Community Based Environmental Protection
Galveston/Harris Counties
Toxic Release Inventory Site
(Facility Submitted a Report to TRI in 1993)
Census Tract
Major Road
County Boundary
Water Body
Data compiled and plot created by
Computer Data Systems, Inc.
EPA Region 6 QIS Support Team
-------
COMMUNITY BASED ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
0123456789 10
Mi IK
Data compiled and plot created by
Computer Data Systems, Inc.
EPA Region 6 GIS Support Team
11
TRI Site -Facility reported release
to air and/or water in 1993
4 Mile Buffer
County Boundaries
Water Bodies
Map created: 96-04-12
Sources:
U.S. EPA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI| - 1993
U.S. Bureau of the Cenaus (TIGER/Line Filee) - 1992
-------
-------
Multi-Media Enforcement Targeting 1995
COUNTY
CODE
CENSUS
TRACT
NUMBER OP
FACILITES
CUMULATIVE
HRI
AVERAGE*
HRI
MAXIMUM
HRIVALUE
MINIMUM
HRIVALUE
CUMULATIVE
EJ INDEX
AVERAGE*
EJ INDEX
MAXIMUM
EJ INDEX
MINIMUM
EJ INDEX
157
071
Io7
167
— nrc —
301
201
201
201
201
201
• 201
201
201
201
201
201
301
301
201
201
201
201
201
711
.01
201
301
301
301
301
301
201
201
201
201
201
.01
201
201
201
301
301
301
301
301
201
701.15
1101.02
1207.00
1213.00
— aaiiSa
202.10
202.20
207.04
206.03
209.00
210.01
211.00
213.02
214.01
214.02
215.02
224.01
225.03
228.01
230.02
232.00
233.00 1
235.00
237.00
340.03
352.00
254.00
259.01
260.00
264.00
265.00
366.00
300.33
301.01
301.03 •
309.03-
314.03
317.03
317.04
31*. 03
331.03
331.03
322.01
322.02
325.02
329.01
332.00
339.01
1 2.
1 4.
1 1.
1 2.
t| •!')
2 IS.
4 30.
1 7.
3 23.
2 32.
5 33.
4 40.
1 11.
1 7.
1
1
2 1 •
1
1
2
2
.0 41.
25.
1 2.
1 5.
2 4.
2 7.
1 3.
2 11.
3 34.
23.
5.
25.
7.
47.
7.
6.
11.
4.
6.
12.
29.
1 22.
6 64.
1 6.
2 7.
1 3.1
1 3.(
2.9
4.9
1.9
2.5
\ H —
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.V
16.4
6.5
10.1
11.4
7.7
5.7
6.6
6.2
6.6
3.9
3.0
4.8
4.1
4.2
2.r
5.1
3.)
: .!
3.;
5.9
11.3
7.9
5.1
6.5
7.7
8.0
7.7
6.6
.8
.6
.6
.3
.9
3 .£
1 .8
.6
.7
r .7
) .0
3.9
4.9
3.5
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.7
19.7
6.9
32.8
11.4
7.7
5.7
.6
.6
.6
.9
.0
5.7
7.8
10.4
2.5
S.I
2.6
6.0
3.2
9.9
20.4
10.2
5.1
6.9
7.7
8.1
7.7
6.*
3.9
4.6
6.6
6.9-
18.0
22.8
16.0
6.6
3.7
3.7
3.0
2.9
4.9
1.9
3.5
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.7
13.1
6.6
5.7
11.4
7.7
5.7
6.6
5.7
6.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.0
1.9
2.5
5.1
1.6
1.0
3.2
1.9
0.0
3.2
5.1
5.7
7.7
7.7
7.7
6.6
3.7
4.6
6.6
5.7
5.7
33.8
5.7
6.6
3.7
3.7
3.0
IS
3
3
3
A
130
340
60
180
90
335
73
16
60
24
45
69
45
9
6
18
46
12
4
18
3
3
2
4
13
14
3
180
60
360
60
45
54
36
45
69
73
18
136
45
48
11
15
IS
2
3
3
lrf
60
60
60
60
45
45
16
16
60
24
45
35
4S
4.
16
l.S
1.5
2
3
4.3
4.7
3
45
60
60
60
45
16
36
45
35
34
16
23
45
24
16
15
15
2
2
2
4
|f
60
60
60
60
45
45
24
16
60
24
45
45
45
9
3
13
6
3
4
16
3
3
3
3
6
6
3
45
60
60
60
45
18
36
45
45
34
18
34
45
34
16
15
15
3
3
3
3
R '
60
60
60
60
45
45
13
16
60
24
45
24
45
9
18
1
1
45
60
60
60
45
18
36
45
34
24
18
18
45
24
IB
15
• Av»r«c« value* b«v« b««a rounded to ta* a«tr«*t t
nth.
Couaty Code*i
071 - ChMbcra Couaty
1S7 - Pore toad County
167 - Oalv««toa Couaty
301 - Barri* County
-------
Multi-Media Enforix
EPA ID1
NAME1
Polcnilit1
HrntOt
""Risii
Indei
COONTTi 1S7 C
T1OT06S078836
TRACT TOTAL
•MOB TRACT i 701. IS
WZTCO OLBO/BURVACTAMTB OR
(1 FACILITY) i
COUNTY i 071 CMBOB TRACT I 1101.03
• TXD008096381 J. M. lOOm CORP. BATTOWB
TRACT T< fAL
(1 FACILITY) i
CODNTY: 167 CBMBOB TRACT t 1307.00
TXD98804008S MAODLIB e BOM MF0. CO. IB
TRACT TOTAL
(1 FACILITY) i
COUNTY: 167 C8MBOB TRACT i 1313.00
TXD000013913 FBMMXOZL FRODB. CO. OZCKZ
TRACT TOTAL
(1 FACILITY) t
COWYi 167 CBMBOB TRACT > 131*. 10
TXD0444S3334 IBP TBCB.
TXD000804303 BBA LZOM TBCH.
TRACT TOTAL
COTOTY: 167 C
TXD000461533
TXD005943438
TXD008080533
• TXD000793937
TXD008079537
TXD008079501
TXD980634783
•TX00008393S8
TXD000839341
TRACT TOTAL
(3 FACILZTZBB)!
BMBOB TRACT i 1330.00
•ONXOB CAHBIDB CORP. TB3UB
t AMOCO CB3MZCAL CO. TBXAB C
.AMOCO OZL CO. TRXAB CITY R
.PBIBRO BMBROY DBA IMC.
% BTBRLZm COMZCALB IMC.
>MARATBOM OZL CO.
rnrrnu riDBTn °B1MT'*"-— *
.AMOCO CB3BOCAL CO. TRXAB C
« AMOCO CB3MZCAL CO. TRXAB C
OALLAB OROOP OF AMBRZCA Z
(10 FACILITIBB) i
2
2
4
4
1
-1
2
2
2
3
5
34
10
10
10
10
6
6
4
3
3
89
.•)
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.5
.5
.6
.6
•
.3
.3
.3
.3
.3
.8
.5
.8
.3
.3
.5
Potential4
Env.
Justice
lodci
15
^
• ^ 15
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
6
13
13
8
4
4
4
4
13
4
4
68
Targeting
POP*
57041
11908
30908
3493P
•"••946
34850
54633
50317
49036
44193
33630
39589
37477
50317
36735
331*3
1995
PE*
Dl7 DV*
El»
DVMAV" DVECO"
3 95
0.95
0.95
0.95
I. no
— JO
.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
.95
.95
.95
0.95
1 1.0
3 1.3
1 1.0
1 1.3
1 1.3
1 1.3
5 1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1 1.7
1 1.7
1 1.7
3
a
a
a
a
a
3
3
a
a
a
a
a
3
a
a
5 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
a i
i i
•
a
a
a
i
i
i
i
a
i
i
MAVEIJ
85.6
13.9
13.6
36.7
43.3
39.0
43.4
43.3
41.0
38.4
37.0
36.6
35.7
43.3
36.5
36.8
EAVEU
18.7
13.1
13.1
19.5
36.7
34.'-'
38.9
39.3
38.9
38.5
38.8
38.5
38.5
39.3
38.8
38.8
Av«rag« value* h«v» b««a rounded to ta» D«ar««t tenth.
Couatv Code*:
671 - Chutbers County
117 - Fort Bead County
167 - Oelvestoa County
- Barrl* County
-------
taulti-Media Enforcement Targeting 1995
EPA ID1
NAME1
PotcntUr3
Health
Risk
Index
Potential4
Env.
Justke
Index
PE« DI7 DV1 Ef*
POP3
DVMAV»» DVECO"
WAVE12 EAVEU
COUNTIESi 301 . HARRIS
167 . OALVESTON
157 - FOHT BEHD
071 . CHAMBERS *
* - aateriak denotes TRI Sitea that have not been verified by tho Region 6 Ola Team. 42 out of the 246 aitea liatad above have flat been verified.
EPA ID
NAME
POTENTIAL
BXALTH RISK
INDEX (HRI)
SPA ID from the 1993 Toxic Release Inventory Database. The EPA ID for Ka«c .tan 6 Boat Chemical la from the RCRA Generators
database.
Facility dame from the 1993 Toxic Releaa Inventory Database.
A ranking from 0 - 100 derived from the . gion 6 Bnforcaman'c Targeting Methodology. Thai HRI •valuatca TRI chemical r*l«aa«a (1993),
population, natality, «g«, and economic aeatua for a four mil* r diun around each facility. HRI • PB • Kf • DI • DV (Bnforcwnvnt
Targeting 1995 Methodology).
4 POTBMTIAL
BNVZRONMBHTAL
JTJSTICB INDBX(BJZ) A ranking from 0 - 100 derived from the Region 6 Environment- il Juatice uialyaia methodology. PBJI » Bf * DVMAV * DVBCO
(Fnvironmental Juatice Veraion 4.^ Xecho-lology, 5-30-94).
5 POPULATION Number OL people in a four mile radlua (50 square milea) around facilitioj. 1990 Cenaua Data (PL94-171 databaae)
Population Bxpoaed - (when a facility releaaea to air only then PB • .95; when a facility releaaea to water only then PB » .05; when
there are releaaea to both air and we<-er then PB » 1) .
Potential Degree of Impact ia the chemical impact (ranked 1 - 5) of the HRI evaluation. TRI chemical releaae data (1993) are evaluated
for each facility.
Degree of Vulnerability evaluate* Cenaua data (the mean of the ranking* of 1 - 5) for natality, economic atatua, and age in the atudy
area for each facility.
Bxpoaure Factor ia a numerical ranking from 0 - 4 of the population for each atudy area. Evaluated on a 1 aquare mile baaia. Uaed for
HRI and BJI.
DVMAV Degree of Vulnerability for Minority Status ia a 1 - 5 ranking baaed on the percent minority population in the atudy area.
DV1CO Degree of Vulnerability for Economic Statua is a 1 - 5 ranking baaed on the percent of houaeholda in a atudy area where income ia leaa
than $15,000.
MAVB Minority Percentage - the percent minority population in a given atudy area.
KAVB Economic Percentage - the percent houaeholda in a given atudy area with income leat than $15,000.
6 PB
7 DI
» DV
9 Bf
STATE COMPARATIVE CRITERIA i
Minority Percentage
Ecooomkallj Stressed Percentage
AR
n*
36.0
LA
34.2
363
!"'V
49.6
31.0
OK
19.0
32.0
TX
39.4
27 A
-------
Black
, Pipeline
Stoning Chemicals
p of America, Inc.
mical
Stan
Trans Inc.\|,;
Amoco Refine
Galveston Bay
Phibro Energy
mon Ci
Marine Te
GulfCoasWa^t
Disposal Autho
Malofc Servifce Co.
I
-------
CENSUS TRACT 1230, TEXAS CITY, TX
Minority Status - Degree of Vulnerability (DVMAV)
Percent Minority by Census Block
State Percentage = 39.4
Q <= tha State Percentage
D> tha Stata Percentage,
<= 1 .33 times tha Stata Percentage
> 1 .33 times the State Percentage,
<= 1 .66 times the State Percentage
• > 1 .66 times the State Percentage,
<= 2 times the State Percentage
> 2 times the State Percentage
-v?
Potential Environmental
Justice Index for
Two Study Areas 1 Sq. Mile 50 Sq. Mile
Total Population 1 47152
Population Ranking (PF) 1 2
Percent Minority 100% 39.9%
Minority Status (DVMAV) 5 2
Percent Economically Stressed 0% 28.8%
Economic Status (DVECO) 1 2
Environmental Justice Index 5 8
Longitude: -94 55 22 Latitude: 29 22 02
Data Sources and References: US Bureau of the Census, 1990 PL94-171 and STF3A Data, and TIGER Rles
US EPA Region 6,1992. Computer Assisted Environmental Assessment Methodologies, Chapter V. Special Applications,
Environmental Equity. Planning and Analysis Section, Management Division, Region 6 EPA, Dallas, Texas
-------
CENSUS TRACT 1230, TEXAS CITY, TX
Economic Status - Degree of Vulnerability (DVECO)
Percent Economically Stressed
by Census Block Group
State Percentage = 27.6
Q <= the State Percentage
D> the State Percentage,
<•••- 1 .33 times the State Percentage
> 1 .33 times the State Percentage,
<= 1 .66 times the State Percentage
• > 1 .66 times the State Percentage,
<= 2 times the State Percentage
> 2 times the State Percentage
-------
CENSUS TRACT 1230, TEXAS CITY, TX
Potential Environmental Justice Index (EJ)
Criteria Ranked by Census Block
(DVMAV * DVECO * PF)
n 1 to 12
D 13 to 25
H 26 to 37
| 38 to 50
| 51 to 100
^}
Potential Environmental
Justice Index for
Two Study Areas 1 Sq. Mile 50 Sq. Mile
Total Population 1 47152
Population Ranking (PF) 1 2
Percent Minority 100% 39.9%
Minority Status (DVMAV) 5 2
Percent Economically Stressed 0% 28.8%
Economic Status (DVECO) 1 2
Environmental Justice Index 5 8
Longitude: -94 55 22 Latitude: 29 22 02
Data Sources and References: US Bureau of the Census, 1990 PL94-171 and STF3A Data, and TIGER Rles
US EPA Region 6,1992. Computer Assisted Environmental Assessment Methodologies, Chapter V. Special Applications,
Environmental Equity. Planning and Analysis Section, Management Division, Region 6 EPA, Dallas, Texas
-------
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EJ) IND£> PILOT
Data : 17 Apr 96 16:14:30 Wednesd...
Requestor : GERALD CARNEY 6EN
Site Id Number : TXDCT1230
Site Name : CENSUS TRACT 1230
County i GALVESTON
State/County FIPS Code : 48167
Location : -94 SS 22 29 22 2
Quality Assurance Resource : 1
CENSUS TRACT 1230
50 square mile study area
Minority Ranking Value (DVHAV) : 2
Economic Ranking Value (DVECO) : 2
Population Ranking Value (PP) : 2
Percent Minority = 39-9
Percent Economically Stressed • 26.B
Total Population - 47152
Potential Environmental Justice Index (DVMAV • DVECO • PP) = 8
CENSUS TRACT 1230
1 square mile study area
Minority Ranking Value (DVMAV) : S
Economic Ranking Value (DVECO) : 1
Population Ranking Value (PP) : 1
100
Percent Minority - --
Percent Economical] Stressed ° 0
Total Population - 1
Potential Environmental Justice Index (DVMAV • DVECO • PP) = 5
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EJ) INDEX PIL.T
The Potential Environmental Justice Index, or the independent sul factors comprising
the index, should b« used as a DEMOGRAPHIC CORRELATION VARIABLE for studies conducted
by the PROGRAMS. These studies may be used to measure Agency policies or procedures
regarding sociological equity for enforcement or permitting activities. The information
given in this report does not represent the final analysis of a site in regard to
Environmental Justice or RISK. The indices and raw data reported are indicators of
Vulnerability for subgroups of people to other stressors.
SEE METHODOLOGY CRITERIA
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EJ) INDEX PILOT
The Potential Environmental Justice Index, or the independent subfactors comprising
the index, should be used as a DEMOGRAPHIC CORRELATION VARIABLE for studies conducts*
by the PROGRAMS. These studies may be used to measure Agency policies or procedures
regarding sociological equity for enforcement or permitting activities. The informal
given in this report does not represent the final analysis of a site in regard to
Environmental Justice or RISK. The indices and raw data reported are indicators of
Vulnerability for subgroups of people to other stressors.
METHODOLOGY CRITERIA
Environmental Justice Indexes are indicators of potential EJ concern.
1990 Census da. a for a Study Area is evaluated and ranked in relationship to
state percentages. Ranking variables are multiplied to produce an index for
prioritizing applications. The ranking variables are:
- Minority Status, Degree of Vulnerability (DVMAV),
- Economic Status, Degree of Vulnerability (DVECO),
and Total Population, Population Factor (PP).
-MINORITY STVTUS (DVMAV) - For TX the percent minority is 39.4».
-ECONOMIC STATUS (DVECO) - Economically Stressed ie defined as Households making
less th?n $15.000 3 year. For TX the percent economically stressed is 27.6%.
The Meth ->d .o<~y for ranking values associated with Degrees of Vulnerability is
* jnkint Criteria
1 <= tne State Percentage
7 > the State Percentage but <* 1.33 tines the State Percentage
3 > 1.33 times the State Percentage but <= 1.66 times the State Percentage
4 > 1.66 times the State Percentage but <= 1.99 times the State Percentage
5 >- 2 times the State Percentage
-POPI • VTION RANKING FACTOR
Ranking Criteria
Total Population is ranked using the following criteria.
(evaluated on a 1 square mile basis)
0 Total Population = 0
1 Total Population > 0 and < 200
2 Total Population > 200 and < 1000
3 Total Population > 1000 and < 5000
4 Tot 1 Population > SOOO
Reference for Quality Assurance Resources
Personal Verification 7
Reconciliation with Quad maps B
Reported from archived files 9
TRIE 10
RCRIS 11
CERCLIS 12
AIRS
PCS
CIS Verified
Professional Judgement
Federal Facility Tracking System
Dun I Bradstreet
-------
CENSUS TRACT 1230.00 - TEXAS CITY, TKX 18
DI
EPA ID
TXD987997657
TXD008080S33
TXO008079501
TXD005943438
TXD981913587
TXD981913132
TXD980626782
TXD000461533
TXD988081048
TXD008079537
TXD000793937
TXD062113329
NAME
DALLAS GROUP OF AMERICA X
AMOCO OIL CO. TEXAS CITY
MARATHON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
ONION CARBIDE CHEMICALS ft
ONION CARBIDE CORP. TEXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STERLING CHEMICALS INC.
PHIBRO ENERGY USA INC.
TEX TIN CORP.
3103839
600973
1357990
37151
359413
440037
16341996
33746 '0
3114 1
30765
'987
NR
.500
.313
.000
.949
.500
.156
.000
NR
000
.141
.000
1818050
462945
1213024
18908
398904
438994
9139268
7923462
101873
1988
NR
.125
.719
.625
.801
.188
.062
.000
NR
.500
.500
NR
1989
45.600
1945956.000
686627.500
1006355.875
18844.199
283176.000
490605.656
14617228.000
NR
3015306.000
121654.750
NR
978
2135752
434036
689022
27532
233567
629223
12346858
2385919
726907
33477
1990
.500
.750
.688
.250
.900
.000
.938
.OCO
NR
.750
.375
.000
1991
1909.500
1810338.500
491116.563
669113.375
33376.350
169557.906
587181.188
8360373.500
2016065.250
668134.000
NR
3384.500
1658304.350
363107.906
590079.135
21653.400
140577.203
540315.500
7003365.000
NR
1745074.750
905586.635
NR
1993
30064.000
1569636.875
968333.188
539367.188
19847.400
137706.397
411916.188
6351197.500
NR
1835611.000
1079566.635
NR
NR - No Releases to Air or Water reported to TRI.
BPA ID BPA ID from the Toxic Release Inventory Database.
NAMB Facility HUM from the Toxic Release Inventory Database. . „ - ,„_ .-_h f.ciiitv
ni Potential Degree of Impact is the chemical Impact of the HRI Evaluation. TRI chemical release data are evaluated for eacn raci.ij.ty.
CENSUS TRACT T30.00 - TEXAS CITY, TEXAS
EPA ID
TXD987997657
TXD008080533
TXD008079501
TXD005943438
TXD981913587
TXD981913133
TXD980636783
TXD000461S33
TXD988081048
TXD008079537
TXD000793937
TXD063113339
NAME
DALLAS GROOP OF AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TEXAS CITY
MARATHON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
OHIOH CARBIDE CHEMICALS 6
ONION CARBIDE CORP. TEXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STERLING CHEMICALS INC.
PHIBRO ENERGY USA INC.
TEX TIN CORP.
1987
NR
13.6
6.8
14.5
3.3
9.7
6.5
34.3
NR
13.6
3.4
3.4
1988
NR
10.2
6.8
14.5
3.3
4.8
6.5
24.2
NR
13.6
3.4
NR
1989
3.2
10.2
6.8
14.5
3.2
4.8
6.5
34.3
NR
13.6
3.4
NR
HRI
1990
3.2
13.6
6.8
10.2
3.2
4.8
6.5
24.2
NR
13.6
6.8
3.4
1991
3.2
10.2
6.8
10.2
3.2
4.8
6.8
24.2
NR
13.6
6.8
NP.
1992
3.2
10.3
6.8
10.2
3.3
4.8
6.8
34.3
NR
10.3
6.8
NR
1993
3.3
10.3
6.8
10.3
3.3
4.8
6.5
34.3
NR
10.3
10.3
NR
NR - No Releases to Air or Water reported to TRI.
EPA ID EPA ID from the Toxic Release Inventory Database.
NAME Facility Name from the Toxio Release Inventory Database.
HRI Potential Health Risk Index. A ranking from 0 - 100 derived from the Region 6 Enforcement Targeting Methodology. The HRI evaluates TRI
chemical releases (1987-1993), population, natality, age, and economic statue for a four irlle radius around each facility.
HRI - PH • If • DI • DV (Enforcement Targeting 1995 Methodology) .
-------
CENSUS TRACT 1230.00 - TEXAS CITY, TEXAS
EPA ID1
NAME2
PE3
Ef4
DVJ
DI*
HRI7
199_1
TXD987997657
TXP008080533
TXD008079S01
TXDOOS942438
TXD981912587
TXD981912132
TXD980626782
TXD000461533
TXD988081048
TXD008079S27
TXD000793937
TXD062113329
1992
TXD987997657
TXD008080S33
TXC008079S01
TXDC05942438
TXC981912587
TXD981912132
TXD980626782
TXD000461533
TXD988081048
TXD008079527
TXD000792937
TXD062113329
1391
TXD987997657
TXD008080533
TXD008079501
TXD005942438
TXD981912587
TXD981912132
TXD980626782
TXD000461533
TXD988081048
TXD008079527
TXD0007 92937
TXD062113329
1990
TXD987997657
TXD008080533
TXD008079501
TXD005942438
TXD981912587
TXD981912132
TXD980626782
TXD000461533
TXD988081048
TXD008079527
TXD000792937
TXD062113329
DALLAS GROUP Of AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TBXAS CITY
MARATBON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
UNION CARBIDI CHEMICALS &
UNION CARBIDI CORP. TBXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STERLING CBBMICALS INC.
PUIBRO BNBROY USA INC.
TBX TIN CORP.
DALLAS OROUP OP AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TBXAS CITY
MARATHON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS fc
UNION CARBIDE CORP. TBXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STERLING CHEMICALS INC.
PHIBRO BNBROY USA INC.
TBX TIN CORP.
DALLAS OROUP OP AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TBXAS CITY
MARATHON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS 6
UNION CARBIDE CORP. TEXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STIRLING CHEMICALS INC.
PHIBRO ENERGY USA INC.
TBX TIN CORP.
DALLAS GROUP OF AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TBXAS CITY
MARATHON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TBXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
UNION CARBIDE CBBMICALS t
UNION CARBIDE CORP. TEXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STERLING CBBMICALS INC.
PHIBRO BNBROY USA INC.
TBX TIN CORP.
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
NR
1.00
1.00
NR
0.95
1.00
1.00
l.Oi
0.95
0.95
1.00
0.95
NR
1.00
1.00
NR
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
0.95
l.oO
0.95
NR
1.00
1.00
NR
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
NR
1.00
1.00
l.CO
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7.
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1
3
2
2
1
1
2
5
NR
3
3
NR
1
3
2
2
1
1
2
5
NR
3
2
NR
1
3
2
2
1
1
2
5
NR
4
2
NR
1
4
2
2
1
1
2
5
NR
4
2
1
3.2
10.2
6.8
10.2
3.2
4.8
6.5
24.2
NR
10.2
10.2
NR
3 .A
10.2
6.8
10.2
3.2
4.6
6.8
24.2
m
10.2
6.8
NR
3.2
10.2
6.8
10.2
3.2
4.8
6.6
24.2
NR
13.6
6.8
NR
3.2
13.6
6.8
10.2
3.2
4.8
6.5
24 i
"iR
13.6
6.8
? .4
Re
-------
CENSUS TRACT 1230.00 - TEXAS CTT> TEXAS
KPA ID1
TXD987997657
TXD008080S33
TXD008079S01
TXDOOS942438
TXD981912587
TXD981912132
TXD980626782
TXD000461533
TXD988081048
TXD008079527
TXD000792937
TXD06J113329
1988
TXD987997657
TXD008080S33
TXD008079501
TXDOOS942438
TXD981912587
TXD981912132
TXD980626782
TXD000461533
TXD988081048
TXD008079537
TXD000792937
TXD062 113329
19B3.
TXT987997657
TX0008080533
TXD008079S01
TXD005942438
TXD9B1912587
TXD981912132
TXD980626782
TXD000461S33
TXD988081048
TXD008079527
Tn>000792937
TXD062113329
NAME2
DALLAS GROUP Of AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TEXAS CITY
MARATHON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TZXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS ft
UNION CARBXDB CORP. TEXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STEALING CHEMICALS INC.
PHXBRO ENERGY USA INC.
TEX TIN CORP.
DALLAS GROUP OP AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TEXAS CITY
MATATRON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS ft
UNION CARBXDB CORP. T13CAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STERLING CHEMICALS INC.
PHXBRO ENERGY USA INC.
TEX TIN CORP.
DALLAS GROUP OP AMERICA I
AMOCO OIL CO. TEXAS CITY
MARATHON OIL CO.
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. TEXAS
UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS ft
UNION CARBXDB CORP. TEXAS
PRAXAIR INC.
STERLING CHEMICALS INC.
PHXBRO ENERGY USA INC.
TEX TIN CORP.
PE3
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
0.95
0.05
0. 5
0.95
NR
1.00
1.00
NR
**R
1. 0
1 00
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.9r
o.rs
SR
1.00
1.00
NR
»-*H
1.0
1.00
0.9F
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
NR
1.00
1.10
1.00
Ef4
2
2
2
3
2
3
1
3
2
2
2
2
S
2
2
't
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
DV*
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
DI*
1
3
2
3
1
1
2
S
NR
4
1
NR
NR
3
2
3
1
1
2
5
NR
4
1
MR
MR
4
2
3
1
2
2
5
NR
4
1
1
HRI7
3.-
10.2
6.8
14.5
3.2
4.8
6.5
24.2
NR
13.6
3.4
NR
NR
10.2
6.8
14.5
3.2
4.8
6.5
24.2
MR
.3.6
3.4
NR
MR
13.6
6.
14.5
3.2
9.7
6.5
24.2
NR
13.6
3.4
3.4
- Ho R*l«e**> to Air or Watvr r«port*d to TRI.
1 BPA ID
1 NAME
3 PB
4 Bf
5 DV
6 DI
7 HRI
EPA ID from th« Tozio R«l«a>* Inventory D»t«ba»«.
Facility HUM from th« Toxic *«!•*•• inventory D»tato«»«.
Population Exposed -
-------
Attachment A
Comparative Risk Analysis
Human Health Risk Index (HRI) Methodology
EPA, Region 6
The Region 6 Human Health Risk Index (HRI) enables users to
select specific HRI subfactors (i.e., age, income, natality,
ethnicity) and perform special regulatory, health, and social-
economic analyses. These special applications include
environmental justice studies, enforcement targeting analyses,
environmental impact studies, and assessments of pollution
prevention projects.
Enforcement targeting is a procedure which ranks industrial
facilities as to the potential risk each facility may pose to .
human health and ecology. The Region's Multi-Media Enforcement
Committee (CRIMES) identified possible high risk facilities from
NEIC compliance data. Facilities were selected for risk
screening if noncompliant in two or more media programs
(air,water,land). The Region's Management Division scientists
estimated the relative risk posed by each facility using a
modification of the Region 6 Human Health Risk Index (HRI). The
methodology ranked each site using Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
data, 1990 Census data and chemical toxicity data from the TRI
Relative Risk-Based Environmental Indicators Model (TRI
Environmental Indicators data managed by EPA's Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics - OPPT). The enforcement
targeting methodology is mathematically and toxicologically
nsistent with the Region's Potential Environmental Justice
evaluation methodology.
All HRI subfactors are mathematically related. All special
application studies contribute to an ever larger risk analysis.
Use of the HRI formula assures the investigator that risk data is
evaluated by documented, consistent, peer reviewed ranking
criteria.
A. Enforcement Targeting Analysis
For the enforcement targeting study, comparative risk assumptions
are a means of applying a consistent criteria to TRI releases and
demographic data. They are not to be confused with risk
assessment assumptions. Comparative risk assumptions should not
be perceived as actual exposures or actual causes of adverse
effects. Comparative risk studies only rank risks (compare one
risk to another). They can not quantify risks.
Region 6 industrial facilities were screened for enforcement
targeting by reviewing EPA compliance data (RCRA, NPDES, AIRS.)
-------
Those facilities with violations in these three regulatory
programs were considered for further targeting.
The 1997 Enforcement Targeting study ranks industrial facilities
in Region 6 by mathematically relating TRI chemical release data,
TRI Environmental Indicators chemical toxicity information, and
Census demographic data. The area of study is a four mile radius
around each facility (50 sq.mi.). The tables attached list the
facilities and the estimated population around each (1990
Census.)
The Human Health Risk Index formula ranks on a scale from 0 to
100. The higher scores indicate a higher potential risk from the
TRI emissions and therefore, a more suitable enforcement target.
Factors examined for each industrial-50 sg.mi. area are total
population, specific annual TRI chemical releases in pounds to
air, land, and surface water, percent of population estimated to
be exposed, household income, age, chemical toxicity through air
and water pathways, ecological toxicj.ty and bioaccumulation
potential via water releases.
1. Comparative Risk Index - Enforcement Targeting Formula
The Enforcement Targeting Formula is similar to the base HRI
(Human Health Risk Index) and the Region's Environmental
Justice formula. Similar data sets and mathematical
relationships are used in each. Therefore, the Risk Index
and the special applications indices can be integrated. The
following are the general components of the enforcement
targeting formula where:
Human Health Risk Index (HRI' « Exposure * Hazard
Enforcement Targeting Ranking - (PE/PC • Pf) • (DI • DV)
PE - Population Excised
PC » Population in Community
Pf = Population Factors (Actual Population)
DI - Decree of Impact
DV » Degree of Vulnerability
"Community" is defined as a 4 mile radius around an
industrial facility. The radius is measured from the
estimated center of the site (TRI data, EPA facility maps,
and personal communications with facility personnel were
used to locate these centers). The radius did not account
for the size of the facility (fence line). The study area
is approximately 50 square miles (calculated: 3.14 X 42 =
50.2). PE is assumed to be
the population potentially exposed to a given TRI chemical
release from the facility.
Note that PE is divided by PC. This represents a ratio of
-------
the potential exposed population to the total population in
the study area. This ratio then becomes the population
fraction exposed in a given area (4 mile radius). For the
1997 Enforcement Targeting initiative, the assumed exposed
population is 100%.
PE (Population Exposed) / PC (Total Population) * 1
2. Comparative Risk Index - Enforcement Targeting Ranking
Criteria
Data for Pf, DI and DV are evaluated in specific ranges and
assigned scaling scores. Pf represents the actual
population for a 4 mile radius area and is scaled from 0 to
4. Degree of Impact (DI) and Degree of Vulnerability (DV)
subfactors are ranked from 1 to 5. Degree of Impact
subfactors include the pounds of TRI chemical releases, air
and water toxicity, and bioaccumulation in fish. Degree of
Vulnerability subfactors are age, economically stressed, and
natality. The enforcement targeting Pf and DI scoring
criteria differ significantly from the HRI method
description (see Chapter IV, Scoring Criteria1) . The Degree
of Vulnerability criteria are similar to the HRI.
Exposure
For the Enforcement Targeting application:
1. PE/PC
0 The community is defined as a 4 mile radius around the
center of the facility.
0 PE is 1 (or 100% of the study area population.)
0 PC is 1 (or 100% of the community.)
0 The FE/PC value is a ratio of the number of people
potentially exposed to the releases of a facility.
2. Population Factor
The Population Factor (Pf) used in the Enforcement Targeting
formula is scored from the actual population for each study
area. The actual population ranking is determined from 1990
Census block totals for population per one square mile by
the scaling criteria following. The criteria scores range
from 0 to 4.
-------
POPULATION FACTOR Population Ranking
Population per 8a. Mile Scaling Score
0 and < 200
> 200 and £ 1,000
> 1,000 and <, 5,000
> 5,000
0
1
2
3
4
Hazard
1. Degree of Impact
The Degree of Impact (DI) is a chemical specific factor. In
the Region 6 Comparative Risk HRI calculation, DI includes
cancer and non-cancer potency factors, assessment of
mutagenicity, environmental fate, and pharmacokinetics.
Risk to human health can be estimated with the enforcement
targeting formula by defining scoring criteria for
population exposed (PE), vulnerability of exposed
populations (DV), and the chemical hazard (DI) criteria.
For this application, potential health and ecological
impacts of a specific TRI reported chemical or group of
chemicals was estimated using TRI Environmental Indicators
data. DI is calculated for each TRI release and the values
are summed. Summing these values for each facility serves
to address the potential additive impact of multiple
chemical releases.
Degree of Impact (DI) is one of two factors defining the
Hazard portion of the enforcement targeting application of
the HRI methodology. Selected facilities in the 1995 Toxic
Release Inventory (TRI-Community Right-to-Know database) are
screened and ranked as to the potential risk each may pose
to the human health and ecology for a four mile radius
around each site. The two primary sources of information
used to determine DI are TRI chemical release data and
Environmental Indicators toxicity information.
Reported 1995 TRI releases to air and water are determined
for each facility. Stack and fugitive air releases are
added to represent total air releases. Water releases are
those to surface water. If a facility reports an air
release and a water release of zero pounds, the DI is
calculated from the air release only. The same is true if
-------
only a water release is reported (DI is calculated from
water.) If a facility reports the zero release of chemicals
to air and water media and these are the only releases
reported or the facility is not found in the TRI database,
then the facility is ranked with the default value of 1.
Chemical specific information from TRI Environmental
Indicators data was used to give a relative estimate of the
potential impact of each TRI chemical release from each
facility.
Toxicity ranking, for each chemical reported in 1995 TRI for
the targeted facilities, was developed to address air
toxicity and water toxicity. Environmental Indicator data
was used as reference data for evaluating the chemicals.
These toxicity values were used to calculate toxicity points
for Degree of Impact ranking.
Each chemical's T^T release to air (pounds) was multiplied
by the chemical's "INHALE_TOX" Environmental Indicators
factor. Each chemical's TRI release to surface water
(pounds) was multiplied by the chemical specific
MORAL_TOX_W" factor plus the bioaccumulation "BCF" factor.
Each of the weighted TRI release values are summed.
For all air releases 95% (0.95) of the total study area's
population was assumed to be exposed. For all TRI releases
to water 5% (0.05) of the total area population was assumed
to be exposed. These fractions w«=>re agreed upon by Region 6
staff scientists in the Air, Hazardous Waste, Superfund, and
Water programs. The rationale for assuming that 95% of the
residents are possibly exposed to air releases and that 5%
of the residents to water releases were: (1) it is possible
for chemicals released to air to travel anywhere in the four
mile radius, all residents can travel throughout the area,
the lungs are very efficient absorber? of airborne
chemicals, (2) chemical releases to surface water are
estimated to come in contact with 5 percent of the study
area population, primarily from eating contaminated fish.
The summed values round for air and water are multiplied by
0.95 and 0.05 respectively. The new value is ranked to
become the facility's Degree of Impact (DI) value.
Application of the toxicity of a chemical to its release is
handled through the methodology following.
1) A facility's specific chemical release of pounds
to air is multiplied by the chemical's estimated
TRI Indicators "INHALEJTOX" value.
2) A facility's specific chemical release of pounds
to water is multiplied by the sum of the values of
-------
the estimated »ORA1_TOX-W» and "BCF" values.
3) The sun of the facility's chemicals for air
toxicity is multiplied by 0.95. The sum of the
facility's chemicals for water is multiplied by
0.05.
4) The sum of the facility's chemical toxicity
calculated under the criteria in 1), 2) and 3)
above are scaled according to the figure
following:
HRI Degree of Impact Scaling Criteria
Release calculation <= 300000 1
Release calculation > 300000 and
<= lOOOooO 2
Release calculation > 1000000 and
<= 2000000 3
Release calculation > 2000000 and
<= 5000000 4
Release calculation > 5000000 5
2. Degree of Vulnerability
The Degree of Vulnerability (DV) of the HRI includes
demographic data for ethnicity, economic status, age,
pregnancy, life-style factors, and pre-existing disease. Of
these subfactors, natality, age and economically stressed,
are used in the enforcement targeting formula. Each DV
subfactor has a scaling range from 1 to 5. The mean of the
subfactor rankings is the facility Degree of Vulnerability.
The maximum value for Degree of Vulnerability in the HRI
formula is 5.
The Degree of Vulnerability factor for this example is
derived from a comparison of the 4 mile radius area's
percent of population under the criteria subfactor and the
state percent of population under the criteria subfactor.
The scaling criteria for the subfactors is evaluated through
the Comparative Risk Index (HRI) Degree of Vulnerability
Ranking Methodology. An area is evaluated specific to the
state criteria in which it resides (see Chapter IV).
-------
Census 1990 data is used for the Degree of Vulnerability
factor. For the Economically Stressed subfactor the risk
group is assumed to be households with an income of less
than $15.000 a year.
HRI Degree of Vulnerability Ranking Methodology
Study Area Subfactor Score
Number of residents in the risk group
less than or equal to the state percentage 1
Number of residents in the risk
group greater than the state percentage
but less than or equal to 1.33 times 2
the state percentage
Number of residents in the risk
group greater than 1.33 times
the state percentage but less than or 3
equal to 1.66 times the state percentage
Number of residents in the risk
group greater than 1.66 times
the state percentage but less than or 4
equal to 2 times the state percentage
Number of residents in the risk
group greater than 2 times the state 5
percentage.
DV
Degree of Vulnerability - The Health Risk Index (HRI)
defines the vulnerability of a population by setting
criteria for Natality, Age. and Economically Stressed,
Life-Style, Ethnicity, and Pre-existing Disease.
Natality, Age and Economically Stressed subfactors are
used to characterize the vulnerability within 4 miles
of each site.
(DV,
rtat
DV
•ge
/ 3
Dvnat "Natality" data is taken from the 1990 Census and is
defined as the number of children less than one year of
age. The assumption is that within the past year, both
mother and fetus could be exposed to chemical releases.
DV
age
"Age" vulnerability data is taken from the 1990 Census
and is defined as individuals from infant to 13 years
old and those over 55 are assumed to be more at risk
than the general population.
-------
DVeco "Economic status" data is taken from the 1990 Census
and is defined as households with incomes of less than
$15,000 per year.
Enforcement Targeting Assumptions?
Through clear recognition of assumptions we can accurately
interpret and realistically use the study results.
1. The data for the industry study area and each TRI
chemical release is evaluated for potential human
health risk. This data is used to calculate specific
enforcement targeting formula risk factors. The
exposure and hazard scores are mathematically related
to produce an enforcement targeting risk index value.
Th« higher risk index number, the more potential human
health and •eological risk to the 4 mile radius around
a facility. The risk index scores can xange from 0 to
100. If the highest risk index score is JO and the
lowest score is 1, the quantitative assumption is that
there is a 30 fold difference in potential risk posed
by the two facilities.
2. Values for study area population are derived from 4
mile radius CIS "clippings" around each industrial
facility. The data is from 1990 block level Census
data. The data does not indicate the population
dispersion within the 50 sg. mile study area.
Therefore, it is assumed that the population is evenly
distributed throughout the 4 mile radius. This, of
course, is never true.
3. Meteorological and topographical factors are not taken
into consideration in the calculations of this
comparative risk study. The assumptions for the study
are that the wind blows equally in all directions and
facility chemical runoff from spills and lagoons
travels equally in all directions. This, of course, is
never true.
4. A single point is used to represent the facility
boundary, as if all releases emanate from that one
cartographic point. The facility may in fact represent
1-3 square miles of the areas shown on each map. There
may be more employees exposed to chemical releases than
residents. The facility employees are not considered
in the Census data used.
5. Ecological concerns are not adequately addressed. For
example, several locations have large areas of wetlands
which included bays, marshlands, rivers, streair=
8
-------
lakes, and estuaries. The lack of human population is
mathematically noted but the resulting potential for
exposure of large ecologically sensitive areas is not.
6. EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT)
"TRI Environmental Indicators" data used in the Degree
of Impact (DI) analyses of facility releases are scaled
from 1-5. Adjustments are not made for fugitive versus
stack emitted pollutants or pollutants released to
fresh, salt, or brackish waters. The scaling factors
used ar« not document quotes but interpretations of the
'•Indicators" values.
7. The Population Exposed (PE) factor assumes 100 % of a
given study area's population can be exposed to a TRI
release. A basic assumption for PE is that if a
facility releases a chemical then the whole study
population is exposed.
i>
8. Degree of Impact is calculated by multiplying a
facility's specific chemical releases in pounds to air
times the chemical's toxicity scaling value. The sum
of the facility's air release toxicity (INHALE_TOX) is
multiplied by 0.95. For TRI release data to water the
sum of bioaccumulation (BCF) and water toxicity
(ORAL_TOX_W) values is multiplied times the chemical's
release to water in pounds. A water release is assumed
to expose 5% of the population due to eating
contaminated fish. The sum of a facility's water
release toxicity is multiplied by 0.05. All the
chemical specific release products are added for each
facility. The calculation assumes the facility's
potential health and ecological impacts from TRI
releases are additive.
9. The enforcement targeting method first screens Region 6
industries through review of compliance history data
from NEIC. Those with evidence of non-compliance in
RCRA, NPDES, and AIRS databases are selected for
comparative risk evaluation. Therefore, facilities
with records of non-compliance are assumed to be better
candidates for enforcement targeting.
10. A review of TRI data and discussions with Air, Water,
Superfund and Hazardous Waste scientists in the region
resulted in a decision that TRI reported releases to
land did not pose significantly risks to the human
population. Judgements were also made that 95% of the
human population in a 4 mile radius could be exposed to
air emissions and 5% of the area's population can be
exposed to a surface water discharge.
-------
11. It is assumed that the human and ecological impacts of
chemical releases from facilities are equal throughout
a 50 sq. mi. study area.
E. Geographic Information Systems and Other Computer Resources
Comparative Risk results are used in Risk Management
decision making processes. Geographic Information Systems
(CIS) can assure locational accuracy for industrial
facilities in Region 6. The Potential Environmental Justice
and Multi-Media Enforcement Targeting applications use
Census 1990 data to provide demographic information.
0 The community evaluated is the 4 mile radius area from
the center of a facility.
0 Population Factors and Degree of Vulnerability use CIS
spatially extracted data. Through quality assurance
techniques and AML application, accurate population
information can be made available to any system
supporting the methodology. This data is essential for
human population and vulnerability analysis.
A format of 1995 TRI data is available to Region 6 CIS
staff. Through the use of GIS facilities, point specific
images can be laid on top of compatible landmark images to
verify location of the study area.
The Degree of Vulnerability and Potential Environmental
Justice Index demographic system was used to extract data
from the Region 6 GIS Library Vo calculate the Degree of
Vulnerability and thp. Potential Environmental Justice Index.
The data sets used were:
TIGER/Line Census Files, 1990 prepared by the Bureau of
the Census. Washington: The Bureau, 1991.
Census of Population and Housing, 1990: Public Law
(P.L.) 94-171 Data (AR, LA, NM, OK, and TX) prepared by
the bureau of the Census. —Washington: The Bureau,
1991.
Census of Population and Housing, 1990: Summary Tape
File 3 on CD-ROM (AR, LA, NM, OK, and TX) prepared by
the Bureau of the Census. —Washington: The Bureau,
1992.
10
-------
QUALITY ASSURANCE
TRI data lat/long points are sometimes reported at locations
other than the true geographical point coordinate, therefore,
verification of the facility location is essential. Information
related to the Region 6 TRI 1990 Spatial Database was checked for
accuracy by CIS Support Staff. Data was reviewed from RCRA files
containing site maps, permit information, and other relevant
source documentation on site specific issues. Addresses from
these files were matched against TRI address information.
Quality assurance for facility location was achieved when TRI
facility point locations from GIS databases were matched against
TIGER line files. Using RCRA program information, the point was
checked for vicinity. If RCRA program information was
inconclusive, verification was attempted by phone using TRI
supplied telephone contacts. Location of the facility was
Determined relative to intersection or major highway, rivers,
railroad, other landmarks incluQ^.ig other TRI sites in close
proximity. If uncertainty exis\.«=u after all verification
attempts were exhausted, the TRI lat/long point became the
default coordinate.
The buffers created from the verified points were then used as
clip coverages for extracting population totals for community
definition in the HRI formula. These buffers were used to clip
total population from PL94171 and STF3A (Census 1990) and Degree
of Vulnerability percentages for subfactors NATALITY, AGE and
ECONOMICALLY STRESSED rankings.
11
-------
Attachment B
Potential Environmental Justice Index Processing
EPA, Region 6
A. History
Environmental Justice refers to the pledge or assurance that no
population subset will endure a disproportionate share of the
country's pollution. There is evidence that minority and low
income communities are exposed to more environmental pollutants
than the general population (Environmental Justice. Reducing Risk
for all Communities. U.S. EPA, OPPE, February, 1992). The
Comparative Health Risk Index (HRI) i-ormula is used to define-and
prioritize specific sites as to their potential for pollution
impacts. The Potential Environmental Justice methodology also
sets criteria, applies basic principles of science, and enables
environmental managers to determine which communities may have
environmental justice concerns and why.
The Comparative Health Risk Index enables users to select
specific HRI subfactors and perform special regulatory, health,
and social-economic analyses. These special applications include
environmental justice studies, enforcement targeting analyses,
environmental impact studies, and assessments of pollution
prevention projects.
The Environmental Justice analysis uses Geographic Information
System (CIS) maps, census demograpl.l- Jata, and the general HRI
method for mathematically ranking ea>.'•» site. Potential
Environmental Justice information is demonstrated using HRI
criteria and rankings alone. The method described is automated
through The Degree of Vulnerability and Potential Environmental
Justice demographic analysis system.
B. Methodology
Sites are evaluated using the Potential Environmental Justice
formula and ranked on a scale of 0 to 100 as to their potential
for environmental demographic concerns. The higher score
indicate greater potential for justice concern. Factors examined
for each site are population density, percent minority population
and percent economically stressed population data. Data is
compared to individual state percentages.
12
-------
1. Potential Environmental Justice Formula
The Potential Environmental Justice Formula is similar to the
base HRI (Human Health Risk Index) formula where:
HRI = Exposure • Hazard
EJI - (PE/PC • Pf) • (DI • DV)
PE - Population Exposed
PC « Population in Community
Pf = Population Density
DI = Degree of Impact
DV » Degree of Vulnerability
DVMAV - Minority Status Score
DVECO * Economic Status Score
HAVE « Minority Percentage
EAVE = Economic Percentage
Like HRI, the community of the Potential Environmental Justice
application is defined as a 50 sg. mi. study area (a 4 mile
radius from the point of interest) or subsets of this base study
area.
Potential Environmental Justice rankings can be calculated for an
individual census block, a census block group, a census tract, or
the area of any polygon or circle surrounding a site of interest.
2. Potential Environmental Justice Ranking Criteria
PE is assumed to be the total population in the community
evaluated (i.e., 50 sg. mi. or smaller area). Therefore, the
PE/PC valu* is 1. If the characteristics of the community or a
specific pollutant allows the researcher to identify particular
portions of the community as the only areas being significantly
exposed, then the PE would be a smaller value than PC, and PE/PC
would be less than 1. For the Potential Environmental Justice
methodology PE is equal to PC. Therefore, the analysis addresses
the total 50 square mile study area.
Data for Pf and DV are evaluated in specific ranges and assigned
a scaling score from 0 to 4 for Pf, and 1 to 5 for each of the DV
subfactors, percent minority population and economically stressed
population.
The Population Factor (Pf) used in the justice formula is the
population density score for the study area. The population
density ranking is determined by evaluating the total population
per scruare mile for the area by the scaling criteria following.
The criteria scores range from 0 to 4.
13
-------
POPULATION FACTOR Population Ranking
Population per Sa. Mile Scaling Score
0 and <, 200
> 200 and £ 1,000
> 1,000 and < 5,000
> 5,000
0
1
2
3
4
The Degree of Impact (DI) is a chemical specific factor. In the
HRI calculation, DI includes cancer and non-cancer potency
factors, assessment of mutagenicity, environmental fate, and
pharmacokinetics. Potential risk to human health can be assessed
with the formula by defining scoring criteria for population
exposed (PE) and the chemical hazard (DI) criteria. For this
application, the potential health impact of a specific chemical
or group of chemicals is not determined in this application.
Environmental Justice Indexes are not potential risk indexes.
Therefore, DI is given the HRI default value of 1.
Degree of vulnerability (DV) for the HRI is the mean of the
ranking values of demographic data including ethnicity, economic
status, age, pregnancy •' -s-stylc factors, and pre-existing
disease.
Of the subfactors above, ethnicity and economically stressed, are
used in the justice formula. Each DV subfactor, ethnicity
(DVMAV) and economically stressed (DVECO), has a scaling range
from 1 to 5. The Potential Environmental Justice vulnerability
scaling scores are multiplied. Therefore, the maximum value for
Degree of Vulnerability in the EJ formula is 25.
The Ethnicity subfactor is derived from a comparison of the
area's percent of minority population to the calculated state
percent minority population. The actual percentages for percent
minority (HAVE) and percent economically stressed (EAVE) are
presented in the attached tables. Region 6 chose to include the
Hispanic population in the definition of minority, even though
this group may have reported themselves as white in the 1990
Census. The minority population of a Region 6 community is
defined as the Census 1990 total of the non-white population plus
the white Hispanic-Origin population.
14
-------
Risk assessors of other Regions will have to make similar census
based decisions to properly identify their Region's
ethnic/minority population.
The scaling criteria for the Degree of Vulnerability subfactors,
Percent Minority and Percent Economically Stressed, is found
through the HRI Degree of Vulnerability Ranking Methodology. An
area is compared to the state in which it resides.
HRI Degree of Vulnerability Ranking Methodology
Study Area Subfactor Score
Number of residents in the risk group
less than or equal to the state percentage 1
Number of residents in the risk
group greater than the state percentage
but less than or equal co 1.33 times 2
the state percentage
Number of residents in the risk
group greater than 1.33 times
the state percentage but less than or 3
equal to 1.66 times the state percentage
Number of residents in the risk
group greater than 1.66 times
the state percentage but less than or 4
equal to 2 times the state percentage
Number of re., , _ .s in the risk
group greater than 2 times the state 5
percentage.
For the Economically Stressed subfactor the risk group is assumed
to be households that make less than $15.000 a year.
The Potential Environmental Justice formula:
EJ
(PE/PC)
(1)
PE/PC
Pf
DI
DV
DVMAV
DVECO
(Pf) • (DI)
(Pop. Den. Rank) • (1)
(DV)
(DVMAV • DVECO)
Population Density Scaling Scores (0-4)
1
DVMAV • DVEC
Minority Status (1-5)
• Economic Status (1 - 5)
Household Income < $15000
15
-------
DVMT The minority population of a Region 6 community is defined as the
Census 1990 total of the non-white population plus the white
Hispanic-Origin population.
DV,,,,, "Economically Stressed" data is taken from the 1990 Census and is
defined as households with incomes of less than $15,000 per year.
The Degree of Vulnerability and Potential Environmental Justice Index
demographic system was used to extract data from the Region 6 CIS
Library to calculate the Degree of Vulnerability and the Potential
Environmental Justice Index. The data sets used were:
TIGER/Line Census Files, 1990 prepared by the Bureau of the Census.
Washington: The Bureau, 1991.
Census of Population and Bousing, 1990: Public Law (P.L.) 94-171 Data
(AR, LA, NM, OK, and TX) prepared by the bureau of the Census. —
Washington: The Bureau, 1991.
Census of Population and Housing, 1990: Summary Tape File 3
on CD-ROM (AR, LA, NM, OK, and TX) prepared by the Bureau of
the Census. —Washington: The Bureau, 1992.
STATE COMPARATIVE CRITERIA:
MINORITY PERCENTAGE
ECONOMICALLY STRESSED PERCENTAGE
AR
17.7
36.0
LA
34.2
36.3
NM
49.0
31.0
OK
19.0
32.0
TX
39.4
27.6
16
-------
CHE& OATA MATRIX
Components for Ca g Degree of Impact Rankings
CAS CHEMICAL ARTX1
000630206
000071556
000079345
000079005
000812044
001717006
000057147
000095501
000095636
000120821
000106887
000096128
000106934
000354234
000107062
000540590
000078875
000122667
000106990
000541731
000542756
000764410
000106467
000123911
000082280
000354256
000075683
, ,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
, ,1-Trichloroethane
, ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
, ,2-Trichloroethane
, -Dichloro-l,2,2-trifluoroethane (HCFC-123b)
, -Dichloro- 1 -fluoroethane
, -Dimethyl Hydrazine
,2 Dichlorobenzene
,2,4 Trimethylbenzene
,2 ,4-Trich lorobenzene
,2-Butylene oxide
,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane(DBCP)
,2-Dibromoethane
,2-Dichloro-l , 1 ,2-trifluoroethane
,2-Dichloroe thane
,2-Dichloroethylene
,2-Dichloropropane
,2-Diphenylhydrazine
,3-But.iJiene
,3-Dich'orobenzene
,3-Dii. ir.oropropylene
,4-Dichloro-2-butene
,4-Dichlorobenzene
, l-Dioxane
\mino-2-methyl-anthraquinone
~hloro- 1 , 1 ,2,2-tetrafluoroethane
-Chloro- 1 , 1 -difluoroethane
000306832 2,2-Dichloro- 1,1,1 -trifluoroethane
000078886 2,3-Dichloropropene
000095954 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
000088062 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
000094757 2,4-D (Acetic Acid (2,4 dichlorophe
0006 1 5054 2,4-Diaminoanisole
039 1 564 1 7 2,4-Diaminoanisole sulfate
000095807 2,4-Diaminotoluene
000120832 2,4-Dichloropheno!
000105679 2,4-Dimethylphenol
000051285 2,4-Dinitrophenol
000 1 2 1 1 42 2,4-Dinitrotoluene'
000606202 2,6-Dinitrotoluene
000087627 2,6-Xylidine
000053963 2-Acetylaminofluorene
000 1 1 7793 2-Aminoanthraquinone
3
1
3
3
I
1
4
2
3
3
3
4
4
1
3
3
3
4
4
2
3
2
2
j
i
:
1
1
1
2
3
3
1
1
4
3
3
3
4
4
1
1
1
ECTX2
3
1
3
3
1
1
4
2
3
3
3
4
5
1
3
3
3
4
4
3
4
2
3
3
2
3
3
1
1
4
3
3
3
4
4
1
1
1
BCF3
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
4
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
1
3
1
4
1
1
1
2
4
3
2
1
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
4
April 21,1997
-------
CAS
002837890
000532274
000110805
000109864
000109068
000088755
000079469
000090437
000091941
000119904
000119937
000101804
000080057
000101144
000101611
000101779
000139651
000534521
000060093
000092671
000060117
000092933
000100027
000099592
000075070
000060355
000067641
000075058
000098862
000107028
000079061
000079107
000107131
000309002
000107186
000107051
007429905
001344281
000061825
007664417
006484522
007783202
CHE1V 1ATA MATRIX
G 'inponents for Ca. g Degree of Impact Rankings
CHEMICAL ARTX1
2-Chloro- 1,1,1 ,2-tetrafluoroethane
2-Chloroacetophenone
2-Ethoxyethanol
2-Methoxyethanol
2-Methylpyridine
2-Nitrophenol .
2-Nitropropane
2-Phenylphenol
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine
3,3 ' -Dimethy Ibenzidine
4,4'-Diaminodiphenylether
4,4 ' -Isopropylidenediphenol
4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)
4,4'-Methylehebis(N,N,dimethyl)benz
4,4'-Methylenedianiline
4,4'-Thiodianiline
4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
4-Aminoazobenzene
4-Aminodiphenyl
4-Dimethylaminoazobenzene
4-Nitrobiphenyl
4-Nitrophenol
5-N itro-o-anisidine
Acetaldehyde
Acetamide
Acetone
Acetonitrile
Ac etophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Allyl chloride
Aluminum (fume or dust)
Aluminum oxide (fibrous forms)
Amitrole
Ammonia
Ammonium nitrate (solution)
Ammonium sulfate (solution)
1
5
2
3
1
1
5
1
3
3
5
3
2
3
}
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
1
2
3
2
5
4
4
3
5
3
4
5
1
1
"^
1
5
ECTX2
1
5
2
3
1
1
5
1
3
3
5
3
2
3
3
4
3
1
3
1
2
3
2
3
4
2
4
5
3
4
5
BCF3
I
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
4
2
2
2
2
2
4
3
2
2
3
2
4
1
2
April 21,1997
-------
CAS
000062533
000120127
007440360
N010
007440382
N020
001332214
000492808
007440393
N040
000098873
000055210
000071432
000092875
000098077
000094360
000098884
000100447
007440417
N050
000092524
000108601
000111911
000111444
000103231
000542881
000353593
000075252
000074839
000075638
000141322
000085687
000123728
004680788
000569642
000989388
001937377
002602462
016071866
002832408
000081889
003761533
CHEI> OATA MATRTX
Components for Ca ,g Degree of Impact
CHEMICAL
Aniline
Anthracene
Antimony
Antimony compounds
Arsenic
Arsenic compounds
Asbestos (friable)
Auramine
Barium
Barium compounds
Benzal chloride
Benzamide
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzotrichloride
Benzoyl Peroxide
Benzoyl chloride
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Beryllium compounds
Biphenyl
Bis(2-chloro- 1 -methethy l)ether
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)adipate
Bis(chloromethy 1 )ether
Bromochlorodifluorome'hane (Halon 1
Bromoform (Tribromomethane)
Bromomethane (Methyl Bromide)
Bromotrifluoromethane (Halon 1301)
Butyl acrylate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyraldehyde
C.I. Acid Green 3
C.I. Basic Green 4
C.I. Basic Red 1
C.I. Direct Black 38
C.I. Direct Blue 6
C.I. Direct Brown 95
C.I. Disperse Yellow 3
C.I. Food Red 15
C.I. Food Red 5
Rankings
ARTX1
4
2
4
4
5
5
3
1
4
4
1
1
3
5
5
1
1
*
5
5
2
1
1
4
1
5
1
2
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
1
1
.1
ECTX2
3
2
4
4
4
4
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
5
5
1
1
3
4
4
2
1
1
4
1
5
1
3
3
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
1
1
1
BCF3
2
3
1
1
2 '
2
1
3
1
1
2
2
2
3
2
1
1
2
1
1
3
2
1
2
4
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
April 21, 1997
-------
CAS
003118976
000842079
000097563
000128665
000076142
000076153
000075694
000075718
007440439
N078
000156627
000133062
000063252
000075150
000056235
000463581
000120809
000133904
000057749
007782505
010049044
000079118
000108907
000510156
000074456
000075003
000067663
000074873
000107302
N084
000126998
063938103
001897456
007440473
N090
007440484
N096
007440508
N100
008001589
001319773
000098828
CHE1V 1ATA MATRIX
Components for Ca. g Degree of Impact Rankings
CHKMI \L ARTX1
C.I. Solv Orange 7
C.I. Sol- t Yellow 14
C.I. Solv. .it Yellow 3
C.I. Vat Yellow 4
CFC 114
CFC 115
CFC- 11
CFC- 12
Cadmium
Cadmium compounds
Calcium cyanamide
Captan
Carbaryl
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon^ iulfide
Catecho
Chlorat ;n
Chlorda ;
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloroacetic acid
^hlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22)
Chloroethane (Ethyl chloride)
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chloromethyl methyl ether
Chlorophenols
Chloroprene
Chlorotetrafluoroethane
Chlorothalonil
Chromium
Chromium compounds
Cobalt
Cobalt compounds
Copper
Copper compounds
Creosote
Cresol (mixed isomers)
Cumene
1
2
2
5
5
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
2
4
j
3
1
1
3
2
5
1
3
1
3
5
5
C
5 •
3
3
1
2
3
ECTX2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
2
4
3
3
3
1
1
3
2
5
1
3
1
3
3
3
5
5
3
3
1
2
3
BCF3
5
4
3
4
2
2
2
2
4
4
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
1
1
1
3
3
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
4
4
4
4
5 .
5
1
1
2
April 21, 1997
-------
THE iv
Coi iponents for CaL
'ATA MATRIX
g Degree of Impact Rankings
CAS
CH •
AL
AR1X1 ECTX2 BCF3
000080159
000135206
N106
000110827
001163195
000117817
002303164
025376458
000334883
000132649
000124732
000084742
090454185
025321226
000075274
000075092
034077877
000062737
000115322
001464535
000111422
000084662
000064675
000094586
000131113
000077781
000079447
025321146
000106898
000140885
000541413
000100414
000074851
000107211
000075218
000096457
Nonel
000151564
000075343
002164172
000050000
000064186
Cumenc droperoxide
Cupfer
Cyanide Compounds
Cyclohexane
Decabromodiphenyl oxide
Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Dial late
Diaminotoluene (mixed isomers)
Diazomethane
Dibenzofuran
Dibromotetrafluoromethane (I lalon 24
Dibutyl phthalate
Dichloro- 1 , 1 ,2-trifluoroethane
Dichlorobenzene (mixed isomers)
Dichlorobromomethane
Dichloromethane
Dichlorotrifluoroethane
Dichlorvos
Dicofol
Diepoxybutane
Diethanolamine
Diethyl phthalate
Diethyl sulfate
Uihydrosafrole
Dimethyl phthalate
Dimethyl sulfate
Dimethylcarbamyl chloride
Dinitrotoluene (mixed isomers)
Epichlorohydrin
Ethyl acrylate
Ethyl chloroformate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid, salts and esters
Ethyleneimine (Aziridine)
Ethylidene dichloride
Fluometuron
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
5
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
2
1
3
1
1
3
1
4
i
1
5
1
1
4
3
1
2.
1
1
3
4
1
1
2
3
3
1
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
5
1
1
1
2
1
3
3
3
1
3
1
1
3
1
4
1
1
5
1
1
3
3
1
2
1
1
4
4
1
1
2
3
3
1
2
1
1
3
1
3
3
1
I
4
3
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
5
1
1
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
April 21, 1997
-------
CAS
CHEiV
Components for Cat
CIIFMICAL
»ATA MATRIX
g Degree of Impact Rankings
ARTX1 ECTX2 BCF3
000076131
N230
000076448
000087683
000118741
000077474
000067721
001335871
000070304
000680319
000302012
010034932
007647010
000074908
007664393
. 007783064
000123319
000078842
000067630
000120581
007439921
N420
000058899
000108316
000109773
012427382
007439965
N450
007439976
N458
000126987
000067561
000072435
000096333
000079221
000078933
000060344
000074884
000108101
000624839
000074931
000080626
Freon 113
Glycol Ethers
Heptachlor
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Hexachloronaphthalene
Hexachlorophene
Hexamethylphosphoramide
Hydrazine
Hydrazine sulfate
Hydrochloric acid
Hydrogen cyanide
Hydrogen fluoride
Hydrogen sulfide
Hydroquinone
(sobutyraidehyde
Isopropyi alcohol
Isosafro'c
Lead
Lead compounds
Lindane
M: leic anhydride
M.lonitrile
Mi neb
Manganese
Manganese compounds
Mercury
Mercury compounds
Methacryonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methyl acrylate
Methyl chlorocarbonate
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl hydrazine
Methyl iodide
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl isocyanate
Methyl mercaptan
Methyl methacrylate
1
3
4
3
4
5
2
1
4
1
5
5
3
3
1
3
3
5
1
1
5
5
4
2
c
3
5
5
4
4
4
1
3
1
2
4
3
3
5
1
2
1
3
4
4
4
3
3
1
4
1
4
4
3
3
1
3
3
5
1
1
5
5
4
2
5
3
3
3
4
4
4
1
3
3
1
1
4
3
2
5
1
2
3
1
4
5
5
3
3
5
2
2
1
2
4
4
4
5
5
1
2
4
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
April 21, 1997
-------
CAS
001634044
000074953
000101688
000090948
001313275
000505602
000121697
000759739
000684935
000924163
000621647
000055185
000062759
000086306
004549400
000059892
016543558
000100754
000091203
007440020
N495
007697372
000139139
000099558
000098953
001836755
000051752
000055630
002234131
020816120
000123677
000056382
000076017
000087865
000079210
000108952
000075445
007664382
007723140
000085449
000088891
N575
CHEI\ MTA MATRIX
C. mponents for Ca. .g Degree of Impact
OI'F.MK L
Methyl te >utyl ether
Methyle- iromide
Methyleniois(phenylisocyanate)
Michlers Ketone
Molybdenum trioxide
Mustard gas
N,N-Dimethylaniline
N-Nitroso-N-ethylurea
N-Nitroso-N-methylurea
N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
N-Nitrosomethylvinylamine •
N-Nitrosomorpholine
N-Nitrosonornicotine
N-Nitrosopiperidine
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nickel compounds
Nitric acid
Nitrilotriacetic acid
Niiro-o-toluidine
Nitrobenzene
Nitrofen
Nitrogen mustard
Nitroglycerin
Octa^hloronaphtahlene
Osmium tetroxide
Paraldehyde
Parathion
Pentachloroethane
Pentachlorophenol
Peracetic acid
Phenol
Phosgene
Phosphoric acid
Phosphorus (yellow or white)
Phthalic anhydride
Picric acid
Polybrominated Biphenyls (PBBs)
Rankings
ARTX1
1
3
5
3
4
1
3
5
1
5 '
5
• 5
5
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
3
3
3
3
1
1
4
1
1
1
3
1
3
3
1
1
1
5
3
4
5
ECTX2
1
3
5
3
3
1
3
5
1
5
5
5
5
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
4
1
1
1
3
1
3
3
1
1
1
5
1
4
5
BCF3
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
:.
2
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
4
2
2
5
1
1
3
1
3
1
2
5
April 21, 1997
-------
CAS
001336363
023950585
001120714
000123386
000114261
000115071
000075569
000075558
000110861
000091225
000106514
000082688
000081072
000094597
007782492
N725
007440224
N740
000100425
000096093
007664939
000127184
000961115
007440280
N760
000062555
000062566
000137268
001314201
007550450
000108883
000584849
000091087
026471625
008001352
000068768
000052686
000079016
001582098
000126727
000072571
000051796
CHE1> DATA MATRIX
Components for Ci ,g Degree of Impact
CHEMICAL
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Pronamide
Propane sultone
Propionaldehyde
Propoxur
Propylene (Propene)
Propylene oxide
Propyleneimine
Pyridine
Quinoline
Quinone
Quintozene
Saccharin (manufacturing)
Safrole
Selenium
Selenium compounds
Silver
Silver compounds
Styrene
Styrene oxide
Sulfuric icid
Tetrachloroethylene (Perchlorethyle
Tetrachlorvinphos
Thallium
Thallium comounds
j'hi mcetamide
Thiourea
Thiram
Thorium dioxide
Titanium tetrachloride
Toluene
Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate
Toluene-2,6-Diisocyanate
Toluenediisocyanate
Toxaphene
Triaziquone
Trichlorfon
Trichloroethylene
Trifluralin
rris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Trypan blue
Urethane (Ethyl Carbamate)
Rankings
ARTX1
5
2
1
1
3
1
3
5
3
4
1
3
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
1
5
3
3
4
4
1
4
3
4
5
2
5
5
~
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
ECTX*
5
2
1
1
3
1
3
5
3
4
1
3
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
1
3
3
3
4
4
1
4
3
5
5
2
3
3
3
4
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
BCF3
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
3
2
2
4
4
1
1
2
2
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
4
1
1
2
4
2
1
1
April 21,1997
-------
CAS
007440622
000108054
000593602
000075014
000075354
None2
001330207
007440666
N982
012122677
000134327
000091598
000057578
000108394
000099650
000108383
000071363
000090040
000134292
00009548/
000528290
000095534
000636215
000095476
000104949
000120718
000106445
000100254
000156105
000106503
000106423
000078922
000075650
Components for C. ig Degree of Impact
CHEMICAL
Vanadium (fume or dust)
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl bromide
Vinyl chloride
Vinylidene chloride
Warfarin and salts
Xylerie (mixed isomers)
Zinc (fume or dust)
Zinc Compounds
Zineb
alpha-Naphthylamine
beta-Naphthylamine
beta-Propiolactone
m-Cresol
m-Dinitrobenzene
m-Xylene
n-Butyl alcohol
o-Anisidine
o-Anisidine hydrochloride
o-Cresol
o-Dinitrobenzene
o-Toluidine
o-Toluidine hydrochloride
o-Xylene
p-Anisidine
p-Cresidine
p-Cresol
p-Dinitrobenzene
p-Nitrosodiphenylamine
p-Phenylenediamine
p-Xylene
sec-Butyl alcohol
ten-Butyl Alcohol
Rankings
ARTX1
3
2
3
3
3
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
4
1
2
4
1
2
4
3
1
1
1
3
3
4
1
2
1
2
2
ECTX2
3
1
3
4
3
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
4
1
2
3
1
2
4
3
1
1
1
3
3
4
1
2
1
2
2
BCF3
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
5
5
3
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
2
2
2
Toxicity factor applied to air releases. Equivalent to the field "INHALE_TOX" in the new Chemical Data Matrix
Ratings were assigned using the following scale: 0-1 = 1; 10 = 2; 100-1000 = 3; 10,000 = 4; 100,000-1,000,000 = 5
Ecotoxicity factor applied to water releases. Equivalent to the field "ORAL_TOX_W" in the new Chemical Data Matrix
Ratings were assigned using the following scale: 0-1 = 1; 10 = 2; 100-1000 = 3; 10,000 = 4; 100,000-1,000,000 = 5
Bioaccumulation factor. Equivalent to the field "BCF" in the new Chemical Data Matrix.
Ratings were assigned using the following scale: < 1 =1; > 1 and < 100 = 2; > 100 and < 1000 = 3; > 1000 and < 10,000 = 4; > 10,000 = 5.
April 21,1997
------- |