,Kahl, M.. 1985. Acute toxicity of organic chemical mixtures to
the fathead minnow. Aquatic Toxicology 6:307-322

Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R.,Macek, K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcen-
tration and elimination of selected water pollutants by bluegill sunfish (Lepomis
macrochirus).

Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority
pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of Environmental Con-
tamination and Toxicology 26:446-452

Heitmuller, P. T.,Hollister, T. A.,Parrish, P. R.. 1981. Acute toxicity of 54
industrial chemicals to sheepshead minnows (Cyprinodon variegatus). Bulletin
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 27:596-604

Geiger, D. L.,Northcott, C. E.,Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T. eds. 1985. Acute toxi-
cities of organic chemicals to fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas): volume
II.

Dietz, A. C.,Schnoor, J. L.. 2001. Phytotoxicity of chlorinated aliphatics to
hybrid poplar (Populus deltoides x nigra DN34). Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 20:389-393

Sandhu, S. S.,Ma, T. H.,Peng, Y.,Zhou, X.. 1989. Clastogenicity evaluation
of seven chemicals commonly found at hazardous industrial waste sites. DNA
Repair 224:437-445

11

14

16

19

21

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Alexander, H. C.,McCarty, W. M.,Bartlett, E. A.. 1978. Toxicity of per-
chloroethylene, trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and methylene chloride
to fathead minnows. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
20:344-352

23

Other; Terrestrial;

Bernard, A. M.,de Russis, R.,Normand, J. C.,Lauwerys, R. R.. 1989. Evaluation
of the subacute nephrotoxicity of cyclohexane and other industrial solvents in
the female Sprague-Dawley rat. Toxicology Letters 45:271-280

25

-------
76052

Chronic (>21 days); Terrestrial;

94468

Other; Terrestrial;

95201

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

200570

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

629907

Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

632863

Other; Aquatic; Fish

632863

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

632864

Other; Aquatic; Fish

632864

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

657898

Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Narotsky, M. G.,Kavlock, R. J.. 1995. A multidisciplinary approach to toxico-
logical screening: II. Developmental toxicity. Journal of Toxicology and Envi-
ronmental Health 45:145-171

Elovaara, E.,Hemminki, K.,Vainio, H.. 1979. Effects of methylene chloride,
trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene and toluene on the de-
velopment of chick embryos. Toxicology 12:111-119

Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J.
A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute and chronic
toxicity of ten chlorinated organic compounds to the American flagfish (Jor-
danella floridae). Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
20:94-102

Sanchez-Fortun, S.,Sanz, F.,Santa-Maria, A.,Ros, J. M.,De Vicente, M.
L.,Encinas, M. T.,Vinagre, E.,Barahona, M. V.. 1997. Acute sensitivity of
three age classes of Artemia salina larvae to seven chlorinated solvents. Bul-
letin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 59:445-451

Valencia, R.,Mason, J. M.,Woodruff, R. C.,Zimmering, S.. 1985. Chemical
mutagenesis testing in Drosophila. III. Results of 48 coded compounds tested
for the National Toxicology Program. Environmental Mutagenesis 7:325-348

Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2002. Effects of tetra-
chloroethylene on the viability and development of embryos of the Japanese
medaka, Oryzias latipes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxi-
cology 42:463-469

Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2002. Effects of tetra-
chloroethylene on the viability and development of embryos of the Japanese
medaka, Oryzias latipes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxi-
cology 42:463-469

Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2006. Growth inhibition in
Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish exposed to tetrachloroethylene. Journal
of Environmental Biology 27

Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2006. Growth inhibition in
Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish exposed to tetrachloroethylene. Journal
of Environmental Biology 27

Crebelli, R.,Andreoli, C.,Carere, A.,Conti, L.,Crochi, B.,Cotta-Ramusino,
M.,Benigni, R.. 1995. Toxicology of halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbons: Struc-
tural and molecular determinants for the disturbance of chromosome segrega-
tion and the induction of lipid peroxidation. Chemico-Biological Interactions
98:113-129

-------
660091

Other; Terrestrial;

660790	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

661061	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

661834	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

676758
700434

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Other; Aquatic; other amphibian -
wood frog and green frog

700434

Other; Aquatic; other amphibian -
american toad

700434

Other; Aquatic; other amphibian -
spotted salamder

700434

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
Amphibian

707209

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

707209

Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

1059985

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hulzebos, E. M.,Adema, D. M.,Dirven-Van Breemen, E. M.,Henzen, L.,Van
Dis, W. A.,Herbold, H. A.,Hoekstra, J. A.,Baerselman, R.,Van Gestel, C. A..
1993. Phytotoxicity studies with Lactuca sativa in soil and nutrient solution.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 12:1079-1094

Brack, W.,Frank, H.. 1998. Chlorophyll a fluorescence: A tool for the inves-
tigation of toxic effects in the photosynthetic apparatus. Ecotoxicology and
Environmental Safety 40:34-41

Brack, W.,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with
green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228

Miyagawa, M.,Takasawa, H.,Sugiyama, A.,Inoue, Y.,Murata, T.,Uno,
Y.,Yoshikawa, K.. 1995. The in vivo-in vitro replicative DNA synthesis (RDS)
test with hepatocytes prepared from male B6C3F1 mice as an early predic-
tion assay for putative nongenotoxic (Ames-negative) mouse hepatocarcinogens.
Mutation Research: Genetic Toxicology 343:157-183

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with
Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environment 43:149-157

McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects
of chlorinated solvents on four species of North American amphibians. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109

McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects
of chlorinated solvents on four species of North American amphibians. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109

McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects
of chlorinated solvents on four species of North American amphibians. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109

McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects
of chlorinated solvents on four species of North American amphibians. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109

Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxi-
city of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to Ceriodaphnia dubia. Eco-
toxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146

Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxi-
city of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to Ceriodaphnia dubia. Eco-
toxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146

Labra, M.,Mattia, F.,Bernasconi, M.,Bertacchi, D.,Grassi, F.,Bruni, I.,Citterio,
S.. 2010. The Combined Toxic and Genotoxic Effects of Chromium and Volatile
Organic Contaminants to Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata. Water, Air, and Soil
Pollution 213:57-70

-------
1916722

Other; Terrestrial;

2127844

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

2298399

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

2298399

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

3298076

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

3559784

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
soil fungi

3559784

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
fungi

3616526

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

3617731
3617731
3617735
3617735

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic;

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; In-
vertebrates

Specht, W. L.,Klaine, S. J.,Hook, D. D.. 1996. Rapid bioassessment methods
for assessing vegetation toxicity at the Savannah River Site - germination tests
and root elongation trials.

88

Bacsi, I.,Toeroek, T.,B-Beres, V.,Toeroek, P.,Tothmeresz, B.,Nagy, A. S.,Vasas,	90

G.. 2013. Laboratory and microcosm experiments testing the toxicity of chlo-
rinated hydrocarbons on a cyanobacterium strain (Synechococcus PCC 6301)
and on natural phytoplankton assemblages. Hydrobiologia 710:189-203

Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J.	93

A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute and
chronic toxicity of 10 chlorinated organic-compounds to the american flagfish

(jordanella-floridae). Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology	^

20:94-102	H

m

Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J.	96	^

A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute and	O

chronic toxicity of 10 chlorinated organic-compounds to the american flagfish	^

(jordanella-floridae). Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology	q

20:94-102	-<

D

Bacsi, I.,Gonda, S.,B-Beres, V.,Novak, Z.,Nagy, S. A.,Vasas, G.. 2015. Alter-	99	J

ations of phytoplankton assemblages treated with chlorinated hydrocarbons: ef-
fects of dominant species sensitivity and initial diversity. Ecotoxicology 24:823-
834

Poecilia sphenops. 30:199-205

Home, J. D.,Swirsky, M. A.,Hollister, T. A.,Oblad, B. R.,Kennedy, J. H.. 1983.	108

Aquatic Toxicity Studies of Five Priority Pollutants.

Home, J. D.,Swirsky, M. A.,Hollister, T. A.,Oblad, B. R.,Kennedy, J. H.. 1983.	110

Aquatic Toxicity Studies of Five Priority Pollutants.

Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic	112

Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia).

Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic	114

Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia).

>

D

O

Steiman, R.,Seiglemurandi, F.,Guiraud, P.,Benoitguyod, J. L.. 1995. TESTING	102	^

OF CHLORINATED SOLVENTS ON MICROFUNGI. Environmental Toxicol-	O

ogy and Water Quality 10:283-285	H

o

Steiman, R.,Seiglemurandi, F.,Guiraud, P.,Benoitguyod, J. L.. 1995. TESTING	104	H

OF CHLORINATED SOLVENTS ON MICROFUNGI. Environmental Toxicol-	™

ogy and Water Quality 10:283-285	2

o

Loekle, D. M.,Schecter, A. J.,Christian, J. J.. 1983. Effects of Chloroform,	106	q

Tetrachloroethylene, and Trichloroethylene on Survival, Growth, and Liver of	Q

m

-------
3617735
3617749
3617749
3617749
3617867

Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

3625336

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

3625489

Other; Aquatic; Fish

3625621
3634174

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; In-
vertebrates

3634174

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

3634370

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

3634370

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

3634370

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
fish and invert

3634375

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; In-
vertebrates

Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic	116

Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia).

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to	118

Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical Properties. 12:15-21

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to	121

Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical Properties. 12:15-21

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to	125

Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical Properties. 12:15-21

Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxi-	128	^

cants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental Toxicology and	—I

Chemistry 26:1931-1939	^

>

Shubat, P. J.,Poirier, S. H.,Knuth, M. L.,Brooke, L. T.. 1982. Acute Toxic-	131

ity of Tetrachloroethylene and Tetrachloroethylene with Dimethylformamide to	^

Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri). 28	O

Schell, J. D. J.. 1987. Interactions of Halogenated Hydrocarbon Mixtures in	134	^

the Embryo of the Japanese Medaka (Oryzias latipes).

~n

De Foe, D. L.. 1980. Tetrachloroethylene Bioassay Results.	136

D

Richter, J. E.,Peterson, S. F.,Kleiner, C. F.. 1983. Acute and Chronic Toxicity 138 ^
of some Chlorinated Benzenes, Chlorinated Ethanes, and Tetrachloroethylene ?
to Daphnia magna. 12:679-684 (OECDG Data File)		|

o

Richter, J. E.,Peterson, S. F.,Kleiner, C. F.. 1983. Acute and Chronic Toxicity	141	—|

of some Chlorinated Benzenes, Chlorinated Ethanes, and Tetrachloroethylene	l~n

to Daphnia magna. 12:679-684 (OECDG Data File)	O

73

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and	144	^

Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) Priority Pol-	q

lutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.	—I

m

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and	146

Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) Priority Pol-
lutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and	148

Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) Priority Pol-
lutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and	150

Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

-------
3634375
3634375
3634391
3634391
3634391
3634436

3689695

3689695

3689695

4214225
4214249

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
invert ,fish,algae

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish
Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

; Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Call, D. J.,Bro°ke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and	152

Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and	154

Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and	156

Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and	158

Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and	160	^

Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.	—I

m
ZJ

Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Com-	162	|>

parisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an Amphipod and a	O

Cladoceran.

m

o

Ahmad, N.,Benoit, D., Brooke, L.,Call, D.,Carlson, A.,Defoe, D.,Huot,	164	-<

J.,Moriarity, A.,Richter, J.,Shubat, P.,Veith, G.,Wallbridge, C.. 1984. Aquatic	O

Toxicity Tests to Characterize the Hazard of Volatile Organic Chemicals in	^

Water: A Toxicity Data Summary—Parts I and II.	~n

H

Ahmad, N.,Benoit, D.,Brooke, L.,Call, D.,Carlson, A.,Defoe, D.,Huot,	166	Q

J.,Moriarity, A.,Richter, J.,Shubat, P.,Veith, G.,Wallbridge, C.. 1984. Aquatic	O

Toxicity Tests to Characterize the Hazard of Volatile Organic Chemicals in	"Z.

Water: A Toxicity Data Summary—Parts I and II.	O

Ahmad, N.,Benoit, D.,Brooke, L.,Call, D.,Carlson, A.,Defoe, D.,Huot,	168 Q

J.,Moriarity, A.,Richter, J.,Shubat, P.,Veith, G.,Wallbridge, C.. 1984. Aquatic	m

Toxicity Tests to Characterize the Hazard of Volatile Organic Chemicals in	q

Water: A Toxicity Data Summary—Parts I and II.	^0

o

Dow Chem Co. 1979. TOXICITY OF PERCHLOROETHYLENE TO DAPH-	170	C

NIDS.	O

m

Ciba-Geigy Corp. 1980. 96 HOUR STATIC FISH BIOASSAY TEST WITH	172

ATTACHMENTS (ATTACHMENT 59).

-------
Study Citation: Leblanc, G. A.. 1980. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to water flea (Daphnia magna). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination

and Toxicology 24:684-691
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	7508

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

study says all chemicals tested were purchased from













commercial chemical suppliers, but does not specify













where tetrachloroethylene came from.

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Study reports a minimum purity of 80 percent for













all chemicals tested, but does not specify what the













purity is for tetrachloroethylene.

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

Low

X

2

6

It appears the volatility of tetrachloroethylene was

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

tion

Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Metric 10:
Metric 11:

Consistency of Exposure Administration
Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Exposure Duration and Frequency
Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

Medium
Low

High
Medium

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

taken into account in the test methods, but it's un-
clear as the study reports generally "The tests were
also conducted in unreplicated 500 mL solutions con-
taining 15 daphnids if dividing the solution into trip-
licate test vessels presented a risk of the loss of the
test substance through volatilization or if vapors of
the substance posed a high health risk to the investi-
gators. In addition, these vessels were covered with
plastic wrap secured with an elastic band."

only minor uncertainties

measurements were not reported and the test sub-
stance is volatile

5-8 exposure groups were used for each chemical, no
range finding was conducted to determine an appro-
priate exposure, but it appears they were appropri-
ate enough to establish an LD50.

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Leblanc, G. A.. 1980. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to water flea (Daphnia magna). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination

and Toxicology 24:684-691
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 7508

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

study didn't report whether test organisms were ac-

climatized.

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Low

It appears there were 15 daphnia in each test con-

Group

centration for tetrachloroethylene and no replicates

to avoid losing tetrachloroethylene to vitalization.

OECD recommends at least 20 and separated into 4

different vessels.

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18:

Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19:

Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20:

Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

Medium

Data for most but not all outcomes by study group

were reported but these minor uncertainties or limi-

tations are unlikely to have a substantial impact on

results.

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Leblanc, G. A.. 1980. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to water flea (Daphnia magna). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination

and Toxicology 24:684-691
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	7508

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

m

-------
Study Citation:
Data Type:
Hero ID:

Broderius, S.,Kahl, M.. 1985. Acute toxicity of organic chemical mixtures to the fathead minnow. Aquatic Toxicology 6:307-322

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

12017

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1



tion









Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment









Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2

Metric 18:

Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Broderius, S.,Kahl, M.. 1985. Acute toxicity of organic chemical mixtures to the fathead minnow. Aquatic Toxicology 6:307-322

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	12017

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis







Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

x 1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes





(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	q

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	pj-j

Overall rating = ^	-,	,	O

N	1	73

O

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is	Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m

-------
Study Citation:
Data Type:
Hero ID:

Broderius, S.,Kahl, M.. 1985. Acute toxicity of organic chemical mixtures to the fathead minnow. Aquatic Toxicology 6:307-322

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

12017

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1



tion









Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment









Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2

Metric 18:

Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Broderius, S.,Kahl, M.. 1985. Acute toxicity of organic chemical mixtures to the fathead minnow. Aquatic Toxicology 6:307-322

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	12017

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis







Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

x 1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

No





(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	q

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	pj-j

Overall rating = ^	,	O

N	1	73

O

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is	Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m

-------
Study Citation: Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R.,Macek,
bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus).
Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 18050

K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcentration and elimination of selected water pollutants by

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

no purity of test chemical was reported, but liquid

gas chromatography was performed during the ex-

periment and purity of the chemical could be deter-

mined then although it wasn't reported in the paper.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

method for allocation was not reported.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Minor reservations about the source of fish.
Three populations of bluegill sunfish (Lepomis
macrochirus) were obtained from a commercial fish
farmer in Connecticut. May not all be the same age,
but length and weight was documented, and age may
not be a big factor in determining BCF.

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R.,Macek, K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcentration and elimination of selected water pollutants by

bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus).

Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 18050

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Low

x 1

Fish were maintained in the holding facilities for a
minimum of 30 days prior to the initiation of the
study. Minor uncertainties in the details provided.

study started with 100 organisms per exposure
group, and took fish out 5 fish on each sampling
day. OECD recommends having enough to remove
at least 4. Unsure the number of replicates.

recommended temp for blue gill is 20-25 degrees C
and this study was conducted at 16 degrees C which
could have lowered metabolism in fish.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Low

x 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

Medium x 1

BCFs and half-lives were reported for each of the
chemicals. Assessment was not as sensitive as it
should be for calculating a BCF - OECD recom-
mends noting if both sexes are used, differences in
growth and lipid content between sexes should be
documented to be non-significant before the start of
the exposure, in particular if it is anticipated that
pooling of male and female fish will be necessary to
ensure detectable substance concentrations and/or
lipid content. This was not noted,
incomplete reporting of minor details of outcome as-
sessment protocol execution

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Low x 2

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium x 1

OECD recommends noting If both sexes are used,
differences in growth and lipid content between sexes
should be documented to be non-significant before
the start of the exposure, in particular if it is antic-
ipated that pooling of male and female fish will be
necessary to ensure detectable substance concentra-
tions and/or lipid content. This was not noted,
data on attrition and health outcomes unrelated to
exposure were not reported for each study group.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High x 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R.,Macek, K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcentration and elimination of selected water pollutants by

bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus).

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18050

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	Medium x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High x 1

Not all regressions, lipid content, and weights were
reported, but BCFs and half lives were reported for
all chemicals.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Medium

1.7

Extracted

No





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

m

-------
Study Citation: Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 26:446-452
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18064

Domain

Metric

Ratingt MWF*

Score

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
Low

Low

x 2
x 1

x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

-0-
73
>

^ftjhough

o

Z	

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High

x 2
N/A
x 1

many chemicals tested and do not give details about negative control response,

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High x 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low	x 1

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low	x 1

posure Levels

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low

x 1

Domain 4: Test Organism

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 26:446-452
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18064

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF*	Score

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	Medium x 1

m

>
O
m
z
o
-<
D

-P3-

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

D
O

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Low	x 2

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	Low	x 1

O
H

m
O

-3-

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Medium x 1

o

C

o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 26:446-452
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18064

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF*	Score

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	Low	x 2	6

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High x 1	1	—

7
—I

Overall Quality Determination"'"	Medium	2.0

>

O

Extracted Yes 171
	2	

	a	

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	-<

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.	O

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	^

1	if any metric is UnacceptaliLp

Overall rating = ^	O

y\ (Metric Scores X MWF;) . MWFj	(round to the nearest tentrf^otherw

- 1	3	o.i	z

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed out and an ^row po
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.	q

=i
m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Heitmuller, P. T.,Hollister, T. A.,Parrish, P. R.. 1981. Acute toxicity of 54 industrial chemicals to sheepshead minnows (Cyprinodon

variegatus). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 27:596-604
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 18110

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High x 2

Medium x 1

Medium

x 1

Unspecified chemical supply companies, analytical
grade with >=80 percent purity.

>=80 percent purity.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response

Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

High
High

Low

x 2
x 1

x 1

Indicated test not acceptable if control mortality ex-
ceeded 10 percent

Randomized allocation not indicated.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Unacceptable x 2

High

x 1

Unacceptable x 1

High
Low

Low

x 2
x 1

x 1

Static system, did not take measures to control
volatilization of Perc and no analytical monitoring.

No analytical monitoring; Nominal concentrations
used and Perc is volatile.

Test concentrations determined after range-finding
test were not reported.

Not specified so uncertain.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Heitmuller, P. T.,Hollister, T. A.,Parrish, P. R.. 1981. Acute toxicity of 54 industrial chemicals to sheepshead minnows (Cyprinodon

variegatus). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 27:596-604
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18110

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control











Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2



Procedures











Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1



Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Medium

X

2

4

Exposure-related behavioral effects not reported,











only mortality, and effects at each test concentra-











tion (e.g. percent mortality at lowest through high-











est concentration tested) not provided.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable





4.0

Metric mean score**: 1.6.

Extracted

No











** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Geiger, D. L.,Northcott, C. E.,Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T. eds. 1985. Acute toxicities of organic chemicals to fathead minnows (Pimephales

promelas): volume II.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 32169

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Medium

2 controls reported. Unsure what kind (water, sol-
vent?)

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

Medium

flow through system used using cycling proportional

tion

diluters with duplicate tanks for each test conc. It's

unclear exactly what system was used for Perc be-
cause the description at the beginning of the paper is
non-specific. It seems like the following system was
used: The electronic diluter was used for expensive
and volatile chemicals or when acute toxicity was
very close to water solubility. Another form of a liq-
uidliquidequilibrator was constructed from a 2.8 L
culture flask atop a magnetic stirrer. A pump forced
lake water into this closed system which contained a
layer of the chemical.

Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

Medium

details of exposure administration was reported but
it's unclear what type of administration applies to
what chemicals

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

High

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

High

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Geiger, D. L.,Northcott, C. E.,Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T. eds. 1985. Acute toxicities of organic chemicals to fathead minnows (Pimephales

promelas): volume II.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 32169

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:
Metric 14:

Test Organism Characteristics High x 2

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions Medium x 1

only minor uncertainties. Study reports, "Fat-
head minnows used in the tests were cultured at
the U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory-
Duluth and the University of Wisconsin-Superior
campus. Adults were held at 25" C in flowing wa-
ter with a 16 hr light-controlled photo-period and
fed frozen adult brine shrimp (Artemia sp.). They
were provided with asbestos pipes (cut in half longi-
tudinally) as spawning substrates, where naturally
spawned and fertilized embryos attached to the un-
derside. The substrates, with intact embryos, were
removed daily and placed in another 25C bath where
hatching occurred; however the spawning substrates
were removed just prior to hatching at the UW-
Superior culture unit, then placed in a rearing bath.
For tests conducted in 1977-1982, newly hatched lar-
vae from the stock culture unit were reared in a sys-
tem similar to the exposure systems at a temper-
ature of 25C. Tests conducted following 1982 used
fish that had been reared in flow-through tanks in
the lab Is culture unit. Larvae were fed 40-48 hr
old brine shrimp nauplii (Bio-Marine Research, Inc.,
Hawthorne, CA) in excess two times daily (once on
week-end days). Embryos and larvae were cultured
in water from the same source as used in the ex-
pos.ures to the test chemicals. Fish that were ap-
proximately 28-34 days old were used in the toxicity
tests." It's ok to have asbestos pipes for spawning
purposes.

number of test organisms was not reported for stud-
ies prior to 1982. the Perc test was in 1979.

Only minor uncertainties, the temperature is ap-
propriate for fathead minnows according to OECD
guidelines.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

Continued on next page . . .

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Geiger, D. L.,Northcott, C. E.,Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T. eds. 1985. Acute toxicities of organic chemicals to fathead minnows (Pimephales

promelas): volume II.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	32169

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control











Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2



Procedures











Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium

X

1

2

data on attrition or health impacts unrelated to
exposure were not reported for each study group,
because only substantial differences among groups
were noted.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1



Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2



Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Dietz, A. C.,Schnoor, J. L.. 2001. Phytotoxicity of chlorinated aliphatics to hybrid poplar (Populus deltoides x nigra DN34). Environ-
mental Toxicology and Chemistry 20:389-393
Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	42313

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Analysis discussed, but measured values not re-



tion









ported

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

to
o

Study Citation: Dietz, A. C.,Schnoor, J. L.. 2001. Phytotoxicity of chlorinated aliphatics to hybrid poplar (Populus deltoides x nigra DN34). Environ-
mental Toxicology and Chemistry 20:389-393
Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	42313

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X 1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control







Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

x 2

2

Procedures







Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

x 1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis







Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Low

x 1

3 method not reported

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Sandhu, S. S.,Ma, T. H.,Peng, Y.,Zhou, X.. 1989. Clastogenicity evaluation of seven chemicals commonly found at hazardous industrial

waste sites. DNA Repair 224:437-445
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	48608

Domain

Metric

Rating^



MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

Low

X

2

6

Refer to other publication



tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured



tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Low

X

1

3

Not reported



Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Sandhu, S. S.,Ma, T. H.,Peng, Y.,Zhou, X.. 1989. Clastogenicity evaluation of seven chemicals commonly found at hazardous industrial

waste sites. DNA Repair 224:437-445
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	48608

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

to
to

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High —

-s- Unacceptable

1.4

Tetrachloroethylene is tested with the Tradescantia-
Micronucleus(Trad- MCN) assay to evaluate their
clastogenic potential.



Extracted

No



















* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) /]T\ MWF.,-

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Alexander, H. C.,McCarty, W. M.,Bartlett, E. A.. 1978. Toxicity of perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and

methylene chloride to fathead minnows. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 20:344-352
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	58126

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

to
co

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

PERC and TCE are DOW commercial products; no













info on DCM

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

Medium

X

2

4

Paper notes that Acute Static tests not appropriate



tion









due to volatility; also conducted Chronic FT tests











(scored separately)

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

to

Study Citation: Alexander, H. C.,McCarty, W. M.,Bartlett, E. A.. 1978. Toxicity of perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and

methylene chloride to fathead minnows. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 20:344-352
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	58126

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
High
High

x 1
x 2
x 1

1

2
1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

High



1.1



Extracted

Yes







* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
to

Cn

Study Citation: Bernard, A. M.,de Russis, R.,Normand, J. C.,Lauwerys, R. R.. 1989. Evaluation of the subacute nephrotoxicity of cyclohexane and

other industrial solvents in the female Sprague-Dawley rat. Toxicology Letters 45:271-280
Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	64580

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

source and lot numbers not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

measured



tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

one concentration



posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

X

2

4

source not reported

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

X

1

3

acclimation not reported

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

X

1

2

number organisms reported, replicates not reported

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

to

<35

Study Citation: Bernard, A. M.,de Russis, R.,Normand, J. C.,Lauwerys, R. R.. 1989. Evaluation of the subacute nephrotoxicity of cyclohexane and

other industrial solvents in the female Sprague-Dawley rat. Toxicology Letters 45:271-280
Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	64580

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X 1

1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
High
High

x 1
x 2
x 1

1

2
1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.5

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
to
-21 days); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	76052

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Medium

X

1

2

Lot numbers not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

not measured



tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

X

1

3

Acclimation not reported

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

X

1

2

Number of organisms reported, replicated not re-



Group









ported

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Narotsky, M. G.,Kavlock, R. J.. 1995. A multidisciplinary approach to toxicological screening: II. Developmental toxicity. Journal of

Toxicology and Environmental Health 45:145-171
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	76052

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

to

GO

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

-------
to

CO

Study Citation: Elovaara, E.,Hemminki, K.,Vainio, H.. 1979. Effects of methyiene chioride, trichioroethane, trichioroethyiene, tetrachioroethyiene and

tofuene on the devefopment of chick embryos. Toxicology 12:111-119
Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	94468

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance









Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

x 1

1

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

x 1

1

Domain 2: Test Design









Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

x 2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

x 1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

x 1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization







Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

x 2

2



tion







Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

x 1

1

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Medium

x 1

2 Unmeasured, egg injection 14 d study



tion







Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

x 2

2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

x 1

1



posure Levels







Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Medium

x 1

2 Unmeasured, egg injection, 14 day study

Domain 4: Test Organism









Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

x 1

1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

x 1

1



Group







Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

co
o

Study Citation: Elovaara, E.,Hemminki, K.,Vainio, H.. 1979. Effects of methyiene chioride, trichioroethane, trichioroethyiene, tetrachioroethyiene and

toiuene on the deveiopment of chick embryos. Toxicology 12:111-119
Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	94468

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X 1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control







Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

x 2

2

Procedures







Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

x 1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis







Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Low

x 1

3 Authors estimate LD50 values

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High —>

1.2

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J. A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute
and chronic toxicity of ten chlorinated organic compounds to the American flagfish (Jordanella floridae). Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 20:94-102
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	95201

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported for Acute study

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J. A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute
and chronic toxicity of ten chlorinated organic compounds to the American flagfish (Jordanella floridae). Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 20:94-102
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	95201

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^



Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

>
O

Procedures	m

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis



Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1



Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

co

to 	

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Fow: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor
t High = 1; Medium = 2; Fow = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	Q

C

1	if any metric is Unacceptable	O

m

-------
Study Citation: Sanchez-Fortun, S.,Sanz, F.,Santa-Maria, A.,Ros, J. M.,De Vicente, M. L.,Encinas, M. T.,Vinagre, E.,Barahona, M. V.. 1997. Acute

Data Type:
Hero ID:

sensitivity of three age classes of Artemia salina larvae to seven chlorinated solvents.

Toxicology 59:445-451

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

200570

Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

co
co

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

Medium

Control response not reported but not expected to
affect results. Typically multi-chemical tests will
only report control results if significant (i.e. > 10
percent mortality)

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Medium

Randomized allocation not explicitly stated, but
method of allocation of organisms to study groups
implies randomized selection: "For toxicity testing,
samples of 10 larvae each were added to 1 mL of
syntheticseawater in plastic 16-mm petri dishes con-
taining..."

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Low

Nominal concentrations used without steps to reduce
volatilization of methylene chloride.

Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

Nominal concentrations with no analytical monitor-

tion

ing reduces confidence in study results for methylene

chloride, but a trend is apparent when compared
across the solvents tested that informs the relative
toxicity of methylene chloride.

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

Study does not provide exposure concentrations, but

posure Levels

paper indicates that "Each solvent concentration

was set in sextuplicate" suggesting six exposure con-
centrations were used for methylene chloride. LC50/
EC50s were determined indicating exposure concen-
trations sufficiently spaced.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page . . .

-------
. . . continued from previous page

co

Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Sanchez-Fortun, S.,Sanz, F.,Santa-Maria, A.,Ros, J. M.,De Vicente, M. L.,Encinas, M. T.,Vinagre, E.,Barahona, M. V.. 1997. Acute

sensitivity of three age classes of Artemia salina larvae to seven chlorinated solvents. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and

Toxicology 59:445-451

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

200570

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X 1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

x 1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

x 1

1





Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment









Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

2



Metric 18:

Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

x 1

1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19:

Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

x 2

2





Procedures









Metric 20:

Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium

x 1

2

Health outcomes unrelated to exposure (i.e. con-











trols) not reported, but not expected to affect inter-











pretation of results.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

x 1

1



Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

Medium

x 2

4

Control results not provided, but unlikely to impact











results.

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

High —

-s- Low

1.5

Nominal concentrations without analytical measure-











ment or measures to reduce volatilization of methy-











lene chloride during testing.

Extracted



Yes







m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Sanchez-Fortun, S.,Sanz, F.,Santa-Maria, A.,Ros, J. M.,De Vicente, M. L.,Encinas, M. T.,Vinagre, E.,Barahona, M. V.. 1997. Acute
sensitivity of three age classes of Artemia salina larvae to seven chlorinated solvents. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and
Toxicology 59:445-451
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	200570

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

co
Cn

D
O

O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

m

-------
co
<35

Study Citation: Valencia, R.,Mason, J. M.,Woodruff, R. C.,Zimmering, S.. 1985. Chemical mutagenesis testing in Drosophila. III. Results of 48 coded

compounds tested for the National Toxicology Program. Environmental Mutagenesis 7:325-348
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	629907

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

x 1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

x 1

1



Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

x 2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

x 1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation



N/A





Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

Low

x 2

6

Allocation not reported



tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

x 1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

x 1

3

Not measured



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

x 2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

x 1

3

1 Concentration



posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

x 1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

x 1

2

Number of organisms reported but not the number



Group







of replicates.

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Valencia, R.,Mason, J. M.,Woodruff, R. C.,Zimmering, S.. 1985. Chemical mutagenesis testing in Drosophila. III. Results of 48 coded

compounds tested for the National Toxicology Program. Environmental Mutagenesis 7:325-348
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	629907

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

co
- 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

-------
Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2002. Effects of tetrachforoethyfene on the viabifity and devefopment of embryos of

the Japanese medaka, Oryzias latipes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 42:463-469
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632863

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
High

High

x 2
x 1

x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High

x 2
N/A
x 1

D
73
>

D

-©-

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High x 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High x 1
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- High x 1
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	N/A

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per High
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

N/A
N/A
x 1

N/A

In this study, static renewal bioassays were performed to assess the acute toxicity ¦

Twenty embryos (three replicates) i

Twenty embryos (three replicates) i

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous p<

Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2002. Effects of tetrachforoethyfene on the viabifity and devefopment of embryos of

the Japanese medaka, Oryzias latipes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 42:463-469
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632863

Domain	Metric	Rating^	MWF*

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

N/A
N/A

In this study, static renewal bioassays were performed
In this study, static renewal bioassays were performed

to assess the acute toxicity ¦
to assess the acutt^oxicity ¦

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

m
73

N/A
N/A

In this study, static renewal bioassays
In this study, static renewal bioassays

to assess the acut^^oxicity ¦

were performed '
were performed to assess the acut^^oxicity ¦

m

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











-<

D
73

assess the acutepfeoxicity

Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

N/A

In this

study,

static renewal bioassays

were performed to

Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

N/A

In this

study,

static renewal bioassays

were performed to

assess the acut^ijoxicity

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

N/A

In this

study,

static renewal bioassays

were performed to

assess the acut^-^oxicity

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High —s- Unacceptable



o
z
o

H

o

H

m

Extracted

No



U
73

O



* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.
^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a

comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating = <

U
H

m

y^. (Metric Scores X K7

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed out and an arrow po
^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2002. Effects of tetrachforoethyfene on the viabifity and devefopment of embryos of

the Japanese medaka, Oryzias latipes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 42:463-469
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632863

o

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2002. Effects of tetrachforoethyfene on the viabifity and devefopment of embryos of

the Japanese medaka, Oryzias latipes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 42:463-469
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632863

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2006.

tetrachloroethylene. Journal of Environmental Biology 27
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632864

Growth inhibition in Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish exposed to

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain f: Test Substance
Metric f:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High
High
High

x 2
x f
x f

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High

N/A

x 2
x f

2
f

N/A

No information

4^
to

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric f f: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

High
High

High

Unacceptable

N/A

x 2

N/A

Larvae were exposed for a time period of 96 hrs
at a concentration of 1 Oppm to determine tetra-
chloroethylene effects on growth rate and total pro-
tein in different age groups.. Weight and length of
medaka larva at 7, 14, 21, and28 days old were mea-
sured to determine the effects of tetrachloroethylene
on larval growth.

No information

D

o

o

H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

High	x 2 2

High	x 1 1

N/A	N/A No information

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

co

Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2006. Growth inhibition in Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish exposed to

tetrachloroethylene. Journal of Environmental Biology 27
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632864

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

N/A





N/A

No information

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

N/A





N/A

Study was conducted to determine tetrachloroethy-
lene effects on growth and age specific sensitivity of
rnedaka larvae at ages 7, 14, 21, and 28 day-old.

Metric 18:

Consistency of Outcome Assessment

N/A





N/A

Study was conducted to determine tetrachloroethy-
lene effects on growth and age specific sensitivity of
rnedaka larvae at ages 7, 14, 21, and 28 day-old.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control











Metric 19:

Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

High

X

2

2



Metric 20:

Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

N/A





N/A

Study was conducted to determine tetrachloroethy-
lene effects on growth and age specific sensitivity of
rnedaka larvae at ages 7, 14, 21, and 28 day-old.

Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

N/A





N/A

Study was conducted to determine tetrachloroethy-
lene effects on growth and age specific sensitivity of
rnedaka larvae at ages 7, 14, 21, and 28 day-old.

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable





4.0

Metric mean score**: 1.1.

Extracted



No









m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2006. Growth inhibition in Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish exposed to

tetrachloroethylene. Journal of Environmental Biology 27
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632864

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^



** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),

EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.	^

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	H

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	3>

(7)

1	if any metric is Unacceptable	ITI

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

o
-<
D
73

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2006. Growth inhibition in Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish exposed to

tetrachloroethylene. Journal of Environmental Biology 27
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632864

Cn

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Spencer, H. B.,Hussein, W. R.,Tchounwou, P. B.. 2006. Growth inhibition in Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish exposed to

tetrachloroethylene. Journal of Environmental Biology 27
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	632864

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

<35

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes





Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m

>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	XJ

o

C

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

-------
Study Citation: Crebelli, R.,Andreoli, C.,Carere, A.,Conti, L.,Crochi, B.,Cotta-Ramusino, M.,Benigni, R.. 1995. Toxicology of halogenated aliphatic
hydrocarbons: Structural and molecular determinants for the disturbance of chromosome segregation and the induction of lipid perox-
idation. Chemico-Biological Interactions 98:113-129
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	657898

-
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Crebelli, R.,Andreoli, C.,Carere, A.,Conti, L.,Crochi, B.,Cotta-Ramusino, M.,Benigni, R.. 1995. Toxicology of halogenated aliphatic
hydrocarbons: Structural and molecular determinants for the disturbance of chromosome segregation and the induction of lipid perox-
idation. Chemico-Biological Interactions 98:113-129
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	657898

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^



Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

>
O

Procedures	m

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis



Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1



Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

GO 	

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor
t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	Q

C

1	if any metric is Unacceptable	O

m

-------
Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Hulzebos, E. M.,Adema, D. M.,Dirven-Van Breemen, E. M.,Henzen, L.,Van Dis, W. A.,Herbold, H. A.,Hoekstra, J. A.,Baerselman,
R.,Van Gestel, C. A.. 1993. Phytotoxicity studies with Lactuca sativa in soil and nutrient solution. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 12:1079-1094
Other; Terrestrial;

660091

CO

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured



tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

X

1

3

Acclimation/Pretreatment not reported

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

X

1

2

Number of organisms reported but not replicates.



Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Hulzebos, E. M.,Adema, D. M.,Dirven-Van Breemen, E. M.,Henzen, L.,Van Dis, W. A.,Herbold, H. A.,Hoekstra, J. A.,Baerselman,
R.,Van Gestel, C. A.. 1993. Phytotoxicity studies with Lactuca sativa in soil and nutrient solution. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 12:1079-1094
Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	660091

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^



Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis



Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1



Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Cn

O 	

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Brack, W.,Frank, H.. 1998. Chlorophyll a fluorescence: A tool for the investigation of toxic effects in the photosynthetic apparatus.

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 40:34-41
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	660790

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

x 1

3

source not identified

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

x 1

3

purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

x 2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

Low

x 1

3

control response for each test group not reported.

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

x 1

3

it was not reported whether there was random allo-











cation to test groups

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

x 2

2





tion









Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

Low

x 1

3

details of exposure for each study group were not re-

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low	x 1	3

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	Medium	x 2 4

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Unacceptable x 1 4
posure Levels

ported, the study did say that "Aliquots of 5mL of
the cell suspension were taken from the turbidostat
and diluted in 10-mL brown glass tubes with the
same volume of an aqueous solution of the chemi-
cal being tested. The tubes were gas-tight sealed
by using screw caps with Teflon-lined butyl rubber
septa and continuously shaken for 2 h at a temper-
ature of 20" C. With this procedure, nonvolatile and
volatile compounds could be tested. During incuba-
tion, light was excluded to prevent C02 consump-
tion by the algae and to avoid C02 deficiency during
incubation."

it was not reported whether exposure concentration
were measured or not.

exposure duration is not standard (600 seconds), but
could be acceptable for what is being measured (flu-
orescence).

unclear how many exposure groups or what the ex-
posure levels were for Perc.

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Brack, W.,Frank, H.. 1998. Chlorophyll a fluorescence: A tool for the investigation of toxic effects in the photosynthetic apparatus.

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 40:34-41
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	660790

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score Comments^



Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low

X 1 3 unknown exactly what cone were tested but the tox-
icity threshold is well below the high solubility of
Perc.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium

Cn

to

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Low
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	High

x 2
x 1

x 1
x 1

Some acclimatization conducted with some mi-
nor uncertainties about pretreatment. The study
says, "Green algae of the species Chlamydomonas
reinhardtii [strain ll-32a SAG(#), according to
Schlosser (1982)] were cultivated in a nutrient solu-
tion for unicellular algae (Kuhl and Lorenzen, 1964)
in a turbiodstat; use of the turbidostat provides ex-
ponentially growing cell suspensions of a constant
density and physiological state by dilution with fresh
medium controlled by a photoelectric cell. The algae
were illuminated continuously by four cool white flu-
orescent tubes (4] 10 W) aerated, and maintained at
a temperature of 20" C. The cultures were kept at a
density of 2] 106 cells/mL for 2 weeks. The doubling
time in the turbidostat was about 13 h."

not reported

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

Medium	X 2	4 for Perc a 600 second EC5 was reported of 13 (F'0/

F0)

Low	X 1	3 details of the assessment protocol were not reported

for each study group

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Low
Procedures

x 2

not enough information provided to allow a compari-
son of env conditions between study groups for Perc.

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Brack, W.,Frank, H.. 1998. Chlorophyll a fluorescence: A tool for the investigation of toxic effects in the photosynthetic apparatus.

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 40:34-41
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID: 660790

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium

x 1

Cn
CO

Data on attrition from controls were not reported for
each chemical explicitly but it was mentioned that
the test concentrations were cored to the controls.
"Toxicity thresholds (TTs) are defined as concen-
trations that reduce or increase at least one of the
Fluorescence parameters for more than the three-
fold value of the maximum of standard deviations
of the controls. A TT is attained when the mea-
surement deviates by 3, 5, 10, or 20 percent from
the respective control value, depending on the re-
producibility of the particular parameter. The TTs
of the tested chemicals, calculated by linear extrap-
olation between the highest concentration without
significant effect and the lowest concentration with
it, are presented in Table 3."

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Low

6 the EC5 was reported to Perc but not much other

detail was reported.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable

4.0 Metric mean score**: 2.1.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
XJ

O
c
o

-------
Study Citation: Brack, W.,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	661061

Cn

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

x 1

1



Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

x 1

1



Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

x 2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

Low

x 1

3

The biological responses of the negative control











groups were not reported

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

x 1

3

Was not reported.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

x 2

2





tion









Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

x 1

1



Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

x 1

1





tion









Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

x 2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

x 1

1





posure Levels









Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

x 2

4

This is not a commonly used algal species. Not a TG

species. Test used unicellular freshwater green alga
Chlamydomonas rehthardtii (strain number 11 -32a
SAG} from the University of Gottingen, Germany.

m
ZJ
>
o
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High

x 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Brack, W.,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID: 661061

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Two replicates per test concentration were reported.
OECD Guideline 201 states the test should include
three replicates, but if determination of a NOEC is
not required, the test may be altered to increase the
number of concentrations and reduce the number of
replicates per conc. There were more than 5 test
cone (the recommended number) used for TCE. The
cell density in the test cultures amounted to 5 " 103
cells/ml at the beginning of the assays.

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

Cn
Cn

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Medium

Figure 3 shows the results of the tests at each conc

for each chemical but it's difficult to determine the

exact concentrations from the figure, so some minor

uncertainties remain.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Medium

SDs were provided, but it was unclear whether or

not there were any unexpected outcomes.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes

Continued on next page . . .

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

-------
. continued from previous page

Cn
<35

Study Citation: Brack, W.,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	661061

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

m
7J

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

CD

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is	^

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.	O

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.	~<>

D
XJ
>
~n
H

D

o

Z
O
H

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Miyagawa, M.,Takasawa, H.,Sugiyama, A.,Inoue, Y.,Murata, T.,Uno, Y.,Yoshikawa, K.. 1995. The in vivo-in vitro replicative DNA
synthesis (RDS) test with hepatocytes prepared from male B6C3F1 mice as an early prediction assay for putative nongenotoxic (Ames-
negative) mouse hepatocarcinogens. Mutation Research: Genetic Toxicology 343:157-183
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	661834

Cn
-
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Miyagawa, M.,Takasawa, H.,Sugiyama, A.,Inoue, Y.,Murata, T.,Uno, Y.,Yoshikawa, K.. 1995. The in vivo-in vitro replicative DNA
synthesis (RDS) test with hepatocytes prepared from male B6C3F1 mice as an early prediction assay for putative nongenotoxic (Ames-
negative) mouse hepatocarcinogens. Mutation Research: Genetic Toxicology 343:157-183
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	661834

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^



Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis



Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1



Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Cn

GO 	

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environ-
ment 43:149-157
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	676758

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score



Domain 1: Test Substance









Z

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2

—1

m

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

x 1

3

73

~l>

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

x 1

3

O

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls

Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

Low
Low

x 2

N/A
x 1

III
Z

o

6 ¦<

D
73
>

~n

this is an acute study with lots of chemicals reported, and they did not report on th

3 D

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Low

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	Medium

x 2

x 1

x 1
x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Unacceptable x 1
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x 1

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 4: Test Organism

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environ-
ment 43:149-157
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	676758

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF*	Score

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High
Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Low
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium

x 1
x 1

x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

D
O

O

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

Medium
Medium

x 2

x 1

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

-m-

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environ-
ment 43:149-157
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	676758

Domain

Metric

Ratingt MWF*

Score

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Low
Procedures

x 2

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium

x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Low
High

x 1

x 2
x 1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable

4.0

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

73

_Q_

Extracted

No

C

o

-TH-

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4), EPA will determine th

As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) /]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwi

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed out and an arrow po
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - wood frog and green frog

Hero ID:	700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High
High
Medium

x 2
x 1
x 1

"Stock solutions were made from 95 percent pure,
analytical-grade PCE, TCE, and cis- and trans-DCE
(Sigma-Aldridge)." Only minor uncertainties about
the purity being at 95 percent, analytical-grade.

Domain 2: Test Design

o*
to

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

For the acute study it was not reported whether the
animals were distributed randomly.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

High

x 2

Continued on next page

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
z
o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

m

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - wood frog and green frog

Hero ID: 700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Medium x 1

<35
co

X 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Medium x 1
posure Levels

x 2

Authors indicate that there may have been some
losses of test chemical during decanting test solu-
tions and during the placing of eggs in test cham-
bers, and while testing a subsample at 1 hour of
exposure TCE cone were only within 70 percent of
nominal. The authors report, "Stock solutions of
TCE, PCE, and DCE were dissolved in local ground-
water in a dilution series. Groundwater was used as
the medium for acute tests to emulate conditions in
surface waters fed by chloroethylene- contaminated
groundwater. Nominal test concentrations were as
follows: PCE-2.5, 7.5, 12.5, and 20 mg/L; TCE-12.5,
20, 40, and60 mg/L; and cis- and trans-DCE-12.5,
60, and 100 mg/L. Based on the results of initial ex-
posures of American toad embryos, a second expo-
sure was conducted with elevated concentrations of
PCE and TCE as follows: PCE-15, 30, and 45 mg/
L; and TCE-35, 55, and 85 mg/L. Maximum expo-
sure concentrations of PCE and TCE were limited
by the compounds' solubility in groundwater. Con-
centrations of test solutions, including controls, were
measured at 24 h (just prior to solution renewal, see
below). Concentrations at t = 0 h were based on
dilutions of measured stock solutions. Some losses
occurred while decanting test solutions and during
the placing of eggs in test chambers. In a sub-
sample of test solutions measured at 1 h of expo-
sure,concentrations of PCE were within 99 percent
of nominal, while cis- and trans-DCE were within 90
percent. However, levels of TCE were only within 70
percent of nominal."

This study had four exposure groups for TCE and
ASTM FETAX Guidelines suggests the following
"At a minimum, five concentrations for each end-
point are used. However, additional concentrations
between the EC16 and EC84 are highly recom-
mended to ensure obtaining accurate 96-hour LC50
and EC50 values."

m
XJ
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O

O
H

O
XJ

O
c
o

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - wood frog and green frog

Hero ID: 700434

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low

x 1

<35

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High
Group

x 1

Test organisms seem to be sufficiently sensitive to
the exposures administered to derive an EC50, but
are not a suggested species in the ASTM guideline
or OECD and EPA guidelines for amphibian growth
and development which suggest African clawed frog.
This study instead used these species to test sensi-
tivity for North American species. Only minor un-
certainties because they are not suggested species
from a guideline.

Study authors did not report whether animals were
acclimatized or whether pretreatment conditions
were the the same for treatment and controls. They
authors do report, " In 2001 and 2002, egg masses of
wood frogs, spotted salamanders," American toads,
and green frogs were collected from a wetland not
contaminated with chloroethylenes in Flamborough
Township (Ontario,Canada). Water from wetlands
were tested for chloroethylenes in 2001 from each
site where eggs were collected. No chloroethylenes
were detected; the minimum detection limit for this
analysis was 1 ppb. Egg masses were less than 24 h
old when exposures were initiated. For each species,
three egg masses were used (with the exception of
the second exposure of American toads, where only
one egg mass was used). Each egg.mass was from a
different female and represented a replicate. Thus,
there were three replicate jars for each chemical by
concentration combination, for a total of 45 jars per
species. Eggs were not dejellied prior to exposure to
more accurately imitatenatural exposure conditions.
Each egg mass was gently divided into clusters of ap-
proximately 30 eggs (with the exception of spotted
salamanders with 5 to 10 eggs) and placed in a 1-L
glass Mason jar containing 300 ml of test solution."

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page . . .

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - wood frog and green frog

Hero ID: 700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium x 1

Animals were held in 1 L glass mason jars contain-
ing 300 ml of test solution. Jars were sealed and
temperature was maintined at 23+-1 degree C us-
ing a water bath. All tests were conducted under
14L/10D light regime. The ASTM guidelines rec-
ommend glass, and this temperature is approprate
for african clawed frog but unsure if this temperature
is also appropriate for these north american species.
Additionally the photoperiod is longer than the one
recommended in the ASTM Guidelines.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High x 2
Medium x 1

<35
Cn

All animals were assessed at the end of the 96 hour
period with minor uncertainties due to incomplete
reporting.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure Medium x 1 2 Controls for the wood frogs and green frogs were

under 10 percent mortality and deformities. Details
on attrition unrelated to exposure for each exposure
concentration were also reported as the average with
a range. There is a wide range of portailities between
the replicates.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High x 1
Medium x 2

Data was reported for each exposure group in ei-
ther table or graphical form. It's hard to tell the
exact numbers from the graphical representation of
the EC50 values for each exposure level, resulting in
minor uncertainites.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.5

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - wood frog and green frog

Hero ID:	700434

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Extracted	Yes

<35
<35

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	H

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.	^

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	3>

CD

1	if any metric is Unacceptable	171

Overall rating =

y^. (Metric Scores X MWF;) / ^ MWFj	(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

o
-<
D
7J

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - american toad

Hero ID:	700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance









Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

x 1

1

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Medium

x 1

2 "Stock solutions were made from 95 percent pure,

analytical-grade PCE, TCE, and cis- and trans-DCE
(Sigma-Aldridge)." Only minor uncertainties about
the purity being at 95 percent, analytical-grade.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:
Metric 5:

<35

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response

High
Medium

x 2
x 1

Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

Low

x 1

Control mortality was reported in table 2 for each
species, and deformities in controls were reported in
figure 1. Control response for mortality for wood
frogs, green frogs and spotted salamanders were all
below 10 percent; for American toads it was about
10.1 percent with one of the replicates having a very
high 26 percent mortality rate, so there are uncer-
tainites for this species for this metric. Authors
threw those numbers out and indicated that the high
mortality rate for that replicate could have been
due to damage the eggs recieved in transit. Fig-
ure 1 shows that the negative control response for
all species for percent mortality is below 10 percent.
ASTM guidelines indcate "An acceptable clutch of
eggs has the capability of developing into Develop-
mental Stage 46 tadpoles with less than 10 percent
gross abnormalities and less than 10 percent mortal-
ity."

For the acute study it was not reported whether the
animals were distributed randomly.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High x 2
tion

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - american toad

Hero ID: 700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Medium x 1

<35
GO

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High x 1
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency High x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low x 1

posure Levels

m
XJ
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O

O
H

O
XJ

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - american toad

Hero ID: 700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High x 1 1

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low x 1

<35
CO

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High x 1
Group

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - american toad

Hero ID: 700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High x 2
Medium x 1

-
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High x 1
Medium x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - american toad

Hero ID:	700434

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Overall Quality Determination"'"	High	1.5

Z

Extracted	Yes	jrj

		73

	 >

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	Q

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.	ITI

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	q

-<
D
73
>

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is	Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.	O

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.	Z

o

H

o

H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - spotted salamder

Hero ID: 700434

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Medium

"Stock solutions were made from 95 percent pure,
analytical-grade PCE, TCE, and cis- and trans-DCE
(Sigma-Aldridge)." Only minor uncertainties about
the purity being at 95 percent, analytical-grade.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

For the acute study it was not reported whether the
animals were distributed randomly.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Low

x 2

Containers were covered and sealed but htere was
no mention of minimizing head space, and authors
mentioned that TCE solutions declined by 50 to 80
percent over the 24 hour period between renewals.
Authors also mentioned, "Each egg mass was gently
divided into clusters of approximately 30 eggs (with
the exception of spotted salamanders with 5 to 10
eggs) and placed in a 1-L glass Mason jar contain-
ing 300 ml of test solution. The lids on the jars were
sealed to reduce volatilization. Dissolved oxygen lev-
els never fell below 80 percent saturation. Three
replicates of embryos were also raised in uncontam-
inated groundwater as controls. Temperature was
maintained at 23 +-1"C using a water bath. All
tests were conducted under a 14L/10D light regime.
An exhaust hood over the water bath ensured the
removal of accidental gaseous PCE, TCE, and DCE
volatilized from the exposure vessels."

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - spotted salamder

Hero ID:	700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Medium x 1

-
O
m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - spotted salamder

Hero ID:	700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Low	x 2

-
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - spotted salamder

Hero ID:	700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low

x 1

-
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: McDaniel, T.,Martin, P.,Ross, N.,Brown, S.,Lesage, S.,Pauli, B.. 2004. Effects of chforinated sofvents on four species of North American

amphibians. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 47:101-109
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other amphibian - spotted salamder

Hero ID:	700434

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium x 1

Animals were held in 1 L glass mason jars contain-
ing 300 ml of test solution. Jars were sealed and
temperature was maintined at 23+-1 degree C us-
ing a water bath. All tests were conducted under
14L/10D light regime. The ASTM guidelines rec-
ommend glass, and this temperature is approprate
for african clawed frog but unsure if this temperature
is also appropriate for these north american species.
Additionally the photoperiod is longer than the one
recommended in the ASTM Guidelines.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High x 2
Medium x 1

-
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

- 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

m

-------
-
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

- 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
GO
O

Study Citation: Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxicity of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to

Ceriodaphnia dubia. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	707209

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

x 1

1



Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Medium

x 1

2

Test substance purity is reported as 99.5 percent as











labeled but not independently verified.

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Low

x 2

6

Authors reported using negative controls but did not











report details of the negative control group.

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

x 1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

x 1

3

Not randomly allocated

Only minor uncertainties about exposure adminis-
tration

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High x 2 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	Medium x 1	2

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-	High	x 1	1
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High	x 2	2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-	High	x 1	1
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x 1	1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	High x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low	x 1

2

3	The study not report how long test organisms were
acclimatized

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxicity of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to

Ceriodaphnia dubia. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 707209

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Low

x 1

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium x 1

The study says that "Responses are based on a sam-
ple size of 10" but it's unclear if that means 10 in-
dividuals or 10 brood cups (10 brood cups is recom-
mended in the EPA effluent guidelines for C.dubia.)
Elsewhere in the study it states "Newly prepared
test solution and 24-h-old test solution composited
from three replicates from each treatment level were
analyzed." The methods say they follow the guide-
lines, but the description isn't explicit about how
many animals were actually used.

Only minor uncertainties about housing. "The stan-
dard, short-term, chronic toxicity test method de-
veloped for U.S. EPA's Whole Effluent Testing Pro-
gram (U.S. EPA, 1994) was followed with modifi-
cations to minimize volatilization of test chemicals.
Instead of 30-ml beakers, individual organisms were
tested in 25-ml borosilicate glass vials filled to capac-
ity and closed tightly using teflon PTFE-lined sili-
con" septa held in place by polypropylene screw-on
caps. These vials are sold by scientific suppliers as
"EPA vials" for storage of water samples. Masten et
al. (1994) found that static-renewal tests with these
vials maintained concentrations of volatile chemi-
cals more successfully than flowthrough test designs.
Tests were conducted in artificial moderately hard
water (U.S. EPA, 1994; Table 2). Light was pro-
vided by full spectrum fluorescent bulbs with a color
rendering index >90 at an intensity of 20 mE/m 2/S
and a photoperiod of 16L: 8D. Daphnids were feel an
algae and cereal leaf mix containing equal numbers
of cells of Se/enastrwn capricornutum and Ch/ore/
la uu/garis mixed with a rye grass infusion (ASTivI,
1994). This mixture was added to diluted stock so-
lutions to yield a final concentration of 3 x 105 algal
cells/ml and 0.03 mg/ml solids from cereal grass in
each test vial. Component algae were cultured indi-
vidually in modified Bold's basal medium (ASTM,
1994). Solutions were renewed daily. Dissolved oxy-
gen was monitored on 24-h-old solutions and always
remained above 7.0 ppm."

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

GO

to

Study Citation: Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxicity of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to

Ceriodaphnia dubia. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	707209

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
High
High

x 1
x 2
x 1

1

2
1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

High



1.4



Extracted

Yes







* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxicity of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to

Ceriodaphnia dubia. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	707209

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1

GO
co

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Medium

X

1

2

Test substance purity is reported as 99.5 percent as
labeled but not independently verified.

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Low

X

2

6

Authors reported using negative controls but did not
report details of the negative control group.

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Not randomly allocated

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

High

X

2

2



Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

Medium

X

1

2

Only minor uncertainties about exposure adminis-
tration

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

High

X

1

1



Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

7 days recommended for EPA effluent guidelines for
C. dubia. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/
files/2015-12/documents/method_1002_2002.pdf

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

High

X

1

1



Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	High x 2 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low	x 1	3

The study not report how long test organisms were
acclimatized

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxicity of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to

Ceriodaphnia dubia. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 707209

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Low

x 1

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

GO
Cn

Study Citation: Niederlehner, B.,Cairns, J.,Smith, E.. 1998. Modeling acute and chronic toxicity of nonpolar narcotic chemicals and mixtures to

Ceriodaphnia dubia. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 39:136-146
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	707209

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
High
High

x 1
x 2
x 1

1

2
1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

High



1.4



Extracted

Yes







* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Labra, M.,Mattia, F.,Bernasconi, M.,Bertacchi, D.,Grassi, F.,Bruni, I.,Citterio, S.. 2010. The Combined Toxic and Genotoxic Effects

of Chromium and Voiatiie Organic Contaminants to Pseudokirchnerieiia subcapitata. Water, Air, and Soii Poiiution 213:57-70
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Piants

Hero ID:	1059985

GO
<35

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

Medium

x 2

4

Used as solvents, no product information provided

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Medium

x 1

2

Used as solvents, no product information provided

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Medium

x 1

2

Used as solvents, no product information provided

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

x 2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

x 1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

x 1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

x 2

2





tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

x 1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

x 1

3

nominal acute exposure



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

x 2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

x 1

1





posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low

x 1

3

nominal acute exposure

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

x 1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

x 1

1





Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

GO
- 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

-------
Study Citation: Specht, W. L.,Klaine, S. J.,Hook, D. D.. 1996. Rapid bioassessment methods for assessing vegetation toxicity at the Savannah River

Site - germination tests and root elongation trials.

Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	1916722

GO
GO

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/information not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured



tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

X

1

3

Acclimation not reported

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

GO
CO

Study Citation: Specht, W. L.,Klaine, S. J.,Hook, D. D.. 1996. Rapid bioassessment methods for assessing vegetation toxicity at the Savannah River

Site - germination tests and root elongation trials.

Data Type:	Other; Terrestrial;

Hero ID:	1916722

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X 1

1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
High
High

x 1
x 2
x 1

1

2
1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

-------
Study Citation: Bacsi, I.,Toeroek, T.,B-Beres, V.,Toeroek, P.,Tothmeresz, B.,Nagy, A. S.,Vasas, G.. 2013. Laboratory and microcosm experiments
testing the toxicity of chlorinated hydrocarbons on a cyanobacterium strain (Synechococcus PCC 6301) and on natural phytoplankton
assemblages. Hydrobiologia 710:189-203
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID: 2127844

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High
Low
Low

x 2
x 1
x 1

not reported
not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls

Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

Medium

Low
Low

x 2

x 1
x 1

controls were used but details about what exactly
controls included were not given. Authors reported,
"The growth of the control cultures (without addi-
tion of chlorinated hydrocarbons) and treated cul-
tures was monitored bymeasuring chlorophyll-a con-
tent and by counting cell numbers."

control response was given but only until 25 hours.

not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Unacceptable x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Low

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Low

x 1
x 1

x 2

8 the laboratory system was open and measurements

were not taken, and flasks were open and aerated
which can lead to rapid volatilization of TCE, how-
ever this was by design in order to better compare
results in the lab to a microcosm experiment also
preformed.

3 details not given about exposure administration for

each exposure level.

3 measured concentrations were not taken and cannot

be expected to be close to nominal concentration
due to the volatility of the chemical. However, this
experiment measured effects in just the few hours
after exposure.

6 exposure happened once and was measured in the

few hours after exposure. This is not in accordance
with any guidelines, but was designed to mimic con-
ditions that were carried out in microcosm experi-
ment for comparison purposes.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Bacsi, I.,Toeroek, T.,B-Beres, V.,Toeroek, P.,Tothmeresz, B.,Nagy, A. S.,Vasas, G.. 2013. Laboratory and microcosm experiments
testing the toxicity of chlorinated hydrocarbons on a cyanobacterium strain (Synechococcus PCC 6301) and on natural phytoplankton
assemblages. Hydrobiologia 710:189-203
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID: 2127844

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Unacceptable x 1 4
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit Low x 1 3

it appears only one exposure group was used to
mimic the conditions in the microcosm

unsure what the actual exposure concentration was
from the author's reporting.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low
Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Low

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 1

4 cyanobacterium Synecococcus elongatus (PCC
6301). not a recommended test species in OECD
201 but in the same genus as a recommended test
species for cyanobacteria

3 not reported

2 the initial cell density is outside the range for this
genus in OECD201 (synechococcus leopoliensis rec-
ommended cell density is 5x104-105). This experi-
ment starts at about 100x106. Each study was done
in triplicate which is recommended.

3 limited reporting of housing conditions

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Low

x 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

Low

x 1

Outcome assessment methodology is described for
changes in growth and enzyme activity. Growth
measures are appropriate but some uncertainties re-
main for how enzyme activity was measured (with
incomplete methodology described). Uncertainties
also exist for when measures were taken. Measure-
ments were taken for growth every second hour, and
for enzyme activity at hour 0, 4, 8, 12, 24.

details regarding execution of study protocol across
study groups was not reported.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Medium x 2 4

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure Low x 1 3

study did not provide enough information about env
conditions across study groups.

authors did not report data on health outcomes un-
related to exposure

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Bacsi, I.,Toeroek, T.,B-Beres, V.,Toeroek, P.,Tothmeresz, B.,Nagy, A. S.,Vasas, G.. 2013. Laboratory and microcosm experiments
testing the toxicity of chlorinated hydrocarbons on a cyanobacterium strain (Synechococcus PCC 6301) and on natural phytoplankton
assemblages. Hydrobiologia 710:189-203
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	2127844

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

CO

to

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1



Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

Low

X

2

6

data was reported in figures, but not very well in













text and the exact concentrations at which algae was













exposed is not reported.

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1



Overall Quality Determination"'"



Unacceptable





4.0

Metric mean score**: 2.6.

Extracted



No











** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J. A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute
and chronic toxicity of 10 chlorinated organic-compounds to the american flagfish (jordanella-floridae). Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 20:94-102
Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish
2298399

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

High x 2
Medium x 1

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

Low

x 1

The source of Perc was not reported, but gas chro-
matography was used to verify identity of chemical.
"The determination of the test compounds in wa-
ter samples was accomplished by solvent extraction
followed by gas chromatography analysis."

Purity of the test substance was not reported.

Domain 2: Test Design

CO
co

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

Low

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

Control response was not reported
Researchers did not report the method for how or-
ganisms were allocated to study groups, or their de-
ficiencies regarding allocation method.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration Low x 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High x 1
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency High x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Medium x 1
posure Levels

Exposure concentrations were not reported in the
flow-through test. Five or six duplicate, logarithmi-
cally distributed concentrations of the test solutions
were used in 30-L aquaria.

Concentrations were prepared in a logarithmic series
but the method used to determine an appropriate
range was not mentioned.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

Domain 4: Test Organism

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

Juvenile flagfish (2-4 months) were used, and were

laboratory raised. Not an OECD or EPA recom-

mended species. Also had minor uncertainties about

where the fish were obtained.

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Medium

Minor uncertainties about details provided. Authors

report, "Laboratory-reared juvenile (2-4 month)

flagfish were used. Fish were raised in the dilu-

ent water and fed freshly-hatched and adult brine

shrimp. Fish were not fed during the tests."

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

10 juvenile flagfish were used per aquarium, and

Group

OECD recommends at least 7.

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18:

Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19:

Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20:

Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low

No adverse outcomes were reported for Perc, and

control response was not reported.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21:

Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22:

Reporting of Data

Low

The data for the static test were not presented in

full, and no information was reported for controls.

Metric 23:

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J. A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute
and chronic toxicity of 10 chlorinated organic-compounds to the american flagfish (jordanella-floridae). Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 20:94-102
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	2298399

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

to

Cn

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

m

-------
Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Medium

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

Purity of the test substance was not reported.

Domain 2: Test Design

CO
<35

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Medium

Researchers reported allocating fish randomly to the

exposure apparatus. Did not specifically say if they
were randomly allocated to control, but it is as-
sumed, so only minor uncertainty.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration High x 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High x 1
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency High x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Medium x 1
posure Levels

"Concentrations were prepared in a logarithmic se-
ries and the 96-hrLC50's calculated from the acute
flagfish data were used to establishthe exposure gra-
dients employed in these chronic tests."

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

Domain 4: Test Organism

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions High x 1

Embryo/larval flagfish were used, and were labora-
tory raised. Not an OECD or EPA recommended
species. Also had minor uncertainties about where
the fish were obtained.

Minor uncertainties about details provided. Authors
report, "Laboratory-reared juvenile (2-4 month)
flagfish were used. Fish were raised in the dilu-
ent water and fed freshly-hatched and adult brine
shrimp. Fish were not fed during the tests."

50 fry (one week old) per test level and the controls.
Duplicate exposures were used, but OECD recom-
mends 4 or 5.

-I

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Smith, A. D.,Bharath, A.,Mallard, C.,Orr, D.,Smith, K.,Sutton, J. A.,Vukmanich, J.,McCarty, L. S.,Ozburn, G. W.. 1991. The acute
and chronic toxicity of 10 chlorinated organic-compounds to the american flagfish (jordanella-floridae). Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 20:94-102
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	2298399

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

to

GO

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

m

-------
Study Citation: Bacsi, I.,Gonda, S.,B-Beres, V.,Novak, Z.,Nagy, S. A.,Vasas, G.. 2015. Alterations of phytoplankton assemblages treated with chlori-
nated hydrocarbons: effects of dominant species sensitivity and initial diversity. Ecotoxicology 24:823-834
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	3298076

Domain

Metric

II at ing1

MWF*

Score



Domain 1: Test Substance









Z

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2

—1

m

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

x 1

3

ZJ

-fc>

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

x 1

3

o

Domain 2: Test Design









III

z
o

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Medium

x 2

4

-<
D
73
>
~n
H

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

Medium

x 1

2

D

o

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation



N/A

Not applicable to allocate individual a

Z
O
—1

gae to study gri^ps rand

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization







H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Unacceptable

x 2

8

Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

Low

x 1

3



Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

x 1

3



CO
CO

tion

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Bacsi, I.,Gonda, S.,B-Beres, V.,Novak, Z.,Nagy, S. A.,Vasas, G.. 2015. Alterations of phytoplankton assemblages treated with chlori-
nated hydrocarbons: effects of dominant species sensitivity and initial diversity. Ecotoxicology 24:823-834
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	3298076

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score



Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

Low

x 2

6



Metric 11:
Metric 12:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low

N/A
x 1

It appears only one exposure group was used however, with a

3

Z
H

m t

microcosm experiment
>
o
m
z
o

D

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

x 2

4

A)
>
-n
H

Metric 14:
Metric 15:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Low
Medium

x 1
x 1

3
2

O
z
O
H

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

Low

x 1

3

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
Low

x 2
x 1

2

3



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Continued on next page . . .

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Bacsi, I.,Gonda, S.,B-Beres, V.,Novak, Z.,Nagy, S. A.,Vasas, G.. 2015. Alterations of phytoplankton assemblages treated with chlori-
nated hydrocarbons: effects of dominant species sensitivity and initial diversity. Ecotoxicology 24:823-834
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	3298076

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF*	Score

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High	x	2	2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	Low	x	1	3

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High	x	1	1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	Low	x	2	6

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High	x	1	1

TTT
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D









	>	



Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable

4.0

H

o

1—1

Extracted

No



D
O









	0	

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4), EPA will determine

unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.	O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

m

O
XJ

if any metric is Unacceptable O

o

y\ (Metric Scores X MWF;) / ^ MWFj	(round to the nearest tenth) oth^vise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed out and an arrow po
U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Steiman, R.,Seiglemurandi, F.,Guiraud, P.,Benoitguyod, J. L.. 1995. TESTING OF CHLORINATED SOLVENTS ON MICROFUNGI.

Environmental Toxicology and Water Quality 10:283-285
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other soil fungi

Hero ID:	3559784

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

Medium	X 2	4 test substance was described as perchloroethylene

High	x 1	1

Low	X 1	3 Not indicated

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

Unacceptable x 2	8

N/A	N/A

Low	x 1	3

No control

No information

No randomization indicated

O

to

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

High
Medium

High

N/A

N/A

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2

2

N/A
N/A

However, it should be consideredthat due to dif-
ferences in volatility, the atmosphericconcentrations
were not the same: 2.40 g L-lfor DCM, 1.90 g L-l
for Per, and 0.50 g L -i for Tri.

Each solvent had one exposure concentration deter-
mined by the atmospheric pressure of the test vessel

No information

D

o

o

H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Metric 16:

Test Organism Characteristics	High

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions	High

Number of Organisms and Replicates per	N/A
Group

Adequacy of Test Conditions	High

x 2
x 1

x 1

2
1

N/A

No information

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Steiman, R.,Seiglemurandi, F.,Guiraud, P.,Benoitguyod, J. L..

Environmental Toxicology and Water Quality 10:283-285
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other soil fungi

Hero ID: 3559784

1995. TESTING OF CHLORINATED SOLVENTS ON MICROFUNGI.

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

N/A
N/A

No information
No information

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

N/A
Low
N/A

x 2

N/A
6

N/A

Not provided

Results were reported but not raw data.
No information

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unaccoptablo -

—s- Low

4.0

Metric mean score**: 1.8. The Paper does not use
a control, but does provide a decent comparison of
the relative toxicities of the three solvents, DCM,
PERC, and TCE over a 32 hour period. While this
doesn't provide endpoints that should be used in any

quantitative way in a risk evaluation, it does provide
evidence that can be used for a qualitative compar-
ison of the toxicities of these three solvents to these
soil fungi.

Extracted

Yes

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4), EPA
will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score is
presented solely to increase transparency.

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

-------
Study Citation: Steiman, R.,Seiglemurandi, F.,Guiraud, P.,Benoitguyod, J. L.. 1995. TESTING OF CHLORINATED SOLVENTS ON MICROFUNGI.

Environmental Toxicology and Water Quality 10:283-285
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other fungi

Hero ID:	3559784

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High
High
Low

x 2
x 1
x 1

Purity/Grade not reported

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

Unacceptable x 2
Unacceptable x 1
Low	x 1

8	no control

4 No control
3 not reported

O

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium	x 2

tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High	x 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low	x 1

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High	x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low	x 1

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x 1

Limited description of system/media preparation

Not measured

1 dose

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics	High

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions	High

Number of Organisms and Replicates per	nan
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	High

x 2
x 1
x 1

x 1

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

o

Cn

Study Citation: Steiman, R.,Seiglemurandi, F.,Guiraud, P.,Benoitguyod, J. L.. 1995. TESTING OF CHLORINATED SOLVENTS ON MICROFUNGI.

Environmental Toxicology and Water Quality 10:283-285
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other fungi

Hero ID:	3559784

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X 1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Low
High
High

x 1
x 2
x 1

3 Not described

2
1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable



4.0 Metric mean score**: 1.7.

Extracted

Yes





** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Loekle, D. M.,Schecter, A. J.,Christian, J. J.. 1983. Effects of Chioroform, Tetrachioroethyiene, and Trichioroethyiene on Survivai,

Growth, and Liver of Poecilia sphenops. 30:199-205
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3616526

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High
Low
Low

x 2
x 1
x 1

not provided
Not provided

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High
High

x 2
x 1
x 1

o

<35

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Low
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- High
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	Low

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

x 1

Renewal exposure; nominal cone; no cover for test
containers

nominal renewal test

nominal renewal exposure

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High
High
High

High

x 2
x 1
x 1

x 1

D
O

O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Low

x 2

No statistics used

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

o

-21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3616526

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X 1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Unacceptable

High

High

x 1
x 2
x 1

4 No statistical analysis

2
1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable



4.0 Metric mean score**: 1.6.

Extracted

No





** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

H

m

-------
o

GO

Study Citation: Home, J

D.,Swirsky, M. A.,Hollister, T. A.,Oblad, B. R.,Kennedy, J

H..

1983. Aquatic Toxicity Studies of Five Priority Pollutants.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish









Hero ID: 3617731











Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3 Not measured



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment









Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Home, J. D.,Swirsky, M. A.,Hollister, T. A.,Oblad, B. R.,Kennedy, J. H.. 1983. Aquatic Toxicity Studies of Five Priority Pollutants.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3617731

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

o

CO

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis







Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

x 1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	q

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	pj-j

Overall rating = ^	,	O

N	1	73

O

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is	Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m

-------
Study Citation: Home, J

D.,Swirsky, M. A.,Hollister, T. A.,Oblad, B. R.,Kennedy, J

H..

1983. Aquatic Toxicity Studies of Five Priority Pollutants.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates









Hero ID: 3617731











Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3 Not measured



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment









Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Home, J. D.,Swirsky, M. A.,Hollister, T. A.,Oblad, B. R.,Kennedy, J. H.. 1983. Aquatic Toxicity Studies of Five Priority Pollutants.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617731

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis







Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

x 1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

o

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	q

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	pj-j

Overall rating = ^	,	O

N	1	73

O

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is	Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m

-------
Study Citation: Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis
bahia).

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic;

Hero ID:	3617735

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Purity/grade not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis
bahia).

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic;

Hero ID:	3617735

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis
bahia).

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617735

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Info not provided

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

info not provided

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis
bahia).

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617735

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis
bahia).

Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617735

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3 Info not provided

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3 info not provided

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Hollister, T. A.,Parker, A. H., Jr.,Parrish, P. R.. 1968. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Five Chemicals to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis
bahia).

Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617735

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

m
O

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	^

o

C

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	O

m

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF*	Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
Low

Low

x 2
x 1

x 1

Source of Perc was not reported, but it was notedly

+• n a +• QnahrtipQl rrra/iD Mov/-1 fxrao nooH	-

that analytical grade Perc was used.
Purity not reported

o
m

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls

Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

Unacceptable x 2

Low

N/A
x 1

No control reported

3

o

The study does not mention a control anywhere.^
The study refers to a blank for Dugesia japonica^
(planarian) but doesn't say what's in the blank, and-p
doesn't mention a blank for O. latipes (red killifish).—|

It's not reported whether animals were randomly al-O
located.	"Z.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Low
tion

Consistency of Exposure Administration	Low

Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	Low

x 2

x 1
x 1
x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Unacceptable x 1
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x 1

O

It is not reported whether the container was closed—|
or open, and Perc is a volatile chemical.	ITI

o

Exposure methods were not reported for each study^g
group	^

It was not reported whether nominal or measured^
cone were used.	Q

—I

Exposure occurred over 4 hours, and OECD recom-ITI
mends 48 hours for invertebrate acute tests.

For Perc, it is unclear how many exposure groups
were used for the LC50 determination.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	Low	X 2	6	Test species is a saltwater invertebrate, and were

used at 5 days old, but the source of the species is
not reported.

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3617749

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Study did not report acclimating water fleas.
10 organisms per exposure group. For freshwater
invertebrates, OECD recommends at least 20. —

"Ten M. macrocopa in 100 ml of test solution were I
put in a 250-ml vial vessel at 20 " 1"C and the sur-C^
vivors were counted after 3 hr in order to determine^
LC50." q

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
Low

x 2
x 1

m
z
o

Determined an LC50

Details of outcome assessment were not reported. ^

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low
Low

x 2
x 1

6
3

>
¦n
H

The study did not provide enough information tc^
allow a comparison of environmental conditions orQ
other non treatment related factors across study-^.
groups. q
Data on health and attrition were not reported for—1
each study group. O

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Medium
Low

High

x 1
x 2

x 1

2
6

m
O

Methods not described clearly

Data for exposure related findings not reported foijO
each study group C

—1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score**: 2.6.

Extracted

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low x 1 3

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Low x 1 3
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions Medium x 1 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF*	Score	Comments^

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4), EPA will
determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score is presented solely to
increase transparency.	2

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor	H

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.	3>

(7)

4	if any metric is Unacceptable	W

Overall rating = ^	,	O

y\ (Metric Scores X MWF;) . MWFj	(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise	^

- 1	3	o.i	D

73

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed out and
arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

H

m

-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source of Perc was not reported, but it was noted













that analytical grade Perc was used.

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Low

X

2

6

the study refers to a blank but doesn't say what's













in the blank. I assume this is the control for D.













japonica (planarian)

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

Low

X

1

3

the study reports that most of the planarian in the













blank test regenerated heads normally, but a number













isn't given and Perc isn't discussed specifically.

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

it's not reported whether animals were randomly al-













located.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Continued on next page

m

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3617749

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Low
tion

x 2

to
to

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Metric 9:

Low

x 1
x 1

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency Medium x 2

It's unclear whether the experiement was conducted
in a closed or open system using static or flow
through methods. The study reports, "The breed-
ing liquid for Dugesia japonica was prepared by dis-
solving 3.74 g of NaCl, 0.49 g of KC1, and 8.5 5 g of
CaC12 into distilled water to make 500 ml. This was
diluted 100 times and neutralized by NaHC03 before
use. Dugesiajaponica were collected from a stream
around which there was no source of pollution and
left without food for over 7 days in the breeding
liquid to excrete alimentary canal contents. Those
of about _2 cm long were used. Dugesia japonica
was cut into two parts (head and body part) at the
nearest section to the eyes of the trisected part be-
tween pharynx and eyes. The body part was used
for the head regeneration test. Ten body parts were
put in 100 ml ofa test solution, and this was left
at 20 " 1" C for 7 days. Observation for head re-
generation was carried out with a stereomicroscope
on Days 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 after head cutting, and the
test solution was replaced at every observatiort. The
degree of regeneration was classified as normal, eye
spot, tetratophthalmic, anophthalmic, aciphthalmic,
and death. The total number of eye spot, tetratoph-
thalmic, anophthalmic, aciphthalmic, and death was
regarded as the abnormal regeneration number. The
ratio of the number to 10 on Day 7 was defined as
the abnormal regeneration rate. The concentration
of the chemical, at which the abnormal regenera-
tion rate reached 50 percent, was defined as EC50"
LC50 of D. japonica was determined at the same
time. LC50 and EC50 values of the test mentioned
above were determined on semilogarithmic paper."

exposure methods were not reported for each study
group

it was not reported whether nominal or measured
cone were used.

Exposure occurred over 7 days, and observation was
carried out on days 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 after head cut-
ting, and the test solution was replaced at every ob-
servation.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3617749

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low x 1 3

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit High x 1 1

not reported for Perc, but for other chemicals it
looks like 4 exposure groups were used plus control.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low

x 1

to
co

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Low

x 1

Minor uncertainties about the quality of the test or-
ganisms given they were collected from the field and
no acclimation is mentioned. Study reports, "Du-
gesiajaponica were collected from a stream around
which there was no source of pollution and left with-
out food for over 7 days in the breeding liquid to
excrete alimentary canal contents. Those of about
_2 cm long were used."

did not report whether they were acclimatized and
they were collected from the field,
number of animals in each solution was not clear,
possibly ten? the study says "Ten body parts were
put in 100 ml ofa test solution, and this was left at
20 " 1"C for 7 days." Is this 10 body parts from 10
different individuals?

housing not mentioned for planarian

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
Low

x 2
x 1

details of outcome assessment were not reported.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Medium x 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low x 1

confounding variables are discussed for planarian.
the study says that confounding may occur due to
the cutting of the head (stress of cutting of the
head).

data on health and attrition were not reported for
each study group.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Medium x 1

methods not described clearly

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

to

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Low x 2
Medium x 1

6
2

data for exposure related findings not reported for
each study group

they did report unexpected outcomes and explained
relatively sufficiently, e.g. the planarian numbers
being very different than the other two species.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Low

2.4



Extracted

Yes







* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

o

H
O
H

m

O
XJ

O
c
o

m

-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^	MWF*	Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
Low

Low

x 2
x 1

x 1

m

Source of Perc was not reported, but it was noted~
that analytical grade Perc was used.	^

purity not reported	|TI

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Unacceptable x 2

Metric 5: Negative Control Response
Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

Low

N/A
x 1

No control reported

3

The study does not mention a control anywhere^
The study refers to a blank for Dugesia japonic^
(planarian) but doesn't say what's in the blank, anef|
doesn't mention a blank for O. latipes (red killifish)H

D

it's not reported whether animals were randomly aO
located.	"Z.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium
tion

Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

Low

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	Low

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

x 1

O

Test was completed in a closed container (sealeeH
with an electrode), but there were some uncertairP"!
ties about how much air space there was in the flaslQ

exposure methods were not reported for each si iid<^
group o
it was not reported whether nominal or measure^
cone were used.		|

Exposure occurred over 48 hours, and it sounds likle"'
a static test but it is not clear. OECD recommends
96 hours for fish acute tests.

For Perc, it is unclear how many exposure groups
were used for the LC50 determination. (For the oxy-
gen uptake it looks like 5 exposure groups according
to figure 2 but that was a different test. )

Domain 4: Test Organism

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3617749

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions Medium

x 1
x 1
x 1

Minor uncertainties about the quality of the test or-
ganisms given they were collected from the market.
Study reports, "Orizias latipes (ca. J_cm, 0. 3 g)
was obtained from the market and acclimated foF
at least 1 week in dechlorinated water at 20" C (toH
tal hardness was about 80 mg/liter). LC50 was d
-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3617749

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Low
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low

x 2

x 1

Study did not provide enough information to allow
a comparison of environmental conditions or other
non-treatment-related factors across study groups,
and the omitted information is likely to have a suh]2
stantial impact on study results. —I

data on health and attrition were not reported fcrjQ
each study group.

m
z

methods not described clearly ^

data for exposure related findings not reported fc^
each study group

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Medium
Low

High

x 1
x 2

x 1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable —

-s- Low

4.0

Metric mean score**: 2.4.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4), EPA will determmp
the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increfcpp
transparency. Q

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor ^0
t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value. 0

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. C

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxicants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1931-1939
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID: 3617867

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High x 2
Low x 1

Medium x 1

Source was not provided

Purity was not provided. Authors described the
chemical purity as "reagent grade"

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Medium x 2

Metric 5: Negative Control Response

Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

Low
Low

x 1

Authors referred to a control when discussing how
they calculated their EC50 value, but additional de-
tails were not reported. The authors indicated that
the details of the test setup can be found at the fol-
lowing source: Lin JH, Kao WC, Tsai KP, Chen CY.
2005. A novel algal toxicity testing technique for
assessing the toxicity of both metallic and organic
toxicants. Water Res 39:1869" 1877.This source in-
dicates that inclusion of a negative control is a part
of the testing procedure.

Negative Control response was not specifically re-
ported in the study, but was incorporated into the
calculation of the percent inhibition.

Researchers did not report how organisms were al-
located to study groups

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

High

High
Medium

x 2

x 1
x 1

Test concentrations were reported in terms of nom-
inal concentrations, but analytical confirmation of
the test concentrations was performed at the begin-
ning and end of the test by HPLC. This was intended
to quantify any potential degradation.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxicants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1931-1939
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID: 3617867

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Medium x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low x 1

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit Low x 1

Authors reported, "All tests were conducted in trip-
licate, with a test duration of 48 h. The population
density of the algae was determined using an elec-
tronicparticle counter" 48 hours is acceptable, but
72 hours is recommended in OECD 201.

The study report indicated that both a range finding
and definitive test were conducted but did not report
the test concentrations.

It is unclear what test cone were, but the solubility
of TCE is very high (999-1472 mg/1), and the EC50
determined was relatively low in comparison 26.24
mg/l)

Domain 4: Test Organism

l—l

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

High

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure Medium x 1 2

Data on attrition was not reported for each study
group, but is unlikely to have a substantial impact
on results.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High x 1
Medium x 2

Results did not include effects at each concentration
level

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

co
o

Study Citation: Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxicants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1931-1939
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID: 3617867

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Commentstt

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X 1 1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

m
73
>
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor ^

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value. q

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. -<

4 if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

y]. (Metric Scores X MWF;) . MWFj (round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

1 3 o.i

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

-------
Study Citation: Shubat, P. J.,Poirier, S. H.,Knuth, M. L.,Brooke, L. T.. 1982. Acute Toxicity of Tetrachloroethylene and Tetrachloroethylene with

Dimethylformamide to Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri). 28
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3625336

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1: Test Substance Identity

High x 2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

1—1

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

1—1

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

Acute Toxicity of Tetrachloroethylene and Tetra-
chloroethylene with Dimethylformamide to Rainbow
Trout (Salmo gairdneri)

Exposure samples containing tetrachloroethylene
(Aldrich Chemical Co. , 99 percent pure)

Five toxicant concentrations and a lake water control
were tested in duplicate.

one death occurred in a Tetrachloroethylene control
chamber after 72 h of exposure.

Ten fish were randomly assigned to each exposure
tank and observed for loss of equilibrium and mor-
tality.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration High

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- High
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit High

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2

x 1
x 1

The recovery of Tetrachloroethylene from spiked
Lake Superior water was 89.9 percent " 6.2 percent
(n" 23).

Observations were made at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h,
and at daily intervals thereafter until the test was
terminated at 96 h.

<0.001, 2.41, 3.69, 6.39, 11.2, and 17.3 mg/L
LC 50= 4.99 mg/L

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 4: Test Organism

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Shubat, P. J.,Poirier, S. H.,Knuth, M. L.,Brooke, L. T.. 1982. Acute Toxicity of Tetrachloroethylene and Tetrachloroethylene with

Dimethylformamide to Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri). 28
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3625336

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High x 1 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High x 1 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions High x 1 1

Rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri Richardson) from
Fattig Fish Hatchery, Brady, Nebraska, were held
for 25 days before testing with Tetrachloroethylene.

Five toxicant concentrations and a lake water control
were tested in duplicate.

Fish were held in 12oc Lake Superior water and were
fed trout pellets from Glencoe Mills, Inc. until 24
hours before testing. Average fish weights at the
time of testing were 3.20 g for the TCE test

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

LC 50= 4.99 mg/L

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure High x 1 1

None reported

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

High
High

x 1

x 2
x 1

LC50 values were calculated by the trimmed
Spearman-Karber method (HAMIL TON et al.
1977).

One death occurred in a tetrachloroethylene control
chamber after 72 h of exposure. No cause of death
was determined.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes

Continued on next page . . .

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Shubat, P. J.,Poirier, S. H.,Knuth, M. L.,Brooke, L. T.. 1982. Acute Toxicity of Tetrachloroethylene and Tetrachloroethylene with

Dimethylformamide to Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri). 28
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3625336

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

co
co

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

-------
Study Citation:
Data Type:
Hero ID:

Schell, J. D. J.. 1987. Interactions of Halogenated Hydrocarbon Mixtures in the Embryo of the Japanese Medaka (Oryzias latipes).

Other; Aquatic; Fish

3625489

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Medium

Clean rearing solution was used as a control, with

only minor uncertainties about formulation.

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

did not report whether allocation to study groups

was random.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

Nominal concentrations were used and were not

tion

measured. Perc is volatile. Rate of loss was deter-

mined for carbon tet and chloroform, but not Perc.

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Low

10 embryos per dose group, which is good, but no

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

mention of how many replicates.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

High

x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page . . .

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Schell, J. D. J.. 1987. Interactions of Halogenated Hydrocarbon Mixtures in the Embryo of the Japanese Medaka (Oryzias latipes).

Data Type: Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3625489

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

co
Cn

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium

Data on attrition was reported in each exposure

group. Other health outcomes were not reported,

but I consider these only minor uncertainties.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Medium

most but not all outcomes were reported, only minor

uncertainties.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
XJ

O
c
o

-------
Study Citation: De Foe, D. L.. 1980. Tetrachloroethylene Bioassay Results.
Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3625621

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High

x 2

N/A
N/A

2 Tetrachloroethylene
Not identified
Not identified

m
73

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High

x 2
x 1

N/A

2
1

Not identified

o
m
z
o

D
73

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

N/A

N/A
N/A

N/A

No information

No information
No information

No information

J>
-n
H

Z
O
H

O
H

O
73

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:
Metric 14:
Metric 15:

Metric 16:

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium

x 2

N/A
N/A

N/A

4 Identified as fathead minnow only
No information
No information

No information

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

N/A
N/A

Bioaccumulation factor is 79
bioaccumulation study

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: De Foe, D. L.. 1980. Tetrachloroethylene Bioassay Results.

Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3625621

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

N/A
N/A

No information
No information

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

N/A
N/A
N/A

No information
No information
No information

73
>
O
m
z
o
-<

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High —>

1.3

bioaccumulation study

s—

73
>

Extracted No

H
D

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

O
73

out and an ajrrpw
H

-------
Study Citation: Richter, J. E.,Peterson, S. F.,Kleiner, C. F.. 1983. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of some Chlorinated Benzenes, Chlorinated Ethanes,

and Tetrachloroethylene to Daphnia magna. 12:679-684 (OECDG Data File)

Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634174

Domain

Metric

Ratingt MWF*

Score

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
High

High

x 2
x 1

x 1

-a—

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls

Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High

x 2

x 1

N/A

D
~0 o

~n
Hi

No information. Four replicates with five animalCiach wei

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- High
posure Levels

High

x 2

x 1

N/A No information. These concentrations were the mean effective exposure based on npjfisured r

x 1 Ol

O
C

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Richter, J. E.,Peterson, S. F.,Kleiner, C. F.. 1983. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of some Chlorinated Benzenes, Chlorinated Ethanes,
and Tetrachloroethylene to Daphnia magna. 12:679-684 (OECDG Data File)

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates
3634174

Domain

Metric Rating^ MWF*

Score

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High x 1 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High x 1 Zi

Group m

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions High x 1 j!?l

CD
m
z
o
-<

D
73
>

~n
H

Z—

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology High x 2 ^2

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment
Metric 17: O

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment High x 1 nil

o~~

73
O

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 q2

Procedures O

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure High x 1 m 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'" High 1.0

Continued on next page

-------
.continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates
3634174

Domain

Metric Rating^ MWF*

Score

Extracted

Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

ifany|tricis

(round(hp the m
<

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed out and an 3row po
^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments. ^

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

-------
Study Citation: Richter, J. E.,Peterson, S. F.,Kleiner, C. F.. 1983. Acute and Chronic Toxicity of some Chlorinated Benzenes, Chlorinated Ethanes,

and Tetrachloroethylene to Daphnia magna. 12:679-684 (OECDG Data File)

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634174

Domain

Metric

Ratingt MWF*

Score

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
High

High

x 2
x 1

x 1

-a—

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls

Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High

x 2

x 1

N/A

D
~0 o

~n
Hi

No information. Four replicates with five animalCiach wei

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- High
posure Levels

High

x 2

x 1

N/A No information. These concentrations were the mean effective exposure based on npjfisured r

x 1 Ol

O
C

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates
3634174

Domain

Metric Rating^ MWF*

Score

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High x 1 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High x 1 Zi

Group m

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions High x 1 j!?l

CD
m
z
o
-<

D
73
>

~n
H

Z—

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology High x 2 ^2

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment
Metric 17: O

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment High x 1 nil

o~~

73
O

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 q2

Procedures O

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure High x 1 m 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'" High 1.0

Continued on next page

-------
.continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates
3634174

Domain

Metric Rating^ MWF*

Score

Extracted

Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

ifany|tricis

(round(hp the m
<

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection

Agency) Priority Pollutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3634370

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

3 Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection

Agency) Priority Pollutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3634370

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4 if any metric is Unacceptable ^

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise O

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection

Agency) Priority Pollutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634370

<35

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection

Agency) Priority Pollutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634370

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

- 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4 if any metric is Unacceptable ^

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise O

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection

Agency) Priority Pollutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other fish and invert

Hero ID: 3634370

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.,Richter, J. E.. 1983. Toxicity and Metabolism Studies with EPA (Environmental Protection

Agency) Priority Pollutants and Related Chemicals in Freshwater Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other fish and invert

Hero ID: 3634370

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4 if any metric is Unacceptable ^

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise O

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.
Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634375

Cn
O

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

3 Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions High x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment High x 1 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634375

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure High x 1 1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

x 1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. q

4 if any metric is Unacceptable pj-j

Overall rating = ^ , O

N 1 73

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634375

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High x 2 2

High x 1 1

N/A Grade/Purity not reported

Analysis reported

n
2
-J
G
n

c
-<

c
2

C
2

C
-e
c

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High
High

x 2
x 1
x 1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

High
High

High

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

x 1

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics High

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High

Number of Organisms and Replicates per High
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 2
x 1
x 1

x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634375

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High
High

x 2
x 1

2
1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
High
High

x 1
x 2
x 1

2
1

7J
>
O
m
z
o
-<

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

>
Tl

Extracted

Yes

H
D

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. Q

4 if any metric is Unacceptable Ul

Overall rating = ^ , O

y]. (Metric Scores X MWF;) . MWFj (round to the nearest tenth) otherwise ^

- 1 3 o.i O

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed out and aiQ

arrow points to the new rating. —I

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments. ^

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.
Data Type: Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634375

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

3 info not provided

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

3 info not provided

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18:

Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1980. Toxicity, Bioconcentration, and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Data Type: Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634375

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Cn
Cn

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure High x 1 1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

x 1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. q

4 if any metric is Unacceptable pj-j

Overall rating = ^ , O

N 1 73

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3634391

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Cn
<35

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

Purity/grade not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

Allocation not reported

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment High x 1 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3634391

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Cn
-
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. q

4 if any metric is Unacceptable pj-j

Overall rating = ^ , O

N 1 73

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.
Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634391

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

The test substance source was not reported.

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

The purity was not included.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

Acclimation not reported

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment High x 1 1

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 3634391

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Cn
CO

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Low

Statistical methods not reported

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. q

4 if any metric is Unacceptable pj-j

Overall rating = ^ , O

N 1 73

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

Hero ID: 3634391

<35

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

info not provided

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

info not provided

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low

not addressed, measured cones in all tests

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment High x 1 1

Continued on next page . . .

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Call, D. J.,Brooke, L. T.,Ahmad, N.. 1979. Toxicity, Bioconcentration and Metabolism of Selected Chemicals in Aquatic Organisms.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other invert,fish,algae

Hero ID: 3634391

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure High x 1 1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

x 1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.2

Extracted

Yes

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. q

4 if any metric is Unacceptable pj-j

Overall rating = ^ , O

N 1 73

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is Q

crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-------
<35
to

Study Citation: Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Comparisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an

Amphipod and a Cladoceran.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3634436

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

3 Allocation was not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

x 2

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Comparisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an

Amphipod and a Cladoceran.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3634436

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments^

<35
co

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / ]T\ MWF,

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor O

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

m
O

4 if any metric is Unacceptable XJ

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise O

-------
Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Ahmad, N.,Benoit, D.,Brooke, L.,Call, D.,Carlson, A.,Defoe, D.,Huot, J.,Moriarity, A.,Richter, J.,Shubat, P.,Veith, G.,Wallbridge, C..
1984. Aquatic Toxicity Tests to Characterize the Hazard of Volatile Organic Chemicals in Water: A Toxicity Data Summary-Parts I
and II.

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish
3689695

<35

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

<35
Cn

Study Citation: Ahmad, N.,Benoit, D.,Brooke, L.,Call, D.,Carlson, A.,Defoe, D.,Huot, J.,Moriarity, A.,Richter, J.,Shubat, P.,Veith, G.,Wallbridge, C..

1984. Aquatic Toxicity Tests to Characterize the Hazard of Volatile Organic Chemicals in Water: A Toxicity Data Summary-Parts I
and II.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3689695

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Fow: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

m
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Fow = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value. 73

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. Q

1 if any metric is Unacceptable O

-------
Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish
3689695

<35
<35

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

<35

Study Citation: Ahmad, N.,Benoit, D.,Brooke, L.,Call, D.,Carlson, A.,Defoe, D.,Huot, J.,Moriarity, A.,Richter, J.,Shubat, P.,Veith, G.,Wallbridge, C..

1984. Aquatic Toxicity Tests to Characterize the Hazard of Volatile Organic Chemicals in Water: A Toxicity Data Summary-Parts I
and II.

Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3689695

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

m
O

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Fow = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value. 73

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High. Q

1 if any metric is Unacceptable O

-------
Study Citation:

Data Type:
Hero ID:

; Aquatic; Fish
3689695

<35
GO

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

3 info not provided

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

3 info not provided

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

tion

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

<35
CO

Study Citation: Ahmad, N.,Benoit, D.,Brooke, L.,Call, D.,Carlson, A.,Defoe, D.,Huot, J.,Moriarity, A.,Richter, J.,Shubat, P.,Veith, G.,Wallbridge, C..

1984. Aquatic Toxicity Tests to Characterize the Hazard of Volatile Organic Chemicals in Water: A Toxicity Data Summary-Parts I
and II.

Data Type: ; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 3689695

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
XJ

O
c
o

-------
Study Citation: Dow Chem Co. 1979. TOXICITY OF PERCHLOROETHYLENE TO DAPHNIDS.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 4214225

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments"^

-
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

used.

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Dow Chem Co. 1979. TOXICITY OF PERCHLOROETHYLENE TO DAPHNIDS.

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID: 4214225

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

Unacceptable

Two test runs were not valid.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

Not listed.

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

The report states that two out of three test were

invalid.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Low

Out of three tests, only one valid test was used for

calculation.

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

Reported.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Medium

The cause of unexpected outcome was not explained.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score**: 1.8.

Extracted

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
XJ
>
a

m
z
o
-<
D
XJ
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
XJ

O
c
o

-------
Study Citation: Ciba-Geigy Corp. 1980. 96 HOUR STATIC FISH BIOASSAY TEST WITH ATTACHMENTS (ATTACHMENT 59).

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 4214249

Domain Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High
High
Low

X 2 2 CAS# 127-18-4

X 1 1 Ciba-Geigy, Batch No. 253952A

X 1 3 Not listed.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls
Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

High
High
Low

x 2
x 1
x 1

Used.
Reported.
Not reported.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low
High

Unacceptable

Low
High

High

x 2

Static

Done

X 1

The test substance is volatile, but the test was con-
ducted in static system.

Nominal used.

Based on the range finding.

Tested below and above the water solubility (206
mg/L) of PERC

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics High

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High

Number of Organisms and Replicates per Low
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X 2 2 Described.

X 1 1 Reported.

X 1 3 The main test did not report, only reported that 3-4

fish were used for range- finders.

X 1 1 Reported.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o

D
73
>

D
O

O
H

O
73

O
c
o

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Medium

x 2

Reported graphically

Continued on next page

-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Ciba-Geigy Corp. 1980. 96 HOUR STATIC FISH BIOASSAY TEST WITH ATTACHMENTS (ATTACHMENT 59).

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID: 4214249

Domain Metric Ratingt MWF* Score Commentstt

- 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

m
73
>
O
m
z
o
-<
D
73
>

D
O
Z

H
O
H

O
73

O
c
o

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Table of Contents

HERO
ID

Monitoring
5405

14003

21469

21778

22045

22186
23081

27974

28104

Data Type

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Reference

Pellizzari, E. D.,Wallace, L. A.,Gordon, S. M.. 1992. Elimination kinetics of
volatile organics in humans using breath measurements. Journal of Exposure
Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 2

Clayton, C. A.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Whitmore, R. W.,Perritt, R. L.,Quackenboss, J.
J.. 1999. National Human Exposure Assessment Survey (NHEXAS): Distribu-
tions and associations of lead, arsenic, and volatile organic compounds in EPA
Region 5. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 9

Wallace, L. A.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Hartwell, T. D.,Sparacino, C. M.,Sheldon, L.
S.,Zelon,H.. 1985. Results from the first three seasons oftheTEAM study:
personal exposures, indoor-outdoor relationships, and breath levels of toxic air
pollutants measured for 355 persons in New Jersey.

Aggazzotti, G.,Fantuzzi, G.,Predieri, G.,Righi, E.,Moscardelli, S.. 1994. Indoor
exposure to perchloroethylene (PCE) in individuals living with dry-cleaning
workers. Science of the Total Environment 156

Heavner, D. L.,Morgan, W. T.,Ogden, M. W.. 1995. Determination of volatile
organic compounds and ETS apportionment in 49 homes. Environment Inter-
national 21

Lebret, E.,van de Wiel, H. J.,Bos, H. P.,Noij, D.,Boleij, J. S. M.. 1986. Volatile
organic compounds in Dutch homes. Environment International 12

Wallace, L. A.. 1986. Personal exposures, indoor and outdoor air concentra-
tions, and exhaled breath concentrations of selected volatile organic compounds
measured for 600 residents of New Jersey, North Dakota, North Carolina, and
California. Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry 12

Chan, C. C.,Vainer, L.,Martin, J. W.,Williams, D. T.. 1990. Determination
of organic contaminants in residential indoor air using an adsorption-thermal
desorption technique. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association
40

Hisham, M. W. M.,Grosjean, D.. 1991. Sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, total
reduced sulfur, chlorinated hydrocarbons and photochemical oxidants in south-
ern California museums. Atmospheric Environment 25

-------
28307

28993

29192

31210

344^0

39644

42715

47782

49414

56224

58056

58060

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring

Thomas, K. W.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Perritt, R. L.,Nelson, W. C.. 1991. Effect of
dry-cleaned clothes on tetrachloroethylene levels in indoor air, personal air, and
breath for residents of several New Jersey homes. Journal of Exposure Analysis
and Environmental Epidemiology 1

Ferrario, J. B.,Lawler, G. C.,Deleon, I. R.,Laseter, J. L.. 1985. Volatile organic
pollutants in biota and sediments of Lake Pontchartrain. Bulletin of Environ-
mental Contamination and Toxicology 34

Singh, H. B.,Salas, L. J.,Stiles, R. E.. 1983. Selected man-made halogenated
chemicals in the air and oceanic environment. Journal of Geophysical Research

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

M. R. Van Winkle, P. A. Scheff 2001. Volatile organic compounds, polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons and elements in the air of ten urban homes. Indoor Air
11

Lehmann, I.,Thoelke, A.,Rehwagen, M.,Rolle-Kampczyk, U.,Schlink, U.,Schulz,
R.,Borte, M.,Diez, U.,Herbarth, o.. 2002. The influence of maternal exposure
to volatile organic compounds on the cytokine secretion profile of neonatal T
cells. Environmental Toxicology 17

Singh, H. B.,Salas, L. J.,Smith, A. J.,Shigeishi, H.. 1981. Measurements of some
potentially hazardous organic chemicals in urban environments. Atmospheric
Environment 15

Ahlers, J.,Regelmann, J.,Riedhammer, C.. 2003. Environmental risk assess-
ment of airborne trichloroacetic acid - a contribution to the discussion on the
significance of anthropogenic and natural sources. Chemosphere 52

Austin, J.. 2003. Day-of-week patterns in toxic air contaminants in southern
California. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 53

Ryan, T. J.,Hart, E. M.,Kappler, L. L.. 2002. VOC exposures in a mixed-use
university art building. AIHA Journal 63

Serrano-Trespalacios, P. I.,Ryan, L.,Spengler, J. D.. 2004. Ambient, indoor and
personal exposure relationships of volatile organic compounds in Mexico City
metropolitan area. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemi-
ology 1

Dowty,B. J.,Carlisle, D. R.,Laseter, J. L.. 1975. New Orleans drinking wa-
ter sources tested by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry: Occurrence and
origin of aromatics and halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Environmental
Science and Technology 9

Ewing, B. B.,Chian, E. S. K.,Cook, J. C.,Evans, C. A.,Hopke, P. K.,Perkins, E.
G.. 1977. Monitoring to detect previously unrecognized pollutants in surface
waters.

-------
27

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Ohta, T.,Morita, M.,Mizoguchi, I.. 1976. Local distribution of chlorinated
hydrocarbons in the ambient air in Tokyo. Atmospheric Environment 10

Singh, H. B.,Salas, L. J.,Cavanagh, L. A.. 1977. Distribution, sources and
sinks of atmospheric halogenated compounds. Journal of the Air and Waste
Management Association 27

Howie, S. J.. 1981. Ambient perchloroethylene levels inside coin-operated laun-
dries with drycleaning machines on the premises.

Aggazzotti, G.,Fantuzzi, G.,Righi, E.,Predieri, G.,Gobba, F. M.,Paltrinieri,
M.,Cavalleri, A.. 1994. Occupational and environmental exposure to per-
chloroethylene (PCE) in dry cleaners and their family members. Archives of
Environmental and Occupational Health 49

Murray, A. J.,Riley, J. P.. 1973. Occurrence of some chlorinated aliphatic
hydrocarbons in the environment. Nature 242

Kostiainen, R.. 1995. Volatile organic compounds in the indoor air of normal
and sick houses. Atmospheric Environment 29

Lindstrom, A. B.,Proffitt, D.,Fortune, C. R.. 1995. Effects of modified residen-
tial construction on indoor air quality. Indoor Air 5

Schwarzenbach, R. P.,Molnar-Kubica, E.,Giger, W.,Wakeham, S. G.. 1979.
Distribution, residence time, and fluxes of tetrachloroethylene and 1,4-
dichlorobenzene in Lake Zurich, Switzerland. Environmental Science and Tech-
nology 13

Weissflog, L.,Elansky, N.,Putz, E.,Krueger, G.,Lange, C. A.,Lisitzina,
L.,Pfennigsdorff, A.. 2004. Trichloroacetic acid in the vegetation of polluted
and remote areas of both hemispheres - Part II: Salt lakes as novel sources of
natural chlorohydrocarbons. Atmospheric Environment 38

Sexton, K.,Adgate, J. L.,Church, T. R.,Ashley, D. L.,Needham, L.
L.,Ramachandran, G.,Fredrickson, A. L.,Ryan, A. D.. 2005. Children's expo-
sure to volatile organic compounds as determined by longitudinal measurements
in blood. Environmental Health Perspectives 113

Adgate, J. L.,Church, T. R.,Ryan, A. D.,Ramachandran, G.,Fredrickson, A.
L.,Stock, T. H.,Morandi, M. T.,Sexton, K.. 2004. Outdoor, indoor, and per-
sonal exposure to VOCs in children. Environmental Health Perspectives 112

Monitoring

Ohura, T.,Amagai, T.,Senga, Y.,Fusaya, M.. 2006. Organic air pollutants inside
and outside residences in Shimizu, Japan: Levels, sources and risks. Science of
the Total Environment 366

-------
39

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring

Zuraimi, M. S.,Tham, K. W.. 2008. Effects of child care center ventilation
strategies on volatile organic compounds of indoor and outdoor origins. Envi-
ronmental Science and Technology 42

Monitoring

Dewulf, J. P.,Van Langenhove, H. R.,Der Auwera, L. F.. 1998. Air/water
exchange dynamics of 13 volatile chlorinated CI - and C2-hydrocarbons and
monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the southern North Sea and the Scheldt
estuary. Environmental Science and Technology 32

Monitoring

Yamamoto, K.,Fukushima, M.,Kakutani, N.,Kuroda, K.. 1997. Volatile organic
compounds in urban rivers and their estuaries in Osaka, Japan. Environmental
Pollution 95

Monitoring

Abrahamsson, K.,Dyrssen, D.,Jogebrant, G.,Krysell, M.. 1989. Halocarbon
concentrations in Askerofj orden related to the water exchange and inputs from
the petrochemical site at Stenungsund. Vatten 45

Monitoring

Amaral, O. C.,Otero, R.,Grimalt, J. 0.,Albaiges, J.. 1996. Volatile and semi-
volatile organochlorine compounds in tap and riverine waters in the area of
influence of a chlorinated organic solvent factory. Water Research 30

Monitoring

Martinez, E.,Llobet, I.,Lacorte, S.,Viana, P.,Barcelo, D.. 2002. Patterns and
levels of halogenated volatile compounds in Portuguese surface waters. Journal
of Environmental Monitoring 4

Monitoring

Huybrechts, T.,Dewulf, J.,Van Langenhove, H.. 2005. Priority volatile organic
compounds in surface waters of the southern North Sea. Environmental Pollu-
tion 133

Monitoring
Monitoring

Gulyas, H.,Hemmerling, L.. 1990. Tetrachloroethene air pollution originating
from coin-operated dry cleaning establishments. Environmental Research 53

Sexton, K.,Mongin, S. J.,Adgate, J. L.,Pratt, G. C.,Ramachandran, G.,Stock,
T. H.,Morandi, M. T.. 2007. Estimating volatile organic compound concentra-
tions in selected microenvironments using time-activity and personal exposure
data. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A: Current Issues
70

Monitoring

Billionnet, C.,Gay, E.,Kirchner, S.,Leynaert, B.,Annesi-Maesano, I.. 2011.
Quantitative assessments of indoor air pollution and respiratory health in a
population-based sample of French dwellings. Environmental Research 111

Monitoring

Su, F. C.,Mukherjee, B.,Batterman, S.. 2011. Trends of VOC exposures among
a nationally representative sample: Analysis of the NHANES 1988 through 2004
data sets. Atmospheric Environment 45

Monitoring

Chao, C. Y.,Chan, G. Y.. 2001. Quantification of indoor VOCs in twenty
mechanically ventilated buildings in Hong Kong. Atmospheric Environment 35

-------
55

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring

Wang, T.,Wong, C. H.,Cheung, T. F.,Blake, D. R.,Arimoto, R.,Baumann,
K.,Tang, J.,Ding, G. A.,Yu, X. M.,Li, Y. S.,Streets, D. G.,Simpson, I. J.. 2004.
Relationships of trace gases and aerosols and the emission characteristics at
Lin'an, a rural site in eastern China, during spring 2001. Journal of Geophysi-
cal Research: Atmospheres 109

Monitoring

Kostopoulou, M. N.,Golfinopoulos, S. K.,Nikolaou, A. D.,Xilourgidis, N.
K.,Lekkas, T. D.. 2000. Volatile organic compounds in the surface waters
of northern Greece. Chemosphere 40

Monitoring

X. M. Wu, M. G. Apte, R. Maddalena, D. H. Bennett. 2011. Volatile organic
compounds in small- and medium-sized commercial buildings in California. En-
vironmental Science and Technology 45

Monitoring

Batterman, S.,Jia, C.,Hatzivasilis, G.. 2007. Migration of volatile organic com-
pounds from attached garages to residences: A major exposure source. Envi-
ronmental Research 104

Monitoring

Dodson, R. E.,Levy, J. I.,Spengler, J. D.,Shine, J. P.,Bennett, D. EL. 2008.
Influence of basements, garages, and common hallways on indoor residential
volatile organic compound concentrations. Atmospheric Environment 42

Monitoring

S. N. Sax, D. H. Bennett, S. N. Chillrud, P. L. Kinney, J. D. Spengler. 2004.
Differences in source emission rates of volatile organic compounds in inner-city
residences of New York City and Los Angeles. Journal of Exposure Analysis
and Environmental Epidemiology 14

Monitoring

Roose, P.,Van Thuyne, G.,Belpaire, C.,Raemaekers, M.,Brinkman, U. A.. 2003.
Determination of VOCs in yellow eel from various inland water bodies in Flan-
ders (Belgium). Journal of Environmental Monitoring 5

Monitoring

Rule, K. L.,Comber, S. D.,Ross, D.,Thornton, A.,Makropoulos, C. K.,Rautiu,
R.. 2006. Sources of priority substances entering an urban wastewater
catchment—trace organic chemicals. Chemosphere 63

Monitoring

Robinson, K. W.,Flanagan, S. M.,Ayotte, J. D.,Campo, K. W.,Chalmers, A..
2004. Water Quality in the New England Coastal Basins, Maine, New Hamp-
shire, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, 1999-2001.

Monitoring

van de Meent, D.,Den Hollander, H. A.,Pool, W. G.,Vredenbregt, M. J.,van
Oers, H. A. M.,de Greef, E.,Luijten, J. a. 1986. Organic micropollutants in
Dutch coastal waters. Water Science and Technology 18

Monitoring
Monitoring

James, K. J.,Stack, M. A.. 1997. The impact of leachate collection on air
quality in landfills. Chemosphere 34

Jia, C.,Batterman, S.,Godwin, C.. 2008. VOCs in industrial, urban and subur-
ban neighborhoods, Part 1: Indoor and outdoor concentrations, variation, and
risk drivers. Atmospheric Environment 42

-------
68

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Duboudin, C.. 2009. Pollution inside the home: descriptive analyses Part I:
Analysis of the statistical correlations between pollutants inside homes. Envi-
ronnement, Risques & Sante 8

Bouhamra, W. S.,Elkilani, A. S.. 1999. Investigation and modeling of sur-
face sorption-desorption behavior of volatile organic compounds for indoor air
quality analysis. Environmental Technology 20

He, Z.,Yang, G. P.,Lu, X. L.. 2013. Distributions and sea-to-air fluxes of volatile
halocarbons in the East China Sea in early winter. Chemosphere 90

McDonald, T. J.,Kennicutt M C, I. I.,Brooks, J. M.. 1988. VOLATILE OR-
GANIC COMPOUNDS AT A COASTAL GULF OF MEXICO SITE. Chemo-
sphere 17

Stefaniak, A. B.,Breysse, p. N.,Murray, M. P. M.,Rooney, B. C.,Schaefer, J..
2000. An evaluation of employee exposure to volatile organic compounds in
three photocopy centers. Environmental Research 83

He, Z.,Yang, G.,Lu, X.,Zhang, H.. 2013. Distributions and sea-to-air fluxes of
chloroform, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, chlorodibromomethane and
bromoform in the Yellow Sea and the East China Sea during spring. Environ-
mental Pollution 177

Su, F. C.,Mukherjee, B.,Batterman, S.. 2013. Determinants of personal, indoor
and outdoor VOC concentrations: An analysis of the RIOPA data. Environ-
mental Research 126

Roda, C.,Kousignian, I.,Ramond, A.,Momas, I.. 2013. Indoor tetrachloroethy-
lene levels and determinants in Paris dwellings. Environmental Research 120

Zoccolillo, L. ,Abete, C. ,Amendola, L. ,Ruocco, R. ,Sbrilli, A. ,Termine, M.. 2004.
Halocarbons in aqueous matrices from the Rennick Glacier and the Ross Sea
(Antarctica). International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry 84

Jia, C.,Batterman, S.,Godwin, C.,Charles, S.,Chin, J. Y.. 2010. Sources and
migration of volatile organic compounds in mixed-use buildings. Indoor Air 20

Bravo-Linares, C. M.,Mudge, S. M.,Loyola-Sepulveda, R. H.. 2007. Occurrence
of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in Liverpool Bay, Irish Sea. Marine
Pollution Bulletin 54

Yamamoto, K.,Fukushima, M.,Kakutani, N.,Tsuruho, K.. 2001. Contamination
of vinyl chloride in shallow urban rivers in Osaka, Japan. Water Research 35

D'Souza, J. C.,Jia, C.,Mukheijee, B.,Batterman, S.. 2009. Ethnicity, housing
and personal factors as determinants of VOC exposures. Atmospheric Environ-
ment 43

-------
81

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring

Loh, M. M.,Houseman, E. A.,Gray, G. M.,Levy, J. I.,Spengler, J. D.,Bennett,
D. H.. 2006. Measured concentrations of VOCs in several non-residential mi-
cro environments in the United States. Environmental Science and Technology
40

Monitoring

Chin, J. Y.,Godwin, C.,Parker, E.,Robins, T.,Lewis, T.,Harbin, P.,Batterman,
S.. 2014. Levels and sources of volatile organic compounds in homes of children
with asthma. Indoor Air 24

Monitoring

Quack, B.,Suess, E.. 1999. Volatile halogenated hydrocarbons over the western
Pacific between 43 degrees and 4 degrees N. Journal of Geophysical Research:
Atmospheres 104

Monitoring

Plummer, L. N.,Sibrell, P. L.,Casile, G. C.,Busenberg, E.,Hunt, A. G.,Schlosser,
P.. 2013. Tracing groundwater with low-level detections of halogenated VOCs
in a fractured carbonate-rock aquifer, Leetown Science Center, West Virginia,
USA. Applied Geochemistry 33

Monitoring

W. R. Chan, S. Cohn, M. Sidheswaran, D. P. Sullivan, W. J. Fisk. 2014.
Contaminant levels, source strengths, and ventilation rates in California retail
stores. Indoor Air 25

Monitoring

Insogna, S.,Frison, S.,Marconi, E.,Bacaloni, A.. 2014. Trends of volatile chlori-
nated hydrocarbons and trihalomethanes in Antarctica. International Journal
of Environmental Analytical Chemistry 94

Monitoring
Monitoring

Ofstad, E. B.,Drangsholt, H.,Carlberg, G. E.. 1981. Analysis of volatile halo-
genated organic compounds in fish. Science of the Total Environment 20

Rogers, H. R.,Crathorne, B.,Watts, C. D.. 1992. Sources and fate of organic
contaminants in the Mersey estuary: Volatile organohalogen compounds. Ma-
rine Pollution Bulletin 24

Monitoring

Dawes, V. J.,Waldock, M. J.. 1994. Measurement of Volatile Organic Com-
pounds at UK National Monitoring Plan Stations. Marine Pollution Bulletin
28

Monitoring

Brown, T.,Dassonville, C.,Derbez, M.,Ramalho, 0.,Kirchner, S.,Crump,
D.,Mandin, C.. 2015. Relationships between socioeconomic and lifestyle factors
and indoor air quality in French dwellings. Environmental Research 140

Monitoring
Monitoring

Wallace, L. A.. 1987. The total exposure assessment methodology (TEAM)
study: Summary and analysis: Volume I. 1

Jain, R. B.. 2015. Levels of selected urinary metabolites of volatile organic
compounds among children aged 6-11 years. Environmental Research 142

-------
95

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Hartwell, T. D.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Perritt, R. L.,Whitmore, R. W.,Zelon, H.
S.,Wallace, L.. 1987. Comparison of volatile organic levels between sites and
seasons for the total exposure assessment methodology (team) study. Atmo-
spheric Environment 21

Christof, 0.,Seifert, R.,Michaelis, W.. 2002. Volatile halogenated organic com-
pounds in European estuaries. Biogeochemistry 59

Wiedmann, T. 0.,Guthner, B.,Class, T. J.,Ballschmiter, K.. 1994. GLOBAL
DISTRIBUTION OF TETRACHLOROETHENE IN THE TROPOSPHERE -
MEASUREMENTS AND MODELING. Environmental Science and Technology
28

Kiurski, J. S.,Oros, I. B.,Kecic, V. S.,Kovacevic, I. M.,Aksentijevic, S. M.. 2016.
The temporal variation of indoor pollutants in photocopying shop. Stochastic
Environmental Research and Risk Assessment 30

K. W. Tham, M. S. Zuraimi, S. C. Sekhar. 2004. Emission modelling and
validation of VOCs' source strengths in air-conditioned office premises. Envi-
ronment International 30

T. Hoang, R. Castorina, F. Gaspar, R. Maddalena, P. L. Jenkins, Q. Zhang,
T. E. Mckone, E. Benfenati, A. Y. Shi, A. Bradman. 2016. VOC exposures in
California early childhood education environments. Indoor Air 27

Dai, H.,Jing, S.,Wang, H.,Ma, Y.,Li, L.,Song, W.,Kan, H.. 2017. VOC charac-
teristics and inhalation health risks in newly renovated residences in Shanghai,
China. Science of the Total Environment 577

Ma, H.,Zhang, H.,Wang, L.,Wang, J.,Chen, J.. 2014. Comprehensive screening
and priority ranking of volatile organic compounds in Daliao River, China.
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 186

Bianchi, E.,Lessing, G.,Brina, K. R.,Angeli, L.,Andriguetti, N. B.,Peruzzo, J.
R.,Do Nascimento, C. A.,Spilki, F. R.,Ziulkoski, A. L.,da Silva, L. B.. 2017.
Monitoring the Genotoxic and Cytotoxic Potential and the Presence of Pesti-
cides and Hydrocarbons in Water of the Sinos River Basin, Southern Brazil.
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 72

Wittlingerova, Z.,Machackova, J.,Petruzelkova, A.,Zimova, M.. 2016. Occur-
rence of perchloroethylene in surface water and fish in ariver ecosystem affected
by groundwater contamination. Environmental Science and Pollution Research
23

Monitoring

Burton, W. C.,Harte, P. T.. 2013. Bedrock Geology and Outcrop Fracture
Trends in the Vicinity of the Savage Municipal Well Superfund Site, Milford,
New Hampshire.

-------
107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Blanco, S.,Becares, E.. 2010. Are biotic indices sensitive to river toxicants? A
comparison of metrics based on diatoms and macro-invertebrates. Chemosphere

Sidonia, V.,Haydee, K. M.,Ristoiu, D.,Luminita, S. D.. 2009. Chlorinated
solvents detection in soil and river water in the area along the paper factory
from Dej Town, Romania. Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai. Chemia 54

Zoccolillo, L.,Rellori, M.. 1994. Halocarbons in Antarctic surface waters. In-
ternational Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry 55

Amagai, T.,01ansandan„Matsushita, H.,Ono, M.,Nakai, S.,Tamura, K.,Maeda,
K.. 1999. A survey of indoor pollution by volatile organohalogen compounds
in Katsushika, Tokyo, Japan. Indoor and Built Environment 8

Focazio, M. J.,Kolpin, D. W.,Barnes, K. K.,Furlong, E. T.,Meyer, M. T.,Zaugg,
S. D.,Barber, L. B.,Thurman, M. E.. 2008. A national reconnaissance for phar-
maceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants in the United States—II)
untreated drinking water sources. Science of the Total Environment 402

Begerow, J.,Jermann, E.,Keles, T.,Freier, I.,Ranft, U.,Dunemann, L.. 1996.
Internal and external tetrachloroethene exposure of persons living in differently
polluted areas of Northrhine-Westphalia (Germany). Zentralblatt fuer Hygiene
und Umweltmedizin 198

Kawauchi, T.,Nishiyama, K.. 1989. Residual tetrachloroethylene in dry-cleaned
clothes. Environmental Research 48

Fielding, M.,Gibson, T. M.,James, H. A.. 1981. Levels of trichloroethylene,
tetrachloroethylene and para-dichlorobenzene in groundwaters. Environmental
Technology Letters 2

Minsley, B.. 1983. Tetrachloroethylene contamination of groundwater in Kala-
mazoo. Journal of the American Water Works Association 75

Coffin, R. R.,Witherell, L. E.,Novick, L. F.,Stone, K. M.. 1987. ESTABLISH-
MENT OF AN EXPOSURE LEVEL TO TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN
AMBIENT AIR IN VERMONT. Public Health Reports 102

Lee, W.,Park, S. H.,Kim, J.,Jung, J. Y.. 2015. Occurrence and removal of
hazardous chemicals and toxic metals in 27 industrial wastewater treatment
plants in Korea. Desalination and Water Treatment 54

Duclos, Y.,Blanchard, M.,Chesterikoff, A.,Chevreuil, M.. 2000. Impact of paris
waste upon the chlorinated solvent concentrations of the river Seine (France).
Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 117

Schwarzenbach, R. P.,Giger, W.,Hoehn, E.,Schneider, J. K.. 1983. Behavior
of organic compounds during infiltration of river water to groundwater. Field
studies. Environmental Science and Technology 17

-------
120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring

Cdc,. 2017. National report on human exposure to environmental chemicals.

Atsdr,. 2007. Public health assessment: Peninsula Boulevard groundwa-
ter plume town of Hempstead, Nassau County, New York: EPA facility ID:
NYN000204407.

Usgs,. 2006. Recent (2003-05) water quality of Barton Springs, Austin, Texas,
with emphasis on factors effecting variability.

Usgs,. 1994. Organic compounds downstream from a treated-wastewater dis-
charge near Dalls, Texas, March 1987.

Usgs,. 2006. Water-quality conditions of Chester Creek, Anchorage, Alaska,
1998-2001.

Usgs,. 2003. A national survey of methyl tert-butyl ether and other volatile
organic compounds in drinking-water sources: Results of the random survey.

Ak, D. E. C.. 2012. Wendell Avenue (MC cleaners).

Usgs,. 2009. Organic wastewater compounds, pharmaceuticals, and coliphage
in ground water receiving discharge from onsite wastewater treatment systems
near La Pine, Oregon: Occurrence and implications for transport.

Helz, G. R.,Hsu, R. Y.. 1978. Volatile chloro- and bromocarbons in coastal
waters. Limnology and Oceanography 23

Aggazzotti, G.,Predieri, G.. 1986. SURVEY OF VOLATILE HALOGENATED
ORGANICS (VHO) IN ITALY - LEVELS OF VHO IN DRINKING WATERS,
SURFACE WATERS AND SWIMMING POOLS. Water Research 20

Fytianos, K.,Vasilikiotis, G.,Weil, L.. 1985. Identification and determination of
some trace organic compounds in coastal seawater of Northern Greece. Bulletin
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 34

Hurford, N.,Law, R. J.,Payne, A. P.,Fileman, T. W.. 1989. Concentrations of
chemicals in the North Sea arising from discharges from chemical tankers. 5

Sauer, T. C.. 1981. Volatile organic compounds in open ocean and coastal
surface waters. Organic Geochemistry 3

Ec,. 2014. SINPHONIE: Schools Indoor Pollution and Health Observatory
Network in Europe.

Wetzel, T. A.. 2014. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) In Indoor Air:
Emission From Consumer Products and the Use of Plants for Air Sampling.

-------
136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Experimental

Won, D.,Corsi, R. L.,Rynes, M.. 2000. New indoor carpet as an adsorptive
reservoir for volatile organic compounds. Environmental Science and Technol-
ogy 34

Experimental

Wallace, L. A.,Pellizzari, E.,Leaderer, B.,Zelon, H.,Sheldon, L.. 1987. Emissions
of volatile organic compounds from building materials and consumer products.
Atmospheric Environment 21

Experimental

Tichenor, B. A.,Sparks, L. E.,Jackson, M. D.,Guo, Z.,Mason, M. A.,Plunket, C.
M.,Rasor, S. A.. 1990. Emissions of perchloroethylene from dry cleaned fabrics.
Atmospheric Environment 24

Experimental

Guo, Z. S.,Tichenor, B. A.,Mason, M. A.,Plunket, C. M.. 1990. The tempera-
ture dependence of the emission of perchloroethylene from dry cleaned fabrics.
Environmental Research 52

Experimental

Sack, T. M.,Steele, D. H.,Hammerstrom, K.,Remmers, J.. 1992. A survey of
household products for volatile organic compounds. Atmospheric Environment
26

Experimental

Fernandez, J.,Guberan, E.,Caperos, J.. 1976. Experimental human exposures
to tetrachloroethylene vapor and elimination in breath after inhalation. Amer-
ican Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 36

Experimental

Opdam, J. J.,Smolders, J. F.. 1987. Alveolar sampling and fast kinetics of
tetrachloroethene in man. II. Fast kinetics. Occupational and Environmental
Medicine 44

Experimental

Imbriani, M.,Ghittori, S.,Pezzagno, G.,Capodaglio, E.. 1988. Urinary excretion
of tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) in experimental and occupational ex-
posure. Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health 43

Experimental

Kreiling, J. A.,Stephens, R. E.,Reinisch, C. L.. 2005. A mixture of environmen-
tal contaminants increases cAMP-dependent protein kinase in Spisula embryos.
Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 19

Experimental

S. Kim, J. A. Kim, J. Y. An, H. J. Kim, S. D. Kim, J. C. Park. 2007.
TVOC and formaldehyde emission behaviors from flooring materials bonded
with environmental-friendly MF/PVAc hybrid resins. Indoor Air 17

Experimental

Kwon, K. iD,Jo, W.,Lim, H.,Jeong, W.. 2008. Volatile pollutants emitted
from selected liquid household products. Environmental Science and Pollution
Research 15

Experimental

Kowalska, J.,Szewczynska, M.,Posniak, M.. 2014. Measurements of chlorinated
volatile organic compounds emitted from office printers and photocopiers. En-
vironmental Science and Pollution Research 22

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

x
P:

2535652

265563O

2718034

35593H

3587655

4440489
444246O

4532343
4663242
4683353

4683358
468336O

4683366

Experimental

Experimental
Experimental

Experimental

Experimental
Experimental

Experimental

Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

484177

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

W. R. Chan, S. Cohn, M. Sidheswaran, D. P. Sullivan, W. J. Fisk. 2014.
Contaminant levels, source strengths, and ventilation rates in California retail
stores. Indoor Air 25

Kowalska, J.,Gierczak, T.. 2013. Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses of the
Halogenated Volatile Organic Compounds Emitted from the Office Equipment
Items. Indoor and Built Environment 22

M. Nohr, W. Horn, O. Jann, M. Richter, W. Lorenz. 2015. Development
of a multi-VOC reference material for quality assurance in materials emission
testing. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 407

Chao, C. Y. H.,Tung, T. C. W.,Niu, J. L.,Pang, S. W.,Lee, R. Y. M.. 1999.
Indoor perchloroethylene accumulation from dry cleaned clothing on residential
premises. Building and Environment 34

Cheng, W. enHsi,Tsai, D. Y.,Lu, J. iaYu,Lee, J. enWei. 2016. Extracting Emis-
sions from Air Fresheners Using Solid Phase Micro extraction Devices. Aerosol
and Air Quality Research 16

UL Env. 2017. Floor Coating VOC Emissions Research Report.

Wetzel, T. A.. 2014. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) In Indoor Air:
Emission From Consumer Products and the Use of Plants for Air Sampling.

C. B. Keil, M. Nicas. 2003. Predicting room vapor concentrations due to spills
of organic solvents. AIHA Journal 64

Won, D. Yang W.. 2012. Material emission information from: 105 building
materials and consumer products.

C Solal, C. Rousselle, C. Mandin, J. Manel, F. Maupetit. 2008. VOCs and
formaldehyde emissions from cleaning products and air fresheners. International
Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate (Indoor Air 2008)

A. T. Hodgson. 1999. Common indoor sources of volatile organic compounds:
Emission rates and techniques for reducing consumer exposures.

A. T. Hodgson. 2001. Predicted concentrations in new relocatable classrooms of
volatile organic compounds emitted from standard and alternate interior finish
materials.

A. C. Ortiz. 2010. Identifying sources of volatile organic compounds and alde-
hydes in a high performance building.

Jia, C. R.,D'Souza, J.,Batterman, S.. 2008. Distributions of personal VOC
exposures: A population-based analysis. Environment International 34

148

149

150

151

152

153

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

729385
1359400

3970H7
3970236
3970251
3970268
3981163
4663145

Completed Exposure Assessments

18169 Completed ExposureAssessment

226o6 Completed ExposureAssessment

23126 Completed Exposure Assessment

35002 Completed Exposure Assessment

58062 Completed Exposure Assessment

58284 Completed Exposure Assessment

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

Arif, A. A.,Shah, S. M.. 2007. Association between personal exposure to volatile 164

organic compounds and asthma among US adult population. International
Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 80

Staples, C. A.,Werner, A. F.,Hoogheem, T. J.. 1985. Assessment of priority 165

pollutant concentrations in the United States using STORET database. Envi-
ronmental Toxicology and Chemistry 4

U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical data reporting: 1,1,2,2,-tetrachloroethene. 166

Oppt Monitoring Database. 2017. Perchloroethylene. 167

Pubchem,. 2017. PubChem: Tetrachloroethylene. 168

Household Products, Database. 2017. Household products database: Chemical 169

information: Tetrachloroethylene.

Consumer Product Information, Database. 2017. What's in it? tetra- 170

chloroethylene.

Bartzis, J.. 2018. Prioritization of building materials as indoor pollution sources 171

(BUMA).

172

Page, G. W.. 1981. Comparison of groundwater and surface water for patterns 172

and levels of contamination by toxic substances. Environmental Science and
Technology 15

Ipcs,. 1984. Tetrachloroethylene. Environmental Health Criteria 31 173

Wallace, L. A.,Pellizzari, E.,Leaderer, B.,Zelon, H.,Sheldon, L.. 1987. Emissions 174

of volatile organic compounds from building materials and consumer products.

Atmospheric Environment 21

U.S, E. P. A.. 2001. Sources, emission and exposure for trichloroethylene (TCE) 175

and related chemicals.

Fuller, B. B.. 1976. Air pollution assessment of tetrachloroethylene. 176

Zoeteman, B. C. J.,Harmsen, K.,Linders, J. B. H. J.,Morra, C. F. H.,Slooff, 177

W.. 1980. Persistent organic pollutants in river water and ground water of the
Netherlands. Chemosphere 9

I92III

Completed Exposure Assessment

Atsdr,. 1997. Toxicological profile for tetrachloroethylene.

178

-------
179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Fishbein, L.. 1992. Exposure from occupational versus other sources. Scandi-
navian Journal of Work, Environment and Health 18

Duboudin, C.. 2010. Pollution inside the home: descriptive analyses Part II:
Identification of groups of homogenous homes in terms of pollution. Environ-
nement, Risques & Sante 9

Chien, Y. C.. 1997. The influences of exposure pattern and duration on elimina-
tion kinetics and exposure assessment of tetrachloroethylene in humans [PhD].

Letkiewicz, F.,Johnston, P.,Macaluso, C.,Elder, R.,Yu, W.. 1982. Occurrence
in tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) in drinking water, food and air.

Nysdoh,. 2005. Improving human risk assessment for tetrachloroethylene by
using biomakers and neurobehavioral testing.

Benignus, V. A.,Boyes, W. K.,Geller, A. M.,Bushnell, P. J.. 2009. Long-term
perchloroethylene exposure: A meta-analysis of neurobehavioral deficits in oc-
cupationally and residentially exposed groups. Journal of Toxicology and En-
vironmental Health, Part A: Current Issues 72

Destaillats, H.,Maddalena, R. L.,Singer, B. C.,Hodgson, A. T.,McKone, T. E..
2008. Indoor pollutants emitted by office equipment: A review of reported data
and information needs. Atmospheric Environment 42

C. J. Weschler. 2009. Changes in indoor pollutants since the 1950s. Atmo-
spheric Environment 43

Gilbert, D.,Goyer, M.,Lyman, W.,Magil, G.,Walker, P.,Wallace, D.,Wechsler,
A.,Yee, J.. 1982. An exposure and risk assessment for tetrachloroethylene.

Dawson, H. E.,McAlary, T.. 2009. A compilation of statistics for VOCs from
post-1990 indoor air concentration studies in North American residences unaf-
fected by subsurface vapor intrusion. Ground Water Monitoring and Remedia-
tion 29

Bogen, K. T.,McKone, T. E.. 1988. Linking indoor air and pharmacokinetic
models to assess tetrachloroethylene risk. Risk Analysis 8

. 1988. Toxic Air Pollutant Emission Factors Compilation For Selected Air
Toxic Compounds and Sources.

de Bias, M.,Navazo, M.,Alonso, L.,Durana, N.,Gomez, M. C.,Iza, J.. 2012.
Simultaneous indoor and outdoor on-line hourly monitoring of atmospheric
volatile organic compounds in an urban building. The role of inside and outside
sources. Science of the Total Environment 426

Du, Z.,Mo, J.,Zhang, Y.. 2014. Risk assessment of population inhalation expo-
sure to volatile organic compounds and carbonyls in urban China. Environment
International 73

-------
193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

L. Golsteijn, D. Huizer, M. Hauck, R. vanZelm, M. A. Huijbregts. 2014. Includ-
ing exposure variability in the life cycle impact assessment of indoor chemical
emissions: the case of metal degreasing. Environment International 71

. 2015. Health Assessment for Groundwater, Surface Water, Soil and Sediment

Data Evaluation, Corozal Well Site, Corozal, Puerto Rico, July 29, 2015. EPA
Facility ID: PRN000206452.

McDonald, G. J.,Wertz, W. E.. 2007. PCE, TCE, and TCA vapors in subslab
soil gas and indoor air: A case study in upstate New York. Ground Water
Monitoring and Remediation 27

Bauer, U.. 1991. OCCURRENCE OF TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN THE
FEDERAL-REPUBLIC-OF-GERMANY. Chemosphere 23

De Rooij, C.,Boutonnet, J. C.,Garny, V.,Lecloux, A.,Papp, R.,Thompson, R.
S.,Van Wijk, D.. 1998. Euro Chlor risk assessment for the marine environ-
ment OSPARCOM region: North sea - Tetrachloroethylene. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment 53

Giger, W.,Molnarkubica, E.. 1978. TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN CON-
TAMINATED GROUND AND DRINKING WATERS. Bulletin of Environ-
mental Contamination and Toxicology 19

Nicnas,. 2001. Tetrachloroethylene " Priority existing chemical. Assessment
Report No. 15.

Oecd,. 2013. Emission scenario document on the industrial use of adhesives for
substrate bonding.

U.S, E. P. A.. 2011. Background indoor air concentrations of volatile organic
compounds in North American residences (1990-2005): A compilation of statis-
tics for assessment vapor intrusion.

Ecb,. 2005. European Union risk assessment report: Tetrachloroethylene. Part
1 - Environment. 57

Australian Government Department of, Health. 2016. Human health tier III
assessment for l-methyl-2-pyrrolidinone.

U.S, E. P. A.. 2012. Toxicological review of tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethy-
lene).

U.S, E. P. A.. 1998. Cleaner technologies substitutes assessment for professional
fabricare processes.

ToxNet Hazardous Substances Data, Bank. 2017. HSDB: Tetrachloroethylene.
Echa,. 2014. Substance evaluation report - Tetrachloroethylene.

-------
208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Echa,. 2008. Annex XV restriction report: Tetrachloroethylene.

Spolana, a s. 2014. Chemical safety report: Trichloroethylene.

Domo Caproleuna GmbH. 2014. Chemical safety report: Industrial use as an
extractive solvent for the purification of caprolactam from caprolactam oil.

D. O. W. Deutschland. 2014. Chemical safety report: Industrial use as process
chemical (enclosed systems) in Alcantara material production.

Vlisco Netherlands, B. V.. 2014. Chemical safety report Part A: Use of
trichloroethylene as a solvent for the removal and recovery of resin from dyed
cloth.

Parker Hannifin, Manufacturing. 2014. Chemical safety report: Use of
trichloroethylene as a process solvent for the manufacturing of hollow fibre gas
separation membranes out of polyphenylene oxide (PPO).

. 2014. Exposure assessment: Trichloroethylene, Part 3.

Iarc,. 2014. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to
humans: Trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, and some other chlorinated
agents. 106

Atsdr,. 2006. Health consultation: Evaluation of tetrachloroethylene vapor
intrusion into buildings located above a contaminated aquifer: Schlage Lock
Company Security, El Paso County, Colorado: EPA facility ID: COD082657420.

Atsdr,. 2005. Health consultation: Walden"s Ridge utility district: Signal
Mountain, Hamilton County, Tennessee.

Atsdr,. 2008. Health consultation: Public comment release: Indoor and out-
door air data evaluation for Chillum perc site: Chillum perc site (aka Chillum
perchloroethylene): Chillum, Prince George County, Maryland: EPA facility
ID: MDN000305887.

Carex, Canada. 2017. Tetrachloroethylene—Environmental estimate.

Carex, Canada. 2017. Tetrachloroethylene—Environmental estimate: Indoor
air.

Who,. 2006. WHO IRIS: Tetrachloroethylene.

Atsdr,. 2011. Case studies in environmental medicine: tetrachloroethylene
toxicity.

Environment Canada, Health Canada. 1993. Canadian Environmental protec-
tion act priority substances list assessment report tetrachloroethylene.

-------
224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

241

INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

European Chlorinated Solvents, Association. 2011. Health profile on per-
chloro ethylene.

Oehha,. 2001. Public health goal for tetrachloroethylene in drinking water.

Arb,. 1991. Proposed identification of perchloroethylene as a toxic air contam-
inant.

Carb,. 1991. Technical support document part A: Proposed identification of
perchloroethylene as a toxic air contaminant.

Carb,. 1991. Technical support document part B: Proposed identification of
perchloroethylene as a toxic air contaminant.

P. E. I. Associates. 1985. Asbestos dust control in brake maintenance. Draft.

Ec,. 2004. European Union risk assessment report: Tetrachloroethylene.

Wu,,et al.,. 2001. Sources, emissions and exposures for trichloroethylene (TCE)
and related chemicals.

Herbert, P.,Charbonnier, P.,Rivolta, L.,Servais, M.,Van Mensch, F.,Campbell,
I.. 1986. The occurrence of chlorinated solvents in the environment. Prepared
by a workshop of the European Chemical Industry Federation (CEFIC). Chem-
istry and Industry 24

Delmaar, J. E.. Emission of chemical substances from solid matrices: a method
for consumer exposure assessment.

Survey
Survey
Survey

Survey

U.S, E. P. A.. 1987. Household solvent products: A national usage survey.

Abt. 1992. Methylene chloride consumer use study survey findings.

Wang, S.,Majeed, M. A.,Chu, P.,Lin, H.. 2009. Characterizing relationships be-
tween personal exposures to VOCs and socioeconomic, demographic, behavioral
variables. Atmospheric Environment 43

Farrow, A.,Taylor, H.,Northstone, K.,Golding, J.,A von Longitudinal, Study.
2003. Symptoms of mothers and infants related to total volatile organic com-
pounds in household products. Archives of Environmental Health 58

Modeling

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

85812

2494965

3001596

Modeling

Park, J. H.,Spengler, J. D.,Yoon, D. W.,Dumyahn, T.,Lee, K.,Ozkaynak, H..
1998. Measurement of air exchange rate of stationary vehicles and estimation
of in-vehicle exposure. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epi-
demiology 8

Akita, Y.,Carter, G.,Serre, M. L.. 2007. Spatiotemporal nonattainment assess-
ment of surface water tetrachloroethylene in New Jersey. Journal of Environ-
mental Quality 36

Olie, J. D.,Bessems, J. G.,Clewell, H. J.,Meulenbelt, J.,Hunault, C. C.. 2015.
Evaluation of semi-generic PBTK modeling for emergency risk assessment after
acute inhalation exposure to volatile hazardous chemicals. Chemosphere 132

242

243

244

4440489

Modeling

UL Env. 2017. Floor Coating VOC Emissions Research Report.

245

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Refer to Appendix E of 'Application of Systematic Review in TSCA Risk Evaluations' at https://www.epa.gov for more information of evaluation
procedures and parameters.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Pellizzari, E. D.,Wallace, L. A.,Gordon, S. M.. 1992. Elimination kinetics of volatile organics in humans using breath

measurements. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 5405

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

Sampling methodology detailed in separate reference which we
don't have. Upgradable upon examination of reference.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
Medium

1
3
3

>20 years old
Only 4 subj ects

Provided consumer products used, but not names or active
ingredients.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
High

1
1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

limited discussion

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Clayton, C. A.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Whitmore, R. W.,Perritt, R. L.,Quackenboss, J. J.. 1999. National Human Exposure Assess-
ment Survey (NHEXAS): Distributions and associations of lead, arsenic, and volatile organic compounds in EPA Region 5.
Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 14003

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High 1 Sampling methodologies explained in detail in other papers

High 1 Analytical methodologies explained in detail in other papers.

N/A N/A air samples

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

>15 years ago
Large sample size

Indoor air, but not directly related to consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

No raw, no minimum.

Supplemental articles on QA/QC activities of project..

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wallace, L. A.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Hartwell, T. D.,Sparacino, C. M.,Sheldon, L. S.,Zelon, H.. 1985. Results from the first
three seasons of the TEAM study: personal exposures, indoor-outdoor relationships, and breath levels of toxic air pollutants
measured for 355 persons in New Jersey.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 21469

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology
Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

High 1

Medium 2

N/A

Standard sampling method not mentioned. Air - Tenax, pump
flow rates, 12 hr period; Breath - spirometer; No info on sample
storage, duration prior to analysis. Field blanks conducted.
GC/MS/COMP. Only very limited detailes provided. Recov-
eries provided, but no other discussion on calibration.

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

30 yrs old

~4^

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High

Large sample size, duplicates

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

Indoor air, but not specific to a product

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

Only GM, mean, and max provided. No raw data.

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

High

Dups, field blanks, lab blanks, controls

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.6

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Aggazzotti, G.,Fantuzzi, G.,Predieri, G.,Righi, E.,Moscardelli, S.. 1994. Indoor exposure to perchloroethylene (PCE) in

individuals living with dry-cleaning workers. Science of the Total Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 21778

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Medium
High

N/A

2
1

N/A

Sampling protocol is described in detail.

Analytical methods are described, and calibration and detec-
tion limits are given.

Biomarker not used for alveolar/breath sampling

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High

High

1
3
1

Presumed to be Modena, Italy

Data collected prior to publication in 1994 (15+ years)
Breath samples from both exposed and control populations,
replicate indoor air samples from 30 households
Consumer indoor air exposure measured by indoor air concen-
trations and breath samples

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Summary statistics only

Quality assurance is not directly discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of variability between different members of
same household

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Heavner, D. L.,Morgan, W. T.,Ogden, M. W.. 1995. Determination of volatile organic compounds and ETS apportionment

in 49 homes. Environment International.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 22045

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low
N/A

N/A

Flow rate provided. No calibration mentioned. Field blanks
used.

No LOD/LOQ.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

Samples collected in 1991

Indoor air in residence, but not directly tied to a consumer
product, but list of potential products listed.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data. No percent detected,
field blanks, no recoveries

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

SD. compared results between smokers and non smokers.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Lebret, E.,van de Wiel, H. J.,Bos, H. P.,Noij, D.,Boleij, J. s. M.. 1986. Volatile organic compounds in Dutch homes.

Environment International.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 22186

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low
N/A

N/A

sampling method is well explained, but no discussion of storage
conditions and calibration.

calibration, DT, recovery samples are not mentioned.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

>15 yrs old

Indoor air study, but not consumer products specific.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

range, mean, deta frequency are provided, but no raw data,
no QA/QC is discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

discussion of variability/uncertainty is quite limited.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wallace, L. A.. 1986. Personal exposures, indoor and outdoor air concentrations, and exhaled breath concentrations of
selected volatile organic compounds measured for 600 residents of New Jersey, North Dakota, North Carolina, and California.
Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 23081

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology
Metric 2: Analytical Methodology
Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

High
High
High

1
1
1

breath

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

>15 yrs old

indoor air study, but not analysis for consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

no raw data

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.4

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Chan, C. C.,Vainer, L.,Martin, J. W.,Williams, D. T.. 1990. Determination of organic contaminants in residential indoor air

using an adsorption-thermal desorption technique.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 27974

Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association.

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology

Medium

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium

N/A

Sampling methodology discussed. At each of 12 homes the fol-
lowing samples were collected in November or December 1986:
four indoor air samples, of varying volumes, using single sor-
bent tube and one indoor air sample using two sorbent tubes
connected in series. Repeat samplings were carried out at six
of these homes in February or March, 1987. The indoor air
samples were collected on the main floor of the home, usually
in the living or family room, where no obvious sources of con-
tamination were present. Indoor air samples were collected at
the same time, usually in the evening or late afternoon where
a uniform 90-minute sampling time was used and pump flow
rates were adjusted to sample the required volume of air. Air
volumes sampled varied from 5 to 50 L. After sample collec-
tion the sorbent tubes were sealed in individual screw cap glass
tubes and then stored in a tightly sealed container until ana-
lyzed.

Analytical methodology discussed. Samples were analyzed us-
ing adsorption/Thermal Desorption coupled with Gas Chro-
matography/Mass Spectrometry (ATD/GS/MS). Method De-
tection Limit (ng/tube) provided in Table I; 6.0 ng/tube for
DCM, TCE and PERC. Analysis was carried out within two
days of sampling.

Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

Medium

1 Canada

3 >15 years (1986„ 1987)

2 large sample (60 indoor air samples collected 1986: 4 samples
using single sorbent tube and 1 sample using two sorbent tubes
connected in a series and 12 homes, so 5x12=60 and 30 indoor
air samples collected 1987 at 6 homes: 5x6=30).

2 Some discussion of exposure scenario, samples collected on

main floor of the home usually in living room or family room
where no source of contamination was present.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: Chan, C. C.,Vainer, L.,Martin, J. W.,Williams, D. T.. 1990. Determination of organic contaminants in residential indoor air

using an adsorption-thermal desorption technique. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 27974

Domain Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No supplemental or raw data. Tables II and III report indoor
air concentrations (range and mean) for 12 homes during 1986
and 6 homes during 1987, respectively.

A blank sorbent tube was carried to and from each home and
handled and analyzed as a sample, except that no air was sam-
pled through the tube. Each week, three tubes fortified at a low
level (approx 70-80 ng) and three tubes fortified at a medium
level (approx 700- 800 ng) with a standard mixture of target
compounds, together with a blank tube, were transported to
and from one sampling site and analyzed by ATD/GC/MS.
To assess the stability of the organic target compounds dur-
ing storage of the sampling tube, triplicate sorbent tubes for-
tified with the target compounds at low and medium levels
(approx 70-80 and 700-800 ng, respectively), together with a
blank tube, were stored for 0,1,3 and 7 days under normal stor-
age conditions and then analyzed by ATD/GC/MS.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Since concentrations of contaminants can vary greatly, effec-
tive use of the technique requires that several air samples of
different volumes be collected at each location.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Hisham, M. W. M.,Grosjean, D.. 1991. Sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, total reduced sulfur, chlorinated hydrocarbons and

photochemical oxidants in southern California museums. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 28104

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Medium 2 Sampling methodology discussed. Chlorinated hydrocarbons

(e.g., PERC) were measured at one museum in the Los Ange-
les area: the Gene Autry Western Heritage Museum (located
between Griffin Park and Burbank). Measurements were car-
ried out over a period of 2 weeks. Indoor air quality was sur-
veyed at several (typically five) locations within each museum
including exhibit galleries, collection storage areas, and other
settings such as a research library. Chlorinated hydrocarbons
were measured on-line using calibrated continuous analyzers.
All analyzers were outfitted with two 1/4 in diameter Teflon
sampling lines. Data were acquired around-the-clock every 30
min, yielding alternatively indoor and outdoor air concentra-
tions..

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 Analytical methodology discussed. Chlorinated hydrocarbons

were measured by electron capture gas chromatography (EC-
GC) as described earlier (Hisham and Grosjean, 1989; Williams
and Grosjean, 1989, 1990) using a SRI model 8610 gas chro-
matograph equipped with a Valco 140 BN EC detector. For
the chlorinated hydrocarbons, precisely metered amounts of
the pure liquids were injected in a 1.00 m 3 Teflonlined con-
tainer. Our EC-GC calibration data for chlorinated hydrocar-
bons were independently verified by analyzing a standard mix-
ture prepared and calibrated in the laboratory of Dr R. Ras-
mussen (Oregon Graduate Center, Beaverton, OR). This mix-
ture, contained in a passivated stainless steel conister, included
0.5-1.1 ppb each of some 15 halogenated hydrocarbons. Anal-
ysis of this mixture in our laboratory gave excellent agreement
for C2C14 (corresponding to nominal and measured response
factors of 0.042 and 0.041 ppb mm-1, respectively. Analysis
of the 15-compound mixture also enabled us to verify that
none of these compounds interfered with PAN, CH3CCI 3 or
C2C14 under our experimental conditions (Hisham and Gros-
jean, 1990). Detection limit was 0.1 ppb for tetrachloroethy-
lene (PERC)

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area High 1 California, Los Angeles area at the Gene Autry Western Her-

itage Museum.

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

continued from previous page

Study Citation: Hisham, M. W. M.,Grosjean, D.. 1991. Sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, total reduced sulfur, chlorinated hydrocarbons and

photochemical oxidants in southern California museums. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 28104

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score

Comments*

Metric 5: Currency Low

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario Medium

3 >15 years (1989)

2 At the Gene Autry Museum, our survey yielded some 600 data
points each for PAN, CH3CC13 and C2C 1 , all from EC-GC
measurements. These pollutants were ubiquitous and could
be detected at all indoor locations. Summarized in Table !
are maximum concentrations and the corresponding range of
24-h averages.. Note: both indoor and outdoor samples were
collected.

2 At the Gene Autry Museum, measurement of indoor pollutants
were made at three locations, one in the museum exhibit area
(Trail View Window), one in a hallway connected to the outside
by a large roll-up door for truck deliveries, (the 'buffer zone')
and one in a working area, the Conservation Room, which was
near the buffer zone and connected to it by a small hallway
and swing doors. The exhibit area was connected to the mu-
seum main HVAC system, and the buffer zone and Conserva-
tion Room were both connected to a smaller HVAC system.

Both HVAC units were equipped with 50: 50 carbon-Carusorb
chemical filtration. Each indoor location exhibited a different
pattern with respect to indoor pollutant concentrations.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

No supplemental or raw data provided. Table 1 summarizes
maximum concentrations and ranges of 24-h average concen-
trations at the Gene Autry Museum. Indoor air concentrations
reported for PERC (C2C14). Also Table 4 reports twenty-four
hour averaged PERC (C2C14) at the Gene Autry Museum .
Calibration data for the EC-GC all exhibited linear behavior
(R >0.998) in the range of concentrations tested, i.e. 0.7-9ppb
for CzCI4,. The corresponding detection limit was 0.1 ppb for
tetrachloroethylene.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: Hisham, M. W. M.,Grosjean, D.. 1991. Sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, total reduced sulfur, chlorinated hydrocarbons and

photochemical oxidants in southern California museums. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 28104

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Indoor levels of ozone, NO 2 and PAN were substantially lower
than outdoor levels when the roll-up door was closed, see Fig.
1. The opposite was true of the chlorinated hydrocarbons,
(also shown in Fig. 1), thus pointing out to indoor sources of
methyl chloroform and tetrachloroethylene. Indoor sources of
chlorinated hydrocarbons have also been identified at six of the
nine institutions included in our previous study (Hisham and
Grosjean, 1989).

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Thomas, K. W.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Perritt, R. L.,Nelson, W. C.. 1991. Effect of dry-cleaned clothes on tetrachloroethylene
levels in indoor air, personal air, and breath for residents of several New Jersey homes. Journal of Exposure Analysis and
Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 28307

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low
N/A

N/A

Sampling methodology is described with some details; no men-
tion of sample storage.

Analysis methods only briefly described
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High

High

1
3
1

Nine homes in New Jersey

Study conducted prior to 1991 (15+ years ago)

Replicate samples, appropriate timing for biomonitoring
(breath) samples, repeated sampling over scenario time
Consumer inhalation exposure via dry-cleaned clothes, mea-
sured by indoor air/breath concentrations

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

Results reported in summary/chart form, not raw data

Quality control and assurance discussed; field blanks, two in-
dependent labs for analysis

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variability and uncertainty discussed with respect to garment
types and other factors affecting emissions

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ferrario, J. B.,Lawler, G. C.,Deleon, I. R.,Laseter, J. L.. 1985. Volatile organic pollutants in biota and sediments of Lake

Pontchartrain. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 28993

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium

N/A

2
2

N/A

sampling method is described well, calibration is not refered.

Analysis method is based onNational Bureau of Standards pro-
cedure though, modified ver. Older method (1976).

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
Low

1
3
3
3

>15 yrs old

sample size is quite small.

study of oysters/clams is off PECO.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data.

Blanks and calibration standards used, in addition internal
standards, however results not reported.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No dicsussion for variability/uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.3

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 Lhe overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Singh, H. B.,Salas, L. J.,Stiles, R. E.. 1983. Selected man-made halogenated chemicals in the air and oceanic environment.

Journal of Geophysical Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 29192

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Low

N/A

sampling method, equipments are discribed. But there is time
lag(3 - 6weeks) between sampling and analysis, experimental
protocol is provided in another reference(singh 1982).

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

High

>15 yrs old

Sufficient sample size(About 40). These samples are collected
in various dates, sites, and depth. But no replicate samples.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

Dataset is well summarized. But no raw data is showed(just
average value). The meaning of hyphen is not explained.

QA is described a bit like calibration, standards though, dis-
cussion is quite limited.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Comparison of measured values and predicted values is de-
scribed though, limited discussion.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: M. R. Van Winkle, P. A. Scheff. 2001. Volatile organic compounds, poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and elements in the air

of ten urban homes. Indoor Air.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 31210

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium 2 Sampling methodology discussed under Study Design.

High 1 The canisters were analyzed in accordance with the U.S. EPA

Compendium Method TO-14 by Gas Chromatography with Se-
lected Ion Monitoring Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS).
N/A N/A Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Low 3

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium 2

Exposure Scenario Medium 2

U.S., Southeast Chicago, IL

>15 yrs (1994-1995)

large sample size (48 samples see Table 1) no replicates?

The questionnaire was designed to measure variables that
may influence pollutant penetration, dispersion, and source
strength. Potential influencing variables that were measured
included household activity levels, household chemical sources,
and factors that could affect ventilation. Specific variables in-
cluded foods cooked, cleaners used during sampling, visitors
during sampling, noticeable odors by occupant, chemicals used
by occupant, window open status, and air-conditioning use.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium 2 No supplemental or raw data. Summary stats for indoor air
provided in Table 1.

Medium 2 Quality assurance was performed on the indoor data by the

Illinois Department of Public Health. VOC, PAH, and elemen-
tal concentrations that were qualified as quantified (> 10 times
the mean blank concentration) and estimated (between 3 and
10 times the mean blank concentration) were included in the
data analyses.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: M. R. Van Winkle, P. A. Scheff. 2001. Volatile organic compounds, poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and elements in the air

of ten urban homes. Indoor Air.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 31210

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

See Discussion section. Indoor VOC concentrations were
highly variable. Similar to the TEAM study, the range of in-
door VOC concentrations were within a factor of 10 to 1000.
As indicated in Table 1, the indoor VOC concentrations, with
the exception of methylene chloride, are generally comparable
to the other studies

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Lehmann, I.,Thoelke, A.,Rehwagen, M.,Rolle-Kampczyk, U.,Schlink, U.,Schulz, R.,Borte, M.,Diez, U.,Herbarth, O.. 2002.

The influence of maternal exposure to volatile organic compounds on the cytokine secretion profile of neonatal T cells.
Environmental Toxicology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 34460

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
High

2
2
1

Sampling methods and equipment are described.

A GC-MS method was described with detection lmits provided.

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

Data collected >15 years old
No replicates.

Indoor air measured in children's bedrooms.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

Summary statistics provided with description of data set, range
of concentrations, and number of samples in data set only.

Quality assurance is not directly discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No discussion on variability but limitations were discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Singh, H. B.,Salas, L. J.,Smith, A. J.,Shigeishi, H.. 1981. Measurements of some potentially hazardous organic chemicals in

urban environments. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 39644

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low
Low
N/A

3
3

N/A

Sampling described in very general terms
Analysis done in field
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
Low

1
3
3
3

Three sites: Los Angeles, Phoenix, Oakland

Data collected prior to 1980 (15+ years ago)

"Large amount of data", but number of samples not specified

Outdoor ambient air concentrations for various chemicals in-
cluding PERC; not currently scenario of interest

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Summary data only

No specific discussion of quality control/assurance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No specific discussion of uncertainty/variability with regards
to PERC

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.7

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ahlers, J.,Regelmann, J. ,Riedhammer, C.. 2003. Environmental risk assessment of airborne trichloroacetic acid - acontribution

to the discussion on the significance of anthropogenic and natural sources. Chemosphere.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 42715

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Unacceptable

N/A

N/A
N/A

Sampling methods not described
Unacceptable for other metrics
Unacceptable for other metrics

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

N/A
N/A
N/A

Unacceptable

N/A
N/A
N/A
4

Unacceptable for other metrics
Unacceptable for other metrics
Unacceptable for other metrics

Study discussed concentrations in soil, rainwater, and plants -
none of these are scenarios of interest

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

N/A
N/A

Unacceptable for other metrics
Unacceptable for other metrics

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Unacceptable for other metrics

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 4.0.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Austin, J.. 2003. Day-of-week patterns in toxic air contaminants in southern California. Journal of the Air and Waste
Management Association.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 47782

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

N/A N/A Data taken from public database (CARB TAC)

N/A N/A No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
N/A
Low

1
3

N/A
3

TAC sites throughout California

Data collected between 1989-2001 (15+ years ago)

Data taken from public database (CARB TAC)

Study looks at weekly variations in ambient outdoor air con-
centration - not currently scenario of interest

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

Summary data included in document

Data taken from public database (CARB TAC)

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Study examines temporal variability

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation:

Ryan, T. J.,Hart, E. M.,Kappler, L. L.

. 2002. VOC exposures in a mixed-use university art building. AIHA Journal.

Data Type

Monitoring

Hero ID

49414

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology High 1

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Gave sampling details. Samples refrigerated and analyzed
within 2 weeks.

Methods well described, but info such as calibration, blanks,
and recoveries were not provided.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Low 3

Spatial and Temporal Variability High 1

Exposure Scenario High 1

>15 yrs

18 to 90 samples

personal monitoring in printing studio at university (relevant
to high-end hobbyist)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results Medium 2 No raw data. Missing the range, but has average, median and

AD.

Metric 9; Quality Assurance Low 3 Used the Qedit function for accuracy and precision, but was

not described. Blanks not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10; Variability and Uncertainty High 1 Discussion different locations of building, compared to other

studies, provided SD.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium 1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Serrano-Trespalacios, P. I.,Ryan, L.,Spengler, J. D.. 2004. Ambient, indoor and personal exposure relationships of volatile

organic compounds in Mexico City metropolitan area. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 56224

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

Detailed sampling methodology, except no storage duration or
calibration procedures reported.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

Over 15 years old
Over 90 individuals

Indoor air samples not linked to specific consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

No raw, missing minimum

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Comparison to other studies.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Dowty, B. J.,Carlisle, D. R.,Laseter, J. L.. 1975. New Orleans drinking water sources tested by gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry: Occurrence and origin of aromatics and halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Environmental Science and
Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 58056

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low

Unacceptable
Medium

Appears to be only a single sample

source water is media of interest, but not finished water

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

No raw, data
little discussion

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.3.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ewing, B. B.,Chian, E. S. K.,Cook, J. C.,Evans, C. A.,Hopke, P. K.,Perkins, E. G.. 1977. Monitoring to detect previously

unrecognized pollutants in surface waters.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 58060

Domain

Metric

Rating"

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

Government paper so assumed use of appropriate methods.

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

Analytical methodology is described and discussed.

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

sw samples

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

>15 years

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Unacceptable

No concentrations; qualitative. Additional data in Progress

Reports.

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

SW samples collected.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Unacceptable

No concentrations provided.

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Low

No discussion on QA.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No variability or discussion on uncertainties.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.7.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk, Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ohta, T.,Morita, M.,Mizoguchi, I.. 1976. Local distribution of chlorinated hydrocarbons in the ambient air in Tokyo. Atmo-
spheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 58091

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low

Medium

N/A

3
2

N/A

Sampling procedures are described very generally
Analytical methods and equipment are given
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High
Low
Medium

1
3

Tokyo, Japan

Data collected in 1975 (40+ years ago)

Sampling at 26 locations monthly for 1 year; no replicate sam-
ples

Study is looking at ambient outdoor air concentrations in ur-
ban environment; not current scenario of interest

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Low

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Summary data only

No specific mention of quality control or assurance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of variability due to sampling locations and
changing weather conditions

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.3

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 Lhe overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Singh, H. B.,Salas, L. J.,Cavanagh, L. A.. 1977. Distribution, sources and sinks of atmospheric halogenated compounds.

Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 58111

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium 2 Sampling procedures are given, though more detail for ambient

air than surface water samples
High 1 Analytical methods and equipment are given in detail

N/A N/A No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

Medium

1
3

Field studies conducted in California

Article published in 1977 (40+ years ago)

Sampling at two sites, one week each. Not clear how many

samples were taken

A concentration is given for PERC in ocean water

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

Summary data only

Some indications of quality control procedures in analysis de-
scription

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Study examined variability between more and less urban loca-
tions

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Howie, S.J..
Data Type Monitoring
Hero ID 58127

1981. Ambient perchloroethylene levels inside

coin-operated laundries with dry cleaning machines on the premises.

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Analytical methods discussed in Section 5
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

Six laundries in Washington DC
Data collected in 1980 (15+ years ago)

Large number of replicate samples

Consumer inhalation exposure via dry-cleaned clothes at laun-
dry facilities, measured by indoor concentrations

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
High

1
1

Raw data provided in Appendix B as well as summary data
Quality assurance discussed in section 7

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variability and uncertainty are discussed

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Aggazzotti, G.,Fantuzzi, G.,Righi, E.,Predieri, G.,Gobba, F. M.,Paltrinieri, M.,Cavalleri, A.. 1994. Occupational and envi-
ronmental exposure to perchloroethylene (PCE) in dry cleaners and their family members. Archives of Environmental and
Occupational Health.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 74875

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Medium
High

N/A

2
1

N/A

Sampling protocol is described in detail.

Analytical methods are described, and calibration and detec-
tion limits are given.

Biomarker not used for alveolar/breath sampling

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High

High

1
3
1

Modena, Italy

Data collected prior to publication in 1994 (15+ years)

Breath samples from both exposed and control populations,
replicate indoor air samples from 30+ households
Consumer indoor air exposure measured by indoor air concen-
trations and breath samples

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Summary statistics only

Quality assurance is not directly discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Some discussion of variability between different times of day,
control vs exposed groups

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Murray, A. J.,Riley, J. P.. 1973. Occurrence of some chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons in the environment. Nature.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 75108

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Unacceptable

Low

N/A

4
3

N/A

sampling methods, equipments, and any other information are
missed.

GC-ECD is used, calibration, LOD, recovery samples are not
described.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

>15 yrs old

sample size is moderate(6 sample), no replicate samples,
samples are collected from the North East Atlantic.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

No raw data.
No description of QA/QC.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

no discussion of variability/Uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.7.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk, Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kostiainen, R.. 1995. Volatile organic compounds in the indoor air of normal and sick houses. Atmospheric Environment.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 76241

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

Sampling methods are described in detail

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

High

Analytical methods are given in detail, including calibration
and detection limits

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Not given, but assume Finland based on laboratory location

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

Data collected prior to publication in 1994 (15+ years)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

More than 10 locations selected as both normal and "sick"
houses, but collection period not given and no mention of repli-
cates

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

High

Consumer exposure through indoor air concentration

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

Data mostly presented as summary statistics; some raw data
given to illustrate particular cases

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Low

Quality assurance is not directly discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

High

Discussion of how a variety of building and furnishing materials
affects indoor air quality

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Lindstrom, A. B.,Proffitt, D.,Fortune, C. R.. 1995. Effects of modified residential construction on indoor air quality. Indoor
Air.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 78782

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low
N/A

N/A

tenax, stated followed epa guidelines. Described sampled
homes.

HPLC and provided MDLs, but did not describe the HPLC.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

>15 yrs
10 homes

testing conditions well described (housing characteristics).
Only one geographic location.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

only geometric means provided. No SD, range.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No SD or CV. described differences between conventional and
experimental homes, no discussion of uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.3

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Schwarzenbach, R. P.,Molnar-Kubica, E.,Giger, W.,Wakeham, S. G.. 1979. Distribution, residence time, and fluxes of tetra-

chloroethylene and 1,4-dichlorobenzene in Lake Zurich, Switzerland. Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 94461

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Medium

N/A

Sampling information is provided.

Analytical methods are described (gas stripping, chromatogra-
phy) but instrument calibration not discussed

Study looks at PERC levels in surface water; no biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

High

1
3

Lake Zurich, Switzerland

Sampling done in 1977-78 (15+ years)

Samples collected in different months throughout year to com-
pare different lake conditions. Some replicate samples.

Surface water in lake; sources identified as sewage treatment
plants

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Raw data not provided; summary of PERC concentration data
in samples given as charts (Fig 2)

Quality assurance implied through standard protocols

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability is characterized for some but not all samples; un-
certainties are identified

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Weissflog, L.,Elansky, N.,Putz, E.,Krueger, G.,Lange, C. A.,Lisitzina, L.,Pfennigsdorff, A.. 2004. Trichloroacetic acid in the

Data Type
Hero ID

vegetation of polluted and remote areas of both hemispheres ¦

Atmospheric Environment.

Monitoring

104106

Part II: Salt lakes as novel sources of natural chlorohydrocarbons.

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium

N/A

Sampling methodology is described and discussed, besides,
some infomation of equipments or sampling strage conditions
are missed.

Analytical methodology is described and discussed, besides,
some information of instruments or recovery samples are
missed.

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Low 3

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium 2

Exposure Scenario Medium 2

>15yrs

less discuss an use of replicate samples.
The information of surface water is discribed.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

2 raw data, less information of summary of data

3 no discussion

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2 uncertainty is discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Sexton, K.,Adgate, J. L.,Church, T. R.,Ashley, D. L.,Needham, L. L.,Ramachandran, G.,Fredrickson, A. L.,Ryan, A. D.. 2005.

Children's exposure to volatile organic compounds as determined by longitudinal measurements in blood. Environmental
Health Perspectives.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 632064

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High 1

Medium 2
N/A N/A

collected by trained phlebotimist

analyzed at CDC using GS MS. Few details provided.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

Samples in 2000
Large sample size

Not directly related to consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data. Missing SD

Quality control was established by using two separate quality
control materials, of which at least one was analyzed daily.
Blood levels for the control pools were compared with pre-
viously established 99 percent confidence limits. Among the
additional data validity checks were examination of gas chro-
matography retentio time, analyte accurate mass, and instru-
ment sensitivity, as well as comparison of mass ratios bwith
known standards.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Adgate, J. L.,Church, T. R.,Ryan, A. D.,Ramachandran, G.,Fredrickson, A. L.,Stock, T. H.,Morandi, M. T.,Sexton, K.. 2004.

Outdoor, indoor, and personal exposure to VOCs in children. Environmental Health Perspectives.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 632310

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low

N/A

storage conditions and durations not provided

Did not actually provide the detection limit, although the did

discuss how they handled LOD values.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
High

1
3
1
1

>15 years old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

High
Medium

no recoveries

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No CV

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ohura, L.,Amagai, L.,Senga, Y.,Fusaya, M.. 2006. Organic air pollutants inside and outside residences in Shimizu, Japan:

Levels, sources and risks. Science of the Total Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 632484

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium

N/A

2
2

N/A

no storage duration, passive samplers

passive sampling were linearly correlated with the concentra-
tions measured by active sampling, calibration not discussed.
Good recoveries.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
High

1
3
1
1

japan
>15 yrs

24 hr samples, large sample size

Questionairre on Selected sociodemographic characteristics
and exposure- related attributes

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

No individual samples.

lab and field blanks, recoveries

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Assessed factors influences exposures

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 Lhe overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Zuraimi, M. S.,Tham, K. W.. 2008. Effects of child care center ventilation strategies on volatile organic compounds of indoor

and outdoor origins. Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 632758

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology High 1 Sampling methodology discussed. For each CCC, an indoor

(main classroom) and an outdoor sampling point were ran-
domly selected for simultaneous air sampling. Indoor sam-
plings were performed in the middle of the classroom near
the breathing zone of children (approximately 0.5"0.7 m). De-
signed to evaluate the "typical" levels of VOCs to which the
preschool children in each CCC are exposed, samplings were
conducted in the middle of the week and during the day from 8
am to 5 pm (sampling interval of 9 h). For noncarbonyls, VOCs
were actively sampled using a sampling pump (AP Buck Inc.)
onto preconditioned Tenax TA sorbent tubes. Duplicate flow
rates were set at 5 and 10 mLmin-1. For carbonyls, duplicate
air samples were pumped through DNPH cartridges (Supelco)
using another sampling pump at flow rates of 0.5 and 1 L min-
1. Flow rates were measured before and after sampling using
the mini Buck airflow calibrator (AP Buck Inc.). Details of
the sample collection, analysis and QA/QC can be found in
the Supporting Information.

Metric 2; Analytical Methodology Medium 2 Analytical methodology discussed. The sampled VOCs on

Tenax tubes were desorbed using an automated thermal des-
orber (Perkin-Elmer), separated using a gas chromatograph
(Agilent) and analyzed using a mass selective detector (Agi-
lent). For carbonyls, the analytes were eluted using acetoni-
trile and analyzed using a high performance liquid chromatog-
raphy equipped with a diode array detector (Agilent). For
every CCC, a field and laboratory blank is employed. VOCs
with measured values lower than their method detection limit
(MDL) were assigned to a value half of the MDL. Details of
the sample collection, analysis and QA/QC can be found in
the Supporting Information.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area High 1 Singapore

Metric 5: Currency Medium 2 >5 to 15 years (2007 pub date)

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: Zuraimi, M. S.,Tham, K. W.. 2008. Effects of child care center ventilation strategies on volatile organic compounds of indoor

and outdoor origins. Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 632758

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability High

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario Medium

1 High number of samples, duplicates. Sampling numbers pro-
vided for each ventilation strategy. In this study, ACMV CCCs
(N=5) are defined as those with a dedicated or shared air han-
dling unit, filtration and fresh air provision (typically about

10 percent of total air change), HB CCCs (N=21), those that
incorporate air conditioning for a portion of the day (typically
2 h) and relying on natural ventilation at other times, NV
CCCs (N=59), those that rely on open windows only for ven-
tilation and AC CCCs (N=19), those that incorporate split
unit air-conditioners without any provision of fresh air. Dur-
ing inspections, it was found that there were rooms in some NV
CCCs which were air conditioned. For these CCCs (N=19), an
indoor air location in the NV room and another in the AC
room were measured simultaneously making it a total of 123
samples. Supporting Information (SI) Table SI provides a de-
scriptive summary of the CCCs characteristics.

2 Singapore is a tropical city, where the ventilation strategies
adopted by the child care centers (CCCs) can be classified as
naturally ventilated (NV), hybrid (combination of natural ven-
tilation and air conditioning) ventilated (HB), air-conditioned
and mechanically ventilated (ACMV), and air-conditioned but
without ventilation (AC). In this article, we present the expo-
sures and risk of indoor VOCs, their sources, and the impact

of ventilation strategies in a nationwide study involving 104
representative CCCs in Singapore.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Supplementary Info available but not provided; requested for
extraction. Table 1 reports indoor air concentrations of TCE
and PERC in CCCs with different ventilation strategies.
For every CCC, a field and laboratory blank is employed.
VOCs with measured values lower than their method detec-
tion limit (MDL) were assigned to a value half of the MDL.
Details of the sample collection, analysis and QA/QC can be
found in the Supporting Information.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

continued from previous page

Study Citation: Zuraimi, M. S.,Tham, K. W.. 2008. Effects of child care center ventilation strategies on volatile organic compounds of indoor

and outdoor origins. Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 632758

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score

Comments*

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Because regulatory decisions are based on risk evaluations,
it is important to know how CCC ventilation strategies give
rise to differing risks estimates of VOC exposures. However,
given the large uncertainties in risk calculations, it is difficult
to ascertain significant differences between estimated cancer
risks. Assumptions used by the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment such as standard body weight and average breath-
ing rate may not reflect the variability of the population at
large and specific differences between adults and children and
between Caucasians and Asians. Also, toxicity information ob-
tained from studies using animals have uncertainty related to
extrapolations from high doses for animals to low human ex-
posures. Indeed, information providing confidence intervals for
cancer potency estimates are still not available. Despite these
assumptions which may bias the estimates, the median values
provide a good indication of the relative risk levels among at-
tending children in CCCs with different ventilation strategies.
Also, analyses of risk assessment used in this study can provide
insight not only about the high-risk VOCs, but also about the
dominant sources of their exposures, which can allow proper
mitigation strategies for more effective means of exposure re-
duction.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 1.7

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Dewulf, J. P.,Van Langenhove, H. R.,Der Auwera, L. F.. 1998. Air/water exchange dynamics of 13 volatile chlorinated CI- and
C2-hydrocarbons and monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the southern North Sea and the Scheldt estuary. Environmental
Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 644857

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Medium

N/A

Sampling equipment, procedures and storage are given

Analytical procedure and equipment described, including de-
tection limit but not calibration.

No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

Map is given with North Sea sampling locations

Data collected in 1995-1996 (15+ years ago)

38 total samples in duplicate from six locations

Surface water inc. from oceans is a scenario of interest, ambient

air is not

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

Data summarized in Table 1

Quality control charts and standard addition tests

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of variability with regards to sources of PERC
in water samples

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Yamamoto, K.,Fukushima, M.,Kakutani, N.,Kuroda, K.. 1997. Volatile organic compounds in urban rivers and their estuaries

in Osaka, Japan. Environmental Pollution.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 645789

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High

N/A

2
1

N/A

Sampling method discussed, but does not indicate if it is a
standard method. Samples stored refrigerated until analysis.
GC/MS. EPA Method 524.2 Mean accuracy, the precision &
method detection limits

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High

High

1
3
1

>20 years (1993-1995)

Large sample size; 30 water samples collected from 30 sites;
sampled different months & years

Site description and sampling sites provided

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Medium

3
2

No supplemental or raw data reported; levels are reported in
Figure 1

Mean accuracy, precision and method detection limits cited.
No control samples?

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Discussion on reasons for distribution patterns of DCM. TCE
and PERC have similar distribution patterns.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Abrahamsson, K.,Dyrssen, D.,Jogebrant, G.,Krysell, M.. 1989. Halocarbon concentrations in Askerofjorden related to the

water exchange and inputs from the petrochemical site at Stenungsund. Vatten.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 658636

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

sampling method is well described, but no calibration, storage
conditions.

analytical method is well discussed and recovery is provided,
but no calibration is provided.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

> 15 yrs old

13 stations, no discussion of replicates,
media interest, but not US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Medium

3
2

no raw data, only mean and SD. and no data for each depth
(5 - 10m).

recoveries in the 90s for PERC. Not well discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

SD is provided. Not well discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Amaral, O. C.,Otero, R.,Grimalt, J. 0.,Albaiges, J.. 1996. Volatile and semi-volatile organochlorine compounds in tap and

riverine waters in the area of influence of a chlorinated organic solvent factory. Water Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 658643

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low

Unacceptable
Medium

>15tys

sample size of SW is not discribed.
The scenario of surface water is discribed.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

not raw data, and some detailed information of statistics are
missed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

uncertainty and variability are not discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.0.

Extracted

Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Martinez, E.,Llobet, I.,Lacorte, S.,Viana, P.,Barcelo, D.. 2002. Patterns and levels of halogenated volatile compounds in

Portuguese surface waters. Journal of Environmental Monitoring.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 659075

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High 1 glass vials, portable freezer, analyzed within 15 days of col-

lection. Used analytical method EPA Method 502 so assumed
used a preservative.

High 1 EPA Method 502

N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

1999-2000
644 samples

surface water in scope - sea, estuarine, river water and indus-
trial effluents - however not in US and older.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Low
High

3
1

no standard deviation . Mean in figure only. No raw data.

Recovery of 93-95 percent, R2 = 0.99.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No SD, did not discus any uncertainties.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Huybrechts, T.,Dewulf, J.,Van Langenhove, H.. 2005. Priority volatile organic compounds in surface waters of the southern

North Sea. Environmental Pollution.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 660096

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Medium

N/A

storage temp and duration provided,

Previously described elsewhere., but robust description pro-
vided. GC-MS. detection limit provided. Recoveries for surro-
gates provided.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

1998-2000

47 samples. Replicate samples used,
appropriate medium, but older data and not US

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

no raw data or supplemental data, but they provided robust
stati sties

Followed QUASI-MEME guidelines, detailed measures de-
scribed elsewhere. This is a European standard, so the as-
sumption is that if appropriate measures were adopted in all
steps of the process, then the QA should be at a high level.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

discussed possible reasons for variation. No standard deviation
provided.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Gulyas, H.,Hemmerling, L.. 1990. Tetrachloroethene air pollution originating from coin-operated dry cleaning establishments.

Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 713690

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Sampling equipment and procedures described, but no mention
of sample storage.

Analytical methods described
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
High

1
3
3
1

Hamburg, Germany

Data collected in 1987 and 1989 (15+ years ago)
One sample at multiple intervals in only one car.
Only the dry cleaned clothes in vehicle is applicable.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
Low

1
3

Raw data given in Table 1

Quality control and assurance not specifically discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability and uncertainty regarding different types of dry
cleaning equipment discussed

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Sexton, K.,Mongin, S. J.,Adgate, J. L.,Pratt, G. C.,Ramachandran, G.,Stock, T. H.,Morandi, M. T.. 2007. Estimating volatile

organic compound concentrations in selected microenvironments using time-activity and personal exposure data. Journal of
Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A: Current Issues.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 730121

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Medium
N/A

N/A

3M model 3500 organic vapor monitors (3500 OVMs), which
are charcoal-based passive air samplers.A more detailed de-
scription of the study design and results was published previ-
ously (Sexton et al., 2004a, 2004b; Pratt et al., 2004, 2005).
GC with an HP 5972 MS detector, Analytical and internal
standards were prepared, and VOC concentrations were calcu-
lated as described previously

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

1999

333 samples, some dups

Inddor air, but not consumer specific

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

Good summary statistics; however, no raw/supplementary
data available.

Duplicate O, I, and P badges were collected periodically during
the study (total n = 80), and correlation coefficients were > .94
for all individual VOC.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Not random sample, one area, are has known low VOC out-
doors

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: Sexton, K.,Mongin, S. J.,Adgate, J. L.,Pratt, G. C.,Ramachandran, G.,Stock, T. H.,Morandi, M. T.. 2007. Estimating volatile
organic compound concentrations in selected microenvironments using time-activity and personal exposure data. Journal of
Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A: Current Issues.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 730121

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

*High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Billionnet, C.,Gay, E.,Kirchner, S.,Leynaert, B.,Annesi-Maesano, I.. 2011. Quantitative assessments of indoor air pollution

and respiratory health in a population-based sample of French dwellings. Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 733119

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Medium 2 Passive samplers. Only limited details provided, but more info

in companion doc (Ramalho etal.,2006).

Metric 2; Analytical Methodology Medium 2 GC with FID/MS.. Few details provided, but more info in

companion doc (Ramalho etal.,2006). LOD is provided.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Medium 2

Spatial and Temporal Variability High 1

Exposure Scenario Medium 2

2003-2005
490 samples

Indoor air of households, not specific to a consumer product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

no raw data, no SD/CV.
Implied, no details provided.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Limitations reported, characteristics of population reported.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Su, F. C.,Mukherjee, B.,Batterman, s.. 2011. Trends of VOC exposures among a nationally representative sample: Analysis

of the NHANES 1988 through 2004 data sets. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 784280

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

Only brief description of blood samples in the article, but doc-

umented thoroughly here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

nhanes/nhanes-09_l 0/lab.pdf

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

High

Analyses used purge and trap extraction or headspace

solid phase microextraction (SPME), and capillary gas

chromatography/mass spectrometry. Consistent quality

control and quality assurance protocols were maintained

(NCHS, 2010e). https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/

nhanes_09_l 0/lab.pdf

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

Medium

approximate nature of these biomarkers was indicated by only

modest correlation with air samples and the rapid clearance in

the blood

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Metric 5:

Currency

Medium

1998-2004

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High

Participants were selected to be nationally representative us-

ing a stratified, multistage, probabilityebased sampling design,

e.g., elderly and minorities were overesampled. VOCs were

measured for a subsample of adults aged 20e59 years for each

cohort studied between 1988 and 2004, with sample sizes from

605 to 1489

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

US population but multiple exposures

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

No access to raw data, but summary stats available.

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

Consistent quality control and quality assurance protocols were

maintained (NCHS, 2010e). However, results such as chemical

recoveries and blanks were not provided in the article to access

the quality.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

High

Limitations mentioned throughout article. SE provided in supp

materials. Multiple years compared.

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

continued from previous page

Study Citation: Su, F. C.,Mukherjee, B.,Batterman, S.. 2011. Trends of VOC exposures among a nationally representative sample: Analysis

of the NHANES 1988 through 2004 data sets. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 784280

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.6

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Chao, C. Y.,Chan, G. Y.. 2001. Quantification of indoor VOCs in twenty mechanically ventilated buildings in Hong Kong.

Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 824555

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Medium

N/A

no recoveries, EPA method

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

>15 yrs

10 samples, 4 hr samples

foreign country, not directly linked to consumer products

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

No raw data

Didn't discuss QC, but used standard methods

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

SD provided, compared results between locations

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wang, T.,Wong, C. H.,Cheung, T. F.,Blake, D. R.,Arimoto, R.,Baumann, K.,Tang, J.,Ding, G. A.,Yu, X. M.,Li, Y. S.,Streets,
D. G.,Simpson, I. J.. 2004. Relationships of trace gases and aerosols and the emission characteristics at Lin'an, a rural site in
eastern China, during spring 2001. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1014392

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Sampling equipment and procedures are described, but cali-
bration, DT are not described.

calibration, DT, replicates are not described

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

Low

1
3

Data collected in 2001 ( > 15 yrs old)
sample size is 30. but no replicates,
ambient air

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

no raw data

No discussion of quality assurance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of uncertainty in correlation between presence
of different gases

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kostopoulou, M. N.,Golfinopoulos, S. K.,Nikolaou, A. D.,Xilourgidis, N. K.,Lekkas, T. D.. 2000. Volatile organic compounds

in the surface waters of northern Greece. Chemosphere.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1024859

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High
Low
High

1
3
1

Samples collected >15 years ago

Water samples were collected from four rivers and five lakes in

the region of Northern Greece, seasonally, four times per year.

Metric 7! Exposure Scenario Medium 2 Closely represents relevant exposure scenario, except it's not

the US population.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2 Summary data reported with statistics; raw data not reported

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2 Limited discussion of uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: X. M. Wu, M. G. Apte, R. Maddalena, D. H. Bennett. 2011. Volatile organic compounds in small- and medium-sized

commercial buildings in California. Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1062239

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
High

N/A

EPA method TO-17; GC-MSConcentrations below MDL were
replaced with 1/2 MDL, while for samples between the MDL
and the analytical limit of quantification (LOQ), determined
as 10 times the standard deviation of low-level spikes, were
reported as the value determined in the laboratory.
Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

>5yrs old (2011 pub)

indoor air study, but not cosumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

the result of concentration for each chemicals is summarized.
But no raw data.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

discussion of variability is limited.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Batterman, S.,Jia, C.,Hatzivasilis, G.. 2007. Migration of volatile organic compounds from attached garages to residences: A

major exposure source. Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1065558

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

passive samplers, tenax absorbant. samples stored 1-3 days
before analysis.

analytical details reported in another paper, but recoveries,
blanks, methods, etc. discussed,
indoor air

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High

Medium

2
2

around 2007

15 samples, but sample is not random or necessarily represen-
tative, although it may capture much of the variation in the
sampled communities.

indoor air, but directly related to consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data. Mean, SD. Max, DF

recoveries, blanks discussed, although not specific to chemical.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

SD provided. Investigated various variables.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Dodson, R. E.,Levy, J. I.,Spengler, J. D.,Shine, J. P.,Bennett, D. H.. 2008. Influence of basements, garages, and common

hallways on indoor residential volatile organic compound concentrations. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1065844

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

Storage conditions and calibration not discussed, but did use
a published method. BEAM study.

Standard TO 17 method was used.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

2005

Large sample size.

Indoor air, but not ties to a specific consumer product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data. Mean and SD in the main report. Other stats
may be in supplemental.

Average recovery of 65 percent. Additional info in supp mate-
rials.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: S. N. Sax, D. H. Bennett, S. N. Chillrud, P. L. Kinney, J. D. Spengler. 2004. Differences in source emission rates of

volatile organic compounds in inner-city residences of New York City and Los Angeles. Journal of Exposure Analysis and
Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1066049

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology High 1 The sampling and analytical methods are described in US

EPA"s Compendium Method TO-17. Sampling methodology
discussed. See Study Design.

Analytical Methodology High 1 The sampling and analytical methods are described in US

EPA"s Compendium Method TO-17. GC-MSD. LODs re-
ported.

Biomarker Selection N/A N/A Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Low 3

Spatial and Temporal Variability High 1

Exposure Scenario Medium 2

NYC , NY (Harlem) and Los Angeles, CA (South Central, LA)

>15 years ( NYC: winterand summer 1999 and Los Angeles:
fall and winter 2000)

large sample size (36 samples); duplicate samples
Measurements were conducted in about 40 homes in each of
the two cities across two seasons.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium 2 No supplemental or raw data. Summary stats for indoor air
provided in Table 3.

Medium 2 Field and laboratory blanks were collected, with each totaling

at least 10 percent of the number of samples. Field blanks
were transported and handled like regular samples, but were
not attached to pumps . Field blanks were used to determine
background contamination and for calculation of method limits
of detection (LODs).

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: S. N. Sax, D. H. Bennett, S. N. Chillrud, P. L. Kinney, J. D. Spengler. 2004. Differences in source emission rates of
volatile organic compounds in inner-city residences of New York City and Los Angeles. Journal of Exposure Analysis and
Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1066049

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty High 1 indoor"outdoor relationships as well as SERs were calculated

for each home and sources of variability in the data were ex-
amined. Between homes, variability may be due to differences
in housing characteristics, building materials, use and storage
of household products, and AERs. Between cities, variability
can be associated with differences in ambient emission sources
and meteorological patterns. Also, seasonal variability within
each city can be due to different meteorological patterns in dif-
ferent seasons, which in turn affect AER, environmental chem-
istry, emission rates, and environmental dispersion rates. By
determining the variability in both indoor"outdoor relation-
ships and SERs, we can gain a better understanding of indoor
contributions to human exposures. The degree of uncertainty
associated with measurement error was also calculated for the

estimated emission rates and this uncertainty was compared
to the inherent variability. We discuss the implication of this
uncertainty on predicting emission rates of VOCs in homes.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Roose, P.,Van Thuyne, G.,Belpaire, C.,Raemaekers, M.,Brinkman, U. A.. 2003. Determination of VOCs in yellow eel from

various inland water bodies in Flanders (Belgium). Journal of Environmental Monitoring.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1066543

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
High

N/A

1
1

N/A

Sample collection and storage are described. Sampling loca-
tions are given and characterized.

Extraction methods and analytical instrumentation and pro-
cedures are given. Detection limit calculation method is de-
scribed.

Study looks at VOC levels (inc PERC) in eel tissue; no
biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

Medium

1
3

Sampling locations are listed (Belgium)

Sampling done prior to 2003 (15 years ago)

Twenty samples collected from variety of locations (river/
pond/canal) throughout Belgium. No replicates mentioned
Surface water through fish tissue samples. Not in US waters

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
Low

1
3

Raw data is given for the 20 eels sampled
No discussion of quality assurance methods

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of variation in PERC levels and connection
with water concentration

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Rule, K. L.,Comber, S. D.,Ross, D.,Thornton, A.,Makropoulos, C. K.,Rautiu, R.. 2006. Sources of priority substances entering

an urban wastewater catchment-trace organic chemicals. Chemosphere.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1250702

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

sampling method, instument is described, but calibration and
storage condition and not mentioned.

Analysis methods and LODs are given, but calibration and
recovery are not described.

No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
Medium
High

2
2
1

Samples were collected in 2005 (>5 yrs old)
no replicates is mentioned

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Unacceptable
High

4
1

no exact result of PERC in any figures or tables, it's just
mentioned too simply in 3.1.2.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

variability is discussed between VOC levels in residential vs.
commercial and industrial samples, uncertainty is not dis-
cussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 1.9.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Robinson, K. W.,Flanagan, S. M.,Ayotte, J. D.,Campo, K. W.,Chalmers, A.. 2004. Water Quality in the New England

Coastal Basins, Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, 1999-2001.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1391354

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Low
N/A

1
3

N/A

NAWQA protocols for fixed-site sampling are designed to as-
sess the spatial and temporal distribution of water quality in
relation to various streamflow conditions and consist of water-
quality sample collection at each fixed site monthly or more
frequently (Gilliom and others, 1995).

USGS lab, but no details in this report on the insstruments.
"All other water-quality samples were shipped to the USGS
National Water-Quality Laboratory (NWQL) in Denver, Colo.,
for analysis."

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
High

1
3
1
1

Samples collected >15 years ago

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
High

3
1

TCE and PERC measured and median concentrations pre-
sented in graphs (Fig 14, 19); so, difficult to extract. Raw
data may be available in referenced reports, or appendix 3.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Limited discussion of uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: van de Meent, D.,Den Hollander, H. A.,Pool, W. G.,Vredenbregt, M. J.,van Oers, H. A. M.,de Greef, E.,Luijten, J. a. 1986.

Organic micropollutants in Dutch coastal waters. Water Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1441544

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Unacceptable

N/A

2
4

N/A

calibration, storage conditions are missed.

The analytical method for PERC and TCE is not provided.

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

1986, >15 yrs old

study of Dutch coastal water, not US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

no raw data, detection frequency not reported.
QA/QC is not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

uncertainty is few discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.2.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: James, K. J.,Stack, M. A.. 1997. The impact of leachate collection on air quality in landfills. Chemosphere.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1486815

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

No biomarker

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High

Unacceptable

3
1

1996 (>15 yrs old)

study of ambient air concentration from landfill leaching, off-

PECO.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

no raw data

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

uncertainty is not discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 1.8.

Extracted

Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk. Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Jia, C.,Batterman, S.,Godwin, C.. 2008. VOCs in industrial, urban and suburban neighborhoods, Part 1: Indoor and outdoor

concentrations, variation, and risk drivers. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1488206

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Medium 2 sampling sites and methods are well described, but sampler

calibration is not described.

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 instrument calibration is not described.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A not biomarker study

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

Samples were collected in 2004 and 2005(>5yrs old)
indoor air study, but no description of consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

no raw data for TCE or perc.
QA/QC is not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Duboudin, C.. 2009. Pollution inside the home: descriptive analyses Part I: Analysis of the statistical correlations between

pollutants inside homes. Environnement, Risques & Sante.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1657000

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

sampling methodology points to 3 references (one is "Measure-
ment protocols and Quality Control").

Sampling analysis points to 3 references. Assumes it's a na-
tionally recognized standard used in France.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High

Medium

High

2
2

October 2003 - December 2005

567 Total Participants, representing a 74 municipalities in 55
departments and 19 regions of France. Although there's a com-
ment in the text about misrepresenting the seasonality.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Supplemental data are clearly referenced.; however, summary

statistics aren't fully reported.

Quality Assurance wasn't directly discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Bouhamra, W. S.,Elkilani, A. S.. 1999. Investigation and modeling of surface sorption-desorption behavior of volatile organic

compounds for indoor air quality analysis. Environmental Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1744157

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low

Medium

1
3

2
2

Samples assumed to have been collected prior to 1999 (date of
publication)

12 samples taken per house (20 houses sampled); it doesn't
seem that replicates were used.

Indoor concentrations not associated with a specific consumer
product

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

No raw data; only minimum values and percent frequency re-
ported in tables. Mean cone presented in graphical form (not
extractable)

Minimal discussion of QC/QA measures; only the use of stan-
dards before and after each set of samples is mentioned.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Limited discussion of variability in indoor concentrations

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: He, Z.,Yang, G. P.,Lu, X. L.. 2013. Distributions and sea-to-air fluxes of volatile halocarbons in the East China Sea in early

winter. Chemosphere.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1940132

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Sample collection method, bottle type, storage conditions, and
storage duration provided.

GC-ECD. retention times, detection limits provided, calibra-
tion standards discussed.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

Cruise was in 2010.

About 40 sampling stations.

China, not US. Location on map provided. Other parameters
collected such as surface seawater temperature and salinity,
were obtained

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

no raw data, range and mean reported, but no SD.

Storage stability assessed. Use of blanks for LOQ determina-
tion. No recovery results provided.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Described reasons for variability, but no SD provided,

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: McDonald, T. J.,Kennicutt M C, I. I.,Brooks, J. M.. 1988. VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS AT A COASTAL GULF

OF MEXICO SITE. Chemosphere.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1946098

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology
Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Low

Low
N/A

3
3

N/A

sampling equipment is described(Glass containers), descrip-
tion of storage duration, sampling method, and calibration is
limited.

analytical conditions are described. No information of recovery
or calibration is served.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area

High

Metric 5: Currency

Low

> 15yrs old

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

single sample

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Medium

the meaning of dash in table 3 is unclear.

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Low

QA/QC is not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Valuability/Uncertainty is not discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.4

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Stefaniak, A. B.,Breysse, p. N.,Murray, M. P. M.,Rooney, B. C.,Schaefer, J.. 2000. An evaluation of employee exposure to

volatile organic compounds in three photocopy centers. Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 1953674

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Analytical method is stated as TO-14.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High

Low
High

Medium

Study was conducted on a university campus (assumed to be
Johns Hopkins University)

Assumed to have taken place before 2000 (year of publication)
Replicate sample used at Center 3 on Day 1, near the high-
speed photocopier.

The purpose of the study was to determine worker exposure in
photocopy centers; data may be used as surrogate of consumer
exposure to printshop emissions.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

Individual data points reported; summary statistics not re-
ported.

QA/QC not discussed; background samples collected and ana-
lyzed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Limited discussion of variability in area samples; only one per-
sonal samples was collected per printing shop

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: He, Z.,Yang, G.,Lu, X.,Zhang, H.. 2013. Distributions and sea-to-air fluxes of chloroform, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethy-

lene, chlorodibromomethane and bromoform in the Yellow Sea and the East China Sea during spring. Environmental Pollution.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2128010

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Medium 2 No standard method, but details provided. Samples analyzed

immediately after collection.

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 samples analyzed on board ship- not at a standard laboratory.

no standard method, but details provided.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
High

2
1
1

2011

53 grid sampling stations
location characterized.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

No raw data. Range and mean provided in text. No SD.
Accuracy of 5 of 18 percent, blanks, calibration of equipment
discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

discussed correlations with ocean parameters. No SD provided.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Su, F. C.,Mukherjee, B.,Batterman, s.. 2013. Determinants of personal, indoor and outdoor VOC concentrations: An analysis

of the RIOPA data. Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2128575

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Samples collected as part of RIOPA study.Passive samplers,
48 hr collection periods, Details described elsewhere. Medium
because only few details provided.

Method described elsewhere. GC/MS used. LOD provided.
Medium because details not provided to verify.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

>15 yrs (1999 to 2001)

310 households

Indoor air, but not directly related to consumer product use.
convenience sample may have over samples outdoor emission
sources. 3 US cities

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

no raw data provided

calibration, blanks etc not mentioned. But they did indicate
which chemicals had low recoveries , and TCE and PERC were
not mentioned.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

robust strengths, liiations

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Roda, C.,Kousignian, I.,Ramond, A.,Momas, I.. 2013. Indoor tetrachloroethylene levels and determinants in Paris dwellings.

Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2128839

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Sampling procedures only summarized, but appear to be stan-
dard (section 2.2)

Analytical procedures only summarized, but appear to be stan-
dard (section 2.2)

No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High

Medium

High

2
1

Paris, France

Data collected 2003-2007 (5-15 years ago)

Large sample (177 households), data collected for 1 year, some
mention of duplicate samples

Consumer inhalation exposure measured by indoor air concen-
tration

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

Concentration results as summary only

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Section 4.3 discusses determinants of domestic PERC levels

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Zoccolillo, L.,Abete, C.,Amendola, L.,Ruocco, R.,Sbrilli, A.,Termine, M.. 2004. Halocarbons in aqueous matrices from the

Rennick Glacier and the Ross Sea (Antarctica). International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2189687

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

High 1

Medium 2

New method that uses large volume of water. Analyzed under
"extreme" conditions in Antarctica.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

Medium

1
3

1997-1998

multiple stations and samples from multiple depths, replicate
samples not collected. Samples were generally collected at mul-
tiple time periods.

Not US, not linked to a source.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

No summary provided, need to calculate the stats.

TCE had low extraction recoveries (50-60 percent). Study did
not discuss if they corrected the concentrations for the low
recoveries. PERC recoveries were acceptable.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

variations due to microclimates.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Jia, C.,Batterman, S.,Godwin, C.,Charles, S.,Chin, J. Y.. 2010. Sources and migration of volatile organic compounds in

mixed-use buildings. Indoor Air.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2214330

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Medium 2

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

Samples collected in 2005-2006 and 2008 (>5yrs old)
indoor air study, but not consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

data is summarized as a table, but no raw data.
Some discussion of QA/QC measures and issues.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

sampling method is simply described, but calibration, storage
condition are not provided, they might be in reference articles,
analytical method is simply described. but calibra-
tion,detection limits, recovery are not provided, they might
be in reference articles.,
indoor air study

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Bravo-Linares, C. M.,Mudge, S. M.,Loyola-Sepulveda, R. H.. 2007. Occurrence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in

Liverpool Bay, Irish Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2277377

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

sw samples

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

2006 (>10 years)

Source of exposure was not discussed.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

Range of data provided only.(no raw data)
Some QA discussion with regards to sampling.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

There are some discussion on uncertainties and variability.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 Lhe overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Yamamoto, K.,Fukushima, M.,Kakutani, N.,Tsuruho, K.. 2001. Contamination of vinyl chloride in shallow urban rivers in

Osaka, Japan. Water Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2310570

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Sampling methodology is described and discussed simply.
Analytical methodology is described and discussed simply,
sw samples

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

>15 years

Unknown if replicate sampling was done.
SW samples collected.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Raw data not provided; summary of PERC and TCE concen-
tration data in samples given as charts (Fig 3)

Quality assurance implied through standard protocols

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No variability; some dicussion on uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: D'Souza, J. C.,Jia, C.,Mukherjee, B.,Batterman, S.. 2009. Ethnicity, housing and personal factors as determinants of VOC

exposures. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2331366

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology High 1 NHANES is well documented, passive exposure monitors

Metric 2; Analytical Methodology High 1 NHANES is well documented. Used a standard method.. GC/

MS and selected-ion-monitoring mode (CDC,2006b), a sec-
ond laboratory used GC/MS in scan mode (Weisel et al.,
2005b). http://www.nber.org/nhanes/1999 2D00/downloads/
lab21aioc.pdf

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Low 3

Spatial and Temporal Variability High 1

Exposure Scenario Medium 2

1999-2000 data,
over 600 samples

Indoor air in homes, but not directly related to a specific con-
sumer product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

range, percentiles, det freq. missing SD . no raw data.

NHANES.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No SD provided

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Loh, M. M.,Houseman, E. A.,Gray, G. M.,Levy, J. I.,Spengler, J. D.,Bennett, D. H.. 2006. Measured concentrations of VOCs

in several non-residential microenvironments in the United States. Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2442846

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Personal samplers, VOC sorbent. Sample volume of 10L or
2.5L Samples stored 1 week in refrigerator..

EPA Method T017

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High

Medium

High

Medium

2003-2005

3 to 17 stores per store type, 5 to 28 samples per store type.
Table 1

Indoor air, but not for a particular product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

No raw data. Range, mean, CV reported in supp and sum-
maries match the limited stats in main text.

Pilot testing, storage stability, 15 percent duplicate samples,
field blanks on 11 percent of samples, correction for blanks if
significantly above the mean,

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Considered in sample collection and analysis. Range of store
types.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Chin, J. Y.,Godwin, C.,Parker, E.,Robins, T.,Lewis, T.,Harbin, P.,Batterman, S.. 2014. Levels and sources of volatile organic

compounds in homes of children with asthma. Indoor Air.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2443355

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Lemporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
High

2
1
1

2010

7 day samples, large sample size
Source identification using factor analysis

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

No raw data

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.2

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Quack, B.,Suess, E.. 1999. Volatile halogenated hydrocarbons over the western Pacific between 43 degrees and 4 degrees N.

Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2468900

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

N/A
N/A
N/A

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

N/A
N/A
N/A

Unacceptable

N/A
N/A
N/A
4

Ambient air from western Pacific Ocean; no relevannce to con-
sumer exposure.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

N/A
N/A

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 4.0.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Plummer, L. N.,Sibrell, P. L.,Casile, G. C.,Busenberg, E.,Hunt, A. G.,Schlosser, P.. 2013. Tracing groundwater with low-level
detections of halogenated VOCs in a fractured carbonate-rock aquifer, Leetown Science Center, West Virginia, USA. Applied
Geochemistry.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2532571

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High 1 Sampling equipment, procedures and storage are given

High 1 Analytical methods and equipment are given, including detec-

tion limits and calibration
N/A N/A No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
Medium
Medium

2
2
2

West Virginia

Samples collected in 2008-2010 (5-15 years ago)

Samples collected at 47 sites, some have replicate samples

Surface water and spring water (relevant) and groundwater
(not currently of interest)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

High
Low

1
3

Raw data given in Table 1

No specific discussion of quality control/assurance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Uncertainties are discussed; variability between different water
sources

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: W. R. Chan, S. Cohn, M. Sidheswaran, D. P. Sullivan, W. J. Fisk. 2014. Contaminant levels, source strengths, and ventilation

rates in California retail stores. Indoor Air.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2535652

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium 2
High 1

N/A N/A

No info on sample storage and duration conditions.

EPA method. LOQ provided in supp materials. No recoveries.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

California
2011-2013

over 20 samples were store type, at least 5 stores per type,
indoor air, but not directly linked to a consumer product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

raw provided in supp.

standard methods used, but calibration and recovery results
not provied.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

variability discussed, but no CV provided.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Insogna, S.,Frison, S.,Marconi, E.,Bacaloni, A.. 2014. Trends of volatile chlorinated hydrocarbons and trihalomethanes in

Antarctica. International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2800175

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Clean glass bottles, no headspace, stored at 4C until analysis
within one year.

Purge and trap with GC-MS. operating conditions provided,
standards provided, calibration described.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Medium
Medium

2
2

2011-2012

triplicate samples, at only nine sites,
surface water on scope, but not US study

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

no raw data

analysis performed in triplicate. R2 >0.998. Recoveries from
75 to 95 percent. Samples stored for up to a year and no
mention of storage stability.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

compared results to past cruises, No discussion of uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.3

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ofstad, E. B.,Drangsholt, H.,Carlberg, G. E.. 1981. Analysis of volatile halogenated organic compounds in fish. Science of

the Total Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2801663

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low
High
N/A

3
1

N/A

no details for sampling methods.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

>15 yrs old

Pooled samples of 3-5 fish.

media and organisms interest, but not US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

No raw data.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No range of data is shown.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Rogers, H. R.,Crathorne, B.,Watts, C. D.. 1992. Sources and fate of organic contaminants in the Mersey estuary: Volatile

organohalogen compounds. Marine Pollution Bulletin.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2802879

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Medium

N/A

Samples collected without headspace. Stored cool until analy-
sis within 24 hours. Extracted and analyzed within 24 hrs.
GC-ECD. HMSO 1995 (british standard method), however
lacked many details actually used, internal standards,

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

1987-89

Single samples on 4 sampling dates for each of 4 waterbodies.
surface water on topic, but not in US

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

missing range., SD no raw darta.

used a standard analytical method, but no discussion of meth-
ods used or recoveries.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Dawes, V. J.,Waldock, M. J.. 1994. Measurement of Volatile Organic Compounds at UK National Monitoring Plan Stations.

Marine Pollution Bulletin.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2803418

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Medium

N/A

UK National monitoring program
purge and trap with gc-MS.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

1992

about 70 samples overall
surface water, but not in US

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Medium

3
2

individual values, but no overall stats
Precision assessed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

variation reflects amounts of industrial activity.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Brown, T.,Dassonville, C.,Derbez, M.,Ramalho, 0.,Kirchner, S.,Crump, D.,Mandin, C.. 2015. Relationships between socioe-
conomic and lifestyle factors and indoor air quality in French dwellings. Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2855333

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

Sampling methodology discussed briefly. Volatile organic com-

pounds (VOCs) were measured in the main bedroom over

seven days with passive radial samplers(Radiellos, Sigma-

AldrichCo.) (Ramalho et al.,2006). VOCs were adsorbed on

Carbograph 4 sorbent then thermally desorbed and analyzed

by gas phase chromatography equipped with a flame ionization

detector and/or mass spectro- meter. VOCs were adsorbed on

Carbograph 4 sorbent then thermally desorbed.

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

Analytical methodology discussed briefly. VOCs were analyzed

by gas phase chromatography equipped with a flame ionization

detector and/or mass spectrometer. Statistical analysis: For

any measurement below the limit of detection (LOD) a value

equal to the LOD/2 was assigned. For measurements below

the limit of quantification (LOQ)a value equal to the LOQ/2

was assigned.

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

France

Metric 5:

Currency

Medium

>5 to 15 years (September 2003 and December 2005)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High

Indoor air concentration were measured one week in a sam-

ple of 567 dwellings representative of the French housing stock

between September 2003 and December 2005. Sample size de-

pendent on socioeconomic factors and by selected occupant ac-

tivities/building characteristics.

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

The pollutants measured were selected on the basis of a classi-

fication of indoor air pollutants developed by the Observatory

on IAQ that applied criteria for short and long-term toxicity as
well as the frequency of their presence in dwellings reported in
the scientific literature (Mosqueronetal.,2003). The sources of
these pollutants include building materials and furniture, heat-
ing and cooking systems, stored solvents, attached garages, and
various human activities including cleaning, painting, use of
consumer products, and smoking. Microenvironments, indoor
climate of the dwellings was also considered

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2855333

Domain Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Supplementary materials provided. Tables 3 and 4 report con-
centrations for PERC in dwellings by selected socioeconomic
status factors and occupant activities/building characteristics,
respectively.

Quality assurance/quality control techniques and results were
not directly discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Strengths and limitations of the study discussed under Section
4.4. Week-long samples (averages for the week) take away the
ability to see peak exposures, and to relate those peak expo-
sures to certain activities.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation:

Wallace, L. A..

1987. The total exposure assessment methodology (TEAM) study: Summary and analysis: Volume I.

Data Type

Monitoring

Hero ID

3004792

Domain

Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology High 1 A lot of detail is given, refer to companion source for full de-

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
N/A

N/A

tails.

A lot of detail is given, refer to companion source for full de-
tails.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
High

1
3
1
1

1984

use of replicate samples, large sample size.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

Summary statistics of phases of the study are presented. No/
limited supplemental data available.

Recoveries and control samples are discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Limited characterization of variability.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Jain, R. B.. 2015. Levels of selected urinary metabolites of volatile organic compounds among children aged 6-11 years.

Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3042164

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

ttromopropane, dated August ^Ul /, biological exposure to
the general population and workers can be assessed by mea-
surement of bromide ion, 1-bromopropane, and its metabo-
lite, N-acetyl-S-(n-propyl)-L-cysteine (AcPrCys) in urine or
blood (NTP 2013). N-Acetyl-S-(n-propyl)-L-cysteine is ex-
pected to be more specific to 1-bromopropane than bromide
due to the presence of the bromide ion in foods; however,
there have also been concerns regarding the specificity of N-
acetyl-S-(n-propyl)-L-cysteine. The ubiquitous nature of N-
acetylS-(n-propyl)-L-cysteine in the urine of the general pop-
ulation suggests that it may not be a specific biomarker for
1-bromopropane, as general population exposure is expected
to be limited. It is unknown if other chemicals and/or endoge-
nous metabolism contributed to the observed urinary levels
of N-acetylS-(n-propyl)-L-cysteine in biomonitoring studies".
The document is available at: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/
ToxProfiles/tp.asp?id=1471&tid=285. NTP. 2013. Report on
carcinogens. Monograph on 1-bromopropane. National Toxi-
cology Program, U.S. Department of Health and Human Ser-
vices.

Sampling Methodology High 1 nhanes sampling. Detailed description at https:/

/wwwn. cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/ContinuousNhanes/

Default. aspx?BeginYear=2011

Analytical Methodology High 1 The laboratory methods used to measure VOCs in urine, as

previously mentioned are provided in Alwis et al. (2012) and
at https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/ContinuousNhanes/

Default.aspx?BeginYear=2011.

Biomarker Selection Medium 2 According to the ATSDR Toxicological Profile for 1-

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area High

Currency Medium

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

Medium

2011-2012 samples

Large sample size, but appears to be spot samples collected (vs
24 hr or first morning voids)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: Jain, R. B.. 2015. Levels of selected urinary metabolites of volatile organic compounds among children aged 6-11 years.

Environmental Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3042164

Domain Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data, but raw data are available from NHANES. Mean
and 95 percent Confidence Interval (CI) provided. No Standard
Deviation (SD).

Study provided creatinine levels to assess completeness of urine
samples.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No SD, but discussed age,gender,race/ethnicity,and exposure-
toenvironmentaltobacco smoke.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Hartwell, T. D.,Pellizzari, E. D.,Perritt, R. L.,Whitmore, R. W.,Zelon, H. S.,Wallace, L.. 1987. Comparison of volatile organic

levels between sites and seasons for the total exposure assessment methodology (team) study. Atmospheric Environment.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3052900

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1

Sampling Methodology

High

Metric 2

Analytical Methodology

High

Metric 3

Biomarker Selection

High

breath

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4

Geographic Area

High

Metric 5

Currency

Low

80s

Metric 6

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High

Metric 7

Exposure Scenario

Medium

not consumer specific

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8

Reporting of Results

Low

no raw, no range or sd

Metric 9

Quality Assurance

Medium

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.6

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Christof, 0.,Seifert, R.,Michaelis, W.. 2002. Volatile halogenated organic compounds in European estuaries. Biogeochemistry.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3242836

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Medium

N/A

niskan sampler, glass bottles, stored cool and dark, until purg-
ing, purged with 12 hours.

purge and trap with gc-ms. Detailed operating conditions pro-
vided.. No authoritative method used.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

1997-1999

14-15 samples per data set
surface water, but not US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

Only range. No mean, median, sd.

Duplicate sample analysis in general. Purge efficiency = 90-93
percent

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Mentioned that other studies said water traps can cause GC
problems, but they said that diverse tests showed that their
water traps worked.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wiedmann, T. 0.,Guthner, B.,Class, T. J.,Ballschmiter, K.. 1994. GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION OF TETRA-

CHLOROETHENE IN THE TROPOSPHERE - MEASUREMENTS AND MODELING. Environmental Science and Tech-
nology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3246559

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

N/A
N/A
N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

N/A
N/A
N/A

Unacceptable

N/A
N/A
N/A
4

Ambient air in troposphere, no relevance for consumer/indoor
exposure

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

N/A
N/A

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 4.0.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as Eligh.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kiurski, J. S.,Oros, I. B.,Kecic, V. S.,Kovacevic, I. M.,Aksentijevic, S. M.. 2016. The temporal variation of indoor pollutants

in photocopying shop. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3371701

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low
Low
N/A

3
3

N/A

Indoor concentrations were measured using gas sensitive semi-
conductor (GSS) sensor technology (with exchangeable sensor
heads for each target gas). There was no discussion on instru-
ment calibration or performance

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low

High
Medium

1
3

Sampling assumed to have been conducted prior to 2016 (date
of publication)

Study measured concentrations of PCE in a photocopy-
ing shop; data may be surrogate for consumer exposure to
printshop emissioons.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Individual data points reported; no summary statistics pro-
vided.

No discussion of QA/QC measures

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Limited discussion on temporal trends;; no discussion on data
gaps, uncertainties, or limitations.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.3

Extracted

Yes

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

continued from previous page

Study Citation: Kiurski, J. S.,Oros, I. B.,Kecic, V. S.,Kovacevic, I. M.,Aksentijevic, S. M.. 2016. The temporal variation of indoor pollutants

in photocopying shop. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3371701

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

*High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: K. W. Tham, M. S. Zuraimi, S. C. Sekhar. 2004. Emission modelling and validation of VOCs' source strengths in air-

conditioned office premises. Environment International.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3393192

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low

N/A

Provided info on tubes, liters collected, range of flow rates,
sample stored in cooler, analyzed on same day.

Did not mention a standard method. Used GC and described
column, use of calibration. Did not provide operating condi-
tions. Did not reference another article for more details.

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Low 3

Spatial and Temporal Variability Low 3

Exposure Scenario Low 3

<2004. Exact date not mentioned.

Only one building. Duplicate samples collected.

No linkage to a source. Singapore.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium 2 No raw data.

Low 3 Mentioned that quality control was conducted. 5 point calibra-

tion curve for each analyte. But no actual QC results provided.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty Medium 2

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: T. Hoang, R. Castorina, F. Gaspar, R. Maddalena, P. L. Jenkins, Q. Zhang, T. E. Mckone, E. Benfenati, A. Y. Shi, A.

Bradman. 2016. VOC exposures in California early childhood education environments. Indoor Air.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3453092

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

Sampling methodology discussed though, calibration of sam-
pler for indoor air is not described.

Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

>5 to 15 yrs old

lack of the information of emission source

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

the summary of results are well described. But no raw data.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

uncertainty for sampling is discussed simply.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.6

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Dai, H.,Jing, S.,Wang, H.,Ma, Y.,Li, L.,Song, W.,Kan, H.. 2017. VOC characteristics and inhalation health risks in newly

renovated residences in Shanghai, China. Science of the Total Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3453725

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Medium

N/A

Analytical methodology is described and discussed; MDL for
DCM not listed.

indoor air samples

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Medium

Medium

8 residences; three sampling sites at each residence: living
room, bedoom, and study. No mention of replicate sampling.
Indoor air samples; not specifically associated with a consumer
product

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Results reported in summary/chart form, not raw data. How-
ever, raw data may be provided in Supplementary Info.
QA is implied.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ma, H.,Zhang, H.,Wang, L.,Wang, J.,Chen, J.. 2014. Comprehensive screening and priority ranking of volatile organic

compounds in Daliao River, China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3488897

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

High 1 Sampling methods and storage are described.

Medium 2 Analytical methods and instrumentation are given. Detection

limits mentioned, but calibration not described.
N/A N/A No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
High

2
1
1

Map with sampling locations along Daliao River (China)
Samples collected in 2011 (5-15 years ago)

Duplicate and triplicate samples taken from 20 locations.
Surface water concentration for VOCs including PERC

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

Summary results only.

Quality assurance described in sampling/analytical procedures

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability assessed with replicate samples

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Bianchi, E.,Lessing, G.,Brina, k. R.,Angeli, L.,Andriguetti, N. B.,Peruzzo, J. R.,Do Nascimento, C. A.,Spilki, F. R.,Ziulkoski,
A. L.,da Silva, L. B.. 2017. Monitoring the Genotoxic and Cytotoxic Potential and the Presence of Pesticides and Hydrocarbons
in Water of the Sinos River Basin, Southern Brazil. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3489827

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High 1

N/A N/A sw samples

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Medium

2
2

>5 yrs.

"60 samples during 9 collections"; no mention of replicate sam-
pling.

sw samples, not in the US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Raw data not provided; summary of PERC and DCM concen-
tration data on page 325 (Table 1).

QA is implied.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Study provided some discussion on uncertainties; no variabil-
ity.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wittlingerova, Z.,Machackova, J.,Petruzelkova, A.,Zimova, M.. 2016. Occurrence of perchloroethylene in surface water and

fish in a river ecosystem affected by groundwater contamination. Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3489953

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Clear methodology for collecting fish samples

Analytical methods based on EPA 601 & 624 standard methods

PCE is concentrated in the fish tissues being sampled

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:

Metric 5:

Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
High

2
1
1

Geographic location is clearly listed - SAP factory in Mimon,
Czech Republic

Samples taken in two batches: 1998 and 2011/2012 (newest
between 5-15 years)

"1998: 7 samples, 1 fish species, 2 locations 2011/2012: 17
samples, 4 fish species, 2 locations"

BCF - aquatic species are ecological population of interest

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
Medium

Raw data and summary are given, with discussion of outlier
Quality control for laboratory testing surface water samples

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Interspecies variability discussed

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Burton, W. C.,Harte, P. T.. 2013. Bedrock Geology and Outcrop Fracture Trends in the Vicinity of the Savage Municipal

Well Superfund Site, Milford, New Hampshire.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3490995

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1:

Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

N/A
N/A
N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

N/A
N/A
N/A

Unacceptable

N/A
N/A
N/A
4

Study is focused on geological properties of an area with
groundwater contamination by PCE. No PCE concentration
data as part of this study, and groundwater intake is not cur-
rently of interest.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

N/A
N/A

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 4.0.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Blanco, S.,Becares, E.. 2010. Are biotic indices sensitive to river toxicants? A comparison of metrics based on diatoms and

macro-invertebrates. Chemosphere.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3501965

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Low
Medium

N/A

3
2

N/A

Little discussion of method

Used standard method SM 6220 C., however few details pro-
vided to verify method properly executed.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
Medium
Medium

2
2
2

2007

only 11 samples

surface water, but river in Spain.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

No raw data, no min or SD.

QC assumed because used standard method.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Sidonia, V.,Haydee, K. M.,Ristoiu, D.,Luminita, S. D.. 2009. Chlorinated solvents detection in soil and river water in the

area along the paper factory from Dej Town, Romania. Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai. Chemia.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3543217

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

Samples collected <15 years ago

Only one sample point; location relative to paper plant not
specified; sampled when the plant was on- and off-line

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
Medium

Lab quality assumed from detail in process description; no con-
trol for water samples

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.3

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Zoccolillo, L.,Rellori, M.. 1994. Halocarbons in Antarctic surface waters. International Journal of Environmental Analytical

Chemistry.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3544414

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Sampling methodology briefly discussed.
Analytical methodology briefly discussed
Biomarker not used.

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

2
2

Antarctica, Italy
>15 years

moderate sample size, no replicate samples.
Exposure scenario of interest: surface water.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

Concentration reported in Table 2.

Procedural recoveries provided, 50 percent for TCE and 75
percent for PERC. Controls not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Not discussed. Authors suggest that the differences in the con-
centrations in various waters can be attributed to sampling site
microclimate and to morphology.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Amagai, T.,01ansandan„Matsushita, H.,Ono, M.,Nakai, S.,Tamura, K.,Maeda, K.. 1999. A survey of indoor pollution by

volatile organohalogen compounds in Katsushika, Tokyo, Japan. Indoor and Built Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3545469

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
Low
N/A

1
3

N/A

calibration, flow rates
LOQ not reported.
No biomonitoring.

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

>15 yrs ago
>50 samples

Indoor air, but no direct link to consumer product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data.

Used field blanks. Recoveries not mentioned.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Focazio, M. J.,Kolpin, D. W.,Barnes, K. K.,Furlong, E. T.,Meyer, M. T.,Zaugg, S. D.,Barber, L. B.,Thurman, M. E.. 2008.

A national reconnaissance for pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants in the United States-II) untreated
drinking water sources. Science of the Total Environment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3559503

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

not baiomarker study

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High

Unacceptable

3
1

Samples were collected in 2001 ( > 15 yrs old)

Reported concentrations do not distinguish between surface
water and groundwater measurements.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
High

3
1

there is not raw data, mean value, and range of value.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

variability is fewly discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 1.9.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Begerow, J.,Jermann, E.,Keles, T.,Freier, I.,Ranft, U.,Dunemann, L.. 1996. Internal and external tetrachloroethene ex-
posure of persons living in differently polluted areas of Northrhine-Westphalia (Germany). Zentralblatt fuer Hygiene und
Umweltmedizin.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3561656

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Sampling equipment and procedures given in detail for both
blood and air samples

Analytical equipment and procedures given in detail for both
blood and air samples

Blood samples tested for PCE and not any biomarkers

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High

Medium

2
2

Essen and Borken, Nordrhein-Westfalens

Data collected prior to 1996 (15+ years ago)

Large number of samples taken, but unclear if replicates were

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

High

Consumer exposure through blood sample concentration and
indoor air concentration

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

Both blood and air concentrations are given as summary statis-
tics

Quality assurance/cleaning procedures were discussed in sam-
ple collection

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variability examined in detail

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kawauchi, T.,Nishiyama, K.. 1989. Residual tetrachloroethylene in dry-cleaned clothes. Environmental Research.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3563210

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low

Low
N/A

3
3

N/A

Sampling discussion is mostly focused on fabrics, with less dis-
cussion of room air samples. Did not indicate which room
articles were placed, ventilation conditions, etc.

Analysis methods described. Recovery samples specifically
mentioned. LOD not provided
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low

High

3
3

Assumed to be Japan

Study conducted prior to 1988 (15+ years ago)

Air and breath samples collected only between 2-4pm on week-
days.

Consumer inhalation exposure, measured by room air and ex-
pired air (breath) concentrations

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Summary results only.

No specific discussion of quality control/assurance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variability discussed with regards to differences between
drycleaning establishments

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Fielding, M.,Gibson, T. M.,James, H. A.. 1981. Levels of trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene and para-dichlorobenzene in

groundwaters. Environmental Technology Letters.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3570809

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

sampling methods and equipments are described, but calibra-
tion is not described.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
High

1
3
3
1

1980s (>15yrs old)

sample size is too small (duplicate sample at one site)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

No raw data for each sample.
QA/QC is not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

uncertainty is not discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Minsley, B.. 1983. Tetrachloroethylene contamination of groundwater in Kalamazoo. Journal of the American Waterworks

Association.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3573107

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low

Low
N/A

3 Sampling procedures and equipment described in detail, but

only for groundwater well sampling
3 Analysis for samples mentioned only briefly

N/A No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High 1 Kalamazoo, Michigan

LOW 3 Data collected prior to 1983 (15+ years ago)

Medium 2 Surface water sampled at eight locations, no mention of repli-

cates

Unacceptable 4 Study focused on groundwater contamination, only briefly

touches on surface water concentration. This involved legacy
contamination (1980) from groundwater and should not be
used.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium 2 Summary data only

Low 3 No specific discussion of quality control/assurance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3 Variability not discussed with regard to surface water results

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable 4.0 Metric mean score**: 2.7.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Coffin, R. R.,Witherell, L. E.,Novick, L. F.,Stone, K. M.. 1987. ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXPOSURE LEVEL TO

TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN AMBIENT AIR IN VERMONT. Public Health Reports.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3573147

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Unacceptable 4 Sampling methodology is not discussed.

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology N/A N/A

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area

N/A

Metric 5: Currency

N/A

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability

N/A

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

N/A

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

N/A

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

N/A

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0 Metric mean score**: 4.0.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as Eligh.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Lee, W.,Park, S. H.,Kim, J.,Jung, J. Y.. 2015. Occurrence and removal of hazardous chemicals and toxic metals in 27

industrial wastewater treatment plants in Korea. Desalination and Water Treatment.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3580141

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Low 3

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology High 1

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Lemporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
High
High
Medium

1
1

27 facilities

waste water effluent, but not in the US

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

No raw data, no SD. No detection frequency.

No discussion, but assumed because used standard Korean

method.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No SD

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

No discussion , but assumed to be in the standard analytical
method used.

Purge and trap with GC. Standard Korean method.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Duclos, Y.,Blanchard, M.,Chesterikoff, A.,Chevreuil, M.. 2000. Impact of paris waste upon the chlorinated solvent concentra-
tions of the river Seine (France). Water, Air, and Soil Pollution.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3587944

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Sampling methodology is described and discussed.
Analytical methodology is described and discussed,
sw samples

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Medium

1
3

2
2

>15 yrs

3 sampling sessions; 14 stations
sw samples collected, but not in the US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Data seems to be raw data.
QA is implied.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Limited discussion on uncertainty; no variability.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Schwarzenbach, R. P.,Giger, W.,Hoehn, E.,Schneider, J. K.. 1983. Behavior of organic compounds during infiltration of river

water to groundwater. Field studies. Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3797825

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Low 3

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Low 3

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

many details of sampling method is missing like storage dura-
tion, vial, calibration.

equipment and analytcal conditions are described, but many
details are missing like calibration, DT, replicates.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

> 15yrs old

surface water study, but river is in Switzerland, not US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

average and SD are shown. No raw data,
discussion of QA/QC is quite limited.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

discussion of variability/uncertainty is quite limited..

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.3

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Cdc,. 2017. National report on human exposure to environmental chemicals.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3827236

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Biomonitoring data for US population from NHANES; infor-
mation on sampling methodology readily available.

Biomonitoring data for US population from NHANES; infor-
mation on analytical methodology readily available.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

Blood concentrations for the period 2001-2008
Blood concentrations for general population

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

Raw data, measures of variation not reported.

Biomonitoring data for US population from NHANES; infor-
mation on QA/QC methodology readily available.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Biomonitoring data for US population from NHANES; infor-
mation on variability/uncertainty readily available.

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.3

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Atsdr,. 2007. Public health assessment: Peninsula Boulevard groundwater plume town of Hempstead, Nassau County, New

York: EPA facility ID: NYN000204407.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3970464

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Unacceptable

N/A

2
4

N/A

Government paper so assumed use of appropriate methods.
No method described,
sw samples

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low

Unacceptable
Medium

2007 ( > 10 years), data collocted >15 years ago

Sample size is not reported and assumptions cannot be made.

SW samples collected.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

Maximum value provided only.
No discussion on QA.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No variability or discussion on uncertainties.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.8.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Usgs,. 2006. Recent (2003-05) water quality of Barton Springs, Austin, Texas, with emphasis on factors effecting variability.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3975032

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Water sampling procedures only briefly described (pg 14).
Sample storage is mentioned.

"Done by NWQL using published USGS analytical methods"
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High

Medium

2
2

Barton Spring, TX

Data collected 2003-2005 (5-15 years ago)

22 samples from each spring orifice over two phases of sample
collection; uncertain if replicates were used

Study of contaminants (inc. PERC) in surface springs from
groundwater source

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:

Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
Medium

Raw data in Table 9; various summary statistics and figures
throughout

Quality control and assurance data is supposed to be in Ap-
pendix 3, which was not included with this copy

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variability of water quality factors was focus of this study

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Usgs,. 1994. Organic compounds downstream from a treated-wastewater discharge near Dalls, Texas, March 1987.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3975036

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Medium

N/A

Water samples for nutrient, organic, and inorganic determina-
tions were collected and preserved according to standard USGS
procedures (Wells and others, 1990).

Methods described and cited, but no indication of recoveries.
Tentative compound identification from GC/MS analyses was
based on computer matching of samplemass spectra with the
National Bureau of Standards library. Identification of all com-
pounds extracted by PT and other selected methods, and indi-
cated with a (b) in the data tables, was confirmed by matching
the mass spectrum and retention time of the sample with those
of authentic standards.(1987).

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
High

1
3
3
1

March 9 and 10, 1987

4 sites, but appears to be one sample per site.
Media of interest. Location well described.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

No summary stats or raw data.

one upstream control site. QA assumed, but not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Discussed uncertainty of analysis methods

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Usgs,. 2006. Water-quality conditions of Chester Creek, Anchorage, Alaska, 1998-2001.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3975042

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Data collection and analysis described in pages 5-7
Data collection and analysis described in pages 5-7
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

iSS

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
High

1
3

2
1

Chester Creek, Alaska

Data collected 1998-2001 (15+ years ago)

11 samples analyzed for VOCs, including PERC
For PCE, only concentration in surface water. Fish tissue anal-
ysis did not include VOCs.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Summary data only; Table 3

No specific discussion of quality control/assurance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No specific discussion of uncertainty/variability

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Usgs,. 2003. A national survey of methyl tert-butyl ether and other volatile organic compounds in drinking-water sources:

Results of the random survey.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3975046

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

Sampling equipment and procedures described; sampling per-
formed by different community water systems personnel across
country

Analytical methods and equipment discussed including detec-
tion limits
No biomarker used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

Medium

United States

Data collected between 1999-2000 (15+ years ago)

954 samples submitted from across the US, with field blanks
included

Data collected on many different chemicals in drinking water
sources; only PERC in surface water is of interest

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

Summary only; PERC is in Appendix 2 on pg 76
Quality control samples

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Uncertainty discussed extensively

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ak, D. E. C.. 2012. Wendell Avenue (MC cleaners).
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3982325

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Unacceptable
Unacceptable
N/A

4
4

N/A

sampling method is not described,
analytical method is not described,
not biomarker study

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
Unacceptable
Unacceptable

2
4
4

measured in 2010( > 5 yrs old)
sample size is not clear

Vapor intrusion, soil, and groundwater - not currently scenarios
of interest.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
N/A

N/A

no raw data, and any other statistical values,
no discussion

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Unacceptable

no discussion

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 3.2.

Extracted

Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk. Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, five of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Usgs,. 2009. Organic wastewater compounds, pharmaceuticals, and coliphage in ground water receiving discharge from onsite

wastewater treatment systems near La Pine, Oregon: Occurrence and implications for transport.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3982442

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Sample collection and storage are described. Sampling loca-
tions are given and characterized.

Detection limit and calibration standards discussed.
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

La Pine, Oregon

Samples collected in 2003 (5-15 years ago)

Replicate samples taken

PERC concentration in wastewater effluent is scenario of in-
terest, though this effluent is being sent to groundwater

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

High
High

1
1

Raw data in Table Bl, B2
Quality control data were collected

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variability discussed in Appendix B

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Helz, G. R.,Hsu, R. Y.. 1978. Volatile chloro- and bromocarbons in coastal waters. Limnology and Oceanography.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 4140523

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium 2 Sampling methodology discussed. To obtain data on the char-
acter of volatile halocarbons in waste discharges, we collected
a series of samples from Back River, Maryland (Fig. IB). This
is a shallow, 12 km long tributary estuary to the Chesapeake
Bay, with a salinity range of about 04 g* kg-1. Its mean depth
is about 1 m and it is well mixed vertically. Near its upper
end, Back River receives 1.5- 1.9 x lo8 liter, d-r of wastewa-
ter from Baltimore" s main sewage treatment plant; the waste
discharges often exceed the freshwater flow from the water-
shed by a factor of two (Helz et al. 1975). The plant provides
100 percent secondary treatment, mostly by the trickling fil-
ter process, to wastes of both domestic and commercial origin.
The effluent is chlorinated before discharge. The first series
of samples from Back River (No. 8-12) was collected in early
February 1977, after northern Chesapeake Bay had been cov-
ered with ice for more than a month. The only uncovered area
was a 0.2-km-diameter patch of water immediately above the
underwater diffusers at the discharge point in midriver. The
second set of samples (No. 13-23) was collected in early May
1977, well after the spring thaw.

Medium 2 Analytical methodology discussed. GC equipped with a Hall
electrolytic conductivity detector (TRACOR). In early stages
of the work, some identifications were checked by mass spec-
trometry, but the high selectivity of the method for only
volatile chloro- and bromocarbons minimizes the danger of
misidentification when only GC retention time is used. Limit
of detection not specified.

N/A N/A Biomarker not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Maryland (Back River estuary)

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

>15 years (February and May 1977)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

The first series of samples from Back River (No. 8-12; 5

samples) was collected in early February 1977, after northern
Chesapeake Bay had been covered with ice for more than a
month. The second set of samples (No. 13-23; 11 samples)
was collected in early May 1977, well after the spring thaw
(open water).

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Helz, G. R.,Hsu, R. Y..

1978. Volatile chloro- and bromocarbons in coastal waters. Limnology and Oceanography.

Data Type

Monitoring

Hero ID

4140523

Domain

Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 Back River: This is a shallow, 12 km long tributary estuary

to the Chesapeake Bay, with a salinity range of about 04 g* kg-
1. Its mean depth is aboutl m and it is well mixed verti- cally.
Near its upper end, Back River receives 1.5-1.9 x lo8 liter, d-r
of wastewater from Baltimore" s main sewage treat- ment plant;
the waste discharges often exceed the freshwater flow from the
watershed by a factor of two (Helz et al. 1975). The plant
provides 100 percent secondary treatment, mostly by the
trickling filter process, to wastes of both domestic and
commercial origin. The effluent is chlorinated before discharge.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8i Reporting of Results Medium 2 No supplemental or raw data. Table 3 lists DCM, TCE, and

PERC concentrations in NM for Back River samples collected
in February 1977 (ice cover) and May 1977 (open water). Some
values are ND, but LOD is not reported.

Metric 9; Quality Assurance Low 3 qa/qc procedures not directly discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty Medium 2 Some discussion of variability due to sampling times, February

(ice cover) and May (open water), and concentration decrease
seaward due to tidal mixing of the effluent. Some uncertainty
regarding the factors causing volatization and its influence on
May samples.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Aggazzotti, G.,Predieri, G.. 1986. SURVEY OF VOLATILE HALOGENATED ORGANICS (VHO) IN ITALY -LEVELS

OF VHO IN DRINKING WATERS, SURFACE WATERS AND SWIMMING POOLS. Water Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 4149721

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low

Medium
N/A

3
2

N/A

Minimal details for the surface water, collected from 31 sta-
tions

No standard method, but GC-EC conditions described.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low

Medium

1
3
3

31 stations, collected multiples time per year. But exact num-
ber of samples not reported.

a canal which collects the wastes of the city of Modena

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

no number of samples,, no SD, no raw data

Mentions calibration for VHO, but no mention of field blanks,
lab blanks, recoveries

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Fytianos, K.,Vasilikiotis, G.,Weil, L.. 1985. Identification and determination of some trace organic compounds in coastal

seawater of Northern Greece. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 4149731

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Low
Low

N/A

3
3

N/A

Described sample containers and filtration method, no info on
sample storage or duration.

gc-ms-ecd. Standard method not used. Operating conditions
not reported., although may be in Garrison et al. 1978;Shino-
hara et ai.1981).

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low

Medium

1
3
3

1980s

Not explicit. 2 rivers, samples collected twice a month for two
years = 24 samples per station

Not US, but sites described. The former is situated close to a
large city, Thessaloniki, and a large industrial area, including
a refinery unit. The latter is close to a smaller city, Kavala,
which is rapidly developing due to off-shore oil wells.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

only mean values reported
No recoveries, blanks discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No SD reported.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Hurford, N.,Law, R. J.,Payne, A. P.,Fileman, T. W.. 1989

discharges from chemical tankers.

Data Type Monitoring
Hero ID 4149734

Concentrations of chemicals in the North Sea arising from

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

sampling method is well described, but calibration is not men-
tioned.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High
Medium

1
3

> 15yrs old

surface water study, but Samples are collected from the sea
around UK.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

No raw data.

QC is described, no quantitative results for QA/QC.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

no discussion of uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Sauer, T. C.. 1981. Volatile organic compounds in open ocean and coastal surface waters. Organic Geochemistry.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 4152375

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High
N/A

2
1

N/A

sampling equipments, storage conditions are described, but no
information of calibration, storage duration.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
High

1
3
3
1

> 15yrs old

<10 samples for open ocean. <5 samples for coast.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Medium

3
2

no raw data, no mean or SD. no discussion of blanks,
discussed extraction efficiency.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

discussion of variability/uncertainty is limited.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ec,. 2014. SINPHONIE: Schools Indoor Pollution and Health Observatory Network in Europe.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 4440449

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low

N/A

calibration of sampler is not provided.

calibration of instrument ,detection limit are not provided

Domain 2: Representative™
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

;ss

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
Medium

<15yrs old (2010-2011)

not directly related to consumer product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Medium
High

2
1

raw data is not provided

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wetzel, T. A.. 2014. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) In Indoor Air: Emission From Consumer Products and the Use of

Plants for Air Sampling.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 4442460

Domain

Metric

Rating f

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low

Low
N/A

3
3

N/A

Very few details provided on sampling such as where samples
placed. Very unclear as to when the product was introduced
to the house and when samples were collected. No internal
conditions such as temp and RH provided.

Standard EPA method, but no LOQ.

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Low
Low

1
1
3
3

current

only one sample per room per house. 4 houses.

Product chemical content use pattern within house not pro-
vided.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity
Metric 8:
Metric 9:

Reporting of Results
Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

Only one sample per location, but not averages across houses.

Quality assurance only briefly discussed, but a standard
method was used.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Variation across houses not discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.6

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Won, D.,Corsi, R. L.,Rynes, M.. 2000. New indoor carpet as an adsorptive reservoir for volatile organic compounds. Envi-
ronmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 12793

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Medium

N/A

No standard method mentioned, but methodology well de-
scribed.

method described, but information such as calibration and re-
coveries not provided.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability

Temporality

Medium
Medium

Low

US sample. Differenct rh tested and different carpets tests.
3 carpet, with and without pads. Only 1 to 9 samples per type,
paper published in 2000 (>15 yrs)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

avg and CV only. No raw.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

limited discussion of uncertainities

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wallace, L. A.,Pellizzari, E.,Leaderer, B.,Zelon, H.,Sheldon, L.. 1987. Emissions of volatile organic compounds from building

materials and consumer products. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 23126

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

High 1

Low 3 instrument calibration, detection limit, recovery samples are

not discribed.

N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

High
Low
Low

1
3
3

just 3 samples for each 4 products
> 15yrs old study

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

no raw data

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

The uncertainties are discussed. That's because equiribrium is
assumed, the values might be underestimated.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.3

Extracted

Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Tichenor, B. A.,Sparks, L. E. Jackson, M. D.,Guo, Z.,Mason, M. A.,Plunket, C. M.,Rasor, S. A.. 1990. Emissions of per-

chloroethylene from dry cleaned fabrics. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 27401

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
High

N/A

1
1

N/A

Contractor concerned that LOD/LOQ not given, but the au-
thors do clearly state the lower end of their calibration curves,
so we know the minimum concentration without regression.
Authors provide details on methodology, instrumentation set-
tings, and QA/QC processes,
testing on fabric

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Metric 6:

Testing Scenario
Sample Size and Variability

Temporality

High
Medium

Low

Some samples less than 10 (emissions from fabrics one per ar-
ticle of clothing)

Older study >15 yrs.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

High
N/A

N/A

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Guo, Z. S.,Tichenor, B. A.,Mason, M. A.,Plunket, C. M.. 1990. The temperature dependence of the emission of perchloroethy-

lene from dry cleaned fabrics. Environmental Research.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 27961

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

Upgraded to high. The sampling methodology and conditions
are reported in detail. This study is old, but this question
does not cover temporality. Further, these methodologies are
still common practice (small environmental chambers, tenax
sorptive tubes, GC analysis).

Upgraded to high. The analytical methodology and conditions
are reported in detail. This study is old, but this question does
cover temporality. Further, these methodologies are still com-
mon practice (small environmental chambers, tenax sorptive
tubes, GC analysis).

No biomarker

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Medium

Low

Scenarios tested for a range of conditions, including some cor-
responding to typical consumer exposure.

Multiple samples taken over period of up to five days.
Experiments took place > 15 years ago (published 1989)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

Summary statistics are included but raw data is not.

Quality control was mentioned in experimental design, but not

described in detail.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability and uncertainty are touched on

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Sack, T. M.,Steele, D. H.,Hammerstrom, K.,Remmers, J.. 1992. A survey of household products for volatile organic com-
pounds. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 28339

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions High 1

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Low 3 detection limits, recovery samples are not discribed.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

Medium
Medium

Low

exposure control is not discussed.

number of products per category varied. Replicates tests for
some products, but not all.

>15 yrs old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

no raw data. Only average is reported.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

uncertainties, limitations are not discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.3

Extracted

Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Fernandez, J.,Guberan, E.,Caperos, J.. 1976. Experimental human exposures to tetrachloroethylene vapor and elimination in

breath after inhalation. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 58143

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Medium

Medium

Sampling methods, protocol, and equipment are described
Analytical methods are briefly discussed. Technique (gas chro-
matography) and instrumentation are given,
tee in breath

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Medium

Low
Low

3
3

Experimental conditions in controlled environment rather than
consumer exposure; biomonitoring

Appropriate sample size, but no mention of replicates
Article published in March 1976 issue of journal, so results are
15+ years old.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

Raw data points provided in figures only
No specific discussion of quality assurance/control

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of variability/uncertainty particularly with re-
gard to urine sampling

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Opdam, J. J.,Smolders, J. F.. 1987. Alveolar sampling and fast kinetics of tetrachloroethene in man. II. Fast kinetics.

Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 58314

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions Medium
Analytical Methodology Low

Biomarker Selection

N/A

sampling described in detail elsewhere, but info such as sam-
pling times, breath holding provided.

analysis described elsewhere, no details provided in report,
could be upgraded upon examination of other report.

N/A

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

Low

Medium

Low

testing conditions described elsewhere.

6 volunteers

1987 study, although the PERC was not a product, so timing
not as important.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

no raw data
limited QC discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

limited discussion of variability

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.4

Extracted

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Imbriani, M.,Ghittori, S.,Pezzagno, G.,Capodaglio, E.. 1988. Urinary excretion of tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) in

experimental and occupational exposure. Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 58324

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High

Medium

N/A

Sampling method described in detail.

Method discussed, but not in detail. Recoveries provided.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Medium

High
Low

different exposure activities used (rest, biking). Not exposed
to a product, but to PERC.
three groups of 5
>15 yrs

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

no raw data

recoveries provided, calibration of equipment not discussed, or
blanks.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.9

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kreiling, J. A.,Stephens, R. E.,Reinisch, C. L.. 2005. A mixture of environmental contaminants increases cAMP-dependent

protein kinase in Spisula embryos. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 58563

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
Medium

Sampling procedures are given in detail
Analytical methodology given in detail

Biomarker (RII antigen) compared after exposure to PERC
both individually and in combination with other studied chem-
icals

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Low

High
Medium

Study looks at Atlantic surf clams; these are sediment-dwelling
and thus excluded from scenario of interest; study is not look-
ing at concentration in body tissues
Large number of samples

Experiments took place prior to publication in 2004 (5-15 years
ago)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

Summary only; data provided in figures
Quality Assurance not specifically discussed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variety of chemical concentrations tested

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.6

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: S. Kim, J. A. Kim, J. Y. An, H. J. Kim, S. D. Kim, J. C. Park. 2007.

flooring materials bonded with environmental-friendly MF/PVAc hybrid
Data Type Experimental
Hero ID 1512515

TVOC and formaldehyde emission behaviors from
resins. Indoor Air.

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology

High
Medium

flooring prep discussed, chamber set up discussed

GC/MS. conditions in table 5. no info on calibration or recov-

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Medium

Low
Medium

3
2

one set of sampling conditions, table 2. Not sure if resin is con-
sidered an adhesive. Korean study, exact product not known,
number of tests is uncertain.

10 yrs old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

no raw data. Uncertain if the EF is a mean or s
QC not explicitly discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No SD

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kwon, K. iD,Jo, W.,Lim, H.,Jeong, W.. 2008. Volatile pollutants emitted from selected liquid household products. Environ-
mental Science and Pollution Research.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 1752751

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

High

N/A

2
1

N/A

Experimental protocol and equipment are described thor-
oughly.

Analytical procedures given in detail, including mention of de-
tection limits and recovery
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Low

Medium
Medium

2
2

Household products tested, but under laboratory conditions.

Goal was to determine composition of products

42 household products tested

Tests conducted prior to article publication in 2008 (5-15 years
ago)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Low
N/A

N/A

Summary data only, data is product compositions and not air
concentration or consumer dose

No specific discussion of quality assurance/control

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of limitations in section 6

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kowalska, J.,Szewczynska, M.,Posniak, M.. 2014. Measurements of chlorinated volatile organic compounds emitted from office

printers and photocopiers. Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 2534318

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

No standard method method mentioned, but chamber size,
temp, RH, air volume, duration reported.

Discussed method, calibration curve. For substance identifica-
tion, the mass spectrum library NIST 05 was available.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Metric 6:

Testing Scenario
Sample Size and Variability

Temporality

Medium
Medium

Low

Office printers is on PECO for PERC.

7 different office equipment devices. Appears that replicates
were conducted since mean and SD provided for each device.

Test date not specified, although assumed to be recent based
on pub date.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

No raw data, mean and SD provided for each device,
calibration provided, no discussion of controls.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Discussed different equipment types.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: W. R. Chan, S. Cohn, M. Sidheswaran, D. P. Sullivan, W. J. Fisk. 2014. Contaminant levels, source strengths, and ventilation

rates in California retail stores. Indoor Air.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 2535652

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions High 1

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology High 1

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

High

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

High

Metric 6: Temporality

High

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

High

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

N/A

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Kowalska, J.,Gierczak, T.. 2013. Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses of the Halogenated Volatile Organic Compounds

Emitted from the Office Equipment Items. Indoor and Built Environment.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 2655630

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

Medium
High

N/A

2
1

N/A

Sampling equipment and methods are described.

Analytical methods are given, including calibration and deter-
mination limits
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Low

Low
Medium

3
2

Agree that the testing scenario relevance is low- The office

items were "disintegrated"(not clear how or to what degree),

and heated to desporb VOCs. Cannot directly compare to

emissions of intact articles at room temperature.

16 different items tested; no mention of replicates

Tests conducted prior to article publication in 2008 (5-15 years

ago)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

High
N/A

N/A

Raw data is given (chromatograms); numbers in summary data
No specific discussion of quality assurance/control

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No specific discussions of variability/uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: M. Nohr, W. Horn, O. Jann, M. Richter, W. Lorenz. 2015. Development of a multi-VOC reference material for quality

assurance in materials emission testing. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 2718034

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low

N/A

Development of new method, micro chamber.

No LOQ provided in article. Method described elsewhere.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Medium

Low
High

3
1

The emissions is from volatility in a petri dish. The product

was not "applied".

Three batches of same product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

No raw data,
not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

High

RSD provided, discussed influence on humidity, chamber flow.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Chao, C. Y. H.,Tung, T. C. W.,Niu, J. L.,Pang, S. W.,Lee, R. Y. M.. 1999. Indoor perchloroethylene accumulation from dry

cleaned clothing on residential premises. Building and Environment.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 3559311

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
Low
N/A

1
3

N/A

Experimental protocol and sampling methodology are de-
scribed thoroughly.

Analysis methods described broadly - gas chromatography/
mass spectroscopy
No biomarker

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

High

Medium

Low

Test locations are actual homes, chosen from consumer survey;
tests simulate typical drycleaning exposure

7 samples per test, duplicate samples at some test locations.
Study done in 1996 (15+ years ago)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

High
N/A

N/A

Raw data reported in Tables 2-4
Quality control measures mentioned.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Environmental conditions and results of duplicate tests are pro-
vided.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Cheng, W. enHsi,Tsai, D. Y.,Lu, J. iaYu,Lee, J. enWei. 2016. Extracting Emissions from Air Fresheners Using Solid Phase

Microextraction Devices. Aerosol and Air Quality Research.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 3587655

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions Medium 2 new sampling method; qualification tests conducted on the

samplers used.

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 Missing some details, method SOP not reported.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4:

Testing Scenario

Low

One test condition. No detailed description of product.

Metric 5:

Sample Size and Variability

Low

No replicate. Single samples of three products.

Metric 6:

Temporality

High

current (2016; publication date)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7:

Reporting of Results

Medium

No raw data. No summary across fresheners, although not as

applicable.

Metric 8:

Quality Assurance

N/A

Minimal QC. RSD (flow rates) in supp files.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty Medium 2 some discussion of variability between emissions.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 2.1

Extracted Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: UL Env. 2017. Floor Coating VOC Emissions Research Report.
Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4440489

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions

Medium

Environmental chamber and chemical emissions were analyt-

ically measured. Sampling conditions reported (temperature,

RH, and air change per hour throughout each test).

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

VOC measurements were made using gas chromatography with

mass spectrometric detection (GC-MS). Measurements are re-

ported to a quantifiable level of 0.04 "g based on a standard

air volume collection of 18 L. Calibrated.

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representative

Continued on next page

o->

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation:
Data Type
Hero ID

UL Env. 2017. Floor Coating VOC Emissions Research Report.

Experimental

4440489

Domain

Metric Rating^

Score

Comments*

Metric 4: Testing Scenario Medium

Small chamber screening phase: Screening tests were con-
ducted to determine the type and amount of VOCs emitted
from each floor coating. The coatings were applied to solid
wood substrates according to the manufacturers recommended
instructions. Then the samples were immediately placed in a
90 L test chamber that is supplied with purified air at stan-
dard conditions of 23"C, 50 percent relative humidity, and 1
air change per hour. Air samples were collected after a 24-hr

equilibrium period to determine the emission rate of VOCs.

Full scale large chamber application phase: Based on the small
chamber screening data, 3 formulations, a low-emitting coating
(Water Based 7), a high-emitting water-based coating (Water
Based 3), and a solvent based coating (Solvent Based 2) were
identified for more comprehensive testing. The comprehensive
testing was conducted in a room sized environmental chamber
(32 m3) and each test included an application phase (where an
installer entered the chamber and applied the coating) and an
early occupancy phase (where the floor was allowed to equili-
brate normally and air samples were collected over a 7-day pe-
riod in the chamber). The chamber was supplied with purified
air at standard conditions of 23"C, 50 percent relative humid-
ity, and 1 air change per hour throughout the test. Prior to
testing, an 8" x 12" wood floor was assembled in the chamber
to serve as the finish substrate. Background samples were col-
lected to identify potential contaminants from the wood floor
substrate. At the start of the application phase, the techni-
cian (a professional flooring contractor) entered the chamber
with a small container of finish and a standard synthetic lambs
wool applicator. The finish was poured onto small sections of
the flooring and spread evenly over the entire surface, then the
technician opened the door and quickly exited the chamber.
Each coating was applied with the recommended number of
coats (2 or 3) and using the recommended dry time between
coats (2-hrs to 24-hrs). Air samples were collected during the
application of each coat (to capture the maximum breathing
concentration) and over the coating plus drying time (to deter-
mine the average breathing concentration during application).
After the door was closed following application ofthe final coat,
the early occupancy phase of the test was started. Data from
the application phase is compared to occupational exposure
guidelines.

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability Medium 2 small sample size; air samples were collected during application

of each coat (to capture the maximum breathing concentration)
and over the coating plus drying time (to determine average
breathing concentration during application.

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: UL Env. 2017. Floor Coating VOC Emissions Research Report.
Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4440489

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Metric 6: Temporality

High

<5 years (2017 pub date)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

No supplemental or raw data. Table 4 reports measured cham-
ber concentrations during full-scale large chamber application
phase results.

Measured concentrations from the application phase were com-
pared to occupational exposure guidelines

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wetzel, T. A.. 2014. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) In Indoor Air: Emission From Consumer Products and the Use of

Plants for Air Sampling.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4442460

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions Low

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology
Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium
N/A

Some info is described in another report. But missing key
pieces of information such as the exact times samples were
collected from the chamber.

Analytical method described, but no limits reported.

N/A

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

Low
Low
High

3
3
1

Chemical content or weight fraction of product not reported.

<5 samples

current

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Low
N/A

N/A

The report lacked a lot of information and organization, no
raw data, no results per sampling interval.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Discussed calibration. Assessed reproducibility and accuracy
of the emission rates generated from the chamber. No recover-
ies mentioned.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.4

Extracted

Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: C. B. Keil, M. Nicas. 2003. Predicting room vapor concentrations due to spills of organic solvents. AIHA Journal.
Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4532343

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High
Medium

N/A

Sampling method well described.

chemical not analyzed, evaporation determined by mass, as
logged by a computer. No calibration was discussed.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:

Testing Scenario
Sample Size and Variability

Low
Low

3
3

Spill of chemical, not of formulated product. One set of con-
ditions however the article states that other studies show that
evap rates don't vary much with different conditions,
range and avg provided, but could not find the number of sam-
ples.

2003, >15 yrs old, but tested using a chemical so not as rele-
vant.

Metric 6:

Temporality

Low

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Low
N/A

N/A

no raw data and no number of samples.
Did not discuss QC measures.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Conducted a study in a test house with one chemical (not
DCM) to compare lab results.

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.6

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Won, D. Yang W.. 2012. Material emission information from: 105 building materials and consumer products.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4663242

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions High 1

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 analytical method is well described, but no recovery samples.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Low 3 Consumer uses(subcategory in table 2) don't match for use of

interest of EPA very much.

LOW 3 only one sample collected per test

Medium 2 2010 and 2011(>5 yrs old)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

High
N/A

N/A calibration, comparison to past data are described, but recov-
eries is not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: C Solal, C. Rousselle, C. Mandin, J. Manel, F. Maupetit. 2008. VOCs and formaldehyde emissions from cleaning products

and air fresheners. International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate (Indoor Air 2008).

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4683353

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions Medium 2 Although it appears that standard methods were used, not

many details were provided.

The emission test chamber method is described in EN ISO
16000-9 (Determination of the emission of volatile organic com-
pounds from building products and furnishing " Emission test
chamber method).

VOCs were sampled on Tenax-TA and analysed using TD/GC/
MSD/FID according to ISO 16000-6.

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
N/A

N/A

Although it appears that standard methods were used, not
many details were provided. Samples were analysed using TD/
GC/MSD/FID according to ISO 16000-6.
no biomarkers

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability

Temporality

Low
Low
Medium

3
3
2

Not US products. Don't know weight fractions of products.
Only two samples per product type.

10 years

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Low
N/A

N/A

Only the maximum concentration provided.
Implied through the use of standard methods.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

only limited discussion of variability.

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.4

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: A. T. Hodgson. 1999. Common indoor sources of volatile organic compounds: Emission rates and techniques for reducing

consumer exposures.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4683358

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions High
Metric 2: Analytical Methodology High

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

N/A

1
1

N/A

robust sampling method description

GC-MS; previously been described (Hodgson and Girman,
1989). This method is a modification of U.S. EPA Method
TO-1 (Winberry etal., 1988a).

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

Low
Low
Low

3
3
3

Tested products not an exact match to scenarios of interest.
3 experiments: latex paint, vinyl flooring, carpet
>15 yrs old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

No raw data

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of uncertainty and variability

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: A. T. Hodgson. 2001. Predicted concentrations in new relocatable classrooms of volatile organic compounds emitted from

standard and alternate interior finish materials.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4683360

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High
N/A

1
1

N/A

no biomarkers

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Testing Scenario

Medium

kind of products, test substance, testing methods are de-
scribed. But exposure control is not discussed, and temper-
ature/pressure are assumed value for estimation of concentra-
tion.

2-4 products samples per product type.

>15 yrs old

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Low
Low

3
3

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

Each results are summarized in each tables. The value in each
tables are not raw data though, raw values of concentration
are possibly calculated by equation(l). Statistical discussion
is missed.

QC discussion is quite limited.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Variability/Uncertainty discussion is quite limited.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: A. C. Ortiz. 2010. Identifying sources of volatile organic compounds and aldehydes in a high performance building.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 4683366

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions High 1

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology
Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium
N/A

testing generally followed California Specification 01350 [15]
and ASTM Standard Guide D-6007-02 [16] using small emis-
sion chambers.

USEPA Method TO-17. standard method and LOQ provided,
but not details on recovery or calibration.

N/A no biomarker

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

Medium

Low

Medium

3
2

only one testing condition, did not vary temp, airflow, etc.
one test per product.

8 years old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results
Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium
N/A

N/A

quality assurance implied but not discussed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

no discussion of limitations

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Jia, C. R.,D'Souza, J.,Batterman, S.. 2008. Distributions of personal VOC exposures: A population-based analysis. Environ-
ment International.

Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

Hero ID 484177

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

High
High

1
1

NHANES
NHANES

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium

1
3

Over 15 years old

Indoor air, but not specifically linked to a consumer use.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
Medium

No raw data, but complete summary stats

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Discussed exposure factors.

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Arif, A. A.,Shah, S. M.. 2007. Association between personal exposure to volatile organic compounds and asthma among US

adult population. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health.

Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

Hero ID 729385

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology
Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

High
High

1
1

NHANES

NHANES. Detailed description of laboratory protocols is avail-
able from the NCHS web site.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Geographic Area
Metric 4: Temporal
Metric 5: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low

1
3
3

>15 yrs

Sample collected for 24-48 hrs. Not specific to indoors or to a
consumer product. Personal activities were investigated.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
Medium

NHANES

no min or max (but 95th CI provided)

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Staples, C. A.,Werner, A. F.,Hoogheem, T. J.. 1985. Assessment of priority pollutant concentrations in the United States

using STORET database. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.

Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

Hero ID 1359400

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

High
High

1
1

STORET refers overall to "STORage and RETrieval", an elec-
tronic data system for water quality monitoring data; devel-
oped and approved source by EPA

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
High

1
3
1

>15 yrs

STORET refers overall to "STORage and RETrieval", an elec-
tronic data system for water quality monitoring data; devel-
oped and approved source by EPA

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
Medium

only median and number of samples

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.4

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical data reporting: 1,1,2,2,-tetrachloroethene.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970117

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology
Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

High
N/A

N/A

Data submitted to EPA by manufacturers.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Geographic Area
Metric 4: Temporal

Metric 5: Exposure Scenario

High
High

High

1
1

US database.

Data appears to be for 2010-2011 production volumes. 2016

data now available.

Indicates if a consumer use product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
Medium

Widely accepted. Users Guide.

Data is organized. Typically only provides range or max con-
centration for product category.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.2

Extracted

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Oppt Monitoring Database. 2017. Perchloroethylene.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

Hero ID 3970236

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Medium
Medium

2
2

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium

Low

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

Medium

Low

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Pubchem,. 2017. PubChem: Tetrachloroethylene.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970251

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology
Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Low
N/A

N/A

Sampling methodologies were not reported,
no samples were analyzed

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Geographic Area
Metric 4: Temporal
Metric 5: Exposure Scenario

N/A
Low
High

N/A
3
1

no sample analysis

Many sources are older >15 yrs.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

Low
High

3
1

No info on how data was compiled or level of QC provided.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

none discussed

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Household Products, Database. 2017. Household products database: Chemical information: Tetrachloroethylene.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

Hero ID 3970268

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Medium
N/A

N/A

About Database webpage describes some info on how data was
collected, but not detailed.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
High

1
1
1

US database.

Products have range of dates including <5 yrs.

Weight fractions in 18,000 various consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
High

1
1

Widely accepted US govt database.

Data is organized. No summary provided, so summary stats
not applicable

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Consumer Product Information, Database. 2017. What's in it? tetrachloroethylene.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

Hero ID 3981163

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Low
N/A

N/A

Webpage provides only very limited info. Brands selected
based on market share.

Shelf survey.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
High

1
1
1

USA and Canada database

"Date verified" provided, come <5 yrs old.

Weight fractions of consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

Low
High

3
1

No info how data collected or QC provided.

Data is organized. No summary provided, so summary stats
not applicable

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.7

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Bartzis, J.. 2018. Prioritization of building materials as indoor pollution sources (BUMA).
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

Hero ID 4663145

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

N/A
N/A

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High

Medium

2
2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
High

1
1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.4

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Page, G. W.. 1981. Comparison of groundwater and surface water for patterns and levels of contamination by toxic substances.

Environmental Science and Technology.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 18169

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

measurements, approaches are described briefly. But not in
detail.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

surface water study, geography of area is described, but it's
quite old study.(data collected in 1979)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

variability/uncertainty is not discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ipcs,. 1984. Tetrachloroethylene. Environmental Health Criteria.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 22606

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

Govt report of secondary exposure data. Medium score since
the paper does not describe lit search.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

SW and aquatic species of interest. Geographical info most
likely found within the secondary sources.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Various secondary sources cited for data. However, limited
discussion on data gaps.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wallace, L. A.,Pellizzari, E.,Leaderer, B.,Zelon, H.,Sheldon, L.. 1987. Emissions of volatile organic compounds from building

materials and consumer products. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 23126

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

Did not describe why selected the one study to compare vs
others.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Indoor air concentrations, but not specific to a product.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

secondary data - only the average concentration was reported
for comparison.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No SD provided for indoor concentrations. They did explain
why chamber vs indoor air concentrations may differ.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2001. Sources, emission and exposure for trichloroethylene (TCE) and related chemicals.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 35002

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium 2 Government report, but did not describe lit search methods

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 For surface water secondary data, does not provide location

within US.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Fuller, B. B.. 1976. Air pollution assessment of tetrachloroethylene.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 58062

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Low 3 No description of literature search method.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 US study and media of interest (water, biota on pg 64), but

the secondary data is from 1975.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 no discussion related to the concentrations in the environment

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Zoeteman, B. C. J.,Harmsen, K.,Linders, J. B. H. J.,Morra, C. F. H.,Slooff, W.. 1980. Persistent organic pollutants in river

water and ground water of the Netherlands. Chemosphere.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 58284

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

persistence is mainly discussed, basically secondary references
are quited.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

US study, but auite old study (1980) and not much data.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussion of uncertainties.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Atsdr,. 1997. Toxicological profile for tetrachloroethylene.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 192111

Domain Metric Rating* Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium 2

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario High 1

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Fishbein, L.. 1992. Exposure from occupational versus other sources. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and
Health.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 200024

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

Few assumption provided. Literature search methods not dis-
cussed.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

Over 15 years old. Intakes not specific to indoors.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

A reference section is provided. But the range provided for
indoor air concentrations was not specifically stated in the text.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No discussion.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

3.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Duboudin, C.. 2010. Pollution inside the home: descriptive analyses Part II: Identification of groups of homogenous homes in

terms of pollution. Environnement, Risques & Sante.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 380600

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

Limited discussion of methods, but references provided for
sampling and analytical methodology.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

survey from 2003-2005

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

Some references that would be useful to review are in French.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Conducted statistical analysis to group comparable homes. No
CV of concentrations provided.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Chien, Y. C.. 1997. The influences of exposure pattern and duration on elimination kinetics and exposure assessment of

tetrachloroethylene in humans [PhD].

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 630433

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium 2

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Medium 2

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Letkiewicz, F. Johnston, P.,Macaluso, C.,Elder, R.,Yu, W.. 1982. Occurrence in tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) in

drinking water, food and air.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 630715

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Draws on data from previous federal surveys, as well as some
state data

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

PERC concentrations in drinking water

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of Reference s

High

References are documented and appear to be reliable

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Study looks at variability in exposure throughout United
States

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Nysdoh,. 2005. Improving human risk assessment for tetrachloroethylene by using biomakers and neurobehavioral testing.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 630847

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Technical approach appears reliable, much discussion of meth-
ods and techniques

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

Assessment of data collected in NYC between 2001-2003; Con-
sumer inhalation exposure through both air concentrations and
blood/breath levels

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

References and reported data are provided in appendix

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Variability characterized for blood/breath perc levels

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Benignus, V. A.,Boyes, w. K.,Geller, A. M.,Bushnell, p. J.. 2009. Long-term perchloroethylene exposure: A meta-analysis of
neurobehavioral deficits in occupationally and residentially exposed groups. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health,
Part A: Current Issues.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 633141

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Assessment techniques appear to be accepted and reliable.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

All studies included are of consumer inhalation exposure mea-
sured by indoor air quality

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of Reference s

High

Studies referenced all appear in peer-reviewed publications

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability in population/media is explored

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Destaillats, H.,Maddalena, R. L.,Singer, B. C.,Hodgson, A. T.,McKone, T. E.. 2008. Indoor pollutants emitted by office

equipment: A review of reported data and information needs. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 694628

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Unacceptable

just Literature review.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

The release of PERC from office equipments is described. US
study. HBCD is not mentioned in document, published In

2008.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

no discussion - all secondary data.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.3.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: C. J. Weschler. 2009. Changes in indoor pollutants since the 1950s. Atmospheric Environment.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 695495

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

Little discussion on methodology.Table 1 provides a sense of
how and why an indoor environment in 2008 is so different
from its counterpart in the early 1950s.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Article discusses trends in indoor pollutants. Table 2 reports
selected pollutants (includes DCM, Carbon Tet, TCE, and
PERC) and trends in their indoor concentrations since the
1950s. There are no concentration measurement; trends are
broadly summarized by up and down arrows. Figure 4(a) re-
ports median indoor concentrations of Carbon Tet, PERC, and
TCE, but these data are derived from 1981-1984 TEAM Study
and the 1999-2001 RIOPA study (secondary studies will not be
extracted)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

References are listed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

The study has limited discussion of key uncertainties and lim-
itations.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation:

Gilbert, D.,Goyer, M.,Lyman, W.,Magil, G.,Walker, P.,Wallace, D.,Wechsler, A.,Yee, J.. 1982. An exposure and risk assess-

ment for tetrachloroethylene.

Data Type

Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID

732615

Domain

Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario High 1

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Dawson, H. E.,McAlary, T.. 2009. A compilation of statistics for VOCs from post-1990 indoor air concentration studies in

North American residences unaffected by subsurface vapor intrusion. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 735303

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Detailed description of literature evaluated and statistical anal-
ysis.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

Most studies are >15 yrs old, and not directly tied to consumer
products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

robust discussion, discussed variability

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Bogen, K. T.,McKone, T. E.. 1988. Linking indoor air and pharmacokinetic models to assess tetrachloroethylene risk. Risk
Analysis.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 819974

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

model for inhalation from groundwater, but groundwater is off-

PECO

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

compared to other studies

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: . 1988. Toxic Air Pollutant Emission Factors Compilation For Selected Air Toxic Compounds and Sources.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 1265174

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

mathematical approach is described very simply. But the dis-
cussion of the approach like validity is missed.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

there are tables of emission factors of TCE and perc for indus-
trial process. But data is quite old (> 15yrs).

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

input data is missed, some of un-peer reviewed sources are
cited.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

variability/uncertainty is a bit discussed.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: de Bias, M.,Navazo, M.,Alonso, L.,Durana, N.,Gomez, M. C.,Iza, J.. 2012. Simultaneous indoor and outdoor on-line hourly
monitoring of atmospheric volatile organic compounds in an urban building. The role of inside and outside sources. Science
of the Total Environment.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 1788276

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

The contractor comment downgraded the paper because itdoes
not link directly to a consumer product, but that is not the pur-
pose of the study. The indoor/outdoor mixing ration measure-
ments can help inform background indoor air concentrations
when considering risk due to use scenarios.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Du, Z.,Mo, J.,Zhang, Y.. 2014. Risk assessment of population inhalation exposure to volatile organic compounds and carbonyls
in urban China. Environment International.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 2536230

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: L. Golsteijn, D. Huizer, M. Hauck, R. van Zelm, M. A. Huijbregts. 2014. Including exposure variability in the life cycleimpact

assessment of indoor chemical emissions: the case of metal degreasing. Environment International.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 2537636

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.0

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: . 2015. Health Assessment for Groundwater, Surface Water, Soil and Sediment Data Evaluation, Corozal Well Site, Corozal,

Puerto Rico, July 29, 2015. EPA Facility ID: PRN000206452.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3491017

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Assumptions for calculations are well-documented

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

Surface water is discussed briefly, only to rule it out. Bulk of
assessment is on groundwater, which is not currently of inter-
est.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of Reference s

High

Reference are well documented; data from EPA and PRDOH

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Some discussions of uncertainty related to dose calculations

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: McDonald, G. J.,Wertz, W. E.. 2007. PCE, TCE, and TCA vapors in subslab soil gas and indoor air: A case study in upstate

New York. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3543741

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 Indoor air study, but not specialized as consumer products.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Bauer, U.. 1991. OCCURRENCE OF TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN THE FEDERAL-REPUBLIC-OF-GERMANY.

Chemo sphere.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3572966

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Low

No discussion on methodology.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Low

Older (1991) German study citing data from 1976-1986.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of Reference s

High

Caution that many cited references could be in German.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No variability and some uncertainties were addressed.

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: De Rooij, C.,Boutonnet, J. C.,Garny, V.,Lecloux, A.,Papp, R.,Thompson, R. S.,Van Wijk, D.. 1998. Euro Chlor risk
assessment for the marine environment OSPARCOM region: North sea - Tetrachloroethylene. Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3573238

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology LOW 3 No discussion on methodology.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Low 3 Older (1998) risk assessment study utilizing data from 1975-

1995 in European surface waters.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 No variability and some uncertainties were addressed.

Overall Quality Determination* Low 2.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Giger, W.,Molnarkubica, E.. 1978. TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN CONTAMINATED GROUND AND DRINKING

WATERS. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3573428

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology LOW 3 No discussion on methodology.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Low 3 study is regarding dw gw. study cites cone of perc up to 80

ug/L in sw.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 No primary SW cone reported; up to 80 ug/L.

Overall Quality Determination* Low 2.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation:

Nicnas,. 2001. Tetrachloroethylene '

' Priority existing chemical. Assessment Report No. 15.

Data Type

Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID

3797979

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 Australia

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Medium 2 Some variability and uncertainties were discussed.

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.5

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Oecd,. 2013. Emission scenario document on the industrial use of adhesives for substrate bonding.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3827300

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Low 3 mostly occupational, not consumer

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium 2

Some discussion of data gaps for release and exposure estimates
(occupational)

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium 1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2011. Background indoor air concentrations of volatile organic compounds in North American residences

(1990-2005): A compilation of statistics for assessment vapor intrusion.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3827392

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

The assessment methods , assumptions are discribed simply for
each studies which are collected by EPA.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

>10 yrs old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

References are peer reviewed sources and compiled data are
summarized. But no raw data.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ecb,. 2005. European Union risk assessment report: Tetrachloroethylene. Part 1 - Environment.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3839195

Domain Metric Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium

media interest, but relatively old report (2005: >5yrs old).
Not US study.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References Medium

Most references cited and seem to be available publicly. Others
are personal communications.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High

Overall Quality Determination* High

1.5

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Australian Government Department of, Health. 2016. Human health tier III assessment for l-methyl-2-pyrrolidinone.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3969286

Domain Metric Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High

Used Consexpo to model inhalation and dermal doses. Used
all default parameters with 4 different weight fractions.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario High

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Medium

model;ed multiple weight fractions.

Overall Quality Determination* High

1.2

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2012. Toxicological review of tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene).
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3970109

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Methodology (literature search strategy) discussed in detail
and seems complete.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

Many studies seem to correlate to occupational and animal
studies, and less on indoor air within households or sw concen-
trations.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

References cited and seem to be available publicly.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 1998. Cleaner technologies substitutes assessment for professional fabricare processes.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3970186

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

Govt report of secondary exposure data. Limited discussion
on lit search methods, assumptions, extrapolations.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Older report (1998). Consumer exposures and aquatic/surface
water concentrations are provided.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Uncertainties discussed; limited characterization of variability

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: ToxNet Hazardous Substances Data, Bank. 2017. HSDB: Tetrachloroethylene.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3970279

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Low 3 No discussion on methodology.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium 2 Relevant media, but almost all secondary articles are >15 years
old.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 Variability is n/a; Uncertainties not identified.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Echa,. 2014. Substance evaluation report -
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3970790

T etrachloroethylene.

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

lit search method is missed.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Unacceptable

just occupational exposure is disscussed. consumer, aquatic
exposure is not described.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.0.

Extracted

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Echa,. 2008. Annex XV restriction report: Tetrachloroethylene.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3970791

Domain Metric Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium

Govt 2008 report. Consumer exposures (back-in-use materi-
als).

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References Low

Many references cited seem to be personal communications.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Medium

Some variability, uncertainties were discussed.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium

2.0

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Spolana, a s. 2014. Chemical safety report: Trichloroethylene.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3970807

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

High

EUSES. Annex 1 has assumptions

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

EU, <5 yrs

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 Multiple scenarios, but no discussion of uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 1.8

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Domo Caproleuna GmbH. 2014. Chemical safety report: Industrial use as an extractive solvent for the purification of capro-

lactam from caprolactam oil.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3970809

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1 Used EUSES to model PECs. Assumptions provided.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 industrial release, but not us.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3 : Documentation of References Low 3 Only one reference ,assumed to be the source of the fate prop-

erties.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 not discussed

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 2.2

Extracted Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: D. O. W. Deutschland. 2014. Chemical safety report: Industrial use as process chemical (enclosed systems) in Alcantara

material production.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3970811

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

EUSES is an accepted model, not sure all inputs provided.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Applicable scenario, but not US

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Vlisco Netherlands, B. V.. 2014. Chemical safety report Part A: Use of trichloroethylene as a solvent for the removal and

recovery of resin from dyed cloth.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3970833

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

EUSES

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No discussion of uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.5

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Parker Hannifin, Manufacturing. 2014. Chemical safety report: Use of trichloroethylene as a process solvent for the manufac-
turing of hollow fibre gas separation membranes out of polyphenylene oxide (PPO).

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3970838

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

EUSES

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

EU. <5 ytrs old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No direct discussion, but evaluated multiple scenarios.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: . 2014. Exposure assessment: Trichloroethylene, Part 3.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3970842

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

Used EUSES but didn't describe inputs

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

based on industrial releases, but in EU

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of Reference s

Low

this is just a chapter and no references included.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

No discussion of variability and uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.8

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Iarc,. 2014. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans: Trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, and

some other chlorinated agents.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3970844

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 Some exposure data are quite old.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Medium 2 uncertainty of exposure data is not discussed

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Atsdr,. 2006. Health consultation: Evaluation of tetrachloroethylene vapor intrusion into buildings located above a contami-
nated aquifer: Schlage Lock Company Security, El Paso County, Colorado: EPA facility ID: COD082657420.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3978056

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium 2 the concept of exposure assessment is described, but no details.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Unacceptable 4 Indoor air study. However, source is not from consumer prod-

ucts, but vapor intrusion from soil contaminated by groundwa-
ter.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 Limited discussion

Overall Quality Determination* Unacceptable 4.0 Metric mean score**: 2.5.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Atsdr,. 2005. Health consultation: Walden'
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3978068

's Ridge utility district: Signal Mountain, Hamilton County, Tennessee.

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

exposure pathway is simply described though, no details are
shown.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Unacceptable

Human exposure for drinking water is discussed.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

discussion is quite limited.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.5.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Atsdr,. 2008. Health consultation: Public comment release: Indoor and outdoor air data evaluation for Chillum perc
site: Chillum perc site (aka Chillum perchloroethylene): Chillum, Prince George County, Maryland: EPA facility ID:
MDN000305887.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3978081

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

concept of exposure assessment is described, but no details.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Unacceptable

Vapor intrusion study.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

no discussion.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score :2.5.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Carex, Canada. 2017. Tetrachloroethylene-
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3978375

¦ Environmental estimate.

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

3 No discussion on methodology.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

2 Canadian and US sources >5 years.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3 No variability; Uncertainties not identified.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Carex, Canada. 2017. Tetrachloroethylene-Environmental estimate: Indoor air.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3978377

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 studies >io years old in us, Canada, Japan.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 No variability; Uncertainties not identified.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Who,. 2006. WHO IRIS: Tetrachloroethylene.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3978390

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Low 3 references are old (>15 yrs old), not US study.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Atsdr,. 2011. Case studies in environmental medicine: tetrachloroethylene toxicity.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3980994

Domain Metric Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Unacceptable

no assessment is conducted, no concentration data.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Low

consumer exposure is fewly refered. it's quite old (>15 yrs
old).

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low

no discussion

Overall Quality Determination* Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.8.

Extracted

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Environment Canada, Health Canada. 1993. Canadian Environmental protection act priority substances list assessment

report tetrachloroethylene.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3981152

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

Govt study from 1993. Wastewater effluent, indoor air, aquatic
species, sw.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability seems to have been met. Uncertainty has been dis-
cussed regarding some articles.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: European Chlorinated Solvents, Association. 2011. Health profile on
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3982134

perchloroethylene.

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

Not much discussion on the "available data."

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

Some data for indoor air and aquatic species but missing de-
tails.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Unacceptable

Secondary sources were not cited and the study did not provide
a list of references.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Limited variability and no discussion on uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 3.2.

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Oehha,. 2001. Public health goal for tetrachloroethylene
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3982310

in drinking water.

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

Govt report of secondary exposure data. Medium score since
does not describe lit search method.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

Govt report from 2001. Indoor air concentrations and con-
sumer (dry cleaned clothes).

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Some variability. Uncertainty was described for developed
models.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Arb,. 1991. Proposed identification of perchloroethylene as a toxic air contaminant.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3982312

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

Techniques and facts are described, but description of details
like method to calculate the concentration are limited.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

indoor air concentration is shown, but consumer product is
not mentioned, quite old study (>15 yrs old)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

It's not clear that references are peer reviewed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

uncertainties and data gaps are discussed quite limitedly.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Carb,. 1991. Technical support document part A: Proposed identification of perchloroethylene as a toxic air contaminant.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3986480

Domain Metric Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium

Govt report of secondary exposure data. Medium score since
does not describe lit search method.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Low

Older study (1991). Building materials and consumer prod-
ucts. Indoor air conc.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High

Overall Quality Determination* Medium

1.8

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Carb,. 1991. Technical support document part B: Proposed identification of perchloroethylene as a toxic air contaminant.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3986481

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

description of lit search method and exposure is missed.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Unacceptable

no media interests.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

no discussion.

Overall Quality Determination*

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.8.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk, Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency.

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation:

P. E. I. Associates. 1985. Asbestos dust control in brake maintenance. Draft.

Data Type

Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID

4151966

Domain

Metric Rating* Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Low 3 Because this monitoring was done under a variety of sampling

times and conditions, with variable amounts of brake drum
dust, and variable asbestos concentrations in the dust, and by
different test methods, the results should be viewed only as
rough estimates of worker exposure.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario High 1 very relevant: dust control for brake maintenance workers

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References Low 3 a mix of old agency reports and publications, industry papers,

and also some personal communications and workshops; but
well documented

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2 Variability described and uncertainty addressed; ultimately a
comparison of dust control methods relative to each other.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

2.2

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Ec,. 2004. European Union risk assessment report: Tetrachloroethylene.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 4152094

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 media interest, but in eu and a bit old (in 2004).

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wu„et al.,. 2001. Sources, emissions and exposures for trichloroethylene (TCE) and related chemicals.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 4152270

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

High 1

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Low 3 US study, but surface water or consumer exposure is described
too simly. and quite old study (>15 yrs old)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty High 1

Overall Quality Determination* High 1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Herbert, P.,Charbonnier, P.,Rivolta, L.,Servais, M.,Van Mensch, F.,Campbell, I.. 1986. The occurrence of chlorinated solvents
in the environment. Prepared by a workshop of the European Chemical Industry Federation (CEFIC). Chemistry and Industry.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 4152304

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Low 3 There is no actual description of assessment.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Low 3 The data of surface water is shown, but not US (Europe), and

quite old (> 15 yrs)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High 1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Medium 2 several scenarios are shown, no discussion for uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination* Medium 2.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Delmaar, J. E.. Emission of chemical substances from solid matrices: a method for consumer exposure assessment.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 4663189

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Low 3 The report discusses the literature review, assumptions, and

limitations of the model. The discussion on data and extrapo-
lations from the model are limited due to data availability and
lack of tested data.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Low

The study models volatile substances using summarized data
and does not specifically model 1-BP. Sample and surrogate
data used may be similar, but the emphasis on building mate-
rials is not in alignment with IBP uses.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3; Documentation of References Low 3 Numerous studies are referenced, but their use is not always

clear or directly related to the text and/or data.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low 3 Variabilities and uncertainties are addressed, but not as they

apply to 1-BP or its specific exposure environments. Models
are built on surrogate paramater values which introduces large
degrees of uncertainty.

Overall Quality Determination* Low 3.0

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 1987. Household solvent products: A national usage survey.
Data Type Survey

Hero ID 1005969

Domain

Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Data Collection Methodology
Data Analysis Methodology

High
High

1
1

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:

Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area

Sampling / Sampling Size

Response Rate

High

High
Medium

Nationwide (U.S.A.) survey with outreach via random dialing
and willingness to provide address and respond to survey.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Reporting of Results
Metric 7: Quality Assurance

High
Medium

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.3

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation:

Abt. 1992. Methylene chloride consumer use

study survey findings.

Data Type

Survey

Hero ID

1065590

Domain

Metric

Rating* Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Data Collection Methodology Medium 2

Metric 2: Data Analysis Methodology Medium 2

Data collection instrument was described. The protocols for
field personnel was not.

Weighted summary stats provided, and unweighted counts pro-
vided in appendix. Could not find a discussion on sampling and
non sampling errors.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Geographic Area
Metric 4: Sampling / Sampling Size
Metric 5: Response Rate

High
High
Medium

for the questionaire, response rate was about 40 percent.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Reporting of Results
Metric 7: Quality Assurance

High
Low

1
3

No discussion of QC

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

limited discussion

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/Ahas no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Wang, S.,Majeed, M. A.,Chu, P.,Lin, H.. 2009. Characterizing relationships between personal exposures to VOCs and

socioeconomic, demographic, behavioral variables. Atmospheric Environment.

Data Type Survey

Hero ID 2331429

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Data Collection Methodology
Data Analysis Methodology

High
High

1
1

Survey was not conducted by the authors, but was taken from
a VOC study done as part of the 1999-2000 NHANES
Statistical methods for analyzing the NHANES data are dis-
cussed

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:

Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Sampling / Sampling Size

Response Rate

High
High

Low

1
1

Survey conducted in the United States

Samples seem large enough to represent the various popula-
tions of interest in this study

Response rate may be documented in original survey data

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Reporting of Results
Metric 7: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Summary statistics only

Not discussed, but implied by use of NHANES survey data

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

Not discussed as part of this analysis of NHANES survey data

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 Lhe overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Farrow, A.,Taylor, H.,Northstone, K.,Golding, J.,Avon Longitudinal, Study. 2003. Symptoms of mothers and infants related

to total volatile organic compounds in household products. Archives of Environmental Health.

Data Type Survey

Hero ID 2443306

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Data Collection Methodology

Medium 2 Data collection methodology discussed. The Avon Longitudi-

nal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a population-
based study of children born to women who resided in Avon
(United Kingdom) during their pregnancy and who had an
expected delivery date between April 1, 1991, and December
31, 1992. There were 14,541 pregnant women enrolled in this
study, and a cohort of 13,971 of their children was still being
followed at age 12 mo. The goal of the ALSPAC is to evalu-
ate environmental, genetic, and social factors that can influ-
ence the health of infants and their mothers. Information was
collected from mothers through self-report questionnaires at
different times during their pregnancy, as well as after the in-
fant" s birth, to ascertain family and household characteristics,
parental occupations, and other socioeconomic factors. The
purpose of this study within the ALSPAC was (a) to determine
indoor levels of VOCs relative to the use of specific household
products and (b) to identify households in which total VOC
(TVOC) levels were high. Investigation of the entire cohort
of children and their parents further identified common health
effects at different points of data collection. We asked subjects
to complete a questionnaire that had questions about the fre-
quency of use of 9 common household products that contain
high proportions of VOCs. A total of 13,164 women completed
the 1st questionnaire when they were 8 wk pregnant. Of these
women, 10,976 completed a 2nd questionnaire 8 mo after birth,
and 10,119 completed a 3rd questionnaire when their child was
21 mo of age. We assumed that information about household
product use during early pregnancy reflected routine use of
these products" rather than later uses which might include
cleaning that occurred because the infant was now a mem-
ber of the household (e.g., use of products to ensure special
cleanliness in the infant" s environment). The types of house-
hold products examined were window cleaners, carpet cleaners,
dry-cleaning fluids, turpentine or white spirit, paint stripper,
house paints or varnishes, pesticides, other aerosols or sprays,
and air fresheners. The categories of use were (a) never or less
than once per week, (b) once per week, and (c) daily on most
days.

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: Farrow, A.,'Taylor, H.,Northstone, K.,Golding, J.,Avon Longitudinal, Study. 2003. Symptoms of mothers and infants related

to total volatile organic compounds in household products. Archives of Environmental Health.

Data Type Survey

Hero ID 2443306

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Metric 2; Data Analysis Methodology Medium 2 Statistical analyses. Mean TVOC levels were calculated on

the basis of the monthly values from the living rooms and
main bedrooms of the homes monitored in the BRE indoor air
study (N = 170). Households with less than 5 TVOC readings
for the year were excluded from the analysis. TVOC levels
were dichotomized into 2 percentiles: < 75th percentile and
" 75th percentile. Use of each of the 9 household products
during early pregnancy was dichotomized to < 1/wk and "
1/wk. We used Pearson"s chi-square and Fisher"s Exact test
(crosstabs) to evaluate the relationships between VOC levels in
the homes and product use during early pregnancy. We then
used products that were statistically significantly associated
with higher TVOC levels in the analysis of the entire cohort to
determine if use of these products was associated with report-
ing of symptoms for infants or mothers. For the total cohort,
we applied logistic-regression analysis to obtain adjusted odds
ratios (ORs) for each symptom with use of a specific product
for different frequencies of use, to determine if the odds of expe-
riencing a symptom increased as use of the product increased.
Adjustments were made for education, mother" s age, housing
tenure, number of children in the home, number of smokers in
the home, paid job subsequent to birth of the child, dampness
or condensation in the home, mold in the home, type of winter
heating fuel, and month the questionnaire was completed. The
first 6 variables controlled for socioeconomic status; the latter

4 controlled for seasonal ventilation differences that might have
influenced the build-up of VOCs (from indoor sources).

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Geographic Area

High 1 United Kingdom

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

continued from previous page

Study Citation: Farrow, A.,'Taylor, H.,Northstone, K.,Golding, J.,Avon Longitudinal, Study. 2003. Symptoms of mothers and infants related

to total volatile organic compounds in household products. Archives of Environmental Health.

Data Type Survey

Hero ID 2443306

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Metric 4: Sampling / Sampling Size

Medium

o->

Metric 5: Response Rate

Medium

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children
(ALSPAC) is a population-based study of children born to
women who resided in Avon (United Kingdom) during their
pregnancy and who had an expected delivery date between
April 1, 1991, and December 31, 1992. There were 14,541
pregnant women enrolled in this study, and a cohort of 13,971
of their children was still being followed at age 12 mo. The
goal of the ALSPAC is to evaluate environmental, genetic,
and social factors that can influence the health of infants and
their mothers. Information was collected from mothers through
self-report questionnaires at different times during their preg-
nancy, as well as after the infant" s birth, to ascertain family
and household characteristics, parental occupations, and other
socioeconomic factors. We asked subjects to complete a ques-
tionnaire that had questions about the frequency of use of 9
common household products that contain high proportions of
VOCs.

We asked subjects to complete a questionnaire that had ques-
tions about the frequency of use of 9 common household prod-
ucts that contain high proportions of VOCs. A total of 13,164
women completed the 1st questionnaire when they were 8 wk
pregnant. Of these women, 10,976 completed a 2nd question-
naire 8 mo after birth, and 10,119 completed a 3rd question-
naire when their child was 21 mo ofage.Ofthe 170total
homes included in this focused study, at least 10 samples were
returned from each of 109 households, and at least 5 samples
were returned from each of 148 households. The 3,339 total
samples represented 73 percent of the number of potential sam-
ples. The highest and lowest TVOC concentrations from indi-
vidual samples were 11.4 mg/m3 (in a living room) and 0.02
mg/m3 (in a main bedroom), respectively. The highest and
lowest geometric mean concentrations of TVOCs in the liv-
ing room and bedroom, from a total of 12 samples from any
house, were 1.559 mg/m3 and 0.063 mg/m3, respectively. The
percentiles of mean TVOC concentrations in the living rooms
and bedrooms are contained in the Notes in Table 1.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Reporting of Results Medium 2 No supporting information or raw data available. Table 1 re-

ports products used during pregnancy that were associated
significantly with greater than/equal to 75th percentile geo-
metric mean of measured Total Volatile Organic Compounds
(TVOCs). No data reported specifically for TCE.

Continued on next page

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

- continued from previous page

Study Citation: Farrow, A.,'Taylor, H.,Northstone, K.,Golding, J.,Avon Longitudinal, Study. 2003. Symptoms of mothers and infants related

to total volatile organic compounds in household products. Archives of Environmental Health.

Data Type Survey

Hero ID 2443306

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Metric 7: Quality Assurance

Medium

No quality control issues were identified

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

For example, in 33 homes all readings in both the living room
and the main bedroom were less than 0.4 mg/m3. In 5 homes,
the TVOC concentrations for both rooms always exceeded the
stated value. Caution is required when our data are compared
with results reported by others and with recommended guide-
lines, which may be based on a different definition of TVOC.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.9

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Serrano-Trespalacios, P. I.,Ryan, L.,Spengler, J. D.. 2004. Ambient, indoor and personal exposure relationships of volatile

organic compounds in Mexico City metropolitan area. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology.
Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 56224

Domain Metric

Rating*

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Mathematicl Equations
Metric 2: Model Evaluation

Low
Low

3
3

Not provided in source. Provided in Hamlett, 2003.

Model described in supplemental source Hamlett, 2003. Mon-
itoring results also provided to compare.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Indoor air

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 4: Model and Model Documentation Availability
Metric 5: Model Inputs and Defaults

Low
Medium

3
2

Model described in supplemental source Hamlett, 2003.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 6: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Monitoring results also provided.

Overall Quality Determination*

Low

2.5

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Park, J. H.,Spengler, J. D.,Yoon, D. W.,Dumyahn, T.,Lee, K.,Ozkaynak, H.. 1998. Measurement of air exchange rate of

stationary vehicles and estimation of in-vehicle exposure. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology.
Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 85812

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Mathematicl Equations
Model Evaluation

Medium
Medium

2
2

IAQ model by EPA, but Beta version

Model has been validated, but unsure if specifically for indoor
car scenarios.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3:

Exposure Scenario

High

1 Contractor comments were based on age of data (date of publi-
cation), however the exposure scenario is highly representative
of a scenario of interest

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 4: Model and Model Documentation Availability
Metric 5: Model Inputs and Defaults

High
High

1
1

Model documention available
Inputs provided

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 6: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Compared to another study, but limited discussion of uncer-
tainties.

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Akita, Y.,Carter, G.,Serre, M. L.. 2007. Spatiotemporal nonattainment assessment of surface water tetrachloroethylene in

New Jersey. Journal of Environmental Quality.

Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 2494965

Domain Metric Rating* Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Mathematicl Equations
Metric 2: Model Evaluation

High
High

1
1

Model seems scientifically sound

Model is corroborated with relevant monitoring data (PCE
concentration in surface water streams)

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Exposure Scenario

Low

Model is based on data collected from monitoring stations be-
tween 1999 and 2003 (15+ years)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 4: Model and Model Documentation Availability
Metric 5: Model Inputs and Defaults

High
High

1
1

Model is based on equations that are given in the article.

Model inputs are PCE concentrations recorded at the locations
of established monitoring stations

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 6: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability and impact of potential sampling error are discussed
briefly

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.5

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation: Olie, J. D.,Bessems, J. G.,Clewell, H. J.,Meulenbelt, J.,Hunault, C. C.. 2015. Evaluation of semi-generic PBTK modeling for

emergency risk assessment after acute inhalation exposure to volatile hazardous chemicals. Chemosphere.

Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 3001596

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Mathematicl Equations
Metric 2: Model Evaluation

High
High

1 compared against monitoring data

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 3: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 4: Model and Model Documentation Availability
Metric 5: Model Inputs and Defaults

High
High

1 models freely available
1 available in supplement

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 6: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Overall Quality Determination*

High

1.2

Extracted

^High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

1 The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------
INTERAGENCY DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Study Citation:

UL Env. 2017. Floor Coating VOC Emissions Research Report.

Data Type

Modeling

Hero ID

4440489

Domain

Metric Rating* Score

Comments*

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Mathematicl Equations

Metric 2: Model Evaluation

Medium

Emission rates of TVOC were used in a computer model tode-
termine potential air concentrations of the pollutants. The
computer model used the measured emission rate changes over
the one-week time period to determine the change in air con-
centrations that would accordingly occur. The emission factor
can be modeled according to a first-order decay.

The emission rates calculated from these samples were used in
a mathematical model to predict the concentration that would
occur in an office environment. The model parameters were
11.1 m2 of flooring in a 30.6 m3 room with an outdoor air
change rate of 0.68/hr.

Domain 2: Representative

^ Metric 3'. Exposure Scenario High 1 <5 years (2017 pub date) Table 5 reports predicted concentra-

^ tions of NMP from time of application to one week for floor

coatings W7 and W3 (floor loading in office)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 4: Model and Model Documentation Availability
Metric 5: Model Inputs and Defaults

High
Medium

There is sufficient documentation in the data source
Data quality acceptance criteria are not discussed but inputs
appear appropriate. The emission factor can be modeled ac-
cording to a first-order decay: EFm = EFO e-kt where, EFm
= modeled emission factor ("g/m"hr) or ("g/unit"hr) EFO =
initial emission factor ("g/m"hr) or ("g/unit"hr) k = rate con-
stant (hr-1) t = time (hr)

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 6: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Overall Quality Determination*

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

^ High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

-------