United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Laboratory
Corvallis, OR 97333
EPA/600/3-89/067
PB 89 220 016
vvEPA
Research and Development
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
TO PROTECT WILDLIFE
RESOURCES
DECEMBER 1989
-------
Water Quality Criteria to Protect Wildlife Resources
Bill Williams*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory—Corvallis
Corvallis, Oregon
Suzanne Marcy*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water Regulations and Standards
Washington, D.C.
Sarah Gerould*
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Environmental Contaminants
Washington, D.C.
Workshop Conducted by
Kilkelly Environmental Associates
The Water Garden
P.O. Box 31265
Raleigh, N.C. 27622
EPA Contract No. 68-03-3439
* Workshop Co-Chairpersons
-------
CONTENTS
List of Tables and Figures iii
Executive Summary ES-1
1 INTRODUCTION 1
Workshop Organization 2
Document Organization 2
2 NEED FOR WATER QUALITY CRITERIA TO PROTECT WILDLIFE 3
Legislative Mandate 3
GAO Report 4
Need for Criteria Specific to Wildlife .. 5
3 STRATEGY TO INCORPORATE WILDLIFE INTO WATER QUALITY CRITERIA .... 7
Framework for Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria 7
Final Wildlife Value 9
4 STRATEGY TO IDENTIFY RISK AND PRIORITIZE CHEMICALS 11
Hazard Assessment 12
Exposure Assessment 15
5 DEVELOPMENT OF FINAL WILDLIFE VALUES 18
Wildlife Factors to Consider 19
Procedures for Wildlife Criteria Development 21
6 RESEARCH ....... 26
Current Status 27
Research Needs 28
References 31
Appendix A: Workshop Participants
Appendix B: 1986 U.S. EPA Water Quality Criteria Summary
Appendix C: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chemical Prioritization List
Appendix D: SARA Title III Superfund List
n
-------
TABLES
1 Protective Legislation that Augments Protection of Wildlife .... 5
FIGURES
1 National Water Quality Criteria Guidelines to protect aquatic
organisms and their uses 8
2 Proposed guidelines to derive numerical water quality criteria to
protect all organisms 10
3 Conceptual framework for Developing Wildlife Criteria 22
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Environmental Research
Laboratory-Corvallis (ERL-C) sponsored a Water Quality Criteria to Protect
Wildlife Resources Workshop, co-chaired by the U.S. EPA Office of Water and
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The workshop was
convened to identify and define the need for water quality criteria to protect
wildlife species. The workshop's goals were to (1) generate a strategy for
developing wildlife criteria based on available toxicological data, (2)
recommend an approach to incorporating wildlife criteria into the regulatory
process, and (3) identify research needs.
Although workshop participants believe that existing aquatic life water
quality criteria will in general protect wildlife species, they identified
several important exceptions. The recommended procedures are designed to
develop a method for identifying chemicals likely to adversely affect wildlife
and to provide a mechanism for developing protective criteria.
Workshop participants recommended an approach that includes modifying the
existing National Water Quality Criteria Guidelines by incorporating a Final
Wildlife Value into the "Guidelines" framework. They also identified
procedures for developing the Final Wildlife Value.
The procedures recommended by workshop participants include two phases:
(1)-prioritize chemicals based on potential adverse impact on wildlife species
and (2) generate a procedure for developing Final Wildlife Values.
The process to prioritize chemicals is a risk assessment based on
evaluation of the chemicals' hazard (e.g., toxicity data) and the probability
ES-i
-------
that wildlife species will be exposed to them (e.g., bioaccumulation,
persistence, and discharge rate).
The recommended chemical screening model is an algorithm developed at the
workshop and subsequently refined to evaluate the relative hazard of chemicals
based on toxicity and tendency for a chemical to bioaccumulate. This
algorithm uses basic measures for generating screening-level wildlife criteria
designed to establish which of the current criteria may not be protective for
wildlife species and to prioritize chemicals for developing wildlife criteria.
The algorithm developed was based on the State of Wisconsin's Wild and
Domestic Animal Criterion procedure (WDNR 1988). The general equation used in
deriving the screening level criteria is:
<.|UP NOEL x Wta x SSF
iLWL Wa + (Fa x BCF)
Where:
SLWC = screening-level wildlife criteria (mg/L)
Wa = average daily water consumption (L/day)
Fa = average food consumption (kg/day)
BCF = aquatic life bioconcentration factor (L/kg)
Wta = average weight of the animal (kg)
SSF = species sensitivity factor (0.01 to 1)
NOEL = no observed effect level (mg/kg-day)
The exposure assessment is necessary because wildlife are particularly
vulnerable to toxicity resulting from indirect food-chain exposures to
contaminants. Factors to be considered in the exposure assessment included
persistence (i.e., rate of degradation), production quantities and use
ES-2
-------
patterns, and probability of release into ambient water bodies used by
wildlife species.
Once chemicals are prioritized the next step would be to derive Final
Wildlife Values to incorporate into the Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality
Criteria. Since it would be cost prohibitive to conduct toxicity tests such
as those used for the aquatic life water quality criteria on all wildlife
species and chemicals, workshop participants have recommended that physiolog-
ically based toxicokinetic models be used to develop Final Wildlife Values.
An important consideration for this process is the incorporation of character-
istics unique to wildlife species.
Physiologically based toxicokinetic models (PB-TK) are mathematical
simulations of known anatomical and physiological functions used to predict
the blood levels of toxic chemicals in organisms subjected to various dosage
regimens. The models al'so attempt to predict the various organ and tissue
levels and extra- versus intracellular concentrations (Bischoff 1987). The
models would be based on three representative wildlife groups to derive
acceptable ambient water and tissue concentrations for Final Wildlife Values.
The PB-TK models would require a selective verification program.
Workshop participants recommended that the following five primary factors
be considered when evaluating impacts on wildlife species:
Bioaccumulation. especially for chemicals that may not be directly
toxic but which may become toxic to wildlife species that are
exposed to the chemicals through food webs
Persistence of chemicals in the environment if prolonged exposure
increases the potential for bioconcentration and biomagnification in
wildlife species
ES-3
-------
Potential physiological differences in metabolic mechanisms between
wildlife species and aquatic life, as well as unique results of
toxicity
Unique behavioral characteristics that may increase exposure and
result in different relative risks among wildlife species
Life history characteristics that may expose certain wildlife
t
species to higher levels of contamination or result in unique
toxicity effects.
Workshop participants identified preliminary research needs that were
intended to address the prioritization of chemicals and to refine Final
Wildlife Value procedures. The primary purpose of the proposed research is to
establish and validate the needed toxic effect and PB-TK models of representa-
tive wildlife species (i.e., a mammal, an avian, and a reptile or amphibian
selected to meet ecological, toxicological, and experimental considerations)
for generating Final Wildlife Values. These studies would also seek to relate
wildlife residue concentrations to water/sediment contaminant levels (major
omission in current water quality criteria) by predicting contaminant parti-
tioning in the food chain and subsequently applying specific PB-TK models that
predict residue uptake, accumulation, distribution, and elimination in the
organism. The research needs are consistent with the role identified for the
use of models in the development of Final Wildlife Values to be incorporated
into the Ambient Water Quality Criteria Guidelines.
ES-4
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Wildlife are frequently impaired by exposure to environmental
contaminants. Current ambient water quality criteria published by the U.S.
EPA Office of Water Regulations and Standards are based on toxicological
testing of aquatic organisms. Research conducted in the last 30 years
indicates that the series of aquatic life toxicity tests used in the develop-
ment of water quality criteria does not always account for exposures and
mechanisms typical of wildlife species (e.g., DDT causing eggshell thinning).
Some chemicals such as DDT, selenium, and PCBs have been evaluated for
wildlife effects. However, many chemicals that may pose hazards to wildlife
species have not been considered. In this document, the term wildlife denotes
birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians that use aquatic resources. Aquatic
life such as fish, shellfish, and benthic organisms are not included in this
category. Unique physiological and behavioral characteristics of wildlife may
increase their relative sensitivity to some chemicals, making current criteria
inadequate for wildlife protection. Studies conducted by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) document adverse effects in natural wildlife popula-
tions from surface water contamination in National Wildlife Refuges (USFWS
1986). Toxicological studies by the USFWS and the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) have also defined specific adverse effects on wildlife
species from exposure to chemical contaminants (Smith 1987). It is imperative
to develop wildlife criteria for all chemicals likely to impair wildlife.
The U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory-Corvallis (ERL-C)
sponsored the Water Quality Criteria to Protect Wildlife Resources Workshop,
1
-------
co-chaired by EPA and the USFWS, on November 1-3, 1988. The workshop was
conducted to identify and define the need for water quality criteria that are
protective of wildlife. The workshop's goals were to (1) generate a strategy
for developing wildlife criteria based on available toxicological data, (2)
identify research areas to fill data gaps, and (3) recommend ways to incorp-
orate these criteria into the regulatory process. This document summarizes
the workshop results.
Workshop Organization
Twenty-six professionals from a variety of institutions (e.g., EPA,
USFWS, State government, academia, and consultants) participated in the
workshop. Participants with expertise in wildlife toxicology, aquatic
toxicology, ecology, environmental risk assessment, and conservation were
selected to provide a variety of perspectives on the wildlife criteria issue.
(see Appendix A for a list of workshop participants). Workshop participants
generated three objectives to accomplish workshop goals:
1. Propose a strategy to incorporate wildlife criteria into the water
quality criteria program.
2. Develop a technique for screening chemicals to prioritize criteria
development efforts based on the chemical's potential to cause
adverse effects for wildlife.
3. Develop a research plan for establishing wildlife criteria.
Document Organization
This document is organized into five topic areas. Section 2 provides
background on the legislative authority for wildlife criteria development and
-------
a justification for this effort based on observed wildlife impacts. Section 3
outlines a strategy for incorporating wildlife criteria values into the
current water quality criteria framework for regulation of chemicals toxic to
wildlife. Section 4 provides a strategy for determining which chemicals are
most likely to impact wildlife species; this will help direct research and
regulatory efforts. Section 5 provides a recommended research strategy for
generating actual wildlife criteria values. Section 6 briefly summarizes the
current status of research efforts that will contribute to wildlife criteria
development and outlines additional research needs.
SECTION 2
NEED FOR WATER QUALITY CRITERIA TO PROTECT WILDLIFE
Public awareness of adverse effects to wildlife caused by exposure to
environmental contaminants has increased. Articles documenting wildlife
impairments caused by these contaminants have appeared more frequently in both
scientific journals (e.g., Hunter et al. 1984, Ringer 1983, Veith et al. 1979)
and popular literature (e.g., Mclntyre 1989). Public awareness has also
supported new legislation that requires protecting wildlife species from
deleterious contamination.
Legislative Mandate
Section 101(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires maintaining water
quality for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife.
Section 304(a)(l) requires the Administrator to develop and publish criteria
for water quality that accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge on
-------
the (1) kind and extent of all identifiable effects on health and welfare
including, but not limited to wildlife, that may be expected from the presence
of pollutants in any body of water; (2) concentration and dispersal of
pollutants through biological, physical, and chemical processes; and (3)
effects of pollutants on biological diversity, productivity, and stability.
Section 304(a)(2)(B) requires the Administrator to develop and publish
information on the factors necessary for the protection and propagation of
shellfish, fish, and wildlife. In addition to the CWA, there are several
other national legislative acts that specifically mandate the protection of
wildlife from environmental hazards (Table 1).
To meet the requirements of the CWA to establish and publish water
quality criteria, EPA developed the Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National
Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses.
EPA uses these guidelines to establish water quality criteria for a variety of
compounds (EPA 1986). These criteria were based on toxicity testing of
aquatic organisms. Although wildlife may be protected by these criteria, the
criteria are designed to protect human health and aquatic life; they do not
systematically incorporate unique characteristics of wildlife species.
GAO Report
In July, 1987, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) issued a report
titled National Refuge Contamination is Difficult to Confirm and Clean UP (GAO
1987) that documented (1) clean-up activities in Kesterson National Wildlife
Refuge (a site where selenium contamination has caused deformities in water-
fowl), (2) adverse effects of contaminant problems at other refuges, and
(3) limited federal efforts to develop water quality criteria to protect
-------
Table 1. Protective Legislation that Augments Protection of Wildlife
Endangered Species Act
Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956
Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918
Bald Eagle Act
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
Marine Mammal Protection Act
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
National Environmental Policy Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
Toxic Substances Control Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965
wildlife and refuge habitat from adverse effects of contamination. The GAO
report concluded, "progress in cleaning up contaminated sites was likely to be
slow [because of] a lack of water quality criteria to determine when wildlife
and refuge habitat are threatened". In response to the GAO report, EPA
modified the water quality criteria for selenium to include wildlife effects.
Need for Criteria Specific to Wildlife
As the GAO Report suggested, water quality criteria for wildlife are
needed by wildlife managers to determine what levels are safe for wildlife
habitat. Wildlife managers are frequently faced with moderately contaminated
-------
aquatic habitat that support wildlife populations. Environmental effects of
the contamination may be subtle. Costly, extensive studies may be required to
determine whether populations are affected and remediation is necessary.
Water quality criteria for wildlife would be extremely useful to determine
whether termination of pollutant discharge or cleanup of wildlife habitat is
needed. With water quality criteria in their present form, the manager cannot
be assured that water quality criteria will provide the protection that is
needed.
For many chemicals it is likely that water quality criteria are protec-
tive of wildlife species. However, selenium, mercury, DDT, and PCB Ambient
Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria were determined to be insufficiently
protective of wildlife. Based on empirical evidence of wildlife impairment,
these criteria were subsequently modified to incorporate a wildlife component;
the criteria became more stringent as a result. These criteria illustrate the
need to incorporate wildlife considerations during development of the criteria
before adverse impacts occur. Since wildlife data are not routinely generated
for, or incorporated in, ambient aquatic life water quality criteria, existing
criteria cannot always provide assurance to managers that wildlife are
protected. Only when the guidelines for establishing criteria specifically
considered wildlife will users be assured that the criteria are adequate for
protecting wildlife and wildlife habitat.
Procedures for deriving criteria presently incorporate a Final Residue
Value. The FDA Action Level is used (when available) as the tissue concentra-
tion in aquatic life that must not be exceeded due to bioaccumulation of an.
aquatic contaminant. However, the FDA Action Level has not yet been estab-
lished for most chemicals. Even where it is set, it is based on typical
-------
consumption patterns for humans. A more realistic scheme would estimate
tissue concentration based on wildlife behavior (e.g., feeding, drinking,
swimming) and sensitivity to contaminants.
Although aquatic species are immersed in surface waters and are therefore
directly exposed, some contaminants may have a greater impact on wildlife
species than aquatic species because of (1) contaminant bioaccumulation and
(2) differences in species sensitivity to specific toxicants. Both of these
factors need to be assessed to adequately protect wildlife. These factors are
discussed in greater detail in Section 4.
SECTION 3
STRATEGY TO INCORPORATE WILDLIFE INTO WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
Two possible approaches for establishing criteria to protect wildlife
include: (1) incorporate a Final Wildlife Value into the current framework
for developing ambient aquatic life water quality criteria, or (2) develop
separate wildlife criteria. Because the first option would require only minor
revision to the Guidelines and a regulatory framework is already in place,
this strategy was preferred by workshop participants. This decision was based
on the assumption that acceptable ambient water concentrations could be
derived by incorporating variables unique to wildlife species.
Framework for Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria
In the current Guidelines (Figure 1), criteria are developed using an
array of aquatic organisms in toxicity tests. A Final Acute Value for fresh-
water aquatic organisms and their uses is derived from acceptable acute test
-------
00
Acute Toxicity to
Animals
Chronic
Toxicity to
Animals
Toxicity to
Plants
Bioaccumulation
Other Data
Final Acute
Value
Final Plant
Value
Final Residue
Value
Lowest Biologically
Important Value
Criterion Maximum
Concentration
Criterion
Continuous
Concentration
Review for
Completeness
of Data and
Appropriateness
of Results
National Criterion
Figure 1. National Water Quality Criteria Guidelines to protect aquatic organisms and their uses.
-------
results. These tests require at least one species of freshwater animal from
at least eight different families (Salmonidae, Osteichthyes, a third family in
the phylum Chordata, a planktonic crustacean, a benthic crustacean, an insect,
a family in a phylum other than Arthropoda or Chordata, and a family in any
order of insect or any phylum not already represented). Acute-Chronic Ratios
are derived from chronic toxicity tests on three or more species (including
one fish, one invertebrate, and one acutely sensitive freshwater species) that
are compared to acute tests on the same complement of species. A Final
Chronic Value may then be derived.
Criteria are generated from these and other tests (see Figure 1). The
Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) is derived using the Final Acute Value.
The Criterion Continuous. Concentration (CCC) is derived from several compo-
nents: Final Chronic Value, Final Plant Value, Final Residue Value, and
Lowest Biologically Important Value. The value with the lowest concentration
drives the CCC.
Final Wildlife Value
Workshop participants suggested incorporating a Final Wildlife Value into
the CCC (see Figure 2). This value would be derived from estimates of chronic
effect values for representative species and bioaccumulation. As with other
final values, the Final Wildlife Value would drive the CCC, which would be
lowered if wildlife were more sensitive to a contaminant than aquatic life.
Recalculation may be required if aquatic organisms were shown to accumulate
tissue concentrations of the contaminant that would be toxic if consumed by
wildlife.
-------
Bioaccumulation
Toxicity Value
(Acute/Chronic)
Final Acute
Value
Final Plant
Value
Lowest
Biological
Important
Value
Criterion
Maximum
Concentration
Criterion
Continuous
Concentration
Review for
Completeness
of Data and
Appropriateness
of Results
National Criterion
Concentration
[Lowest Value]
Figure 2. Proposed guidelines to derive numerical water quality criteria to protect all organisms.
-------
Deriving a Final Wildlife Value may be more complex than deriving other
final values used in current water quality criteria. Several factors includ-
ing physiological, behavioral, and life history characteristics of wildlife
species must be considered. The persistence and bioaccumulation potential of
contaminants are also critical. These factors are further discussed in
Section 5.
SECTION 4
STRATEGY TO IDENTIFY RISK AND PRIORITIZE CHEMICALS
No field studies have been conducted to verify that the water quality
criteria are protective of wildlife. Studies are currently under way to
investigate the concentrations of selenium needed for wildlife protection, and
preliminary, unpublished data from field studies of PCBs in cormorants in the
Great Lakes have been interpreted by some to suggest that aquatic criteria do
not always protect wildlife (Kubiak, pens. comm.).
A risk assessment paradigm can be used to determine which chemicals are
most likely to impair wildlife. To assess the risk a chemical presents to
wildlife species, two factors must be considered: (1) evaluation of the
hazard and (2) the probability of wildlife exposure to the chemical or its
metabolites. Chemicals that could pose a risk to wildlife are those that are
highly toxic and/or bioaccumulate. Chemicals that increase the probability of
exposure are those that are frequently applied, ubiquitous, and/or persist in
the environment and are most likely to come into contact with wildlife.
11
-------
Hazard Assessment
Workshop participants concluded that the relative hazards of a contami-
nant to wildlife may be assessed and prioritized using three sources of,
information: (1) toxicity tests on aquatic, domestic and wildlife species;
(2) determination of the bioaccumulation potential (bioconcentration factor)
of a chemical; and (3) wildlife epidemiological studies. Only limited
information for these three categories is currently available. Toxicity tests
have been conducted by USFWS and EPA on selected chemicals on a limited number
of species. The obvious need for additional toxicity tests on representative
species and selected chemicals is discussed in Section 5. A data base of
information exists for bioaccumulation potential in aquatic plants and fish
for most criteria pollutants. Bioaccumulation potential may also be estimated
from the chemical and physical properties of the chemical. Information from
categories (1) and (2) above can be combined for use i.n a chemical screening
algorithm. Field evidence suggests reproductive and physiological impairments
from exposure to contaminants in natural wildlife populations. However, no
rigorous wildlife epidemiological studies exist, and it is difficult to use
the existing anecdotal evidence in hazard assessment. Therefore, wildlife
epidemiological studies are not discussed in this report.
Toxicitv Tests
EPA's Quality Criteria for Water 1986 (EPA 1986) lists 136 chemicals for
which a criterion or other value has been generated based on toxicological
tests of aquatic organisms. Human health advisories generated from research
on mammalian species are also available. Many of these chemicals are listed
as a Lowest Observed Effect Level (LOEL) because insufficient data are
12
-------
currently available for criteria development (see Appendix B). However,
relative toxicity values for these chemicals allow an assessment of potential
wildlife impact.
The USFWS prepared a list of 138 chemicals that are potential water
quality hazards for wildlife (see Appendix C). USFWS personnel in research
and operations added chemicals to the water quality criteria list and rated
the combined list based on their experience with toxicity to wildlife,
bioaccumulation potential, and extent of environmental exposure. The
priorities given on the list are intended to suggest an order for incorporat-
ing wildlife information into EPA criteria or advisories.
Chemical Screening Algorithm
An algorithm was developed at the workshop and subsequently refined to
evaluate the relative hazard of chemicals based on toxicity and tendency for a
chemical to bioaccumulate. This algorithm uses basic measures for generating
screening-level wildlife criteria designed to (1) establish which of the
current criteria may not be protective for wildlife species, and (2) priori-
tize chemicals for developing wildlife criteria.
The algorithm developed was based on the State of Wisconsin's Wild and
Domestic Animal Criterion procedure (WDNR 1988). The general equation used in
deriving the screening level criteria is:
13
-------
SLWC = NOEL x Wta x SSF
Wa + (Fa x BCF)
Where:
SLWC = screening-le'vel wildlife criteria (mg/L)
Wa = average daily water consumption (L/day)
Fa = average food consumption (kg/day)
BCF = aquatic life bioconcentration factor (L/kg)
Wta = average weight of the animal (kg)
SSF = species sensitivity factor (0.01 to 1)
NOEL = no observed effect level (mg/kg-day)
Data from applicable studies in the scientific literature are used to
calculate SLWCs. The lowest SLWC of those calculated is used as the criteria.
The SSF depends on applicability of the study to wildlife: SSF of 1.0 is used
when the SLWC is derived from a wildlife species; smaller SSF values are used
when the SLWC is derived from non-wildlife species, reflecting the uncertainty
of extrapolation from non-wildlife to wildlife species. During a post-
workshop meeting at the Environmental Research Laboratory Duluth (ERL-D), MN,
in January 1989, a core committee from the original workshop proposed to
obtain BCFs for organic chemicals from a quantitative structure activity
relationship (QSAR) model developed at ERL-D (Bradbury et al. 1989). Utiliza-
tion of this approach will allow rapid and consistent generation of SLWCs.
Chemicals to be used to calibrate and validate the screening algorithm
are those known or expected to impair wildlife including DDT, dieldrin, PCBs,
mercury, lead, pentachlorophenol, and selenium. It is generally accepted that
chemicals of greatest immediate concern for wildlife are probably those with a
14
-------
Log P > 2.5 (highly bioaccumulating) and those with documented reproductive
effects.
ERL-Duluth generated SLWCs using the above algorithm for current
criteria, advisory, and USFWS chemicals of concern. This effort, in conjunc-
tion with evidence outlined above, provides a basis for prioritizing chemicals
that need wildlife criteria development. A chemical priority list will be
generated from evidence of wildlife impairment, chemical toxicity ratings
available from EPA and USFWS, and the chemical screening algorithm. The
priority list is expected to be complete in October 1989 and will serve as the
preliminary hazard assessment for wildlife.
Exposure Assessment
Contaminant impacts on wildlife may result from characteristics that
cannot be accounted for by testing aquatic species. The physiological,
behavioral, and life history characteristics of different wildlife groups will
alter both their probability of exposure and their sensitivity to a contam-
inant. Wildlife are particularly vulnerable to toxicity resulting from
indirect food-chain exposures to contaminants. Some factors to consider when
deriving wildlife criteria are persistence (i.e., rate of degradation),
production quantities and use patterns, and likelihood of release into ambient
water bodies used by wildlife species. These characteristics largely deter-
mine the probability of significant exposure of wildlife populations. To
determine the risk associated with a contaminant, its inherent toxicity must
be combined with an exposure assessment. If exposure is very high, a
moderately toxic chemical can be classified as a high environmental risk.
Conversely, if the probability of wildlife exposure is extremely low, even a
15
-------
highly toxic or bioaccumulating chemical may be classified as a low risk
contaminant. Additionally, the environmental fate and transformation of toxic
chemicals should also be considered in any risk assessment. This is important
for such transformations as mercury to methyl mercury, selenium to seleno-
methionine, acephate to methamidophos, and others.
Factors and sources of information identified at the workshop that could
contribute to an exposure assessment include the following:
1. Exposure to chemicals that occur through oral (water, food, and
sediment consumption) and dermal exposures — Critical variables for
assessing risk include exposure pathways for wildlife from biocon-
centration/bioaccumulation through the food chain.
2. Production history — Both historical and current production rates
and use of a chemical should be evaluated. Production estimates can
help determine whether a chemical is likely to be encountered
frequently enough or in sufficient quantities to constitute a
hazard. Some persistent chemicals like DDT have been banned from
use in the United States (DDT is still in use in other countries)-.
DDT also occurs sometimes as an impurity in other compounds. DDT
and other persistent chemicals are still widespread in the environ-
ment.
3. Intended use — Categories of intended chemical use will help
determine potential routes of exposure. Chemicals with under-
estimated exposure values because the chemical is listed as an
"inert" ingredient in a pesticide formulation (i.e., not the primary
active ingredient of a compound) are of special concern.
16
-------
4. Inventories of point source discharges — These will aid in deter-
mining the types, quantities, and locations of discharged contam-
inants.
5. Sources of nonpoint contamination — Nonpoint sources should be
considered, particularly for pesticides in agricultural areas. Some
naturally occurring contaminants may become a problem when naturally
concentrated or released (e.g., metals and sulfur compounds from Mt.
St. Helen's eruption). Naturally occurring compounds are also
concentrated and released in hazardous quantities as a result of
anthropogenic activities (e.g., mining activities and irrigation).
For example, naturally occurring selenium leached from soil by
irrigation and diversion of irrigation waste water surrounding the
Kesterson Reservoir and Wildlife Refuge caused reproductive impair-
ments in local waterfowl.
6. Potential contaminant "sinks" that may result in overestimated (and
sometimes underestimated) risk of exposure — Chemical properties
that promote or restrict exchange from one matrix to another (i.e.,
sediment — water column — volatilization) will alter exposure
potential values.
7. Seasonal effects — Contaminant concentrations may change with the
seasons (e.g., increased contaminant levels could be associated with
seasonal snowmelt; low water that exposes contaminated sediment beds
during the dry season could result in high exposures).
8. Critical life stages -- Seasonal changes in concentration may or may
not coincide with critical life stages such as molting or egg
laying. Different life stages of an organism can exhibit different
17
-------
degrees of sensitivity to toxic chemicals; generally, young wildlife
are more sensitive than adults.
Information from the monitoring networks of various agencies (e.g., U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS), EPA, USFWS) can provide a basis for determining the
extent and magnitude of contaminant distribution. Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA III) requires that owners and
operators of certain facilities that manufacture, import, process, or other-
wise use certain toxic chemicals annually report their releases of those
chemicals to each environmental medium. This information aids research and
development of regulations, guidelines, and standards. The most recent
updated list from the Federal Register (February 16, 1988) is included as
Appendix D.
SECTION 5
DEVELOPMENT OF FINAL WILDLIFE VALUES
It would be cost prohibitive to conduct a number of toxicity tests, such
as the series of aquatic life toxicity tests used in the development of water
quality criteria, on all wildlife species and chemicals. Workshop partici-
pants have recommended using physiologically based (PB-TK) toxicokinetic
models to develop most of the data needed for formulating a Final Wildlife
Value. However, some toxicity testing will also be required to verify model-
derived numbers and to expand the comparative toxicology data base.
18
-------
Wildlife Factors to Consider
There are five primary factors to consider when evaluating impacts on
specific species: bioaccumulation, persistence, physiology, behavior, and
life history characteristics.
Although some chemicals may not be directly to.xic to aquatic life or
wildlife, those that bioaccumulate to toxic levels may become a problem for
wildlife species exposed to the chemical through food webs. Except for the
Final Residue Value (BCFs based on FDA action levels for humans, when they are
available) bioaccumulation is not considered under the Guidelines. Bioaccumu-
lation is based on two mechanisms: bipconcentration and biomagnification.
Bioconcentration occurs when organisms are directly exposed to a contaminant
in the ambient water, and the contaminant is absorbed and stored in body
tissue. Biomagnification occurs when predators consume and accumulate
contaminants bioconcentrated in the tissues of prey species. Organic
compounds with a log octanol : water partition coefficient (Log P) greater
than 2.5 are likely to bioaccumulate. Metals of concern include organo-
metallic forms (e.g.,methylated forms) and those that pose special problems
because of their specific characteristics of transformation, sequestration,
complexation, and speciation.
If a contaminant persists in the environment, wildlife exposure is
prolonged and the potential for bioconcentration and biomagnification
increases. One measure of environmental persistence is half-life (Tl/2),
which quantifies the effects of volatilization, photolysis, biodegradation,
and other processes that diminish the concentration in aquatic ecosystems and,
thus, the hazard to wildlife.
19
-------
Potential physiological differences in metabolic mechanisms between
wildlife species and aquatic life, as well as unique results of toxicity,
should be evaluated. For example, DDT when metabolized to DDE can cause
eggshell thinning, an important toxic effect in birds. Unique elimination
pathways (e.g., milk) may affect reproduction in wildlife species. Wildlife
that are directly exposed to a contaminant may not be the ultimate target of
the toxic effect. Animals may also pass their contaminant burden on to their
offspring, which are likely to be more sensitive than the adult.
Behavioral characteristics unique to wildlife species may increase
exposure that results in different relative risk. For example, ducks consume
sediments along with aquatic invertebrates and vegetation and may directly
ingest concentrated contaminants. Predators more easily obtain poisoned and
sick prey species. Manatee, attracted to warm currents, seek out highly
contaminated effluent discharges. Wildlife use aquatic resources that may be
exempt from existing water quality criteria. For example, the Galveston ship
canal has an industrial use designation and is laden with contaminants, yet
waterfowl are attracted to the area. Precious metal extraction processors
often use large open pools of water containing cyanide in regions where there
are few alternative landing sites for waterfowl. These sites attract and kill
large numbers of birds each year. Although alterations in behavior caused by
exposure to toxic chemicals may not always result in acute toxicity, it may
make animals more susceptible to predation or upset normal patterns of
foraging, habitat selection, and mate selection.
Some life history characteristics of wildlife expose them to higher
levels of contamination or result in unique toxicity effects. For example,
wildlife with semi-aquatic habits have several exposure pathways. Piscivorous
20
-------
birds may be exposed through drinking water and consumption of fish. Newborn
beavers may be exposed dermally from contaminated sediments in the lodge and
orally by ingestion of contaminated milk. During periods of migration,
estivation or hibernation, some wildlife species mobilize fat-soluble contam-
inants, thus significantly increasing potential exposure to contaminants.
Procedures for Wildlife Criteria Development
New techniques for developing wildlife criteria are needed because of the
high cost and time required to obtain acute toxicity data on each chemical for
eight species and chronic toxicity data on each chemical for three species.
The current format that relies on FDA action levels and aquatic toxicity is
impractical and inadequate. Rather, PB-TK models that predict toxicity
effects based on data from representative species are necessary to develop
wildlife criteria because few wildlife species are suitable for laboratory
culture and testing. Additionally, the cost and complexity of these models
are significantly less. Figure 3 illustrates the approach recommended by
workshop participants to develop wildlife criteria.
Workshop participants were concerned about relying on the model for
simulations it cannot give, i.e., multiple trophic changes, life history, and
behavioral interactions with the environment. Exposure pathways unique to
wildlife may require an additional form of criteria that will account for
contamination from both direct and indirect exposure. Wildlife criteria
should be formulated from two values: one for water concentration and one for
tissue concentration. Applying criteria to wildlife will be greatly enhanced
by using both variables. For each variable, toxicity values for three species
would be used, one each for mammals, birds, and amphibian/reptiles. Final
21
-------
All Chemicals
Prioritization
'Existing Literature Toxicity Assessment
'Epidemiological Data (Wildlife Kill Reports)
'Exposure Assessment
'Screening Model
Wildlife Final Value Development
'Three Representative Animal Toxicity Tests
'Physiologically Based Toxicokinetic Models
'Wildlife Life History Characteristics Assessment
'Tissue Concentration Determination Procedures
Revised or Confirmed CCC
Figure 3. Conceptual framework for developing wildlife criteria.
Criteria Values will be derived from the three PB-TK models that predict toxic
effects and steady-state concentrations from concentrations in the tissue of
food organisms and the environment of the three groups. The model will
extrapolate data generated from the physiologic responses of similar labora-
tory species. It will ultimately incorporate behavioral data (e.g., food
consumption) available from the literature and scientific community in order
22
-------
to determine input sources of exposure. For example, by basing model inter-
actions on the physiologic basis of chemical effects, a model for rats might
be adjusted to more closely resemble the physiological functioning of a mink.
Values for contaminant exposure would be modified to more closely resemble the
sources and quantities available to mink. The model would then be used to
extrapolate between the rat and the mink in terms of the toxic effects and the
steady-state concentration.
Water and Tissue Concentrations in Wildlife Criteria
Water quality criteria may not provide sufficient protection for wildlife
species, because of multiple ambient exposure pathways. To understand this
impact, an alternative tissue based criteria is needed. Direct wildlife
exposure to aquatic contaminants results from consuming and swimming in or on
contaminated water. Where water bodies are subject to regulation by available
Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria, wildlife species will generally
be protected from direct exposure. However, wildlife come in direct contact
with waters not designated for aquatic life (e.g., mine tailings ponds) and
where few, if any, aquatic organisms may survive. Wildlife exposure from this
contact may be significantly elevated above safe levels.
Indirect exposure through bioaccumulation of persistent chemicals is
frequently the primary source of contamination to wildlife species. Although
related to ambient water concentrations, characterizing the problem may not be
possible from water concentration alone, particularly in wetlands. Measures
of tissue burdens will promote characterization of contamination and trophic
level impacts. Extrapolation from tissue concentrations to ambient water
concentrations may be needed to regulate ambient water concentrations of
23
-------
pollutants: The New York Department of Environmental Conservation
extrapolated from tissue concentration, to solution chemistry, to a water
quality criteria value by extrapolating back from critical tissue
concentrations to estimate the water concentration. A contaminant dose was
derived from this estimated water concentration (Newell et al. 1987).
Uncertainty exists with this back calculation; this technique should receive
further evaluation before being used in developing wildlife tissue criteria.
Establishing a tissue concentration criterion will also help account for
other exposure routes (e.g., direct consumption through ingestion of sediments
or grooming activity). Developing the residue-based criteria that protect
wildlife from waterborne pollutants requires (1) defining the relationship
between contaminant concentrations in water/sediment and those in wildlife
species, and (2) developing the knowledge base to estimate the probability of
harmful effects based on contaminant-residue levels in tissue.
Tissue concentration criteria can be used effectively in an assessment
and regulatory framework. Residue-based tissue criteria will be valuable to
the USFWS programs for assessing the impact to wildlife on and off USFWS
lands. The EPA Wetlands program would benefit from tissue-based criteria
because ambient water concentrations are not always measurable in wetlands.
For contaminants that are readily metabolized, it is often necessary to look
at the chemical breakdown products. Using this approach may also provide a
basis by which risk assessments of contaminated and hazardous waste sites may
be completed and remedial action implemented. However, serious problems exist
in determining the sources of tissue contaminants, especially in global
migrant species.
24
-------
Three Representative Animals
Sensitivity to a toxic chemical can vary greatly among different species.
Workshop participants identified three wildlife subgroups (mammals, birds, and
amphibian/reptiles) for which predictive/extrapolative models should be
developed to generate criteria (see Figure 3), and for which validation
testing should be conducted. This approach will help account for species
differences in physiology and behavior, including diet, food intake, length
and intensity of exposure, storage, reabsorption, metabolism, periodic
starvation and associated metabolic changes, and differences in hibernation or
migration.
The models will account for the major variables that directly impact
contaminant exposure, and will predict the kind and amount of anticipated
exposure for each representative animal. Limited empirical research will be
required to develop and verify model predictions; verification will be done
with laboratory and field experiments. Water concentration criteria should be
based on these representative animals.
c.
The tissue concentration portion of the model predicts that each
representative animal will bioaccumulate total body levels of contaminant
based on variables unique to the animal group. Body burdens will result from
contact with or consumption of sediments, water, and aquatic organisms. Also
included is a grooming factor to account for possible consumption through
removing contaminants on skin, feathers, or fur. Water concentration and
tissue concentration extrapolations would be combined to derive a Final
Wildlife Value.
25
-------
Physiologically Based Toxicokinetic Modeling to Generate Criteria
Performing toxicity tests with wild mammals and birds is expensive and
often impractical; the workshop recommendation is to develop most wildlife
criteria from predictive/extrapolative techniques based on PB-TK models. The
models presently developed are mathematical simulations of known anatomical
and physiological functions to predict the blood levels of various dosage
regimens. The models also attempt to predict the various organ and tissue
levels as well as extra- versus intracellular concentrations. PB-TK modeling
establishes the uptake, elimination, distribution, and body burden of con-
taminants within an organism. Broad application of the models is based on the
many similarities in the anatomy and physiology of mammalian species. The
same blood flow diagram could be used for all mammals, and most organs and
tissues are similar fractions of the body weight. Major qualitative differen-
ces, such as the absence of a gallbladder in some species, are the exception
(Bischoff 1987). As noted above, the PB-TK models will be based on three
representative wildlife groups to derive acceptable ambient water and tissue
concentrations for Final Wildlife Values. The models would require a
selective verification program (see Section 6). The implementation of a
model-generated data program with verification is a major commitment that
should be identified and discussed in more detail. ~
SECTION 6
RESEARCH
Once we prioritize our research effort to reflect the relative risk of
wildlife contamination for individual chemicals, developing PB-TK models to
26
-------
generate wildlife criteria will require understanding the relationship between
body and/or tissue contaminant levels for both acute and chronic toxic
effects.
Current Status
Preliminary efforts to establish wildlife criteria have begun. The
wildlife criteria workshop was a major step toward establishing direction in
the initiative and determining how to use ongoing research conducted by the
USFWS and EPA laboratories. The EPA Environmental Research Laboratories in
Athens, GA, and Duluth, MN, have developed and are refining fate and transport
models that can be used to predict how contaminants partition in ecosystems.
Sediment criteria research at USFWS and EPA laboratories is evaluating the
relationship between water/sediment contaminants and food chain species.
Research on toxicant accumulation is in progress at ERL-Corvallis. Develop-
ment of toxic effects models in aquatic organisms and wildlife species are in
progress at ERL-Duluth. These techniques and corresponding expertise provide
a broad foundation of knowledge that can be applied toward developing wildlife
criteria.
ERL-Duluth is prioritizing chemicals with the screening level wildlife
criteria algorithm (see Section 4). To help verify this effort, work at ERL-
Corvallis was initiated in spring 1989 to test the effects of dieldrin and
other selected toxic compounds on mallard ducks and leopard frogs and to
obtain acute 96-hr LC50 values, chronic NOEL values, and bioconcentration data
from water-only (drinking, paddling, and preening) and feeding exposures.
Data will be compared to information in the criteria documents for fish and
invertebrates and to screening level criteria predictions from ERL-Duluth.
27
-------
The experimental design used in feeding studies will include both commercial
and natural foods that contain dieldrin. In addition, the design will examine
the impact of oral and dermal exposures by including drinking and paddling
water both with and without dieldrin.
Research Needs
Contaminant residues in representative wildlife species (e.g., mammal,
avian, and reptile or amphibian selected on ecological, toxicological, and
experimental considerations) needs to be correlated to acute and chronic
toxicity ehdpoints through the development of toxic effect models. In turn,
wildlife residue concentrations will be related to water/sediment contaminant
levels based on predicting contaminant partitioning in the food chain by
applying specific PB-TK models that predict residue uptake, accumulation,
distribution, and elimination in the organism. Models will not be able to
predict uptake from sediment without some idea of sediment consumption by
wildlife in the field. As far as is known, these values are not available in
the literature.
Expanded research efforts will be required to establish and validate the
needed toxic effect and PB-TK models for generating wildlife criteria. The
comparative toxicology data base for wildlife species should be expanded to
document correlations between dose and effect as well as dose and body burden.
Future research will deal with selected representative chemicals and with a
limited number of animals. Initial efforts will use one bird (such as the
mallard) and one mammal (such as the mink). There is also a need for studies
to develop methods to better estimate food chain bioaccumulation pathways.
28
-------
Extensive literature searches will be conducted to obtain toxicity and
exposure information on domestic animals (including ducks, chickens, mice, and
rats") to compare with the limited available information for wild species.
Extrapolation from existing data to wild species will show us where research
needs to be conducted to generate missing information. Residue/toxic effect
data will be obtained from existing data bases, tests for specific toxic
mechanisms, and ongoing residue monitoring studies. Physiological parameters
for developing PB-TK models (e.g., tissue volumes, lipid content, and blood
flow rates) will be derived from the literature and through empirical experi-
mentation. The approach will be validated by comparing predicted residue
effect levels and accumulation to those empirically determined in the labora-
tory.
A limited number of acute and chronic tests will be conducted to verify
model predictions. There are no plans to conduct tests with each criteria
chemical for several species of animals, as has been done in the past with
fish and invertebrates. A major consideration in applying criteria, both for
aquatic and wildlife species, is the uncertainty associated with using either
empirically-based or mechanistic model-derived results under field conditions.
Thus, as is being done for laboratory-derived aquatic life criteria, model-
derived criteria for wildlife also should be assessed in controlled field
studies.
Identifying new test species and developing new test procedures,
especially for more diverse groups of waterfowl and amphibians, is needed.
Additionally, adapting existing fish exposure systems for waterfowl and
amphibians can be very productive; some studies in this regard have been
initiated at ERL-Corvallis. Verification of model predictions with laboratory
29
-------
testing is critical to ensure model usefulness and acceptance by the scien-
tific and industrial community. For example, chronic laboratory reproductive
studies exposing mallards to selenium could simulate conditions at Kesterson
Reservoir and provide valuable model-verification data.
30
-------
REFERENCES
Bischoff, K.B. 1987. Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling:
Pharmacokinetics in Risk Assessment, Drinking Water and Health, Vol. 8.
National Academy Press. Washington, DC. 1987.
Bradbury, S., P. Fitzsimmons, and E. Anderson. 1989. Screening study for
Wildlife Criteria development. Prepared for U.S. EPA Office of Water,
Office of Water Regulations and Standards. ERL-Duluth, Duluth, MN.
Hunter, M.L., J.W. Witham, and H. Dow. 1984. Effects of a carbaryl-induced
depression in invertebrate abundance on the growth and behavior of
American black duck and mallard ducklings. Can. 0. Zool. 62:452-456.
Kubiak, T. 1989. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, East Lansing, MI.
Telephone conversation with Dr. Suzanne Marcy. Office of Water Regula-
tions and Standards, USEPA, Washington, DC.
Mclntyre, J. 1989. The common loon calls for help. National Geographic,
175:510-524, April.
Newell, A.J., D.W. Johnson, and L.K. Allen. 1987. Niagara River biota
contamination project: fish flesh criteria for piscivorous wildlife.
Technical Report 87-3, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Bureau of Environ-
mental Protection, New York State Department of Environmental Conserva-
tion.
Ringer, R. 1983. Toxicology of PCBs in mink and ferrets. Pages 227-290.
In: F. D'ltri and M. Kamrin, eds. PCBs: Human and Environmental
Hazards. Butterworth Pub., Woburn, MA.
Smith, G. J. 1987. Pesticide Use and Toxicology in Relation to Wildlife:
Organophosphorus and Carbamate Compounds. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. U.S. Department of Interior Resource Publication 170.
31
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1986. Quality Criteria for Water 1986
(Gold Book). EPA 440/5-86-001. Office of Water Regulations and
Standards, Washington, DC (with updated Criteria Documents and advisories
as they become available).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Preliminary Survey of Contaminant
Issues of Concern on National Wildlife Refuges. Division of Refuge
Management, Department of Interior. Washington, DC.
U.S. General Accounting Office. 1987. National refuge contamination is
difficult to clean up. Resources, Community, and Economic Development
Division. GAO/RCED-87-128. Washington, DC.
Veith, G., D. Kuehl, E. Leonard, F. Puglisi, and A. Lemke. 1979.
Polychlorinated biphenyls and other organic chemical residues in fish
from major watersheds of the United States, 1976. Pest. Monit. J. 13:1-
20.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1988. Technical Support Document
for Chapter NR105 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code. Madison.
32
-------
APPENDIX A
WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
-------
WORKSHOP LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Participant
Water Qua.lity Criteria to Protect Wildlife Resources
Beaverton, OR, November 1, 2, and 3, 1988
Address
Telephone
Expertise
Harold Bergman
Steven Bradbury
Denny B. Buckler
Clayton Creager
Bruce Duncan
John Finn
Sarah Gerould*
Charles J. Henny
Zoology Department
Box 3166
University of Wyoming
University Station
Laramie, WY 82071
U.S. EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
6201 Congdon Boulevard
Duluth, MN 55804
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The National Fisheries Contaminant
Research Center
Route 2
Columbia, MO 65201
Kilkelly Environmental Associates
P.O. Box 31265
Raleigh, NC 27622
U.S. EPA
Region X
Environmental Services Division
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Department of Forestry and
Wildlife Management
Holsworth Hall
University of Massachusetts
Amhurst, MA 01003
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Div. of Environmental Contaminants
1000 North Glebe Road
Room 601
Arlington, VA
22201
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Pacific Northwest Field Station
480 S.W. Airport Road
Con/all is, OR 97333
307/766-4331
Environmental
Toxicologist
218/720-5527
314/875-5399
Environmental
Toxicologist
Aquatic
Toxicologist
919/781-3150 Environmental
Scientist
206/442-8086 Ecologist
413/545-2757 Systems Ecologist/
Flow Analysis
703/358-2148"
Environmental
Contaminants
503/757-4840 Wildlife Biologist
-------
Participant
Address
Telephone
Expertise
El wood F_ Hill
Stephen Hornick
Clarence Johnson
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
Laurel, MD 20708
Kilkelly Environmental Associates
P.O. Box 31265
Raleigh, NC 27622
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Research Support
Room 513, Matomic Building
1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, O.C. 20240
301/498-0348 Research
lexicologist
919/781-3150
Environmental
Scientist
202/653-8766 Environmental
Contaminants
Stephen Jordan
Maryland Dept. of Natural Resources 301/974-2767 Aquatic Biologist
Chesapeake Bay Program
B3 Pawes State Office Building
Annapolis, MD 21401
Tim Kubiak
Suzanne Marcy*
John Maxted
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
301 Manly Miles Building
1205 S. Harrison Road
East Lansing, MI 48823
U.S. EPA
Office of Water (WH-585)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
U.S. EPA
Office of Terrestrial Wetlands
Protection (A-104-F)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
U.S. EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
Benjamin Parkhurst Western Aquatics, Inc.
P.O. Box 546
203 Grand Avenue
Laramie, WY 82070
Alan Nebeker
Thomas W. Purcell
U.S. EPA
Office of Water Criteria and
Standards Division (WH-585)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
517/337-6650 Environmental
Contaminants
202/382-7144 Behavioral Ecology
202/382-5907 Environmental
Scientist/Water
Quality
503/757-4875 Research Biologist
307/742-7624 Environmental
Toxicologist
202/475-7321 Water Quality
Criteria
-------
Participant
Address
Telephone
Expertise
Robert K. Ringer
David Schmedding
Gerald Schuytema
Robert Spehar
Kenneth Stromborg
Paul Wickster
Bill Williams*
Chi eh Wu
Department of Animal Science
Room 132 Anthony Hall
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
NSI Technology Services
Wildlife Toxicology Program
200 S.W. 35th Street
Con/all is, OR 97333
U.S. EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Con/all is, OR 97333
U.S. EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
6201 Congdon Boulevard
Duluth, MN 55804
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay
Room WH-480
2420 Nicolet Drive
Green Bay, WI 54311
NSI Technology Services
Wildlife Toxicology Program
200 S.W. 35th Street
Con/all is, OR 97333
U.S. EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Con/all is, OR 97333
U.S. EPA
Office of Research and Development
OEPER (RD-682)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
517/355-8414 Environmental
Toxicologist
503/757-4746
Wildlife
Toxicologist
503/757-4764 Research Biologist
218/720-5564 Aquatic Biologist
414/465-2682
Wildlife
Toxicologist
503/757-4727 Environmental
Toxicologist
503/757-4679 Environmental
Toxicologist
202/382-5977 Environmental
Engineer
* co-chairperson
-------
APPENDIX B
1986 U.S. EPA WATER QUALITY CRITERIA SUMMARY
-------
Wnter Quality Criteria Summary
Aceneplhene
Acrolein
Acrylonllrile
Aldrin
Alkalinity
Ammonia
Antimony
Aratnic
Ar»*nlcfPENT»
Ar«enic(TRI»
Aibeiio*
Bacteria
Barium
Bentene
Beniidine
Beryllium
BHC
Cadmium
Carbon Talrachloride
Ch lord an*
Chlorinated Bententi
ChlorinaUd Naphthalene!
Chlorine
ChloroalkylElheri
Conrentrationa In ugL
Priority
Pollutant
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Caret-
nofen
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Froth
Aculf
Criteria
1.700.*
68.*
7.660.*
3.0
Cnt>n»
e.ooo.»
B50.»
360.
f«r Pnm»r»
6.300.»
2.600.*
130.*
100*
3.9-f
38.300.*
24
260.*
I.6IIO.*
19
238.000*
Praah
Chronic
Criteria
620.*
71. •
2.600.*
20.000.
pH.«4
1 .600.*
48*
190.
K •«*«•«(« ft
6.3-
1.1 +
0.0043
60*
II.
Marine
Acute
Criteria
970.*
65.»
1.3
T«Mtwr»t«r*
2.319*
69.
•••
6.100."
0.34»
43.
60.000*
0.09
160*
7.6»
13.
Marine
Chronic
Criteria
710.*
D>p*«4
700.*
9.3
0.004
129*
7.6
Unlu Per Liter
Water
and
Pleh
Inyeation
320.|if
0.068ug**
0.074ng**
S«» l>MMfn«fti.
I46.ti(
2.2ng**
30kf/L«»
ii..i
l.mg
0.66Mg*«
0.12ng**
6.8ng»*
lO.pg
0.4uc»«
0.46ng«*
Fith Con-
eumpllon
Only
780 ,,g
066pc**
0.079ng"
46.000.ug
17.6ng**
9*« D*r»m«ftl.
40.g**
0.63ng**
117.ng**
6.94pg»*
0.4Bng»*
Drinking
Walrr
M.C.L.
O.Oftmg
-------
Water Quality Criteria Summary
Chloruclhyl Elher (DIS 2l
Chloroform
Chloroliopropyl Ether lDIS-21
Chloroniethvl ElherlBISi
Chlorophenol 2
Chlorophenol 4
Chlorophe noxv Herbicide* (2.4.6. TPl
Chlorophenoxy Herbicidei(2.4-Di
Chlorpyrifot
Chloro 4 Methyl 3 Phenol
Chromium (UEXl
Chromium (TRI)
Color
Copper
Cyonidr
DDT
DDTMetoljoliteiDDEi
DDTMeUbolitrlTDEi
Demelon
Dibulylphlhalale
Dirhlorobentenei
Dlrhlocorbeniidlne
Dichloroelhone 1.2
Dichlorethylenei
Cnnrrnlrnlinnt In |ipL
Priority
Pollutant
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Carci-
nogen
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Fresh
Acute
Criteria
28.900.*
4.380*
0063
30.*
16.
1.700. •»
Hatrallv*
18.*
22.
II
1.050.*
oor.'
1.120*
118.000.*
11.600.*
Preih
Chronic
Criteria
1.240.*
2.000.*
0.04)
11.
210. *
ai>i>o»«i
12. +
6.2
0001
O.I
763*
20.000.*
Marine
Arulc
Criteria
29.700.*
0.011
I.I 00.
10.300.*
•SM Docum»t
2.19
1.
0.13
14.*
3.6*
1.970.*
113.000.*
224.000.*
Marine
Chronic
Criteria
0.0056
60.
2.9
1.
0.001
O.I
Unitt Per l.ilrr
Water
and
Pish
Ingetllon
0.03ug"
0.19ug*»
34.7M6
OOOOOOlTtmf**
lO.pg
100.MC
60.Mg
I70mg
200. pg
0.024ng**
36. mg
400.M(
0.01 jig**
0.94ug**
0.033ug**
Fish Con-
•umplion
Only
1.36jig**
16.7pg"
4.36mg
0.00184ug**
3.433. mg
0.024ng**
164. mg
2.6m;
0.020pg"
243.PP-*
l.86uf
Drinking
Water
M.C.L.
0.06mg
0 06mg
Dale
Refer
ence
I980FR
I9ROFR
I980FR
1980FR
I980FR
I980FR
I980FR
1976RB
1986FR
19HOFR
I985FR
1985FR
I976RH
I985FR
I9H5FR
I960FR
1980FR
I980FR
I976RB
1980FR
I980FR
1980FR
I980FR
I980FR
lot
Sintei
Aqunlic
Life
Slan-
nanogrami
f " fiber*
FR - Federal Regiiter
Y • Yei •*• • Hardneai Dependent Criteria 1100 mg L used).
N -No * - IniufUclent Data to Develop Criteria.
Value Presented le the L.O.E.L.- Lowed Obaerved EfTecl Level.
*• - Human Health Criteria for Carcinogen* Reported for Three
Rlak Level*. Value Pretenud It the 10-6 Riak Level.
*•* • pll Dependent CrlUrla (7.8 pH tucd).
RD • Quality Criteria for Water. 1976 (Redbook).
M.C.L. • Meiimum Conianiinant Level
-------
Wntcr Quality Criteria Summary
,
Dichlorophenol 2,4
Dichloropropane
Dichloropropene
Oicldrln
Diethylphlhalate
Dimelhylphenol2.4
Dimelhylphlhalale
Dinilrololuene 2.4
Dinitrololuent
Dinitrotoluene
Dinitro-o-cre»ol 2.4
DioKin 12.3.7 .8-TCDOJ
Diphenylhydratine
Dlphenylhydratlne 1,2
DI-2-EthylhexylPhlh«liU
Endoaulfan
Endrin
Elhylbeniene
Fluoronlhene
Cane*. Tola) Diitolved
Cuthion
Haloethen
Halomelhane*
Hepuchlor
Heiarhloroethanf
HeMachlorobentene
Hexachlorobuladiene
Concenlrnlinns In |ipL
Priority
Pollutant
N
Y
V
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
V
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Card
nogen
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Freth
Acute
Criteria
2.020.-
23.000*
6.060.*
2.6
2.120*
330.*
0.01*
270.*
0.22
0.18
32.000*
3.D60 *
N>rr»ll
360.*
11.000.*
0.62
980.*
90.*
Frt.h
Chronic
Criteria
366.*
6.700.*
244.*
0.00 19
230.*
0.00001*
0066
0.0023
Hi«i
-------
Water Quality Criteria Summary
HexechlorocyclohexanelLlndenel
H ex nchlorocyclohex one- Alpha
Heiechlorocyclohexane-IJele
Hexechlorocyclohemne-Game
He»echlorocyclohe*«ne-Technlcel
HexachlorcyelopenUdlene
Iron
laophorone
Uod
Malolhion
Manganeie
Mercury
Methoxychlor
Mires
Monochlorobentene
Nsphthalene
Nickel
Nitrate*
Nilrobeniene
Nilrophenoli
Nllroitmine*
Nllro»odibulyUmine N
Nllroiodiethylamln* N
Nilroeodimelhylamlne N
Cnncentrnlioni In upL
Priority
Pollutant
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Carci-
nogen
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Freih
Acute
Criteria
2.0
7.*
11 7,000*
82. +
2.4
2.300*
I.400.+
27.000.*
230.*
6.860.*
Fre.h
Chronic
Criteria
O.OG
62*
1.000.
3.2*
O.I
0.012
0.03
0.001
620.*
160 +
I60.«
Marine
Acute
Criteria
0.16
7.*
12.900.»
140.
2.1
2.360.*
76
6.680.*
4.860*
3.300.000*
Marine
Chronic
Criteria
6.6
0.1
0.026
0.03
0.001
8.3
Unili Per Liter
Water
and
Fiih
Ingeition
»2ng**
I6.3ng**
18.6ng"
12.3ng**
206.UK
• O.Smg
6.2mg
60. pg
60.pg
I44.ng
lOO.pg
466. pg
13.4ug
10. mg
IBBmg
6.4ng**
O.Bnjr"
1.4ng**
Fi»hCon-
•untption
Only
31. ng**
64.7ng*«
62.6ng**
4».4ng**
620.mg
lOO.ug
146. ng
lOO.ug
687.np**
l.240.ng**
16.000.ng**
Drinking
W.i,,
M.C.I..
0.004nip
0 OJmg
0 002inp
O.lftmg
lOnifr
Dntr
Refer-
ence
I9ROFR
I9BOPK
19ROFH
I9BOFR
I980FR
I980FR
1976RD
I980FR
I985FH
1976RB
1976RB
I98SFR
I976RB
I976RB
I980FR
I9ROFR
!98fiFR
I976RB
I980FR
1980FR
I980FR
1980FR
I980FR
I980FR
/of
Stales
W,th
Aquatic
Life
Stan-
dard
12
3
15
20
7
7
17
12
7
1
10
6
1
1
1
g - gramt
mi; • milligrams
ug - mlcrogrami
ng • ninoprami
r • fiber*
PR • Federal RegiHer
Y • Yea •» - Mardneit Dependent Criteria 1100 mg Luaad).
N • No *" InaufTiclent Data to Develop Criteria.
Value Preaented lathe L.O.E.L. - Lowell Observed Effect Level.
** • Human Health Criteria, for Carcinogen! Reported for Three
Riak Level*. Value Pretented iathe 10-6 Rltk Level.
•** - pH Dependent Criteria 17.8 pH u«ed».
no - Quality Criteria for Water. 1976 (RedbookI.
M.C.L. • Maximum Contaminant Level
-------
Water Quality Criteria Summary
Nitroaodiphenylamine N
Nllroaupvrrolidlne N
OllandGreaae
Oxygen Ditiolved
Parathion
PCS'*
Penlachlorlnated Ethane*
Penlachlorobanzene
Pentachlorophenol
PH
Phenol
Phoaphorua Elemental
Phlhalole Eilcri
Pnlynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon*
Selenium
Silver
Solldt Diuolvcd and Sillnltv
Solid* Suspended and Turbidity
Suinde-Hydrogen Sulflde
Trmperalurf
Trtrachlormated Ethane*
Tetrochlorobaniene 1.2.4.6
Tetrachloroethnne 1.1.2.2
Telrachloroelhane*
Concentration! In ppL
Priority
Pullulenl
Y
V
N
N
N
Y
N
N
V
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Carci
nogen
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Freeh
Acute
Criteri*
H«rr«uw«
Warmw«l«i
0066
20
1.2«0.»
20.»**
10.200.'
940*
260.
4.1 4
Ntrrall'i
Sp«rU«
9.320.*
9.320-
Freih
Chronic
Critrrin
!tul«m«nl
••4 C«M*al«ff
0.013
0.014
1.100.*
I3."»
6.69
2.660.*
3.*
36.
0.12
3i4l«**AI
2.
D»p«n4iM
2.400.*
Marine
Aculr
Criteria
•9«* Oo«1*l1l4HI
CrttirU M*in>
10
390.«
13.
6.800.»
2.944.*
300*
410.
23
•&•• Docwmtnl
Crlltrl*
9.020.*
Marine
Chronic
Criteria
•S«« Oommaiit
0.03
281.*
7.9*
6.6-8.6
O.I
3.4*
64.
1.
•B*« O»r«m«M
UniuPcr Liter
WaUr
and
Fiih
Ingeitlon
4.900.ng**
I6.ng**
0.079ng**
74.Mg
101. mi
3.6mg
28ng**
10-pg
eo.pg
260.mg
38 Mg
O.I7MC**
Fiah Con-
aumption
Only
16.IOO.ng**
9l.900.ng**
0.079ng"
86.Mg
31.log**
«M«
10.7M(r**
Drinking
Water
M.C.L
0.01 nig
O.O&mg
Dale
Refer
ence
I980FR
I960FR
I916RB
1986FR
I986FR
I980FR
1980FR
I980FR
1986FR
I976RB
I980FR
I976RH
I980FR
I980FR
I980FR
1980FR
I976RB
I976RH
1976RB
I976RB
I980FR
I980FR
I980FR
I980FR
• of
State*
With
Aquatir
Life
Stan-
dard
56
56
8
16
1
2
66
23
6
1
15
14
56
44
56
1
1
g " promt Y • Yea
ill); • milligram* N « No
pg • inicrogram*
ng • nanogram*
f • fiber*
FR « Federol Regi*ler . RR
+ • Hardneaa Dependent Criteria (100 mg Luaedi.
* - InaulTicivnl Data U> Develop Criuria.
Value Preacnted la lha L.O.E.L. • Lowell Obaerved Effect Level.
** ** Human Health Criteria for Carcinogen* Reported for Three
Rl*k Levela. Value PraaenUd la tha 10-6 Riak Level.
••• - pit Dependent Criteria (7.8 pH uaadl.
Quality Criteria for Water. 1976 fRedboohl.
M.C.L. • Maximum Contaminant Lev*)
-------
Wntcr Quality Criteria Summnry
Tetrachloror-lhylene
Tctrachlorophenol 2.3,6.6
Thallium
Toluene
Toiaphene
Trichlorlnated Ethane*
Trichloroelhane 1,1,1
Trichloroelhane 1.1,2
TrlchloroelhyUne
Trichlorophenol 7.4.6
Trirhlorophrnol 2.4.6
Vinyl Chloride
Zinc
Concentration* In |ipL
Priority
Pollutant
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Carci-
nogen
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Prrth
Acute
Criteria
6.280.*
1.400.*
17.600.*
013
IH.OOO *
.
40.000. •
120. »
Preih
Chronic
Criteria
840.*
40.*
0.0002
0.400.*
21.BOO.*
970.*
IIO-»
Marine
Acute
Criteria
10.200.*
2.130.*
6.300.*
0.21
31.200.*
2.000.*
96
Marine
Chronic
Criteria
460.*
440.*
6.000.*
0.0002
96
Unlu Per Liter
Water
and
Fnh
Ingcttlon
O.Bug**
.
13 pg
14 3mg
0.7 lnc"
18 4m([
0.6pg*«
2.7Mg*»
2.600 pg
1.2ug**
2.Mg**
Piih Con-
sumption
Only
8.86pg**
48.ng"
424.mg
0.73ng**
I.OSg
41.8pg**
80.7MC**
36»ig**
626. pg**
Drinking
Water
M.C.I..
0.006mg
•
Dnte
Rrler
ence
I9BOPR
I9ROKR
I980FR
I980FR
198GFH
I980FH
I980FR
I980FR
I980FR
1980FR
I980FR
I980FR
I987FR
* of
SlKlet
Wiih
Aquatic
Life
Stan-
rinril
1
2
1
17
1
1
I
19
f • gromi
nig • milligrami
ug • mlcrogrami
ng • nsnogromi
f • Hbert
Y « Yei
N - No
PR a Federal Regiiler
f • Harrine*! Dependent Criteria (lOOmg Luted I.
• • Insufficient Data lo Develop Criteria.
Value Praiented It the L.O.E.L. • Lowed Oliierved Effect Level.
*• • Human Health Criteria for Carclnogeni Reported for Three
Risk Level*. Value Preiented i* the 10-6 Risk Level.
•** " pll Dependent Criteria (7.8 pH uiedl.
RB - Quality Criteria for Water. 1976 iHcdbooki.
M.C.L. • Maximum Contaminant Level
-------
APPENDIX C
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE CHEMICAL PRIORITIZATION LIST
-------
CHEMICAL
RATING
CHEMICAL
RATING
Acenaphthene
Acephate
-Acrolein
AcrylonitrUe
AlachJor
Aldicarb
L
M
L
L
L
M
Chloralkyl ethers
Chloroform
Z-Chlorophenoi
ChJorostyrenes
Chlorpyrifos
Chlorsulfron
L
L
L
M
M
L
Aldrin/DieldrLn
Aluminum
Ammonia
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos
Atrazine
Azinphos methyl
Azoxybeozenes
Azobenzenes
Barium
Benzene
Benzidine
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
M
L
L
L
H
L
M
L
H
H
L
M
L
L
M
K
L
M
Chromium
Copper
Creosote
Cyanides
Cypermethrin
2,4-D
2,4-DP
DDT metabolites
DLazinon
Dibenzodioxins
Dibenzofurans
Dicamba
Dichlorobenzidine
Dichloroethylenes
2,4-dichlorophenol
Dimethoate
2,4-dimethylphenol
Dinitrotoluene
M
M
M
H
L
M
M
H
M
H
H
L
L
L
L
M
r^
M
Carbon tetrachloride L
Chlordane H
Chlordimeform L
Chlorinated biphenyls H
Chlorinated benzenes H
Chlorinated biphenylenes H
Chlorinated diphenylethers H
Chlorinated ethanes L
Chlorinated hydrazobenzenes H
Chlorinated naphthalene H
Chlorinated phenols M
Chlorine L
Diphenylhydrazine
DLsulfoton
Diuron
Endosulfan
Endrin
Eptam
Ethylbenzene
Famphur
Fenvalerate
M
M
L
M
H
L
M
L
M
-------
CHEMICAL
RATING
CHEMICAL
RATING
Fluroanthene M
Fluoride M
Fluridone M
Freonll3 L
Glyphosate L
Guthion M
Haloetbers M
Halomethanes L
HeptachJor H
HexachJorobutadiene H
Hexachlorocyclohexane H
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene M
Isophorone M
Lead H
Linuroo L
Malatbioo L
Mercury H
Methomyl M
Met boxy cbJor L
Methyl mercury H
Mirex H
Naphthalene L
Neburon L
Nickel M
Nitrobenzene M
Nitrophenols M
Nitropyrenes M
N it rosa mines L
Organotins H
Organolead M
Paraquat M
•Paratbion (ethyl and methyl) M
Pendimethalin L
Phenol M
Phosphate L
Phthalate esters L
Picloram M
Polybrominated biphenyls H
Polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons H
Proban L
Propanil L
Resmethrin M
Selenium H
Silver M
Sulfometuron methyl L
Temephos H
Terbufos M
Tetrachloroethene L
Tetrachlorethylene L
Terphenyls H
Thallium M
Thiobencarb L
Toluene L
Toxaphene M
TrichJoroethylene L
Trifuralin M
Vanadium L
Vinyl chloride L
Xylene L
Zinc M
Pentacblorophenol
Permethrin
pH
M
L
L
-------
APPENDIX D
SARA TITLE III SUPERFUND LIST
-------
4500 Federal Register. / Vol. 53. No. JO / Tm:sd;iy. l-'uljruary 1U. 19UU / Rules «ind Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
IOPTS-400002A; FRL 3298-21
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Community Right-to-know
ACENCV: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule contains the
"uniform toxic chemical release reporting
form as required by section 313 of Title
HI of the Superfund Amendments and
Rcduihorizution Act of 1986. Section 313
requires that owners and operators of
certain facilities that manufacture.
import, process, or otherwise use certain
toxk: chemicals report annually their
releases of those chemicals to each
environmental medium. This rule also
enquires certain suppliers of toxic
chemicals to notify recipients of such
chemicals in mixtures and trade name
products. .•.. -
DATE: This rule is effective March'\7,
1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:-' • •
Sam K. Susnett Deputy Project
Coordinator (TS-779). Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Hotline. Environmental Protection
Agency. Room. WH 562A. 401 M Street.
SW. (Washington. DC 20460. {800-535- _.
020:). In Washington. DC and Alaska. - »
202-179-3449). , ' "•"' '
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority
The Agency is promulgating this rule-.-
pursuant to sections 313 and 328 of Title '
III of the Superfund Amendments and '
Reauthorizntion Act of 1986. Pub. L 99-
499 (42 U.S.C. 11013 and 11028). Title III -
is also titled "The Emergency Planning
and Community Right-To-Know Act of
1906." Section 313 of Title III requires
owners and operators of covered
facilities to report annually their
releases of listed toxic chemicals.
Section 313 also specifies that EPA must
publish a uniform toxic chemical release
form. In addition, section 328 provides
EPA with the authority to promulgate
such regulations as may be necessary to
carry out the purposes of Title III.
II. Background
A. Rfjjti/atiiry History and Summary of
Public Participation
On OctohiT 17. 1986, the President
signed inio l;tw the Superfund
Amendments and ^authorization Act
of 1986 (SARA). Pub. L 99-439. The
m.ijor function of (his legislation is to
Hinend and n:;mlhori/i: provisions of (ho
Comprehensive Environment;)!
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). I lowever. Title •
III of SARA is a free-standing statute
(not part of CERCLA) that is titled "The
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-To-Know Act of 1986." In general.
Title HI contains authorities relating to
emergency planning, emergency
notification, community right-to-know • .
on chemicals, and a toxic chemical .
release inventory. •'.-.'
The focus of this rule is the toxic • .
chemical release inventory provision .
contained in section 313 of Title III of.
SARA. Section 313 requires owners and
operators of certain facilities that
manufacture, process, or otherwise use a
listed chemical to report annually thoir. .-
releases of such chemicals lo any
environmental medium. The reports are
to be sent to both EPA and the State in .
which the facility is located. The basic ...
purpose of this provision is to make ;'•?...
available lo the public information. ••• V
about releases of certain toxic chemicals
that result from operations of certain : ^
facilities in their community. • .•• ' •' .
EPA issued a proposed rule, published
in the Federal Register of June 4.1987 (52
FR 21152). The proposed rule contained :
(he toxic chemical release inventory. . '•-
reporting form and interpretive "
requirements for reporting. The
preamble of the proposed rule outlined
the public participation activities that
led up to the development of the - •..
proposal. After publication. EPA -- -'•'•
received over 100 written comments on
Lbe proposed rule. In addition. EPA held.
public meetings in Washington. DC.
Chicago, 11. and San Francisco. CA. .. •'•
Attendees at these meetings presented- '
oral comments representative of wide'.
'range of interests including the affected
industry, environmental and other
public interest groups. Slate and local
governments, and individual citizens.
In addition. EPA fws held other
meetings with, and received other
communications from, interested parties.
B. Overview uf Final Rule Requirements
The reporting requirements of this rule
apply to owners and operators of
covered facilities that manufacture.
process, or otherwise use listed toxic
chemicals. A covered facility is one that:
Has 10 or more full-time employees.
Is in SIC codes 20 through 39.
Exceeds an applicable manufacture,
process, or use threshold.
EPA interprets "in SIC codes 20
through 39" to rcijte lo the primary SIC
code of the facility. If the facility is
comprised of multiple establishments.
facility coverage is b.ised on a relative •.
comparison nf the value of products
shipped and/or produced H! 20 through
39 establishments versus non-20 through
39 establishments in that facility.
EPA has included a definition of "full-
lime employee" and guidance on
determining SIC coverage.
EPA has not included a small business
exemption in this rule different from that
provided by section 313. However, the
Agency is allowing reporting in ranges
for releases to an environmental
. medium and for off-site transfers of
wastes that are below 1.000 pounds per
year. EPA expects that small businesses
. will benefit most from this provision.
The range reporting is for calendar years
1987.1988. and 1989 only.
The thresholds arc those provided by
the statute:
':. For manufacturing or processing as
defined—75.000 pounds for 1987, 50.000
pounds for 1988. 25.000 pounds per year
•-_ for 1989 and thereafter.
.'•.-. For toxic chemicals otherwise used
the threshold is 10.000 pounds per year
-;for all years.
Reports must be submitted annually
..on or before July 1 for the preceding
.year's data.
The chemicals subject to reporting
initially are those chemicals as provided
by section 313(c), with certain technical
modifications.
' Additions or deletions of chemicals
from the list may result from petitions or
EPA's own review of the list. Any such
changes will be by notice and comment
.."rulemaking, and EPA will identify the •
reporting years which they apply.
• Mixtures and trade name products
•. imported, processed, or usud at a facility
roust be evaluated for the presence of
listed toxic chemicals. However. EPA
has applied a de minimi's concentration
limitation of 1 percent (or 0.1 percent if
the chemical is a carcinogen) consistent
" with the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) Hazard
Communications Standard (HCS) in C9
CFR 1910.1200. Toxic chemicals present
in concentrations below the de minimi's
limit do not have to be factored into
threshold and release reporting
. calculations.
In relation to reporting on mixtures,
EPA has developed a supplier
requirement. Owners or operators of
facilities in SIC codes 20 through 39 who
supply mixtures or trade name products
containing listed toxic chemicals must
notify their customers about the
presence and concentration of those
chemicals in their products. However.
the tin minimis limit as described above
also applies to this requirement. The
supplier notification requirement takes
effect with the first product shipment 'n
-------
4530 Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 30 / Tuesday, February 16. 198fl / Rules and Regulations
the product to be a trade secret. The
notice would indicate that the toxic
chemical is present in the mixture in a
concentration of no more than 15
percent by wciyht. The upper bound
value chosen must be no larger than
necessary to'adequately protect the
trude secret.
(g) A person is not subject to the
requirements of this section to the
extent the person does not know that
the facility or establishment(s) is selling
or otherwise distributing a toxic
chemical to another person in a mixture
or trade name product. However, for
purposes of this section, a person has
such knowledge if the person receives a
notice under this section from a supplier
of a mixture or trade name product and
the person in turn sells or otherwise
distributes that mixture or trade name
product to another person.
(h) If two or more persons, who do not
have any common corporate or business
interest (including common ownership
or control), as described in § 372.38(0.
operate separate establishments within
a single facility, each such persons shall
treat the establishments) it operates as
a facility for purposes of this section.
The determination under paragraph (a)
of this section shall be made for those
establishments.
Subpart 0—Specific Toxic Chemical
Ustings
5 372.65 Chemicals and chemical
categories to which thlt Part applies.
The requirements of this Part apply to
the following chemicals and chemical
categories. This section contains three
listings. Paragraph (a) of (his section is
an alphabetical order listing of those
chemicals that have an associated
Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS)
Registry number. Paragraph (b) of this
section contains a CAS number order
list of the surae chemicals listed in
paragraph (a) of this section. Paragraph
(c) of this section contains the chemical
categories for which reporting is
required. These chemical categories are
listed in alphabetical order and do not
have CAS numbers. Each listing
identifies the effective date for reporting
under 5 372.30.
(a) Alphabetical listing.
Crwmical name
A«.,,(*.hy^, • ' ' ' '
AcoUffltfO ...............
•
ACfOiGffl ii in.--.-. mm
Acrylamoa ._ _.
AldnnC 1 .4:5.8- Oimef
no
hanonapmn«ten«,1 Z3.4.10. 1 0-fteucttoro- 1 ,4,4c5.8.a*^«xiriyojo-<1 .*lph*.4^ph«^4*Jjeta..5.a*pn«..8 alp*i«..
A'lyf e*4fnyjfl
Aluminum (turn* or
4-Amino«zot>enzon€
4* A nunoO'p^af^rt . ™
AJ 1 u 1 lo/imm nilfato (
Ammonium jutlate |
*i«t)
O-A""*^"1* ......
^.AniciH.na
o-AntsKiine hydrocN
Antnijcfln* _ _
Antimony ...
Araenic
Benzal Cruonde ...
_
Rffn-irtino
Befizoic tncNorxla |
Benioy! cfiloooe.
Bis(2^htor>1-meff<)
Bis(2-emyihexy4)ad«
Bromolorm (TnCrom
Bromometriane (Me
1.3.Butadiena..i
Bytyi icryiiTe
/vBulyl alconol--.
tfr • ' . , ' ,.,, „, ., „
f«rr BuM alcoriot
Buty4 benzy pnmaia
CAS No,
75-07-0
60-35-9
67^4-1
75-05-8
53-96-3
79-06-1
79-10-7
. 107-13-1
. 909-00-2
107-05-1
7429-90-5
1344-28-1
117-79-3
60-09-3
92-67- 1
82-28-0
7664-41-7
6484-52-2
" 7783-20-2
. 02-53-3
90-04-0
104-94-9
134-29-2
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
1332-21-4
7440-39-3
98-67-3
55-21-0
71-43-2
92-87-5
98-07-7
98-88-4
94-36-0
100-44-7
7440-41-7
92-52-4
111-44-4
542-88-1
108-60-1
103-23-1
75-25-2
74-83-0
106-99-0
141-32-2
71-36-3
. 78-92-2
75-65-0
85-68-7
106-88-7
123-72-8
Effoct/va
Oil*
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/OT/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
. . 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
OU01/87
01/01V87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/07
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
'';'"* ' •* ' . .*' ' ' ~" ' '
Federal Register / Vol. 53.'No. 30 / Tues'day. February 16. 1988 / Rules and Regulations 4531
1
Chemical name •
C 1 Acid Blue 9 (jiimmomim salt
Cl Acid Blue 9 ODOdium sa'1
C 1 Acid Gfeerf 3 .'.. ...... ..
C 1 Basic Gf***fi 4 . ... .
Cl Basic Rfxl 1 - -.
Cl D"ed B'K^ 38 -.....,_.-...._
C 1 D»ecl B'Ow" 95
C' Owft* v»iia(T»d« _..._
Capian1 1 H-isotfxkXo- 1 .3(2H|-diooe.3a.4.7.7a-tetr
Carbaryt 1 -Naphthalene), metfiytca/bamate)
Cafto" leirac'i'o^J* •••.'• ' • . .
CiirWv* tu""d» '
Caiechoi
Chkxamben (Benzoc tod,3-am«no-2,5-dicf*xo-
Cmordane(4.7-MeOianoindan.1Z4.5.a.7>8,8-ocU
) - :. '
cfttofO-2,3.3a.4,7,7i-h«x«hydro-) .'..... ••••••- '
Cfilnnn* rjiniajit ' • ' ' " . ' ..'•...
Qtioroacetic acx) . " '
CWorobenniate (Beruoncacebe acid. 4-cNoro-.a
lpha.-<4..cNofOpri*«y<)- •lph».-fiy*o«v-. tthyi ttttr].. . __
Cw«fom«il¥l m«tHv< ether
Chkvopran^ ' . . »
Chlorothalonil( t .3-8enzenedic«rbonrm(e.2.4,5.64
Cobalt —.„,„.„...., _...„„„„ '
Ovuuw
»inc*"C'o-1
nj~ja
-------
\
4532 Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 30 / Tiicsd-iy. February 16.. 1980 / Rules and R
Chemical name
CV-niy. su'We _. ., . , -- , . T T- .. —
3 3 .DxnmnoiyncrtTidina , .. , . .„
4.Oimetnytani.noaiDOon7ene _ .. ,., .. ;,r ., ......
3 3 -Dimemvlbcrtfldina (»Tolidinel , 11M . '
DimemyloaiBamyl enionde ..'...... . ,
1 l-D.-mcir.yl hydrazina _
2.-t-Cimeinyioficnol _
Huneihyl phthalale ^,r r..^
Omplhyi sullale ... .. ... .._
4 G-Oinitro-0-creul _
2,4.Dmitropnenol . .,, . . ......
? 4-Oinit/oio'ueoe ... „ .,_ . . .-
?,f>.0>nitrQIQlWW ,, .,,...,....
/vOv'yl prtr.ilfMH , .' ..
1 4.(Ti5»;»n» ,,..,,
1 ?.n;finenyl|-,yl ,,,.",... . . ,
flhyi 3Crylat4 . .. _.__._._.. ,.r ..,,..... _—- . .....,,
Eif'v'fr^'^zppc
Elhyl chiQ'-^tQrmale ., ._ ..
FlhyUfV? .. „,.„... . ...
£thylene O*»J9 ., , , - , ,^,,n. ii i n
Pivo">fliufon (U'fl», N N-*mi>lhT'-N'-f3-'«fYl-) - . '
Fr«K>n 113 (Ft'ifKMi. 1 1 2-IPf hWO-' 2.2-tP'HM'O-] '
Mf>4;Mn^>n ll.«Tnrt» .,...--
Hy^*oqutt\on4.L_.._ ___ . - ^.,,n.
l9Cbulyrjl4eny4« ._.
ko(T«npy( ^irnixJ (Qxty p^nont <^t strong tod process tn tufijecl, no tucptw nootetion.) _
^.V.lsflpropylirfofwwj^hflrxjl _
Load
t jon-uMj tCycio'y!"*^* 1234 VfrlwincfVonHl ilpti«.^.iipna ,3 b«l» ,* a'pha-S »'phm tbflttl-1
Ujioir annyrtrirto .,,.._ _
u^rvvj tCVpiimoa4»Mife iod. l^-fltf^amdiytbis- mnngarvne eomp'vK)
ktan^aoese ,.. 4.i
Mflamn* . ._ , .. •
Mfcun/ ,._ ... .„ .„,,.._ ^ L ....
Metnarv>l . ., _ _ _ _ _ ,....,..,..
MemoryrjMo' f&o"?*"*, MM2.?.?-f1chlO'Ofltny(i» ... ... ,... .....
4 4'.UemyV>nplM«ner1i»rWm.j ,._ _ .' _ ..pi-
Melhyl oinyl kotiyw .._ ,_ , . ,., _ ,
MAthyf hyf)r;)?ine ,. ,_ „ ..
Metnyl nx^jflp , , „ . ..,,....,, ,
^jipthyi isooufy* ketooe .. .. , . ,r
Methyl if ocyfinatt , ..
k^ihyt m^thAcryidte. ._ .... .».
Mahler's heigne ,,. , ,
Naontna'.anf , :,.. • .
jfCfta.Napnmytiimirvp .., .. , , ...,,,
/M/.a-N;ipmtvrlamirt4 . _ . ... ., , , __ ^ .
Nickal ' ,.... . , .. , „..,„
Ni?r^ acid
^.Nitro-C>>ani^dn« H ,..__.. _ _ ,_H..V.
Naroh^nz^A^? .. . ,....,.. ,
4-N4lrobipiU'nyl r ln. . ,
Nitrnfan (p0r-^~> J i-ft1-M,i«O- ' •('•"Irrn'M-rvlTY1-) ... ., ,.
CAS No.
M-67-5
1 19.90-4
60-11-7
119-03-7
79-44-7
57-14-7
105-67-9
131-11-3
77-78- t
S34-S2-1
51-29-5
121*14-2
606-20-2
1 1 7-84-0
123-91-1
122-66-7
. 106-89-8
110-80-5
140-88-5
t 00-4 1-4
541-41-3
74-85-1
107-21-1
• 1S1-56-4
75-21-8
96-45-7
2164-17-2
50-00-0
. . 76-13- t
73 n a
. 1 18-74- 1
87-88-3
77-47-4
67-72-1
1335-87-1
680-31-9
302-01-2
10034-93-2
7647-01-0
74-90-8
.. 7664-39-3
123-31-9
78-84-2
67-63-3
80-05-7
7439-92-1
S8-89-9
1 08-31-8
T2 427-38-2
7 A3 9- 96- 5
tO»-78-T
7439-97-8
67-56- »
.. . 72-O-S
109-86-4
96-tt-3
1634-04-4
1Q1-14-4
101-61-1
101-68-8
74-95-3
101-77-9
78-93-3
60-34-4
. 74-88-4
108-10-1
624-83-9
80-62-6
90-94-8
1313-27-5
SOS -60-2
91-20-3
134-37-7
91-59-8
7440-02-0
7897-37-2
139-13-9
99-S9-2
98-95-3
92-93-3
1836-75-5
EHeclrve
a.iie
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
' 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
j 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
Or/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
' 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
. 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01'87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
"01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
Federal Register /'Vol. 53.'Na "30 /Tuesday. February 16. 1988 /" Rules and Regulations:.::^'
Crwrncal nam«j
*M'otfpf mui;aro (2-CWyo-N-(2,,fylt™wl1,
rV-^'(rov>ciflifY1af— ^
/U.KJ,|,ovj^lmpff,yl»fn-«fl
/U.HJ.trn-HX, nn,^ y'Vrjtwl"'>-1 "
Saccnann (only persona wno ma/xrfacBjre a/a aub(4Kt. no iuppii4» noofcauon) H^^«misotniaioK3(2H>-or>a,1.1-dioxJdfl]__._
Sol»n««n
Silver
Sod'ufr* r^yfl'oiidfi (sofuiKy*) • '
Sodiuf1 fijifate (sotuuofi) * • ' * *
Slyrena , .,... . ' IM
Su"y"C BC'd , , , ' ' ' .... '. '
To(»fv/iinu|,r anr1
t i ? J-'fi'ai-hlofnfttfiano
Tp!f.ii;ni'>0'1'''ylpnfl (P^fCft'O'OetPv'Sflt)
TeiMcniorvinoncs [Phosphoric acid. 2-cMwcM-(2,4,5-tncnJoropnenyf}e(henyl dimetfiyl ester]
Thallium _ _..._ .. .
4 4*.Tffe4)^ijipi4irg
Thiourea ._,,, „..._ -,.,. ,,.„
Tiftnmjm flio«.<1fl
Toll U30(> _ _.. . .__ _ _.. .. ... _ _ •
TnliiAnii.? fvdirsfrrvanfllff
n-TnlMirt
o-To'uKJino hydrocnlohde ..... ..__•._... ... . ..
TnariQuore (2 5-Cyclofiexa(Jie/ie-1,4xJione.2.3,5-tns(1-4tfirirJinyl)-] . _. „ _
TncWonon [Pnospnomc acid. (2.2.2-lricnJO'Ol-hydroxyatnyl)- dl)-l ] _ _... . _ _ . .
fuse1 3-ditxomocropvOphosDhate
Uionano i£inyi caroamale) —
CAS NO.
51-75-2
55-63-0
86-75-5
100-02-7
79-46-9
156-10-5
121-69-7
924-16-3
55-18-5
62-75-9
86-30-6
621-64-7
4549-10-0
59-89-2
759-73-9
684-93-5
16543-55-8
100-75-4
2234-13-1
20816-12-0
56-38-2
67-66-5
79-21-0
108-95-2
' 106-50-3
90-43-7
"•-. 75-44-6
'7684-38-2
7723-14-0
85-44-9
88-89-1
1336-36-3
1120-71-4
57-57-6
123-38-6
114-26-1
115-07-1
75-55-8
75-56-9
110-86-1
91-22-5
106-51-4
82-68-8
81-07-2
94-S9-?
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
1310-73-2
7757-82-6
100-42-5
. 96-09-3
7664-93-9
100-21-0
79-34-5
127-18-4
961-11-5
7440-28-0
62-55-5
139-65-1
• 62-55-6
1314-20-1
13463-67-7
7550-45-0
108-68-3
584-64-9
91-08-7
95-53-4
636-21-5
8C01-35-2
68-76-8
52-68-6
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
95-9S-*
60-06-2
1582-09-8
95-63-6
126-72-7
51-79-6
"Sri
01/OV/87
01/OU87
O1/O1 /87
01/O1/87
01/01/87
01/O1/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
' 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
' 01/01/87
01/01/87
Ot/01/67
01/01/87
. 01/01/87.
01/01/87
OV01/87
01/01/87
•' 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/0
-------
4534 Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 30 7 Tuesday. February 16. 1988 / Rules and Regulations
Chemical name
Vanarfaim (tiimo or i>r;l) ,
VWwt gc£t31e
Vinyl bromide .. ..
Vinyl chtonda . .
Vinylidflps C'^Of'dC -. -
Xyfc>n« (im»pi} ts/yiwr) , ,..,,.. , , , , „ ^
/rvXy1fn0 ,.,. ,-.. , .. .
(hXylonn ,._ __ , „ ,, , ,„„ --„,...._ , ...... -
9 B-XyLrtUM ,.,,.-,..-- -
Zinc (tuft** w dust) - . - — — i I. i i
7i"*<> (Ciwt>amo(*tf^ci'C *?4. V2-fl(fm««d'yenyf)ff5tnr]_
£0Cf-PTOoK>|)«,9iyniH _ ,
•*-*m"oa«&»»«ii«ir
4-0«nelhYlamjn(»irrrt?ffT"Pn»
Liflftxd hy^Arine
THeacaumaA
TYnm^
f>c*^o~« (Phosphoric acid, 2.2-dicMofoothenyt dimethyl ester) .._..._.
Cartmryl n-Napnthalffnol, mflthyteaitjamf10?
Uettar*}!
Isepropyt alcohol (onry persons who manufaclure by the strong add procaat
ant njhfffct tuppKef notification rot rtqiirert)
Tri«ziguof>« (Z 5-Cvctohexa(3*r»#-1 4-™>'"y|)-J
nJ^iitwt xlmtv^
Bfl"7fl^t
1 1.1-Tricnlo'oethane (Methyl chloroform).. „
Merhorychlor (Benzene, 1,V-<2.2.2.-Uxhloroethylidene)bts (4-mothoxy-) —
OfOfnofnethaoe (Methyl bforrwde) .... . ... -.— i
Chloromethane (Methyl chloride) < -I.....M , --...
U<>*hyl KXlMM .,
V«lyl rttlnnrte
,
Ac*iaMehv(W
DicWofwnfltwin* (MethyHtn* chlonde)
Ca^o" d"w"'*»
frffAan* nn^f
Bfoniotann (Tribfomornethane) .. ..........
Freon 113 [Ethane. l.1.2-lnchloro-1.2^-trinuorc-] :
HeptacMor (1.4.5.6.7.8.8-Heptachloro-3a.4,7,7a-letranydro-4.7-memano-1HH
Hexacworocvciooeniadiene —
n09ne} 1
EHective
date
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
' 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
Federal Register /
CAS NO. !
77-78 1
78-84-2
78-87-5
78-92-2
78-93-3
79-OT-S
79-01-6
79-06-1
79-10-7
79-11-8
79-21-0
79-34-5
79-44-7
79-46-9
80-05-7
80-15-9
80-62-6
81-07-2
81-88-9
82-28-0
82-66-4
84-46-2
84-74-2
85-44-9
85-68-7
86-30-6
87-62-7
87-68-3
87-86-6
88-06-2
88-75-5
88-89-1
90-04-0
90-43-7
90-94-4
91-OB-7
91-20-3
91-22-5
91-59-6
91-94-1
92-52-4
92-67-1
92-87-5
92-93-3
94-36-0
94-59-7
94-75-7
' 95-47-6
95-48-7
95-50- 1
95-53-4
95-63-6
95-80-7
95-95-4
96-09-3
96-12-8
96-33-3
96-45-7
97-56-3
98-07-7
98-82-8
98-87-3
98-88-4
98-95-3
99-59-2
. .JOO.-02-7.
100-21-0
100-41-4
100-42-5
100-44-7
100-75-4
101-14-4
101-61-1
101-66-8
101-77-9 i
101-80-4 i
103-:3-t
104-94-9
105-67-9
I06-J2-3
10S-44-5
1 2 -Oie/nor op/ aotnr
UK-Buy froNrt
i Meinyl athyl kaion*
i 1 1 2- TricMQf QeIMP*
A£fv(Aff*44
;v-v^c-;.^o^-r^;=,v -..>• --v ••'- ;:; •; ^ ^ ;gffl^8^^:
_ ' . ." »4*"i ,
CAainVCaV R«V^0 . * ••'?•-*
-.•-.-.-
_ .
.
Arfyto? aC*}
GftioroAcatic ^^"^
Pfl**c«'>c »cn< ...
1 1 2.2-T«i/acfltorO*tnan«
.....
Mein-H nwtnawviiwt
Saccnam (orWy peraoni wr
r 1 Fond a~f 15 ..
i OuntnzMMt fP*nl«rtl)oronjt
a manufnctuv are m6jm no (uppfior notification) [1 ? Rnn7isottuaiol-3(2HH)r»«l1 l^fovto1
C^llyl nnpitlf |«
O^-'iy pMHftt|f4 .. .. ......
Butyl banzyt pnttalata
Pontarnioropfvjnnt {PCP)—>
P;»TW *f*f
.... ... ... •
... ... .....
. . .. .- - - .-•
. . . .• +-..••
.......... ....... .-..••
.... . . • . .-...•
n.A«uur>n4
... ....
Tftfi,nn« 7 B 1,.rri ,..ntt+ . •• - • -
Mapnifulana . • ....
rVvmluv. • ........
ftett-Mflpntrvanw* •- ... •
3 J -Oct"yo6flnTKfr*i
O*«7irkn»
XJ^I.Irnh^n^nyl
..... • • .... _ ,
- .- -. • - — . . . :.
..-•••
^Altnla
5 4.O fAcBtic maa, p,*-i*gt«c'gp*'«"C"y>-l < . .
n.KyU>na
n-Tjo+ni
1 ?J!^cnlnfQn*nt«vO adioata
An |rj
2 4-Oi'neinyipnenoi
p-Xywne
n*ne) (MBOCA) ... . ... . .....
ma) (MBI) . .. .. - ...,,, j., -
••
!yg^. .-.
'.•MB1/87:'-
OUO1/87 '-
01/O1/87 ;.j
OV01/87 '
01A)1/87^
OU01/87 .
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87 -'
01/01/87
01/01/87 U
01/01/87 .1
01/01/87
01/01/87 *
C12 .'<
01/01/87 .=
01/01/87 <
01/01/87 1
01/01/87 -i
• 01/01/87 \
. 01/01/87 ..; •
..01/01/87 V
• 01/01/87 •
01/01/87 -
- 01/01/87
01/01/87 •
01/01/87
01/01/87 .
01/01/87
01/01/87 .
01/01/87 .
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
"• 01/01/87 •
01/01/87
01/01/87
•01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87 .
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87 1
01/01/87 ;
01/01/87
01/01/87 .
01/01/87 ,
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87 '
01/01/87
01/01/87
. 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
4536 Federal Rcgisler / Vol. 53. No. 30" / Tuesday. February 16. 1988 / Rules and Regulations
CAS No.
106-46-7
106-50-3
' 106-51-4
106-88-7
106-89-8
106-93-4
106-99-0
107-02-8
107-05-1
107-06-2
107-13-1
107-21-1
107-30-2
106-05-4
108-10-1
108-31-6
108-38-3
108-39-4
108-60-1
108-78-1
108-88-3
108-90-7
108-95-2
- ' 109-86-4
"• 110-80-5
110-82-7
110-86-1
111-42-2
• 111-44-4
114-26-1
•* ' 115-07-1
115-32-2
117-79-3
117-81-7
117-84-0
' — 118-74-1
119-90-4
• 1 19-93-7
": 120-12-7
120-71-8
120-80-9
~" 120-82-1
• ' 120-83-2
-" 121-14-2
121-69-7
122-66-7
123-31-0
123-38-6
123-72-8
'- 123-91-1
128-72-7
136^33 fl
127-18—4
128-66-5
131-11-3
132-64-9
133-06-2
133-90-4
134-29-2
134-32-7
135-20-6
139-13-9
139-65-1
140-88-5
141-32-2
151-56-4
" 156-10-5
156-62-7
302-01-2
309-00-2
334-88-3
463-58-1
492-80-8
505-60-2
510-15-8
532-27-4
534-52-1
540-59-0
' 541-41-3
541-73-1
Chemical name
1 4-OchtoroOenzene
/vPhenylenediamina... . , ,._ ,„ , ..... , ,, , „
M-Butytene oxide .. _ .. ,, .„ .. , „ , ,..,.
1.2-Oibfomoelhane (Ethylene dibromide)
1 3'BLrt4diene
Acmtem . . _
AUyl cftlfyMftl ... . .: .....
17-OichtofOflthiipfl (Ethy<9«» dichkyide) _ , „ , , -
Prftvtprw otvro*
CNoromethy* methyl ether.,..
Ueifiyi bobuty1 kew*»
• -jj- - mfiyfhirff
To*w°e
(2ilOT>(Mra«n*
Phftvtf
J MftffMjKyiHP.IPOf '
p^a^
Dietfiarolami™*
pif(2<«ilfyoflfhyf) ?>***
Pmpoor [Phenol. 2-<1-methy1elho»yf-, ma|hyVMi'friimfll»l
2-4/T«Qar»thraQU"W<4 ' T1 •»" V
Qi(2-«tfy»e^yfl ptitfte'ate (OEHP) .. ___._
nJtnrlyl phf«ul«ff
?.T-Pi'»*ffx>i«yt>««ndi«»
f j-_£Wii^ tf«~f
t t rkrtUn/njih«f«n! ' • - ••.
?*-f>~tmt^w^ ' • • - .
A/ M-TWnalHyOnJin* "
I^AptMnythyrirumatHydrmMtMnTMMi) . _
1 •"-Omar-
QJ. jurao "UVVVTI K""^"
T«« fiiru m Ian* (P«cftkyB4ithvl*n'l
Cl Val Yrtltn- ' , ,
Otwrffofunin
Captan (lH-Hoindole-1 3{?HHliofle 3a_4 7 7»-'»*"'"yrif>3.f(iTi(*iiorom«(f«yt)thio].7 .. __ . „
CT>loramben [Ben7oic acid J-i""""^? W^h'c'O-l
•**i»-*'iiDnthvlamtrm
Cvplfl''?'' fB4>"I9"«»C''n«. N-*lydfQHy-N-«'trQ90, »""nor|iylTl Mil)
4 J'.ThiQOninriinA
Eltiyl acrylatt ......... , , , " , . ...UL.
Elhyleoeimine(Azinrtine),', " „"" ",.,', ,' , ' .' ",",,.. " '.„.,,,„,„' .
?^^^^n' "~~ ~'
HydrvT"**
AJdr¥i(1.4:S.8-Oin*thanonaphthalef>e,1.2.3.4.10.10-h«^
B«(pna fl»t>"«M
Cartwny^ sulfide ' . - ...... .. .n...
C 1 So"vitnl Y»"ow 34 (*urimin«) ;...... ;, , ... ,r ,„..,.._,,,„, - ,„»-„.„.„
Mistart gat [Ethane 1i1'-1f'tobist2-chloroO '.._ . „ ....
CttforobenzilateCBenereneacetic acid. 4.alpha.-<4-tof ooenrene ... .. ' ...«. » . .. .. .
Effective
dale
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
' 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
. 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
- 01/01/87
• 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/.87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
• .V
Federal Register / Vol. 51 No. '30
' - w • ' V. • ' ' • ' *V ^^(4 i&& -fe J • • ; • • »' '
V Tuesday/ February 16. 1088 / Rules and 'Rq^IaUou ijiv^tnX
CAS NO.
542-5-6
542-88-1
569-64-2
606-20-2
615-05-4
621-64-7
624-U3-9
636-21-5
680-31-9
684-93-5
759-73-9
842-07-9
924-16-3
989-38-6
1120-71-4
1163-19-5
1310- r3-2
1313-27-5
1314-20-1
13-9-77-3
13-JO-20-7
1332-21-4
13C5-87-1
1326-36-3
1344-28-1
1464-53-5
1582-09-8
1634-04-4
1836-75-5
1897-45-6
1937-37-7
2164-17-2
2234-13-1
2003-16-4
2602-46-2
2630-18-2
2832-40-8
3118-97-6
3761-53-3
3844-45-9
4549-40-0
4680-78-6
.64B4-52-2
7429-30-5
74J9-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
7440-02-0
7440-22-4
7440-28-0
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-41-7
74 10-43-9
7440-47-3
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
7440-63-2
••' 7440-66-6
7550-45-0
7647-01-0
7664-38-2
7C64-39-3
7C64-41-7
7664-93-9
7697-37-2
7723-14-0
7757-62-6
7782-49-2
7782-50-5
7783-20-2
8001-35-2
10034-93-2
10049-04-4
12122-67-7
12427-38-2
13463 67-7
16071-86-8
16543-55-8
•CtMfncal name ' • ' ' "
, 1 n^^opmfy^w,
? $.0*xVQ<0'u«n*
t 4-(>tmifX)3ir,o'»
/U.Nitr««4.(f<7K>-A|l-mmrvhjr»a
lU.Ni-rQTO.A/.^ttVm*
C 1 SofiYl dimqtfiyl m\«t]. —....
&"Wt W"fl"fl
Unh/fi'ar»im fn/tnte
•
*y*»"* (m»*nett!y<).7 _, ir... : ,. , ',,.,
J -- - •-,-,„'"
nry)pK*ny<].] ..
.(; j-^^Jo^-?-p»op^V>«5'
-------
4538 Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 30V Tuesday. February 16. 1988 / Rules and Regulations
CAS No.
' 20816-12-0
25321-22-8
25376-4 S-«
33156-41-7
Chemical name
Ovv* t«ln)"tfe ......
Oc^QfoOwe"* (mnrerj •vxTl^n}
Oiarrmototuene (muiM isomet), _-.._...—.._ .
? l-Qt|imna3i«3Ql£ tulfglf ,„„._.,-
Effect**
date
. 01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
(c) Chemical categories in
alphabetical order.
Category name
Effective
data.
Antimony Compounds: Includes any unique chemical sutetance that contains antimony as part ol that cherncaf* Mrasowckxe.
Arsenic Compounds,: Includes any unique chemical subsunce that contains arsanc a* pan ol (net chemicara intraAtmcmm ._
Barium Compounds: Includes any uraque chemical substance that contains banum as part ol ftal chemical's r*»s»wcJufe___
BeryUium Compound*: Includes any unique chemical substance that contains beryllium as part ol mat cnemcaTt intrastructun*..
'Cadrnum Compounds: Includes any unique chemical substance that contains cadmium as part ol thai chemical's infrastructure-
Cnioropnenols : • : i
01/01/87
01/01/87-
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
(5-x)
; Where Jt-l to 5 ' . ''";'' .''.'.' ': ' '
CTvornum Compounds: Includes any unique chemical substance that contains chromum as part ol tnf uamitafi
Cobaft Compounds: Include* any unique chemical sirfrnanrt thai containe cobafl a*, pad ol Burt cae«»caJ'*->>*»e*«c
Capper Compounds: Includes any unique chemical substance that contain* copper a* part of that ijtanmjft riwastr
Cyanide Compounds; JC' CM* where X.- K' or any other group where a formal disauciauun can be-mat*. For eomple KCn^or Ca(CNh.
Oycol Ethert: Includes mono- and dV ether* of «Bi>«ene gtycot diethyiene glycol. and tnetnyiene py*-' • •; • • • "
01/01/87
01/01/87-
01/01/87
01/01/87 •
oi/oi/er
R-COCH.CH.lA-1
Where:
n-1.2.or3
R>aDiyl or aryl groups.
R^R H. or groups which, when removed, jrield gtycol ethers wrtn the structure: ..
. R-(OCH>..a,).-o« . . •
Potymers are excluded trom this category. ' . •
Load Compounds: Includes any unque chemical substance that contains lead as pert of that chemical's infrastructure :—
Manganese Compounds: Includes any unique chemical substance that contains manganese as part ol that chemcafs infrastructure..
Mercury Compounds: Includes any unique chemical substance that contains mercury as part of (hat chemcal's infrastructure——
Mdtel Compounds: Includes any unique chemical substance mat contains nickel as part of that chemicars Infrastructure _.—
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
-------
i*t«^
01/01/17
wnero»-i to 10 . • ' •-.'". '•' .' '•';' '•" -',....•.•",• ... . _
Seten«mi Con-pa***: Includes any uriqu*ctomfcal substance that contains 'lalanMm'ai part of" (hit cttaiiear7**^^***^ '• ' ' '" "'••'..' • •" ~y.
SKer Compouida: Indudes any unqu* ercmieal aubaunea tnai contfcna tayar a* part of hat ensmicafa w»^.«n^... • . • • .......... ..,
Thallium CompowxJa; inckjooi any uniqu* cr*mical autaune* tnst oxnjjra (naltium as part of ffwt cnarrteaTa >n. • • • .
Zine Compound*: includes any vnrua chamieal ubstarca mareontaina xiric as part of ttut dMmieai-. infcmrumM - ,
••01/01/87 -j
•01/01/87 J
=01/01/87 ;{
O1/01/87 .'
Subpart E—Forms and Instructions • .;-
§ 372J5 Toite cftsmical ralcas* rtportng
form and Instructions. . • v .
[a] Reporting form. "" • " .-
WUJNO COOC «SM^O-M r. '-:•••:... j '
2 . ^'* •*•.*••- T - .» *.•"•'•- • • •
"
-------
4538 Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 30V Tuesday, February 16. 1988 / Rules and Regulations
CAS No.
Cnameal nama
EffaClN*
20816-12-4
2S321-22-6
2S376-4S-*
39156-41-7
Otmwrn tatroada-
Oicrtorobanzana (mixed tsonwrs).
Oarmxjtoluana (misad isomar*)_
2.4-Oiamnoanooia suflata
. 01/01/87 '
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
(cj dhemical categories in
alphabetical order. . . .
ElfacDva
Antimony Compounds: Induda* any uniqua cnamical subatanea Ml containa antimony n part of Ml chamcaf* MasOuclura.
ATM**: Compounds: Indudas any uniqua cnamical subsume* mat contain* arsanic a* part ol Ml oftamcaTs Mraaavcajra __
Barun CompowidK InOudm any unqu* ehamieal tubstanea tttat eonuma banum u part ol Ml cftamicar* Mras»veiw«^__
BaryHuni Campardc InciuctM any uniqua c^amical subsianoa that oontamc b«ytlium a» pan ol Bui chanwaCi inlrastrvielur*..
'Cadmum Compound*: Indudn any uniqua c^atnical tubstanc* thai oontama cadmium aa pan ol 0____
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/67
-------
:: Federal WteV Jfo?feWfeV^
PotyUomnawd B&Mnyi* (P8B«)_
.01/01/17
w „ -";t • '.*«'•• * * *^ ' * • •:'•• - • •••»-•-.•
-i to 10 .: .' • • -.. • •. 'v '_•* •;''•". '-
Sakmium Confound* todudn any unfeMChonilcal aubalaniM that contains Ml*nium «
SA«r Con«««)d«: Indudn tny uniqu* (tftcnwaJ tutatmo* Vyti eontung «aw is part o« Vwi efwmicaf* WrMtmc^a .
Thallium Compeuxii: Incfetos any iniqu* cf^micat tUmann mil eonuim VitKum u part of Ml tfivnicaTt htfcMirua^
Zine Compounot incMe* any vnru« ehomical M»Ur,c« B»r contain* zinc as part o> that ettwrteaC
••01/01/87 -j
•01/01/87 j
rOI/01/87 ';
•01/01/87 .'
Subpart E—Forms and Instructions • :--?•..-.'- :.- -.•••/ :-—:— '.—:-"";T
537245 Toite ehamlcal rvteas* raportlng
form and Instructions.
(a) Reporting form. '"'"' • " .--.
MAINO ttXIf
•-'.•-.{• •-.:• - '.
' • • »*'. *.*•• > ' •
------- |