905R85106                / /
    "" "* /***** I "~ '} ^  ' " ""
            '"   '
                                                         Re : S J 2 5 0 9
                                                            12P3T84
     •JAN  819B5                              "                /r

ENVIKUNMuNi L PROJECTION AGENCY
     Um ,..Y, REGION V        LISTING BACKGROUND  DOCUMENT

     Th'e'.jEp.l lowing wastes containing  tetra- ,  penta- ,  and      I/
     hexachlor6~dibenzo-£-dioxins  (CDDs) or -dibenzofurans(CDFs7
     and other toxic constituents:

      F020  Wastes (except wastewater and  spent  carbon  from  hydrogen
            chloride purification) from the production  and manufac-
            turing use (as a reactant, chemical  intermediate,  or
            component in a formulating process)  of  tri- ,  or  tetra-
            chlorophenol or of intermediates  used to  produce their
            pesticide derivatives.  (This  listing does  not  include
            wastes from the production of  Hexachlorophene from
            highly purified 2,4, 5-trichlorophenol .)                 (H)

      F021   Wastes (except wastewater and  spent  carbon  from  hydrogen
            chloride purification) from the production  or manufac-
            turing use (as a reactant, chemical  intermediate,  or
            component in a formulating process)  of  pentachlorophenol ,
            or of intermediates used  to produce  its derivatives.     (H)

      F022  Wastes (except wastewater and  spent  carbon  from  hydrogen
            chloride purification) from the manufacturing use  (as a
            reactant, chemical intermediate,  or  component in a
            formulating process)  of tetra-, penta-, or  hexachloro-
            benzenes under alkaline conditions.                      (H)

      F023  Wastes (except wastewater and  spent  carbon  from  hydrogen •
            chloride purification) from the production  of materials
            on equipment previously used for  the production  or
            manufacturing use (as a reactant, chemical  intermediate,
     M For the purposes of this document the following acronyms  and
     Definitions are used:

     PCDDs                   = all isomers of all chlorinated
                               dibenzo-p_-dioxins ;
     PCDFs                   = all isomers of all chlorinated
                               dibenzofurans;
     CDDs and CDFs           = all isomers of tetra-, penta-, and
     j                          hexachlorodibenzo-£-dioxins and
                               -dibenzofurans, respectively;
     TCDDs and TCDFs         = all isomers of tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxins
                               and -dibenzofurans, respectively;
     TCDD and TCDF           = the respective 2 , 3, 7-^J.somers .
     PeCDDs/Fs and HxCDDs/Fs = the penta-and hexachloro compounds.

-------
      or component in a formulating, process) of tri-, and
      tetrachlorophenols.    (This listing does not include
      wastes from equipment used only for the production or
      use of Hexachlorophene made from prepurified 2,4,5-
      trichlorophenol.)                                           (H

F026  Wastes (except wastewater and spent carbon from hydrogen
      chloride purification) from the production of materials
      on equipment previously used for the manufacturing use
      (as a reactant, chemical intermediate, or component in
      a formulating process) of tetra-, penta-, or hesachloro-
      benzenes under alkaline conditions.                         (H)


F027  Discarded unused formulations containing tri-, tetra-, or
      pentachlorophenols,  or compounds derived from these chloro-
      phenols.  (This listing does not include formulations
      containing Hexachlorophene synthesized from prepurified
      2,4,5-trichlorophenol.)                                      (H)


F028  Residues resulting from incineration or thermal treatment   (H)
      of soil contaminated with EPA Hazardous Was-te Nos.
      FQ20, F021 , F022, F023,  F026, and F027:                       4

-------
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                         Page

 I.  Summary of basis for listing                           4

II.  Chemical and physical properties of CDDs
     and CDFs.                                              6

III. Reactions causing the formation of CDDs and CDFs       8

     A.  Formation of CDDs                                  9

     B.  Formation of CDFs                                  10

IV. Sources of the wastes and typical disposal practices   11

    A.  Sources: Manufacturing processes causing
        formation of CDDS and CDFs.                        11

        1.  Formation of CDDS                              11

            a.  production of ring-substituted
                chlorophenols                              11

            b.  Syntheses using tri- and tetrachloro-
                phenols                                    16

            c.  Manufacturing operations on CDD/
                CDF-contaminated equipment                 18

            d.  Manufacture of formulations                19

        2.  Manufacturing processes associated with
            the formation of CDFs                          20

        3.  Miscellaneous processes causing the
            formation of CDDS and CDFs                     22

        4.  Other toxicants of concern in these wastes     23

    B.  Quantities of wastes produced                      23

V.   Waste management                                       24 -

VI.  Basis for listing these wastes as hazardous           25

     A.  Hazards posed by the wastes                       25

     B.  Mismanagement incidents and environmental         32
         contamination

-------
                                                       Page


     C.  Health and environmental effects               43

         1.  Structure - activity relationships in      43
             the mechanism of action, toxicity and
             persistence of CDDs and CDFs

         2.  Health and environmental effects of CDDs   45

         3.  Health and environmental effects of CDFs   55

         4.  Health and environmental effects of
             chlorophenols and hexachlorobenzene

VII.  Response to comments


Tables 1-9                                            63-84

Figures 1-23                                          85-107

References                                             108 - 122
                             4

-------
I.  SUMMARY OF BASIS FOR LISTING



     Tetra-, penta-, and hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins  (CDDs)  and




-dibenzofurans (CDFs) are known or expected to  the present  in wastes



from the production and manufacturing use of tri-, tetra-,  and penta-




chlorophenols and from the manufacturing use of  tetra-, penta-,  and



hexachlorobenzenes under alkaline conditions and  elevated tempe-



ratures.  CDDs and CDFs likewise are present in  wastes resulting



from the production of materials on equipment previously used




for the production and manufacturing use of tri-  and  tetra-



chlorophenols, and in formulations containing these chlorophenols



and their derivatives.  These wastes also contain chlorophenols.




The Administrator has determined that these wastes are acute



hazardous wastes under 40 CFR 261.11(a)(2), since they are  capable



of causing or significantly contributing to serious irreversible,




or incapacitating reversible, illness.  The Administrator has



further determined that these wastes, including  still bottoms,



reactor residues, untreated brines,  spent filter aids, spent



carbon adsorbent, and sludges resulting from wastewater treatment,



may pose a present or potential hazard to human health or the



environment when land disposed or incinerated at  interim status



facilities, and therefore should be  prohibited from being



managed at these types of facilities.  The Administrator has



further determined that special permit standards are appropriate



for land disposal and incineration facilities managing these wastes.



This conclusion is based on the following considerations:

-------
1.  These wastes typically contain significant
concentrations of tetra-, penta-, or hexachloro-
dibenzo-p_-dioxins and -dibenzof urans, which are
exceptionally potent toxicants.  2 , 3,7,8-Tetrachloro-
dibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and a mixture of 1,2,3,7,8,9-
and 1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachloro-£-dioxins are among
the most potent animal carcinogens known, and
are potential human carcinogens. In laboratory
studies, TCDD is teratogenic, fetotoxic, and embroytoxic
at extremely low doses.  In addition, based on
structure-activity considerations, many CDDs and
CDFs are expected to be extremely powerful acute
toxicants and inducers of the liver microsomal
enzyme  system.  These substances are all persistent
in the  environment.

     These wastes also contain signficant concentrations
of tri-, tetra-, and pentachlorophenols and their
chlorophenoxy derivates.  EPA's Cancer Assessment
Group (CAG) has determined that 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
(2,4,6-TCP) is a potential human carcinogen.  In addition,
certain chlorophenols may cause liver and kidney
damage; some chlorophenoxy compounds are also
potential human carcinogens, and may have reproductive
effects.  Although these compounds may undergo
environmental degradation, they are sufficiently
persistent under some environmental conditions
to warrant concern for their human health effects.

2.  CDDs and CDFs are capable of causing, or significantly
contributing to serious irreversible illness,
or incapacitating reversible, illness, at extremely
low dose levels.  Moreover, these toxicants are
persistent, and can migrate from these wastes.  CDDs
and CDFs are present in these wastes in concentrations
orders  of magnitude higher than these dose levels.
Since these wastes contain substantial concentrations of
potentent carcinogens, the Administrator has
therefore determined that these wastes are acute
hazardous wastes.

3.  The wastes are typically disposed in landfills
or by incineration.  Disposal in a landfill in the
presence of solubilizing solvents could result in
leaching of the CDDs or CDFs.  The water soluble
chlorophenols and their derivates also can cause
pollution of ground or surface waters.  Furthermore,
the constituents of concern in these wastes pose
a threat of pollution of surface waters from
windblown dust, water run-off, erosion, or flooding
of disposal sites.  Incineration or burning of
these wastes under improper conditions (too low
a temperature, insufficient oxygen, inadequate

-------
        dwell time) may generate, or fail to destroy the
        CDDs and CDFs.  This could conceivably lead to the
        increased formation of these materials from precursor
        substances, and emission to air, resulting in human and
        environmental exposure.

        4.  Significant amounts of CDDs and chlorophenols have
        been shown to have escaped from these wastes into
        the environment.  These wastes  (i.e., still bottoms,
        brines, and spent filtration materials), have
        contaminated soil, surface waters, alluvial stream
        deposits and fish.
II.  CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CDDs and CDFs.

     Chlorinated dibenzo-£-dioxins and -dibenzofurans are

derivatives of dibenzo-p_-dioxin and dibenzof uran.  The

structural formulae of the dioxin and dibenzofuran nuclei,

and the abbreviated structural conventions used in this

report are illustrated below:
   Both compounds may have a variety of substituents in the

numbered positions.  Theoretically there are 75 different PCDDs

and 135 PCDFs.  Almost all of these compounds have been synthe-

sized, but analytical differentiation is difficult.   Not all

the CDDs and CDFs have been identified in the environment.

For the chlorinated dioxins and dibenzofurans of interest

in this document, the possible isomeric distribution (USEPA

1980,  1982)  is as follows:

                             7

-------
tetrachloro derivatives:



pentachloro derivatives:



hexachloro derivatives:
    Number of Isomers



dioxins     dibenzofuran.s



 22 TCDDs     38 TCDFs



 14 PeCDDs    28 PeCDFs



 10 HxCDDs    1 6 HxCDFs
   Of the 22 TCDDs which may occur, 2,3,7,8-TCDD is the dioxin



which is best characterized in terms of toxicity, persistence,



and environmental contamination.  Because analyses are



difficult and expensive, it is, for practical or economic



reasons, not always possible to differentiate between



"total" TCDDs and the 2,3,7,8 isomer. For example, in toxicolo-



gical or environmental fate studies, when "total" TCDD is reported,



it is not always clear whether all or only some of the isomers



contribute to the observed effect.  In a prior action, relating



to TCDDs in emissions from municipal solid waste resource



recovery incinerators, the Agency determined that, for purposes



of assessing risk related to TCDD exposure, it was prudent to



make the conservative assumption that all TCDD isomers contribute



to the toxicity of TCDD mixtures (USEPA,  1981b).  Consistent



with this worst-case assumption, the concern in this document



is with the isomeric mixtures of tetra-,  penta- and hexa-CDDs,



rather than, for instance, with the 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD alone.  A



similar determination was made for the CDFs.  The reasons



for the Agency's determination are explained below (Section V.C.I).
                             8

-------
    Some  of  the  physical  and  chemical properties  of  CDDs

 and CDFs  are  outlined  in Table  1.   These  compounds  form

 nearly planar molecules  of almost  identical  size, which

 form crystalline  solids  with well-defined melting points.

 TCDD is  the only  compound of the series for  which solubilities

 have been determined.  However, the structural  similarity

 between  CDDs  and  CDFs  gives  comparisons of their physico-

 chemical  characteristics high validity.   For example,

 because  of  their  low polarizability, all  these  compounds are

 expected  to be  essentially insoluble in water,  considerably more

.soluble  in  certain organic solvents, lipophilic, and characterized

 by  strong binding to organic matter, such as soil constituents.


 III.  REACTIONS CAUSING  THE  FORMATION OF  CDDs and CDFs.

    Several  reactions,  summarized below, are  of  environmental

 importance  because they  result  in  the formation  of  dioxins and

 dibenzofurans:
                       chlorinated           chlorinated
 chlorophenols 	>  predioxins   	>   dioxins
 chlorophenols
      +                 chlorinated   	>  chlorinated
 chlorobenzenes  	>   isopredioxins         dibenzofurans
                    /
                   /
 polychlorinated   /
     biphenyls    /

-------
   A. Formation of CDDs (Esposlto, 1980).

   Chlorinated dioxins are formed in an exothermic reaction from

£-chlorinated phenols in the presence of base at elevated tem-

peratures.  The reaction,  illustrated for TCDD formation as

reaction 1 of Figure 1,  shows the participation of an ortho halogen;

the presence of an ortho halogen, however, is not an absolute

requirement for dioxin formation.  A compound such as 2-nitro,

4,5-dichlorophenol can also serve as a reactant for TCDD formation;

even relatively weak bases, such as quinoline or pyridine can

effect reaction, and dioxins have been formed at temperatures

as low as 145 °C.

   Dioxin formation occurs in several steps, with the intermediate

formation of pre-dioxins,  (these compounds have been identified

in waste sludges and commercial products, as well as in the

products of laboratory experiments).

   The formation of chlorinated dioxins can also occur indirectly.

For instance, in the course of preparation of polychlorobenzenes

by electrophilic halogens, neutralization of the acidic by-

product with alkali can lead to the formation of a chlorophenol.
                                               y
Subsequent distillation may then produce PCDDs.

   In thermal processes, the mechanism forming TCDD has

been estimated from theoretical (thermodynamic) considerations

to take place most efficiently at about 800-1000 °C, while
2y  Wastes from the production of chlorinated benzenes are EPA
Hazardous Wastes Nos. K085 and K1Q5.  Although the possibility
of the formation of CDDs was mentioned in the Background Document
supporting those listings, they were not cited as toxicants of
concern.  Since these wastes are already listed hazardous wastes,
the Agency has no current information on their concentration
of CDDs/CDFs, and judges that these are unlikely to be high, it
was not deemed necessary to list these wastes as acute hazardous
wastes.  The presence of CDDs in these wastes and in still
bottoms from chlorobenzene solvent recovery are currently being
studied.  Our listing determinations will change if data warrant
such change.


                           10

-------
its decomposition is most likely to occur above  1350 °C  (Shaub

and Tsang, 1982).

   The mechanisms of the condensation reactions  outlined above

are exceedingly  complex, and may involve molecular rearrangements.

As a consequence, mixtures of chlorinated dioxin isomers are

usually produced.  Nevertheless, prevalence of specific  isomers

can be predicted in most cases.  It is, for instance, possible

to predict that  oxidative condensation involving trichlorophenols

will produce an  isoraeric mixture containing far more TCDDs than

will the reaction involving dichlorophenols, which produces
                                             I/
a preponderance  of dichlorodibenzo-jD-dioxins.


   B.  Formation of CDFs.

   The thermal oxidative cyclization of chlorinated phenols,
                                 A/
polychlorinated  biphenyls (PCBs) ,  polychlorinated diphenyl ethers

(isopredioxins), or chlorobenzenes under alkaline conditions

(reactions 2 and 3 of Figure 1, and Figure 2), are expected to

generate wastes  containing CDFs.

   As a consequence of these reactions, CDFs can be generated

under manufacturing conditions  similar to those under which

CDDs are generated, and are expected to be present in the
_3/  However, the technical products used in commercial practice
seldom are pure with respect to isomeric composition.  In actual
practice, therefore, even wastes from operations producing or
using dichloropenols may contain some CDDs and CDFs.  The Agency
is investigating this possibility.

4/  There is no domestic production of PCBs,  and therefore no
wastes are generated from the production of PCBs.  Disposal
of mixtures containing more than 50 ppm of PCBs, however,
is regulated under TSCA (40 CFR 761).
                             11

-------
wastes from such process operations.

   As is the case for CDDs, many of the CDFs produced differ

from those expected on the basis of the straightforward

reaction mechanism hypothesized in Figure 1.  The reactions

discussed above take place via complex mechanisms, involve

intramolecular rearrangements,  and generate mixtures of

isomers.  As in the case of CDDs, however, it is possible

to predict the prevalence of some CDF isomers over others


IV.  SOURCES OF THE WASTES AND TYPICAL DISPOSAL PRACTICES.

    A.  Sources: Manufacturing Processes Causing Formation
        of CDDs and CDFs.

   Because of the chemical reactions outlined above, CDDs and

CDFs are found as unwanted contaminants in a variey of

manufactured chemicals, process intermediates, and process wastes.

  The following discussion is based in part on the review

by Esposito (1980) .


   1.  Manufacturing processes associated with the formation of CDDS

   Based on the reactions outlined above, CDDs are most

likely to be formed in the following manufacturing processes.

   a.  Production of ring-substituted tri-,  tetra- or penta-
       chlorophenolirT

   Chlorophenols are used directly as fungicides, flea repellants,

wood preservatives, antispetics, disinfectants, antigumming agents

in gasoline, and as paint removers.  They are also utilized for the

synthesis of biocides (chlorophenoxy derivatives), dyes, pigments,
                    I/
and phenolic resins.
5/  This document does not consider wastes from the production of
cTyes, pigments, and phenolic resins using chlorophenols as feedstock
materials.  These wastes will, however, be studied in the course of
our ongoing  Industry  Studies Program.

                             12

-------
       Chlorophenols (annual world production about 150,000

kkg (USEPA, 1982a)) are produced by the chlorination of phenol

or by the alkaline hydrolysis of the appropriate chlorobenzene.

The former reaction is preferred, in part, because under these

conditions the formation of CDDs and CDFs is minimized; however,

significant concentrations of CDDs and CDFs are still generated

in using this process.  2,4,6-TCP, 2,3,4,6-TCP, and PGP are
                         6/
prepared by this process.    2,5-DCP and 2,4,5-TCP are most

readily prepared by the alkaline hydrolysis of chlorobenzenes,

but other methods are available.  Figures 3 and 4 illustrate

the possible mechanisms forming CDDs in the course of synthesis
                             II
of 2,4,6-TCP and 2,3,4,6-TCP.   CDFs are also formed, by analogous

reactions, as illustrated in Figure 2.

   Chlorination of phenol can be accomplished in either a,batch

or a continuous reactor fashion.  The continuous process is
67  Monochlorophenol,  2,4-DCP and £-chloro-jD-cresol are also
prepared by this process, however, wastes from their manufacture
are not listed, because, at this time, the Agency does not have
sufficient evidence that they contain CDDs and CDFs at levels of
concern.

l_l Wastes from the production of DCPs may also contain CDDs and
CDFs.  These may, for instance, arise as follows.  Technical CDP
typically contains a few per cent 2,4,6-TCP resulting from over-
chlorination (USEPA, 1971).   Thus the possibility exists for the
formation of small amounts of, principally, 1,3,6,8-TCDD (Figure 3).
Recent sampling of distillation bottoms generated in DCP manufacture
showed the presence of 70 ppb of 2,3,7,8-TCDD.  This finding is
difficult to explain on the basis of reaction chemistry alone, and
may have resulted from equipment contamination resulting from the
manufacturing of 2,4,5-TCP at this plant about seven years
previously.  If information is collected that indicates
that CDDs and CDFs are present in the wastes from DCP
manufacture at significant levels, they will also be listed.

                             13

-------
much more efficient, and is thus usually employed.  Figure 5



is a process flow diagram which generally illustrates the continuous^



process for the production of chlorophenols by the chlorination



of phenol.  Figure 6 illustrates the specific process for the pro-



duction of PGP, showing the waste streams of concern.  Since increased



chlorination results in increased decomposition of chlorophenols



(Figure 3 reactions 1-4), the chlorination of PGP, for example,



is usually halted when 3-7% tetrachlorophenol remains.



     Because the direct chlorination of phenol forms 2,4,6-TCP



rather than the 2,4,5-isomer, more 1,3,6,8-TCDD than 2,3,7,8-TCDD



is formed (reaction 8 of Figure 3).  Molecular rearrangements



occur, and other CDDs,  including up to 38 ppm HxCDDs



(USDHHS, 1980), as well as CDFs (USEPA, 1981a) are also



formed, and .are found in commercial PGP (see Table 3).       '        ^



   Because PCP is widely used as a pesticide, there is a



demand for technical formulations free of CDDs.  This is



most readily accomplished by distillation.  However, one



manufacturer encountered difficulties in this process,



and another, who used to distill PCP in order to purify it



(Figure 6), no longer does so.  (USEPA, 1979).  The still



bottoms from PCP purification contained concentrations as high



as 2000 ppm of CDDs (des Hosiers, 1982b), and are presumed



to contain CDFs.  HxCDDs have also been identified in technical



PCP at 30 ppm  (Table 3) (USEPA, 1979; Miles, 1984).



   The hydrolysis of chlorobenzenes is another widely used



method for the preparation of chlorophenols.  It is used
                             14

-------
mainly to prepare chiorophenol isomers which can not readily


be obtained by the chlorination of phenol.  Hydrolysis is


carried out in an alkaline aqueous solution, at high temperature


(200-300 °C) and pressure (500 psi), conditions which are


conducive to the formation of CDDs and CDFs.  2,5-DCP,


2,4,5-TCP, and 2,3,5,6-TeCP are prepared by this method.  Several


other, more costly methods are available, but are seldom used.


   2,4,5-TCP can be efficiently prepared by the alkaline


hydrolysis of tetrachlorobenzene.  Its production can result


in the formation of TCDD (reactions 1  and 2 of Figure 7) and


TCDF (Figure 1).  A diagram outlining a typical process for

the production of 2,4,5-TCP using this process is illustrated


in Figure 8.  The amount' of CDDs formed in this process is a


function of reaction temperature (Langer, 1973; IARC, 1977);


the reaction temperature and pressure depend on the solvent


used (methanol, ethanbl, ethylene glycol, toluene, isoamyl/amyl


alcohols).  For example, the process using water or methanol

as solvent operates at around 220-300°C (Kirk-Othmer, 1979).


At this temperature, laboratory experiments show the formation


of about 1.6 g TCDD/kg 2,4,5-TCP. On the other hand, the process

using ethylene glycol is designed to operate at a lower temperature,

and thus should reduce the potential for CDD formation.


Nevertheless,  even using ethylene glycol as a solvent can

lead to TCDD formation:  two industrial accidents, one in


England (1968) , and one in Italy (1976) , releasing large

                                                       8/
amounts of TCDD, involved this process.   (USEPA, 1979).
8/  The Agency has recently been advised of a completely
    different process for the synthesis of 2,4,5-TCP that
    completely avoids the formation of CDDs and CDFs.


                           15

-------
   The 2,4,5-TCP product, as well as the wastes from this

process -- distillation bottoms, spent filter aids, and reactor

bottoms, if any -- are expected to contain CDDs (including
                                                       I/
TCDD) and CDFs,  as well as tri- and tetrachlorophenols.   These

wastes are generated in considerable amounts: for example, toluene

still bottoms constituted about 5% of TCP production volume

(Harris, 1981).   Data in Table 5 (items 12-28) show that the

concentration of TCDDs in still bottoms ranges from 0.6-350 ppm,

averaging 110 ppm.  TCDD concentrations in filter aids

(items 25-28) range from 0.008-2 ppm, however, confidential

data in the Agency's files show a range from 0.008-300 ppm,

averaging 27 ppm (15 samples).

     In recent years, TCDD contamination has been recognized

as a problem.  As a result, changes in manufacturing conditions

have led to a significant decrease in TCDD concentrations

of manufactured products.  However, this may not have changed
                                        107
the concentration of CDDs in the wastes.    The more

careful control of reaction conditions may reduce but cannot
9_/  In addition, other reaction side products, such as polyethers,
methoxylated and/or ethoxylated aromatics,  and polymeric phenols,
are present.  The toxicity of these compounds has not yet been
established.

IQ/  In general the data in Table 5 are often for "mixed"
wastes - i.e., for mixtures of wastes generated in TCP and
phenoxyherbicide manufacture (such wastes are apparently
seldom segregated), and for wastes which probably resulted
from manufacturing processes conducted a few years ago.
                             16

-------
prevent the formation of CDDs and CDFs,  and product purification

techniques may be presumed to increase the concentrations of

contaminants in the wastes.  Moreover, the Agency believes

that, even at the current levels of CDD and CDF contamination

of chlorophenols and their derivatives,  caution is warranted

in the disposal (as compared with the proper use) of these

materials.


   The TSCA (1976) inventory lists few producers of the

higher chlorinated phenols:

              PRODUCTION OF SOME CHLOROPHENOLS(a)


CHLOROPHENOL                                  PRODUCER


2,4,5-TCP                 .                Dow, Midland, MI
2,4,6-TCP                                  Dow, Midland, Ml
2,3,4.6-TCP                           .     Dow, Midland/ MI
PCP(b)                                     Reichold, Tacoma, WA
                                           Vulcan, Witchita, KS

(a) TSCA Inventory (1976); data for 1976-1978.

(b) 1978 production capacity 28,000 kkg  (Chemical Products
    Synopsis, 1979)


   There is, at this writing, no domestic production of

2,4,5-TCP, and it is anticipated that the outcome of legal

proceedings on 2,4,5-T and Silvex may influence future production.
                                                          ii/
   b. Syntheses using tri-, tetra, and pentachlorophenols.

   2,4,5-TCP is used as a starting material for the synthesis

of a series of biocides.  Since TCDD contaminates one of
11/  Derivatives of dichlorophenols such as the ester and
amine salts of 2,4-D contain lower chlorinated dioxins
(see Table 3).  The 1,3,6,8-isomer is the only reported
TCDD in these products.   The Agency is studying wastes from
these manufacturing processes.

                             17

-------
the starting materials for their synthesis (2,4,5-TCP),



and may also be generated in the formation of the phenoxy



derivatives (see Figure 7 (reaction 2) and Figures 9-12) , it is



expected to be present in the phenoxy derivatives (see



Table 3), as well as the wastes from their manufacture and



processing (Table 5).



   A typical process for the manufacture of a phenoxy herbicide



(2,4,5-T) is presented in Figure 13.  The process diagram



illustrates the process as it was conducted more than ten years



ago using methanol as the solvent.   Process modifications, however,



have been made to reduce the contamination of product with



CDDs (des Rosiers, 1982b).  Careful control of reaction



time, temperature, and pH are said  to have effected reduction



in TCDD formation (Buzzelli, 1980).  The solvent used is



now typically a mixture of ethylene glycol and toluene or



xylene (Anzani et al., 1979), and distillation to remove



solvents is typically part of the process.  However, the



product still contain CDDs and CDFs since the distillation



is performed at temperatures and pressures not designed to



remove these impurities.  One manufacturer of 2,4,5-T/Silvex



reports the use of activated charcoal adsorption to remove



TCDD (and, presumably, other CDDs and CDFs) from its product



(Buzzelli, 1980).  This process, designed to maximize



adsorption of CDDs and CDFs, generates spent carbon adsorbent



as a waste of concern.  Figure 13 shows the process wastes,



such as caustic scrubwater,  spent filter aids, and/or spent carbon



adsorbent, that are likely to contain CDDs or CDFs (des Rosiers,



1982b).  Data in Table 5 (items 8-28) show that these



wastes can be contaminated with CDDs at several hundred ppm.




                             18

-------
   Another 2,4,5-TCP derivative, the bacteriostatic agent

Hexachlorophene (HCP),  is not presently produced by any

U.S. manufacturer.  Due to present pharmaceutical specifications,

HCP was, until recently, synthesized (Figure 12) by condensing

a purified grade of 2,4,5-TCP with formaldehyde in a mixture

of concentrated sulfuric acid and ethylene dichloride

(Figure 14).   Because the reaction occurs at rather low

temperatures  (72-78 °C), and at acid pH, no CDD or CDF

formation is  expected to occur.  Earlier production techniques

resulted in TCDD contamination of product due to carry-over

of contaminants from the TCP feedstock used (des Hosiers,

1982b).  CDDs are reported to be virtually absent «0.1

ppb) from spent acid, wash solutions or recovered solvents

produced in recent years (USEPA, 1979).  Thus, wastes from

the production of HCP using prepurified 2,4,5-rTCP are not

included in this listing.  The manufacture of several

herbicides (e.g.,  Erbon, Sesone) entails the use of other

toxic materials, such as the carcinogen ethylene oxide.

Process descriptions, however, make it unlikely that the

wastes from these processes will be contaminated with this

compound, and ethylene  oxide is therefore not cited as a toxicant

of concern in these wastes.

   The Agency is assessing the reported possible release

of chlorinated xanthenes in the course of HCP synthesis,

as well as the concentration of HCP in these wastes.   An

evaluation of the potential risks to human health posed by

these contaminants may  show that these wastes should be

regulated.
                             19

-------
   Table 10 summarizes the processes discussed above and the

wastes of concern in this document.

   c.  Manufacturing operations on CDD/CDF-contaminated equipment.

   Some process wastes may be contaminated with CDDs or

CDFs because they were generated in the course of a manufacturing

process performed on equipment that was previously used for a

CDD or CDF-generating process.  Production trains are often

used for the manufacture of different chemicals whose manufacture

necessitates the use of similar process equipment.  In the

manufacture of chemicals on a production train previously

used for a process generating, e.g. , CDDs, both the product and

the wastes generated can be contaminated with CDDs.  This

was shown to be the case, for instance, for wastes resulting

from the manufacture of 2,4-D, which contain TCDD because

the equipment used, previously employed to produce 2,4,5-T,

remained contaminated with TCDD (See Table 5) after production
                                             12/
shifted to 2,4-D (45 FR 32677, May 19, 1980).    It has been

theorized that the 2,4,5-T and TCDD residues remaining in

the equipment would be extracted in on-going 2,4-D processing.

Based on this supposition, one could calculate the number

of process cycles necessary to remove the contamination

(45 FR 32678).  There are, however, no sampling data over

time to support this hypothesis, and the Agency has recent

data which indicate that, in the case of another manufacturer,

still bottoms generated seven years after 2,4,5-TCP production

ceased still contain 70 ppb of TCDD.
121 Recent sampling and analysis showed 20 ppm CDDs and 450 ppm CDFs
in the 2,4-DCP still bottoms of a 2,4-D manufacturing facility
where 2,4,5-TCP had been manufactured many years earlier. (Data in
docket file: memorandum from B. Tichenor, October 1, 1982.)  See also
footnotes 3 and 6.

                             20

-------
   d.  Manufacture of formulations.

   Many chlorophenols, phenoxy herbicides and phenoxy herbicide

formulations are contaminated with CDDs and CDFs, often at concen-

trations of 20-90 ppm (Table 3).   More than 1300 such formulations

were found to be contaminated with TCDDs (at unspecified levels)

(Table 4).

2.  Manufacturing processes associated with the formation of CDFs.

   CDFs are contaminants of polychlorophenols,  phenoxyherbicides,

hexachlorobenzene, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) .   The

reactions underlying this contamination we believe are similar to

those illustrated in Figures 1  and 2.  In the production of

2,4,5-TCP (Figure 7), for example, CDFs are formed at the beginning

of the reaction, before most of the 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene

used as starting material reacts, whereas CDDs  tend to be

formed near the end of the process, when 2,4,5-trichlorophenolate

formation is favored (USEPA, 1982a).

   Identification of CDFs in various commercial products  is out-

lined in Table 3.  For example, several analyses of commercial PCP

report 130-140 ppra of CDFs (Table 3).   There are differences in

isomeric CDF composition of American and European PCPs.  The major

CDFs in some American formulations were the  2,3,6,7- and  2,4,6,7-

tetra, the 2,3,4,6,7-,  1,2,4,7,8- and 2,3,4,7,8-penta, and

1,2,3,6,7,8-hexa isomers.  European formulations contained

traces of the 2,3,7,8-tetra and 2,3,4,7,8-penta CDFs.   These

differences may reflect differences in the methods of synthesis.
13/  This discussion is based in large part on the information and
   references discussed in USEPA (1982a).


                             21

-------
In the U.S., PGP is manufactured by the chlorination of phenol



(Firestone, I977a); in Europe, both this process and the



alkaline hydrolysis of hexachlorobenzene (at 135-275 °C) have



been used.  The product of chlorination tends to contain more



of the comparatively more highly chlorinated CDFs.  Typically,



the final pentachlorophenol biocidal formulation consists of



80 - 88 % PGP, and 12 - 20 % 2,3,4,6-TCP, in addition to



PCDDs (1000 - 3000 ppm),  PCDFs (200 - 600 ppm) (principally



tetra - octa isomers),  and chlorinated diphenyl ethers



(Firestone, 1972;  Lamberton et al., 1979).  It has been reported



that CDDs and CDFs, principally the hepta- and octa congeners,



but also 30 ppm of the hexa-CDDs and -CDFs, accumulate in the



sludges from wood treatment processing using PGP (Lamberton,



et al., 1979; Table 6,  items 28-29).  Analysis of tri- and



tetrachloro'phenols shows  about 50 ppm of CDFs (see Table 3) .



   Until recently much less attention was paid to the presence



of CDFs than to the occurrence of CDDs in herbicides. As



discussed above, phenoxy herbicides are synthesized by



reacting the appropriate haloalkanoic acid with the appropriate



chlorophenol, usually under alkaline reflux conditions



which are conducive to the formation of predioxins, dioxins,



and dibenzofurans (Figure 1).  The presence of CDFs in



chlorinated phenoxy herbicides was confirmed for five



herbicide formulations.  These data, summarized by EPA



(1982a) are listed in Table 3.  The concentration of



CDFs and CDDs are similar.  Various 2,4,5-T formulations



contained tri-, tetra-, and penta-CDFs (although not




                               22

-------
the most toxic 2 , 3 , 7 , 8-tetra  isomer) at concert cratioi 3  up



to 0.7 ppm.  All samples showed the presence of  chloi Lnated



diphenyl ethers, which are known precursors of CDFs  :i  pyrolyti



reactions  (Rappe, et al., 1978, see below), in concer ^rations



as high as 1%.



3. Miscellaneous Processes Causing the Formation of  (DDs and CD  s.



   Laboratory studies have also established that CDDt and



CDFs are generated in the course of combustion of a  \ ariety



of chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons.  These data, r< /iewed



in Esposito (1980), and USEPA  (1982a), show that chiccophenates



are the precursors for CDD formation, whereas  the thtrmal  oxida



tion of PCBs and chlorinated benzenes causes the fom ation of



CDFs.  In both cases, oxygen is necessary, and the fcrmation of



CDDs and CDFs decreases with increasing temperature  (-Shaub and



Tsang, 1982).  Formation of CDDs and CDFs  is likely  ID  occur in



incinerators or other thermal  combustion units that  c Derate



at 750-900 °C.  At temperatures higher than 1200-140( °C,



little CDD or CDF is found (Ahling, 1979;  Junk and Richard,



1981; Redford, 1982).  In fact, at these temperatures,



thermodynamic calculations show that CDDs  (and presun ibly  CDFs)



are likely to decompose (Shaub and Tsang,  1982).  (see pp.  10 an   11)



   The mechanisms forming the  various dioxins and ditanzofurans



is still far from certain.  Little is known about the



relative contribution of chlorination,  dechlorinatioi ,  and



inter- or intramolecular rearrangements under conditions of



pyrolysis.   A thorough understanding of such processes  is



necessary in order to estimate the generation of the  3DDs






                             23

-------
and CDFs.  The Agency's concern with respect to pyrolytic           ^



generation of CDDs and CDFs in the management of wastes which



contain their precursors is outlined below (see section V.A.).



4.  Other toxicants of concern in these wastes.



    The wastes described in this document arise mainly from the



manufacture and synthetic use of chlorophenols.  The production



of chlorophenols is almost never isomer-specific, and the wastes



from a plant performing such processes are therefore expected to



contain a variety of chlorophenols.  For instance, technical



2,4,5-TCP may contain small amounts of 2,5-DCP (arising from



1,2,4-TCB contamination of the 1,2,4,5-TCB used for its synthesis);



2,4-DCP contains 2,6-DCP (if underchlorinated) and 2,4,6-TCP (if



slightly overchlorinated) (USEPA, 1971); 3,6-DCP may contain 3,4-DCP.



Thus, such wastes as the distillation bottoms resulting from



chlorophenol production, and the neutral aqueous wastes from a



plant producing chlorophenols, or using technical 2,4-DCP or



2,4,5-TCP to produce chlorophenoxy compounds, is expected to



contain variable mixed chlorophenols.  In addition these wastes



contain various chlorophenoxy acids (USEPA, 1971).  A study



of an aqueous waste at one herbicide manufacturer found



that it contained 13.5 kg/day of mixed chlorophenols and



about 32.7 kg/day of phenoxy acid (USEPA, 1971).  A "typical"



untreated aqueous waste stream from phenoxy acid manufacture



contains 112 ppra of mixed chlorophenols and 235 ppm of chlorophenoxy



acids (Sittig, 1980) .
                             24

-------
   B.  Quantities of Wastes Produced.


    About 11,600 kkg/year of hazardous wastes were estimated

to be produced in the manufacture of priority pollutant

chlorophenols (2-chlorophenol, 2,4-DCP, 2,4,6-TCP and PCP),

and about 79,000 kkg/year are produced in the manufacture
                                  14/
of phenoxy compounds (Jett, 1982).


IV.  Waste Management

   Many of the producers of chlorophenols are also engaged in

the manufacture of chlorophenoxy derivatives.  Many of the

listed wastes are generated in the production of pesticides.

A recent assessment of the pollution potential of pesticide

production and formulation processes reached some very

general conclusions on the management practices of wastes

from this industry (USEPA, 1978c) .

   The aqueous waste stream from the production of chlorophenoxy

herbicides using chlorophenols is expected to contain a

variable mixture of chlorophenols, salts of various chlorophenoxy

acids, chloroalkanoic acids and their by-product hydrolysates,

and mineral salts, as well as the toxicants of principal

concern in this document, i.e^, CDDs and CDFs.  Of these,

the first two compound classes (chlorophenols and chlorophenoxy
14/  2-CP and 2,4-DCP are not covered in this listing; the fraction
oT the total wastes attributable to 2,4,5-TCP, 2,4,6-TCP, tetra-
chlorophenol, and PCP production is not known.  At the present time,
because of the 2,4,5-T RPAR proceeding, there is little 2,4,5-TCP
production.  Upon its resolution, 2,4,5-TCP production may well
resume.
                             25

-------
acids) are amenable biological degradation.  One study (USEPA,  1971)



demonstrated that treatment by use of an aerated lagoon             £



and a stabilization pond removed 87-94% of chlorophenols



and 49-80% of the chlorophenoxy acids in about two weeks, when



a sufficiently adapted biological population had been developed.



However, CDDs and CDFs are not easily biodegradable (Phillippi,



1981; Huetter, 1982), and accumulate in the sludges and residues



of settling ponds and wastewater treatment plants (see Table 6  -



values as high as 1200 ppm CDDs in settling pond muds).  Other



wastes from the manufacture of chlorophenols are generally



land-filled or deep-well injected; treatment wastes are



impounded (Jett, 1982).



   Waste management in the course of manufacture of phenoxyacetic



pesticides is a little better characterized: fifteen wastes



from the manufacture of phenoxy acetic acid compounds manufac-        ™



tured by five manufacturers are disposed of by landfill, on-site



impoundment (4 manufacturers), and by deep-well injection



(1 generator).  Of the five manufacturers, two generate spent



activated carbon, and two manage their solid wastes using



on-site drum storage and impoundment (Jett, 1982).





V. BASIS FOR LISTING THESE WASTES AS HAZARDOUS.



   A.  Hazards posed by the wastes.



   The basis for listing these wastes is the presence of tetra-,



penta-, and hexa-CDDs, and -CDFs, tri-, tetra-, and pentachloro-



phenols, and their chlorophenoxy derivatives.



   Several of the CDDs and CDFs are among the most potent animal



carcinogens known, and are considered to be potential human carcino- ^




                              26

-------
gens.  In laboratory studies, TCDD is teratogenic, fetotoxic,

and embryotoxic at extremely low doses.  These substances are

persistent in the environment.  Because of their potency as

toxicants, the wastes containing CDDs and CDFs are being listed
                     I!/
as acutely hazardous.

   Data in Table 5 indicates that the level of contamination of

these wastes is significant: distillation bottoms may contain

several hundred ppm of CDDs (Table 5).  Still bottoms from

2,4-DCP/2,4-D production resulting from manufacture processes

using equipment previously used for 2,4,5-TCP or 2,4,5-T

production, can also be significantly contaminated with CDDs

(item 10, Table 5).  Other wastes (filter aids) from these

processes contain smaller (but still significant) amounts

(8-200 ppb) of TCDDs (Table 5, items 25-28).  However,

confidential data indicate that concentrations may be 30,000

times higher than this.  Cooling pond muds may contain 1200 ppb

TCDDs (Table 6, item 105).  In most of the cases listed in the

Tables, analyses for CDDs other than TCDDs, or for CDFs, were

not performed.   Their presence is inferred from knowledge of

reaction chemistry and process technology.

     Where carbon adsorption is used to purify a technical

product (as,  for instance, in 2,4,5-T purification (Buzzelli,
15/  The RCRA definition of acute hazardous waste is set forth
at 40 CFR 261.11(a)(2).   Under that definition, such a material
is not necessarily "acutely toxic" in the way that term is used
by toxicologists.   Rather, the term is intended by EPA to
identify wastes  which are so hazardous that they may "cause or
significantly contribute'to an increase in serous irreversible,
or incapacitating  reversible, illness", regardless of how they
are managed.

                            27

-------
1980), the spent carbon filters undoubtedly contain the CDD



and CDF contaminants (since this is the reason for the use



of the carbon adsorbent).  Spent carbon from product purifi-



cation is, therefore, an acute hazardous waste.



   The chlorophenol and chlorophenoxy content of the wastes



produced in these operations is expected to be variable.



As outlined above, these compounds, because they are water



soluble, are expected to concentrate in the aqueous wastes,



where they are amenable to biological treatment with adapted



organisms.  However, some products (i.e., chlorophenoxy



acids, esters, ethers,  amines, sulfides, and salts) precipitate



during processing and will contaminate filters, spent



filter aids, etc.  In anaerobic environments, and where



microbial adaptation has not occurred, these chemicals



persist.  In fact, this has been demonstrated in some of



the damage incidents outlined below which show the persistence



of these 'compounds, and their ability to pollute the environment



     The contamination of chemical intermediates and commercial



chemical products with CDDs and CDFs (Table 3) has several



implications.  First, the presence of these contaminants



(up to 100 ppm CDDs and 50 ppm CDFs in trichlorophenol,



100 ppm CDDs and 70 ppm CDFs in tetrachlorophenol, and up



to 30 ppm CDDs and 140 ppm CDFs in PGP) will result in the



contamination of the products derived from them (Table 3),



as well as of the wastes generated in product synthesis.



Thus, the contamination of HCP produced in the 1970's was



due to the presence of CDDs in the 2,4,5-TCP used for its



                             28

-------
synthesis (Esposito, 1980).  The second result of product



contamination is the fact that their disposal thus raises



environmental concerns.  The presence of CDDs and CDFs in



biocides and their formulations can be substantial (see



Table 3). Chlorophenols can contain as much as 100 ppm



CDDS and 60-140 ppm CDFs.  Phenoxy herbicides, even those



manufactured in the 1970's, may contain as much as 10 ppm



CDDS, and apparently very low levels of CDFs.  Older stocks



of herbicides derived from 2,4,5-TCP are much more heavily



contaminated.  Thus, the disposal of these herbicides is of



environmental concern,  due to the substantial concentrations



of these potent carcinogens.



     The damage incidents outlined below, and the data in



Table 6 show that the levels.of contamination cited above



are of environmental concern.   CDDs and CDFs can escape



from these wastes and contaminate airborne dust, stream



alluvia, and food (principally fish).  For instance,  fish



from rivers near industrial installations manufacturing



chlorophenols and chlorophenoxy compounds are contaminated



with TCDFs, and with TCDD at levels up to ten times the



TCDD concentration at which FDA advises fish consumption



should be limited (Table 6, and Figures 16 and 17).



   It is very difficult to estimate the total volume of



CDD- and CDF-containing wastes (see pp. 24 and 25).  Some



idea of the magnitude of the problem can, however, be



derived from the fact that a waste disposal site used for
                             29

-------
over twenty years for the disposal of wastes from the



production of TCPs and phenoxy herbicides, and a tank used



to store HCP production wastes for only two years, are



estimated to contain 120 and 8 kg of TCDD respectively



(des Rosiers, 1982a) .



   TCDD, and, given their physicochemical similarities, the



other CDDs and the CDFs as well, are water insoluble and



bind strongly to organic soil constituents.  In fact, with



time, TCDD bound to soil becomes more difficult to desorb



(Phillippi, 1981; Huetter, 1982).  Therefore these substances



are not ordinarily expected to leach to groundwater aquifers.



However, these constituents have been shown to be quite mobile



(see section B below) possibly because they were co-disposed



with solubilizing solvents (Table 1), or in situations in



which soil binding sites were exhausted.  Furthermore,



these wastes pose a threat of pollution of air and surface



waters resulting from windblown dusts, water run-off or



erosion or flooding of waste disposal sites.  All these



scenarios have occurred (see Section V. B. below).



   Chlorophenols, especially those of higher degree of



chlorination, can likewise pose a threat of environmental



contamination.  Although these compounds undergo photolytic



decomposition, and are susceptible to degradation by



adapted microbial communities, they are persistent where



light and adapted microorganisms are absent.  Trichlorophenols



have, for instance, been identified at levels of concern in
                             30

-------
various media at Love Canal thirty years after their disposal

(N.Y.S., 1981; USEPA, 1982.).  2,4,6-TCP is a potential human

carcinogen, other chlorophenols taint water and fish at very low

(less than ppb) levels (USEPA, 1980f; 1980g).  Chlorophenol-

contaminated wastes thus pose a substantial threat to human

health and the environment if mismanaged.

   CDDs and CDFs are mobile and persistent.  Chlorophenols

and chlorophenoxy acids are also mobile, and persistent in the

absence of adapted microbial communities (USEPA, 1982c; NYS, 1981)

Thus, the listed wastes, if improperly managed, can present

a substantial hazard to human health or the environment.

As discussed in greater detail below (Section V.C.), the

half-life of TCDD in soil has been estimated as 1.5-10 years;

recent experiments would greatly extend this estimate

(Huetter, 1982).  Based on structure-activity relationships

it is reasonable to assume that the half-life of CDDs and

CDFs are similar to that established for TCDD (USEPA 1982a).

   A further risk to human health is posed by incineration

of wastes containing chlorophenols, chlorobenzenes,  or
                          j.6/
polychlorinated biphenyls.    CDDs and CDFs can be created

by incomplete incineration of such materials (Buser and

Rappe, 1979). Table 5 shows that particulates from industrial
16/  Disposal of materials containing more than 50 ppm of PCBs is
regulated under §6(e) of TSCA.   The disposal of hazardous wastes
containing less than this concentration of PCBs is not regulated
by TSCA, and is also not adressed in this listing.  The formation
of CDFs by incineration of PCBs is used here as illustrative of
the environmental processes forming CDFs.
                             31

-------
incineration can contain up to 80 ppb CDDs.  The thermal            g



production of CDFs from PCBs is of special environmental



importance.  Buser and Rappe (1979) showed that when specific



PCBs are pyrolyzed at 500-700 °C, CDFs are obtained in 1-10 %



yield, together with chlorinated benzenes, naphthalenes, and hydroxy



PCBs.  The results of a series of experiments identifying



products obtained from specific PCB reactants are depicted



in Table 2.  The CDFs of concern in this document are most



likely to be formed in the course of improper (incomplete)



combustion of the more highly chlorinated PCBs.  A possible



reaction scheme, which may explain this array of products,



is shown in Figure 2.  Such pathways are important in



explaining the origin of the CDFs found in the environment.



   Pyrolysis of chlorobenzenes,  as well as reaction between         |



chlorophenols and polychlorobenzenes,  also yields CDFs



(reaction 3, Figure 1).  Mechanisms similar to those depicted



in Figure 2 for the oxidative cyclization of PCBs are



probably operative here as well.



   Table 5 shows that fly ash and other particulates from



industrial incineration can contain high ppb concentrations of



CDDs and CDFs.  Soot from an electrical fire (in which



transformer fluids containing PCBs and chlorinated benzenes



were subjected to heat from the fire), contained several



hundred ppms TCDFs (one sample contained 645ppm (Table 5)).



Although CDDs and CDFs bind very strongly to combustion



particulates, (Silkworth, 1982), improper management of
                             32

-------
these wastes (i.e. , residues from incineration) , such as

co-disposal with solubilizing solvents, or disposal under

conditions where dispersion by wind or water run-off can

occur could pose a threat to human health or the environment.

   B. Damagea incidents and environmental contamination.

   Improper disposal of dioxin-containing wastes has resulted

in the contamination of stream sediments and wildlife, and

may have injured the health of persons who were, as a

consequence, placed at risk.  Most of the damage incidents

described below focused on environmental pollution by

TCDDs.  It is reasonable to assume,  however, that TCDDs

are a marker substance for the CDDs  and CDFs, since their

presence can be postulated from knowledge of the reaction

chemistry outlined in Section II, and of the .common fate

and transport properties of the CDDs and CDFs.


   0 In 1971 , four horse arenas in Eastern Missouri were sprayed

for dust control with a TCDD-contaminated waste oil sludge,

a mixture of used oil and oily chemical wastes.  The soil

of one arena contained 32 ppm of TCDD (Table 6) and 6500 ppm

of trichlorophenol (Kimbrough,  1980).   As much as 30 kg of

TCDDs may have been disposed in this manner.  As a result

of their contact with the contaminated soil, hundreds of
11/  These residues may pose a hazard to human health.  The
Agency is studying ways to prevent their contamination with
CDDs and CDFs.
                             33

-------
birds, several cats and dogs, and many rodents died within



a few weeks after the spraying.  In the ensuing three



years, 75 horses died, and ten adults and children became



ill with symptoms that included chloracne, urinary tract



infections, gastrointestinal disorders, headaches, and



joint pain.  The long-term consequences of these exposures



are as yet unknown (Beale et al., 1977; Kimbrough, 1980).



The mismanagement circumstances surrounding this incident



have been summarized by Carter et al. (1975).  The used



oils used for dust control had been collected from many sources



in Eastern Missouri, and include 68,000 liters of distillate



residues from TCP produced for the manufacture of a chlorophenoxy



compound.  These distillation bottoms were later shown to contain



about 350 ppm of TCDD, and were mixed with reclaimed motor



oils and lubricants (Carter et al. , 1975; Kimbrough, 1980).   .



°  The recently discovered environmental pollution in many



localities in Missouri resulted from the (use in the early 1970's)



of similarly contaminated used oils used a dust suppressant.



Recent environmental studies revealed ppm concentrations of TCDDs



in a residential area in Imperial Mo., and in December 1982 concen



trations above 100 ppb TCDD were measured at several sites in



Times Beach, MO. (USEPA, 1983).  Because of the potential health



risks posed by these concentrations of TCDD, and the difficulty



and expense of cleanup operations, EPA determined that the



purchase of homes and businesses, and the relocation of the



Times Beach inhabitants, were the best way to prevent



further potential harm.  This operation was estimated
                          34

-------
to cost $33 million, not including clean-up costs.



0  Chlorophenols and chlorophenoxy derivatives  (2,4,5-T, 2,4-D,



and HCP) were manufactured at a facility in the Midwest in the



early 1960's.  This facility manufactured Herbicide Orange



in the 1960's, and Hexachlorophene (of unknown purity) from



1969 through 1971.  Wastewater from these operations was



for the most part discharged to unlined lagoons.  Wastewater



sludges, filter aids, etc., were in part disposed on-site,



but many were (improperly) disposed off-site (see below).



   The river which runs through the plant property has



documented water quality problems which date to 1961.  These



problems intensified during the period of HCP manufacture.



The plant discharge included chlorophenols and HCP



(USEPA, 1971; I982b).  Problems noted (USEPA, 1982b)



included: very high COD and BOD (these indicate the presence



of degradable chemicals), absence of benthic (bottom-dwelling)



organisms in the river below the plant discharge (their



presence was noted upstream from the plant site); overgrowth



of the alga Sphaerotilus below the plant, and fish kills.



   In 1971, a spring about two miles downstream from the plant's



discharge was noted to be contaminated (high COD and BOD), and



in late 1981 the sediment of this spring was discovered to



contain 6 ppt of TCDDs (USEPA, 1982b) .  The presence of



TCDDs and TCDFs in fish captured in a river near the plant



has recently been confirmed (see data of Table 6, and Figures



15-17).  Within the limits of such environmental monitoring



(the habitat of many fish,  unless caged,  may extend several



miles) , it is apparent that fish near the Verona manufacturing
                            35

-------
site may have levels of TCDDs as high as 120 ppt (Figure 15).



Sixty ppt was observed in fish caught 2.75 miles downstream.



These values are 3-6 times higher than the level at which FDA



advises that fish consumption should be limited (USDHHS 1981b).



Eight miles downstream fish contained 6 ppt TCDDs (Fig. 16).



Very low concentrations (0.8, 2.5, 6.2 ppt) of TCDDs were



found in fish as far as 45 miles downstream from Verona



(Figure 17).  These studies also show contamination with



TCDFs.  As compared with similar fish collected 2-3 miles



upstream or 8 miles downstream, fish caught near Verona



contain about 6-12 times more 2,3,7,8-TCDD (Figures 15



and 16).  Fish caught far downriver from Verona have



low levels (110-1070 ppt) of TCDFs (Figure 17).  The



source of this contamination, possibly arising upstream



from La Russell (Figure 17) is at present unknown.



Guidelines for CDF consumption have not been established.



   In addition, some wastes from this manufacturing facility



[35,000 gal. of 2,4,5-TCP still bottoms (about 350 ppm



TCDDs, see Table 6), spent filter aids (8 ppb TCDDs indicated



in Table 8, but later data indicate that these wastes



may contain 300 ppm and average 27 ppm TCDDs), as well



as a "high strength refractory wastewater" (200 ppb



TCDDs)  (Harris, 1981)] were disposed at several sites:



   a) According to anecdotal information, some wastes,



both drummed and in bulk, were disposed on-site in unlined



trenches and lagoons.  This disposal may be a contributing
                          36

-------
   factor in the observed contamination of the Spring River

   described above.  Deep municipal wells in the area have also
                                              187
   been shown not to contain TCDDs (DL=100 ppty7  Preliminary

   evaluation by a hydrogeologist, of environmental monitoring

   data presented in USEPA (1982b) concludes that it is possible

   that the Spring River alluvial aquifer may be contaminated

   with dioxin, and urges that a monitoring program of the Spring

   River be undertaken (Day, 1982).  Harris (1981), and USEPA

   (1982b) also called attention to the need for long-range dioxin

   monitoring studies to define the extent, if any, of CDD/CDF

   contamination problems in the Spring River.

     b)  30 - 150 drums of the wastes were dumped from the back

   of a truck into a trench on a farm site in 1971.  These

   wastes included drums containing "muddy water" (360 ppb

   TCDD), "chemicals" (140 ppb TCDD), and still bottoms (43
                                   19/
   and 319 ppm TCDD) (See Table 5).    These wastes leached

   into the soil, and caused visible contamination. Following

   confirmation of the presence of TCDD, based on expert opinion

   that migration could occur, and that the site was not suitable

   for hazardous waste disposal, remedial measures were undertaken

   to prevent exposure to users of shallow ground water and water

   from deeper aquifers.   TCDDs have migrated vertically in

   the soil for several feet. After considerable cleanup and
187  DL = detection limit.
J_9_/  Other data in the Agency's possession show concentrations up
     to 2000 ppm CDDs in the still bottoms.
                             37

-------
   decontamination activity,  the soil of the site still contained

   up to 500 ppb of TCDD (Table 6, items 40-46).
                                                          20/
     c)   In 1971-1972, aqueous wastes from HCP manufacture   were

   stored in the open-topped  digester of an abandoned concrete

   wastewater treatment plant, and in a small open topped

   storage tank.  The wastes  contained up to 2 ppm of TCDDs

   (Table 5).  The digester,  later filled in with debris, leaked

   about half of its 225,000  gal waste contents.  A report of the

   sampling and analysis studies showed that the bottom residues

   of the digester contained  about 60 ppb of TCDD (Table 6),  and

   concludes: "although environmental sampling of surface waters

   and private wells has not  established any public or environmental

   exposure resulting from potential ground-water contamination

   by the digester contents... the sampling and analysis performed

   to date does not confirm that the contents of the digester

   have not leaked or are not leaking to groundwater.  Indeed,

   there is every reason to believe the soil immediately

   surrounding the digester is contaminated with TCDD as a

   result of a 1971 leak. . .(P)recipitation on previous

   fill-in material creates a hydraulic head which. . .can be

   expected to force a slow but continuous loss from the digester."

   (Harris, 1981).  The digester, trench, and areas of sludge

   deposits have been fenced  and posted.
20/  These wastes resulted from manufacture on equipment which was
previously used for 2,4,5-TCP production.   About half a dozen 30
gallon open-top drums with wastes containing TCDD at 7 ppb were
stored on another farm.   Results of environmental monitoring are not
yet available.

                               38

-------
     d)  In order to prevent hoof rot in cattle, several farmers

   obtained spent filter aids from Hexachlorophene production,
                                 2i/
   containing about 8 ppb of TCDD   (Table 5),  and spread it on

   feedlots and gate areas in such a manner that cattle would

   walk through it. The soil of one feedlot, sampled nine

   years later, contained up to 830 ppt TCDD.  One report

   summarizing the above contamination incidents concluded

   that "the actions of (the companies involved) in the handling

   and disposal of their various waste streams  are classic

   examples of hazardous waste mismanagment" (Harris, 1981).

   These practices may have adversely affected  the health and

   welfare of some individuals, since there are anecdotal

   reports of chloracne as well as liver disease among the farm

   families concerned.


0  Environmental contamination occurred at a 2,4,5-TCP/2,4,5-T/

2,4-D production facility in Jacksonville AR.  Several

thousand drums of toluene still bottoms with up to 300 ppm

of TCDDs,  and 2,4-D wastes containing 20 ppb of TCDDs were

improperly disposed at this facility (Table 5,  items 8-22).

It was estimated (45 FR 15595) that, in total,  these wastes

contained  25 kg of TCDD.  The drums corroded over the years,

and their  contents slowly contaminated the environment.
 21/ These wastes resulted from manufacture on equipment
     previously used for 2,4,5-TCP production.  Other
     data indicate that these materials may contain as much
     as 300 ppm, and average 27 ppm of TCDDS.
                             39

-------
  a)  The soil in the area where toluene still bottoms were

stored above ground contains up to 559 ppb of dioxin (Table

6, item 66), most probably from the substance stored in

the barrels leaking onto the ground.

  b)  High levels of TCDDs (up to 900 ppb) were found in

the sediments of an on-site cooling pond and equalization

basin (Table 6).  The sump below the equalization basin

contained 700 ppb of TCDDs (Table 6, item 65).

  c)  The sediments of two nearby streams, the Rocky Branch

Creek and Bayou Meto contained significant levels of TCDD.

The highest concentration of dioxin was found in the sediment

of Rocky Branch Creek near the plant site, viz., 17000 ppt

(Table 6, item 53), and further downstream at levels up to

384 ppt (item 75).  With the exception of one finding of

1600 ppt, the levels of dioxin in the sediment of Bayou

Meto range up to 70 ppt (Table 6).

d)  Significant levels (3-8 ppb) of TCDDs were found in

the sediment of the Jacksonville Sewage Treatment Plant

(Table 6, items 73, 74), which received aqueous discharges from

the manufacturing facility.

e)  Fish and other aquatic life in Bayou Meto have accumu-

lated dioxin to levels up to 600 ppt.  The court evaluating
                                                             _22/
these findings, and expert testimony, concluded that "Dioxins

can and have been transported off the ... site on dust, by
22/  Data of Table 6 show that the "dioxins" referred to include
CfDDs and CDFs.
                             40

-------
the action of surface water, the infiltration of ground water



into the landfill areas and equalization basin area, and



when people and equipment move to and from the ... site.



Samples show that dioxin has been transported off the  ... site



into fish and sediment in Bayou Meto, and also into the



Jacksonville Sewage Treatment Plant".  The court found  that the



cited environmental contamination constituted "an imminent



and substantial endangerment to the health of persons", justifying



the need for abatement (U.S. vs. Vertac Chemical Corp., 489 F



Supp. 870, 879 (D. Ark. 1980)).



     0  The Hyde Park landfill is located in the extreme northwest



Horner of the County of Niagara, New York.  From 1953  to 1975,



Hooker Chemical Company disposed of 84,000 tons of hazardous



wastes, including organic solvents, and wastes from the



production of chlorophenols and phenoxy herbicides at  this



site (USEPA, 1980a).   The landfill is estimated to contain



about 120 kg of TCDD (des Hosiers, 1979, 1982a) .  The  15 acre



landfill contains two drainage ditches which empty into



Bloody Run, a tributary of the Niagara River (see Figure 18).



Bloody Run is a small stream, accessible over much of  its



length, which flows through a small residential area abutting



the University of Niagara, before emptying into the Niagara River



through a concrete sewer line.  A breach in the landfill



contaminated the stream with organic residues, including TCDD.



Off-site monitoring of TCDD indicated 18-220 ppb TCDD conta-



mination (Figure 8, and Table 6, item 86), averaging 70 ppb,



for an estimated 55,000 cubic yards of stream bed sediment in
                             41

-------
Bloody Run.  Alluvial contamination decreases as a function



of distance from the landfill, but is still 6 ppb at the



stream's discharge face at the Niagara River (see Table 6         ™



and Figure 18).  Remedial action for this site has been



estimated to cost more than $12 million.






0  The Love Canal landfill, located in the southeast corner



of the City of Niagara Falls, New York, was used from 1942



to 1953 by Hooker Chemical Company for the disposal of



21,800 kkg of hazardous waste, including those containing



CDDs, CDFs, and chlorophenols (N.Y.S., 1981; USEPA, 1982c).



Two hundred thirty-nine homes and a grammar school were



built on land around the "canal".  Numerous natural drainage



features and three storm sewers underlie the area, and



ultimately flow into two small streams, Black Creek and



 Bargholy Creek.  The monitoring data summarized in Tables 6       ^



 and 9 and illustrated in Figures 22 and 23, illustrate the



 fact that TCDDs and chlorophenols have persisted (they were



 present 25 years after disposal ceased), and have migrated



 into the environment, resulting in the contamination of soil



 and sediment at a considerable distance from the dump site.



 The high TCDD levels found in some storm sewer sediments (up



 to 655 ppb) are particularly worrisome because of frequent



 local flooding from sewers.  (USEPA, 1982d).  TCDD was also



 found in the stream beds of local streams (up to 37.4 ppb),



 and in crayfish from those streams (3.7 ppb).  Remedial actions



 now underway, are estimated to cost in excess of $45 million



 (USEPA, 1980a).  Many legal suits resulting from the contamination






                            42

-------
have been filed, and are now in litigation.  A judgment approving



settlement (U.S. vs. Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corp., Civil



Action 79-989, January 1981) stipulated cleanup levels which



are technically feasible (i.e., based on analytical detection



levels in water (1-10 ppt)  and soil (10-50 ppt) .



0  Disposal of CDD/CDF-containing wastes and/or incineration



of industrial wastes at an industrial facility may have



resulted in the contamination by CDDs and CDFs of the Tittabawassee



River in Michigan, and of fish living in the river.  This



contamination is thought to have resulted at least in part



from the discharge of CDD-contaminated scrubber water from



the facility's incinerator (Table 5).   Fish in the Tittabawassee



and Saginaw rivers contain up to 80 ppt of TCDD,



up to 240 ppt of TCDDs,  and 373 ppt of CDDs (Table 6 and Figure



21).  One fish sample contained 255 ppt of CDFs (Table 6, item



199). These values show the potential for CDDs and CDFs to



accumulate to levels of concern: in the case of TCDDs the



concentrations in fish are almost five times those determined



by FDA to be the acceptable limit of TCDD in fish for human



consumption (USDHHS, 1981b).





   0 Eighty thousand gallons of Herbicide Orange were stored



from 1968-1977 at a military facility near Gulfport, MS.



Leaking drums caused TCDD contamination of the storage



area and its surroundings.   The mean concentration of TCDD



in the soil at the spill sites in July 1977 was 240 ppb



(Gross, 1980).  Figure 20 illustrates  environmental sampling
                            43

-------
     results.  TCDD levels in soil and in biota (composite

     crayfish/mosquito fish samples) decrease as a function of

     distance from the storage site.  However, even 2.2 miles

     downstream of the site there was 20 ppt TCDD in fish.  The

     statement summarized: "these observations appear to be at

     odds with the commonly held view that TCDD in soil is

     immobile" (Gross, 1980).



     These damage incidents amply demonstrate that these

wastes contain high concentrations of CDDs and CDFs,  that

these toxic substances can migrate from the wastes if they

are mismanaged, that they persist in the environment, and can

become part of the human food chain, posing a threat to human

health of serious irreversible or incapacitating disease.

     In addition, the following damage incidents concerning

PGP were identified from O.S.W.E.R Superfund and O.S.W enforcement
                                               23/
action files, as well as from Regional sources.

   0 Selma, CA.  This Superfund site covers 12 acres, and is located

about half a mile from a residential area including light industry

and agriculture.  Wood treating operations began at this site in

1936;  pressure treatment was used since 1965.  Pressure treatment

solutions used included PCP dissolved in mineral spirits, heavy

oil, ketones, or aromatic oils.  More than a million Ib of PCP

were used between 1970 and 1979.  Process wastes were discharged

into an off-site drainage ditch, several on-site disposal wells,
23/  Wastes resulting from the use of PCP in wood preservation
     operations are not covered by this listing-.
                               44

-------
and an unlined pond.  Sludge removed from tanks was placed in piles

on-site.  Elevated levels of PGP were found in soil and ground

water, both on- and off-site.  An aquifer that is the sole source

of water in the area is located about 25-30 feet below the site.

Soil is contaminated with 0.002-4500 ppm of PGP; ground water con-
                             24/
tained 0.001- 2.3 ppm of PGP.    (Schultz, 1983.)

   0 Haverford, PA.  Wood preserving facility from 1947-1963.  Liquid

wastes were disposed into a well beneath the plant. A nearby tribu-

tary, Naylor's Run, was contaminated.  (Superfund priority site.)

The environmental consequences of the management at this site are

in the peer-reviewed literature, and show 230 ppb PGP in creek water

one mile downstream from the facility in 1974. (Fountaine, 1976.)


   0 Mena,  AR.  Active wood processing plant.  Waste products from

previous operations (1967-1977), including PGP, have contaminated

surface and possibly subsurface waters.   Monitoring found 0.036

ppb PGP in drinking well water, and 118-2000 ppm PGP in the soil

of surrounding residential areas.  (Superfund priority site.)


   0 Denver, CO.   A wood treating facility occupying 64 acres

in an industrial  section.  From 1964 to 1981, PGP was used to

treat and preserve wood.  Contamination of soil, ground water,

and surface water has been documented. Ground water north of the

facility contains 1.1  ppm of PGP.  An unlined irrigation ditch

along the northern boundary of the site also contains traces of PGP.
24/ The Ambient Water Quality Criterion for PGP, which was based on
organoleptic criteria, is 0.03 - 1.0 ppm.  (USEPA, 1980).
                                45

-------
     Pensacola, FL.  Currently inactive wood treating facility



operated from the early 1900's to 1981.  Wastewater contaminated



with PGP was discharged into two 80,000 gal. percolation ponds.



6ppm PGP was found in ground water near the facility.  (Superfund



priority site) .






   0 Live Oak, FL.  Abandoned wood preserving facility (1964-1977)



that used creosote and PGP.  Wastewater was stored on-site in a



five acre surface impoundment.  Soil, and possibly ground water



and a surrounding wetland, are contaminated.  Surrounding residences



use private wells as a water source.  (Superfund priority site) .





   0 Whitehouse, FL. The 11 acre site of a wood preserving company



located in a residential district, whose residences obtain drinking



water from private wells.   The facility has treated wood with PGP



since 1950.  Complaints of oily residues on the ground, and an



abnormal taste in the water of one of the private wells led to an



investigation.  4-12 ppm of PGP was detected in two monitoring wells



but in none of four private wells tested.  In addition, chlorophenol,



dichlorophenol, and tetrachlorophenol were identified, but not



quantitated.  (Superfund priority site.)





   0 Caldwell, ID.  Site of a lumber company.  Spillage occurred



from tanks and drums containing PGP.  Ground-water contamination



was detected in the aquifer used for the city water supply.



(Superfund priority site).





   0 Pocatello, ID.  This site was used by a railroad company to



treat rail ties, probably with PGP, at an unknown location in the



                              46

-------
company's yard.  In 1980, the State sampled wells in the vicinity



and detected PGP at parts per trillion.  In March 1983, EPA



found 9 ppm of PGP in the sludge, and 4.5 ppm PGP in the liquid



phase of an unlined impoundment on-site.  (Superfund Priority



Site.)





   0 Galesburg, IL.  Railroad tie treatment facility, operating



since 1907.  Ground water in the vicinity of waste sludge



ponds, the drip track area, and a spray irrigation field is



contaminated with significant levels of phenols.  The



contaminated water is leaching into surface water: monitoring



data showed <0.4 ppb to 17 ppm PGP.  The possibility of ground-water



pollution is of great concern because the site is located



over an aquifer that is the water supply for local residents.



There is potential for surface water contamination of nearby creeks



as well.





   0  Joplin,  IL.   Operations at a wood preserving facility using



creosote and PGP have contaminated the aquifer underlying the



plant, as well as  contiguous surface waters.  In ground water, PGP



concentrations range up to 3.4 ppm; 120 ppb and 9 ppb were measured



in two springs, on- and off-site, respectively.  2 ppm was detected



in Joplin Creek, downstream from the site.   (International Paper



Co., 1983)





   0 Pere Marquette, MI.   Landfill one mile east of Lake Michigan,



operating from 1971-1978  resulted in ground water contamination



with PGP and other compounds.  (Superfund priority site).
                                47

-------
     Libby,  MT.  Ground-water contamination with PGP by unknown



or undefined wood preservative and/or paper mill practices.



Three wells showed detectable levels of PGP; two wells approached



or exceeded ambient water quality criteria levels.  (Superfund



priority site) .






   0 Newport, DL.  Wood preserving plant (in operation from 1929-1972).



In later years, the pressure injection process, using PGP containing



"traces of dioxin", dissolved in fuel oil was used. A sump was used



for effluent collection.  Standing water sample contained 20 ppm of



PGP.  There is possible ground water, surface water, and soil



contamination.






   0 Cass Lake, MN.  Wood preserving operation.  This facility dis-



charged 12,000 gal. of wastewater daily into an unlined aerated



pond.  PGP was detected in ground water at concentrations exceeding



ten times the EPA AWQC level, and there is contamination of local



wells and a nearby beach.





   0  Brooklyn Center, MN.  A wood treatment facility using PGP



since 1965.   From 1965 until 1980, a pond was used for the disposal



of waste from this process.  In addition, general burial of sludges,



and at least two large wood treating solution spills, in 1953 and



1968, occurred at the site.  Ground water beneath the site is conta-



minated with PGP: up to 50 ppb PGP was detected in drinking



water wells in the surrounding community, and 3.8 ppm of PGP has



been detected in groundwater beneath the site.  (Minnesota (MNCPA),



1983.)






                              48

-------
   0  New Brighton, MM.  Site of two wood treatment facilities



operating on a 68-acre site using PGP.  Sludges from this operation
 f


were discharged to a surface impoundment in a wetland on the site.



Contaminants from the site have migrated from the impoundment into



the surrounding ground water.  Nearby wells periodically contain



low levels of the chemicals used at the site.  Standing water and



soil on-site contain up to 3300 ppm (average, 1400), and 140 ppm



of PGP, respectively.  Miscellaneous debris contains per cent levels



of PGP.  The State is considering plans to remove the sludge and



contaminated soils.  Hexachlorinated dioxins were identified (but



not quantitated)  in the standing water.  (Superfund priority site.)





   0 Broken Bow,  OK.  Wood preserving facility using surface im-



poundments for storage and recovery of PGP.  Wastes contained 5.9 ppm



of PGP.  There is contamination of soil,.ground water, and a nearby



creek:  soil near the creek contains 0.32 ppm PGP; sediment in the



creek contains 1-9.9 ppm of PGP.





   °Laramie, WY.   A tie treating facility covering 100 acres,



just southwest of the city.  The facility has been in operation



since the 1880s.   Pollutants, including PGP, have migrated



from unlined surface impoundments contaminating the shallow



ground water beneath the site,  as well as the Laramie River.



The extent of the contamination problem has not yet been



defined. (Superfund Priority Site.)





   ° Conroe, TX.   Contamination of soil with PGP and HxCDDs, and



of water with PGP was recently discovered in a residential area
                                  49

-------
bordering a wood treatment facility.  At the border of the facility,



soil samples contained <1 - 110 (average 28) ppm of PGP; samples



taken from residential yards showed <1 - 30 (average 12) ppm



of PGP.   Total HxCDD values were 1.5 - 12 (average 4) ppb, and



HxCDFs were found in 1.7 - 21 (average 9.5) ppb concentration.



(Superfund Priority site.)



     An extensive fish kill in a Swedish river was traced to the



release (caused by vandalism) of a chlorophenolic wood treating



solution.  One week after the release, 2,4,6-TCP, 2,3,4,6-TCP,



and PGP were distributed throughout the 15 km long system of



streams and lakes that was sampled.  About 8 km downstream



from the release point, the total concentration of these three



chlorophenols was 19 ppb about a month after the incident



soil/sediment concentrations were not measured).  Fish caught



about 10 km downstream accumulated 0.57-1 ppm of these chlorophenols    ^



in liver.  These analyses illustrate the persistence and bioaccumulation



of these toxicants.  (Renberg et al. 1983).



   0 Extensive contamination of soil and water with chlorophenols



occurred in the vicinity of two finnish sawmills using chlorophenol



wood preservatives.  Up to 45 ppm PGP (60-80% of the total chlorophenols)



was found in the soil of one saw mill.  The main components of the



wood preserving solution  (2,4,6-TCP, 2,3,4,6-TCP and PGP) were the most



abundant at most sites, indicating the environmental stability of



these chlorophenols in soil.  Lakes near these saw mills contained about



40 ppb chlorophenols (mostly 2,3,4,6-TeCP) (these levels are 40 times



greater than EPA's WQC for this chlorophenol).   (Valo et al., 1984).



   0 Another documented damage incident concerns the accidental



release, in December 1974, of wastewater containing PGP in fuel
                             50

-------
oil, which overflowed the banks of a wastewater  impoundment at



the Davis Timber Company in Hattiesburg, MS.  The oil and PGP



entered a creek leading to a lake, resulting  in  an extensive



fish kill.  An additional fish kill was observed two years later.



This incident has been described  in the open  literature  (Pierce



et al., 1980).  These investigations showed that, despite some



environmental degradation, PCP remained the primary contaminant,



and caused "thorough contamination of lake sediment".  Two years



after the release, PCP concentration in sediments was about



0.05-0.3 ppb, ten to one hundred  times higher than background



concentrations found in sediment  samples from an isolated pond



that received no industrial or agricultural drainage.



   In addition, there are several studies illustrating the fact



that PCP and HxCDDs have contaminated the human  food chain.  For



several years, the FDA has surveyed foods for the presence of



PCP and HxCDDs.  This sampling leads FDA to estimate that PCP



levels in the adult total diet result in average daily ingestion



of about 3 mg PCP/kg/d.ay.  The majority of this  ingestion results



from two food composites: "meat,  fish and poultry", and  "oils,



fats and shortenings."  (P. Lombardo, 1983).  The possible



long-term sequelae of these exposure levels has not been determined.



     In 1983,  FDA found that rendered fat and meat and bone



meal samples derived from PCP-treated sheepskins, and used



for the preparation of poultry feed, contained up to 78 ppm



PCP and "total dioxins" (HxCDDs, HpCDDs and OCDDs)  up to 94



ppb.   This resulted in eggs contaminated with up to 0.3 ppm



PCP and about 221 ppt of HxCDDs, HpCDDs and OCDDs.  (Hill,



1983).   Although this contamination did not result  from the



mismanagement of industrial waste, it illustrates the ease



                             51

-------
   The above damage incidents amply illustrate that PGP wastes

are frequently mismanaged, that PGP can migrate from the wastes if

they are mismanaged, that PGP persists in the environment, and

that PGP and HxCDDs can enter the human food chain.  The resulting

potential for harm to human health through irreversible or

incapacitating disease is outlined below.

     C.  Health and Environmental Effects.

     The health and environmental effects of the CDDs,  CDFs,

  and chlorophenols are more fully described in the Health

  and Environmental Effects Profiles.


     1.  Structure-activity relationships in the mechanism of
         action, toxicity, and persistence of CDDs and  CDFs.

       The toxicokinetics of these substances is the subject

  of two excellent recent reviews by Poland and Knutson (1982),

  and by Neal et al. (1982).  The extreme toxic potency of the

  CDDs and CDFs (see below) suggests that these substances

  affect some fundamental cellular processes.  Studies  of

  the biochemical effects of CDD and CDF intoxication have

  focussed on some of these fundamental proceses ,  viz.  induction

  of hepatic microsomal AHH monooxygenase activity, in vitro

  keratinization, and stereospecific binding to a specific

  cytosolic protein (Kende and Wade, 1973; Poland and Glover,

  1974; McConnell et al., 1978; Poland et al., 1979; Bradlaw,

  1979, 1980; Moore, 1980; Knutson and Poland, 1980; McKinney

  and McConnell, 1982).

       There is a strong correlation between the systemic

  toxic potency of CDDs and CDFs, their potency as enzyme

  inducers, their response in the in vitro keratinization test,

  and their ability to bind to the cytosol receptor.


                              52

-------
   Those CDD and CDF congeners which have high acute toxicity,



which are potent enzyme or keratinization inducers, and which



bind strongly to the cytosol receptor, share certain structural



features:



   1)  they have halogen atoms in at least three lateral



(2,3,7,8)  ring positions; and



   2) they have at least one unsubstituted ring position.



   The Agency recognizes that within congener groups there



are differences in toxicity (Bellin, 1984; Kociba, 1984).



There is,  for instance, a 370-fold difference in acute



toxicity between the 1,2,3,7,8- and 1,2,4,7,8- PeCDD isomers



(see Table 7), and 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD is 100 times more active



than 1,2,3,7,9-PeCDD in the j.n vitro keratinization test



(Knutson and Poland, 1980).   (However, even the less toxic



isoraer has extremely high acute toxicity (LD50,gp =1.1



mg/kg),  and therefore  is of concern to the Agency).  The



ED50 for AHH induction in rat hepatoma cells is 50 times



greater than that for  1,2,3,8-TCDD, and several penta- and



hexa-CDDs  and CDFs are not responsive in this assay (Bradlaw,



1981).



   Because most of the isomers of the listed congeners are



toxic, albeit to different degrees, and because the Agency



believes that most of  these wastes contain a certain



percentage of the most toxic (TCDD) components, it is



appropriate and permissible to rely, in part, on the known



structure-activity relationships to establish the potential



toxicity of these wastes.  Moreover, the identification and



analysis of individual isomers would be quite costly, and not



necessary  because of the toxic nature of the CDDs/CDFs.  The




                             53

-------
Agency thus determined that dibenzo-p_-dioxin congeners are



toxicants of concern in these wastes.






      2.  Health and Environmental Effects of CDDs.



   The Health and environmental effects of CDDs are



extensively discussed in three peer reviewed documents



prepared by EPA (USEPA 1984a; USEPA 1984c; and the HEP



prepared for this listing.  The following highlights this



material.



       a.  Exposure: environmental fate and transport of CDDs.



   It has been estimated that the fraction of human exposure



that can be directly attributed to drinking water alone is



probably low (USEPA, 1981c).



   The low solubility of CDDs (0.2 ppb for TCDD, Table 1) and their



high affinity for soils with high organic content (Kearney, 1972;    '



Ward and Matsumura, 1978; Homberger, 1979) would seem to



decrease the likelihood of ground-water contamination



(Helling, 1973; Matsumura and Bezenet, 1973).  However, in



soils with low organic content, or soils whose binding



capacity is exhausted, or where CDD-containing wastes are



co-disposed with solubilizing solvents (see Table 1), the



likelihood of ground-water contamination by CDDs increases



greatly.  CDDs could also conceivably reach ground-water



via channelization due to fracturing, or as a consequence



of desorption due to changes in soil pH (USEPA, 1981c).



   In some instances, despite their low solubility, water



transport can be appreciable. (Helling et al., 1973).  For



example, studies on the fate of TCDD in a microagroecosystem






                             54

-------
show very little vertical movement of TCDD in soil (Nash



and Beal, 1978), but water transport can nevertheless occur:



only 7 weeks after three applications of Silvex® containing



7500 ppb of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, water leachate contained 50 - 60



ppt of TCDD.  In areas of heavy rainfall and/or sandy soil,



vertical soil migration, and lateral displacement via soil



erosion and runoff also can occur (Esposito, 1980).



    Estimates of the half life of TCDD in soil range from 1.3



to more than 10 years (USEPA, 1981 a; NRCC, 1981).  Laboratory



studies show that the half-life of TCDD in sediment-containing



Wisconsin lake waters is about 1.5 years; the half life in



water without sediment was longer (Ward and Matsumura, 1977).



However, these values may greatly underestimate the true value,



since it has recently been shown that radiolabelled TCDD adsorbed



to soil becomes progressively more resistant to extraction



during incubation experiments (Phillippi et al.,  1981; Huetter,



1982).  Additionally, TCDD is highly resistant to microbial



degradation.  (USEPA, I981a; NRCC, 1981).



   One of the major environmental concerns regarding CDDs



focuses on their persistence in sediments, because of the



biological magnification which may result.  From  studies on



model systems, it has been estimated that sediments and suspended



solids accumulate a million times more TCDD than  the water in



which they occur.  Biota which live in sediments  containing



adsorbed CDDs ingest these contaminants,  and bioconcentrate them.



   Bioconcentration of TCDDs has been determined  in model



ecosystems in studies which were reviewed by Esposito (1980).






                               55

-------
Bioaccumulation ratios are species dependent.  For the mosquito



fish, the value was 4875 after 7 days of exposure.  In a different



study, at soil concentrations as low as 0.1 ppb,  ^C-TCDD



accumulated in the organisms tested with accumulation ratios



as high as 24,000 for mosquito fish, and 2,000 for catfish.



   The weighted average bioconcentration factor for TCDD in



the edible portion of aqueous organisms consumed  by Americans



is estimated as 122,000 (USEPA, I981a).



   The largest portion of the daily intake of CDDs probably



comes from the fatty portion of foods such as milk, beef, and



fish.  Their contamination could be importantly affected by



concentrations of CDDs in soil, dust, and water sediments.



TCDD has been reported in the edible portion of many fish, and



is highest in bottom feeders like catfish, suckers, and carp



(see Table 6).  Animals feeding on contaminated forage accumulate



TCDD in their adipose tissue (Table 6), posing a  danger of



human exposure.  Human exposure could result from inhalation and



ingestion of airborne particulates, or from ingestion of water



contaminated with such particulates.  Wind dispersion of airborne



contaminated dust particles is a known dispersion mechanism



for dioxins.  Airborne dust from improperly disposed hazardous



wastes was shown to contaminate contiguous areas.  For example,



near the Hyde Park landfill, dust on the rafters  of an industrial



facility at which no internal TCDD contamination  could occur,



contained 700 ppt TCDD (Table 6, item 103).
                               56

-------
   b.  Metabolism of CDDs.



   Studies of the metabolism and biological storage of CDDs have



been carried out only for TCDD, and the rat, mouse, and dog are the



species best studied (Rose et al., 1976; Hay, 1981 Koshakji, 1984).



   About 70-86% of orally administered TCDD is absorbed, with



an elimination halflife of about a month.  As compared to



TCDD dissolved in ethanol, adsorption of TCDD to soil causes a



30% reduction in its biological availability (Poiger and Schlatter,



1980 McConnell, 1984).   Fecal elimination is the major route



in the hamster, mouse,  and rat (53% of the ingested dose),



with about 13 and 3 percent of the ingested dose appearing in



urine and exhaled air,  respectively.  Dermal absorption of



CDDs occurs (USDHHS, 1980b),  but, in the case of wastes, has



not been quantified.  There are also no data to indicate what



fraction of inhaled CDD adsorbed onto respirable dust particles



is absorbed.



   Most of the absorbed TCDD which is stored (mainly in pancreas,



liver and fat)  is not metabolized (Hay, 1981).   However, about 1%



of the absorbed material is metabolized to poleracidic metabolites



which are converted to  glucuronides before excretion in urine and



feces (Koshakji,  1984).  It has been proposed that TCDD may be



metabolized to (DNA-reactive) arene oxides (Guenther et al.,



1979).  Long term incubation with adapted microbial cultures



likewise showed minimal conversion to hydroxylated metabolites



(Phillippi et al.,  1981).



   A protein which strongly binds halogenated dioxins (and
                             57

-------
dibenzofurans) has been isolated from the cytoplasm of several



tissues of rats and mice (Carlstedt-Duke, 1979; Greenlee and



Poland, 1979; Okey et al.,  1979).



The total body burden of TCDD in human beings is low (Table



6), but it is persistent;  thus,  CDDs (CDFs)  can be detected



in blood years after exposure (Hay, 1981).  TCDD has been



detected at levels from 20  to 173 ppt in adipose tissue of



three Vietnam veterans who  were  heavily exposed to Agent Orange.



Tissue samples from other Vietnam Veterans and controls contained



less than 20 ppt TCDD (Gross, 1984).





   c.  Health Effects.



    TCDD is the isoraer whose biochemical and toxicological



effects have been best studied in the laboratory.



   The pathologic effects produced in a given species by the



toxic CDD congeners are similar  to those of TCDD, differing



only in the intensity of the effect produced by a given isomer.



   CDDs are among the most  acutely toxic substances known with



LD50's (in the relatively resistant rat) in the ug/kg range



(see Table 7).  The structure/activity relationships outlined



above are readily apparent; species differences in LD50 are



considerable, and are thought to result from species differences



in the metabolism of these  compounds.  The systemic effects in



animals of long-term, low level  exposures were recently reviewed



(USEPA, 1981c).  Even at very low doses (0.001 - 0.01 ug/kg)



various studies observed some mortality, lethargy, decreased
                             58

-------
body weights, liver pathology, including biochemical evidence



of liver damage, thymic atrophy, decreased lymphatic tissues,



disturbances of porphyrin metabolism and mild adverse effects



on reproductive systems.



   1.  Biochemical effects.



   TCDD has a dramatic influence on various enzyme systems in



many species, including man (Esposito, 1980).  TCDD is by far



the most potent known stimulator of the microsomal enzyme



system, including hepatic amino levulinic acid synthase (ALAS)



and aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase (AHH) (Poland and Glover, 1974)



It also induces other enzymes, such as ligandin (a protein



which transports organic anions),  and enzymes important in



glucose and heme metabolism, such as ALAS.



   2.   Effects in human beings.



   Because human exposure to CDDs  usually occurs along with



exposure to other chemicals (e.g.,  2,4,5-T, chlorophenols,



CDFs),  the clinical effects observed are not always



ascribable to CDDs alone.  However, by extrapolation of the



known effects of CDD exposure in animals, the chronic human



effects can be estimated.



   Human CDD exposures have resulted from 23 accidents in



the manufacture of 2,4,5-TCP and from use of phenoxy herbicides



contaminated with CDDs.   As is the  case in animals, the



appearance of the toxic effects of  exposure to dioxins is



somewhat delayed.  The body systems that are affected are



the skin,  nervous system, liver, lipid metabolism,  general



metabolic state, cardiovascular system, blood forming organs,






                             59

-------
and (perhaps) the immune system.




   Chloracne is commonly found in workers exposed to halogenated



aromatics (Taylor, 1979) and is said to be a sensitive indicator



of overexposure to TCDD (Reggiani, 1981).  The acnegenic



potency of CDDs is related to their structure.  TCDD is



one of the most potent chloracnegens known (Beljan,  1981;



Taylor, 1979).



   Severe nervous system effects also occur with CDD exposure,



including pain and weakness in the lower extremities, often



accompanied by difficulty in walking and limb coordination.



Peripheral neuropathy, hyperirritability, sleep disturbances, and



"neurasthenia"  have been reported.



   Effects on the liver range from abnormalities in liver



enzymes and toxic hepatitis to porphyria cutanea tarda, a



systemic disease with high fatality rates.  Elevated serum



cholesterol and serum lipids, urinary tract infections,



joint pains, and gastro-intestinal disorders have also been



enzymes and toxic hepatitis to porphyria cutanea tarda, a



systemic disease with high fatlaity rates.  Elevated serum



cholesterol and serum lipids, urinary tract infections,



joint pins, and gastro-intestinal disorders have also been



noted (Beljan,  1981; Reggiani, 1981; Pasderova-Vejlupkora,



1980; USEPA, 1981c).



  3.  Reproductive, teratogenic, and mutagenic effects.



   TCDD and HxCDD produce adverse reproductive and teratogenic



effects in rodents and monkeys at extremely low dose rates.
                             60

-------
These effects were recently reviewed (USEPA, 1981c), and



are outlined in greater detail in the Health and Environmental



Effects Profile (HEP).  In brief, reproductive effects are



seen in rats dosed at 0.125 ug/kg/day throughout pregnancy



(fetal mortality, fetal intestinal hemorrhages, early and



late resporptions), with no signs of maternal toxicity.  In



mice and rats, 1 ug/kg/day on day 6-15 of gestation results



in increased incidence of kidney abnormalitites, cleft palate



formation, and intestinal bleeding in offspring.  Certain  mouse



strains (C57B/6J) are more susceptible than others (AKR/g)



to these teratogenic effects (Pratt, 1984).



   In a three generation reproductive study Murray et al. (1979)



noted that 0.1 ug/kg/day significantly decreased fertility of



rats.  For the F1 and F2 generations there were significant de-



creases in fertility, litter size, gestation, and postnatasl



survival even at 0.01 ug/kg/day.   Although there also was a



statistically significant decrease in these last two parameters



at 0.001 ug/kg/day, the authors interpreted this dose as a NOEL



for reproductive effects. From a critical re-evalaution of the data,



Nesbit and Paxton (1982) concluded that 0.001 ug/kg/day is an



effect level for TCDD, and that a NOEL has not been established



in this study.   Schantz et al. (1980) determined that studies



such as Murray's (1979) study stood "only a poor chance ...  at



detecting a significant effect".   A reproductive study in



monkeys noted abortions, stillbirths, and failure to conceive



at a calculated daily dose of 0.0015 ug/kg/day (Schantz, 1979).
                             61

-------
   Administration of TCDD to pregnant rats results in the



induction of many enzymes in several fetal tissues.  Exposure



of newborns to TCDD by lactation causes enzyme induction.



TCDD is concentrated in the milk, and, particularly early in



lactation, the pup can actually receive a higher dose (in



ug/kg) than was administered to the mother (Berry et al.,



1977; Lucier and McDaniel, 1979).  Pregnant monkeys are



"unexpectedly sensitive" to TCDD,... "as susceptible to TCDD



poisoning as the... guinea pig." (McNulty, 1984)  These



investigators found that TCDD is fetotoxic in the monkey, but



the high rate of abortion (even at a dose of 0.2 ug/kg)



prevented conclusions as to its teratogenic potential.   Schwetz



et al. (1973) studied the effects of 0.1 - 100 ug/kg/day HxCDD



in rats.   There was a significant-, dose-related, increase in . .



maternal body weight gain, increased liver pathology, decreased



body fat, and increase in late resorptions.  At 100 ug/kg/day



there was an increase in cleft palate formation, abnormal



vertebrae and split sternebrae.



   4.  Carcinogenic effects.



   TCDD is carcinogenic in mammals at extremely low doses (see



Figure 21).  In an oncogenic study in rats, 100 ng of TCDD/kg/day



increased the incidence of liver, lung, and nasal tumors.  At



10 ng/kg/day, an increase in neoplastic liver nodules was



noted, and at 1 ng/kg/day some pre-neoplastic liver changes



were observed (Kociba et al., 1978).  These studies suggest



that TCDD is an order of magnitude more potent a carcinogen



than aflatoxins.  Two NCI bioassays also concluded that TCDD






                             62

-------
is carcinogenic in rats and mice when administered orally, or



by dermal application (DHHS I980a,b).



   An NCI bioassay (DHHS,1980a) showed that oral administration



of a mixture of HxCDDs is carcinogenic in rats and mice.



Dermal application of these hexachloro isomers resulted in



a statistically significant increase in fibrosarcomas of the



skin, but, in line with the NCI/IARC criteria, such results do



not demonstrate the material's carcinogenicity when applied by



this route.



   EPA's determination that the mixture of HxCDDs is carcinogenic



has been disputed by Dr. Squire, who reviewed the NCI data



(Squire, 1983), and noted a lower incidence of neoplastic



nodules in female rats than that reported by NCI (and originally



accepted by EPA).  He evaluated several of the lesions diagnosed



as tumors by NCI as non-neoplastic regenerative nodules, and



concluded that there is only "equivocal" evidence that these



HxCDDs are potential human carcinogens.



   As a result of these comments, experts from GAG and from



the National Toxicology Program (NTP) have reviewed both



Dr. Squire's evaluation and the histology slides gathered in



the NTP study.  As a result of their re-evaluation, they again



concluded that there is sufficient evidence that the mixture of



HxCDDs is carcinogenic,  as indicated by a statistically significant



increased incidence of liver tumors in female rats and in mice



of both sexes (Haberman and Bayard, 1983; McConnell, 1983).



   The review led GAG to estimate that the carcinogenic potency



of the two HxCDDs ranges from 0.59 per ug/kg/day (male rat) to






                             63

-------
11 per ug/kg/day (male mouse).  GAG recommended that 6.2 per



ug/kd/day, derived from hepatocellular carcinoma and adenoma



data in male mice and female rats (the test systems in which



the response was most strongly evident),  be used as the upper



limit potency estimate for HxCDD (McGaughy, 1984).  Either of



these estimates makes HxCDD one of the most potent carcinogens



identified by the Agency.



   The mechanism of carcinogenic action of TCDD and HxCDD is



not yet established.   Several recent studies investigating the



interactions between TCDD and various carcinogenic PAHs, demonstrate



the complexity of the interactions between TCDD and other



carcinogens in vivo (Pitot et al., 1980;  Berry et al., 1979;



Cohen et al., 1979; Giovanni, 1979).  Based on the experiments



of Kociba (1978), CAG's most recent estimate of the potency



factor for TCDD in humans, q-|*, is 1.56 x 10-" per mg/kg/day,      ™



showing that TCDD is a more potent carcinogen than aflatoxin



(USEPA, 1980c).  However, the rodent bioassay may greatly



underestimate the potential low dose risks of exposure to TCDD



in the presence of other environmental carcinogens that are



activated by AHH (Longstreth and Hushon,  1982).



   There is impressive epidemiologic evidence associating



soft tissue sarcomas, lymphomas, and stomach cancer with



and exposure to phenoxy herbicides and/or TCDDs (USEPA 1980d,



I981g; Acheson, 1982; Blair, 1981).  These studies cover agricul-



tural and forestry workers exposed to herbicides, as well as



industrial workers exposed to TCDD.  Workers in occupations



associated with exposure to PGP are also at increased risk of      M
                               64

-------
several forms of cancer (see below).  Since these are reports



of occupational exposure, the -etiologic agent cannot be unambiguously



identified.  However, since HxCDDs are potential human carcinogens,



and since these contaminants are present in commercial PGP in



concentrations averaging about 15 ppm,  they could be responsible.



   5.  Immunotoxic effects.



   Thymic atrophy is a pronounced effect of the CDDs.  The



immunotoxic effects of TCDD are outlined in the HEP.  Recent



investigations show that HxCDD is responsible for some of the



immunosuppressive effects of technical grade PGP.  Daily oral



exposure of adult female mice for 14 days to 10, 30, or 100 mg



technical grade PGP/kg body weight suppressed the peak (day 4)



IgM antibody response to sheep red blood cells by 44%, 53%,



and 72%, respectively.  Similar exposure to purified PGP had



no effect.  Exposure to 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD at 0.2, 1.0, and 4.0



ug/kg (concentrations corresponding to  those resulting from



the exposure to technical PGP) achieved 30%, 47%, and 62%



suppression of the peak antibody response.   Addition of 0.1 ug



of'1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD or 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD to spleen cells of



untreated mice caused 80% suppression.   (Holsapple et al., 1984)



   d.  Aquatic toxicity (EPA, I981c)



   TCDD is toxic to fish and invertebrates  at levels as low



as 1  ng/1 (ppt).  At 200 ppt TCDD,  invertebrates show moderately



reduced rates of reproduction resulting from 17 to 55 day



exposures.  Fish exposed at 1 and 56 ppt for 24 to 96 hours



suffer 50 - 100 % mortality, expressed  several weeks after



cessation of exposure. No data are available concerning the






                               65

-------
toxicity of TCDD to saltwater aquatic life, nor on its effects

on aquatic or terrestrial plants.


   e.  Existing guidelines and standards.

   From studies on carcinogencity in rats, EPA has estimated
                                               257
that lifetime exposure of people to 6 fg/kg/day   engenders an

excess cancer risk at the 10~6 level. (USEPA 1984).  The

resulting draft ambient water quality criterion for the protection

from the potential carcinogenic effect of exposure to TCDD

from the ingestion of contaminated water and aquatic organisms,

based on a 10~6 excess cancer risk, is 1.3 x 10~8 ppb. (USEPA,

1984).

   The above exposure/risk estimates are based on upper boundary

estimates for the dose-response extrapolation, and may be

overestimates

   The National Research Council of Canada (NRCC, 1981) has

estimated that ingestion of less than 30-90 fg/kg/day

should be sufficient to protect for the risk of cancer at

the 10~6 risk level.

   The FDA (USDHHS, 1981b) advises that fish containing

25-50 ppt of dioxins should be eaten only twice a month by

permanent residents, who ordinarily might eat a fairly

large amount of fish from the area, and only once a week by

sport fishermen, and that fish containing more than 50 ppt

should not be eaten.  Canada has established a guideline of

20 ppt for TCDD in commercial fish found in Lake Ontario.
2_5/  1 fg = 10-15 gm.
                               66

-------
(USDHHS, I981b).  The Canadian guidelines were based on



chronic systemic toxicity considerations and do not consider



cancer risk.  The FDA determined 300 ppt (i.e., 0.3 ug/kg)



as a level of concern for the presence of HxCDDs in chicken



and eggs (Bolger and Biddle, 1983).



   No draft criterion is available to protect fresh and



saltwater species from TCDD toxicity.



   Criteria or guidelines to protect against the risks inherent



in exposure to other CDDs have not been developed.  However,



from the point of view of potential carcinogenicity, at any



risk level, the allowable dose for HxCDDs is only about



twenty times that calculated for TCDD (USEPA, I984c).



3.  Health and environmental effects of CDFs.



   a.  Exposure: environmental fate and transport (USEPA, I982a)



   The widespread use of the many chlorinated chemicals of



commercial importance which are contaminated with CDFs render



them fairly continuously available to ground water and run-off



water.  However, the similarity in molecular configuration,



vapor pressure, and calculated partition coefficient between



CDDs and CDFs (Table 1)  provide a reasonable basis for the



following comparisons.  In common with CDDs, CDFs are expected



to be almost insoluble,  and to adsorb strongly to organic



soil components.  As is  the case for CDDs,  this suggests



that transfer to water may occur only where soil binding



sites are exhausted, where these chemicals  are co-disposed



with solubilizing solvents (Table 1), or where entrainment



by run-off water or windblown dust can take place.






                             67

-------
   CDFs are also expected to be persistent in the environment.



The molecular similarity between CDDs and CDFs implies that



CDFs will be found to be as resistant to microbial degradation



as are CDDs.



   CDFs have been detected in the water of a river receiving



industrial waste from a chemical manufacturing plant, and



in the bay draining this river (Table 6).  Thus,  there is



potential for low-level contamination of ground water,



rivers, and streams with CDFs.  Data currently available



are not sufficient to estimate the magnitude of the exposure



to CDFs in ambient water.



   CDFs are expected to bioaccumulate in a manner similar



to that of the CDDs, and they have in fact been found in



wildlife and in exposed human beings (Table 6).  BCF's have



not been experimentally determined for these substances,



but the physicochemical properties of CDFs, in particular



the Kow (Table 1) lead one to expect a BCF similar to that



estimated for TCDD, i.e., about 50,000 - 100,000.



   b.  Metabolism.



   The absorption, distribution, and clearance of CDFs have



been studied in guinea pigs, rats, and monkeys, using mixtures



of isomers, and also using pure C^ ^--labelled TCDF.



These studies show large differences in species sensitivity



and biological half-life (Table 8).  In all three species



(guinea pig, monkey, and rat), fat and liver are the most



significant repositories, but the guinea pig (by far the
                             68

-------
most sensitive to the acute effects of CDFs) absorbs much



more of the administered CDF than do the rat or the monkey,



and the biological half-life and acute toxicity are greater



in the guinea pig than in the rat.  It has been suggested



(Birnbaum, 1980; loannou, 1983; Poiger, 1984) that the



ability to metabolize and clear TCDF may explain the rat's



relative ability to resist the acute toxic effects of this



compound.  Although the disposition of TCDF in the monkey



and rat is similar, monkeys and guinea pigs clear TCDF



more slowly, and are more sensitive to this chemical (Birnbaum



et al., 1981 lannou, 1983; Poiger, 1984).  Experiments



with mice have shown that CDFs (including TCDF and 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF)



are transferred to offspring via the placenta and in milk



(Nagayama, 1980).  In rats and mice, with a half-life of



days, TCDF is more readily eliminated than TCDD.



    In rats, TCDF is cleared only in metabolized form; the



tetrachloromethoxy-, trichloromethoxy- and two trichloromethyoxy



dibenzofurans were identified as the major metabolites



(Poiger et al., 1984).



   PCDFs have been found in human beings. In Japanese who



consumed contaminated "Yusho" oil, CDFs were detectable in



liver and fat (0.16 - 17.6 ppb) nine years after their



ingestion of the contaminated oil (USEPA, 1982a).   The



liver of one "Yusho" patient was estimated to contain 0.01



and 0.9 % of the tetra- and pentaCDFs,  ingested 44 months



previously (Kuroki and Masuda,  1978) .  A study of the






                             69

-------
retention of CDF isomers in the tissues of a Taiwanese



patient who died about two years after ingesting rice-bran



oil contaminated with PCBs and CDFS showed that the liver



contains the highest concentration of GDFs.  The major CDF



isomers found were the most toxic, laterally-substituted



ones including 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF, 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF, and



1,2,4,7,8-PeCDF (Kunita, 1984).



   Rappe and Buser (1981) have reported PCDFs in the blood



of sawmill, textile, and leather workers  exposed to 2,3,4,6-TCP,



PGP, or PCP laurate.  Their blood was shown to contain the higher



chlorinated CDFs at the ppt level (see Table 6).





c.  Health Effects.



   1.  Toxic effects in animals.



   The pattern of toxicity of CDFs is indistinguishable- from



that produced by TCDD (Moore, 1978).   In  the guinea pig,



the species mo'st sensitive to CDFs (Moore et al., 1979a) ,



the oral 1059 for TCDF is 5-10 ug/kg, only 2-4 times



greater than that for TCDD.  As with CDDs,  the acute toxic



effects of CDFs are species-dependent.  Studies on the



accumulation and distribution of TCDF in  guinea pigs administered



small daily doses demonstrate that, when  a body burden of



about 6 ug/kg is attained, the toxicity of the compound in



this species is irreversible, and results in progresive



weight loss and death.  (Decad et al, 1981).  The systemic



effects of chronic low level exposure are reviewed in



USEPA (1982a).  At 500 ug/kg/day, rats develop chloracne-like






                             70

-------
lesions on the ears, loss of body weight, reduced thymus,



ventral prostate, and seminal vescicle weight, and altered



serum lipids.  Rhesus monkeys fed 5 ug/kg/day show atrophy



or squamous metaplasia of the sebaceous glands, involution



of the thymus, and bone marrow hypoplasia. In addition,



the clinical appearance in Rhesus monkeys was exactly the



same for TCDF as for TCDD, although the acute toxicity of



TCDF was estimated to be approximately one tenth that of



TCDD (McNulty et al., 1980).



  2.  Biochemical effects.



   PCDFs are potent inducers of the' liver microsomal enzyme



system.  The induction spectrum resembles that of 3-raethyl-



cholanthrene (SMC), inducing AHH activity.  The approximate



ED5o for AHH induction in the rat, 0.5 ug TCDF/kg/day x 5



days, is about the same as that reported for TCDD administered



as a single injection, i.e., about 30,000 times more potent



inducing ability than SMC (Goldstein,  1977) .  CDFs are also



potent inducers of ALAS, the rate-controlling enzyme of



heme biosynthesis (Goldstein, 1977;  Oishi and Hiraga, 1978).



   Limited information is available concerning the effects



of CDFs on immune function.   Chlorinated aromatics in general



depress many aspects of immune function.  CDFs may affect



the host defense mechansim,  since toxic doses cause severe



thymic atrophy in the guinea pig, mouse, and chicken, and



lymphopenia in the chicken.
                             71

-------
   3.   Human health effects.



   The severe systemic, chronic, reproductive, and teratogenic



effects which were observed in the Japanese Yusho patients



(USEPA, 1982a) are undoubtedly due in part to their CDF



exposure, since it has been demonstrated in rabbits that



the concomitant effects of CDF and PCB exposure can be



differentiated (Vos and Notenboom-Ram, 1972).  The contaminated



"Yusho" oil contained 5 and 20 ppm PCDFs (USEPA, 1982) and



led to the accumulation of up to 25 ppb PCDFs (including



the CDFs) in the liver, kidney and adipose tissues of



those exposed.  Kunita et al (1984) showed that the 2,3,7,8-



TCDF, 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF, 1,2,4,7,8-PeCDF and 1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDF



found in the adipose tissue of Taiwanese patients were



"the main causative agents in the pathogenesis of Yusho



disease".  It is, however, impossible to estimate the



magnitude of the contribution of the CDFs to the problems



experienced by Yusho patients (or by exposed workers), or



to what extent their symptoms relate to the other toxic



components of the chemical products to which these people



were exposed.



  4.  Teratogenic, reproductive, and mutagenic effects.



   The teratogenic potential of 2,3,7,8-TCDF has been



studied in the (Ah-responsive) C57BL mouse.  TCDF was



administered as a single dose (0.1 - 0.8 mg/kg) i.p., on days



10, 11, 12, or 13 of gestation.   A dose dependent increase was



observed in the frequency of fetal resorptions and fetal



death (day 10-11) and in cleft plate and hydronephrosis (day






                             72

-------
11-12).  0.1 mg/kg, administered on day 12, produced marked



thymic hypoplasia.  The authors established 0.2 mg/kg as



the ED5Q in a single dose regimen for cleft palate production



(Hassoun et al. 1984).



   CDFs may also cause reproductive effects: oral administration



to rats, at 1 and 10 ppm, of a mixture of CDFs resulted,



at the higher dose level, in decreased testosterone levels



in testes and decreased seminal vesicle weights.



   There are few mutagenicity studies on pure CDFs.  TCDF



and octa-CDF were not mutagenic in the Ames assay (USEPA,



1982i).  However, as is the case for CDDs,  such a study is



limited by the extremely low water solubility of the CDFs,



and the Ames test system is notoriously insensitive to aromatic



hydrocarbons.



   Inoue et al. (1979) have shown that a mixture of CDF isomers



containing 3 to 6 chlorine atoms markedly increased sister



chromatid exchanges (SCEs) in cultured hamster lymphoma



cells at 0.1 ppm, whereas PCBs do not.  An increase in SCEs



is taken as indicative of chemical interaction with or damage



to DNA.  TCDF and octa-CDF were negative in a recombinant



DNA assay (Schoenig, 1981, quoted in USEPA, 1982a).



   5.  Carcinogenicity.



   Halogenated CDFs are now being tested for carcinogenicity.



Because of the chemical and biological similarities between



CDDs and CDFs, the carcinogenic properties  of CDDs  may be useful



models for the carcinogenic properties of CDFs.   Several studies



(summarized above) have shown that TCDD, and a mixture of
                             73

-------
two HxCDDs are very potent animal carcinogens by oral and



dermal routes (see above).  The potential carcinogenicity



of the analogous CDFs may therefore be postulated with



some confidence.



   Several epidemiologic studies of populations exposed to commercial



products contaminated with CDFs and CDDs (chlorophenoxy acids,



chlorinated phenols, PCBs) show an increased risk of cancer, but



do not allow a conclusion of the role of the individual contaminants



relative to that of the parent compounds.






   d.  Aquatic Toxicity.



   The few available studies were summarized by EPA (1982a).



Young Atlantic salmon, fed a mixture of di-, tri-, tetra-



and octa-CDFs, showed a median time to death of 120 days.



Only the octa-CDF accumulated in the tissues.  Immature



brook trout exposed to 2,8-DCDF, and to a mixture of tri-



and tetra-CDFs accumulate the higher CDFs more than the



2,8-isomer.





   e.  Existing Guidelines and Standards.



   No standards or guidelines have been formulated for these



compounds.





3.  Health and environmental effects of chlorophenols and their



derivatives, are described in the Health and Environmental



Profiles.  In the case of PCP, additional information is



available in the position documents prepared by EPA's Office of



Pesticide Programs (USEPA, I981a; 1984).  However, several recent
                             74

-------
reports of human health effects not mentioned in those documents



are discussed here.



   A recent review of acute PGP poisoning episodes (Wood et al.  ,



1983) provides added support for the fact that dermal absorption



of PGP and TCP is an important route of exposure.



   There are now many reports in the literature indicating that



workers in occupations associated with PGP exposure are at



increased risk of nasal and nasopharyngeal cancer, stomach



cancer, and non-Hodgkins lymphoma (Grufferman et al., 1976;



Bishop and Jones, 1981; Hardell et al., 1982;  Williams, 1982;



Gallagher and Threlfall, 1984).  Because these are reports



of occupational exposure, it is of course not clear whether



the etiologic agent is PGP, or its associated CDD or CDF



impurities.  Although, one report (Olsen and Jensen,  1984).



does not support the hypothesis that nasal cancer can be associated



with chlorophenol exposure, in toto these reports reinforce



EPA's concerns regarding the hazardousness of PGP.
                                75

-------
                          REFERENCES                                 4

Acheson, E.D. 1982.  Data on dioxin.  Nature 295:92.

Ahling, B. et al. 1977.  Formation of polychlorinated dibenzo-
p-dioxins and dibenzofurans during combustion of a  2,4,5-T
formulation.  Chemosphere 8:461-468.

American Wood Preserving Institute (AWPI). 1977. "Pentachlorophenol  -
a wood preservative".  Memorandum from Subcommittee 6, to EPA/OPP.
March.

Anon. 1983.  Effects of chemical preservatives on the health of
wood treating workers in Hawaii, 1981. Clinical and chemical
profiles and historical prospective study. July

Anzani, G., et al.  1979.  Disastro Icmesa.  F. Angeli Editore,
Milan, Italy.

Barnes, D.G. 1983. Memorandum to members of the Dioxin Management
Task Force. November 15.

Baughman, R.W. 1976. Tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxins in the
environment; high resolutions mass spectra at the picogram level.
Diss.  Abst. Inst. 36(7): 3380(B).

Beale, M.G. et al.  1977. Long term effects of dioxin exposure.      ^
Lancet i: 748.

Bealty P.W. et al.  Effect of alderation of rat hepatic mixed -
function oxidase (MFO)  activity on the toxicity of 2,3,7,8 -
tetra chlorodebenzo-p-dioxin.  (TCDD).  Toxicol Appl.  Pharmacol
45:513-519.

Bellin, J. and D. Barnes 1984.  Health hazard assessment for
chlorinated dioxins and -dibenzofurans other than 2,3,7,8-TCDD.
In Symp. on Adv. Health Risk Assessment.  Cincinnati, OH. October 25.

Beljan, J.R. et al. 1981.  The health effects of Agent Orange
and polychlorinated dioxin contaminants.  Technical Report.
Prepared by the Council on Scientific Affairs.   American
Medical Association, Chicago, IL.

Berkau, E.E. 1979. Memorandum to EPA staff:  transmittal of key
industrial pollution control division monthly progress report
highlights. (August 9).

Berry, D.L  et al. 1977.  Transplacental induction of mixed
function oxygenases in extra-hepatic tissues by 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin.  Biochem. Pharmacol. 26:1383-1388.
   •In RCRA docket file. All other references are to publications
   in the open literature.

                              76

-------
 Berry,  D.L.  et al.  1979.  Studies with chlorinated dibenzo-p_-
 dioxins,  polybrominated biphenyls and polychlorinated biphenyls
 in a two-stage system of mouse skin tumorigenesis:  potent
 anti-carcinogenic effects.   Ann N.Y. Acad. Sci. 320:405-414.'

 Bishop,  C.M.,  and A.H. Jones 1981.  Non-Hodgkins lymphoma of
 the scalp in workers exposed to dioxins.   Lancet (ii) 369.

 Birnbaum, L.S. et al. 1980.   Disposition and excretion of
 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofurans in the rat.  Toxicol. Appl.
 Pharmacol. 55:342-352.

 Birnbaum, L.S. et al. 1981.   Fate of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodiben-
 zofuran  in the monkey.  Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.  57:189-196-
 Blair,  E.H.  1981.  TSCA § 8(e) submission, March 6.   Available in
 TSCA Docket.

 Bleiberg, J. et al.  1964 Industrially acquired porphyria.
 Arch.  Dermatol. 89:793-797.

"Bolger,  M.,  and G.N. Biddle  (DHHS) 1983.  Levels of concern for hexa-
 (HCDD),  hepta- (HpCDD) and  octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins (OCDD)
 in chicken and eggs.  Memorandum to J. Taylor.  April 29.

 Bradlaw,  J.  A. and  Casterline. 1979.  Induction of enzyme
 activity in  cell culture: a  rapid screen for detection of
 plnar  polychlorinated organic compounds.  J.  Assoc.  Off. Anal._
 Chem.  62: 904-906.

 Bradlaw,  J.A.  et al. 1980.   Comparative induction of aryl
 hydrocarbon  hydroxylase activity in vitro  by analogues of
 dibenzo-_p_-dioxin. Fd. Cosmet. Toxicol. 18: 627-635.

 Buser, H.R.  and H.P. Bosshardt.  1978a.  Polychlorierte Dibenzo-
 p_-dioxine, Dibenzofurane und Benzole in der  Asche Kommunaler
 und Industrieller Verbrennungsanlagen.  Mittgeb.  Lebensmittelunter.
 Hyg. 69:191-199.

 Buser, H.R.  et al.  1978b. Polychlorinated  dibenzofurans (PCDF's)
 found  in  "Yusho"  oil and in  used Jananese  PCB.  Chemosphere
 7:439-449.

 Buser, H.R.  1979a Formation  of polychlorinated dibenzofurans
 (PCDFs)  and  dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs)  from pyrolysis of
 chlorobenzenes.   Chemosphere 8:415-424.

 Buser  H.R. and Rappe,  1979.   Formation of  polychlorinated
 dibenzofurans  from  the pyrolysis of individual PCB  isomers.
 Chemosphere  8:157-174.
                               77

-------
o
o
Buzzelli, D.T. 1980.  Direct testimony (exhibit 810). In re:
the Dow Chemical Company, et al.,  FIFRA Docket Nos. 445, et
al.,  USEPA.  October 14.

Carlstedt-Duke, J.M.B. 1979. Tissue distribution of the
receptor for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-_p_-dioxin in the rat.
Cancer Res. 39:3172-3176.

Carter, C.D. et al. 1975.  Tetrachlorodibenzo dioxin: an
accidental poisoning episode in horse arenas. Science 188:738-740.

Casarett and Doull.  1981.  Toxicology, MacMillan.  New York.
Chau, F. 1982a.  Memo to the file:  March 18, 1982.  Telephone
conversation with John R. Kotninsky concerning Hyde Park Landfill,
Niagara Falls, New York.  (May 5).

Chau F. 1982b.  Memo to the file-.   March 13, 1982. Telephone
conversation with Harry Gilmer, (EPA, Region 7), concerning
the Sturgeon, MO chlorophenol spill.  (May 17).

Chen, P.H. and R.A. Hites. 1983.  Polychlorinated biphenyls and
dibenzofurans retained in the tissues of a deceased patient
with Yucheng in Taiwan.  Chemosphere 12:1507-1516

Clark, J.M. 1981.  A review of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
(PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs): sources
and effects.  Prepared for U.S. EPA Region V.

Cochrane, W.P., et al. 1980.  Analysis of Technical and formulated
products of 2,4-dichlorophenoxy acetic acid for the presence
of chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins.   Workshop on the "Impacts
of Chlorinated Dioxins and Related Compounds on the Environment."
Rome (Italy), October 22-24.

Coffey, S.  1973.  Rodd's Chemistry of Carbon Compounds,
2nd ed.  Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., N.Y. Vol. IVA. p. 194.

Cohen, G.M. et al. 1979. Anticarcinogenic effects of 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlordibenzo-£-dioxin on benzo(a)pyrene and 7,12-dimethyl
benz(a)anthracene tumor initiation and its relationship to
DNA binding.  Cancer Res. 39:4027-4033.

Czuczwa, J.M. and RA. Hites. 1984. Trends in sediment cores.
Fourth Intl. Symp. Chlorinated Dioxins and Related Cpds. Ottawa, CN.
October 16-19.

Day,  A. (USEPA/OSW) 1982. Memorandum to C. Kleveno (USEPA/OSWER).
May 13.

Decad, C.M. et al. 1981. 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
tissue distribution and excretion in guinea pigs. Toxicol.
Appl. Pharmacol. 57:231-240.


                              78

-------
0  des Rosiers,  P.E.   1979.  Technical evaluation of Hooker Chemical
  and Plastics  Corporation waste disposal sites in the Niagara Falls
  area, New York.  U.S.EPA/Office of Research and Development.

  des Rosiers,  P.E.   1981.  Practical aspects of environmental impact
  assessment: U.S. experience. In: Quarterly Environmental Impact
  Statement: A New Instrument for Political Ecology.  Volume 17.
  Institute for the study of law, economics, and the environment,
  Rome.

  des Rosiers,  P.E.  (EPA/ORD).1982.  Personal communication with J.S.
  Bellin (EPA/OSW).

  des Rosiers,  P.E.   1983.  Remedial measures for wastes containing
  polychlorinated dibenzo-p_-dioxins  (PCDDs) and -furans (PCDFs) :
  destruction,  contaminant and process modifications. Ann. Occup. Hyg.
  27:57-72.

  di Giovanni,  J. et al. 1979.  2 , 3 , 7 , 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-_p_- dioxin:
  potent anti carcinogenic activity in CD-I mice.  Biochem.
  Biophys.  Res. Communic. 86:577-584.

  Di Domenico,  A., et al. 1980.   Ecotoxicol. Environmental
  Safety 4:346.

0  Dymerski, P.   1979.  (Health Dept., State of N.Y.) Memorandum
  to S. Kim,  (Health Dept., State of N.Y.)  Sediment dioxin
  results.   Final report.

0  Eadon, G., et al.  1982.  Comparisons of chemical and biological data
  on soot samples from the Binghamton State Office bulling. Center for
  laboratories  and research, New York State Department of Health.

0  Erdreich  E.,  1983.  Memorandum to  Judy Bellin on epidemiologic study
  of woodworkers in Hawaii.  November 16.

*  Esposito, M.P. et al.  1980.  Dioxins.   EPA 600/2-80-197.  U.S. EPA,
  Washington, D.C.  20460.

  Facchetti, S., et al.  1980. Distribution of 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
  dibenzo-p_-dioxin in the tissues of a person exposed to the
  toxic cloud at Seveso  (Italy). Adv. Mass Spectrom. (8B):1405-1414.

  Fanelli,  R. et al.  1980.  2 , 3 , 7 , 8- tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxin
  toxic effects and tissue levels from the contaminated area of
  Seveso, Italy.  Arch.  Environ. Contamin. Toxicol. 9:  569-577.

°  Fochtman, E.G. 1982.  Letter to EPA/Office of Pesticides and Toxic
  Substances, re: 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy acetic acid wastes stored
  by Vertac Chemical Company in Jacksonville, AR.  (March 3).


                                79

-------
Fountaine, J.E. et al. 1976. Some observations regarding
pentachlorophenol levels in Haverford Township, Pennsylvania.
Water Res. 10: 185-188.

Gallagher, R.P. and W.J.T. Threlfall. 1984.  Cancer risk in wood
and pulp workers.  In: Carcinogens and mutagens in the environ-
ment.  CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. (In press).

Gierthy, J. F. and G. D. Frenckel.  1982.  A preliminary report
on the evaluation of an in vitro  assay for the detection of
"dioxin-like" activity using extracts of soot from the Binghamton
State Office building.  Center for laboratories and research,
New York State Department of Health.

Goldmann, P.J.1973.  Schwerste akute chloracne. Eine Masse Intoxi-
kation durch 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.  Hautarzt
24:149-152.

Goldstein, J.A.,  et al. 1977.  Effects of pentachlorophenol
on hepatic drug metabolizing enzymes and porphyria related
to contamination with chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.  Biochem. Pharmacol. 26:1549-1557.

Greenlee, W.F. and Poland, A. 1979.  Nuclear uptake of 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-_p_-dioxin in C57B1/6J and DBA/2J mice.
J. Biol. Chem. 254:9814-9821.

Gross, M.L. 1980.  Direct Testimony (exhibit 223) In re:
The Dow Chemical Company, et al., FIFRA Docket Nos. 415, et
al.,  USEPA.  April 30.

Gross, M.L. et al. 1984. 2 , 3 , 7 , 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxin
levels in adipose tissue of Vietnam Veterans.  Envir. Res.
33:261-268.

Guenthar, T.M. et al.  1979.  2 , 3 , 7 , 8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxin :
binding of reactive metabolic intermediates principally to
proten in vitro.  Pharmacol.   19:12-22.

Guild, D. 1982.  Communication to F. Chau concerning Vertac
site, Jacksonville, AR (May 7).

Haberman, B., and S. Bayard (ORD/OHEA). 1983. Memorandum to Judy Bellin
(OSW) on evaluation of carcinogenicity of HxCDD.

Hansch, C. and A. Leo.  1979.  Substitution Constants for Correlation
Analysis in Chemistry and Biology.Wiley Insterscience,New York.
   Available from National Technical Information Service
   U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road,
   Springfield, VA  22161.

                              80

-------
  Hardell,  L. ,  et al.  1982.  Epidemiologic study of nasal and
  nasopharyngeal cancer and their relationship to phenoxy acid or
  chlorophenol  exposure.  Am.  J.  Ind.  Hyg. 3:  247-257.

  Harless,  R.L., et al. 1982.   Determination of 2,3,7,8-
  tetrachlorodibenzo-_p_-dioxin  in  fresh water fish.  Chemosphere
  11:193-198.

0  Harris,  D.J.   1981.   Memorandum to dioxin workgroup and others:
  status report #36 -  Denny Farm  site.  (October 7).

  Hassoun,  E.  et al. 1984.   Teratogenicity of 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
  dibenzofuran  in the  mouse. J. Toxicol. Envl. Health (In press).

  Hay,  A.  New metabolic pathways  for chlorinated dioxins.  Nature
  294:514-515.

  Hay,  A.W.M.  1977.  Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin release at
  Seveso.  Disasters 1: 289-308.

0  Health and Welfare Canada -  1981.   News Release 1981-84:   "Dioxin
  Guideline Announced  for Commercial Fish".  (July 17).

  Henck, J.W.  et al. 1981.   2, 3 , 7 , 8-tetrachlorodibenzo-_p_-dioxin:
  acute oral toxicity  in hamsters.   Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
  59:405-7.

 °Hile, P.J. (DHHS), 1983.   Letter  to  E. Johnson (EPA/OPTS).  re
  contamination of eggs and poultry  in Texas.  April 22.

  Holsapple, M.P., et  al. 1984. Immunosuppression by sleected
  hexachlorodibenzo-£-dioxins  (HxCDD)  in adult female B6C3F1 mice.
  National  meeting, Society of Toxicology, Atlanta, GA.  (Abstract).

  Homberger, E. et al. 1979.  The Seveso accident: its nature,
  extent,  and  consequences.  Ann. Occup. Hyg.  22:327-370.

  Huetter,  R.  et al.  1982.  Studies on microbial metabolism of
  TCDD  under laboratory conditions.   Pergamon Ser. Environ. Sci.
  5 (Chlorinated Dioxins and Related Compounds)87-93.

  Huff, J.  E.  et al.,   1980.  Long-term hazards of polychlorinated
  dibenzodioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans.  Env. Health.
  Persp. 36:221-240.

  International Agency for  Research  on Cancer (IARC).  1977.  Mono-
  graphs on the evaluation  of  the carcinogenic risk of chemicals  to
  Man.  Vol  15:   Some fumigants, the  herbicides 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T,
  chlorinated  dibenzodioxins and  miscellaneous industrial chemicals,
  Lyon, 354 pages.

 0 International Paper  Co. 1983.  RCRA  Part B permit application.
  July  29.


                               81

-------
Inoue, et al. 1979.  Sister chromatid exchanges in Chinese
hamster cells exposed to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's)           .
and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDF's).  Osaka-puritan           (
Koshu Kenkyusho Kenkyo Hokoku, Shohakim Eisei Hen. 9:165.
(Chemical Asbstracts 91:187593).

loannou, Y.M. et al. 1983. Toxicity and distribution of
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran in male guinea pigs.
J. Toxicol. Env. Health.  12:541-553.

Isensee, A.R. and G.E. Jones.  1975.  Distribution of 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin in aquatic model ecosystem
Environ. Sci. Technol.  9:668-672.

Jensen S. and L. Renberg, 1973. Various Chlorinated Dimers
present in several technical chlorophenols, used as
fungicides.  Env. Health Persp. 5:37-39.

Jett, G. (EGD) 1982. Memorandum to J. S. Bellin (OSW), re:
Hazardous waste estimates for phenoxyacetic compounds and priority
pollutant chlorophenols in the pesticide industry.  June 1.

Jirasek, L. et al 1973. Chloracne and porphyria cutanea tarda in
association with the production of herbicide C e s k. Dermato1.
48:306-317. (translation).

Jungclaus,  G.A., et al. 1978.  Organic compounds in an industrial
wastewater: a case study of their environmental impact.
Environ. Sci..Technol.  12:88-96.

Junk, G.A.  and J.J. Richard. 1981.  Dioxins not detected in effluents
from coal/refuse combustion. Chemosphere 10:1237-1241.

Karkkainen, D. I981a.  Letter to Assistant Administrator,
OPTS, with report describing wastes produced at the Jacksonville,
AR facility after May 12, 1980. (July 8).

Karkkainen, D. I981b.  Letter to R. Mays,  re: Wright State
data on 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid wastes. (March 16).

Kearney, P.C. et al. 1979.  Persistence and Metabolism of
chlorodioxins in soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 6:1017-1019.

Kenaga, E.E.. 1980.  Correlation of bioconcentration factors
of chemicals  in aquatic and terrestrial organisms with their
physical and  chemical properties.  Environ. Sci. Technol.
14:553-556.

Kimbrough, R.D.  1980.  Halogenated biphenyls, terphenyls,
napthalenes,  dibenzo-dioxins and related products.  Elsevier/North-
Holland.  N.Y.

Kirk  - Othmer, 1979.  Encyclopedia of chemical technology.
John  Wiley and sons, New York.  Third edition, volume 5«

Kitchin, K.T. and J.S. Woods.  1979. 2,3,7,8-Tetrachloridibenzo-
£-dioxin (TCDD)  effects  on  hepatic microsomal P-448 - mediated
 enzyme activities.   Toxicol.  Appl.  Pharmacol.  47:537-546.

                               82

-------
Kloepfer, R. D. et al. , 1983.  Occurrence of  tetrachlorodibenzo-jD-
dioxin in environmental samples from southwest Missouri.  In:
Chlorinated Dioxins and Dibenzofurans in th total  environment,
G. Choudhary et al.,  eds., Butterworth Publishers,  Boston.

Kloepfer, R.D., and J. Zirschky 1983.  TCDD distribution  in  the
Spring river,  southwestern Missouri.  Environment  International
9: 249-253.

Kocher, C.W. et al. 1978.  A search for the presence of
2,3,7,8-tetradioxin in beef fat  Bull. Environ. Contamin. Toxicol.
19: 229-236.

Kociba, R.J. et al. 1978. Results of a two-year chronic
toxicity and oncogencity study of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-
p-dioxin in rats.  Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.  46:279-303.

Kociba, R.J. et al. 1979. Long-term toxicologic studies of
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin (TCDD) in laboratory
animals.  Ann N.Y. Acad. Sci. 320:397-404.

Kociba, R.J. and 0. Cabey 1984. Comparative toxicity and  biologic
activity of chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin and  furan  relative  to
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD).   In 4th Intl.
Symp. chlorinated dioxins and related compound's". Ottawa,  CN.
October 16-18.  (to be published in Chemosphere) .

Kominsky, J.R. 1979.  Synopsis of Investigation:  Hyde Park
landfill chemical disposal site.  Niagara Falls, New York.
Project No. TA 79-22.   (See Chau 1982).

Kominsky, J.R. 1980.  Letter to C. Morgan re: Mirex, Lindane, and
tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin in Hyde Park Landfill, Niagara Falls,
NY.   (January 4).

Koshakji, R.P. et al.  1984. Studies on the metabolic fate of
[14C] 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) in the mouse.,
Tox. Appl.  Pharmacol.  73:  69-77.

Kouri, R.E. et al. 1978. 2 , 3 , 7 , 8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxin as
cocarcinogen causing 3-methychloranthrene-initated subcutaneous
tumors in mice genetically "nonresponsive" at Ah locus.  Cancer
Res. 38:2777-2783.

Kuehl.  D.W. 1981. Unusual polyhalogenated chemical residues
identified  in fish tissue from the environment.   Chemosphere
10:231-242.

Kunita, N.  et al. 1984. Casual agents of of Yusho. Amer. J. Ind.
Med. 5:54-58.

Kurohi H. and Y. Masuda 1978.  Determination of polychlorinated
dibenzofuran isomers retained in patients  with "Yusho."
Chemosphere 7:771-778.


                              83

-------
  Lake, J.L.  et al.  1981.  A polychlorinated dibenzofuran and
  related compounds  in an  estuarine ecosystem.  Env. Sci 15: 549-553.

  Lamberton,  J.,  et  al.  1979.  The determination of polychloro-
  dibenzo-£-dioxins  in pentachlorophenol wood treatment solutions.
  Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J.  40:816-822.

  Lamparski,  L.L.  and T.J.  Nestrick.   1980.  Determination of
  tetra-, hexa-,  hepta-,  and octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin isomers
  in particulate samples  at parts per  trillion levels.   Anal. Chem.
  52:2045-2059.

  Langer, H.G.  et  al., 1973.  Formation of dibenzodioxins and other
  condensation  products  from chlorinated phenols and derivatives.
  Env. Health Persp. 5:279-282.

  Langhorst,  M.L.  and L.A.  Shadoff. 1980.  Determination of parts-
  per-trillion  concentrations of tetra-, hexa-,  hepta-, and octa-
  chlorodibenzo-£-dioxins  in human milk samples.  Anal. Chem. 52:
  2037-2044.

  Leo, A.J.  1979.   Hausch  dualysis and the uses  partition coefficients,
  In:  I.M.  Asher  and C.  Zeruos  (eds.); synep. structural correlates
  oT carcinogenic  and mutageneis:  A guide to testing priorities.
  Proc. 2nd  FDA off. Science Summer symp.  August 31 -  September 2.
  A FDA, Washington, D.C.

  Lombardi,  P.  (FDA) 1983.   Letter to  Anne Barton (EPA) re PGP
  and HxCDD  fi-ndings in market basket  surveys.  April 14.

  Longstreth J.M.  and J.  Hushon  1981.   Risk Assessment  for 2,3,7,8-
  tetrachlorodibenzo-_p_-dioxin (TCDD).   Proc. 2nd.  Int. Symp.
  on Chlorinated Dioxins  and Related Compounds.   Arlington, VA.

0 Librizzi,  W.  J.   1978.   Memo to the  file: dioxin.  (April 4).

0 Librizzi,  W.  J.   1979.   Memorandum to C. Morgan: dioxin data, Hooker.
  (November  27).

  Lucier, G.W.  et  al. 1975. Postnatal  stimulation of hepatic
  microsomal enzymes following administration of TCDD to pregnant
  rats.  Chem.  Biol. Interact. 11:15-26.

  Lucier, G.W.  and O.S.  McDaniel. 1979. Developmental toxicology
  of the halogenated aromatics:  effects on enzyme development.
  Ann. N.Y.  Acad.  Sci. 320:449-457.

  Mahle, N.H. and  H.S. Higgin.  1977.   Search for the presence
  of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin in bovine milk.  Bull
  Environ. Contamin. Toxicol.  18:123-130.

  McConnell,  E.E.  and J.D.  McKinney. 1978.  Exquisite toxicity in the
  guinea pig to structurally similar halogenated dioxins, furans, bi-
  phenyls and naphthalenes.  Toxicol.  Appl. Pharmacol.   45: 298.

  McConnell,  E.E.  et al.    1978.  Toxicity of 2, 3, 7, 8-te'trachloro-     .
  |>-dioxin in Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulalta) of following a
  single oral dose.   Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.  29: 229-241.

                                84

-------
McConnel, E.E. 1983. Memorandum to John A. Moore, November 29.
McConnel, E.E. et al. 1984. Dioxin in soil: bioavailability
after ingestion by rats and guinea pigs. Science  223:1077-1079.

McGaughy, R. (EPA/ORD). 1984.  Memorandum to A. Rispin (EPA/OPP)
on carcingenic potency estimates for HxCDDs.  April 19.

McNulty, W.P. et. al. 1980.  Chronic toxicity of 2,3,7,8-tectra-
chlorodibenzofuran for Rhesus macaques.  Workshop:  Impact of
chlorinated dioxins and related compounds on the environment.
Rome, Italy.  October 22-24.

McKinney, J. and E. McConnell. 1982.  Structural specificity and
the dioxin receptor.  Ln Chlorinated dioxins and related compounds -
impact on the environment. Perg. Sere. Env. Sci. 5:367-381.

McNulty, W.P. 1984. Fetotoxicity of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachloro-dibenzo-
p_-dioxin (TCDD) for Rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) .  Amer. J.
Primatol.  6:41-47.

Meierer, R. E. 1978.  Letter to Bernie Carreno: TCDD analysis of
sediment samples.  (December 29).  (Contained as an attachment
to Nees, 1979) .

Miles, W.F. et al. 1984. Isomer specific determination of hexachloro-
dioxins in technical pentachlorophenol (PGP) and its sodium
salt. Fourth Intl. Symp. Chlorinated Dioxins and Related
Compounds. Ottawa, CN.  October 16-19.

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MNCPA) 1983.  Request for
issuance of a request for response action to the Joslyn Manufac-
turing and Supply Company regarding contamination at and
around the company's site in Brooklyn Center, September 27.

Moore, J.A. 1978. Ecol. Bull.  Toxcicity of 2,3,7,Stetrachloro
dibenzo-_p_-Dioxin.  27:134-144.

Moore, J.A. et al. 1979. Comparative toxicity of three halogenated
dibenzofurans in guinea pigs, mice and rhesus monkeys.
Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 320:151-163.

Murray, F.J. et al. 1979. Three-generation reproduction study
of rats given 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in the
diet.  Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 50:241-252.

Nagayama, J, et al. 1976.  Determination of chlorinated
dibenzofurans in Kanechlor and "Yusho Oil".  Bull. Environ.
Contamin. Toxicol. 15:9-13.

Nagayama, J. et al. 1980.  Transfer of polychlorinated dibenzofurans
to the foetuses and offspring of mice.   Fd. Cosmet.  Toxicol.  18:153-157

National Research Council Canada (NRCC).  1981.  Polychlorinated
dibenzo-£-dioxins: criteria for their effects on man and his
environment.  NRCC No. 18574.  Ottawa,  Canada K1A OR6
Neal, R.A. et al.  1982.  The toxicokinetics of 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in mammalian species.   Drue Metal
Rev.  13:355-385.                                  	& 	

                              85

-------
0 Nees, P.O. 1979.  Letter to William Librizzi, U.S. EPA re:
  Hyde Park Landfill,  Niagara Falls, New York (January 24).

  Nisbet, I.T.C., and  M. Burr Paxton. 1982.  Statistical aspects of
  three-generation studies of the reproductive toxicity of TCDD and
  2,4,5-T.  The Amer.  Statistician. 36:290-308.

0 New York State 1978.   Department of Health News:  re:  dioxin in
  fish from Lake Ontario (August 5).

0 New York State 1979.   Department of Environmental Conservation,
  Albany, New York.  Document No. 20143.

0 New York State 1982.   Department of Health 1981.  Office of Public
  Health.  Love Canal.   A special report to the governor and
  legislature.   April.

0 Norton, Keith C. 1982.  Letter to Anne M. Gorsuch.  Re:  Pollution
  of the Niagara River.   (March 30).

0 Nosenchuck, N.H.  1980.  Letter to Steven Jellinek, U.S. EPA.
  re: disposal  of dioxin contaminated waste material. (December 31).

  Ogilvie, D. 1981.  Dioxin from the Great Lakes Basin.  Ambio
  10:38-39.

  Oishi, S. and K. Hiraga.  1978.  -Is a mixture of polychlorinated
  dibenzofurans an inducer of hepatic porphyria?  Food Cosmet.
  Toxicol.  16:47.

0 O'Keefe, P.  1979.  Memorandum to S. Kim: an annual survey of
  TCDD levels in fish  from Lake Ontario and the Niagara River.
  (April 26).

  Okey, A.B. et al. 1979. Regulatory gene product of the Ah locus.
  J. Biol. Chem. 254:11636-11648.

0 Oliver, C.  1978.  Report of meeting (12/11/78) with OCAW Local 8-778
  and USW Locals 12256  and 12230: health effects to nearby workers
  from Hyde Park Landfill, Niagara Falls, NY.  (December, 11).

  Olsen, J.H. and O.M.  Jensen 1984. Nasal Cancer and Chlorophenols.
  The Lancet. July 7,  p. 47.

  Paderova-Vejlupkova,  J. et al. 1980.  Chronic poisoning by
  2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin.  Pracov Lek. 32:204-209.
  (NIH translation, NIH 80-556).

  Phillipi, M.  et al.   1981.  Fate of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-
  £-dioxin in microbial cultures and in soil under laboratory
  conditions FEMS symp.   12 (Microb. Degrad. Xenobiotics Recalitrant
  Compounds).  221-233.
                                86

-------
Pierce, R.H. et al. 1980.  Pentachlorophenol and degradation
products in lake sediment. In contaminants and sediments,
Vol. 2., Analysis, chemistry and biology.  R.A. Baker, ed.
Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, MI.

Pitot, H.C., et al. 1980.  Quantitative evaluation of the promotion
of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin of hepatocarcinogenesis
from dietyl nitrosamine.  Cancer Res. 40:3616-3620.

Poiger, H.. and Ch. Schlatter, 1980.  Influence of Solvents
and Adsorbents on  Dermal and Intestinal Absorption of TCDD.
Fd. Cosmet. Toxicol.  18:477-481.

Poiger, H., et al. 1984. The metabolism of 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
dibenzofuran in the rat. Chemosphere. 13:351-357.

Poland, A., et al. 1979. Studies on the mechanisms of action
of the chlorinated dibenzo-p_-dioxins and related compounds.
Ann N.Y. Acad. Sci. 320:214-230.

Poland, A. and E. Glover, 1979.  An estimate of the maximum
in vitro covalent binding of 2 , 3, 7 , 8-tetrchlorodibenzo-_p_-dioxin to
rat liver protein, ribosomal RNA and DNA.  Cancer Res. 39:3341-3344.

Poland, A. and J.C. Knutson.  1982.  2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-
£-dioxin and related halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons:
examination of mechanisms of toxicity.  Ann. Rev. Pharmacol.
Toxicol.  517-554.

Pratt, R.M. et al. 1984. 2 , 3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin-
induced cleft palate in the mouse: evidence for alterations in
palatal shelf fusion. Terat. Care. Mutag. 4:427-436.

Rappe, C.  et al.  1978.   Formation of polychlorinated dibenzo-
p_-dioxins (PCDDs) and dibenzofurans by burning or heating
chlorophenates.  Chemosphere 7:269-281.

Rappe, C.  et al.  1979.  Dioxins, dibenzofurans and other polyhalo-
genated aromatics: production,  use, formation and destruction.
Ann N.Y. Acad. Sci. 320:1-18.

Rappe, C.  et al.  1979.   Identification of polychlorinated
dibenzofurans (PCDFs) retained in patients with "Yusho."
Chemosphere 8:259-266.

Rappe, C.  and Buser H.R.  1981.  Occupl expoto poly chid Dxs
and DEE.  ACS Synip Ser.  149:319-342.

Rappe, C.  et al.  1981.   Identification of polychlorinated
dibenzofuran in environmental samples.  Nature 292:524-526.

Redford, D.P. et  al.  1981.   Emission of PCDD from combustion
sources.  International Synip.   on chlorinated Dioxins and
Related Compounds.  Arlington,  VA; October 25-29.
                              87

-------
o
Reggiani, G.  1980.  Localized contamination with TCDD -
Seveso, Missouri, and other areas.  In: Kimbrough, 1980.
Op. Git,  pp. 303-352.

Reggiani. G. 1981.  Toxicology of 2 , 3 , 7 , 8-tetrachlordibenzo-p_-
dioxin  (TCDD): short review of its  formation, occurance,
toxicology, and kinetics, discussing human health effects,
safety measures, and disposal.  Reg. Tox. Pharmacol. 1:211-243.

Renberg, L. et al. 1983.  Levels of chlorophenols in natural
waters and fish after an accidental discharge of a wood-
impregnating solution. Ambio 12:121-123.

Ris., C.(ORD/OHEA). 1983. Memorandum to Judy Bellin (OSW) on
epidemiology study of woodworkers in Hawaii. September 16.
(with appended memorandum from D. Bayliss).

Ritchey, Scott 1982.  Memorandum to Filomena Chau:  Dioxin Data
from Fish in the Spring River (April 7).

Ryan, J. J.  1979.  Dioxin analysis and results for fish from
Lake Ontario.  Minutes of meeting.  (October 3).
Schantz, S.L. et al. 1979.  Toxicological effects produced in
non-human primates chronically exposed  to fifty parts per
trillion 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD).  Toxicol.
Appl. Pharmacol.   48:A180.  (Abstract).

Sarna, L.P. et al. 1984. Octanol-water  partition coefficients
of chlorinated dioxins and dibenzofurans by reversed-phase HPLC
using several C]_g columns.  Chemosphere 13:975-983.

Schultz, F.A. 1983. Memorandum to E.A.  Price September 9.
Schwartz, B.A. et al.  1973.  Toxicology of chlorinated
dibenzo-p_-dioxins.  Environ. Health Perspect. 5:87-99.

Schwetz, B.A. et al. 1980. Insensitivity of tests for reproductive
problems.  J. Env. Path. Toxicol. 3: 81-98.


Shadoff L.A. et al. 1977.  A search for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-
p_-dioxin (TCDD) in an environment exposed annually to 2,4,5-trichloro-
phenoxyacetic acid ester (2,4,5-T) herbicides.  Bull. Environ.
Contamin. Toxicol. 18:478-485.

Shaub, W. M. and W. Tsang. 1982.  Physical and chemical properties
of dioxins in relation to their disposal.  Proc. second intl.
symp. on dioxins.  Arlington, VA.,  October.  1981 (In press).

Silkworth, J. et al.  1982.  Acute  toxicity in guinea pigs and
rabbits of soot from a polychlorinated  biphenyl-containing
transformer fire.  Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.  (In press).

Sittig, M. 1980. Pesticide manufacturing and toxic materials
control encyclopedia.  Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge,
N.J.

                              88

-------
o
 Smith,  R.M.  et al.   I981a.   Analysis  of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodi-
 benzofuran  and 2,3, 7,8-tetrachlorodibenxo-p_-dioxin in a soot
 sample  from  a transformer explosion in Binghamton, New York.
 Division of  Laboratories  and Research,  New York State Department
 of Health,  Albany,  NY.(Feb.  20).

'Smith,  R. M.  et al.   1981b.   Analysis of a Binghamton soot sample
 for tetrachlorodibenzofurans and  tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxins.
 (Oct.  1).

 Smith,  R.M.  et al.   1982a.   Determination of  polychlorinated
 dibenzofurans and  polychlorinated dibenzo-p_-dioxins in
 surface wipes of  ceiling  panels  in a  contaminated office
 building.   Division of  laboratories and research.  New York
 State  Department  of Health.   Albany NY.  (January 11).

 Smith,  R.M.  et al.   1982b.   Determination of  polychlorinated
 dibenzofurans in  soot smaples from a  contaminated office building.
 Center  for  Laboratories and  Research.   New York State Department
 of Health.   Albany,  N.Y.   (March  10).

 Smith,  R.M.  et al.   1983.   2 , 3, 7 , 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxin
 in sediment  samples from  Love Canal storm sewers and creeks.
 Environ.  Sci. Technol.  17:6-10.

 Squire,  R. A. 1983.   An assessment of the experimental evidence
 for potential carcinogenicity of  hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
 June 29.

 Stalling, D.L.. et  al.  1981a.   Isolation and analysis of PCDFs
 in aquatic  samples.   In:  J.D. McKinney, ed. Environmental
 Health  Chemistry.   Ann Arbor, MI   p.  177.

 Stalling,,D.L.  et  al.   1981b.  Residues of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-
 p-dioxins and Dibenzofunns  in Laurentain Great  Lakes Fish.  Columbia
 National Fisheries  Research  Laboratory, U.S.  Fish and Wildlife
 Service.  Presented at  2nd  International Conference on TCDD and
 related  compounds,  Washington,  D.C.   October  1981.

 Taylor,  J.S.  1979.  Environmental  chloroacne:  update and review.
 Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.  320-295-307.

 Taylor,  M.L.  1979.   Letter  to Charles  Gozda,  U.S. EPA re:   Wright
 State University's  analyses  of dioxin  samples.   (December 5).

 Tiernan,  T.O.,  et  al.  1981.   Quantitation of  parts per trillion
 levels  of 2 , 3, 7 , 8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxin in EPA-furnished
 extracts of  biological materials.   Final Report,  U.S. EPA
 Cooperative  Agreement  No.   CR806846-01  (ORD).

 Truesdale, J. W.  1980.  Letter to G.  Olsen re:  TCDD,  Vertac,
 Jacksonville,  AR.  (January  25).
                                89

-------
0 Tumasonics, G.,  and L. Kaminsky. 1982.  Chick embryos as a probe
  of the relative toxicities of soot samples from a polychlorinated
  biphenyl-containing transformer: preliminary report.  Center for
  laboratories and research.  New York State Department of Health,
  Albany, NY.

0 Turner, J. N. and D. N. Collins.  1982.  Binghatnton State Office
  Building - soot-induced morphologic alterations in the livers of
  guinea pigs.  Center for Laboratories and research.  New York State
  Department of Health.   Albany, NY.  (January 6).

  U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services.  1980a.
  Carcinogenesis bioassay of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p_-dioxin
  (CAS No. 1746-01-6) in Osborne Mendel rats and B6C3F1 mice
  (gavage study).  NIH Publ. No. 82-1765.  NTP80-31.  NTP
  Technical Report Series No. 209.

  U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services.  1980b.
  Carcinogenesis Bioassay of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodebenzo-p-dioxin
  (CAS No. 1746-01-6) in Swiss-Webster mice. (Dermal Study).
  NIH Publication No. 82-1157.  NTP 80-32.  NTP Technical Report
  Series.  No. 201.

  U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services.  1980c.  NCI/NTP
  Bioassay of a mixture of 1,2,3,6,7,8- and 1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachloro-
  dibenzo-£-dioxins for possible carcinogenicity.  NIH 80-175.

  U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services.  1981 a.  PCB transformer
  fire, Binghamtom, N.Y. MMWR30: 187-193.

0 U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services.  1981b.  Food and
  Drug Administration - 1981 FDA talk paper #T81-32.  August 28
  "Dioxin in Fish".

* U.S.  EPA.  1971.  Biological treatments of chlorophenolic wastes.
  Water Pollution Control Research Series 12130 EGK0671.  NTIS
  PB No. 206813.

* U.S.  EPA 1975.  Aqueous odor threshold of organic pollutants in
  industrial effluents.   EPA 660/4-75-002.
o
o
U.S. EPA 1978a.  Dioxin in industrial sludges.  Draft status report.
(June 15).

U.S. EPA 1978b.  Analytical data - Hyde Park Landfill, Niagara
Falls,  New York.

U.S. EPA 1978c.  Development of information on pesticides
manufacturing for source assessment.  EPA 600/2078-100.  PB.
No. 283051.

U.S. EPA 1978d.  Report of the ad hoc study group on pentachloro-
phenol contaminants.  Environmental Health Advisory Committee,
Science Advisory Board.


                              90

-------
  U.S. EPA 1979.  Toxic Substances Assessment: Chlorinated dioxins
  in chemical manufacturing processes.  Industrial Manufacturing
  Quality Control Evaluation Series. EPA 02/79-01.  Prepared
  by Technical Resources, Inc., P. E. des Hosiers, Project Officer.
  Confidential document.

* U.S. EPA 1980a.  Damages and Threats caused by hazardous material
  sites.  EPA 430/9-80/004.

  U.S. EPA 1980b.  POM emissions from stationary conventional combustion
  processes, with emphasis on polychlorinated compounds of dibenzo-£-
  dioxins (PCDDs), biphenyl (PCBs) and dibenzofurans  (PCDFs). TRW.
  EPA Contract No. 68-02-3138.  Available at the EPA  library.

  U.S. EPA 1980c. Background document on chlorinated  dioxins, preliminary
  briefing of the Toxic Substances Priority Committee by the Chlorinated
  Dioxins Workgroup. (January 9)

* U.S. EPA 1980d.  Risk Assessment on (2,4,5-trichloro-phenoxy)
  acetic acid (2,4,5-T), (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy) propionic acid
  (Silvex), and 2, 3, 7 ,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-jp_-dioxin (TCDD) .
  EPA-600/6-81-003.

* U.S. EPA 1980e.  Second Annual Report: Chemicals Identified
  in Human Biological Media, A Data Base, Volume II.  EPA-
  560/13-80-036B.

  U.S. EPA 1980f.  Ambient water quality criteria for chlorinated
  phenols.  EPA 440/5-80-032.

  U.S. EPA 1980g.  Ambient water quality criteria for pentachloro-
  phenol.  EPA 440/5-80-065.

  U.S. EPA  1981 a.  Creosote, inorganic arsenicals, pentachlorophenol.
  OPP Position Document 2/3.

° U.S. EPA  I981b.  Interim evaluation of health risks associated with
  emissions of tetrachlorinated dioxins from municipal waste resource
  recovery facilities.   Office of the Administrator.  (November 19)

0 U.S. EPA. 1981c. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for 2,3,7,8-
  tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin.  EPA 440/5-80-072 (Draft) July. (See
  U.S. EPA. 1984a.)

* U.S. EPA.  1981e.  Chemicals identified in feral and food animals, a
  data base.  Volume I.  EPA 560/5-81-009.

* U.S. EPA.  1981f.  Chemicals identified in human biological media, a

* U.S. EPA.  1981f.  Chemicals identified in human biological media, a
  data base.  Volume II.  EPA 560/13-80-036B.

0 U.S. EPA.  1981g.  Carcinogen Assessment  Group: Carcinogen Assessment
  in Air of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin (TCDD).  (May 8)

0 U.S. EPA 1981h.  Incineration of PCBs, Summary of Approved Actions,
  Energy Systems Company (ENSCO)  EL  Dorado,  AK.   February  6.   EPA
  Region 6.
                                91

-------
o
  U.S.  EPA 19811.  Incineration of PCBs,  Summary of Approved Actions,
  Rollins Environmental Services.   Deer Park, TX.  EPA Region 6.

  U.S.  EPA 1981J.  Aquatic fate process data for organic priority
  pollutants.   EPA report 440/4-81-014.

  U.S.  EPA.   1982a.   Multimedia criteria for the dibenzofurans.
  EPA/Office of Research and Development.   Unpublished draft.

  U.S.  EPA.  1982b. Preliminary Investigation of Spring River
  Basin.  EPA Region VII.   Environmental Services Division (March
  22).   D.J. Harris,  Project Officer.  Confidential document.

  U.S.  EPA.  1982c.  Environmental  Monitoring at Love Canal.   Volumes
  I - III.  May.  EPA 600/4-82-0309.

  U.S.  EPA.  1982d.  Environmental  Monitoring at Love Canal
  Interagency Review.  May.

  U.S.  EPA 1982e. Test methods for evaluating solid wastes.
  Physical/chemical methods. SW-846.

  U.S.  EPA 1982f..  Development document for effluent guidelines
  standards  for pesticides. EPA 440/1-82/079b (Proposed)

  U.S.  EPA 1983a.  Statement of Anne M. Burford concerning the relo-
  cation of  Times Beach,  MO.  February 22.

  U.S.  EPA 1983b.  Dioxin strategy.  Office of Water Regulations
  and Standards and Ofice of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
  November 28.

  U.S.  EPA 1983c.  REM/FIT Remedial action master plan, Galesburg/
  Koppers, Galesburg IL.  01-5VC8.0.  September 23.

  U.S.  EPA 1983d.  Guidance manual for hazardous waste incinerator
  permits.  O.S.W. SW-966.

  U.S.  EPA 1984a.  Ambient Water Quality Criteria for 2,3,7,8-TCDD.
  EPA 440/5-84-007 (February).

  U.S.  EPA 1984b.  Wood preservative pesticides - creosote,  penta-
  chlorophenol, and the inorganic  arsenicals.  P/D 4. OPP.  January
  11. (Draft).

  U.S.  EPA 1984c.  Health assessment document for polychlorinated
  dibenzo-£-dioxins.   EPA-600/8-84-014A.  May. External review draft.

  U.S.A.  y_s  Vertac Chemical Co. ejt al.  U.S. District Court, Eastern
  Distric~of Arkansas , #LR-C-80-109, 1980.

  U.S.A.  and State of New York vs_ Hooker Chemicals and Plastics  et al
  U.S.  District Court, Western District of New York, #79-989, 1979.

  Valo, R. et al. 1984. Chlorinated phenols as contaminants of soil
  and water  in the vicinity of two finnish sawmills. Chemosphere
  13:835-844.
                                92

-------
Van Ness, G. F.  1980.  Tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxins in chemical
wastes, aqueous effluents and soils.  Chemosphere 9:553-563.

Veigh, G.D. et al 1979.  Measuring and estimating the bioconcentrations
fractor of chemicals in fish.  J. Fish Res. Board Canada.  36: 1040-
1048.

Villanueva, E.G. et al. 1974. Evidence of chlorodibenzo-
p-dioxin and chlorodibenzofuran in hexachlorobenzene.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 22:916-917.

Vos J.G. and E. Notenboom-Ram. 1972.   Comparative toxicity
study of 2,4,5,2',4',5'-hexachlorobiphenyl and a polychlorinated
biphenyl mixture in rabbits. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 23:563-578.

Ward, C.T. and Matsumura, F. 1978.  Fate of 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) in a model aquatic
environment.  Arch. Environ. Contamin. Tox. 7:349-357.

Williams, P. 1982.  Pentachlorophenol, an assessment of the occupa-
tional hazard.  Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 43: 799-810.
Wood, S., et al., 1983.  Pentachlorophenol poisoning. J. Occup. Med.
25: 527-530.

Yamagishi, T.  et al.  1981.  Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
and dibenzofurans in commercial diphenyl ether herbicides,
and in freshwater fish collected from the application area.
Chemosphere 10:1137-1144.

Zingeser, M.R. 1979.  Anomalous development of the soft
palate in rhesus macaques (Macaca Molatta) prenatally
exposed to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-£-dioxin.  Teratology
19:54A-55A. (Abstract).
                              93

-------
                                               RE:  SJ2405


VII.  Response to Comments

     A number of comments were received which addressed the

Agency's proposed listing of CDD- and CDF- containing wastes.

The Agency1s response to many of these comments were described

in the preamble to the final regulation for these wastes.

In the following material, we further amplify some of our

responses, and address other comments that were received.

1.  One commenter stated that EPA had improperly applied its
    criteria in determining the listed wastes to be acute toxic
    wastes.  In particular, the commenter believes that it is
    improper to cite data indicating the toxicity of the "pure"
    material rather than that of the waste material in which
    it is contained.  The commenter argued that EPA did not
    (but should) cite studies which demonstrate that the
    listed wastes (rather than its constituents) pose a
    potential hazard.

              The Agency agrees that no data on the directly-

  ..       established toxic effects of these waste were cited.

         However, there are no studies directly showing the

         animal or human effects of these wastes nor do we

         believe that such studies are necessary for a determination

         concerning the need to regulate wastes as acute

         hazardous wastes.  The toxicants of concern are

         known to leach from these wastes and are otherwise

         bioavailable (e.g., ingested when absorbed to soil).

         Determination of the degree of hazard posed by

         wastes (or other materials) known to contain certain

         concentrations of toxicants is routinely made, as

         in these regulations, by accepted toxicologic methods

         of hazard assessment.  Such methods use dose and

         species extrapolations to estimate the potential

         hazards to human health.  The Agency ,therefore, does

                                  94

-------
     not agree with the commenter that an estimation of

     the degree of hazard must await a bioassay.  It

     should be noted, however, that the Office of Research

     and Development is developing and validating protocols

     for this purpose (i.e., developing bioassays which

     would enable a direct assessment of the hazardous

     nature of the waste).  The conceptual and methodologic

     problems encountered in the development of such an

     assay particularly for systemic effects of chronic

     exposure are far from trivial,  and an accepted

     test may be difficult to achieve.


One commenter argued that 1 kg or less per month
of an acutely hazardous substance is not necessarily
an appropriate or magical number to exempt a generator
from regulation.  The commenter stated that other factors
should be considered in setting the level, and that
hazardous wastes that have an oral LD50 of 5 mg/kg or
less, and that are persistent in the environment should
also be regulated.

          The Agency agrees that in establishing a small
                                            *
     quantity generator (SQG)  level  policy decisions need

     to be made.  We established a 1 kg per month small

     quantity generator (SQG)  exclusion limit for acute

     hazardous wastes,  since these are deemed by the

     Agency to present  more of a hazard to human health

     since only a relatively small quantity of the wastes

     need get into the  environment to present a risk of

     serious or fatal illness.  (In  the industrial setting,

     the SQG limit is,  for all intents and purposes, equal

     to zero.)  The Agency also agrees that other factors,

     including persistence and bioaccumulation of the

                              95

-------
     toxicants of concern, quantity of waste, current

     management practices, history of mismanagement, etc. are

     also appropriate in determining whether a waste should

     have a one kg SQG limit (i.e., wastes that are toxic (T)

     may also be designated as having a 1 kg/mo level rather

     than the general level of 1000 kg/mo).  In fact, all

     these factors were used by the Agency in setting a

     1 kg/mo SQG limit.  The present regulation, and

     this background document illustrate that decision.

One commenter stated that distinguishing between the different
isomers of the CDDs and CDFs would not be a regulatory burden;
however, the commenter also stated that inclusion of all
isomers on Appendix VIII would create a regulatory burden
and an analytical nightmare.

          The Agency perceives these comments as contradictory.

     It would, we agree, be extremely costly, and therefore

     burdensome to regulate these wastes in such a fashion that

     isomer-specific analysis would be required (e.g., if we

     list all isomers on Appendix VIII, persons subject to the
                                                   o
-------
Several commenters state that EPA has failed to demonstrate
that PCP and its contaminants are acute hazardous wastes.
They argue that EPA1s criteria for this listing are imper-
missibly vague, because the Agency failed to identify what
it considers to be serious irreversible or incapacitating
reversible illness.  They also state that EPA improperly
used structure-activity relationships to extrapolate the
health effects of 2,3,7,8-TCDD to PCP and its contaminants;
that EPA must consider the wastes containing PCP on the
basis of the toxicity of PCP itself, and not on the
basis of its contaminants; and that PCP and its contaminants
do not cause chronic health effects.

          The comments are to some extent contradictory,

     for the same persons who state that EPA has failed to

     define what it considers to be "serious irreversible

     or incapacitating reversible" illness also state that

     neither PCP, nor PCP - containing wastes meet this

     criterion.  The criteria for defining acute hazardous (H)

     wastes to which these commenters refer, are directly

     based on the statutory language of RCRA §1004(5>(A).

     No one challenged the statutory provision as impermissibly

     vague, nor did we receive any comments on this criterion

     during the comment period following the promulgation of

     §261.11(a)(2)  on May 19, 1980.

          Furthermore, in the preamble to that regulation,

     EPA stated its intention to apply this standard to wastes

     "containing substantial  concentrations of potent carcinogens..."

     (45 j[R 33107).   TCDD and HxCDD  are among  the most potent

     carcinogens tested in rodents,  and are present in

     these wastes in  substantial concentrations (see above and

     Table 3).

          We disagree with the comment that EPA improperly

     extrapolated the health  effects of TCDD to PCP and

     its contaminants.  As discussed more fully in the

                          97

-------
preamble to the final version of this regulation, and



discussed elsewhere in this document, we believe that it



is appropriate and permissible to place reliance on the



biochemical and toxicity structure-activity relationships



for these compounds.  It should also be noted that the



Agency is not evaluating the toxicity of the HxCDD and



HxCDF conquers - the chlorinated dioxins and -dibenzo-



furans most prevalent in wastes from PCP production and



manufacturing use—solely by reference to structural



similarity with TCDD and TCDF.  We are, however, relying



on structure activity relationships in stating that all



forms of HxCDDs and HxCDFs are constituents of concern.



     As to the basis for the Agency's concern requiring



the toxicity.of PCP and its contaminants, the principal



basis for listing these wastes as acute hazardous



wastes is the presence of substantial concentrations of



both HxCDDs and HxCDFs and of PCP.  As discussed in the



preamble for the final version of the regulation and in



this document, the Agency determined that a mixture of



two HxCDDs is a potential human carcinogen of high



potency.  Moreover, based on biochemical-structure



activity relationships (receptor induction, receptor



binding strength, enzyme induction, cell keratinization,



etc.  (Bellin, 1984; Kociba, 1984)) the Agency also



determined that HxCDDs and HxCDFs may have chronic



systemic effects similar to those established for TCDD.



     Additionally, the levels of HxCDDs in PCP wastes



are of concern in terms of the potential for serious



                       98

-------
         harm if they are released to water or air, either in

         soluble form, or adsorbed to soil particulates.  10~7

         to 10~6 is an appropriate estimate for a water quality

         criterion for HxCDDs, based on that for TCDD and the

         difference in the carcinogenic potency values of HxCDD

         and TCDD.  This value is a minisule fration (10~^-°)  of

         the concentration of HxCDDs in PCP wastes.  The Agency,

         therefore, concludes that the potential toxicity of  HxCDDs

         at the level found in PCP are of regulatory concern.

5.  Concerning the degree of toxicity of PCP and its HxCDD
    contaminants,  several commenters further stated that HxCDD
    is not a carcinogen, and that, if it is a carcinogen, it  is
    a promoter, rather than an initiator of carcinogenicity.   These
    commenters further argue that PCP is not acutely toxic to
    people, and that, in any case, the concentration of HxCDD in
    PCP is so low that acute toxic effects of PCP would be
    observed before HxCDD exposure would be sufficient to cause
    a teratogenic  response.  (The commenters noted that in the
    rat a teratogenic response to HxCDD was found at a dose of
    100 ug/kg body weight.)  They thus conclude that the conta-
    minants in a dose of PCP will be no more toxic than the PCP
    itself, and that the Agency erred in designating these
    wastes as acute hazardous wastes.

    The Agency disagrees with these comments.  The carcino-

    genicity of a  mixture of two HxCDDs was established by the

    positive response obtained in animal bioassay studies. The

    data from these studies were recently reviewed by an expert

    reviewer employed by the commenters, and by NTP and EPA1s

    Carcinogen Assessment Group (CAG).   While the commenter's

    expert concluded that there is only "equivocal"  evidence  of

    HxCDD1s carcinogenicity, scientists from both NTP and EPA

    disagreed with this evaluation.   The CAG concluded that the

    tested mixture of HxCDDs is an extremely potent human carcinogen

    They estimate  the carcinogenic potency of the HxCDD mixture


                                99

-------
is between 0.59 per ug/kg/day (male rat) to 11 per ug/kg/day


(male mouse).  The CAG recommended that 6.2 per ug/kg/day


derived from hepatocellular carcinoma and adenoma data in


male mice and female rats (the test systems in which the response

                                                       \
was most strongly evident) be used as the upper limit potency


estimate for HxCDD (Haberman and Bayard, 1983; McGaughy, 1984).


There are at present no scientific methods which have sufficient


general acceptance to allow one to establish an unambiguous


mechanism of action for this carcinogenic response.  HxCDD


may be a promoter, a co-carcinogen, or a complete carcinogen.


There is at present no valid scientific basis for a risk


extrapolation assumption other than the no-threshold model


presently used by CAG for the cancer hazard extrapolation.


     The Agency agrees that.the PCP dose for acute lethality


(about 160 mg/kg body weight) does not classify PCP as an


acutely toxic substance (as distinct from acute hazardous


waste), such as those listed in §261.33(e).  Indeed, the


Agency judged that it should not be so listed. (45 FR


78533, November 25, 1980).  However, the carcinogenic


and teratogenic effects or HxCDD are of significant


regulatory concern, and the Agency strongly disagrees


that the acute toxicity effects of PCP are of greater


concern than its teratogenic effects.  It is true that


acute toxicity (LD50) is more easily observed and evaluated


than carcinogenicity or teratogenicity: fewer animals


need be observed, and the lethal endpoint is more


unambiguously noted.  This, however, does not lessen



                           100

-------
    the concern for the possible serious irreversible and

    chronic systemic health effects of PCP and its contaminants.

    Even evaluating the commenters1 remarks at face value, however,

    one notes that lifetime exposure to one hundredth of the

    LD50 of commercial PCP containing 15 ppm of HxCDDs would
                                      ,26/
    incur an excess cancer risk of 10 J  .  Someone exposed

    to a dose approaching the median LD50 would receive a

    dose 1800 times larger than the ADI established for the
                                   27/
    reproductive effects of HxCDDs.

          The Agency therefore judges that the designation

    of PCP-containing wastes as acute hazardous (H) wastes

    was appropriately drawn.

6.  Several persons commented that EPA1s determination that
wastes containing PCP are acute hazardous wastes should be
peer-reviewed by an impartial scientific panel, similar to the
Science Advisory Board.

        The Agency feels that the usual regulatory procedures

    suffice in the case of PCP-containing wastes,  as they do for

    other wastes,  to ensure that implementation of RCRA is properly

    achieved.   The administrative process,  consisting of extensive

    interagency review and comment, regulatory proposal, review of

    public comments,  modification of the proposed  regulation, and

    further interagency review before finalization suffices to
    26/ 1/100 x LD50 x 15 ppm HxCDD/PCP=10~2  x 120  mg  PCP/kg x
       (15xlO~6 mg HxCDD/mg PCP)  x 103  ug/mg  = 0.018  ug  HxCDD/kg/day,

       Risk=potency x exposure =  6.2/ug/kg/day x  0.018 ug/kg/day =
       0.1

    27/ Exposure/ADI=(15xlO~6 mg  HxCDD/mg  PCP x 120 mg PCP/kg/day x
       10~5 ng/kg = 1800 ng/kg/d  / 1  ng/kd/d  = 1800.
                               101

-------
    ensure that there is ample opportunity for comment and review

    from many points of view.  Moreover, a judgment on technical

    and policy issues is made and reviewed by many persons within

    the Agency.  In the case of these wastes, technical,  scientific

    and administrative issues concerning the CDDs and CDFs were

    reviewed by the Chlorinated Dioxin Workgroup, by a committee

    of scientific and technical experts meeting in Cincinnati in

    July 1983, and by the Agency's Dioxin Monitoring Taskforce.

    The health and environmental effects of chlorophenols were

    prepared and evaluated by scientists from a contractual agent,

    and were reviewed by scientists in several EPA offices.

         The Agency therefore judges that additional outside

    peer review is not needed.

7.  Several comments were received in response to EPA's question
regarding the desirability, practicality,.and advisability
of developing a "characteristic" definition of hazardousness
under 40 CFR 261.24 for these wastes.  Whereas some commenters
suggested that this would be a desirable regulatory goal, others
felt that this might not be a suitable regulatory alternative,
since it might encourage dilution as a means for circumventing
disposal.  One commenter argued that EPA should develop a charac-
teristic definition of hazardousness for the CDD and CDF  contaminants
of PCP, stating that adequate data exists in the RPAR rulemaking
docket to define such a level.  The commenter stated that failure
to set such a level would unjustifiably cause all wastes  containing
PCP to be classified as acute hazardous wastes, and argued that
the delisting mechanism places an undue burden on the regulated
community.  One commenter recommended that the Agency set 1 ppm of
CDD or CDF as the lower limit of concern for any waste.

         On reconsideration, the Agency concluded that with

    presently available data, it is not possible to develop

    a characteristic definition of hazardousness for these

    wastes.  This is true even for wastes from 2,4,5-TCP  or

    those containing PCP: 2,3,7,8-TCDD and a mixture of HxCDDs
                              102

-------
    (the only CDDs whose potency has been estimated)  are

    the principal, but not the only CDD/CDF contaminants

    of concern in these wastes.  Qualitative and pragmatic

    considerations dictated the selection of all CDDs

    and CDFs as toxicants of concern (48 FR 14515).  However,

    a quantitative risk assessment is needed to develop a

    "characteristic" definition.  Such a risk assessment

    would need to consider the carcinogenic or teratogenic

    potency of the individual toxicants of concern.  In the

    case of the listed wastes, that would mean a detailed

    knowledge of the response for each of the CDD and CDF

    isomers cited as toxicants of concern.  There are no

    data sufficient for this purpose.  Moreover, the Agency

    continues to judge that the delisting process is a more appropriate

    means to deal with the question of the limit of concern for

    human health and the environment — especially for these very

    toxic wastes.


8.  One commenter questioned the regulatory relevance of the
criteria used by EPA to define the listed wastes as acute hazar-
dous wastes.  In particular the commenter questioned the relevance
of the application of these criteria to PCP, because "EPA has
neither controlled wastes containing (PCP) under TSCA, nor
implicated wastes containing (PCP)  in a series of damage
incidents."  The commenter also argued that, since EPA has
failed to conduct a risk assessment, it has not proven that
these wastes are likely to pose a substantial risk to human
health and the environment.

         The Agency disagrees with these comments.  The criteria

    used by EPA to determine whether a waste should be subject

    to control under RCRA are derived from the definition of

    hazardous waste in Section 1004 of that statute, and are

    stated in 40 CFR 261.11.  These regulations state that the
                                103

-------
Administrator shall list a solid waste as acutely hazardous

if it is capable of causing or significantly contributing

to an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating

reversible, illness.  The commenter correctly calls

attention to the fact the EPA did not cite mismanagement

incidents concerning PCP-containing wastes.  Although it

is not necessary to do so in order to list these wastes

as acute hazardous wastes, we have incorporated a description

of eighteen such mismanagement incidents in the revised

Background Document.

          Furthermore, the Agency's determination that a

waste is an acute hazardous waste may be qualitative,

and need not be based on a quantitative risk assessment.

It is difficult to develop an exposure scenario which

can satisfactorily encompass the many possible exposure

conditions presented by the myriad individual waste

management situations which one can envision.  There are

no potency criteria for many of the toxicants of concern,

and it is difficult to estimate the exposure factors

resulting from waste mismanagement in a generic (i.e.,

not site-specific) fashion.  A scientifically meaningful

quantitative risk assessment is therefore difficult to

develop.  The Agency's Exposure Assessment Group (BAG),

however, has been working on this problem.

One comment was received stating that the regulation should
clearly state whether the surrogate used for the trial burn
showing acceptable destruction and removal efficiency (DRE)
is to be found in the waste, can be spiked into the waste,
or if a trial burn can be conducted solely on the surrogate.
The commenter also asked EPA to include a requirement for
continued hydrocarbon monitoring.


                         104

-------
         The dioxin regulation follows the format of the present

    incinerator standards.  §264.342 clearly states how POHCs

    (surrogates) are selected.  In general, a trial burn surrogate

    is a substance more difficult to decompose than the substance

    whose ORE is to be assured.  In the case of CDDs and CDFs, a

    substance such as carbon tetrachloride would be acceptable.

    Detailed guidance is provided in the incinerator guidance

    manual (U.S. EPA, 1983d), which explains how to use the

    POHC/surrogate system.

         At the present time, the Agency does not share the

    commenter's confidence in continous hydrocarbon monitoring.

    The Agency has no data showing a corelation between ORE

    and total unburned hydrocarbons, except where the DRE drops,

    and unburnt carbon (UNC) increases.  Carbon monoxide is still

    the best indicator of process upset and the Agency will continue

    to require a CO monitor.  We will, however, continue to support

    research which tries to correlate DRE with other measurable

    conditions.

10.  Several comments were received concerning the listing of wastes
that are generated in the course of a manufacturing process
performed on equipment that was previously used in a process
that generated CDDs or CDFs.  The commenters argue that,
despite evidence that such contamination can occur, EPA's concern
is not warranted,  because cross-contamination can be avoided.
The commenters thus conclude that extending regulation to such
wastes is not warranted.    _.

         The Agency disagrees with these comments.  The history

    of contamination of the wastes from manufacturing operations

    at the Vertac  Chemical Company (outlined in this Background

    Document)  suffices as a basis for EPA1s determination.
                              105

-------
    The commenters submitted no proof of their statement that

    process equipment contaminated by CDDs or CDFs can be readily

    rendered free of contamination.  The Agency requested substan-

    tiating data, but received no reply.  Furthermore, the many

    unsuccessful attempts that have been made to decontaminate

    manufacturing equipment that was contaminated as a result of

    industrial accidents show that decontamination of reaction

    equipment is, in fact, very difficult.  As a consequence, in

    several instances, contaminated equipment was buried.

    (Bleiberg, 1964; Goldmann, 1973; Jirasek et al., 1973; Hay, 1977)

         The Agency thus concludes that the best way to control

    the possible route of environmental pollution resulting

    from contaminated equipment wastes is to presume them to be

    acute hazardous wastes, leaving the possibility  of a showing

    of non-hazardousness to the delisting process.  In a

    delisting petition one needs to demonstrate either with

    historical records of equipment use, or otherwise, to show

    that the CDDs and CDFs of concern do not occur at levels

    of regulatory concern.  The Agency has no data showing how

    cross-contamination can be avoided.  In fact, the discussion

    in this document (Supra) shows that such contamination does

    occur.

11.  One person commented that the proposed regulation does not
adequately address the management of dioxin-containing waste.  The
commenter considered the proposed regulation to be a weakening
of existing regulation under TSCA.  In particular, the
commenter argued, the proposed rules do not address  the
management of CDD/CDF-containing cleanup materials,  do not
establish sufficiently stringent regulatory limits,  and do not
address dioxin detoxification processes.


                              106

-------
         The Agency does not agree with the commenter that this

    regulation has more limited regulatory effect than the TSCA

    regulation which it replaces.  The less extensive and less

    stringent TSCA regulation was, in all respects, subsumed

    into this regulation.  Moreover, the commenter appears to

    have misinterpreted the regulation.  Thus, the small quantity

    generator exclusion limitation for these wastes (i.e. , 1

    kg per month) applies to the waste, not to its CDD or CDF

    content.  The Agency agrees that, except for residues of

    incineration or thermal treatment, this regulation does not

    specifically list wastes from detoxification processes.

    The regulations (40 CFR 261.3(c)(2))  already state that a

    waste resulting from the treatment of an EPA hazardous

    waste is a hazardous waste, unless it is delisted.

    Moreover, as a consequence of this listing, facilities

    wishing to treat these wastes, will now become subject to

    regulation.

12.  One commenter stated that, for optimal efficiency in
regulating hazardous waste, EPA should integrate its regulatory
efforts under RCRA and TSCA.  The commenter suggested that
questions concerning possible waste management problems should
be an integral part of the TSCA §3 (premanufacture notification)
review process, and that data collection  to support these
regulatory evaluations should be required of an applicant
pursuant to authority under RCRA and TSCA.


         We agree that consideration of possible hazardousness

    of the wastes generated by the manufacture, or the  significant

    new use of a newly manufactured chemical is extremely

    important.  Such consideration considerably enhances  EPA1s

    hazardous waste regulatory activities.   It is for  this  reason

    that there is considerable interaction  among  the  Agency's


                              107

-------
    office regulating hazardous waste management, and that conducting  A

    premanufacture review.  Aspects of waste management are indeed

    considered in the course of the PMN review process, and applicants

    are asked to provide relevant data where these are 'needed.

    There is, however, no mechanism under RCRA enabling the Agency

    to obtain data for chemicals or processes which have not been

    previously manufactured.


13.  One person commented on the need to clarify the effect of
requiring full permit status for mobile treatment units in an
emergency response situation.

         The final regulation requires incinerators or other

    thermal treatment units burning these wastes to demonstrate

    that they can achieve six 9s destruction and removal efficiency

    (ORE) on POHCs in the waste.  Under §265.352 interim status        ^

    incinerators or other thermal treatment units may burn these

    wastes if they receive certification from the Assistant Administrator

    for Solid Waste and Emergency Response that they can meet the

    technical standards of Subpart 0 of Part 264 when they burn

    these wastes.

         This approval process must provide an opportunity for

    public comment.  (See the preamble for this regulation.)   In

    appropriate circumstances, emergency permits for burning these

    wastes may be issued (see §270.61).

14.  One commenter stated that EPA has failed to cite evidence that
chlorinated dioxins are present in the environment due to
their production in combustion (including woodburning) processes
that bear no relationship to deliberate manufacturing operations.
The commenter states that, before adopting this regulation, EPA
should consider whether a background level exists.                     ^
                                108

-------
     in discussing the generation of CDDs and CDFs (in the



Background Document for this regulation), the Agency alluded to



this theory, known as the "Trace Chemistry of Fire" hypothesis.



In view of the known reaction chemistry underlying the formation



and decomposition of these chemicals, and the widespread



occurrence of chlorinated compounds in the environment, the



known occurrence of CDDs and CDFs in the combustion residues from



many sources is not surprising.  Recent data (Czuczwa and Kites,



1984) on the occurrence of CDDs and CDFs in sediment cores from



several of the great lakes, as well as from three Swiss lakes,



lead to the conclusion that increased CDD/CDF deposition in



these sediments may be mostly due to atmospheric inputs, began



in 1940 and increased only after development of the chlorinated



organic chemical industry.  While these data are preliminary,



they reinforce the Agency's conclusion that there is a need to



ensure the proper management of these wastes.  As part of the



Dioxin Strategy (USEPA, 1983b), the potential hazards of combustion



sources such as incineration of hazardous and municipal waste,



incineration at wire reclamation facilities, internal combustion



engines, home heating units (e.g. woodburning stoves),  boilers



and inadvertent combustion sources (e.g.  transformer  fires)  will



be evaluated (Tier 7 sources).   Results from these investigations



will indicate to what extent these activities contribute to



environmental pollution with CDDs and CDFs,  and may



indicate that disposal of wastes from some of these sources



should be regulated.
                            109

-------
15.  One commenter stated his concern that, as acute hazardous
wastes, these wastes were improperly proposed to be listed under
40 CFR 261.31 rather than under 40 CFR 261.32.  The commenter is
concerned that this will result in "indiscriminate inclusion
and regulation of ill-defined wastes from diffuse sources as
acutely hazardous waste."

         The Agency judges that these wastes are properly

    listed as hazardous wastes from non-specific sources,

    for they result from several processes.  The criteria

    for listing wastes under both sections are identical

    (§261.11).  There is therefore no basis for the commenter's

    fears.

16.  One commenter did not agree with EPA1s determination not to
list CDD- and CDF-containing wastes such as certain fly ash
materials, or wastes resulting from wood preservation, until
it has analytical monitoring data showing the potential hazards of
such wastes.  The commenter argued that the Agency should list
these wastes now, on the basis of present knowledge of reaction
chemistry and process technology.  The commenter stated that
EPA is imposing a burden to regulation that is unjustified in
fact or law, because RCRA "does not require a smoking gun": the
Agency must prove that a solid waste must be regulated if it
may "pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human
health or the environment...".

         In the preamble to the proposed regulation, the Agency

    outlined its concern that wastes other than those covered in

    this listing may contain CDDs and CDFs.  The suspected processes

    are being studied in order to verify whether these concerns

    can be substantiated.  Until such verification is achieved,

    however, and a demonstration of their potential hazard

    is made, the Agency cannot list these wastes.  In order

    to substantiate a finding that a waste " "may pose a

    substantial present or potential hazard.." the Agency

    may not act on mere suspicion.  Under OSWs industry
                             110

-------
    studies program, the Agency is gathering data on

    the processes and technologies of concern, and additional

    data are derived from ongoing activities in other Agency

    offices including data being gathered under Tier 4 of

    the Dioxin Strategy.  If those data lend support to a positive

    listing decision, the Agency will bring the appropriate wastes

    under RCRA regulation.


17.  One commenter suggested that the Agency develop a regulation
indicating how materials subject to the regulation could be
made suitable for delisting.  The commenter suggested that
such a regulation should specify a specific delisting method,
should emphasize that alternative technologies can be used,
and that a method of delisting the treated waste exists.

         The Agency judges that is not necessary to develop

    a special regulation on delisting.  As the commenter points

    out, the RCRA regulations already provide a mechanism for

    delisting wastes at specific facilities.  40 CFR 260.22

    lists the criteria which must be demonstrated in order delist

    an acute hazardous waste or at least to demonstrate that the

    waste is only toxic.

         Treatment, storage, and disposal of a waste is subject

    to the permitting requirements of the RCRA regulations.  In

    general, these permits neither proscribe nor prescribe specific

    treatment modalities.   It would be stifling of technological

    innovation to specify a requirement for the use of specific

    technologies for the treatment of wastes.   Some of the

    factors raised by the commenter may, however, be discussed

    in the management standards for these wastes, whose development

    is presently in progress.


                                Ill

-------
18.  Comments received on the analytical method.

    a.   One person commented that,  in the directions for the
    extraction procedure (Section 9 of the method),  no information
    was provided on the identitiy or quantity of  solvent needed.

             The Agency agrees with this comment.   Step 9.7.3

       will be added as clarification, and will direct the transfer

       of sample extract with a small volume of methylene chloride.


    b.   Several comments were received on the use  of HPLC in the
    sample clean-up procedures.  One commenter felt  the procedure
    description to be inadequate.   Another respondent commented
    that additional chromatography, using disposable pipets,
    would be preferable to the use  of HPLC,  because  it would
    prevent the possibility of cross-contamination.   A third
    person doubted that the clean-up procedures are  sufficient
    to  prevent interference.

              The Agency judges that the method description provides

         adequate discussion of the HPLC clean-up  procedures,  since

         these procedures are discussed in greater detail in-the

         Solid Waste Test Manual (USEPA, I982e).   With respect to

         the comment on cross-contamination, good  analytical

         technique, which includes  adequate rinsing  between sample

         injections, should suffice.  Moreover, the  Agency has no

         data supporting the effectiveness,  for these wastes,  of

         additional column chromatography.  The commenter did  not

         provide data in support of this suggestion.  Therefore the

         Agency judges that the elimination of the HPLC clean-up

         procedure is not warranted.  As to the efficacy of the

         clean-up procedure, the Agency agrees that  no practical

         clean-up procedure will suffice to eliminate all interfering

         substances.  The developers of the method have shown  that
                               112

-------
     the suggested clean-up procedure is, for the wastes to be

     analyzed, efficacious under most conditions.

c.  One person commented that EPA should specify a limit
of quantitation, and also called attention to the fact that the
analytical method for the detection of PCBs is 10 ng per
resolvable GC peak as a reasonable estimate of the smallest
amount a GC/MS instrument can measure.  The commenter questioned
whether the specified 0.015 ng/peak detection limit can be
achieved, especially in the expected presence of co-eluting
substances.  Another person commented that the footnote
to Table I in the method description is inaccurate.

          The Agency agrees that a limit of quantitation can

     be calculated if the limit of detection is known, but

     disagrees that such a calculation is useful or necessary

     if results specify the limit of detection that was achieved,

     The Agency also agrees that the analytical method for PCBs

     required a higher detection limit than the one specified

     here for the analysis of CDDs and CDFs.  The two methods

     were developed for different regulatory purposes, and a

     comparison of their detection limits is therefore not

     appropriate.  Our data show that the lower detection limit

     is achievable but continued evaluation of the method may

     show that it" is not realistic for some matrices.  If so,

     the Agency will modify the procedure appropriately.   The

     Agency also agrees that the footnote to Table I  of the

     method needs revision;  it has been modified accordingly.


 d.   One commenter stated that the method requires the use
 of  very costly GC/MS equipment, and notes that most  labo-
 ratories do not have such equipment.

          The Agency agrees that the needed equipment is  intri-

     cate and costly, but without such equipment it is not
                             113

-------
     possible to properly analyze for CDDs and CDFs at levels

     of regulatory concern.  Many, if not most, large industrial

     anayltical laboratories have such equipment (GC/EC, low-

     resolution GC/MS, and optional HPLC) .

e.  Several comments were received relating to the use of
standards.  One commenter stated that GC/MS standardization
does not require the use of specific labelled isomers,
that the use of expensive Cl5 and CLg isomers should not
be required (even if the analysis for 015 and Clg compounds
is required),  and that the use of isomers should not be
restricted to chlorine isomers.  One respondent stated that
it is not valid analytical methodology to use the 2,3,7,8-TCDD
and its congeners as surrogate standards for the quantitative
measurement of all CDDs and CDFs.  Another person stated
that the procedure'does not clearly state how calculations
for quantitation of 015 and Cl5 compounds are to be performed.

          The use of surrogate compounds is often justified,

     e.g., when the surrogate has the same extraction charac-

     teristics and chromatographic elution rate as the compound

     that is being determined.  Unfortunately there is, at present,

     no satisfactory surrogate for the CDDs and CDFs.  Further-

     more, experience show that accurate analysis at the extremely

     low concentrations needed for the CDDs and CDFs can only

     be achieved by standardization of the use of an internal

     standard.

          The Agency agrees with the commenter regarding the

     need, in general, to use a specific isomer as the standard

     for a particular compound.  However, at present, very few

     isotope-labelled CDD or CDF isomers are commercially

     available.  Moreover, this method is not intended for

     isomer-specific analysis, since it is intended to fulfill

     the regulatory need to establish the presence of the          ,
                             114

-------
     total CDDs and CDFs.  The use of specific  isomers  as a

     standard  for each possible  isomer or congener  is therefore

     not  absolutely necessary.   Nevertheless, the Agency may

     re-evaluate this method  in  the future, and, if warranted,

     require the use of  additional isomers when these become

     commercially available.  Although bromine compounds

     might be  adequate as surrogates for the chlorinated

     compounds, their use also would sacrifice accuracy,

     and  there use would probably not result in the

     reduction in cost or convenience.


f.  One person commented that the proposed rule applies
to chlorophenols and to phenoxy  acids, but noted that the
proposed method does not include a procedure for their
analysis.  This commenter also states that analytical
procedures should not be mandated, but should allow for a
different procedure.

          The proposed method was intended only for the

     determination of CDDs and CDFs.  EPA's document describing

     test methods for evaluating solid wastes (U.S. EPA I982e)

     contains a method for chlorophenols and chlorophenoxy

     compounds.  The RCRA regulations (40 CFR 260.21) provide

     for the use of a method other than the one required.


g.  One person commented on the proposed laboratory disposal
requirements, stating that the amounts of the compounds in
working standards and sample extracts are no more hazardous
than many other compounds used in the laboratory,  and should
be allowed to be disposed with other laboratory wastes.
Alternatively,  the commenter suggested that CDD/CDF laboratory
wastes should be allowed to be disposed with plant  wastes.

          The method procedures specify that,  as a  general

     analogy, laboratory wastes containing CDDs and CDFs may
     be disposed in a manner similar to that used for radioactive


                          115

-------
     or infectious waste.  Thus, they should not simply be

     poured into the laboratory drain, but should be separately

     collected and disposed as hazardous waste.


g.  Additional comments received related to specific statements
in the stated procedure.  The Agency has responded by
revision of the method where this was appropriate.
                          116

-------
W
,-J
co
 CO
 fa
 ta
 a
 CO
 a
 a
 CJ

 W

 S
 O
 C/D

 fa
 O

 c/3
 W
w
o-i
O
o
w
PS
o
o
i— i
en
PU


CO
fa
Q
CJ
X
ac




CO
fa
Q
CJ
cu
OH



fa
Q
CJ
H





CO
Q
Q
CJ
X
M



CO
Q
Q
CJ
CU
O-i





Q
Q
CJ
H



















0
	 NO

VJ
-rT*
2C
si

o
0
m
r-l
CJ
00
rfi
CM
r—
CJ
0
m
r-l
CJ
st
3C
CN
»—
O


CN
O
v£>
r-4
CJ
CN
K
CN
Cj"
CN
O
m
r-l
CJ
•OO
rfi
CN
^~
CJ

CN
O

m
OO






CN
CM
OO















4J
-1
00
H
CU
S
-1
cO
H
0
O
0)
-1
o
4
— 4


ON
•O-
CM
1
I--
•o-
CM

m
00
CM

,
O S-i
cxm c
CO CM CU
> K














30








O
ro













-











•o
E
00
P

CJ
>
in
CN

•»
•
B
rH
4-1
CO
CU

>•,
4-)
H
CO
C
cu
0
S-i
o
ex
cO
>





















o
o
m

x\





















Q|
*^
CN
/^
o
O
/\








o

-
Q.
3
CU
—1
...
o
r-l
4J
r-l
CO
O
P.
5
o
cu
Zi










































^^
Q O O OOO O
Q r- r- r-o-o
CJ 00 r- 00
H ' t—
N-' r-l
i— 1 O
cu o c
C C cO cu
ooo =0 4-J C
r-( 4J XJ O CU
CJ CU 4-) O rH
W O CU 1 >,
CJ CO E C X


CM O O O O
o r^ CM o O
o m r~- >3~ NO
O rH rH
•
o






cu
c
cu
B N
CU CU C
ex a cu
CU XI
N O
>-, C to
4-1 CU O
r-l CU X5 r-l 0)
-1 C O rC C
H to cu S-i o cu
£J CU tNl O -r-l 3
P 4-) C rH T3 i-H
H CO CU X! 1 O
O 5 XI 0 O 4J
./}

















































14-1 1
ooml
NO O
O rH
rH X
y! en
rs \AJ
NO NO
" • •
^




^^
o
o
r^
N_^
4J
2
u
H
o
H
4-1
4-1
CU
0
o
5
H
)
fX
-1
o
A








*O
t-l"
•
NO







T3
^j-
•
in

el
ON
OO
o

I
CN
CN
*
o


B_l
O
•
o

1
ON
OO
•
ON

"O El
OO CN
"4-4 . -J-
NO co r^ *
o m --ON
00 r-l T-Xl I
Ot^A _ ^sj .^l ^Ji
T—  00
5-1 CU O O
CO X! O r-l
X,








-i
'









































CO rQ O 1 •!-! T-)I—| |
o o o o o o o
O O O O O OO
NO O O CN O ONO
r- OO O CN ^ <±NO
oo oo i— CN m
00





„
to
O rC
4-> CO S-J
O -H C1J
CO <4-4 >
4-1 •<-!
S-i
c o
O-r-i r"
r^ fb^
r-l 4J -H
4-) CO X!
CO 4-1 G04J
5-i co p 3
4J T3 •• O O
C  CU X! 4J
CJ CO S-i 4J
C E 3 I T3
O._J r« f> fl i
r- 1 w J j> U^
O 4-) cO O OC
O CO CU r-H CO
H cu B m o
Q
                                  -in-

-------
/•—v
M
CU
rH
X)
cO
H
O
u
co
Oi
O
C
0)
)H

en
r»-

N— /
[^
•
o
1
PH
OC
O
r-l
m
00
•
o
ii
PM
CJ
PQ
OC
0
rH
S
O
W
00
o
r-l
II
PM
00
O
rH
CO
CO
T3
CU
4->
CO
rH
3
O
rH
cfl
CJ


ll
1
)
)
•
oo
•
o
+
PM
1
OC
O
rH
r->
•
o
II
1
PL,
CJ
PQ
OC
0
rH
OC
C
•iH
CO
d
r-
r-
en
rH
•>
0
cu
rJ


.
S~*\
en
r^
en
rH
N_/
O
CU
rJ
TJ
CO
x:
o
CO
c
cO
x
<4H
O
13
O
x:
14-1
,
Xl
"O
D
4J
cO
rH
3
O
r-l
Cfl
CJ


•
s—
en
r«.
en
rH
O
cu
r-J
T3
c
cfl
XI
O
CO
C
CO
X
*^s
m
•
o
i
ll
s
o
4-1
cO
O
rH
MH
O
rH
CO
>
0
s
CU
}->
1-^
.
o
+
II
rH
CJ
rH
MH
o
c
O
•H
4-1
•r-l
"O
,-o
CO
T3
CU
4-)
CO
E
•iH
4-)
CO
w


1 •
\s~*
. o
. 00
i en
rH
N^
k
cO
0(
cO
C
CU
US
>-
Xl
T3
CU
4-1
O
' 3
CT
CO
4J
CO
T3
T3
CU
x:
CO
•H
rH
•§
a
S
•
•r-j
•
o
00
en
r-l
<
OH
W
CO
3
C
•iH
T3
CU
4J
O
S
cr
CO
0)
3
rH
CO
>


t
)
i
i
.
•r™
OO
en
rH
£
S
o
VJ •
4H x->
0
CO 00
4J en
CO rH
Q v-'
•
rH
.
s—*
rH
00
en
rH
. s-X
rH
OO OC
en C
rH CO
CO
-H
cO
T3 T3
cO C
C cO
cfl
lO XI
3
CJ cO
erf x:
S CO


sea and Jones (1975). m. Sarna et al . , 1984. Log P values for
DCDF and OCDF are about the same as those
for the corresponding dioxins.
c
cu
CD
1— 1


cO X) OTJ  0) MH

-------
                                         TfiBLE 2

                FORMATION OF CDBFs FPOM THE PYSOLYSIS OF SPECIFIC PCBs.  a
PCS Pyrolyzed
            CDBFs Formed
Tetra;

2,3,4,5-
2,3,5,6-
2,6,2',6'-

Penta;

2,3,4,5,6-


2,4,5,2',5'-


2,4,5,3',4'-

2,4,6,2',4'-

2,3,6,2',5'-



Hexa;

2,4,5,2',4',5'-

2,4,6,2',4',6'-

2,4,5,2',4',6'-

2,3,4,2',3',4'-

2,3,5,2',3'/5l-

2,3,6,2',3',6'-


3,4,5,3',4',5'~
*2,3,4; 1,2,3,4-
 1,2,4-
 1,9; 1,4,9-
*1,2,3,4; small amounts of 1,2,4-;
 2,3,4-;

*2,3,3; small amounts of 2,3,6,3-
 plus three other tetra; 1,3,4,6,9;

*2,3,7,8-; 2,3,6,7-; 1,3,4,7,8-

*1,3,7-; 1,3,6,7-; 1,3,7,9-; 1,3,4,7-;

 1,4,8-; 1,2,8-; 1,4,6,8-; 1,2,6,8-;
*l,2,4/8-; 1,2,5,9-; 1,4,6,9-;
*2,3,7,8-; 2,3,4,7,8-; 1,3,4,7,8-

 1,3,7,9-; 1,3,4,7,9-;

*1,3,7,8-; 1,3,4,7;8-; 1,3,4,7,9-;

*3,4,6,7,-; 1,2,3,6,7-;

 2,4,6,8-; 1,2,4,6,8-;

*1,2,4,8-; *1,2,3,9-;  1,2,4,6,9-(?);
 1,2,4,8,9-

 2,3,4,6,7,8-;  small penta-CDBFs
                                       [continued)
                                        -64-

-------
Table 2 (cont'd)
Hepta:
2,3,4,5,2',3',4'-                        2,3,4,6,7-; 1,2,3,4,6,7-;
                                         1,2,3,6,7,3-; 1,2,3,4,7,3,9-;
                                         1,2,3,4,6,7,8-; 1,2,3,4,6,7,9-;

2,3,4,5,2',4',5'-                       *2,3,4,7,8-; 1,2,3,4,7,8-;
                                       •*1,3,4,6,7,8-; 2,3,4,6,7,8-;
                                         1,2,3,4,6,7,9-;
Octa;

2,3,4,5                                  *2,3,4,6,7,8-; *1,2,3,4,6,7,8-;
2',31,4',5'-                              octa-.
a.  Source: Buser and Rapper, 1979.

* = Most abundant PCDBF
                                            -65-

-------


'J*
-J
CJ
z

^
..
1 -i*
r£
X




in
.b (fl
a Cb
'CJ Q
la.


in
i,
Q
=
oo
on
—4
„
0

.,-1
in
O
a.
in
u








i
t






CJ I
X I
2:
in
x
^
o
0)
a.
in
•^
Q
~J

OO
i-' S
-CJ
- "l

in
a
£2
CJ
04















































1

in
a
0
X
T
in
^
i
CJ
0)
a.



in
^
a
CJ
E~*

CO
- Q
f** O
- CJ
co H
- 1







£i2
CJ
«
!D
o
O3





















r-^
,-n

^
c
3;
If!
eg
tj
Q
•J5 C
-J C
0 0)
z -c
co a
x o
(X Li
O 0
OS rH
••"N _£
iJ 0
X 0
CJ C
0
M e























a
z









^
0
c
3!
c*
Q
0

0

-C
0
•H
T3
1

























































31

*4
**
X
•





•a
o
00
31


•,
^
a,
Cd








































1 3
3 3
3 3
n 3
-H










3
3
Jl
V


































b


fl
CM
oo
31
-H

^
^
a.
u


£3
§
3
\£




3
^
^
vO


3
3
m
P^
-1


3
S


























o
3
^
1
3
^H









3
m
N/




3
V



3
,-n
V





_.
O
,*N
V








00

r— t
*.
O
xJ
•FH
in
O
a
in
CO









3
oo
31
*H
*
in
en
3)
z

c
fl
>







































3
ii
Z 3
—1


1 3
Q 3
z in
—i



3
1 3
3 3
3 31
ro »



3
3

3 ••O



in
CM
^g
on
—4
^
<
a.
CO

i
" 3 3
3 3
3 3
3 -n
—i -a
V V
oo
31

^
0
4J
•1-4
in
0
a
in
CO









1
3 3
3 3











3 3
3 3
CO l~


1 3
3 O
3 3
CN 3
V —4

1




























1
O
CM 3
3 3
• *Q
V








—1
0
C
0!
s:
a
o
u
o
—4
C.
0
• H
L)
jj
3 3
3 3
V V

























1 3
C 3
. O 3
3 3

0 U

O Q

r*
O
10
4-1
C

a
-Hf-

-------
p
OO
oo
h^ •
CO


ro
i-i
•




























































ro
x— \ -
rt ui
X-N $ 1
TJ 0. H
ro 5
CO K-
B £
rt i— '

















X\
1— '
O
o








































N
N
|— i

M
OC
















h-1
O
§








































W
i*
l—i
VD
OC
CL







VO OO 1— '
O N3 O

§^^
|
CL-.















































P
1—"

00

















\y
I-1
g
o
o






\s
t—
O
o
8





























B?
B
CO

ft
p
1— 1

00
0




I—1
o
o
i
^__i


o













































g
1— '

00
ro



cr ro -»
BO"
-P" OO
N 1 -
3 2.Y1
ro rt rt
O H-
3 O
O i-i
X O
*^ "
^-^












_i
Ul



OO
o
o
8
















V*
Ul
o

















i i i ro
co CL 3 H--
Cu i— [-•• co .p-
I—1 X Q I
rt 3 ro O CJ
(T) D-. O 1
rt rt
i-1 rt
& ^ ro
a i-1 w
H. rt
3 ro ro
ro co i-i
rt
ffi
i-i











tO N3
ro — ' ro
O O ON
1 - 1
ro oo — *
00 *^J Ul
ro
£i3





































uQ
h"
CO
I—1

00
ro
ro
V
o









N3
0
1
00

U)
o













































I

1— '
OC


















/\
o






/\
«^
o































c?
o
3*
QJ
5
ro
i—1
VO
00
^^















/\
o
o






MUl
O O
o o
^D 1
0





























CO
I-1'
rt
0
h-1

00
o
1I?
Is
%


















Ul
M M
O OO
O 1



L/i "^^J
O 1




|



Ul /\
ro o
0 1






SM
10
0 0



ro oo
O 1
o



i


/\

O Ui
O OO
1
s
I-1
VO
00
ro
fu



O
D
0
•o
henat
ro








































*

s
o
o
o
,_,
0

CI3
o

o
o
o
o




g
K*"1
VO
oo
o
cr



s* 1
i— s-
P. O x-s CO
O Q rt O
K- 3 ro i-r
CL 3 O M
ro ro 5* o
i-s 5 i-t
P3 O H- O
OH- 0-0
I Co fu 3^
j>j i— » i— • ro

O






/^
Ul
o















t— '

f^
0






















u>
s
o





•*

t— '
VO
OO
I-1

















S3 ro
o o
i

s\
[sj
U) O
O 1


H*^ /^
f— > OJ
o o
O 1


ro
to /\
VO O^
0 0
O 1





vo ro
o o
O 1

-p- /\

O 0
O 1
o

O 00
o o

0
^/\
Ul 00
0 0
8
*»

— k
oo
ro
co
















/\




/N
— fc
O
O



00
o
o
o











/\
s
o
o

^
o
o
o
o

8
0
o




£
a
CO
rt
ro
3

^s.
"^





















































^.
vr
s
o
w
CO
B
CO
t-1
s
^o
00
o
I—1

x-v
o
o
3
rt
_
CL

**—/












&
O^
O
1
00
00
Ul
o
o


























s
t-1
ro
CO
w
M
00
4^


g
O
PI









N:

H^ O»
x-s ^
O *J

00
1

^
c.
1


h£
ro
c.
i

^j
P^
r



3
c
r
03

1 N
So
° V
a
H
r
c
IT!
a

n
a
r

S
a
P
c
a

<-(
C
a
s
5

t
C
E


11
ro
oo
O
fl
^
C
ro
a.




^

CT*
S-X
























^
|
^















i

j
3
j
1
)
3
J
3
j ^1
5 ™
j


-

-------
a
c
o
0)
K
J
as
<  (0
H  a.



35
DJ
u
2
OS
u
i^
r/i
OS


en
Q
Q
O
X

en
~ o
~ * Q
* C_)
H
r
CO
p-
v Q
ro Q
(N E-





Cd
dj
2:
^
O
33
O
CO
en

«
O
•^
en
0
a
in
Cd



o
o
in
\/
o
1 O
O 0
o o
in r-4






o
en
en

«
•.-i
— '
0)
N
N
3
m








o
o
t— t
V






u
c
CD
in
0)

a
X •»*
U
>
»— (
•P-I
en
o
CO
^

«.
0

en
0

en
CiJ

o
i a
o o o
o o o
in in *-H
V


0 0
0 0
in in
V V










0)
c c
0 0
12 en
u a>
U CO



ro
eN
CO
en

w
 i
0)
N
N
3
CO








0
o
t— t
V






4J
c
0)
tn
0)

0.




o
CO
2

•.
• r-t
0)
N
N
3
ffl








O
O
»-^
V






c
0)
en
a)
u
Q.
^^








-------



































.






.a
a
a

.r-s
'O
41
D

•H
jj
C
O
o


ro

41
rH 41
-Q Ol
rO <0
E-| 0,
C/)
£1]
cj
z
u
a:
u
ct.
u

CO
Cl4
a
o
10
Clri
Q
O
X
X


in
b.
a
o
4)
a

in
In
a
CJ
H

1 I
r-OO
- Cb
, t- Q
-CJ
<*> H
N














CJ
0
K
^
, O



m
CN
00
CJ\
rH

fc
^J
a,
0
1 0
0 0
o vo
00 rH

1 O
0 0
0 0
m (N




1 O
o o
0 TT
CN (J\

,
o o
o o
rH 00
m




1 O
0 0
o <*
CN CN


_»
Ll
O

Q JC
u cj
E-> 0
< L,
z <
M -~-
Oi U3
O J C
J >H (0
X Z O
CJ til -H
XX Li
M |J CU 1)
M O M E
w cu en *^

1 O
o o
o o
oo m
m rH

1 0
o o
O VO
in in



I o
o o
0 O
o o
rH rH

1
O O
O 0
(^ ro
00




1 0
O O
O U3
r^ m


c
4)
jr.
Q
O

CJ

Li
O
rH
C £.
(0 O
4) O
a c
O 41
Li £
3 04
Cij *-*

1
0 0
o o
f— 4 ^<
-H (N

1 O
0 0
O rH
•fl1 PO



o
1 O
0 •»
0 O
in r-t

o
1 O
O CN
O CN
IN rH




1 0
0 0
O CN
rH CN


Li
O
rH

O
4)
C
10
^
^^

4)
in
4)
c
10
a
10
1-3

1
o
o
r~
(N

1
o
rH
00
o
o
r»
i m
o
0*0 1
CO O
rH 0
VO
rH

i -ol
0 0
CN O
in m
CN



*^ *U !
0 0
00 O
CN rr
rH







4!

s
i-H
• H
0

0

tn
3
>H
£








1
0 0
0 0
^r o

41
3 T
c r~
10 CA
— 1 rH
rH
'•H
1 O
o o
in o
P") 00
in


Q
Z






Q
Z
















Z
u
c*o
z
u
ffi
o

O
J
£C
CJ
^
><
CJ
X


J>
M


        Of
        tN
        O
        C
        0)

        a
        o
        £.
        O
        10
        Ll
        Jj
        0>
        CO    4)
         a 01 o
         o  c  -r-

         o  L.  ^
        rH  O  41
        jr      w
         o  to  41
         (0  JJ  C
        JJ  C  10
         c  41  a.
    r*   a;  CT (0
    m   Q" <  rj

  I      >4J  4)  *U
  (   C   O  •«  41
  )  -*H      (tj  JJ
         41  E  10
in
    •o  LI
  -  41  3  O ~H
 O  O JJ
 tn
         X      10
 4) *D *r4  *U  -U
 >  O  E  4)  C
 4)  Li     W  O
 cn o- <  D  cj
TO
        O "
               ffi

-------
                           TABLE 4
         COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATED
              WITH TETRAChLORO or BROMODIOXINSa'b
                                              NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL
                                              PRODUCTS CONTAINING
COMPOUND                                      TCDDs
Erbon (2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenaxy)-ethyl                20
       2, 2-dichloropropionate.'

Hexachlorophene (2,2'-methylene-Dis(3,4,6-            ^68
                 trichlorophenol)
                                   *
Ronnel (U-2,4,5-trichlorCphenyl-U,0-aimethyl-         325
        thiophosphate)

Silvex or'Fenoprop (2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)-       376
                    propionic acid, esters and
                    salts)

2,4,5-T (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy acetic acid)          443

2,3,4,6—Tetrachlorophenol        '                     •  1

2,4,5-Trichloropnenol                                 12o

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol               _                   22
(a)  based on Esuosito et al.,

;b)  Survey of data 6/15/78 - 1/6/80

-------






































o
Oi
^
^,

y:
\r\ ^
X
03 <
J 2
ac
< z
pH iWH

X

H_
(^
t t
X
a;

















































X
Cd
£J
z

ry
iJ

U
ai












X
jj
u
z

c-4
X

13
u
2:
o






in
Q
D
U
a

in
a
^
*j
7£
=



w
Q
Q

01
a




in
a
a

EH

i
so

r~" Q
- Q
-i 0
- H
IN
g
01
JJ 
^

C
0)
c
'r4
m
v
^
Li
10
SX








*
0'

3
jj
O
*,•
^j
C
ID
E


C
^
w

"— 1
*
































*" ^
\^










HI









a.
H
1
•^
•.
 3
•-1 "O
jJ 0
in LI
a
C Q<
01 u
3 EH
^_(
^
EH





















3
^
0
0
•n
I
o

o
o
-H









„



















_t
CO

*— 1

•.
J^
^J
TJ
-H
CJ













*— 1
r
fc
,
Li
u^
£

0)


.Q
Ll
0)
X




































o
r>4
O
•

m

3
vu

Li
0)
r;
f)
3
Li
O
in

a
u
^


o
X
^
"H























1

































^
r^
o
•









\0






o>
CT
•o
3
in

a*
u
H


O
X
^
—4
k
in
in
01
z

c
HJ
>






















1


































-sj
rsj










r*



(D
'y
Li
fQ
£
U
tn
•D
t
a
u
H
	
(C

x

c
dJ
c
•^H
fD
^
^
U
(T3
^












..
Oi 1
<
^
.
U
vu
£

a>
s

^Q
Lt
0)
r




























f- 4
•
-H





*r
30

rn
•

^















	




X
r-
^
rsj
,-^

Lt,

in
^*






jj
c

< =
Q
01 •-<
—1 3
"Hi U
.-4 01
C* T3
c c 01
in o JJ
j^ HI
o -c c
TJ 0* "H
^ y H

13 Li O
4j a o
^
D





























^
fN











O


01
o>
n
3
^H
in

H
1
•n
x
*r
^
rg



3^
r-
CPi
•-^

*
u
0

>.
fTJ
H

"











t-H
S
^
•
Li
U-l
E

0)
TJ

^2
Ll
OJ
r









—4
-H

t






















O
-H
0
•


^



















*—i
CO

^H

*.
^t*
Li
tJ
-H
•J

"










.,
a: in
< E

• jj
Li 0
U-4 .O
g
01
0) C
•c 01
—4 3
O_J
*— 1
—i O
o iJ
Ll
(U




























0
o
o
C3
•»









rs,



in
E
C
4J
4J
O
ffl
_,
^
• (-t
4J
iw



3>
^*
y,
^^

*
Li
0

;>,
T3
EH

1










in
E
0
jj
0


»H
0
c
£
0)
E
































^
o
10









m































"








OJ
31 Li
H3 o)
Li >
C fl
in
Q
= 0
O JJ
Li
uu «
~H
-I 01
—1 Li
•"Vj fQ
w ^































^*
3?

•









^






































Li
0)
OJ >
31 f
n3 -H
LJ
0 £
tn jj
jj
g 0
O -Q
Li
U-l «.
—4
-1 0)
-1 Li
Qj tj
in n






























o
0
•3
^<
^









m





































in
E
0
jj
jj
0
jQ

^H
>i>H
J_J
U)

OJ
c
0
r
0
^j





























o
•3)
o
<— t
i— j
-H









U5



































^^
_4
.^4
iJ
U)

(1)
c
0)
3
0
.u

0


01

.c
o






























0
0
y\
T
^D









r~

































-H
— 1
.,-<
jj
U3

0)
C
OJ
D
^H
0
jj
k.
01
3
•c

tn
01
Li
O
a





























o
o
3
C^
CO
:N









CO

















i
'


i






i




01
Jj I
nj
Ll
u
c
01 -~
0 Li
C 0
C ±J
U 0
fl
—1 Li
.^4
aJ 0
in jj

0) 01
c ai
01 Ll
3 TJ
o o
Jj ~-





1























o
o
0
0
.T}
fM





t
1


,















6

-------
 a
 a
 a
 a
 c
*|H
JJ
 C
 0
 o
 1C  1C
E- a






u:
EC
CJ
Z
EC-
er
CC'
El.
EC
K

-


.






cr.
EC
CJ
Z
<
£-
cr.
£
7;
CJ
ct
r^
O
tn
EL
c
CJ
ft

tt'
c
c
ft
1C
c
c
CJ
X
s
tr.
D
Ol
ft



tn
r=
c
Cs>
;H
r


X
•• c
r- c
- CJ
c- E-
- I
CN
E
Ol
JJ "• Ll
X U-l































c
c
c
rH
r^
(— 1


C
CN




in
E
C
jj
jj
0 ~
ff T;
-
r-1 JJ
rH C
•H O
JJ CJ
tr. ^-

c
X
cr
rH

*
4)
rH
10
•c
tn
41
3
Li
E-





• •
CC
<

* rH
• *-H
Ll -rt
U-l JJ
E in

0! 41
T" C
l— »—
.rl 4)
0 3
•r* rH
£ 0
Ll JJ
0)
I























—
c
c
c
IT











rH
N



















m
X
CT rH
rH X
er
* rH
L;
01 -
u-i tn
a-H
41 Li
C Ll
rH flj
* X





••
c
s

- in
• E
Li 0
u-i jj
E JJ
• c
4' £.
rr"
•rH rH
O rH
•ft »rH
£ JJ
LI tn
a-
X























c
c
c
c
If:
c*-.


c
—
—
f.
*t
fr*


(V
c\





















rH
X
cr
i— 1

^
tn
.rH
Ll
Li
10
S
»
E
Li
10
UJ

JJ
10

•c
0'
a
E
3
•c
CO **
01 C
jj s:
in
10 S
3 cr.
























icl
c
c
c
r",
^J-











f.
CN















































































C
c
c
cr
rH
f










rj-

IN



































in
01
3
•c
•rH
tn
4)
U

• •
C
s:


j=
tn
C
01
Z
































































rH
X
cr
rH

«,
tn
'fH
Li
Li
10
X



C
0
• rl
JJ
CJ
3
•c
0
Li
a

ft
CJ
•y-

E
O
Li
U-l

























C
C
c
CN












X
N















































































c
1C

















in
4)
jj
tn
10


0>
jj
rl
tn
0
a
E
0







rH
X
cr
rH

^
CJ
CJ
K
Z











































z
c
M
t- c
V. rH
•^ rH
CC 1
Z IT
C
CJ
C
z
<

2

M
^
a
EC
2 CT
^ CN
CJ
z

Eu
C

tr.
E- £
cj tn
— 10
c
c >
A rH
ft El.

• *
M <
M
































0

1*1
1
JJ
•rH
rH
t-1
O
10
UJ

D>
C
• rH
JJ
10
0)
•C





c
c
CN


















c
c
vc












vc






































Li
rH C
ro JJ
•n in
LV 3
JJ £.
V E
3 O
T O
C
•H rH
10
Cf^
\J
10 0
0 X
•rH rH
Ll -H
01 c
E
rf












cs











X
m










C
Z

r-
r^







































rH
10
a

c
•rH
C
3
E
C
1C
CJ

L<
0'

<











*j
rH









f
•
r>










v

C

X


















c
X
er
rH

^
•rl
j<;
tn
Li
10
a
E
10
rJ
I ,
0
JJ
«3
jj

a,
• rH
CJ
V
Ll
a

•
jj
tn
0
iu
JJ
o
a
fH
Q)























IT
r-

i^.









r^
•«3

c

a























£

CC
a-
rH

*
<
ft
EC










rH
10
c.
.rl
CJ

c
E

fH
C
3
£
C
10
CO
a
c
Li
r-
EC











—
CN
1

cr






^
CN
1
CN













C\
^

















C
X
er


«
.rH
££.
in
Li
10
a
E
(T,












to
Li
0
JJ
10
Li
4
C

U
c

























CC
•
cr
vc









V
•
(N
10
CN
^

















                                                                                                                                                          •c

                                                                                                                                                          10
                                                                                                                                                               I
                                                                                                                                                              ir
                                                                                                                                                              in
                                                                                                                                                          ra  E
                                                                                                                                                          c  o>
                                                                                                                                                          C  JJ
                                                                                                                                                          CJ  ~H
                                                                                                                                                          C
                                                                                                                                                              •c
                                                                                                                                                          C  1
                                                                                                                                                          C  JJ
                                                                                                                                                         —  If:
                                                                                                                                                          JJ  -r*
                                                                                                                                                          (C  rH
                                                                                                                                                          L.
                                                                                                                                                          JJ  K
                                                                                                                                                          C  (D
                                                                                                                                                          0)  3
                                                                                                                                                          CJ  rH
                                                                                                                                                          c  
                                                                                                                                                          o
                                                                                                                                                              01
     LI
     01  C
     >  «
     
£  ic -H
 ax jz
 Q. JJ
         to
C  4'  CD
C JJ  £
C  1C -H
  - O JJ
C -H
oc T c
 i   c c
c — < c
c
C 1C C
u* jj m
    1C  I
U) •£  C
"H     C
    •H  C
a- ic  f
Ol 'H
C JJ  >,

e  c  jj
                                                                                                                                                     IB  -C

-------














































-,.•1
O
Z
it]
2i
ta
a.
S3










CO
M
O
Z
4
^H
iO
E".
3
O
rr*
1— 1
O






.0
o
33
ON
rH

•i
<
CU
a






n
rH
CO
ON
rH

*
«r£
Cu
a






rH
33
3\
-1

•
y
^
3
"a

~f

~

~~
-
•
"o
•rt- -
EL, r
3 0
H -p —
cd
C L,
cd cu
0 C =
iH r-l
L, 0 S
CU C
£ r-l
«*



I*.
1 9 °




























*










x— *
.a
a
s_^
, — ,
•c
cu
c
rH
.P
C
o
0
^^

in
pr
O
rH 1)
.0 L;
cd cd
EH OH
*-> rn




L^
g .
j
< 33
EH Q
HO



O
0






CO
Q
a
O

CO
Q
0
0-


CO
a
Q _
p
EH


33
-Q

-O
mEn
- 1
CM

g
CD
-P ^
tH









Id
0

S
o
CO














*












on
3-


































tn
l
on













31





















o
CM
O
•
1
a
z





CM
O
I

Z




m
o
o

1
a



in
3"






rH
33
ON
rH

*
y
Li
.-d
— i
0







•
4J
CO
0
L,
4J
O
cu

o
•
CU L,
E P
o a
3: a





















3-
on










3-
•








sD
•
O


O
31



4-1
O
O
CO

CU
o
cd
r- 1
a
o
LI
•H
Be,




















rn
1
CM
•
O






on
1
a
z






rH
•
1

Z


t—
=T

^~-
_
) >
-~
O
O
^^

**•
CO
cd

...
rH
BC,



rH
CO
<3N
rH

•
O
C_3
rr:
•z.























*



































o
0
rH











co
3-



rH
33
ON
rH

*
y
LI
3)
rH
O

.. 2

c
4J -H E
cd o 3
L, 0 rH
CU O
CO 0
iH rH
O C_ O
C rH rH
•HO r_
CD r-l
C ft o
rH 03 CU
•H i a
x a a
a
>»O 1
Li EH
cd a
u .P a
o o o
V C




















. f.
0 0
0 0
o o

rH ,O






.^
0 0
o o
30 0
rH in




.M
0 0
0 0
CO CM
CM 33


ON
3-

EH





















. *
0 0
0 0
-nvn
rH UN






•~o
0 0
0 0

onrH


^-^
0
vO

O — -
r-i a
rH Z


0
in


o
33
CT\
rH
•>
O
4J
rH
CO
o
• • a
L, CO
CU M rH
4J CU
a
S rH
CU
t. 3
0) <~
o
O rH
3 cd
L, P
0 C
CO CU
E
C CU
rH rH
rH a
x a
3
>, JO
L,
cd i
4-9 4^
O rH
rr s






















o
o
."M










vD
3-











rH
in

3


rH
cd
.3
C
0)
E
cu
rH
a
a
3
CO

j
3
O

p
rH
2






















0
O
3"
^







O
0
in
CM











CM
JN






CU
3
"O
•H
CO
CU
Li

Li
CU
3
O


bC
C
•H
rH
O
o
o






















0
— 1







o
-o
1


rH











on
in







co
C
O
rH
CO
CO
rH
g
CU

cu
CO
3
o
_2
Lt
CU
*
o
0-,
































O
0
O
3O
on











3-
in











































































in
in


rH
33
ON
rH

^
J^
L.
cd
rH
0













M
c
.rH
a
cd

o
CO

cu
L.
^
3








o
o
*o
•
rH
rH





























O
r-H
S'
•


,O






M
C

a
cd
SH
O
CO

CU
o
cd

LI
3









O
on
>.
•






























x>
in
o
•


^
in

CO
o
4->
cd
rH
3
O
rH
P
Li
cd
Cu

•
a


cd
rH
CO
ON
rH

•
CO
~r;
33
a

£>
-H
33
C3N
rH

-
rj
4J
H
E
CO


CM
33
ON
rH

•
C
o
•o
cd
Cd

cd
CM
33
ON
rH

•
r*
4J
^H
E
W
-CM
cd 33
rH ON
33 rH
ON ~
rH 4J
Li
- O
s s

rH rH
g .rH
CO CO

o
CM
CO
ON
rH

M
r*
.p
rH
g
"O




. .
CO
>«
z

M
4)

•H
C>_i

rH
cd
O
rH
Li
4J
0 1 1 1 1 1
0
rH
Cd
O






1
0 0
0 0
O 0
j- on
CM t—
rH CM





























o
o
ON
CM


CO
in








O
o
o
in
3-




















O
0
33
rH





~2
0
CM
rH


ON
in

o
0
co
on
3"


o
o
0
in
3"
rH



































O
O








o
o
0
o
o
rH





























0
0
o
on


t-H
J3








O
o
o
ON
ON
— 1





























O
in
CO
r\j


CM
^o

O
1 0
0 0
ON3-
i — i in


0
o
o
1 O
0^0
.O rH



































on
.0


43
NJ
33
ON
rH

•
^
^
•H
E








CU
4->
cd
C
CU
hO
O
E
O


4J
O
o
CO




O
o
o
rH
•n



o
o
o
33
rH





rH O
33 33
TV ON
rH rH

« O
CO 4J
rH rH
Li CO
« o
.•d a
— a


o
r

cu

rH
CO

cu E
4-> Li
CO Cd
cd r-,
2
c
• Q
L,
t-i 'O
E 0)
a
• E
.3 3
Li "O
cu
3:
















































3"
.O






•• p
L, O
cu o
~ CO
40
o


•
0
















o
sD
^"


o
3"
rH


m
sO











. .
^
«H
O
C

•a
c cu
-H L,
•H CU
±4 P
T-H
>1 rH
L, '_.
.Ti 2
•P 3
0 1
Ll
























o
o
CM








0
3-













vD
vO








-3
9

S
4J
rH
rH
i_,
1
























in
o
o
•







33
CM
O
O
'











r—
.£>

Ll
cu
4J
-•d
^

cu
-p
CO
cd
^s
•
M
rH
M

-------
'Cd
la:

ji

-------


1 REFFRENC


CIRCUMSTANCES

0)
fc
U

0)
X
I
0]
£

i"
jj

t?
ss
X
z


y.

y

1
cc
r^ 6
CN

1*
'-<



5
£
m
cc
cr
pj j^
t cc
ID o-
U- p-l
a
pH S


Red ford
1982


c
u
•t-t
i
•(-i
o
•(-1
c
3
Z




















U"T

CC

OJ
m
J-
(N
ID

1
raw refuse (fi50°C)


:|
c
£

cJ
VC
Jl
i

1



JJ
„



r^

VC

i!
?
ID
pH
£


coal+ ROF ( 1200°C)


u|
•
I2
a. -
m ,H
» (0
u — •
<


























OJ
V



yL
|r
Cil l-

cr
cr
tn*


>c
J^ CC
01 cr
C rH
|


i
i-H
•t-l
U-J
(C
2 §
cu Jc

























in
rH

LT1


conduit influent nearby
factory drainage ditch
below landfill
Niagara University,
downstream


























•|H ^1
pH (0




















IT







r-,


w TJ ID
C • O 0> p-1
C 0! C « £ •-< D.
•- 4 — < -M C 3 VU
ID T3 U) PH E -p< S
ti 1C 10 ID £ O 0
•D U jC 3 t-l O $ PH
Ol CT QJ JJ Q.PH QJ S 2
tec dikj-p* oipHiitP
30 UT3CID CC
0 — -i "ID 3UJOftCL
•c jj jj j: jj jj c
IDC Q.C3 •-<••••
CT » N •C 0} 0) COp-'tntf)
cvu.rtij&o-pH ma)
•PHVJJPH rrnj.UijJjJlj Dirr
—ICID ci^e iccju-c'C
OC35CJJgiD53-
CptrCjJC c p-i o p^ p- 1
o 6 w -c U)."-|,'H cLtn tn K


















o-
c








ir.


















^-
c
2



2





VC


















_
u"
c

-_-

z





r-




















pH

.







oc




















VC
LT,
C








g,




















PH
LT
C








C



















^
^-t



z





pH




















-H

•







 to

£ 5
M JJ

21
ID JJ
C
JJ O
11
O lJ
x C
CL [t.
1C £

-------
                                9
•c
o>
3
C
•H
JJ
C
o
o
   
u
jj jj
C If.
01 C
E 3
JJ 0
i
10
.J
O<
01

01
•a
>rH
O
• rH
JO
u
0)


^J
01
JJ
UH
10

01
^H
10
01
>

•
10

c
in

rH
•rH
O

01
JJ
01
10
3

w
41

i
10

«.
10
c
01
^J
10

01
01
rd
0
X

































o
o
ro
ro
1
O
o
03
rH
ro



rH
ro


























(H
5|

»
O
c
•rH
01
c
10













(N
•
rH
1
ro
O



























(N
ro

























tj
M

»
0
01
10
0
.rH
£.
U













ro
•
1
ro
O
•






ro
^
•
1
in
0
o













ro
ro


C
1C
rH
a

4)
•a
•rH
01
JJ
3
0

rH
•1-4
o
in

*.
rH
^


•o
c
10
rH
TJ

E

k
3
O
C














C
CO
fM
I
P-






o
(N
rH
I
rH






O
O
rH
I
ro
f



*T
ro












>i
JJ
• rH
rH
• rH
O
10
U-l

c
o
•rH
JJ
10
E
10
rH
O
4)
r-l

41
M
• rH
2

O

rH

^
•rH
C
ID
•*H
Ol
Ol
01
Oi







CO
r*.
a\
rH

K
rH
•rH
0
01

E
0

•• r-
^
rH &
10 O
JJ EH
rH
^
^ ^
O
01 Oi
41 C
> 0
41 co
Cfl




































in
in
1
o
(N
O
*



l£
ro

O
cc
o>
rH

•»
>*H
F-H
rH
OJ
c
«J
d-






V-I
(U
Jj
c
0)
u

M-i
0

E
V

\c

c
•rH
r.
jj
• rH
3

"^

01
C
0
N
























•Ol
ro
^r
•
rH
in
1
Q
Z














-~
ro



^j
Ol
jj
C
4)
0

U-l
0

E


in
•
^c
rH

C
-rH
£
JJ
•rH
3

ffi

01
c
O
N

























«s\
rH
^f
O

1
Q
Z














CO
ro





.J
41
JJ
C
01
O

IU
0

E


XC
(N

C
•rH
r*
JJ
•rH
3

o;

4)
C
0
CS1

























«s\
r-
^<
c

i
C
z














(T>
ro




n
CN
oc
o-
rH

^
 10
10 S
0
0)


b
01 0)
Oi E
jj :
0! 'M
10 -O
3
01
1 JJ
O> 01
C 10
U 3
IJJ
E «
0'

JJ C
•-1 E
3 ID
01
^
E 01
>4 JJ
10 -rH
a. 01
0
> Q.
0) E
c o
c o
41
c


















1

ro
o
'
*.
0
cc
(N
,
»«
O
ro
CO












o










J3




















41
O
ID

^
3
01

3
O
rH
41
fi

01
01
^
U
c
-rH

(N
rH


























0
^f
CN
1

•
O)














ro
"












O>
CO
ro
1
CO
•














*3"
"











0)
o
10
U-l
^4
3
w

3
0
rH
4)


01
0)
r*
0
C
• rH

CO
i-H




























(N
ro
in
1
rH













01
o
10
UH
ij
3
01

3
0
rH
0)
-Q

01
4<
JZ
0
C
•rH

T
(N























41
O
10
UH
^4
—
01

3
0

41
JO

01
41
r"
U
C
• rH

O
ro



























P-
m
rH

ro
•


1
1










in
'a'











IO
•=r














O
m
rH
1
ro
•














•*~
"*



jQ
(M
CO
o-
rH

«
3
1C
jr
u






rH
-rH
1C
'M

;>,
r: c

1C
41 »
C -H
rH
in --H
0) OJ
JJ 01
UH
10 rH
o
•o c
41 01
-G f^
a
j<; o
41 in
4) O
rj ^H
U JT
O
C
rH








rH
CO
a-
rH

^
C
1C
c

01
•rH
EH




JJ
C
>0
rH
a

a jz
< CT
•• D
. JJ C
JJ C u
C 10 SI
10 -H JJ
^H p.
a E
UH 10
• 0 4)

C 41 JJ
lJ •O M
UH -rH
E 01 UH
0
41 JJ
•O 01 JJ
•-H 10 01
O W ID
•-<
41
Z















10
0)
.J
10

JJ
3
0

3
0
rH
JO

UH
0

.C
JJ
w
0
z




















10
4)
^j
10

JJ
3
0

3
0
rH
^

UH
O

jj
01
10
Li3







	 I
— |
1
|



1
















•
CTi
ro
















CO
rr

















m
ro
m
•











1 1
1 1
1 I
1

















en

o







1


















in
^






1




I


CA
^


o
m






rH
m
C
01
\ E

•H -O
o 01
en ra I
                                                                                                                    a
                                                                                                                    a

                                                                                                                    r-
                                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                                    o
c
o

JJ
u
01
Jj
01
Q
                                                                                                             131

-------
i 	 r 	 1 ~~
i
— t
cn a

*n ' y\ 72 '"^
u 3
§ u -
• ^ -32
1 ! ife
i

i

i
i
i ..
i— >
'•o
0,
o c cn
!< % O jj
rj > cn
' •• Cj C CJ
i jj X 5
C 'JJ fy i
' U C j »
j^j; "O o
j£ '4-; CO U U
2: ' ~ JJ ~ ""
g » 23 jH£
£ : '§ * | S
^? * ~ j
s i>
^
Tiernan

cn
r-

— t
• '
iT
^
**
1



^
a
cn
rH
• fc
C
CO
H


a

rH

0
•rH
en
fi



c^
f"1*
c^
"H
O
H

\ ' i
i
JJ 1

0
•2
CP
z
%.
13
jj
f
inter
x_
r-t
8
o
0
Jj
r—
±J
• rH
C
• rH
03
U


CJ
f
r-J
CO
TT
— <
8
u


en
^v
u.
cn
o
u
S
"S
a
?


' i '
. , i — i i
- , ,




rxj pond mud sediment
rH
O
— ; 	

rH
a
cn
rH
03
c
rH
H

1
1
1 "SJ




a
— <
«,
•c
'^
1
3
CO

/•H

o"
Jj
"5
i
CO


cn

cn
rH
O
o?
EH
i
i
1 1
1 !


1
o
'JH
M.
o
CO
t
i
t
c
•o
g
X
rH
vu
0
c
03
1)
CO

|
i
o
'4H
0
JJ
§

1














i

ization basin mud
rH
'2

ization basin mud
— i
03
•^
cij
i

C
•rH
8
.Q
f mud, below equal iz.
runot


u

^
—i
§
Jj
JJ
5
c
1
rH
03
— T
i
cn

i
i i
1 'I 1
1 1
i i i
i
r-J 55
-H

a
' cn
l,^
^

[Tiernan
I








•n
r^
CJ^
—




Taylor,



JN
CO
S
•c
rH
•fH
C!
i
i
i . i
' ^
! ' ! 03
1 i_i
jj
i
rH
U
'•u
rH
rH
c
rH
—1
•rH
'?
S3
rH

•
o:
§
rH
03
CO
X
en
• rH
1
1
1
1

03
CU
03
03
§
CO
•o
2
UH
O
en


trecin
downs


i

i 2,
i
i
03
C
rH
3
rH
JT
O
fQ
1
&
U
jj
CU
o?
!O
CO
(D
.2
5
|

i
i
i


O

cn

JS
rM f^-
y\
--ol"


Esposit

U
r .

03
jj
u
(§"
jj
f\i ij
cu a D
>)cn >
*
•4
rH
*
S
.,H ^/]
'3 ^
II



CN
a
cn
rH 1
• H
^ 1
1
1
1 -
ij ! ~~
1^3
f—
fg
jj
line to sewaye treati
LI
3
cn
c
' S

e treatment _£)l ant
sewaj


„
•5
x,
C
JJ C
Ig fy
•^ — i
.n sediment, oxj
aje treatment i
- ?
i! «
5



"cl
jj
B
1
jj
OJ
e
CO
rH
U
>
—j 1
O 1 ^ '
J
^
:l.uence
Br tefore cont
>
'


U JJ
c c
03 .„
2 5
0 O
&\£
•J! -
C 0
jj 4J
O QJ
II

I
'J t
3
3 .
'*U 1^4
cz
^ 1
0 <
? ,
^|i
- ^ '
^ >^G
\ '
~* Tj •
O --^ '


t f
i i
i
I

i i


5^ j
r? rt t»
S, Vj

1

1




i
1



1

t
1 i
' 1 f
1 J i
I ^J
1 —I 1






i



.III
! X |
^ ! 5J-
*"" ' V^ U")
PI =. ".

_ " i ^
r^ 1
~ 1 1
o* , f
,
t

m
.n

i

^^
'T
T ^J
."S


Ti
CO
1
' i


^
-•N
r^4





m
'— t
«n
in

i t
1
i i
•^ -i. ' ' '
'V. '

f"!?
^ ^ rj I
/** ' v u-H f
~" -M *" ! I
r1 ^^ 1


r^



i

i
I

i







t
i




mi^

|

i

i

i
i



^ | ^» j
3


-^
!O


1
1


i i


3
1





"*.
^
r-
^1^4 vo cn
r*-
! l"5*!''1
I i
i

1 I




(




i





r— n
. ** . rt







^w






a i
-1


i t
, ]


1
' 1 — !
I 1 ! '— '
i i ' i ,"s
i









rs


i i ~
i i i
i ' i

i
! 1



S


, r\ 1 — *
^^ ' ; «,
vc ^r r-
'5






o :N
i
t
! 1





o
ro
."N

.,.
CO
m
*|
i
I





fr ,
II
4i '

si
t j « I
i
*

1 'JJ

T"
3
n
— t
,_!

i-.
^ CO


3"~
"VJ '
n ' c« o >«c ~
O • r-»l.*O
cc [^ :N
CO
'N '
I '
i 1 1
X o
2
J— *1 •"


* i iii i





1
i i
i

1 i 1


I


^j i ) * i
j_j ^
C 3 .'N ,-0 <3-
C '-i «= n n
0 — ' .
n


n'vjo

^
•nln n
I
t t



1






i 1
i j
1


I 1

1

1
iii i i
i I I I i i ill


i ' '
i i i
1 1
1 •


i i 1 Iii

a Icri
n [in

7-;

rH
^ ^


•^
Co

n <=Hn ^c


'sC VJ7 '\O
P».
-o
1
a


y V
VO

O
p»»

r— t ,-NJ
r^ r^-



I

1

ro
r*^

53.


t t

— i — i — i — i 	 r
_f)
r- r-
i
 -rH j 1
Ol '
^ T if,] '
JISJ *
= ^ cn1
J 3 C
r 3
H Cl)
HOC
-1 JW UtJI 1
)nfiueiv
.ocatio
« b '
- o '
H -J  '
fcl
CH n ^
SS-H
* ol1 CJ
(C -H O
r-1 Jj
•j_il en
|2!>
^ JJ U
5*1""'^"
i
i t
i r '
f ' t
1 ! '
f i } >
1 1
1 1 ' !
1 '
!
| |
' ' f
I ' ' >
) t
(
t

i i

i t
t i f
il |jj
,i i i 9
vj — i cn
3 2 .*O

1 f~
rH C.
i i
I i i
1 t
t '
1
1 ' '
""^J
— ^
1 '".!
t | _^^
' »
i
1 !

; — (|M
3 a a
-o ^r
CO CO
I








*c
CT>
H
^



cn
?.

!
Srtj
S
•a
^2£
| Kaninsl





i
|





















•n
r-














•n
CO








CO
s





^
a
u
o
c
•\f
>.
x:
*-;

















CO
•k
•**
33

=
l^j
"











VC
a








j
73
[3
	



r4l
JJ
I
U
t -1.
1
c
fi!
>|
'x'
•2
(
1
1
1
1

1
i

i
i
t
t
i
i
»
i
;


—
,-Sj
-"
1



s+l
^
^

^J
m



r^!
CO '









-------


HI


F
ct

1








|g
I
§
0


£
g
P




K

6
X
X




2
f*
p
1
oc
S"


**" S-1
•* f1
CN

I.
M

VXIRCR




cr

cr.
rH
cr.
ffl
LI
jj
in
•8
E

c
c
rH
ffl
CJ £
• H
C 'I I
10
o "c
rH
cc



















^c
rH








OC
CC

X.
'r?
c
CC
cr


^,
v
in
Komin
i
lul
JJ

1
E

§
rH
influent,
Ifill
JJ 10
-r-4 rH
C "S
8



















*fl*




p^
•



y
""
jj
i
*H
"£
JD





*•*.
»
r_j
|



E r-H
rH
C •»•*
S TJ
10
ffl *+j
C £
(S|
rH


















CN
•
"*








c
cr


c
CC
cr
rH


^.
\^
in
Komin



E "•<
rH

C <*-<
10
iffluent,
•earn of 1
yj ,ui
JJ
jj tn
8


















vr
CN
rH



in
•
^*


rH
O"







f%»
CT*
rH
i

, rt
C *H
'«!
IM rH
0
m o
i
^f ^j
C Jj
n c
rH V


















C.
fr^









CN
cr



c
cc
rH

>,

in
c
•H



£
'•H
iw
•s
10
I., near
E
CO
CT
(0
•1-4
Z
























*•»
•
~
V

(*":
O*







r^
O"1
rH
1

K
10
CO
•H
Z

jj
c
CJ
c
£
>
rH
ff


















C.
tj









^f
C"1




>fc
0
CN
X
cr
rH
i
o;







i'
8
3 JJ
10 ffl
C IT.
> cr
S






















C
r-
in
cr

i
in
cr





CN
CC
cr


1






jj
1
1
0
jj
cr.
























if",
1/1
u:

i
^
cr



















£

CJ























T
•
^*
PO
1
Z
_
y















W
-iJ
p
£
tn
1
aqara F
S






















c
^
*,
£
^
*
CN
*





rH
00

f^

^
rH
c








£
S
1
€

£










in
1





TT
1
rH



f,
1

•

g.
cr

jj
^

















M
10
rH
r
r
3~
t










i





^
i

~








cr
cr




















£
'g
jj
a








n

•
c




m
^
i
1








c




















£
Q
.
cr.











c\







^


CN
rH
•
^


__<
rH




















0
CT
<0
0
e









m

c






^
^








CN
rH


C
OC
rH


>,

tn
j Komin
rH
LU
a
^
ra
0.
ffl
|
C
JJ
c
"a
in
ffl
UH
2






















CN
*
V
*
r*-

m
rH















JJ
c
rH
a
UH
E
•H
0
£

•rH
^;
U]

S.








I
o
c
z

















rH
^
'


CN

•
~


^r
rH

1
rH
^

rH
OC
rH

«i
c
10
[Tiern
1

>«H
8

*
g
.
c
10
"a
M-l
E
€
>r-l
0
• H
•£
ffl
X

















(N
cr
cc








IT,
^











IK
1

C
.rH
JJ
10
•c

X
o

&
z
"a
QJ
jJ
&
§


















^.
*
^








^
rH














ffl
*c
3
rH
ra
c
w
5
8
•H
4J
10
N
10
3
?


















§
7\J
rH








-^
rH







f^.
CT1
rH
i


c ><
ll2-
^ rH
i— 1 rH
•H
*- VJJ
Li -C
ffl C
10 rH
rH
10
rH JJ
jt 10
JJ
s















1 c
c c
= c
IN rH
rH








CC
C
rH
ffl
Leachat



o
CN
CO
cr
rH
I

I
UJ
!
en
c
3
ffl
: leachat
rH
CO
c
(0
CJ
ffl
s






















uc
IT

,H


(T
rH







CC

PH
|




Li

-------

1
I
I
KI'JKBKfcNOiJ
Oliver, 1978

i

!
~O 2
f g

! <3 ^
1 U 1T3
UJ
*3
'2 &£
' * ^ SJ C
|1 S^
!g .S£
3 * *
^* 'f U
IF ! J2 $
i ._ i
X 1
i ~ I
' i£ '
i -~ i
• i
t /-* '
! ^
t_J
1 ^ 1
1 """ 1
| |
|
jQ
r~\ t
"

' J-H t
1 ^ <*•>
!p- 2
i -5J
^ *" t
CN
s
r - i
1* 2
L" ' |
1
-.1
-? 1
5 i
i % »

1 £3 J-l
ti3 "*"* -— J
y =;
- ' • — <
* '-' rt
-• 2 !


1
|









jj
(0
'•u
1







i— '















rH








1)
_)
JJ
'U
u
1 1
1
It
33
P- P-
P** 3^
Ti -H
*"* i .
- U
C O
-H .C
r*" ' fj
<3 ' O
S i

1
1

!


•
5
jj
jj
Ranye-ted c

i
i
i


i
i

i
i
0

^j •
« ^ i
• i^~i
. V


1

1

i

U^ Ivfll
rH -Hi
rH rH
1








JJ
03
JJ




rH
33
rH
rH




g
U
"8
_!_!
(0
0)
U
i
| Contact w.






o
_;















-H
-H














rH
ITiernan. 198
!


















o
§
r
*~*
o
^
/™N







33
— (
rH







1
i
1




1
i
1
0)
rH
33
— I























!
j
1


O

CO
CO
m









V
•^-1
E



P-
03
i
rH

"8
•^
0)
^J
'.
vn
^r
CM
|
[ cattle qrazi













9




i
i
i

^
rH
rH















rH
33
XH
*
jt$







^
CT
— t
^
>
| Seveso, Ita











ca^
•
p-
i
o
•





i

CN
—1















rH
•33
rH
1
1





p-
rH
rH
| Seveso, Ita













00
1


]



1
1
-.1
CN
— (





1


t






rH
33
rH
!H




JJ
JJ
C
8
3
3
| PCI'- treated







=.
en











i
I
i

CN
CN







U
0)
r-l
rH



—I
Tiernan, 198





















-^
CO — ,
^i O
^^" *
z




1
1
1
j
CN
_H







1





0
03
Esposito, 19







C
• iH
Jj
1C
rH
/tv
~1
Cannercial (
0 CO

0^
'•"'


o o
CO 33
• •
-^







\






"N

1


C
•r-l
JJ '
(0 1
rH '
0
• H
— 1
U 1
c
rT


i
rH
lr_J
'.2
1






§
• •
Seveso, Tta












1
 CN
• •







33 i
1 t r
r 1 i
1 1 I t
1

P-
VO • CN CN
jrH CN . rH
i
— i cNlro T'-n vn
,-T) -i-j s-f-) s-T| -Y-) ^rj
t
1
1

1
1
s\
i Q
u ' c
ij <
 JJ > J
' ^Q JL,.' ril UU Lj
•"^ ^ f3
'X ^ '•"
i i
rHl rH
5 ?
11"
§Ss
C Ju
! 5 Ir!.2
JJ-i ;2|c_,
1
1 I
•
!

1 |
1
1 1
1
1 1
i 1
1
1 1
1
l
i
1
1 rs
~
— .
i
t
-« i
'?
i
i j
i
i

i i
i
1 r
f I
1 1
1

I
Dluj! CTi
33 ^ ^
0^0
Jk Jk Js*
zzz|

i 1

1
1
1
1 1

P~ 33 C^
;"*"* ro ro
rH rH rH




I
1

1 t J
JJ (H
fTj 'JJ
•4J '
u
^ (S

'jd !^


•a
33
i ^
<
t

1
i
l
1 t
1 l
1 1
i 1
I
1
1 1
i
1
1
r? 1
-^ 1
^^
1
t
f


1

I
f
1

1
i
r-l
"CN
a
JJ
z







5
^H







1
1

i

 •^—— •
         II  'I
 II  !!
 JJ  JJ
 c  c
 •rJ -i-1
 c  5
 -JUH  C>  —
 S  51
uo  —*
"•^  Cw^
 II    II

 5   5
03  r:
i
         o    —

-------


























































1
1

1
1

i
!
i
i
i


i




i
i

c
£
) *
l£
I
1
1
1

o
p

— « r
•c
0) 0
c ,_
•* 3
t! l>
C r
0 Js
O

>£
^ 'J.
c
-H 4) 2
£ -Ji ~
(c <6 c
H ON,;/

-H
Cfl X ^ ~«
u iy< CM x
U -* TO 3*
2 Ov —
U - — *
o; .* *
u u . u
CL> *0 <; £_j
iJ -HO. OS
a (J M z
- 1
c '
fl
— ,
! a 1
j =
0 ro
•rf -c
JJ <0
• o
O 1- > TJ •"
"Z iO c i-i
< oi (aa 3 01
5- u i. a
•J5 -" 33
¥ 3 10 lu y2
3 CO
u ^ .-a)
1-1 4) <0 (0 lu
u Iz M i J
no\
' X T
in ' — « o
i I . .
8
£ 1
JV
in
i =>.
m M3
X ' 'O •- '
a 1 Ir- 3 '
'U . T I
X '3
X 1 »
1 1
1 1
I3l I
3 in .n l
in ' .N — * o !
i. 1,0 0 . 1
Q 1 . .
CJ 1 1 .
o M=o
a. 1 1 ™ 1
' O 1
• I'M
1 i 1
u) -n I 1
1< 10 1 I
Q -i 1
0 • | *
E- 1
I

II lin l
1 I ! Mil
03 1 13 I
Kn_ .
r- x IT ol l 1
'a |oo J i
n '_) . . in 1
* f-i 1 — t
- ! °
1 1 -1
01 I M 1 J
a l | i
a M i
o ' 1
s: !
1 1
ii ii
S 1 I M
O 1 i 1
_> 1 1
X 1
T 1 1

j
M 1
i i ii
-> 1 i '
o M
i, < i i
1 l
' 0 I
1 •f 1
ji M -H i
2 'in • r-,
1 ]«r I o
JO1 -0
- • 1 13 .
If- 1
1 1 0
i 1 •
1 01 o
la i 33
-a 1 M I,
1 U 31 CO
-e- oo
4 1
! ^-i *M -n * in ,0 p-
1 T V ^T •$• «r T *T
-*-^-H-*^-H-H-4
jj
| (0 ^j

' 3) 4_i £ t/1
1 (J) ~H .- _ ^
' Ifl 4J -H }J i—1 ^i

O 3 OJ 0) O> |
l_J£i? W I
	 1 — | — 1 	 ] 	 "
-.1 -.
03J X)
JM ~* :T
"Hi— t 33 — '
(X ^
MST> -<
0) -^ 0)
-fH «. -i-4
> * j£ >
-H U *-" "H
•^ CJ fl -^
31 a -H 31
JO Z O C


—
£ j fl>
31 31
-M "*
jr
o
3 "«
3 Z
31
— z Jo
C O U
10 O O • O — 3
31 -l •« > -l U I
r. o n « 10 s 10 a.-o
-iDUCCJC^fl
z z u o o ^ o
CO).
4T V 4) U 4) -^ 41 4} 4)
ItJCOiTJiOlOfOiOnSLi
_jj_jj^ir:_i.-iLi:
"i ill
J 1
~ ' 1 1

j
j I
1 1 '
1 1
1 L ' I '
i MM
i MI' '
i ' 1 I ! 1
1 i I i M 1
ill 1
1 1 I 1 1
i M i
MI i i
Mi> M
1 l ' ' i i i
i I ii
• Ml
1 iii
i i i i
1 i 1
1 i i
1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1
III
I 1
1 l
Hi
1 I
i I
1 i 1
1 1
' 1 1
M M
M
ii | 1
1
I
1 1
! j i : ; !
I f ! i ''
Mi
1 1 1 1 i
 o o o


•n O ^ T T T • •
op oooo
30 31 o — i ^ m T in
| | 1 	











GO
Ol
-H

41
.*
rc
—

M M a
X y.
- . 01
4) 11 (j
O O C
C C IS
jj 4) 41 T3
« V 'O — i
O >i 9 > 0
I u u a.
u a. a.
« ^J £
10 4j g E C
tO 14 ^J "4-
- 10 g
'O 31 g E ^
•a 10 x x
10 -0
u -z.





t
1

1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1 1

1
1

j


1
!•




1 1
1 1

1
1=
IP"- o
53 1
I * I-1
-1 -1 "^
* =°
Ivo 1 ST
1 '0| L
' i-^L
i d
1 1

i 1
1
1 )
1
1 1
1 1 1
1
1 i




1
i






1










1
x r- co 31
2 i 5 f!



co
i>
01
in
3
£ 	
	 j— T 	 1 	 r—r
*
1 r-
-^ rr>
—I 33 -H ^ -( -
30 x oo r- ac
ji — < ^ ff> » a-
— t ^( — i nj ^
•. *j
^ » » o
U U u C 4) C.
O <3 U ^ ^ C-
a: -H o; >- a
2 U 2 0£ O Z

Of OS Q£ Of
|
0 a a &* (
u o o u 1
c c c c a> l
OJ 0) 1) Q} .U
"O "O "D *O •-<
.^ -^ .^ .^ (/]
> > > > O
oooo a
0^ Q- cu a- O
e e s e u o
oooo « •*• •
\J U W Vj 5) U
u-i 4-i u-i yj j^ TJ
"3 jj 1
sees -J c (
-*£ ^ ^ -^ 1 O '
U-1
^4 fQ
'** 1-J
i 1
1 '
!

! 'II
i '
i iii
i i i
l l
i i
l l

i i
I 1
1 ! 1
i i j i
f tt
iii i i
i i iii

! iii
1 I *
[ ! I '
i 1 1 1
' III
I 1 1
i '
1 ! 1 '•
i 1 1 i If i
! 1 ' ( 1 t
i ,

II 1 i II II
I iJi!
i i * i
• i i

: ii I i:
l i ll ii
ii ! l ' ' ii
' l i i ii 'i
I I' M ' '
1 'II
C ^ U3 0 M
MJ"| "^ ys 1 ill
J -Nil III
n -.11 l i l 1 i
i li 1 1 l i 1
— i 	 ii 	 1 M 1 — r
1 I i i i P i
' ' ' ' 1 '
i ' ' i ' ' '
' j If i * (I
1 1 ' 1 ' t
• I | > 1
1 i Iii
iii II
1 t | 1 | i
1 | !
1 ' 1
' 1 1 1
1 I I ' t
'' i ' 1
'i i i !
II iii
l Mi
ill! 1
11 .


T
• 31
0 >! 0 '
^ to o
•* -1 •
•11
1 10 VO
m ,-N v i
-133
! ! I °. ' °. i
jra.
(^ I
H Ql UIT3
O 3 -M 31
3 U -
1 -H -, 3
T . 1 . .
3 1 Mil
o la Mo a
iz ^O
jo II
1 <0
1 C
u O
0) 4J
(n ±j 10
e f a £
io ^ a> cc
-i C -C -
_JLlLj__Li 	
— 1 	 TH 	 1
31
-ij f^
CO " * 31
91 X -^ ^H -H
-1 3i » 3;
-" 31-3-
- -H 4) — i 1
C - 14-1 I
• 0 X - 41 > |
*J Ui O 1) U 1
U 10 U ^ U
o -i a.- a. 1
z o z o z i
r
i !
•
i x
41
4)
>;
1 u
J= 1 fl
0 1 -,
m i 1
4) .. 1 10 >
ffl U U 10
41 10 rj
JJ S 31
-,.- 10 „
ai a -10
> z
41 <0 £
O <0 Li 3
O 31 O 0
CK 10 i, z
Z
II III
Ms- •N ' .
| M ro 1 b!
1 1- 3 1 5
II- • i ii
1 ^

1 1 •*
M
i M ic
I ' ! l3>
(31 m lin ml-.
IrN 3 Mr-l 3C
|0 3 1 I-H -Ml
' • • 1 ' . .Ic
' I1-1
1 ""
1
' F
1 i C
\3i T 'nish.
 E
I ' O(^ TJ
p! e3>w
fa 5
1 Z ! 1 c/I*J m
1 1 I0
1 [^ c »
t - U .G
j -H — a
! 
-------




























































































-^

fl)
c
••H
JJ
C
Q
CJ
_
r~

4—1 Q
.Q "

E- a


u
0
z
! u

01











u
o
5
r
D
1*
*-4
O
01
fk,
a
u
^


TP.
u-
a
S





'Jl
i.
c
u
01
a



tn
a.
a
o
£-<




i
33
p-
« lit
m Q
-U
•N H


tn
a

y
n .


en
Q

O
X
I



tn
a
a
o
o
a.


tn
Q
Q
CJ

1
CO
»
r- Q
• a
-n U
•M

E
H «
*

z
3
o
en
3



c
0
•*•

O
z



1 _c
V
,_|
•• 44

?3
CO
0 u
O 3J
o> o
> u
M "8
10 0
r* 2-
IB tn

z


































































o

3

>,
3D
U1
O


p-


















«
u
u
u

-
3
S-
a
cj
0
ream
tn
5"




































































^

•

^
r-
3
O


r-















— .
—4
13
C
C.

01

0
.j
u
c
HI
u
o
31
>








































































in
o



r-
















_^
«
V
Ll
u

TJ

5
u
o
stre
3
O
•o



































































in
-n

3

«
r-
3
O


^







•H
O3

1 .
'C.
CJ
a;
z










n
c
3
O
O
>•

a































































,
r-
!N









33
















tn

* -c

c
c u
5) CJ
3 -

— c
10 o
c
fl 13
Jt

3




























































*"





•^

•

H.
—1
3


OS






X



L
•T

^_
4J
0
U
JJ
1)

c
4)

11
CJ
in o
-4 tn
tj 'C
c
4^ ?
•a
^ n
•0
_i
2
3
•



-4
3
O






^J"
3
3







T
3
3





































'









X







-H

Jl

^_

a
z

•









0)
•j
<
(Q
03
C
.^
-Jj


in
-H
.



^
•n
3
•





T
•^
3







P^
•^
3












j,

-T)
,



>l

—4
*




p^
/I
^4
'


Q*

3











*


























JJ
O
a-
3.


55
3




•J1
3
3




4

fN

3







j-l
3
3





















a
~z




i—4
,-M
O



r-
CN
3











X









X
—1


a,


•a
c
1 0
a

>
u
1TJ
"*
J
M jJ
2>
* jJ
•0 3
^-t jJ
•a
-4 -Q
I 1)

a




























































P^
3

I

b









2
_














g
Li

cn
c

c
•a

j
E
jj
3
Li
jj
•o
U






























































CN
O

I
-H
O
















X



a
-C

-
^£







m
•• ^
ec 01
0}
en r**
tn r-
3 -»
-Q 3

jJ ^^
•4^
E-t





























































3

_^











*







»



u
T]

CJ









i
fl
-o
o
a
91
I




































































"1
,-M
^3*
O

4
z


X






1

X
?
h
c.

Q
z










c
—4
a
3
o
—4
a






























































3
=
i-H












^






1 —
X

-H
j
kd

l_
u








c
JH
a
0
i
(U
tn
c
O
















































3


.















3
rsi

1
3

O
3


»


















C
U

c


o
ream
in
c
O
•o
I





























































O)

I
o

3

vO


X
3
3










5
-H


a
c
,_4

'T
-u






^.
a
LJ
u
^
0
3
O
O


=
TN
"N
-'
7


,j^
7
^






^
p^.
3







r-


,











-n

•N





Tf
3t



_

'-t
^O
3
Di
3
X
3











—
^
























i
I"
c
C
0






-



















































—









-n
3


3
3



3






_


".
j£
Li
in

CJ









ream
en
c
O
•o
e
.— *




































































in
O


3 3
3



3


















C
TJ

1 2
i
U
o
1
Ll V)
0) C
•- c
os -o
c

U5


































































•ji

I^Q
3

i
z


3
























i
O
Ul
c
•6
£
in



































































in
3

.
|
X
r^i
3



3











>
n
3















'















































'
3
3

u
j
~ * » •
jo,a a
:aaa

M .
""3—^3
033 3
J . . .
1.3C 3

bll II II
C
i
00 ^t
•H— 
-------
































































a
a

^
•c
o)
D
C
4J
C
O
0
*"*
VC
is CT
rt3 (t3
E- a









£
i

£

£
m*



i.
. u
a.


«>
i.
^
y-
;
en
, i.
! o
. 01
a.



en

p
E-

01
S
O
a.
in
0
—
X

in
o
CJ

a-

<0

'a
'a
f-1



i
00
r-> O
- Q
\
a a
z z


*o r-* a
O o C

*B
—
**•







*-» CC i-
OC CT CC
Cf -H C

0!
I:
c
•* ~ * 5
Li *J •*•
°, •; °
u -«.t.
f*L ~
21 ?
- K Si


L3 Jjf
i ;
D rv o »^ O^
_ 00  dj
. -SJi'S
£ C O t
a « _2 % z
< * !- a x
v a e
rt u • S

' o o ui oc
• c I — oc
pf ti 5 i
01 c *S «
1 c 1 - f


5 f £ K'
1

I



'
1





o
\Ti
1

, *



i i-4
0
0
V
1
1


1






!
1

1

-» 0*1
' o S
^ o

Q
Z


o
00
1
^ 0
s °
o .
* \s
ri *£) ^ CO
— ( _l ^ ,_(
N C'J CM (N ^
1











U
MJ
O
§
£
4J
1
E
oc
rsi


























^H
0
o
V
























s
•


o
(N








ec
O1


1 Ztrschky
"ft
£
^ ,
•e
"S '
r^ ^
(N! -
c •





I




















CN
O
O













0
(N
.



O
'


(N
0
* U
CO -
•-H C
O


^ f>













t fe
££

E 1
ir in
t r^






i




















^i
0
0













c
*£




o




0

• o
•

J (-)
J CN













i
4-
"e
IT
C
ec





















































o
o
in
0
o


s












a
f *
0 J -C
confluence
:he Chproke'
livorous fi
ij "o "
U-l
i!1
*C "W
JJ JT fN

3 *>





















O
r^-
o
""













•—'
0
0


a
z









S













(T.
[/]
•carnlvorou!
i



















































TJ
fl)
N
C
<0
Jj
o

fN














r;
en
livorous fi
C
S
E
c
CT

























!N














•*•
O
o


a
z









N













in
U-l
to
•carnivorou
i






















































0
0



00
fN














m
livorous fi!
t
8

-;
(N
f^

j




















O
^
"^














-^
o
0


Q
Z









N













(f)
U-l
tn
-carnivoroui
1





















































0
o
o
o


o
en














£.
Ul
UJ
tn
§
*£
5
"E
^

or


















0
in
r-

»
o
r—














—*
O
o


z









m













tn
M
-carnivorou:
\






















































o
o



(N












I
I
$
o -§
il upstream
livorous fi
c t
"S
It

£
oc























o
-"
l—















— '
0
o


c
z









m
m









oc


' Yamagish
g
1
is treated <

-------
o  .

 o  '

W
CJ
Z
U
REFER

CIRCUMSTANCES



m
O
a


01
i-

^

V)
D
U
D
3.


»)
i.
^
E-


£


1
1

1 PCD-contamlnateU (Yuslio)
cooking oil, Japan, 1968:
12 years after exposure







c

_



e^t o
*
•— t r




f>

1



f~ 'j.
rng
CM t*

1
d
Q
. 0
^" i
1
t en
a
i O

! x
X


;
- c
Q
a
i

&
|3




30



m u
CM"

§*
"* ^
,==





















i


V)
z
«<
3E
5
X
"X.
1— I
? LTN \i
D f*^ *
»-" fM '
O D
rH *~
B gt
H
CO
a
a

-i
-<
3
j
a
I
3
3
i
H

.
cn
*"•

<|

Japanese victims
Seveso. 'Italy
-
rvf

i

«
|7 I
) (in

. '0




V
2
.00
r. .
: ' l *c

j




€
in i
O ff*

. 0


1
• O











o
^


1
o
o
V




1


1
j





,



























0 t~~
n m
M CU
j
(N

1
rt








CM CM CM
cn
oe
w
• V
r« >
»^ V
« J
0 C
30 =E
O XJ T-
J-i O"i J-
n
a<

Yuslto Victims
Yuslio victims

CT> «
1

•
^
«
'm
'(=
0

V
^ ^
Irt •
1 *A
u-l 1
0 0>
O ,
OJ
C
•^
V.
l«- |ii


00
£
5
-J

































»

e
v

,_,
a
w


a)
r-t
§

[Sawmill wortera exposed to
La^lAS-TCP






n


^^
v



i
<-i























n
I
v



<^j
i
V















r- (

g
Textile & leaUier workers
expoaed to PCP or derivativ







m
i

v


o
1
f-1
V






















tn
JL
v




V















CM
fi


i
I

a
ii



















X
CTN
^_
Jj
i
lg

1
(— (
I
1


















i

!





































m
o

m
o
o

a
z






CM
















^
o

V








»




i|^
CTx j\ 30
CM -4-i" r"t
^Ifl
< 3,1 §
§3^3s
CQ M
S E
3 C
c a
C -H £3
ll"
£<£i|



























o
0
in
V










O>
0
O



in
O
o
o



^






OlAI
0 O

o o
ii
J^ <^ f— X) ^
LTN J™\ 'J^ LTN Lf"\



tj
tJ H
o td
o F^

OQ




fell
(-» C -H
O « -P
•q g jj
3-| a
J a
u.
CM
e 3 P
J ^ 0)




























1





















*t ^

' *
o o

0
^- in
O O
r»4 •
O
• o
i °
S33S5

yj
Co "O
§2|
sap

fl-4 P Q


                                                                                                                                            §m
                                                                                                                                            =>
                                                                                                                                         o o


-------
                           TABLE 7

  Estimated single oral lethal dose 50-30 values of certain
 polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin and dibenzofuran isomers a
Chlorine isomer
2,3,7,8 d
1,2,3,7,8
1,2,4,7,8
2,3,4,7,8
1,2,3,4,7/3
1,2,3,6,7,8
1,2,3,7,8,9
2,3,4,6,7,8
Guinea - pig
ug/kg
CDD CDF
0.<3;2C 5;10e
3
1,125
<10f
73
70-100
60-100
12 Of
Mouse
ug/kg
CDD CDF
284 660 Ci e
132;6203
338
>5,000

825
1,1250


Rat
ug/kg
CDD CDF
2 2 ; 4 5 c 5 f
Il9b
>2500b
i
1
413b
625b'e
1
720b
|
i
I
(a)  adapted from Huff, 1979,  except as otherwise indicated.

(b)  estimated from body surface conversion ratio factor
    (equivalent area dose):  rat (mg/kg)  = !_ mouse (mg/ky).
    (Casarett and Doull,  1981)             2

(c)  for male and female animals,  respectively (Schwetz et al., 1973).

(d)  LD50 for TCDD (115 ug/kg)  = 70 in monkey (McConnell et al.,  1978)
    115 in the rabbit (Schwetz, 1973);  >300 in the  dog (Schwetz,  1973
    5000 in the hamster (Henck, 1981).

(e)   Schwetz et al.  (1973)  report that 1 of: 2 male  rats given
     100 mg/kg orally was killed;  no deaths occured in 4  female
     mice given 2 g/kg, or  in  2 female rats given 1 g/kg.
     These authors report an  approximate value of 100  mg/kg for
     the oral LD50 of a mixture of 3 HxCDDs of unknown composition.

(f)   Decad et al., 1981.

(g)   C57BL/6j(Ahr) and DBA/2J(And)  mice,  respectively  (Weal,  et al,
     1982).

-------
                            TABLE 8

     Toxicity, Distribution and Whole-body Half Life of  the
              Radioactivity Derived from 14C-TCDBF
                                                                  - J 3 - d O
Percent Dose Recovered
Guinea pig
3 days"
DISTRIBUTION3
Liver 29. 3 _+ 0.6
Adipose 56 .9 +_ 7.6.
Skin 17. 1 + 0.6
Muscle - 15.6 +_ 4 .5
Feces 4.7
Urine 2.3
HALF LIFE (days) >20
LD50, oral, ug/kg 5-10
LD50/30, TCDBF 2
LD50/30, TCDD
Monkey Rat Mouse
21 days° 3 days13

1.0+0.8 5.9^0.3
3.7 + 2.8 11.6 + 2.3
2.4 + 1.6 1.2 +_ 0.3
1.6 + 0.1 _ 0.3+0.3
71.5 62.1
13.2 . 2.0 ^
8 2
1000 6 6600
20 23
aSource:  Decad et al., 1981

^Days after iv administration of l^C
 guinea pig: 6 ug/kg; monkey and rat: 30.6 ug/kg

-------
                                 TABLE  9

              Environmental Monitoring  Data  From  Love  Canal
SAMPLE
CIRCUMSTANCES
                                      CH EM I C AL  ( o ob
                        RE 5 E RE i
                                     TCDD
                                   CHLOROPHENOLS
                                              tn     tetra   penta
 IR
Homes near canal
                                   ND'
ID
a, c

SOIL



near canal

near canal

<.002 -
0.312
no

670 -
ysooo


i
i




o , o

a
LEACttATE
                        1.56


WrxTER
.


SUMPS
• water
sediment

STORM SEV/ER



shallow wells
near canal


near canal
_




•

ND




ND
ND, .02,0. 5
0. 5,9570



I





30



734














C

1 «


14





r*
A



sediment !  near canal
           away from canal
           further awav
                                     306
                                     655
                                     ND-5
                                 95900,
STREAM SEDIMENT
             Black and
             Berg hoiz Creeks
             Niagara River
                 |     ND-37.4
                 !  .02,.06,.10J
*   References:  a = EPA, i9a'2c; D = N'YS 1982; c = t\YS  1979.

**  N.D. = oelcw aetection limit; ID = oresent iut not  cuantitatea.

-------
                              TABLE  1'J

             SUMMARY O? CHLOROPHENOL AMD CHLOROPHEN*
                 MANUFACTURING  PROCESSES AND WASTES
PROCESS
         PHENOL/CHLOROPHENOL
              FEEDSTOCK
                                 PRODUCT! S)
                                                   WASTSS/RS5 1 DU E
Manufacture of chloroohenols.

a.  chlorir.ation of ohenol.
      I   phenol
      !   phenol; 2, 4-DC?
                                 2,4-DCP
                                2,4,6-TC?
                                2,3,4,6-TC?
                                    PC?
                                                 (  spent carbon from HC1
                                                 (  purification;
                                                 (  "distillation  octtor.s;
                                                <(  "reactor residues;
                                                 (  chlorination reaccor
                                                 (  scrubber liquid.
    hvc'rolvsis of chloro benzenes .
     " !    "   •                 !
      !   1,2,5-TC3
      !   1,2,.4,5-TCH
                                  2,5-DC3
                                  2,4,5-TCP
                                                   "reaccor residues; "scenz
                                                <(  filter aids; "d is t ilia t io.-
                                                 (  bet tons.
M anu f a c ture _o_f pesticides_derived from 2,4,5-TC?^

                               !  2,4,5-TC?   !
         2,4,-5-T
         2,4,5-T?
         Ronnel
         Sesone
         Srbon  •
         HCP, Isobacc
                                                    "reactor resdues;
                                                    buttons; aqueous effiuen:
                                                    from separator; "residues
                                                    fron procuct filcracion
                                                    or centri fucacion ; "sper.-
                                                    filter aids.
*   Pastes  listed  in this Background Document.

-•  Because of  process variations at individual facilities, not all cr.ese
   residuals  occur at every facility.

"*•  In many instances, these cnlorophenols are no-: isolated, ouc are used
   directly as feedstocks for subsequent syntheses.

:-  Present processes use purified 2,4,5-TC? and do noc generate wastes
   of concern.

 •  This tabulation is illustrative, not definitive:   similar waste
   resale ing  fron the production of chlorphenates fron other tri-,
   tetra-, or oencachlorcohenols are also of concern.

-------
                                   98
 D5
LL
  V)
 U.
 Q
 O
 OT
 Q
 Q

 °
 Li.'
LL
o
2
O
c
o
u.
     o.
     <
     LU
     c
                    o
                     ro
                    Z
                     I
                          CJ
                          n
                                                                                 2
                                                                                  I
                                                                                    n
                                                                                              UJ
                                                                                              n"
                                                                                              5
                                                                                                   2
                                                                                                   O
n
2
o
                                                                                             2
                                                                                             O
                                                                                                   2
                                                                                                   O-
                                                                                             <<

-------
                                FIGURE  2

         POSSIBLE  REACTION SCHEMES  FOR  THE PYRCLYSIS OF


                2,2'/4,4',5,5'-hsxachlorobiphenyl.
          C!  Cl
                                   loss of :
                                   onno C!
                                   loss of ortho !-:
                                   and Cl witn
                                   Cl snirt
                                   loss of ortno
                                   h ana Cl
                                   loss of rwo
                                   orno H
                                                      13.7.3-;.2tra-CC5.=

                                                     ci            .c:
                                                      2.3.4.7,3-oema-COSr
                                                      C!
Source: acantad  from  Busar  and Raooe,  1979.

-------
  Cl
   246-TC?
                                                           sc:
                                          246-TC? radical  (A)
2346-TeC?

      e»
   rCP

      ct
       a

FCP    ,
                  c:.
                              c: s
                                               a
                                           2346TeC? radical (3)
                                               • 0


                                        A   "r^V    V . .„,
                                  •ci
                              Cl Cl
                                               c:
               -  a
             -   a
  Ci
          Cl Cl




          Cl C
                                           PC? radical  (C)
                                          
-------
                              7IGT7SZ  4
                          OF 2,2,4,5-rzr-lACZLC3.0PEZ^CL
OH


-------
                         JT"   PFCCUCITCN Ci  GJLQrCFfiSCCLS 3Y DIRECT

                                         CF PHENOL.
                CMorme
Noncorract heating
 •^Caolmg Coils
   'Eacrs Vessel
            Purification or Sale
Aluminum
 Chloride
 Catalyst
                                                                                                       Svoroouc:

-------
                PRODUCTION  SCHEMATIC J03. PSST
* =
— w
                         I

                         I

                         I

                    31    I

                    y    i
                    y
                    c    i
                    w
                            i      i
                                                         £-«!  '


2 a i j

                                                               s»
                                                               p
                                                               3
                                                               u
                                                               I

-------
                                       :
S'SSTSSIS 0?  2,4,5-mCSLORCPSZNOI.,  2,4,5-T a 1373312  5 SALTS
                                               COOH

-------
                                                                                o
                                                                               ca
          I
                                                                               (SI
           A
      •u     o
       /a    —
       u -a *J
      •—  c  *
      >*.  «  4.
      —     «S
      •o     c.
      —     a
       u    1/1
                                                                                                    c
                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                    'O
                                                 O


                                                 C.
                                                  1

                                                 u")
                                                                               0.-3
                                                                               1/1 ••-

                                                                         X__    <
(_)
H-

•o
                                                                               t/1 •—
                                                                               < -^
                                                                               3C u-
A
                                                                                                    CJ

                                                                                                    p

                                                                                                    Q-



                                                                                                    co

                                                                                                    a
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       »^
                                     u  •*-
                                     w  —
                                     3  -a
                                     o  o

-------
  FIGtfSZ  3:  STS7HZSIS CF SILVZIa ESTSS 4 SALTS
Cl
                                       ci-

-------
IIGuaZ IQ:  Si^THZSIS CI XCJffii
                                   2'.4."3-T3l-

-------
JICU3LE IT:  STTCZESIS OF  SZSCNI .^73  ZS3CN
                                                         31 S'Jt SGulUa  (Ssiu^-'


OH
i Q .-Vs
ChU *->c
C^'^\ ^
V-7 qX
X = H O
• ii
OCcH4QS-CH
i /~i LL
^-s. ^^ 0
,| i NaCH
^


GCj
I
^^
' !!
W
c
PI
, . ,— » ^ -^
."i .w5~\w
* ] i
'*• /•»
„>-' Q


Na

                                                                  '-w.tw--

-------
Cl



a
°rt
o^^
ci

-------
         £3
        •a?
         3 u
> O
p— U
O 
         — o
         O u
         a v
                         c
                         O
 3
-o
 O

 a.
                         i
                        un
         55
                         =
                         03
                         i.
                        O
                        1/1
                        
-------



0*"
CM
X
CM
vo
tf:

in
3
3 5
w
U

O
O>
LT>
CO
m

i i
a;  PO

VO

u .c
Ol u
•*•* re
«3
'

i.
Ol
4.1
U.
^
i.
o
4->
1C
4->
Q.
U
0)
Q.
4
0)
U.
J
cn
ro 
I
i)


g
I




o
*» 0)
F- 0
4A 3
CO
!
i
(
4
•r
U
'
S
0
1*
•*
U

L
a
L
C
f
\
1
•^
^"
re
1/1
>
LI
U

T
C
o
o
c
1
jy^ *
^o *
CO C
CM t

O>
O
00
r
m>
J


) V
- 10

'
1
V

c
o
•)-
£x
CM
3 VO
a. •—
v
5?
CM r
C
rt
M
O





in
O
•o
i— (A
•Oj g
>- *»
a. o
0 CD
*""" ai .c  j_, ^
35 3 U O)
^- i_
*fc- O
r— •*•
H-> I/I
£ §
•^ u
33^ ^ 4J
6- i 3
~= o ^
CM -D S_ X^N
co o a. / as J
o. -, V^

o
4->




 O)
•o
 >  re
       x a.
       o
       •o oo'
CM
 I  ••
 O  0)
 S-  (J
 o  s-

S  o
 O 00
       I
      VO
      in
      CQ
      O)
      i-
      3
      CT

-------
                                                          Whole/Fillet
                                                            39   NA**
                                                            50   NA
                                        Tcs»j>   36
                                                                  .  UnivofNZ/
                                                          Vnole     Who Is /Fillet
                                                                      NA    15
       CONCENTPATICNS
?CDD/rCDBI
TISH  , Ncr
Source: ETA, '.1982b.
                                              ,3/7 r*}    Fish La]
                                                        Whole
                                                                     Univ of JE
                                                                    Waola/Tinet
                                                                      52
                                                                     120    >IA
                                                                      Univ" of Ni
                   r&; *i
T ' 245-ICP/I7HCP wastes
          '         '
                                                           or-.' v
                                                           "
                                                .
                                                Xf^'oi  tUJ.-^V;^
                                                                    niv of NZ
                                                        Whole     V^icle/Fillet
                                                                      Univ of NZ
Fish: trout,  sucker, chub.
    : not analyzed
     rreaci from Verona
                                                                           Ur.iv of NZ
                                                  k ):±:


-------
FIGURE Ifl;  TCDD/TCDBF CO!TTlv1TT70^rTTTnNr?;  IN FISH, SPRING RIVLR,
           VEKHA, MO. , NOVEMBER 19.81.
                                     rn.^-ts:
                                                       1 •*"!' ' '  y
                                                       \ •   v y>.
              ^ i  x'   ' » rntt^tt
                w-— -—- —• p^~ — - •»i— -
              ; r\ r^.. ^\
            M 'J^0
Fish Lab    Univ  of NE
 (Whole)
    NA       NA   <8
    NA       NA   <8
             2,3,7,8
             Total TctiiS
                                    Lab    Univ of NZ
                                Whole
                      SCALE 1:24000
                           o
     F1sh Sample Collection Point^Downstream from Verona,

-------
fal
                                                                                                                                       cn
                                                                                                                                       o

                                                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                                                       en  w
                                                                                                                                       r-t  M

                                                                                                                   OKLAHOMA   S  g

                                                                                                                                       S  n
                                                                                                                                       O -H

                                                                                                                                          4J
                                                                                                                                       •H -fl
                                                                                                                                       
-------
'•'                                                        (                                                  '                                               si                                                                                           '

-------
       1 a .
^ J.SJW*'—* *»J •    __ ,	
Concentrations of TCDDs  ar.d TCDBFs in
(Sources:  -cited in  Table  5) .
                                                 fish(1970-1977)?
a.  Valuer in  ( )-= TCDD; values  with
    Values in  C ] = CDDs.
    All data are  in sg/g  (??t).
    See also Table 6~,  iter:^"l92  ff.

b.  TCDBFs = 37 ppt.

-------
              -i
                  t
            S     1
            o
 o  &       «~     I
—•  ^-    j   —J    ^>
—s /-^s    !   —     T
         I    i
                                    »  C a ^^ ^.
                                    s  3 < -r: 9
                                     AJ
 C. C"

Q 51



o.«
u  •
5

-------
 >
 ***
 t wf
 ^»

"a
   8
   S
   3 —
  3 —
  9
  3
               Thymus atrophy in rats treated 31 days
              1 Cert satata m cr*^r.ant female inics ~eate
-------
FTGD3E 22:  TCED :CNTICP^7G DATA SI I£tfE GMSL
 - - O- - ^PCUNO WA7s3 '
 Scares:  Z?A, 19S2c.

-------
                                            RGURS.  23

                                DICXJN: LOVS CANAL SAMPLES
                                        SIACX C3f£X  S708M
                                          5ID1MINT:   SIOIMfNTi
                                             Hppb   31ppb
                                     « AT FISH
                            IN StRGHOtTZ
                                     3.7 pco
                   JTORM
                    S£Ot.M{Nr :
                                  CAflSON fSOM
                               T3£ATM£NT P1.ANT:
                                          17 pot
                                 S70R
                                  t ?S£DIM£NT:
                                     son. ACSOSS
                                     572 E;T
                                     SANO LfNSI:
                                            ppr
                                                SUSfA« SOIt. F5OM
                                                SOUTHERN SIC7ION
                                                Of LOVt CANAL: 5.
Sourci:  NY5r  IS 82
                                               •/-r

-------