A risk assessment report (RAR) on zinc and zinc compounds has recently been prepared in the framework of the European Union (EU) Council Regulation 793/93/EEC on Existing Chemicals. The EU Scientific Committee on Human and Environmental Risks (SCHER) has, however, expressed some fundamental, science-based concerns about the approach followed and the conclusions. The main objective of the present study was to assess the potential environmental risks associated with current use patterns of Zn in nine EU river basins in Germany, France and Belgium, thereby using more advanced methodologies which are largely in line with the recommendations made by SCHER. This included (i) avoiding working with measured Zn concentrations from monitoring stations that were potentially influenced by point sources and/or historical contamination, (ii) the full bioavailability normalization of all chronic ecotoxicity data to river basin specific physico-chemistry using biotic ligand models (BLM), prior to deriving predicted no effect concentrations (PNEC) with the species sensitivity distribution (SSD) approach, and (iii) the use of a probabilistic framework for risk characterization. Further, a total risk approach instead of an added risk approach was used, and the PNEC was equated to the HC5-50 without an additional assessment factor. Based on monitoring data we estimated predicted environmental concentrations (PEC) for the different EU river basins between 1.3 and 14.6 microg dissolved Zn/L. PNEC values varied between 22.1 and 46.1 microg dissolved Zn/L. This resulted in deterministic risk characterization ratios (RCR) that were below 1 in all river basins, suggesting that there is no deterministic regional risk associated with current use patterns of Zn in these river basins. With the probabilistic approach we identified rather limited risks, i.e., between <0.4 and 18.3%. When the EU RAR approach was applied to the same monitoring datasets, deterministic risks were found in different river basins. A detailed analysis showed that this different deterministic conclusion of risk is mainly due to the fact that the EU RAR (i) uses an additional assessment factor of 2 to derive the PNEC and (ii) uses a more conservative approach for implementing bioavailability (BioF approach). We argue that the larger conservatism in the EU RAR mainly originates from decisions made to deal in a pragmatic way with (i) uncertainty related to the across-species extrapolation of BLMs and (ii) the relatively high sensitivity of some multi-species toxicity studies.