Document MojGan7Y4ELRpqBzYN1Xd22Qz

--ATSDR V 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE AgencyTor .Toxic Substances nind Disease Registry *'^September 1995 This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions about 1,2-dichloroethane. For more information, you may call 404-639-6000. This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances and their health effects. This information is important because this substance 1 may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other chemicals are present. SUMMARY: Exposure to 1,2-dichloroethane occurs mainly in the workplace. Breathing high levels of 1,2-dichloroethane damages the central nervous system, heart, liver, kidneys, and lungs. This chemical has been found in at least 493 of 1,416 National Priorities List sites identified by the Environmental Protection Agency. What is 1,2-dichloroethane? (Pronounced l,2-di'kl6r'o fith'an') 1,2-DichIoroethane is a manufactured chemical that is not found naturally in the environment. It is clear and has a pleasant smell and a sweet taste. It is also called 1,2-ethylene dichloride, dichloroethylene, or ethylene dichloride. Its most common use today is to make vinyl chloride and other chemicals and to dissolve grease, glue, and dirt. It is also added to leaded gasoline to remove lead. In the past, 1,2-dichloroethane was used in home products such as cleaning solutions and paint removers. It is rarely used in these products today. What happens to 1,2-dichloroethane when it enters the environment? Most of it goes into the air during manufacturing or use. It evaporates very quickly ffom water into the air. In air, it is readily broken down by sunlight. It slowly breaks down in water. It can stay in groundwater for many years. In soil, it can be broken down within several months if another compound called methane is also present. How might I be exposed to 1,2-dichlproethane? Breathing contaminated air in workplaces where it is used Breathing contaminated air near factories where 1.2-dichloroethane is made or used Breathing contaminated air near hazardous waste sites that contain the chemical Drinking water from contaminated wells Breathing contaminated air when using cleaning products or other products that contain 1.2-dichloroethane. How can 1,2-dichloroethane affect my health? Breathing high levels of 1,2-dichloroethane results in many harmful effects to people. It causes damage to the heart, central nervous system, liver, kidneys, and lungs. These same effects have been seen in people who accidentally ingested high levels of the chemical. We do not know the effects in people of breathing or ingesting lower levels of 1,2-dichloroethane over a longer period of time. '**'* DEPARTMENT 9f HEALTH and HUMAN'SERVIC.ESPublic .Health Service .. : `tAj.tncy for Toxic Substances arid Discase'RReegistry ' 00 1?8330 CONF IDFNT TAI Page 2 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE Agency for ^bxic -Substances and Disease Registry ... '^September 1995 Studies in animals have found similar nervous system damage and kidney disease from breathing and ingesting the chemical. Other effects in animals include a reduced ability to fight infection. These effects have not been adequately studied in people. Animal studies suggest that 1,2-dichloroethane is not likely to harm the ability to reproduce or cause an increase in the number of birth defects. Animal studies show that direct contact with 1.2- dichloroethane can cause damage to the skin and eyes. How likely is 1,2-dichloroethane to cause cancer? The Department of Health and Human Services has determined that 1,2-dichloroethane may reasonably be anticipated to be a carcinogen. Human studies are inconclusive. Several studies have not shown an increase in tumors in workers exposed to 1.2- dichloroethane. One study found an increase in colon and rectal cancer in people who drank contaminated water, but other chemicals were also present in the water. There is good evidence from animal studies that ingest ing large amounts of 1,2-dichloroethane causes an increase in a variety of tumors. In some animal studies, it caused cancer when breathed or absorbed through the skin. Is there a medical test to show whether I've been exposed to 1,2-dichloroethane? Tests are available that measure levels of 1,2-dichloro ethane in breath, blood, breast milk, and urine. These tests are not usually available in a doctor's office. However, a sample taken in a doctor's office can be sent to a special laboratory if needed. 1,2-Dichloroethane leaves the body fairly quickly, so these tests are only good for exposures that occurred within the previous few days. The tests can't tell if an exposure will result in harmful effects. Has the federal government made recommendations to protect human health? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set a limit in drinking water of 0.005 parts of 1,2-dichloroethane per million parts of water (0.005 ppm). EPA requires that discharges or spills into the environment of 100 pounds or more of 1,2-dichloroethane be reported. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set an occupational exposure limit of 50 parts of 1,2-dichloroethane per million parts of air (50 ppm) for an 8-hour workday, 40-hour workweek. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has recommended an occupational expo sure limit of 1 ppm of 1,2-dichloroethane for a 10-hour workday, 40-hour workweek. Glossary Carcinogen: A substance that can cause cancer Ingesting: Taking food or drink into your body PPM; Parts per million Tumor: An abnormal mass of tissue References Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1994. Toxicological profile for 1,2-dichloroethane. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Where can I get more information? ATSDR can tell you where to find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate, and treat illnesses resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state health or environmental quality department if you have any more questions or concerns. For more information, contact: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Division of Toxicology, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop E-29, Atlanta, GA 30333, Phone: 404-639-6000, FAX: 404-639-6315. if^tSSB'cderal RecyfclingProgram -- y S*Printed on Recycled Paper OO 178331 CONFTOFNT TA1 -Atsdr 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry September 1 V`>5 This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions about 1,2-dichloroethane. For more information, you may call 404-639-6000. This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances and their health effects. This information is important because this substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other chemicals are present. !Br^thlnehig^ie^lSlfjF^pf^6rblBfnjtoe ... What is 1,2-dichloroethane? (Pronounced l,2-dPkl6r'0 6th'an') 1,2-Dichloroethane is a manufactured chemical that is not found naturally in the environment. It is clear and has a pleasant smell and a sweet taste. It is also called 1,2-ethylene dichloride, dichloroethylene, or ethylene dichloride. Its most common use today is to make vinyl chloride and other chemicals and to dissolve grease, glue, and dirt. It is also added to leaded gasoline to remove lead. In the past, 1,2-dichloroethane was used in home products such as cleaning solutions and paint removers. It is rarely used in these products today. What happens to 1,2-dichloroethane when it enters the environment? Most of it goes into the air during manufacturing or use. It evaporates very quickly from water into the air. In air, it is readily broken down by sunlight. It slowly breaks down in water. It can stay in groundwater for many years. In soil, it can be broken down within several months if another compound called methane is also present. How might I be exposed to 1,2-dichloro ethane? Breathing contaminated air in workplaces where it is used Breathing contaminated air near factories where 1.2-dichloroethane is made or used Breathing contaminated air near hazardous waste sites that contain the chemical Drinking water from contaminated wells Breathing contaminated air when using cleaning products or other products that contain 1.2-dichloroethane. How can 1,2-dichloroethane affect my health? Breathing high levels of 1,2-dichloroethane results in many harmful effects to people. It causes damage to the heart, central nervous system, liver, kidneys, and lungs. These same effects have been seen in people who accidentally ingested high levels of the chemical. We do not know the effects in people of breathing or ingesting lower levels of 1,2-dichloroethane over a longer period of time. " 51 <':5->U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Public Health Scrv ' .-.'C - .. -Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry I DO 1?833? OONFTDFNTTAt Page 2 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry - ''September 1995 Studies in animals have found similar nervous system damage and kidney disease from breathing and ingesting the chemical. Other effects in animals include a reduced ability to fight infection. These effects have not been adequately studied in people. Animal studies suggest that 1,2-dichloroethane is not likely to harm the ability to reproduce or cause an increase in the number of birth defects. Animal studies show that direct contact with 1.2- dichloroethane can cause damage to the skin and eyes. How likely is 1,2-dichloroethane to cause cancer? The Department of Health and Human Services has determined that 1,2-dichloroethane may reasonably be anticipated to be a carcinogen. Human studies are inconclusive. Several studies have not shown an increase in tumors in workers exposed to 1.2- dichloroethane. One study found an increase in colon and rectal cancer in people who drank contaminated water, but other chemicals were also present in the water. There is good evidence from animal studies that ingest ing large amounts of 1,2-dichloroethane causes an increase in a variety of tumors. In some animal studies, it caused cancer when breathed or absorbed through the skin. 1,2-Dichloroethane leaves the body fairly quickly, so these tests are only good for exposures that occurred within the previous few days. The tests can't tell if an exposure will result in harmful effects. Has the federal government made recommendations to protect human health? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set a limit in drinking water of 0.005 parts of 1,2-dichloroethane per million parts of water (0.005 ppm). EPA requires that discharges or spills into the environment of 100 pounds or more of 1,2-dichloroethane be reported. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set an occupational exposure limit of 50 parts of 1,2-dichloroethane per million parts of air (50 ppm) for an 8-hour workday, 40-hour workweek. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has recommended an occupational expo sure limit of 1 ppm of 1,2-dichloroethane for a 10-hour workday, 40-hour workweek. Glossary Carcinogen: A substance that can cause cancer Ingesting: Taking food or drink into your body PPM: Parts per million Is there a medical test to show whether I've been exposed to 1,2-dichloroethane? Tests are available that measure levels of 1,2-dichloro ethane in breath, blood, breast milk, and urine. These tests are not usually available in a doctor's office. However, a sample taken in a doctor's office can be sent to a special laboratory if needed. Tumor: An abnormal mass of tissue References Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1994. Toxicological profile for 1,2-dichloroethane. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Where can I get more information? ATSDR can tell you where to find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate, and treat illnesses resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state health or environmental quality department if you have any more questions or concerns. For more information, contact: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Division of Toxicology, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop E-29, Atlanta, GA 30333, Phone: 404-639-6000, FAX: 404-639-6315. . fc^^^fTfderal Recycling'Program -;,r*|Printed oil Recycled Paper DO 1 ? 8 3 3 3 CONFTDFNTTAl ( P~i jC* A - 6 (NO. 90) NEWS DEN* 6-22-96 Comment* Offered During a meeting May 16, eorarasnters offered var ious viewi of the proposed new standard. A number of speakers noted the variations among regions in the composition of air pollution, asking that the standard have flexibility to addraas those differences. Greg Schaefer, speaking for the Wyoming and Colo rado mining associations, called for averaging moni tor readings in determining compliance with the proposed regulation, elimination of the PM-1014-hour standard, and evaluation of alternative forms of the standard to deal with daily variations in the ratio of PM 1.5 and PM 10. Dale Londgren, speaking for the National Mining Association, focused on nature's and traffic's contribu tions to background particulate levels. Jon Heuss of General Motors said there had been a steadily decreasing amount of PM pollution from U.S. vehicles. Alfonse Mannato of the American Petroleum Insti tute asked tbet the staff and advisory committee consider whether the risk assessment used inflated estimates of health risk from particulate* and to address what he called an understatement of the uncertainties about causes and results. He said the proposed standard would greatly in crease the number of non-attainment areas for air quality in the United States. The recommended stand ard does not hava an adequate scientific basis, he said, and EPA should reaffirm its existing standard. Deborah S. Shpranta of the Natural Resources De fense Council argued for an even lower range for the standard, based on an NRDC estimate of the effects of a PM-3.5 standard of 10 micrograms on mortality and morbidity in 239 metropolitan areas. ... She listed "breath-taking uncertainties" and "breath- taking risk ratios" in analyzing the scientific database, but noted the study's findings of thousands of lives prolonged at a PM-3.5 standard of 10. Ronald White of the American Lung Association said the revised document was a "significant improve ment" over the November 1995 draft. "The American Lung Association agraos with EPA that the current [particulate matter] standard is not protective of human health,'.' Whit* said. "Tha ALA recommends that you adopt the bottom and of tha range."Q /.. - Drinking Weter HEALTH ADVISORY GUIDANCE FROM PA ' MAY REFLECT NEW INFORMATION ON CANCER The Environmental Protection Agency may publish new drinking water health advisories, or update exist ing ones, using new information on cueer risks, an agency official said May 21. Jennifer Orme-Zevaleta, chief of the Human Risk Assessment Branch in EPA's water office, told meeting of interested parties that health advisories an currently based on noucarcinogenic effects. As the agency revises its cancer risk guidelines to recognize that not all carcinogens an the same, this information may be included in its advisories, she said. Health advisories are studies on the health effects of contaminants In drinking water. Intended to provide Kdance for the general public, they also aft used to ermine the maximum contaminant level of regu lated substances. Tha agency was seeking input on how tha advisories are used, whether changes in their methodologies should be made, how they should be formatted, end how they should bolt be need. State, municipal, and water utility representatives told EPA officials tha advisoriss are used for chemi cal spill incidents, as guidance for treatment tech niques end technology, for enforcement, end by schools. Participants asked the agency to focus Its advisories on those contaminants that are most likely to bo found In water systems. They also asked for ltss technical, "reader-friendly'* documents. It wts suggested that EPA propers different fact sheets, more concise forms of these advisories, for different audiences. , EPA has published health advisories m 146 contami nants. Additional advisories are under development for cyanaxlse, chlorine dioxide, dilcnl hydrate, chlorine, ttchloreeitfe add, trichloracetic add, trichloroethylene, manganese, methyl-t-butyl ether, Chloramines, trihalo methane, bentaaon, arsenic, sulfate, polychlorinated biphenyls, heminone, and toxapbene. Meeting partfctaaats suggested the agency prepare health edvfeorie nr aoetachlor, ehlororaetroo, nitrate, dtatin, and UrlarinuxO Oxene Depletion ALL REFRIGERANT SUBSTITUTES MAY SE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS, EPA SAYS IN PROPOSAL, . Conditions imposed on certain oxone-depleting chemicals would bo extended to all substitute for CFC-12 that are used in vehicle air conditioners under an Environmental Protection Agency proposal to be published May 22. EPA proposed to apply use conditions imposed on certain compounds to all substitutes for CFC-12, a chlorofluorocarbon .used as a coolant b June 1995 EPA imuad a role to apply the conditions for two alternatives (111 DEN A-M/1I/05U0O *R It tiien proposed to apply those conditions to two other compounds Oct 1, 1995, and will make that proposal Anal in a separate notice scheduled to appear May 21 (190 DEN A-2,10/1/95) (60 FR 51MS). CFC production was banned in 1995 .because the chemicals an considered class I ozena depleting sub stances under the Clean Air Act Provisions in that law implement requirements under the Montreal Pro tocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. . . Among the use conditions aet up by EPA an restric tions designed to prevent cross contamination between CFCS and their substitutes and to smooth tha transi tion to alternatives. For example, each refrigerant may be need only with the fittings unique to that compound. The conditions also include labeling re quirements and a ban on using a substitute to "top off.' a system that usas another refrigerant, EPA said. Copyrlgm ISM by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC;, WasMrtpton.D.C. 20037 !MMS7S/S6/S*i0 00 1?8334 CoNF TOFNTTAL HAR-11-199& 14--54 CHET1STAR A-2 (NO-41) NEWS OEN 3-1-96 Lambehops, potatoes, and mushroom* also would not meet the RCRA exit level criteria because they have at least one constituent found at higher levels than what EPa proposed. I Other common items that would fail the F CRA exit level include human blood, plasma, transfix *d blood, municipal sewage sludge, asphalt, and soil, E tart said. Sludges that are considered non-hazardots in pub licly owned treatment works would be onsidered hazardous under the HWIR proposal becausi the con stituent levels in the waste water are higher than the HWIR proposal Ekart said. For industry to meet the conservative exit levels, "it means our waste water and sludges have to be much cleaner than the food we eat and tin soil we walk on,** Ekart said. "And In some instances it has to be cleaner then the water we drink." A greater concern for the waste generating industry i* that little environmental benefit can be gaTi id from meeting the exit levels and that the risk asiesoaent will he used on future rulemakings agency* ide, she said. Agency Expected Compariaone The agency anticipated that the waste generating Industry would make comparisons such as jthe one Ekart made, Tina Kaneen, an attorney in ERA'S Of fice of General Council, said at the panel discussion. While EPA made similar comparisons, "Quit* didn't look quite as dismal," she said. The agency's intention U not to propose exit levels that are in the range of oatunlly occurring com pounds in the environment, Kaneen said. "We wouldn't want to achieve that multi or we would want to have a good explanation for do ng so," she said. The agency will look at seemingly conserva tive exit levels and determine whether the risk assess ment methodology on those constituents is flax cd and can be amended,* aneen said. The treatment industry, on the other hand, is con. corned that the exit levels for some constitue its are too high, David Case, general counsel for the Eivlronmental Technology Council, said at the panel discussion. At the proposed exit levels for lead, was t will easily eom>de the liners In solid waste landfill 1, Case said. "Our perspective is this approach oughl to be conservative. This is a very Urge step for EPa to take," Case said. The multipathway risk assessment is important for EPA to have developed because in the first rule, the exit levels were based on ground Iwatar contamination only. That approach was unacceptable to the itates and to the technology council, Case said. He acknowledged that some of the propose^ exit levels are conservative, but defended the agency's proposal. "The rule was nevar intended to allow Waite as generated to exit RCRA Subtitle C in largh vol umes." Casa said. "We're talking about a relief valve" for materials that are mixed with or derived from hazardous waste. The HWIR rule is only supposed to apply to very low-risk wastes, such as reaidue* of waste treated to land disposal restriction levels, Case said. Kaneen noted that only about 21 percent of hazard ous wastes could qualify to exit the RCRA Subtitle C regime under the proposal While the focus of the HWIR proposal has been on the mutiipathway risk assessment. Casa urged that commenters andEPa pay attention to the implemen tation of the rule. Self implementation The agency is calling for a self-implementing sys tem, In which industry would sample aud analyze its wastes aud test them for levels of constituents. If those levels meet the exit criteria, industry would just have to document that the waste is not subjeet to RCRA Subtitle C regulations. Rut Case said self-implementation may not be credible. Public participation U cut down in a self-im plementing rule, he Mid. The rule proposes that a newspaper notice be placed in the community where the weata is generated. But Case noted that the com munity receiving the waate that to considered no longer hazardous also should receive notice. "we think the most Important thing to for HWIR to be credible," CaM said. Without extensive public partldpation, credibility is diminlshed.0 -- By Amy Porter Chemical Safety EU DRAFT LICT OF CHEMICALS FOR TESTING, >_ A6SE6SMENT, TRIGGERS CRITICISM FROM U.$. -- The European Union has drafted a list of 42 chemi cals for possible testing end risk assessment, prompt ing a new round of criticism from U.S. officials, who argue that European countries should focus on sub stances for which there to little information about haalth or ecological affects. In a series of Interviews with BNA Feb. 12-23, officials from both aides of the Atlantic discussed whether the selection of chemicals in the SU's draft third priority list waa compatible with a voluntary chemical testing program set up under the Organiza tion for Economic Cooperation and Development A chief criticism by U-S. officials to that the EU draft list targets chemicals which, for the most part, already have been tested extensively. When the list to iaiued In final form, it also will servo as the EU's contribution to the OECD chemical testing program, which to called the Screening Information Date Sets program. Bringing well-studied chemicals Into the SIDS pro gram thwarts the goels of the program, according to the US. officials. SIDS, established in 18B#, was designed to obtain a base set of health and ecological effects data on high production volume chemicals to identify those that may pose a hazard or Med additionel In-depth testing. Another goal was to spread the cost of chemical testing evenly among industrialized countries with each OECD member country agreeing to be responsi ble for a certain percentage of the chemicals revtewed in 8IDS. Copyright 9 ISM by THE BUREAU pF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC., Washington, D.C. 20037 DO 1 789.15 1MP-2S7S/H/SO+J0 OONFTDFNTTAI too/zoo siTmaNyrirm xozt ooza bis zozs, 06-ST 88/I0/C0 MAR-11-1996 14:55 CHEMSTAR r.tftOJ'tOKK* 3-1-96 * 06N NEWS (No. 41) A - 3 viFor several of the chemicals selected the EU, such as formaldehyde end cadmium, tit level of understanding about their potential adv|roe health ffecta is so great that sophisticated risk 1 rnenta hive been done for them, Ellen Sllbergtld. Uoiveni* ty of Maryland lexicologist, aeid. Stlbergeld, who represent! U.S. euv)roomeuUl groups at SIDS meetings, said those chemjc ala are not appropriate for the OECD screening progri m. EU Third Priority List The draft list is the third such list ainc^ Ute EU'i chemical regulation was established In 1993. The list is expected to he made final by the end oJf 1996, European officials said. Patrick McCucheou, a senior official with the Commission of the European Union, toid BNA composition of the final list is oaf, likely to change significantly. The underlying regulation authorizes the EU to obtain information about chemicals In commerce and regulate them if they pose e threat. It calls for the annuel publication of a priority list of ehermeaie for regulatory review. The EU regulation is comparable to the chemical reporting, testing, and control provi sions In the Toxic Substances Control Act The EU'* selection, of well-studied chemicals in Its first and second priority lists also sparked the ire of UA chemical makers. U.S. companies said the EU wu not carrying its fair snare of the testing burden in the OECD screening program (U4 DEN AA-1, 8/10/96). U.S. Companies, Environmentalists Concerned After reviewing the draft third priority list, repre sentatives of Uif. environmental groups Joined UA chemical makers In expressing disappointment. EINECS No. 203-713-7 231-152-8 203-716-0 204-539-4 *25-768.8 *32-118-8 *30-148*8 250-379-8 387-477-0 131-1114 233-104-9 ~4-200*838-9 --*08-006-0 204-371-1 231*555.9 231*059.5 200*001-5 200-915-7 201*178*4 266*026*2 203*806-2 247-148-4 216453-1 '203-458-1 231-906-6 >33-143-1 234-190-3 165-150-3 365-181-9 *65-178-6 270-093-2 285-511-9 *85-6124 395432-1 293-433-7 293-438-4 295-443-1 *96-3*9-9 296-942-7 297-852-0 297-8534 CAS No. 109-86-4 7440-43-9 98-96-3 122-394 5064-31-3 10039-54.0 15096-31.3 30899-19-5 85536-85-9 7410-0Z-0 7786-814 73.09*2 111-76-2 120-12-7 7412-00-4 7712*50-5 30-00-0 75-91-2 79-114 63996-93*1 110*85-0 23627-99-4 1634-04-4 107-06-2 7776*50*9 7789*09-3 1 0599-01-9 64743*48*9 6474X49-0 6474Z-734 69410-97-9 85116-60-S 85118414 92045-51-7 92045-524 92045-57-1 9204541-9 92062-15-1 93165-55-0 93763-834 93763-14-6 tird El) Draft Priority List Substance MnetOXytthano! cadmium compounds nitrobenttlte dlphettylamlne triSOdimn MtrtlotrUcettte bi9(hydro:ry(ammonium) sulphate trisodium baxafluoroBhiminate pentanol alkanes, CuLit. ehloro nickel | nickel sulfate dlchlororoettaae 24uteiy(tUnol anthracene, pure sodium nittli chlorine forrnaldehyds ten-butyl hydroperoxide chloroacetie acid pitch, coal tar, tugb temperature piperonne 1 Mkabromocyclododeoane tert-butyl methyl ether t.l-didiloroelhane potassium dlcbromate ammonium dlchromate codlum dlchromate naphtha (petroleum), hydrotroatad haavy naphtha (petroleum), hydrotreated light naphtha (petroleum), bydrodesuUuriaed light distillates (petroleum), light hydrotreating procsa-low boiling naphtha (petrpleum), hydrodesulfuriied thermal cracked light naphtha (petroleum), hydrotreated light, cyoloalkane-ccntalnlnr naphtha (petroleum), heavy steamed-cracked, hydrogenated naphtha (petroleum), hydrodesulfuriied full range naphtha (petroleum), hydrotreated light, steam cracked hydrocarbon1. C4.1a, naphtha erscklni hydrotreated solvent naphtha (petroleum), hydrotreated light napthenle naphtha (petroleum), light steam-cracked hydrogenate hydrocarbons. C*.n, hydrotreated, dearomatitea hydrocarbons, C(.j3, hydrotroatad, dearoaatised Sponsor Country Austria Belgium Germany Germany Germany Ocrmany Germany Germany Germany Denmark Denmark France France Greece Italy Italy The Netherlands Tbe Netherlands The Netherlands Tbe Netherlands Sweden Sweden Sweden/Prance United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom H)0/C00 Copyright * 1996 by the BUREAU Of NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC., Washington, o.C. 90037 DO 1 i 1060-2I7S/96/SO+-60 CONFTDFNTTAt SmwaNvjTiTHIH 1022 0028 (US 202 lfi:2T 98/TO/CO i iru^-J. J. A - 4 (No. 41) NEWS DEN* 3-1-96 "Thai the EU is throwing chemicals Into U a SIDS program like cadmium doesn't make sense," SUbergeld said. Current cadmium testing is sophistic itod to the point where researchers ere evaluating the chemi cal at the molecular level, she said. To use the SIDS framework -- which was d< signad to evaluate high production, date-poor chemUals -- for cadmium is ridiculous, she said, adding the; there is more data on cadmium than can fit into ;i SIDS dossier. An entire SIDS review meeting, where nomally date on 30 chemicals are evaluated, would he i leaded to do e proper review of eadmlura data, SUbergeld said. By the U selecting wall-studied chemicals, the SIDS program is being asked to become more turn a chemical screening and testing program, Ed Miller, a senior technical associate from Eastman Chtmlcal Co., based in Kingsport, Tenn., said. Millar sis > par ticipates In OECD's SIDS program. The well-studied chemicals should be evalua ed to determine If risk reduction action are needed, the VS. officials said. This type of risk management s tlvlty was not envisioned to happen as part of SIDS, they said. OECD has a separate program, the risk reduction program, where OECD members have struggled to reach consensus on huw and whether to control uies of substances like lead, mercury, cadmium, methylene chloride, and bromin a ted flame retardants. | U.S. industry remains committed to SIDS program, Miller said. Silbergeld agreed. She said the SIDS pro gram has become a "How ean 1 meet my workload?" resource for many countries. ffU- Substances That Could Poaa Risk McCucheon acknowledged the disagreement] be tween tha EU and United States about the me of chemicals that should be brought into SIDS. He said the EU's regulatory program was frustrated by the first chemicals that completed the SIDS program. Those chemicals were determined not to pose a risk and need no additional work, he Mid, adding that was not a good use of limited chemical sersening and testing resources. "We have a slightly dlffarent vltw of OECD pro gram [than U.S. representatives]. We think the l IDS program should do more than fill data gaps. It sh mid produce an initial assessment that should se the basis for OECD risk reduction activity," he said. As a result, the EU has selected only chami:als thought to pose a risk for its priority lists and its contribution to the SIDS program, McCucheon sal<;.D -- Bv Sara Thurin Re^Lin Rep. James Hansen (R-Utah), chairman of the House Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Lendl, Feb. 39 agreed to conduct the hearing, according to two members of the panel. The two, Ranking Minority Member Bill Richardson (tb NM) and Rep. Pet Williams (D-Mont), asked Hansen to hold the hearing. An aide to the subcommittee told BNA no date has been set for the hearings, Concern about the proposed mine, which would be dug 2V4 miles from me northeast corner of Yellow stone, focuses on its hlgh-altltude, high-precipitation, earthquake-prone location and a planned 5.5 million ton tailing impoundment. Crown Butte Mince Inc., a Canadian-owned corporation based In Montana, plans to extract geld, silver, end copper from the site in the Gallatin National Forest, according to a Feb. 29 hear ing request letter from Williams to Hansen. In the letter, Williams said. "We frankly need to hear what impact then may be on Yellowstone's wildlife; what precautions are necessary to avoid a catastrophic spill into'the local streams and water shed; who will ultimately boar the cost of potential environmental degradation." Williams noted that Richardson in 1996 introduced HR 1816, a measure that would cancel Crown Butte Mines' federal land leases. "I haven't signed onto this particular bill," tha Montana congressman wrote. But. he Mid, Riehard- son'a legislation "is a seriously intentioaed and inven tive bill and would be a useful focus of a hearing and dlscuMion" on the mine. Williams said Congress should investigate "whether this mine can be safely operated or should be operated at all on Yellowstone National Park's border." The Montana Democrat called Yellowstone, the world's tint national park, "the crown jewel of America's park system" Meanwhile, Tom Cassidy, general counsel for con servation group American Rivers, said, "The moun tains above Yellowstone National Park and the Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone River are the most unsuitable place imaginable for a large mine." If mined, the site would pose "long-term chronic and potentially cata strophic environmental damage," h* said in a statement "Tha recreational, ecological, fish and wildlife, end scenic value of these lands to the American public far outweigh the short-term profits and long-term envi ronmental threats posed by the mine," Cassidy said. According to American Riven, the company will have to pay $5 per acre -- for a total of $220 -- to mine the site, paying no royalties. The dollar figure and policy on royalties are mandated by the 1672 Mining Law.O Mining HOUSE RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE TO HOLD HEARING ON MINE ON YELLOWSTONE BORDER A House subcommittee will hold a hearing on Uie controversial gold mine planned for the northern fa or der of Yellowstone National Park in Montana, mem bers of the panel announced Feb. 39. Risk Assotsmant NEW REPORT PROM SCIENCE ADVISORY B ARC TO ADDRESS ECONOMICS, QUALITY OF UFE The board of scientists advising the Environmental Protection Agency will probably add "quality of Ufe" Issues and increased economic data to Its next analy- Copyright e IftM by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. WeahlngiOn. O-C. 20037 1 M0-297S/9S/S0-T.S0 n0 i78337 CONFTDFNT TAl m/roo siTiavcwjniraiH mr ooS9 8a zozq, is'-zi 9 6,'TO.'CO TOTAL P,004 -Atsdr V 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry .. .September 1995 This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions about 1,2-dichloroethane. For more information, you may call 404-639-6000. This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances and their health effects. This information is important because this substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other chemicals are present SUMMARY: Exposure to 1,2-dichloroethane occurs mauyy m imm 31. What is 1,2-dichloroethane? (Pronounced 1 ^-dPklSr'o Sth'an') 1,2-Dichloroethane is a manufactured chemical that is not found naturally in the environment. It is clear and has a pleasant smell and a sweet taste. It is also called 1,2-ethylene dichloride, dichloroethylene, or ethylene dichloride. Its most common use today is to make vinyl chloride and other chemicals and to dissolve grease, glue, and dirt. It is also added to leaded gasoline to remove lead. In the past, 1,2-dichloroethane was used in home products such as cleaning solutions and paint removers. It is rarely used in these products today. What happens to 1,2-dichloroethane when it enters the environment? Most of it goes into the air during manufacturing or use. It evaporates very quickly from water into the air. In air, it is readily broken down by sunlight. It slowly breaks down in water. It can stay in groundwater for many years. In soil, it can be broken down within several months if another compound called methane is also present. How might I be exposed to 1,2-dichloro ethane? Breathing contaminated air in workplaces where it is used Breathing contaminated air near factories where 1.2-dichloroethane is made or used Breathing contaminated air near hazardous waste sites that contain the chemical Drinking water from contaminated wells Breathing contaminated air when using cleaning products or other products that contain 1.2-dichloroethane. How can 1,2-dichloroethane affect my health? Breathing high levels of 1,2-dichloroethane results in many harmful effects to people. It causes damage to the heart, central nervous system, liver, kidneys, and lungs. These same effects have been seen in people who accidentally ingested high levels of the chemical. We do not know the effects in people of breathing or ingesting lower levels of 1,2-dichloroethane over a longer period of time. ^^tj^lJ^.'DEPARTAiENT'OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Public Health Service for Toxic Substances und Disease Registry V .* DO 128338 CONFTDFNTT At