United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Regulations and Standards
Washington. DC 20460
Water
                           June, 1985
Environmental Profiles
and Hazard Indices
for Constituents
of Municipal Sludge:
Methyl  Ethyl Ketone

-------
                                 PREFACE
     This document is one of  a  series  of preliminary assessments dealing
with chemicals  of potential  concern  in municipal  sewage  sludge.   The
purpose of these  documents  is to:   (a)  summarize  the  available data for
the  constituents  of  potential  concern,  (b)  identify  the key environ-
mental  pathways  for  each  constituent  related to  a reuse and disposal
option  (based on  hazard  indices),  and  (c) evaluate the  conditions under
which such a pollutant may pose a hazard.   Each document provides a sci-
entific basis  for making an  initial  determination of whether  a pollu-
tant, at levels currently observed  in sludges, poses a  likely hazard to
human health  or  the  environment  when  sludge  is disposed  of by  any of
several methods.   These methods include landspreading on  food  chain or
nonfood chain  crops,  distribution  and marketing  programs, landfill ing,
incineration and ocean disposal.

     These documents  are intended to serve as a rapid screening tool to
narrow  an initial list of pollutants to  those  of  concern.   If a signifi-
cant hazard  is  indicated by  this preliminary  analysis,  a  more detailed
assessment will  be  undertaken  to  better quantify the  risk  from  this
chemical  and to derive  criteria if warranted.   If a hazard  is  shown to
be unlikely, no further  assessment  will be conducted at  this time;  how-
ever, a  reassessment will  be  conducted after  initial  regulations  are
finalized.  In no case,  however,  will criteria be  derived  solely on the
basis of  information presented in this document.

-------
                            TABLE OP CONTENTS


                                                                     Page

PREFACE 	   i

1.  INTRODUCTION	  1-1

2.  PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FOR METHYL ETHYL KETONE IN MUNICIPAL
      SEWAGE SLUDGE	  2-1

    Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing 	  2-1

    Landfilling 	  2-1

    Incineration 	  2-1

    Ocean Disposal 	  2-1

3.  PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDICES FOR METHYL ETHYL KETONE IN MUNICIPAL
      SEWAGE SLUDGE	  3-1

    Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing 	  3-1

    Landfilling 	  3-1

         Index of groundwater concentration resulting
           from landfilled sludge (Index 1) 	  3-1
         Index of human toxicity resulting from
           groundwater contamination (Index 2) 	  3-8

    Incineration 	  3-9

    Ocean Disposal 	  3-9

4.  PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR METHYL ETHYL KETONE  IN MUNICIPAL
      SEWAGE SLUDGE	  4-1

    Occurrence 	  4-1

         Sludge 	  4-1
         Soil - Unpolluted 	  4-1
         Water - Unpolluted 	  4-1
         Air 	  4-2
         Food 	  4-2

    Human Effects 	  4-3

         Ingestion 	  4-3
         Inhalation 	   4-3
                                   11

-------
                            TABLE OP CONTENTS
                               (Continued)

                                                                     Page

    Plant Effects 	  4-4

         Phytotoxicity 	  4-4
         Uptake 	  4-4

    Domestic Animal and Wildlife Effects 	  4-5

         Toxicity	  4-5
         Uptake 	  4-5

    Aquatic Life Effects 	  4-5

         Toxicity 	  4-5
         Uptake 	  4-5

    Soil Biota Effects 	  4-6

         Toxicity 	  4-6
         Uptake 	  4-6

    Physicochemical Data for Estimating Pate and Transport 	  4-6

5.  REFERENCES	  5-1

APPENDIX.  PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR
    METHYL ETHYL KETONE IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE 	  A-l
                                   111

-------
                                SECTION  1

                               INTRODUCTION
     This  preliminary  data  profile  is  one  of  a  series   of  profiles
dealing  with  chemical  pollutants  potentially of  concern  in municipal
sewage  sludges.   Methyl  ethyl  ketone (NEK) was  initially identified as
being  of  potential  concern when  sludge  is  placed in a  landfill.*  This
profile  is a  compilation of  information  that may  be  useful  in  deter-
mining  whether  MEK  poses an  actual  hazard  to  human   health   or  the
environment when sludge is disposed  of by this method.
     The  focus  of   this   document   is  the   calculation  of  "preliminary
hazard  indices"  for  selected potential exposure  pathways,  as  shown in
Section  3.   Each  index  illustrates the hazard  that could  result  from
movement  of  a  pollutant  by  a  given pathway  to cause  a  given  effect
(e.g., sludge •» groundwater •» human  toxicity).   The values  and  assump-
tions  employed  in  these  calculations  tend  to  represent  a  reasonable
"worst case";  analysis  of error  or  uncertainty has been  conducted  to a
limited degree.  The resulting value in most  cases  is  indexed to  unity;
i.e.,  values  >1  may indicate  a  potential hazard,  depending upon  the
assumptions of the calculation.
     The data used  for  index  calculation have  been selected  or estimated
based  on  information presented  in  the "preliminary data  profile",  Sec-
tion 4.    Information in  the profile is based on  a compilation  of  the
recent  literature.   An  attempt has  been  made to  fill  out  the  profile
outline to  the greatest  extent  possible.  However,  since  this  is  a  pre-
liminary analysis,  the literature has not been exhaustively perused.
     The  "preliminary  conclusions"  drawn  from each  index in Section  3
are  summarized  in   Section 2.   The  preliminary  hazard  indices will  be
used as a  screening tool  to determine which pollutants and  pathways  may
pose a hazard.   Where a potential hazard is  indicated  by  interpretation
of  these  indices,  further analysis  will  include  a  more detailed  exami-
nation  of  potential  risks as  well  as  an  examination  of  site-specific
factors.   These more  rigorous  evaluations may  change  the  preliminary
conclusions presented  in  Section 2,  which are  based  on a  reasonable
"worst case" analysis.
     The   preliminary   hazard  indices  for   selected  exposure   routes
pertinent  to  landfilling  practices  are  included  in  this  profile.   The
calculation formulae  for  these  indices are  shown  in the Appendix.   The
indices are rounded  to two significant figures.
  Listings were  determined  by a  series  of expert  workshops  convened
  during  March-May,  1984  by  the  Office  of  Water  Regulations   and
  Standards (OWRS)  to  discuss  landspreading, landfilling,  incineration,
  and ocean disposal,  respectively,  of  municipal  sewage  sludge.
                                   1-1

-------
                                SECTION 2

             PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FOR METHYL ETHYL KETONE
                        IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
     The  following  preliminary  conclusions  have  been  derived  from the
calculation of  "preliminary hazard  indices",  which  represent  conserva-
tive or  "worst  case" analyses  of hazard.   The  indices and  their basis
and  interpretation  are  explained   in  Section  3.    Their  calculation
formulae are shown in the Appendix.

  I. LANDSPREAOINC AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING

     Based on  the recommendations of  the experts  at the OWRS  meetings
     (April-May,  1984),  an assessment of  this reuse/disposal option  is
     not being  conducted  at  this time.   The U.S.  EPA reserves  the right
     to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.

 II. LANDFILLING

     Conclusions  were  not  drawn because   index  values  could  not  be
     calculated due to lack of data.

III. INCINERATION

     Based on  the recommendations of  the experts  at the OWRS  meetings
     (April-May,  1984),  an assessment of  this reuse/disposal option  is
     not being  conducted  at  this time.   The U.S.  EPA reserves the right
     to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.

 IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL

     Based on  the recommendations of  the experts  at the OWRS  meetings
     (April-May,  1984),  an assessment of  this reuse/disposal option  is
     not being  conducted  at  this time.   The U.S.  EPA reserves the right
     to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
                                   2-1

-------
                               SECTION 3

          PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDICES FOR METHYL ETHYL KETONE
                      IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
 I. LANDSPREADINC AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETINC

    Based on  the recommendations of  the experts  at  the OWRS  meetings
    (April-May,  1984),  an  assessment of  this reuse/disposal option  is
    not being conducted at  this  time.   The U.S. EPA reserves  the right
    to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.

II. LANDPILLING

    A.   Index of  Groundwater Concentration  Resulting from  Landfilled
         Sludge (Index 1)

         1.    Explanation  -  Calculates  groundwater contamination which
              could occur  in a potable  aquifer  in the landfill  vicin-
              ity.    Uses   U.S. EPA's  Exposure  Assessment  Group (EAG)
              model, "Rapid Assessment of Potential Groundwater Contam-
              ination Under  Emergency Response  Conditions" (U.S.  EPA,
              1983).  Treats  landfill  leachate as  a pulse  input, i.e.,
              the application  of  a  constant source concentration for a
              short time period relative to the  time frame  of  the anal-
              ysis.   In order  to predict  pollutant  movement  in soils
              and groundwater, parameters regarding transport  and fate,
              and boundary or  source  conditions  are evaluated.   Trans-
              port   parameters  include  the   interstitial   pore   water
              velocity  and  dispersion  coefficient.     Pollutant  fate
              parameters include  the  degradation/decay coefficient  and
              retardation  factor.   Retardation is  primarily a  function
              of  the  adsorption  process,  which  is  characterized by  a
              linear,  equilibrium  partition   coefficient   representing
              the  ratio of adsorbed  and  solution  pollutant  concentra-
              tions.  This  partition  coefficient,  along with  soil  bulk
              density and  volumetric  water  content,  are used  to  calcu-
              late   the  retardation  factor.   A computer  program  (in
              FORTRAN) was  developed  to  facilitate  computation  of  the
              analytical solution.  The program  predicts pollutant  con-
              centration as a  function of time and location  in  both  the
              unsaturated   and  saturated  zone.   Separate  computations
              and parameter estimates are  required  for each zone.   The
              prediction  requires  evaluations  of   four   dimensionless
              input  values  and  subsequent evaluation of  the  result,
              through use  of the computer program.

         2.    Assumptions/Limitations  - Conservatively assumes  that  the
              pollutant  is  100 percent  mobilized  in  the  leachate  and
              that  all  leachate  leaks  out of  the  landfill  in  a  finite
              period and undiluted  by  precipitation.   Assumes  that  all
              soil  and aquifer properties are  homogeneous and  isotropic
              throughout each zone;  steady, uniform flow occurs only  in
                                  3-1

-------
          the  vertical  direction  throughout  the  unsaturated zone,
          and  only  in  the  horizontal  (longitudinal)  plane  in  the
          saturated zone; pollutant  movement is  considered  only in
          direction of groundwater flow  for  the saturated zone;  all
          pollutants  exist  in concentrations  that do  not  signifi-
          cantly affect  water movement;  for organic  chemicals,  the
          background  concentration  in the  soil profile  or  aquifer
          prior to  release  from the  source  is  assumed to  be zero;
          the pollutant source is a  pulse  input;  no dilution of  the
          plume occurs  by  recharge  from  outside  the  source area;
          the  leachate   is  undiluted  by  aquifer  flow within  the
          saturated zone;  concentration  in  the  saturated  zone  is
          attenuated only by dispersion.

3.   Data Used and Rationale

     a.   Unsaturated zone

          i.   Soil type and characteristics

               (a)  Soil type

                    Typical     Sandy  loam
                    Worst      Sandy

                    These two  soil  types were  used by Gerritse  et
                    al.  (1982) to  measure  partitioning of  elements
                    between   soil  and  a  sewage   sludge   solution
                    phase.    They are used here since  these  parti-
                    tioning  measurements (i.e., Kj  values) are con-
                    sidered   the   best  available   for   analysis   of
                    metal transport  from  landfilled   sludge.    The
                    same soil types are also used  for  nonmetals  for
                    convenience and consistency  of analysis.

               (b)  Dry  bulk density

                    Typical     1.53   g/mL
                    Worst      1.92S  g/mL

                    Bulk density  is the dry mass per unit volume  of
                    the  medium (soil), i.e.,  neglecting the mass  of
                    the  water  (Camp  Dresser  and McKee, Inc.  (COM),
                    1984).

               (c)  Volumetric water  content  (6)

                    Typical     0.195  (unitless)
                    Worst       0.133  (unitless)

                    The  volumetric water  content  is the  volume   of
                    water  in   a  given   volume  of  media,  usually
                    expressed  as  a  fraction or percent.  It depends
                    on properties of  the  media and  the water flux
                             3-2

-------
          Estimated by infiltration or  net  recharge.  The
          volumetric water content  is  used  in calculating
          the water movement  through  the unsaturated zone
          (pore  watery  velocity)  and   the   retardation
          coefficient.  Values obtained from COM, 1984.

     (d)  Fraction of organic carbon (foc)

          Typical    0.005  (unitless)
          Worst   v   0.0001 (unitless)

          Organic content  of  soils  is described  in  terms
          of percent organic carbon, which  is  required in
          the  estimation  of  partition  coefficient,  K
-------
          Eight  landfills were  monitored  throughout the
          United  States and  depths to  groundwater  below
          them  were  listed.    A  typical  depth  to ground-
          water  of  5  m was  observed  (U.S.  EPA,  1977).
          For the  worst case, a  value of 0 m  is used to
          represent the  situation  where the bottom of the
          landfill is  occasionally or  regularly below the
          water table.   The  depth  to  groundwater must be
          estimated  in order  to  evaluate  the  likelihood
          that  pollutants  moving  through  the  unsaturated
          soil will reach the groundwater.

     (d)  Dispersivity coefficient (a)

          Typical    0.5 m
          Worst      Not applicable

          The dispersion process  is  exceedingly  complex
          and difficult  to quantify,  especially  for the
          unsaturated  zone.   It  is sometimes  ignored  in
          the unsaturated  zone,  with  the  reasoning  that
          pore water velocities  are usually large enough
          so  that  pollutant  transport   by   convection,
          i.e.,  water  movement,  is paramount.   As  a  rule
          of  thumb,  dispersivity   may be  set  equal  to
          10 percent  of  the  distance  measurement of the
          analysis  (Celhar  and   Axness,   1981).     Thus,
          based on depth to groundwater  listed  above, the
          value for the  typical  case is 0.5 and  that for
          the worst  case  does  not  apply since  leachate
          moves  directly to the unsaturated zone.

iii. Chemical-specific  parameters

     (a)  Sludge concentration  of  pollutant  (SC) -  Data
          not immediately available.

     (b)  Soil half-life of pollutant (t|) = 3 days

          Based  on its  relatively  high water  solubility
          and  low octanol/water   partition coefficient,
          MEK is expected  to  have  a high soil mobility.
          Two processes  that  may  account for significant
          loss of  MEK   from  soil   are  volatilization and
          biodegradation.  By  analogy  from aquatic media
          and lack of adequate data, the half-life of MEK
          in soils can be speculated  to be about a few
          days  (3  days  chosen  as  a   worst-case value)
          (U.S.  EPA,  1984).  (See  Section  4, p.  4-1.)

     (c)  Degradation rate (jl) = 0.231  day'1

          The unsaturated zone can  serve  as an effective
          medium  for  reducing  pollutant  concentration
                    3-4

-------
               through  a  variety of  chemical  and biological
               decay  mechanisms  which  transform  or attenuate
               the pollutant.   While these decay processes are
               usually  complex,  they are  approximated  here  by
               a  first-order rate  constant.    The degradation
               rate is calculated using the following formula:


                         y =

          (d)  Organic  carbon  partition  coefficient   (Koc)  =
               4000 mL/g

               The  organic  carbon  partition  coefficient   is
               multiplied   by  the   percent    organic   carbon
               content  of   soil   (foc)  to  derive   a  partition
               coefficient  (K
-------
     (c)  Hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer (K)

          Typical    0.86 m/day
          Worst      4.04 m/day

          The hydraulic conductivity  (or  permeability)  of
          the aquifer is needed  to  estimate  flow velocity
          based on Darcy's  Equation.   It is a  measure  of
          the volume  of liquid  that  can  flow  through  a
          unit area or  media  with time; values  can  range
          over nine orders  of magnitude depending on  the
          nature of  the media.   Ueterogenous  conditions
          produce  large spatial  variation  in  hydraulic
          conductivity,   making  estimation  of  a  single
          effective value   extremely  difficult.   Values
          used  are  from  Freeze  and  Cherry   (1979)   as
          presented in U.S.  EPA (1983).

     (d)  Fraction of  organic  carbon (foc) =
          0.0 (unitless)

          Organic  carbon  content,  and  therefore  adsorp-
          tion,  is  assumed  to  be  0 in  the saturated zone.

ii.  Site parameters

     (a)  Average hydraulic gradient between landfill and
          well (i)

          Typical   0.001  (unitless)
          Worse      0.02   (unitless)

          The  hydraulic gradient   is  the  slope  of the
          water   table  in an  unconfined  aquifer,  or the
          piezometric   surface  for  a   confined  aquifer.
          The  hydraulic   gradient   must  be   known   to
          determine  the   magnitude  and   direction   of
          groundwater  flow.   As  gradient increases, dis-
          persion  is  reduced.    Estimates  of typical and
          high gradient values were provided by  Donigian
          (1985).

     (b)  Distance  from well to landfill  (Aft)

          Typical   100 m
          Worst        50 m

          This  distance   is   the  distance   between   a
          landfill  and  any  functioning  public  or  private
          water  supply  or livestock  water  supply.
                    3-6

-------
          (c)  Dispersivity coefficient (a)

               Typical    10 m
               Worst       5 m

               These  values  are  10 percent  of  the  distance
               from  well  to  landfill  (AH),  which  is  100 and
               SO m,   respectively,   for  typical   and  worst
               conditions.

          (d)  Minimum thickness of saturated zone (B) = 2 m

               The  minimum  aquifer   thickness  represents  the
               assumed  thickness  due   to   preexisting  flow;
               i.e., in the absence  of  leachate.   It is termed
               the  minimum  thickness because  in the  vicinity
               of  the  site  it  may  be  increased by  leachate
               infiltration  from the  site.    A  value of  2 m
               represents   a   worst    case   assumption   that
               preexisting flow  is  very limited  and therefore
               dilution  of  the  plume  entering   the  saturated
               zone is negligible.

          (e)  Width of landfill (W)  = 112.8 m

               The  landfill   is  arbitrarily  assumed  to  be
               circular with an area  of  10,000 nr.

     iii. Chemical-specific parameters

          (a)  Degradation rate (p) = 0 day'1

               Degradation  is  assumed  not  to  occur  in  the
               saturated zone.

          (b)  Background   concentration   of   pollutant   in
               groundwater (BC) = 0 Ug/L

               It  is  assumed  that  no pollutant  exists in  the
               soil profile  or aquifer  prior  to release  from
               the source.

4.   Index Values  -  Values were not  calculated due  to  lack  of
     data.

5.   Value Interpretation -  Value  equals the  maximum  expected
     groundwater concentration  of  pollutant,  in  Ug/L, at  the
     well.

6.   Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not  drawn because
     index values could not  be calculated.
                         3-7

-------
B.   Index   of   Human    Toxicity    Resulting   from   Groundwater
     Contamination (Index 2)

     1.   Explanation  -   Calculates  human   exposure  which  could
          result from groundwater contamination.   Compares exposure
          with acceptable daily intake (ADI) of pollutant.

     2.   Assumptions/Limitations -  Assumes  long-term exposure  to
          maximum concentration at well  at a rate of 2 L/day.

     3.   Data Used and Rationale

          a.   Index  of   groundwater  concentration  resulting  from
               landfilled  sludge  (Index  1)  -   Values   were  not
               calculated due to lack of data.

          b.   Average human  consumption of  drinking water  (AC)  =
               2 L/day

               The value  of  2  L/day is  a standard  value  used  by
               U.S.  EPA in most risk assessment studies.

          c.   Average  daily  human  dietary  intake  of  pollutant
               (DI)  - Data not immediately available.

          d.   Acceptable  daily   intake  of   pollutant   (ADI)   =
               7600  ug/day

               The U.S.  EPA  (1984)-derived  ADI  of  7.6  mg/day  is
               based   on  the  inhalation  MPIH,  assuming  respective
               absorption  for  ingestion and  inhalation to  be  100%
               and 50%.   The  inhalation  MPIH is  based on  a  study
               showing a  no-observed-adverse-effects-level  (NOAEL)
               (increased  liver enzyme  activity:    fetal  anomalies)
               in rats and  assuming  an  uncertainty  factor  of  1000.
               (See  Section 4, p.  4-3).

     4.   Index 2 Values  - Values were  not  calculated due  to  lack
          of data.

     5.   Value Interpretation  -  Value  equals factor  due only  to
          groundwater contamination  by  landfill  by which  expected
          intake exceeds ADI.   The value  does  not account  for  the
          possible increase resulting from daily dietary  intake  of
          pollutant  since DI data  were not immediately available.

     6.   Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not  drawn because
          index values could not be  calculated.
                              3-8

-------
III. INCINERATION

     Based on  the recommendations  of  the experts  at the  OWRS meetings
     (April-May,  1984),  an assessment^ of  this reuse/disposal  option is
     not being conducted at  this  tirr.e.   The U.S. EPA reserves  the right
     to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.

 IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL

     Based on  the recommendations  of  the experts  at the  OWRS meetings
     (April-May,  1984),  an assessment of  this reuse/disposal  option is
     not being conducted at  this  time.   The U.S. EPA reserves  the right
     to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
                                   3-9

-------
                              SECTION 4

           PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR  METHYL ETHYL KETONE
                      IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. OCCURRENCE

   A.  Sludge

       1.  Frequency of Detection

           Identified as one of the products of       U.S. EPA, 1980
           activated sludge treatment of sewage and   (p. 1)
           as a component of the leachate from solid
           waste.

       2.  Concentration

           Data not  immediately available.

   B.  Soil - Unpolluted

       1.  Frequency of Detection

           Data not  immediately available.

       2.  Concent rat i on

           Based on  its relatively  high  water  solu-    U.S.  EPA,  1984
           bility and low octanol/water  partition      (p.  1)
           coefficient,  MEK  is  expected  to have a
           high soil  mobility.   Two  processes  that
           may  account  for the  significant loss of
           MEK  from  soil  are volatilization and bio-
           degradation.   By analogy  from aquatic
           media, the half-life  of MEK in soils can
           be speculated  to be  about a few days.

           Organic carbon partition  coefficient =     Griffin, 1984
           4000 mL/g

  C.  Water -  Unpolluted

      1.   Frequency of Detection

           In most surface waters, MEK may bio-       U.S. EPA, 1984
          degrade almost completely within 10 days.  (p. 1)
          The evaporative half-life from water was
          calculated to be approximately 6 days
           (in calculating the evaporative half-life,
          the assumption that MEK is "slightly
          soluble"  remains questionable).
                                4-1

-------
    2.  Concentration

        a.  Fresh water

            Data not immediately available.

        b.  Seawater

            Data not immediately available.

        c.  Drinking water

            It is probable that some MEK is in     U.S. EPA, 1980
           ..municipal water supplies; however,     (p. 1)
           ^there are insufficient data to
            estimate the amount.

D.  Air

    1.  Frequency of Detection

        It is probable that all the MEK used as    U.S. EPA, 1980
        an industrial solvent is evaporated into   (p. 2)
        the atmosphere along with the MEK pro-
        duced by automobile exhaust.

        Half-life in air:  14 hours                U.S. EPA, 1984
                                                   (p. 1)

    2.  Concentration

        Data not immediately available.

E.  Food

    1.  Total Average Intake

        MEK is a naturally occurring ketone        U.S. EPA, 1980
        present in many foods including cheeses,   (p. 1)
        milk, cream, bread, honey,  chicken,
        oranges, black tea, and rum.  Thus  the
        appearance in food appears  to be
        ubiquitous.

    2.  Concentration

        In a variety of breads, MEK (1-Buta-none)   Sosulski  and
        levels ranged from 420 to 656 mg/100 g.     Mahmoud,  1979
                                                   (p. 535)
                              4-2

-------
II. HUMAN EFFECTS

    A.  Ingestion

        1.  Carcinogenicity

            Data not immediately available.

        2.  Chronic Tozicity

            a.  ADI

                The ADI  of 7.6 ing/day was derived by   U.S.  EPA,  1984
                the U.S.  EPA from the MPIH, assuming
                respective absorption for ingestion
                and inhalation to be 100% and 50%.
                The derived ADI is based on a study
                showing  a NOAEL (increased SGPT ac-
                tivity;  fetal  anomalies) in rats and
                an  uncertanity factor of 1000.

            b.  Effects

                EPA has  derived a short-term health    U.S.  EPA,  1981
                advisory  for a 10 kg child.  The one-
                day and  ten-day health advisories  for
                MEK in drinking water are 7.5 mg/L
                and 0.75  mg/L  respectively,  and are
                based on  hepatotoxicity observed
                in  terms  of increased serum enzyme
                activity  and lipid accumulation in
                the livers  of  animals.

        3.   Absorption Factor

            Acute toxicity  studies in animals indi-    U.S.  EPA,  1980
            cate that MEK is absorbed from the          (p. 2)
            gastrointestinal (GI)  tract.

            Quantitative  data  on  the  oral  absorption    U.S.  EPA,  1984
            of MEK  are not  available,  but  absorption    (p. 2)
            from the GI tract  can  be  inferred from
            systemic toxic  effects  seen  after acute
            oral administration.

    B.   Inhalation

        1.   Carcinogenicity

            Data not immediately available.
                                 4-3

-------
         2.  Chronic Tozicity

             a.  Inhalation Threshold or NPIU

                 The calculated maximum dose tolerated  U.S. EPA,  1984
                 for subchronic exposure is 2.191       (p. 11)
                 mg/kg/day or 153.4 mg/day for a
                 70 kg human.  An MPIH of 15.3 mg/day
                 was derived by the U.S. EPA based on
                 studies showing a NOAEL (increased
                 SGPT activity; fetal anomalies) in
                 rats and an uncertainty factor of 1000.

             b.  Effects

                 Neurotoxic effects have been reported  U.S. EPA,  1980
                 in a worker chronically exposed to     (p. 3)
                 MEK; however, total exposure to
                 other compounds in Che workplace was
                 not determined.

         3.  Absorption Factor

             Acute toxicity studies in animals indi-    U.S. EPA,  1980
             cate that MEK is absorbed from the         (p. 2)
             respiratory tract.

             Quantitative data on the pulmonary         U.S. EPA,  1984
             adsorption of MEK are not available,  but   (p. 2)
             adsorption from the lungs can be inferred
             from systemic toxic effects seen after
             acute and subchronic inhalation exposures.

         4.  Existing Regulations

             The occupational  exposure limit for MEK    U.S. EPA, 1980
             during a 10-hour  workshift  has  been        (p. 5)
             established at 200  ppm (590 mg/rn^)
             (NIOSH, 1978)
III. PLANT EFFECTS

     A.  Phytotoxicity
         No studies have  been  encountered concerning     U.S.  EPA,  1976
         the effects of any  of the  ketonic solvents  in   (p. 281)
         plants.
     B.   Uptake
         Because most  ketonic  solvents  are  fairly        U.S.  EPA,  1976
         soluble,  it appears unlikely that  they will     (p.  155-56)
         bioaccumulate in  significant quantities in
         food  chain organisms.   Since they  are also
                                  4-4

-------
        rapidly attacked by microorganisms, it is
        unlikely that they will persist in the envi-
        ronment long enough to be taken up by
        organisms.

IV. DOMESTIC ANIMAL AMD WILDLIFE EFFECTS

    A.  Toxicity

        Attempts to induce neuropathy in rats  by       U.S.  EPA,  1980
        inhalation or subcutaneous administration      (p.  3)
        have failed.

        Inhalation exposure of pregnant  rats to  MEK    U.S.  EPA,  1980
        has  been shown  to  produce  teratogenic  and      (p.  iii)
        fetotoxic  effects.

        See  Table  4-1.

    B.   Uptake

        Data not immediately available.

V.  AQUATIC LIFE EFFECTS

    A.  Toxicity

       1.  Freshwater

           a.  Acute

               The observed 96-hour LC5Q values  for   U.S.  EPA,  1980
               the bluegill and mosquito fish  are     (p. iii)
               5640 and 5600 ppm respectively.
               Inhibition  of cell  division of  the
               bluegreen alga Microsystis aeruginosa.
               begins at 110 ppm.

           b.   Chronic

               Data not immediately available.

       2.   Saltwater

           Data  not immediately available.

   B.   Uptake

       Data not  immediately available.
                                4-5

-------
 VI. SOIL BIOTA EFFECTS

     A.  Toxicity

         Using a mixed microbial culture, the mean      U.S. EPA, 1976
         tolerance level for MEK is 14 g/L.  Many       (p. 281)
         ketones have only a mild and apparently
         transient inhibitory effect on the growth of
         E. coli at ketone concentrations of
         I x 10~3 moles/L.

     B.  Uptake

         Data not immediately available.

VII. PHYSICOCHEMICAL DATA FOB ESTIMATING PATB AND TRANSPORT

     Molecular weight:  72.11                           U.S. EPA, 1980
     Melting point:  -86.4°C                            (p. 1)
     Boiling point:  79.6°C
     Vapor pressure:  77.5 mm Hg
     Solubility:  Very soluble in water
                  Miscible in alcohol, ether, acetone,
                    and benzene

     Solubility MEK in Water Weight Percent:  26.8      U.S. EPA, 1976
     Solubility Water in MEK Weight Percent:  11.8      (p. 6)

     Methyl ketones are known to be rapidly attacked    U.S. EPA, 1976
     by microorganisms, and therefore they are not      (p. 155)
     likely to be around to be taken up by the
     other organisms.

     Log octanol/water partition coefficient:  0.26     U.S. EPA, 1984
                                                        (p. 1)
                                   4-6

-------
                                  TABLE 4-1.  TOXICITY OP METHYL ETHYL KETONE TO DOMESTIC ANIMALS AND WILDLIFE
Species (N)a
Rat (20)
Rat
Rat (10)
Rat



Rat
Chemical Form
Fed
MEK
MEK
MEK
MEK
MEK
MEK
MEK
MEK
Feed
Concentration
(Mg/8)
NRb
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Water
Concentration
(mg/L)
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Daily
Intake
(mg/kg)
3,980
3,300
5,530
0
1,250
2,500
5,000
200
Duration
of Study
NR
NR
NR
90 days
90 days
90 days
90 days
24 weeks
Effects
LDso 14 day
Lethal
14 day LDj0
No effect
No effect
Elevated SCPT0 activity
Depressed body weight
Slight neurological effects
References
U.S. EPA, 1976 (p. 205)


U.S. EPA, 1984 (p. 3)




a N = Number of experimental  animals when reported.
b NR = Not reported.
c SGPT = Liver enzyme.

-------
                                SECTION  5

                                REFERENCES
Abramowitz,  M.,  and  I.  A.  Stegun.    1972.   Handbook  of  Mathematical
     Functions.   Dover Publications, New York, NY.

Camp Dresser and McKee,  Inc.   1984.   Development  of  Methodologies for
     Evaluating  Permissible  Contaminant  Levels  in  Municipal  Wastewater
     Sludges.   Draft.  Office  of Water Regulations  and  Standards, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Donigian, A.  S.,  1985.   Personal Communication.   Anderson-Nichols & Co.,
     Inc., Palo Alto, CA.  May.

Freeze,  R.  A., and J.  A. Cherry.   1979.    Groundwater.   Prentice-Hall,
     Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Gelhar,  L.  W.,  and  G.  J.  Axness.    1981.    Stochastic  Analysis  of
     Macrodispersion  in  3-Dimensionally Heterogenous Aquifers.   Report
     No.  H-8.    Hydrologic  Research Program,  New  Mexico  Institute  of
     Mining and Technology, Soccorro, NM.

Gerritse, R.  G.,  R.  Vriesema, J.  W.  Dalenberg  and H. P.  DeRoos.   1982.
     Effect  of Sewage Sludge on  Trace  Element  Mobility  in Soils.   J.
     Environ. Qual. 2:359-363.

Griffin,  R.   A.    1984.    Personal Communication  to U.S.  Environmental
     Protection   Agency,   ECAO  -   Cincinnati,   OH.     Illinois   State
     Geological Survey.

Pettyjohn, W.  A., D.  C.  Kent, T.  A.  Prickett,  H.  E. LeGrand,  and  F.  E.
     Witz.    1982.    Methods  for  the  Prediction  of  Leachate  Plume
     Migration  and  Mixing.   U.S.  EPA  Municipal Environmental  Research
     Laboratory,  Cincinnati, OH.

Sikora,  L.  J., W. D. Burge,  and  J.  E.  Jones.    1982.   Monitoring  of  a
     Municipal  Sludge Entrenchment Site.   J.  Environ.  Qual.   2(2):321-
     325.

Sosulski, F., and R. M. Mahmoud.   1979.  Effect  of  Protein Supplement  on
     Carbonyl   Compounds   and  Flavor   in   Bread.     Cereal   Chemistry
     56(6):533-536.

U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency.   1976.  Investigation of  Selected
     Potential  Environmental   Contaminants:    Ketonic  Solvents.    EPA-
     560/2-76-003.  Office of  Toxic Substances, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   1977.    Environmental  Assessment
     of  Subsurface  Disposal   of  Municipal  Sludge:    Interim  Report.
     EPA/530/SW-547.     Municipal   Environmental  Research  Laboratory,
     Cincinnati, OH.
                                   5-1

-------
U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.    1980.   Methyl  Ethyl  Ketone:
     Hazard  Profile.    Environmental  Criteria  and  Assessment  Office,
     Cincinnati, OH.  April 15.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.    1981.   Advisory  Opinion  for
     Methyl  Ethyl   Ketone.     U.S.  Environmental   Protection  Agency.
     November 19.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.     1983.    Rapid  Assessment  of
     Potential   Groundwater   Contamination   Under   Emergency   Response
     Conditions.  EPA 600/8-83-030.

U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency.   1984.   Health Effects  Assessment
     for Methyl  Ethyl Ketone.   ECAO-CIN-H003.    Environmental  Criteria
     and Assessment Office, Cincinnati,  OH.  18pp.
                                   5-2

-------
                               APPENDIX

     PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR METHYL ETHYL KETONE
                       IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE  SLUDGE
 I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AMD-MARKETING

    Based on  the recommendations  of  the experts  at  the OWRS  meetings
    (April-May,  1984),  an  assessment of  this reuse/disposal option  is
    not being  conducted at  this  time.   The U.S. EPA  reserves  the right
    to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.

II. LANDPILLING

    A.  Procedure

        Using  Equation  1,   several  values of  C/CO for  the  unsaturated
        zone  are calculated  corresponding  to  increasing values of  t
        until  equilibrium  is reached.   Assuming  a  5-year  pulse  input
        from the landfill,  Equation  3  is employed to estimate  the  con-
        centration vs. time data at the water  table.   The concentration
        vs.  time curve is then transformed into  a  square pulse  having a
        constant  concentration   equal  to  the peak  concentration,  Cu,
        from the unsaturated  zone, and a duration,  to, chosen  so  that
        the   total  areas under  the curve and  the pulse are equal,  as
        illustrated in  Equation  3.  This square pulse   is then  used  as
        the   input  to the  linkage  assessment, Equation 2,   which  esti-
        mates  initial dilution in  the  aquifer to  give  the initial  con-
        centration, C0, for the  saturated zone assessment.   (Conditions
        for   B, minimum  thickness  of  unsaturated  zone,  have  been  set
        such that dilution  is actually negligible.)   The saturated  zone
        assessment procedure is  nearly identical to that for the unsat-
        urated zone except  for the definition  of certain parameters  and
        choice of  parameter values.   The  maximum concentration  at  the
        well,  Cmax,  is  used to  calculate  the  index  values  given  in
        Equations 4 and 5.

    B.  Equation 1:  Transport Assessment


                         erfc(A2) + exp(Bi) erfc(B2)] =
         Requires  evaluations  of  four  dimensionless  input  values  and
         subsequent  evaluation   of . the  result.   Exp(A})  denotes  the
         exponential   of   Aj,    e  *,   where   erfc(A2)   denotes   the
         complimentary error function  of  A2.   Erfc(A2)  produces  values
         between 0.0 and 2.0 (Abramowitz and Stegun,  1972).
         where:
              A.  - X_  [V* -  (V*2 + 4D* x
              14 1     n*
                   2n*
                                  A-l

-------
          Y -  t  (V*2 *  AD*  x
     A2 =        (AD* x  t)'
     R, _ X_  [V*  +  (V*2 + AD* x
     Bl ~ ?n*
          2D*
          Y *  t  (V*2 *  4D*  x
     B2 =        (4D* x  t)*
and where for the unsaturated zone:

     C0 = SC x CF = Initial leachate concentration  (yg/L)
     SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (mg/kg DW)
     CF = 250 kg sludge solids/m3 leachate =

          PS x 103
          1 - PS

     PS = Percent  solids   (by  weight)  of  landfilled  sludge =
          202
      t = Time (years)
     X  = h = Depth to groundwater  (m)
     D* = O x V*  (m2/year)
      a = Dispersivity coefficient  (m)

     V* = —9— (m/year)
          0 x R
      Q = Leachate generation rate  (m/year)
      0 = Volumetric water content  (unitless)

      R = 1 + Pdfy x K
-------
           R = 1 +  dry x Kd = Retardation factor = 1 (unitless)
                     0
               since K      q.*W** -  and B > 2
                 —  K  x  i  x 365             -

D.  Equation 3.  Pulse Assessment
                 = P(x»t)  for  0  < t £ t
                 = P(x,O  -  P(x.t - t0) for t > t
     where:
          t0  (for  unsaturated zone) =  LT = Landfill  leaching time
          (years)

          t0  (for  saturated  zone) =  Pulse duration  at  the  water
          table (x = h) as determined by  the following equation:

               t0 = [  o/°° C dt]  t Cu

                   C( Y  t )
              C) =   r—  as determined by Equation 1
                              A-3

-------
     B.    Equation 4.   Index of Groundwater Concentration  Resulting
          from Landfilled Sludge (Index 1)

          1.    Formula

               Index 1 = Cmax

               where:

                    Cmax = Maximum concentration of  pollutant  at well  =
                           maximum of  C(Al,t)  calculated  in Equation  1
                           (ug/L)

          2.    Sample  Calculation  -  Values  were not  calculated due  to
               lack of data.

     P.    Equation  5.      Index   of  Human   Toxicity  Resulting   from
          Groundwater  Contamination (Index 2)

          1.    Formula

                          (II x AC) + DI
               Index 2 =


               where:

                    l\ - Index  1  =  Index of  groundwater  concentration
                         resulting from landfilled  sludge (ug/L)
                    AC = Average  human  consumption   of   drinking   water
                         (L/day)
                    DI = Average daily human dietary  intake  of  pollutant
                         (Wg/day)
                   ADI = Acceptable daily intake of pollutant (ug/day)

          2.    Sample  Calculation  -  Values  were not  calculated due  to
               lack of data.

III. INCINERATION

     Based on  the  recommendations of  the experts at  the OWRS  meetings
     (April-May,  1984),  an  assessment of  this  reuse/disposal  option  is
     not being conducted at  this  time.   The U.S. EPA  reserves  the  right
     to  conduct such an assessment for this option  in the future.

 IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL

     Based on  the  recommendations of  the experts at  the OWRS  meetings
     (April-May,  1984),  an  assessment of  this  reuse/disposal  option  is
     not being conducted at  this  time.   The U.S. EPA  reserves  the  right
     to  conduct such an assessment for this option  in the future.
                                   A-4

-------