Are Hazard Assessment Methods in the Assessment of Chemical Alternatives Suitable for REACH?

The assessment of chemical alternatives for hazardous
substances
is an important prerequisite for avoiding regrettable substitution,
and several methods have been developed in the past to perform such
a hazard assessment for chemical alternatives. We investigate here
whether GreenScreen, Cradle to Cradle, multiple-criteria decision
analysis (MCDA), the Pollution Prevention Options Analysis System,
the U.S. EPA Safer Choice Standard and Criteria, and the GHS column
model 2020 from IFA use similar criteria for the evaluation of substances
as Article 57 of the European chemicals regulation, REACH, and how
suitable these methods are for assessing per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances. MCDA and GreenScreen were analyzed in detail using two
different data sets. The results of the assessments show that none
of the investigated hazard assessment methods use the same criteria
as described in Article 57 of REACH. It was also not possible to parametrize
multi-attribute value theory (MAVT), a commonly used MCDA method,
to align with Article 57 of REACH by using the relatively simple objective
hierarchy that has been proposed in previous publications. There is
therefore an urgent need for a modified/new method that can be used
in the future to assess organic substances that are used within the
European Economic Area.