TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (fttae read /attractions on the revent before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
  EPA/600/8-88/Q39
                             2.
             3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO

                  PB88-180260/AS
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

  Health  Effects  Assessment for  Ethyl  Ether
             ft. REPORT DATE
                                                           6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 . AUTHOR(S)
                                                           I. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
              10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                                           11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 Environmental Criteria  and Assessment Office
 Office of Research  and  Development
 U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
 Cincinnati. OH   45268	
              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOO COVERED
              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                EPA/600/22
15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
   This report  summarizes and evaluates  information relevant to a preliminary interim
 assessment of  adverse health effects associated with specific chemicals  or  compounds.
 The Office of  Emergency and Remedial Response  (Superfund) uses these  documents  in
 preparing cost-benefit analyses under Executive Order 12991 for decision-making under
 CERCLA.  All estimates of acceptable intakes and carcinogenic potency presented in
 thj's document  should be considered as preliminary and reflect limited resources
 allocated to this  project.  The intent  in  these assessments is to suggest acceptable
 exposure levels  whenever sufficient data are available.  The interim  values  presented
 reflect the relative degree of hazard associated with exposure or risk to the
 chemical(s) addressed.  Whenever possible,  two categories of values have been
 estimated for  systemic toxicants (toxicants for which cancer is not the  endpoint of
 concern).  The first, RfD5 or subchronic reference dose, is an estimate  of  an exposure
 level that would not be expected to cause  adverse effects when exposure  occurs  during
 a limited time interval.  The RfD is an estimate of an exposure level  that  would not
 be expected to cause adverse effects when  exposure occurs for a significant  portion
 of the lifespan.   For compounds for which  there is sufficient evidence of
 carcinogenicity, qi*s have been computed,  if appropriate, based on oral  and
 inhalation data  if available.
 7.
                               KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C. COSATI Field/Group
 8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

  Public
10. SECURITY CLASS (Thu Report I

  Unclassified
                                                                         21. NO. Of PAGES
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (This page I
                                                Unclassified
                           22. PRICE
   F«nn 2220-1 (R«». 4-77)   PREVIOUS COITION if OMOLETE
                                                                               " //J

-------
                                            EPA/600/8-88/039
                                            May, 1987
          HEALTH EFFECTS ASSESSMENT
               FOR ETHYL ETHER
ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA AND ASSESSMENT OFFICE
OFFICE OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
      OFFICE OF  RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            CINCINNATI, OH 45268

-------
                                  DISCLAIMER
    This,   document   has   been   reviewed   In   accordance   with   the   U.S.
Environmental  Protection  Agency's  peer and  administrative  review policies
and approved for publication.  Mention  of  trade  names  or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                      11

-------
                                    PREFACE


    This report  summarizes  and  evaluates Information relevant  to  a  prelimi-
nary  Interim assessment  of  adverse  health  effects associated  with  ethyl
ether.   All  estimates  of   acceptable   Intakes   and   carcinogenic   potency
presented  1n  this document  should be  considered  as preliminary  reflecting
limited  resources allocated  to  this  project.    Pertinent  toxlcologlc  and
environmental data were located  through  on-Hne  literature searches  of  the
TOXLINE and  the  CHEMFATE/DATALOG  data bases.  The basic  literature  searched
supporting  this  document  1s current  up  to  May,  1986.  Secondary  sources  of
Information have also been  relied  upon  1n  the  preparation  of  this  report  and
represent  large  scale health assessment  efforts  that entail  extensive  peer
and Agency review.  The following  Office  of  Health and  Environmental  Assess-
ment (OHEA) sources have been extensively utilized:

    U.S.  EPA.   1986b.    Integrated  Risk  Information   System  (IRIS).
    Reference dose  (RfO)  for  oral exposure  for  ethyl  ether.   Online.
    (Verification  date  6/11/86,  final   approval   pending).   Office  of
    Health  and   Environmental   Assessment,  Environmental  Criteria  and
    Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH.

    The Intent In these assessments 1s  to  suggest  acceptable  exposure levels
whenever sufficient data were available.   Values  were not  derived  or larger
uncertainty  factors  were  employed  when  the  variable data  were  limited  1n
scope   tending   to   generate  conservative  (I.e.,   protective)   estimates.
Nevertheless, the  Interim  values  presented reflect  the  relative  degree  of
hazard associated with exposure  or risk  to the chemlcal(s)  addressed.

    Whenever  possible,  two  categories   of   values  have  been   estimated  for
systemic  toxicants   (toxicants  for  which  cancer   Is  not  the  endpolnt  of
concern).  The  first,  RfD$  (formerly AIS)  or  subchronlc reference dose,  Is
an estimate of an exposure  level  that would  not  be expected to cause  adverse
effects when  exposure occurs during  a   limited  time Interval   (I.e.,  for  an
Interval that  does  not constitute  a  significant  portion  of  the  llfespan).
This type  of  exposure estimate  has not  been extensively  used,  or  rigorously
defined, as  previous risk  assessment efforts  have  been  primarily  directed
towards  exposures  from  toxicants  In  ambient  air  or  water  where  lifetime
exposure   1s  assumed.   Animal   data   used   for   RFD$   estimates   generally
Include exposures  with  durations  of  30-90  days.   Subchronlc human data  are
rarely  available.  Reported exposures are usually from  chronic occupational
exposure  situations  or  from reports  of acute  accidental exposure.   These
values  are   developed   for  both   Inhalation  (RfD$j)  and   oral   (RfD$g)
exposures.

    The  RfD  (formerly  AIC)  1s  similar  1n  concept and  addresses  chronic
exposure.  It 1s an estimate  of an  exposure  level  that  would not be expected
to cause  adverse effects  when  exposure  occurs for  a significant  portion  of
the  Hfespan  [see U.S. EPA (1980) for   a  discussion of this  concept].   The
RfO  1s  route-specific  and  estimates acceptable  exposure  for either  oral
(RfDg)  or   Inhalation  (RfDj)  with  the  Implicit  assumption   that  exposure
by other routes   1s Insignificant.
                                      111

-------
    Composite  scores   (CSs)   for  noncarclnogens  have also  been  calculated
where data  permitted.   These  values  are used  for  ranking  reportable  quan-
tities and  the methodology  for  their development  1s explained In U.S.  EPA
(1983).

    For  compounds  for  which  there Is sufficient  evidence  of cardnogenld ty
RfD$  and  RfD  values are  not derived.   For  a  discussion of  risk  assessment
methodology  for  carcinogens   refer  to U.S.  EPA  (1980).   Since cancer 1s  a
process  that  1s  not characterized by  a  threshold,  any  exposure  contributes
an  Increment  of  risk.   For  carcinogens,  q-|*s  have  been computed,  1f  appro-
priate,  based on oral  and Inhalation  data 1f available.
                                      1v

-------
                                   ABSTRACT
    In  order  to  place  the  risk  assessment  evaluation  1n  proper  context,
refer  to  the preface  of  this  document.   The  preface  outlines  limitations
applicable  to  all  documents  of   this  series  as  well  as  the  appropriate
Interpretation and use of  the quantitative estimates presented.

    Ethyl   ether  has   not  been  adequately   assessed   for   cardnogenlclty,
chronic toxldty  or  teratogenldty.   A  recent 90-day  oral  toxldty  study
(American  81ogen1cs Corp.,  1986)  with  rats  showed  dally  doses of  2000  and
3500  mg/kg  to be associated  with accelerated  rates  of mortality;  whereas,
500 mg/kg/day was a NOAEL.   From these data,  an  RfO^o  of 350  mg/day  and  an
RfDfj  of  35   mg/day  for  a   70  kg  human, were derived.   A CS   of  10  was
calculated for  mortality  observed 1n rats at  2000 mg/day 1n the  same  study
(American  B1ogen1cs  Corp., 1986).

    Inhalation exposure data  at a single  concentration  suggested  treatment-
related changes  In  relative organ weights 1n  rats and  guinea  pigs,  but  the
data  were Inadequate  for  derivation  of  an  RfD$i  or   RfDi.   For  Informa-
tion  only, an RfDj  of 854  mg/day  could  be calculated  from  the ACGIH  (1986)
TLV of  400  ppm  (-1200  mg/m3).   This  value  may be  adopted  as  the  RfD$i  as
well.    These  values are  not recommended  because  the  basis  for  the TLV  1s
very weak.

-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
    The  Initial  draft  of  this  report  was  prepared  by  Syracuse  Research
Corporation under  Contract No.  68-03-3112  for  EPA's  Environmental  Criteria
and  Assessment  Office,  Cincinnati,  OH.   Dr.  Christopher  DeRosa and  Karen
Blackburn  were  the  Technical   Project  Monitors  and  John  Helms  (Office  of
Toxic  Substances)  was  the Project  Officer.   The  final  documents   In  this
series  were  prepared  for  the  Office  of  Emergency  and Remedial  Response,
Washington, DC.

    Scientists from  the  following U.S.  EPA  offices provided  review  comments
for this document series:

         Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH
         Carcinogen Assessment  Group
         Office  of  A1r Quality  Planning and Standards
         Office  of  Solid Waste
         Office  of  Toxic Substances
         Office  of  Drinking Water

Editorial review for the document series was provided  by the following:

    Judith Olsen and Erma Durden
    Environmental Criteria and  Assessment Office
    Cincinnati,  OH

Technical  support   services  for  the document   series  was  provided  by  the
following:

    Bette Zwayer, Jacky Bohanon and K1m Davidson
    Environmental Criteria and  Assessment Office
    Cincinnati,  OH
                                      v1

-------
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.
2.


3.








4.




5.
6.

ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY AND FATE 	 '-....
ABSORPTION FACTORS IN HUMANS AND EXPERIMENTAL ANIMALS . . .
2.1. ORAL 	
2.2. INHALATION 	
TOXICITY IN HUMANS AND EXPERIMENTAL ANIMALS 	
3.1. SUBCHRONIC 	
3.1.1. Oral 	
3.1.2. Inhalation 	
3.2. CHRONIC 	
3.2.1. Oral 	
3.2.2. Inhalation 	
3.3. TERATOGENICITY AND OTHER REPRODUCTIVE EFFECTS. . . .
3.4. TOXICANT INTERACTIONS 	
CARCINOGENICITY 	
4.1. HUMAN DATA 	
4.2. BIOASSAYS 	
4.3. OTHER RELEVANT DATA 	
4.4. WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE 	
REGULATORY STANDARDS AND CRITERIA 	
RISK ASSESSMENT 	
Page
. . . 1
. . . 3
. . . 3
. . . 3
. . . 4
. . . 4
. . . 4
. . . 5
. . . 5
. . . 5
. . . 5
. . . 6
6
7
. . . 7
. . . 7
. . . 7
7
9
. . . 10
     6.1.    SUBCHRONIC REFERENCE  DOSE  (RfDs)  .............    10

            6.1.1.    Oral (RfDso) ...................    10
            6.1.2.    Inhalation (RfDSI) ................    10

     6.2.    REFERENCE DOSE (RfD)  ...................    11

            6.2.1.    Oral (RfD0)  ...................    11
            6.2.2.    Inhalation (RfDj) ................    11

     6.3.    CARCINOGENIC POTENCY  (q-j*) ................    14

 7.  REFERENCES ............................    15

APPENDIX:  Summary Table for Vanadium and Compounds ..........    21

-------
                             LIST  OF  ABBREVIATIONS





CS                      Composite score



PEL                     Frank-effect level



Koc                     Soil sorptlon coefficient



MED                     Minimum effective dose



NOAEL                   No-observed-adverse-effect level



PEL                     Permissible exposure limit



ppm                     Parts per million



RfD                     Reference dose



RfDj                    Inhalation reference dose



RfDQ                    Oral reference dose



RfD$i                   Subchronlc Inhalation reference dose



RfD$Q                   Subchronlc oral reference dose



RVj                     Dose-rating value



RVe                     Effect-rating vaTue



SGOT                    Serum glutamlc oxaloacetlc transamlnase



SGPT                    Serum glutamlc pyruvlc transamlnase



STEL                    Short-term exposure level



TLV                     Threshold-limit value



TWA                     Time-weighted average

-------
                     1.  ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY AND FATE

    Selected  physical   and  chemical  properties  and  environmental  fate  of
ethyl ether are listed In Table 1-1.
    In  the  atmosphere,  ethyl  ether   1s  expected to  exist  primarily  In  the
vapor  phase.   The  atmospheric half-life  listed In  Table  1-1  Is  based  on
experimentally   determined   rate  constants   ranging   from   8.9xlO~12   to
9.3xlO~12  cm3  molecule"1  sec"1   for  the  reaction   of   ethyl   ether  with
HO  radical   at   25°C  and  an   ambient  HO  radical   concentration  of  S.OxlO5
molecules  cm"3   (Atkinson  et  al.,   1979;  Graedel,  1978).    In   aquatic
systems,  H  appears   that  volatilization  would   be  an  Important  removal
process; ethyl ether 1s  reported to volatilize  very rapidly from  the surface
layer of dilute aqueous  solutions  (Pemberton and  Counsel!, 1978).   Using the
method  of  Lyman  et al.  (1982) and  an  estimated  Henry's Law constant  of
1.26xlO~3  atm-m3/mol  at  25°C   (Hlne  and Mookerjee,  1975),  the  volatiliza-
tion half-life from water 1  m  deep  has been calculated to  be ~6 hours.
    Based  on  Us   K   ,  ethyl   ether   1s  not  expected  to  be  significantly
removed  and  transported through suspended partlculate matters  and  sediments
In water.   Bloaccumulatlon  In  aquatic organisms  also Is  not  expected  to  be
significant.
    The  half-life  of   ethyl  ether  1n  soil  could not  be  located   1n  the
available literature.    Its high vapor  pressure  (442 mm  Hg at  20°C)  and rapid
volatilization   from   aqueous   solution   suggest  that   ethyl   ether  should
volatilize rapidly  from moist  and  dry soil surfaces.  High mobility In soil
Is  suggested  by  K    values   of  24-73  and  detection   of  ethyl  ether  1n
groundwater  below  municipal  and Industrial  waste  landfill sites  (Sabel  and
Clark, 1984; DeWalle and Chlan, 1981).
OllOh                               -1-                              02/11/87

-------
                                   TABLE  1-1

                   Selected  Physical  and  Chemical  Properties
                     and  Environmental  Fate  of  Ethyl  Ether
        Property
        Value
      Reference
CAS number:

Chemical class:

Molecular weight:

Vapor pressure:

Water solubility:

Log octanol/water
  partition coefficient:

pKa:

B1oconcentrat1on factor:

Soil adsorption
  coefficient:

Half-lives:
  Air

  Water



  Soil
60-29-7

aliphatic ether

74.12

442 mm Hg at 20°C

6.46x10* mg/S. at 20°C


0.89

-3.59

2.8 (estimated)

24-73 (estimated)



26-27 hours

~6 hours



NA
Weber et al., 1981

Valvanl et al., 1981


Hansch and Leo, 1985

Kulevsky et al., 1969

Lyman et al., 1982

Lyman et al., 1982;
Sabljlc, 1984
Atkinson et al.,
1985; Graedel, 1978
H1ne and Mookerjee,
1975; Lyman et al.,
1982
NA = Not available
OllOh
       -2-
             02/11/87

-------
           2.   ABSORPTION  FACTORS  IN  HUMANS AND  EXPERIMENTAL ANIMALS
2.1.   ORAL
    Pertinent data regarding the absorption of  ethyl  ether  after  oral  Intake
could not be located 1n the available literature.
2.2.   INHALATION
    Henderson  and  Haggard  (1943)  estimated  -that a  man  of  average  weight
would  absorb   a  maximum  of 1.25 g  of  ethyl   ether,  resulting  1n  a  blood
concentration  of  0.018  g/l,  when  exposed to  an atmospheric  concentration
of  400  ppm  (1200  mg/m3).   Further  details,  such  as  the  duration  of
exposure, were not provided 1n  the ACGIH (1986)  review of this study.
    Cowles et  al.  (1972)  exposed pentobarbltal-anestheslzed  mongrel  dogs  to
mixtures  of  four  anesthetic  gases  Including  0.65X  ethyl  ether,   by  endo-
tracheal  Intubation,  for  100  minutes.  Inspired  and end-tidal  gas samples
were  measured  every  1-2 minutes.   Blood  samples  were  taken from several
sites.  Including  the femoral artery,  periodically throughout  the  exposure.
The  authors  found  that  It took  78.9  minutes  for the  partial  pressure  of
ethyl  ether  In alveolar  gas  and 92.5 minutes  for  the partial  pressure  1n
arterial blood to  reach  50% of  the  partial pressure  In Inspired  air.   These
results  Indicated  that  the uptake of  ethyl  ether after  Inhalation  exposure
was relatively slow  compared with the  other anesthetics tested.  Because the
focus  of  this  experiment  was  the prediction of concentrations  of anesthetic
gases  In  various  tissues,  additional quantitative data  regarding respiratory
uptake of ethyl ether were not  provided.
OllOh                               -3-                              10/28/86

-------
                3.   TOXICITY  IN  HUMANS  AND  EXPERIMENTAL  ANIMALS
3.1.   SUBCHRONIC
3.1.1.   Oral.   In  a   preliminary  draft  of  an  American  Blogenlcs   Corp.
(1986) 90-day  gavage study,  30 albino rats/sex  were  given 0,  500,  2000  or
3500  mg/kg/day  ethyl ether.  Body  weight and  food consumption  values  were
recorded  weekly;  hematologles,  clinical  chemistries  and  uMnalyses  were
measured at  an  unspecified  Interim period, and  upon  study completion,  organ
weight measurements  and gross  necropsies  were  performed.   H1stopatholog1cal
analyses are 1n progress.
    During the study, 4/60 rats  (2  males  and  2 females) given 2000 mg/kg/day
and 15/60 rats (6  males  and  9 females) given  3500 mg/kg/day died.  Male rats
had Inhibitions  In  body  weight  gain at 2000  and 3500 mg/kg/day and decreased
food  consumption   at   3500   mg/kg/day.    High-dose  males  had  significant
decreases In  hemoglobin  and  hematocrU values, and a  slight  Increase  1n red
cell  count.   SGPT  and  serum  cholesterol  levels  were  significantly Increased
at  3500  mg/kg/day.   Although the relative weights  of  the  brain, kidneys and
testes/ep1d1dym1des  were  Increased   at   the   high  dose,  the  significant
reductions In body  weight  gain  1n  this group  make Interpretation difficult.
Females  given  the   high  dose had  Inhibitions  In body  weight  gain,  elevated
SGOT  levels  and significantly  Increased  llver-to-body weight  ratios.   The
dose of  2000 mg/kg/day  resulted  1n  a  transient  Increase 1n serum cholesterol
and  elevated  relative   Hver  weights  In females.    There  were  no  other
treatment-related  effects   on  hematology,  clinical  chemistry,  urlnalysls
parameters or organ weights at either 500 or  2000 mg/kg/day.
    The  Investigators  observed  signs  of  light anesthesia  at  2000 mg/kg/day
and,  especially, at 3500 mg/kg/day.   Before the  final  sacrifice, ophthalmic
examination revealed retinal  atrophy 1n the  eye of one 500 mg/kg/day female,


OllOh                         '      -4-                              02/11/87

-------
two 2000 mg/kg/day females and  two  3500 mg/kg/day  males.   Necropsies  of  rats
given the 2000 and 3500 mg/kg/day dosages  revealed lung  and  liver  discolora-
tion, and dlstentlon and discoloration of  the stomach.
3.1.2.   Inhalation.    Chenoweth  et  al.   (1972)   studied   the  effects   of
repetitive  ethyl  ether exposure  on  the  growth,  hlstopathologlcal,  hemato-
loglcal  and biochemical  (SGOT  and  SGPT)  parameters of 10  rats/sex,  6 guinea
pigs/sex  and  2  rabbits/sex.    Each  species  was  exposed  to  2000  ppm  (6063
mg/m3) ethyl  ether,  7 hours/day, 5  days/week.   The number  of  exposure  days
was 34/44 for  rats  and 33/43 for guinea'pigs and  rabbits.   Treatment had  no
effect on terminal body weights  In  rats or guinea  pigs,  but  H significantly
decreased relative heart  and liver  weights  1n  rats,  and  Increased  relative
testlcular weights In  guinea  pigs.   Because  only  two rabbits/sex  were  used,
1t was difficult  to  assess  effects  of treatment on organ  weights.   No  other
treatment-related effects were observed.
3.2.   CHRONIC
3.2.1.   Oral.  Pertinent data  regarding  the chronic  oral toxlclty  of  ethyl
ether could not be located In the available literature.
3.2.2.   Inhalation.    ACGIH  (1986)  reviewed  the  limited   data   available
regarding Inhalation exposure to ethyl ether  and concluded that  narcosis  and
general   anesthesia  are  the primary  effects,  which  occur  at exposures  to
-3.6-6.5  volume  %  (109-197  g/m3).    Respiratory arrest  has  been  associated
with  concentrations  of 7-10  volume  % (212-303  g/m3); higher concentrations
are  fatal.    Symptoms  In occupatlonally  exposed  workers  Include  anorexia,
exhaustion,  headache,  sleepiness, dizziness,  excitation  and  psychic disturb-
ances.   Blood dyscraslas,  particularly  In  women,  and  albumlnurla  are  also
seen.  Nelson  et  al.  (1943)  reported that 200 ppm (-600  mg/m3) was approx-
imately  the  threshold  of  nasal  Irritation   and   that 300 ppm  (-900 mg/m3)


OllOh               '                -5-                              02/11/87

-------
was  an  objectionable working  atmosphere.   Cook  (1945),  on the  other  hand,

suggested  that  exposure  should  be  limited  to  500  ppm  (-1520 mg/m3)  to


avoid  Irritation,   and   stated  that  exposure  to  500-1000 ppm  (-1520-3030


mg/m3) was not associated with demonstrable Injury to health.


3.3.   TERATOGENICITY AND OTHER REPRODUCTIVE EFFECTS


    There were no  data  available  on the reproductive  effects  of  ethyl  ether


In  humans  or  on  Its teratogenldty  In experimental  animals.    Land et  al.


(1981) studied the  effects  of acute high  level  Inhalation  exposure  to  ethyl


ether  on  spermatozoa morphology.   Male  mice  were  exposed to  0.32 or  1.6


volume %  (9700 or  48,500  mg/m3,  respectively) ethyl  ether, 4  hours/day  for


5 consecutive  days.   Ep1d1dymal  spermatozoa were examined  for  morphological


aberrations 28 days  after  the last exposure day.   Neither  concentration  had


a significant  effect upon  the  percentage  of  abnormal  spermatozoa,  compared


with control values.


3.4.   TOXICANT INTERACTIONS


    Ethyl ether  Inhibits the metabolism  of hexobarbltal (Vermeulen  et  al.,


1983),  acetaminophen  (Watklns  et  al.,   1984),  gentamldn  and  tobramycln


(Hlgashl  et al.,  1982),  amlnopyrene (Hanew et  al.,  1984),  ethanol (Hobara et


al., 1985) and N-n1trosod1methylam1ne (Keefer  et  al.,  1985).   Watklns et  al.


(1984) showed  that ethyl  ether  Inhibited  conjugation  of acetaminophen  with


sulfate,  glutathlone and glucuronlc add,  thus  slowing the  rate of  detoxifi-

cation.   In most  of  these  studies,  plasma  clearance  of the  Interacting


toxicant  was depressed by co-administration  of  ethyl  ether, while volumes of


distribution  were   unchanged.   Keefer  et   al.  (1985)  found,  however,  that


clearance of  N-n1trosod1methylam1ne was unaffected  by  prior  treatment  with


ethyl ether.   The  small  dose of  N-n1 trosod1methylam1ne used  1n  this study,


compared   with  the   doses  of  toxicants  used   by other  Investigators,  may

                                                 »
account for this  difference.



OllOh                               -6-                               02/11/87

-------
                             4.  CARCINOGENICITY
4.1.   HUMAN DATA
    Pertinent data  regarding  the potential  cardnogenldty  In humans  after
ethyl ether exposure eould not  be located  1n  the  available  literature.
4.2.   BIOASSAYS
    Pertinent  data  regarding   the   cardnogenlcl ty   of  ethyl  ether   after
chronic administration  In  experimental  animals could not  be  located  In  the
available  literature.   The  National  Toxicology  Program  has  not  scheduled
ethyl ether for  cardnogenldty testing  (NTP,  1986).
4.3.   OTHER RELEVANT DATA
    Inhaled ethyl  ether  stimulated  tumor  growth  1n mice with  subcutaneously
or  Intravenously  Implanted tumor  cells  (Frld et  al.,   1984).   In the  same
study, the  mltotlc  Index  of Implanted  tumor  cells  In rats was not  affected
by administration of an unspecified  concentration of  ethyl  ether.
    Ethyl ether  did not Increase the number of revertants  In  five strains  of
Salmonella  typh1mur1um,  nor  did It cause  mutagenldty  In  three  Escher 1ch1a
coll  strains deficient   In  tryptophan   synthesis  (DeFlora  et  al.,  1984).
Results were the  same  with or  without  S-9 mix.  Abe  and Sasaki (1982)  found
that  ethyl  ether  had no  effect  on  the  number of sister chromatid  exchanges
1n  cultured Chinese hamster  ovary  cells.   Ma et al.  (1984)  reported  that
ethyl  ether gas   did  not  Increase mlcronucleus  formation  In  the  plant,
Tradescantla palldosa.
4.4.   HEIGHT OF EVIDENCE
    Because of  the  lack  of human and experimental animal  data  regarding the
cardnogenldty  of  ethyl  ether,  the chemical  should  be categorized  In IARC
Group 3,  Cannot  Be Classified,  or  CAC- Group  0,  Not  Classified, applying the
OllOh                               -7-                              10/28/86

-------
criteria for  weight  of  evidence  (U.S.  EPA,  1986a).   These  categories  are
reserved for chemicals with Inadequate evidence of animal cardnogenldty In
the absence of human  data.
OllOh                               -8-                              03/16/87

-------
                     5.  REGULATORY STANDARDS AND CRITERIA







    The  ACGIH  (1985)  adopted  a  TLV-TWA of  400  ppm  (-1200  mg/m3)  for  an



8-hour  exposure  to  ethyl  ether,  and a  TLV-STEL of 500  ppm  (-1500  mg/m3).



The ACGIH  (1986)  cited occupational  data  Indicating that higher  concentra-



tions  In man result  In  Irritation and narcosis.  The OSHA  (1985)  PEL  Is  also



1200 mg/m3.



    U.S. EPA (1986b) derived an RfD  for  oral  exposure  of  0.5 mg/kg/day  or  35



mg/day for a 70 kg  human.   In  this  derivation,  an  uncertainty factor  of  1000



was applied  to  the  low dose  of  500 mg/kg/day  (NOAEL)  In the  90-day  gavage



study using rats by American B1ogen1cs Corp.  (1986).
OllOh                               -9-                              03/16/87

-------
                              6.   RISK  ASSESSMENT



6.1.   SUBCHRONIC REFERENCE DOSE (RfO$)



6.1.1.   Oral  (RfDSQ).   The  only  subchronlc   oral   study   available  for



derivation  of  an  RfDso  1s   the  90-day  gavage  study  using  rats  by  the



American B1ogen1cs  Corp.  (1986).   The  high mortality  rate  at  3500 mg/kg/day



clearly Indicates a PEL.  At  2000  mg/kg/day,  4/60 rats died,  and  Inhibitions



In  body weight  gain,   transient  Increases  1n  serum cholesterol and  relative



hepatic  weights,   retinal  atrophy  and   gross   necropsy  aberrations   were



observed.   Since one rat  treated with  500  mg/kg/day had retinal  atrophy, but



no  other  effects were  observed  1n this treatment  group.   H1stopatholog1cal



examinations  did  not  reveal any ethyl  ether-related   lesions; thus,  the 500



mg/kg/day dose may  be  considered  as  a NOAEL.  An  uncertainty factor of 100



(10  for  Interspedes  extrapolation  and  10  for  the  range of  Intraspedes



sensitivity)  1s  applied  to  the NOAEL  of  500 mg/kg/day  to attain  an  RfDSQ



of 5.0 mg/kg/day, or 350 mg/day for a 70 kg human.



6.1.2.   Inhalation  (RfOQT).    The   study  by   Chenoweth   et   al.  (1972)
                          O 1


suggested  treatment-related  effects   of  ethyl  ether  exposure  on  relative



organ  weights of  rats  and  guinea pigs.   Since  the  decreases   In  relative



heart and liver  weights  In  rats  and  the Increased relative testlcular weight



In  guinea  pigs  were  not accompanied  by  changes  1n  serum enzyme  levels  or



hlstopathologlcal appearance,  the  significance of  these  effects  1s  unclear.



The short duration  of  the Chenoweth et al.  (1972) study may have  been Inade-



quate  for  assessment  of  the  cumulative effects  of longer-term  exposure  to



ethyl ether.  No other data were adequate for  quantitative risk  assessment.
OllOh                               -10-                             05/13/87

-------
6.2.   REFERENCE DOSE (RfD)



6.2..1.   Oral  (RfOQ).   An  RfDQ of  0.5 mg/kg/day  or  35 mg/day  for  a  70



kg  human can  be  derived  from  the  RfD~Q of  5.0 mg/kg/day  calculated  In



Section 6.1.1., by applying an additional  uncertainty  factor of  10  to expand



from  subchronlc  to chronic exposure.   The RfD-  should  be re-assessed  when



adequate chronic  toxlclty or  reproductive  toxlclty data  reveal  the  presence



of  adverse  effects  at  500 mg/kg/day.   This  analysis  agrees  with  a  recent



U.S.  EPA  (1986b)  analysis  In which  an  RfD  of  35  mg/day was  derived  in  an



Identical manner.



    Table  6-1   shows  the  derivation  of  a  CS  for  oral Intake  using  the



American  B1ogen1cs  Corp.  (1986)  results.    Although   dally  exposure to  500



mg/kg ethyl  ether  was  associated  with retinal  atrophy,  this effect  was  seen



grossly  In only  one  rat,  and  results have not  yet  been  confirmed  hlstologl-



cally.  The  dally  dose of  2000 mg/kg,  which  resulted 1n the  deaths  of  four



rats. Is a more  suitable value  for  CS  derivation.  Division of  this dose  by



10  (to  approximate chronic exposure),  and subsequent multiplication  by the



cube  root  of the average  rat  body weight  to  the assumed human body weight



(70  kg)  results  1n a  human  MED  of  2311 mg/day  for a 70 kg man.   The  human



MED  corresponds   to  an  RV  of  1.0.   The RV   for  Increased mortality  Is



10,  for a CS of 10.



6.2.2.   Inhalation  (RfD.).  The  only  available  toxlclty  study  regarding



chronic or subchronlc Inhalation exposure  to ethyl  ether was  by  Chenoweth et



al.  (1972).    Data  from  this  study  were   Inadequate  for  derivation of  an



RfD,  because only one  level  was  tested ^nd  the duration of  the  experiment



(44  days) was too short to evaluate the subchronlc toxldty of  ethyl ether.
OllOh                               -11-                             05/13/87

-------


























i_
O>
£

uu
, 	
>•,
g^
H-i
UkJ

k-
0
u—
l/l
O)
o
u


0;
-*-»
M—
un
O
CL
0




































4)
u
c
41

41

4)
oe




oo
0
41
;>
Cf.

.*•>
>
03
c -a
= Ol
3 £
z —




4>
O>
03
Wl
O
^2
4>
3
un
O
a.
X
LU



X
4)
t/J


*\
V» C
0) —
«- "3
O t—
4) -M
a. oo
C/5






4>
^_j
3
O
Q£





C
03

03
r—
CO
CM







>^
03
•o
"01
-^
Ol
E

o
0
o
(Nl


u.
«
Z




^
^Hl
03
l_










r^
03

O
^3
03
1/1 ^^
'•«J (^
.r~
C -
41
01 a.
O i_
— o
CD f ^








>>
t, •
*—
f—
03
^
O
E










































O
c
^
r—
03














r-
O^
^» 1^
^•*
41 •
3 •
O (—
C 03
4)
-C -->
^_3 4)


0
•
^"

^^

•0 f5
4) 4> i—
ui > 3
03 -- 'o w
41 *< — JZ
i. 03 -^ Ol
'^J r* i/l •*••
C 41 4l 4l




O
_!






J3
r»
cn




"-^
^j
^x -O >i
O ^ CO 4> 03
^ i- ^- — • tJ
O 3 \ i_ \
v^ O vi 4> Ol
— • 03 C \
_ r- -3 p Oi
a. • n -ii =
CX- — -CO fM
W " W^
f^l qj» • i^ L^
O \ >> >>
O O1 H3 f^ O
(Nj £ "^ "^ •^




z



03 Q£
U -2.
C V.
•*— Ol
3 —
Ol CL




C
O

H_»
03
r^
03
-C
C
H-4

































I/I
^
O
^^
^^
3
03
>,
J3
•o
4)
•^
^~
>
O

a.

03
03
•o
—
O
t_
t^

»
Ol

.
r^
CO
I
1/1
03
3

-C
Ol
.^
41
3

4_>
03
L.

41

03
t
4)
>
^^
03



















'
^
3
on
O
a.
X
4>

y
M~
C
O
.c
u

0
^^

c
0
•^
"«3
E
X
0
^
Q.
a.
03

L.
O
<*•
0
'—
^_
o

L.
o
^_l
u
03

>>
•4_*
_^
03
^_)
^
O)
C
3

^.
O

C
o
^™
^K)
03
U
H—
r—
a.
a.
^£
^3
O

0)

03


C
o

^_»
03
03
sz
c

1 —
^~
-0
^rf
03
""^
3
'•-^
03
^ .
Ol
"O ji
C
03 c
^~
*
_^ ^
Oi
f""» **^
03 01
03 3

O *^
-o
a- °
o -°
^-^ ll
I/I 2
^"
? 4»
^— t-
ti i>
^*
03 ,

>> •.
-0 '—
•3 •
O ."M
J^ ^-«
>CTl
O •
i-O
CX 3

^ CO
03 C"
~"o
. — -
g
o.^
"T 3
1 2
ta.
Q
•o "*"
^
•° ^
^— »
^~
"3 £
C 0
**~ u.
E ^-
^
41 n
— E

C CO
03 CO
4> •
X 0
U







































































•a
4<
^H-t
L.
O
ex
a/
^

,<_J
O
22

a

a:
z
OllOh
-12-
10/28/86

-------
    The  ACGIH  (1986)  TLV  of  400 ppm  (-1200  mg/m3}  may  be considered as  a
basis  for  an  RfDj.   The TLV  of 400  ppm  appears  to  be  based primarily  on
the  data  of  Cook  (1945),  who  stated  that  exposures  to  500-1000  ppm
(-1520-3030  mg/m3)  did  not  result  1n  demonstrable  Injury   to  health  and
recommended that exposures  should be limited  to  500  ppm  to  avoid  Irritation.
Nelson  et  al.   (1943),  however,  reported  that  200  ppm   (-600  mg/m3)   was  a
threshold  for  nasal  Irritation  and  that  300  ppm  (-900  mg/m3)  was  objec-
tionable 1n  the workplace.   The TLV of 400  ppm,  therefore,   Is  Intended  to
protect  against  Irritation,  narcosis and demonstrable Injury  to  health.   In
derivation  of  an  RfD,  for  ethyl  ether,  a  transformed dose of  122  mg/kg/day
1s calculated  by  expanding to continuous  exposure and assuming  that  humans
weigh  70 kg  and Inhale 10  m3  of air during  the workday.   Application  of  an
uncertainty  factor  of  10  results  1n   an  RfDSI  of  12.2  mg/kg/day, or  854
mg/day  for  a  70  kg human.   Because  of  the  weak  basis  for  the  TLV,  this
RfD.  Is  not  recommended,  and 1t 1s  suggested that  a subchronlc  Inhalation
experiment  of  at  least 90  days  duration with multiple species and multiple
exposure levels be performed.
    The  Chenoweth  et  al.   (1972) results can  be used 1n   the  derivation of a
CS.   Inhalation of  2000  ppm (-6060  mg/m3)   ethyl  ether,  7  hours/day  for
33-34  exposure days resulted  In  decreased  relative weights  of  the hearts and
livers  of   rats  and   Increased   testlcular  weights   1n  male  guinea  pigs.
Chenoweth  et  al.  (1972)  stated  that  the  mean  terminal  body weight  of  the
exposed  guinea pigs was 687  g.   Assuming a guinea  pig of  this weight Inhales
0.33 m3  of air/day [using  the formula of  U.S.  EPA  (1986c)],  and converting
to  continuous  exposure,   the  air concentration  of  6060  mg/m3  1s  equivalent
to  a   dose of  652  mg/kg/day.    Division of  this  equivalent  dose  by  10   (to
approximate  chronic  exposure),  and  multiplication by the  cube root  of   the
OllOh                               -13-                             05/13/87

-------
                                         I
ratio of  animal  to human body weights results  In  a  human MED of 977 mg/day
for  a  70 kg  human.   This MED corresponds  to  an RV  of  1.0.   When the RV
Is multiplied  by  an RV  of 4  (for  changes  In  organ weights), the  resulting
CS Is 4.0 (see Table 6-1).
6.3.    CARCINOGENIC POTENCY (q^)
    Because of the  lack  of cardnogenldty  data for ethyl ether, determina-
tion  of carcinogenic potency Is not  possible.
OllOh                               -14-                             02/11/87

-------
                                7.   REFERENCES







Abe, S. and  M.  Sasaki.   1982.   SCE as an  Index of mutagenesls  and/or  card-



nogenesis.  Sister chromatld exchange.   Prog.  Top  Cytogenet.   2:  461-514.







ACGIH  (American  Conference  of  Governmental  Industrial  Hyg1en1sts).   1985.



TLVs: Threshold Limit Values for Chemical  Substances  In  the  Work  Environment



Adopted  by  ACGIH  with  Intended  Changes   for  1985-1986.   Cincinnati,  OH.



p. 24.







ACGIH  (American  Conference  of  Governmental  Industrial  Hyglenlsts).   1986.



Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values and Biological  Exposure  Indices,



5th ed.  Cincinnati,  OH.   p. 259.







American  Blogenlcs  Corp.   1986.   90-Day  gavage  study  1n  rats using  ethyl



ether.   Status Report for ABC Study No.  410-2343.   3/18/86.







Atkinson,   R.,  K.R.  Darnall, A.C.  Lloyd,  A.M.   Winer  and  J.N.  Pitts,  Jr.



1979.  Kinetics and mechanisms of  the reactions of  the hydroxyl  radical with



organic compounds 1n  the gas phase.  Adv. Photochem.   11: 435.







Chenoweth,  M.B.,  B.K.J.  Leong,  G.L.  Sparschu  and  T.R.  Torkelson.   1972.



Tox1c1t1es  of methoxyflurane,  halothane,   and  dlethyl  ether   1n  laboratory



animals on  repeated  Inhalation at  subanesthetlc  concentrations.   JJK  Cell.



B1ol.  Toxlclty  Anesth.,  Proc.  Res.   Symp.,  Dow  Chemical,   Midland,  MI.



p. 275-285.
OllOh                               -15-                             10/28/86

-------
Cook, W.A.   1945.  No  title  provided.   Ind.  Med.   14:  936.   (Cited In  ACGIH.
1986)

Cowles,  A.L.,  H.H. Borgstedt  and  A.J. Gillies.   1972.   Uptake and  distri-
bution  of  four   Inhalation  anesthetics  In  dogs.   Anestheslology.   36(6):
558-570.

DeFlora,  S., P.   Zanacchl,  A.   Camolrano,  C.  BennlcelH  and G.S.  Badolatl.
1984.  Genotoxlc activity and  potency  of  135 compounds  1n  the Ames reversion
test and In a bacterial DNA-repa1r  test.  Mutat. Res.   133(3): 161-198.

Dewalle, F.B. and  E.S.K.  Chlan.  1981.  Detection of  trace  organlcs  In  well
water near a solid waste landfill.   J.  Am. Water Works  Assoc.  73:  206-211.

Fr1d,  I.A..   A.I.  Evtyukhln,  M.I.  Bernshteln,  et  al.   1984.   Effect  of
anesthesia on the  tumorlgenlc  process  In  experimental  animals.   Eksp.  Onkol.
6(3): 57-60.  (CA 101:1037131)

Graedel, I.E.  1978.   Chemical  Compounds  1n  the Atmosphere.   Academic  Press,
New York, NY.  p. 268.

Hanew,  T.,   S.   Schenker,  C.G.  Meredith   and  G.I.  Henderson.   1984.   The
pharmacokinetlc   Interaction  of  dlethyl  ether  with amlnopyrlne In the  rat.
Proc. Soc. Exp.  B1ol.  Med.  175(1): 64-69.

Hansch,  C.  and  A.J.  Leo.   1985.  HedChem  Project.  CAS No.  60-29-7.   Issue
No. 26, Pomona College, Claremont,  CA.


OllOh                               -16-                             10/28/86

-------
Henderson,  Y.  and H.W.  Haggard.   1943.   Noxious  Gases,  2nd  ed.   Relnhold
Publishing Corp., NY.   p.  195.   (Cited In ACGIH,  1986)

H1gash1, Y., N.  Notojl,  R.  Yamajo and N.  Rata.  1982.   Effect of  anesthesia
on drug  disposition  In  the  rat.   J.  Pharmacoblo-Oyn.   5(2):  112-119.   (CA
096:173861s)

Hlne, J. and P.K.  Mookerjee.   1975.   The  Intrinsic hydrophlllc  character  of
organic compounds.  Correlations  In   terms  of  structural contributions.   J.
Org.  Chem.  40(3): 292-298.

Hobara, N.t A. Watanabe  and  H.  Nagashlma.  1985.  Effect of various central
nervous system-acting  drugs  on  ethanol and acetaldehyde metabolism  In  rats.
Pharmacology.   30(6):  333-338.

Keefer,  L.K.,  W.A. Garland,  N.F.  Oldfleld,   J.E.  Swagzdls and B.A.  M1co.
1985.   Inhibition of  N-n1trosod1methylam1ne  metabolism  1n  rats  by  ether
anesthesia.  Cancer Res.   45(11  part  1):  5457-5460.

Kulevsky, N.,  C.T. Hang and  V.I.  Stenberg.   1969.   Photochemical oxidations.
II.  Rate  and  product  formation  studies  on the  photochemical   oxidation  of
ethers.  J. Org.  Chem.   34:  1345-1348.

Land, P.C., E.L.  Owen  and H.W.  L1nde.  1981.   Morphologic changes  1n  mouse
spermatozoa after  exposure  to  1nhalat1onal anesthetics  during early sperma-
togenesls.  Anestheslo'iogy.   54(1):  53-56.
OllOh                               -17-                             10/28/86

-------
Lyman,  W.J.,  W.F. Reehl  and D.H.  Rosenblatt.   1982.   Handbook  of  Chemical
Property  Estimation  Method.   Environmental  Behavior  of Organic  Compounds.
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.  p. 5-5.

Ma,   T.H.,   M.M.   Harris,  V.A.  Anderson,  et   al.    1984.    Tradescantla-
mlcronucleus  (Trad-MCN)   tests  on  140  health-related  agents.    Mutat.  Res.
138(2-3): 157-167.

Nelson,  K.W.,   J.F.  Ege,  M.  Ross,  I.E.   Woodman and  L.  Sllverman.   1943.
Sensory  response  to  certain  Industrial  solvent  vapors.    J.  Ind.  Hyg.
Toxlcol.  25: 282-285.  (Cited In ACGIH, 1986)

NTP   (National   Toxicology   Program).    1986.     Management   Status   Report.
6/10/86.

OSHA  (Occupational   Safety  and  Health  Administration).   1985.   Safety  and
Health Standards.  Code of Federal Regulations.  29:  1910.1000.

Pemberton, R.C. and  J.F.  Counsell.   1978.  The relative evaporation  rates  of
solutes and water  from dilute aqueous  solution at 25°C.   Sc1.  Tech.  Aerosp.
Rep.  16(14): 19.

Sabel, G.V. and T.P. Clark.   1984.   Volatile organic  compounds  as Indicators
of  municipal   solid  waste  leachate contamination.   Waste  Manag.  Res.   2:
119-130.
OllOh                               -18-                             10/28/86

-------
Sabljic, A.  1984.   Predictions  of  the nature and strength  of  soil  sorptlon



of  organic  pollutants  by  molecular  topology.   J.  AgMc.   Food  Chem.   32:



243-246.







U.S.  EPA.   1980.   Guidelines  and  Methodology  Used  In  the Preparation  of



Health  Effects   Assessment  Chapters  of  the  Consent  Decree Water  Criteria



Documents.   Federal Register.   45(231): 79347-79357.







U.S.  EPA.   1983.   Methodology  and Guidelines for  Reportable  Quantity  Deter-



minations Based  on  Chronic  Toxldty Data.   Prepared by the  Office  of  Health



and Environmental  Assessment,  Environmental  Criteria and Assessment  Office,



Cincinnati,  OH  for  the  Office  of   Solid  Waste  and  Emergency  Response,



Washington, DC.







U.S.  EPA.    1986a.    Guidelines   for   Carcinogen   Risk  Assessment.   Federal



Register.  51(185): 33992-34003.







U.S.  EPA.   1986b.   Integrated  Risk   Information  System  (IRIS).   Reference



dose  (RfD)  for  oral exposure  for  ethyl  ether.   Online.  (Verification  date



6/11/86,  final  approval   pending).   Office  of  Health   and  Environmental



Assessment, Environmental  Criteria and Assessment Office,  Cincinnati,  OH.







U.S.  EPA.   1986c.    Reference  Values  for Risk  Assessment.   Prepared  by the



Office  of  Health  and  Environmental  Assessment,  Environmental  Criteria and



Assessment Office,  Cincinnati, OH for  the Office  of  Solid Waste,  Washington,



DC.
OllOh                               -19-                             02/11/87

-------
Valvanl,  S.C.,  S.H.   Yalkowsky  and  T.J.  Roseman.    1981.   Solubility  and



partitioning.   IV.  Aqueous  solubility  and  octanol-water  partition  coeffi-



cients of liquid nonelectrolytes.  J. Pharm. Scl.   70: 502-507.







Vermeulen, N.P.E., H.  Danhof,  I.  Setlawan and  D.O.  Brelmer.   1983.   Disposi-



tion of hexobarbltal  In  the  rat.   Estimation  of "first-pass" elimination and



Influence of ether anesthesia.  J. Pharmacol.  Exp. Ther.   226(1): 201-205.







Watklns,  J.8.,  C.P.  Siegers  and  C.D.  Klaassen.    1984.   Effect of  dlethyl



ether on  the biliary  excretion of  acetaminophen.   Proc.  Soc. Exp. B1ol. Med.



177(1): 168-175.







Weber, R.C., P.A.  Parker  and M.  Bowser.   1981.   Vapor  pressure distribution



of  selected  organic   chemicals.    U.S.   EPA,   Cincinnati,   OH.   39 p.   EPA



600/2-81-021.
OllOh                               -20-                             10/28/86

-------
                              c
                              O)
                              O)
                              01
                              a.
       03
    1/1 O"i
 C  U r—
 fO  —
 U  C  -
—  a,  .
 i-  en a.
 O)  O i_
 S  — O
                                                                 CO
 U  C   -L
<-  0)   •
 t-  CT CL,
 91  O  u  C
 E —  O
«t CQ c_>  :
                                                                           00
                                                                           •
                                                                     e o r- •<
                                                                     fO H-    Q.
                                                                     U C   - UJ
                                                                     «- Ol   •
                                                                     u o>  a.   •
                                                                     Ol O  t_ C/l
                                                                     S —  o   •
                                                                     •< CD U =3
                 a*
                 i/i
                 o
                a

                 
                                 <—  >»       r—  >>
                                 fO £  1>     «3 J=  1)
                                 c  a. c     c  a. c
                                 —  o  o     —  o  o
                                              O) I-*  C
                                                           01
                                    •a  >.
                                    O) *->
                                    1/1 ••—
                                    ^ i—
                                    OJ  13
                                    U 4->
                                    U  L.
       o.    _z
 t=

(/J
                 O)
                 1/1
                 o
                              c
                              OJ
                 ai
                 CL
                 x
                                              o -a
                                              ^^
                                                  ai
                                 ^N  3
                                 C"  u
                                 n  4>
                 i/i
                 >t
              I-  H3
              o -a
             sa-
                 il)
                                                           en  u
 o> c  _i     cn c  _i
 s  o  u-i     e  o  j-i
    o  •<        u  <
o     o    o     o
o o  z    o o  z
uo ai  ^—'    un ai  ^-~
                                                                                  i- >>
                                                                                  O f«3
                                                                                  >< O)
                                                                                  
                                                                                  73 «-
                                                                                  ^^ u
                                                                                  \ 01
                                                                                  c^ ^
                                                                                  S c — -
                                                                                     o <—
                                                                                  o u -o
                                                                                  O    i_
                                                                                  o o o
                                                                                  CM (Ti —
                              a.
                             V5
                                    v_
                                    a>
                                 o S
                                 1^0 l_
                                 a o
                                                               at
                                                            o i-
                                                           a  o
                                                 ^—       Q£ 	.
OllOh
                                              -21-
                                                                   05/13/87

-------