# ChemNames

Notes:
CAS # and chemical name not found in chemfinder


Name:
methylphosphonothioic acid S-[2-[bis(1-methylethyl)amino]ethyl] O-ethyl ester


# Definitions

Definition:
Plant-soil bioconcentration factor for above-ground plants


Definition:
Plant-soil bioconcentration factor for forage/silage


Definition:
Plant-soil bioconcentration factor for below-ground plants


Definition:
COPC air-to-plant biotransfer factor, above-ground plants


Definition:
Fraction of wet deposition that adheres to plant


Definition:
Bed sediment/sediment pore-water partition coefficient


Definition:
Suspended sediment-surface water partition coefficient


Definition:
Plant-soil biocontration factor for grain


Definition:
COPC soil loss constant due to biotic and abiotic degradation


Definition:
Acute inhalation Exposure Guideline-Tier 1


Definition:
Temporary emergency exposure limit-Tier 1


Definition:
Acute inhalation Exposure Guideline-Tier 2


# ParamExplanations

Explanation:
H value was calculated using the theoretical equation from Lyman et al. (1982), which defines the constant.  Recommended value was calculated using the MW, S, and Vp values provided in this database.


Explanation:
Kds value was calculated using the correlation equation with Koc cited in U.S. EPA (1998b) for an assumed organic carbon fraction of 0.01 in soil.  Measured organic carbon in soil, specific to site conditions, should be used to calculate Kds, because the value varies, depending on the fraction of organic carbon in soil.  The recommended Kds value was calculated by using the Koc value provided in this database.


Explanation:
Kdsw value was calculated using the correlation equation with Koc cited in U.S. EPA (1998b) for an assumed organic carbon fraction of 0.075 in suspended sediment.  Measured organic carbon in suspended sediment, specific to site conditions, should be used to calculate Kdsw, because the value varies, depending on the fraction of organic carbon in suspended sediment.  Recommended Kdsw value was calculated by using the Koc value provided in this table.


Explanation:
Kdbs value was calculated using the correlation equation with Koc cited in U.S. EPA (1998b) for an assumed organic carbon fraction of 0.04 in bottom sediment.  Measured organic carbon in bottom sediment, specific to site conditions, should be used to calculate Kdbs, because the value varies, depending on the fraction of organic carbon in bottom sediment.  The recommended Kdbs value was calculated using the Koc value provided in this databasea.


Explanation:
Ksg value was calculated using the chemical half-life in soil, as cited in Howard et al. (1991).


Explanation:
Fv value was calculated using equations cited in Junge (1977) and Bidleman (1988).  Recommended Fv value was calculated using the Tm and Vp values provided in this database.  Vp value for this compound was converted to a liquid-phase value for use in the calculations.


Explanation:
MW used to calculate Henry's Law Constant (H) and diffusivity in air and water (Da and Dw).


Explanation:
Tm used to calculate the Fraction of Pollutant Air Concentration in the Vapor Phase (Fv).


Explanation:
Vp used to calculate Henry’s Law Constant (H), and Fraction of Pollutant Air Concentration in the Vapor Phase (Fv).


Explanation:
S used to calculate Henry’s Law Constant (H), and Fraction of Pollutant Air Concentration in the Vapor Phase (Fv).


Explanation:
Kow used to choose appropriate empirical correction factors for aboveground and root produce.  Used to calculate Babeed and Bamilk values.  Use din choosing between BCFs and BAFs.  Used in correlation equations to calculate Koc.  Used to calculate Root Concentration Factor (RCF).  Used to calculate Plant-Soil Bioconcentration Factors for Aboveground Produce (Brag) and Forage (Brforage).


Explanation:
Koc used to calculate Partitioning Coefficients for Soil-Water (Kds), Suspended Sediment-Surface Water (Kdsw), and Bottom Sediment-Sediment Pore Water (Kdbs).


Explanation:
Geometric mean of values cited in source.


Explanation:
Geometric mean of measured values obtained from source.


Explanation:
ERNS = EPA's Emergency Response Notification System.  The alternate CAS was used incorrectly.


Explanation:
AIRS/AFM = AIRS Facility Subsystem.  AIRS = EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System, a computer-based repository for information about air pollution in the United States. This information comes from source reports by various stationary sources of air pollution, such as electric power plants, steel mills, factories, and universities, and provides information about the air pollutants they produce.


Explanation:
AFS-Enviro = AIRS Facility Subsystem in Envirofacts incorrectly uses the Alternate CAS


Explanation:
PPIS = EPA's  Pesticide Product Information System incorrectly uses the Alternate CAS


Explanation:
TSCATS 2.0 = Toxic Substances Control Act Test Submissions (TSCATS) database incorrectly lists the alternate CAS


Explanation:
CAA 111 = Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 111 incorrectly uses the Alternate CAS


Explanation:
CAA 112b = Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 112(b)(1) lists pollutants that are judged to be hazardous if emitted into the air.  The listing incorrectly uses the alternate CAS


Explanation:
CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.  Releases of substances on this list that are in excess of their reportable quantities must be reported to the National Response Center.  The alternate CAS was used incorrectly


Explanation:
CORR = Chemicals On Reporting Rules database.  The CORR database consists of two parts, a list of chemicals regulated by certain sections of TSCA and EPCRA, and a list of FR citations relevant to the specific regulation of chemical substances.  The alternate CAS was used incorrectly.


Explanation:
CWA 311 = Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 311(b)(2)(A) requires EPA to compile a list of hazardous substances which, when discharged to navigable waters or adjoining shorelines, present an imminent and substantial danger to the public health or welfare.  The alternate CAS was used incorrectly.


Explanation:
There is a PPRTV available which we recommend using.  Please contact your Permitting Authority for the value.


Explanation:
RCF value was calculated using the correlation equation with Kow that is cited in Briggs et al.(1982), using the Kow value recommended in this database.  For more information please see HHRAP Appendix A-2.


Explanation:
No soil degradation rates were reported.  We therefore recommend assuming ksg equals zero.


Explanation:
No distinction was made between aboveground produce and forage.


Explanation:
Koc value was calculated using Kow correlation equations provided in U.S. EPA (1996b).  For further details please see HHRAP Appendix A-2. Koc value was calculated using the Kow value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Kdsw value was calculated using correlation equation provided in U.S. EPA (1993d), using Koc value recommended in this database and mid-range foc values recommended by U.S. EPA (1993d).  For further details please see HHRAP Appendix A-2.


Explanation:
Kdsw value assumed the same as Kds value, because organic carbon does not play a major role in sorption for metals, as cited in U.S. EPA(1994).  Kdsw is a t pH=6.8.  For further details please see HHRAP Appendix A-2.


Explanation:
Kds value was calculated using correlation equation provided in U.S. EPA (1993d), using Koc value recommended in this database and mid-range foc values recommended by U.S. EPA (1993d).  For further details please see HHRAP Appendix A-2.


Explanation:
Kdbs value was calculated using correlation equation provided in U.S. EPA (1993d), using Koc value recommended in this database and mid-range foc values recommended by U.S. EPA (1993d).  For further details please see HHRAP Appendix A-2.


Explanation:
Kdbs value assumed the same as Kds value, because organic carbon does not play a major role in sorption for metals, as cited in U.S. EPA(1994).  Kdsw is a t pH=6.8.  For further details please see HHRAP Appendix A-2.


Explanation:
For more information please see HHRAP Appendix A-2.


Explanation:
Consistent with information provided in U.S. EPA (1997a), methyl mercury was assumed not to exist in the air phase and, therefore, assigned an Fv of zero.


Explanation:
Value was calculated using the correlation equation with Kow and H as cited in Bacci, et al. (1990) and Bacci, et al. (1992), then reducing this value by a factor of 100, as recommended by Lorber (1997).  No distinction was made between values for aboveground produce and forage.  Value was calculated for a temperature (T) of 25C, using the H and Kow values  recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Bv values for vegetative growth (such as leaves and stems) in Baes et al. (1984) were used for Brforage.


Explanation:
Brrootveg value was calculated by dividing the RCF value with the Kds value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Brgrain value was calculated using the correlation equation with Kow as cited in Travis and Arms (1988), using the Kow value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Brgrain value was calculated by multiplying the uptake slope factor with a conversion factor of 2 x 10^9 g/ha soil.  The uptake slope factor and the conversion factor were obtained from U.S. EPA (1992) for grains/cereals.


Explanation:
Brforage value was calculated using the correlation equation with Kow as cited in Travis and Arms (1988), using the Kow value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Brforage value was calculated by multiplying the uptake slope factor with a conversion factor of 2 x 10^9 g/ha soil.  The uptake slope factor and the conversion factor were obtained from U.S. EPA (1992) for leafy vegetables.


Explanation:
Brag value was calculated using the correlation equation with Kow as cited in Travis and Arms (1988), using the Kow value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Brag value was calculated using methodology and data from U.S. EPA (1992).  The Brag is a weighted average of (1) a Brag (fruits) value combined with a human consumption rate of fruits of 1.44E-03 kg/kg/day, and (2) a Brag (vegetables) value combined with a human consumption rate of vegetables of 1.49E-03 kg/kg/day.  Brag (fruits) was calculated by multiplying the uptake slope factor with a conversion factor of 2 x10^9 g/ha soil, both obtained from U.S. EPA (1992b) for garden fruits.  Brag  (vegetables) was calculated by weighting the uptake slope factors for garden fruits (75%) and leafy vegetables (25%) and multiplying the result with a conversion factor of 2 x10^9 g/ha soil.  The uptake slope factors and the conversion factor were obtained from U.S. EPA (1992b).


Explanation:
Brag value was calculated using methodology and data from Baes, et al. (1984):  The Brag is a weighted average of (1) a Brag (fruits) value combined with a human consumption rate of fruits of 1.44E-03 kg/kg/day, and (2) a Brag (vegetables) value combined with a human consumption rate of vegetables of 1.49E-03 kg/kg/day. A Br value for nonvegetative growth (reproductive) in Baes, et al. (1984) was used for Brag (fruits).  A Br value for nonvegetative (reproductive) growth and Bv values for vegetative growth weighted as 75% (reproductive) and 25% vegetative were used for Brag (vegetables).


Explanation:
Br values in Baes, et al (1984) for nonvegetative growth (such as tubers) were used for Br rootveg.


Explanation:
Br values for nonvegetative growth as recommended by Baes et al. (1984) were used for Brgrain.


Explanation:
Br rootveg value was calculated using an equation and parameter values acquired from U.S. EPA(1992).  Please see the HHRAP Appendix A-2 for more details.


Explanation:
BCFfish value calculated using the correlation equation with Kow obtained from Veith, et al. (1980), using the logKow value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Based on discussions in U.S. EPA (1997a), an Fv value of 0.85 was assigned for mercuric chloride.


Explanation:
Bapork value was obtained from U.S. EPA (1995a), which divided the uptake slope, as cited in U.S. EPA (1992b; 1995a), by a daily consumption rate of 4.7 kilograms dry weight per day and converting the result to a wet weight basis assuming a 70% moisture content in pork.


Explanation:
BAF value was calculated by multiplying a food chain multiplier (FCM) with an estimated BCF.  FCM was obtained from U.S. EPA (1995b).  BCF was estimated using the correlation equation obtained from Veith et al. (1980), using the logKow value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Baeggs value was calculated using the correlation equation with Kow as cited in California EPA (1993), using the Kow value recommended in this database.


Explanation:
Baegg value was obtained from U.S. EPA (1995a), which divided the uptake slope, as cited in U.S. EPA (1992b), by a daily consumption rate of 0.2 kilograms dry weight per day and converting the result to a wet weight basis assuming a 75% moisture content in eggs.


Explanation:
Bachicken value was obtained from U.S. EPA (1995a), which divided the uptake slope, as cited in U.S. EPA (1992b), by a daily consumption rate of 0.2 kilograms dry weight per day and converting the result to a wet weight basis assuming a 75% moisture content in chicken.


Explanation:
Babeef value was obtained from U.S. EPA (1995a), which divided the uptake slope, as cited in U.S. EPA (1992b; 1995a), by a daily consumption rate of 20 kilograms dry weight per day and converting the result to a wet weight basis assuming a 70% moisture content in beef.


Explanation:
As in U.S. EPA (1995), we assume metals don't experience air-to-leaf transfer.


Explanation:
Ba (pork) was calculated using the correlation equation  presented in RTI 2005 assuming a pork fat content of 23%.


Explanation:
Ba (chicken) was calculated using the correlation equation  presented in RTI 2005 assuming a chilcken fat content of 14%.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation  presented in RTI (2005) assuming a beef fat content of 19%.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation  presented in RTI (2005) assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
As an ionizing chemical, the logKow used in estimating the Ba was calculated per RTI (2005) using the following equation: Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral) is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated using the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 10.61.


Explanation:
Ba (milk) was calculated using the correlation equation  presented in RTI (2005) assuming a milk fat content of 4%.


Explanation:
Ba (milk) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a milk fat content of 4%.
As an ionizing chemical, the logKow used in estimating the Ba was calculated. See the Ba(beef) explanation above for more details.


Explanation:
Ba (pork) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a pork fat content of 23%.
As an ionizing chemical, the logKow used in estimating the Ba was calculated. See the Ba(beef) explanation above for more details.


Explanation:
Ba (chicken) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a chicken fat content of 14%.
As an ionizing chemical, the logKow used in estimating the Ba was calculated. See the Ba(beef) explanation above for more details.


Explanation:
Ba (egg) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming an egg fat content of 8%.
As an ionizing chemical, the logKow used in estimating the Ba was calculated. See the Ba(beef) explanation above for more details.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 3.98.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 10.15.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 7.75.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 4.09.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: PHYSPROP) of 5.22.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 3.74.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 4.21.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 4.6.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 5.99.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 10.28.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 8.56.


Explanation:
Ba (beef) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a beef fat content of 19%.
Calculated as per RTI (2005) Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa (source: CHEMFATE) of 6.94.


Explanation:
Ba (egg) was calculated using the correlation equation presented in RTI 2005 assuming a milk fat content of 8%.


# ParamVals

ParamNote:
Calculated from RfD using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


ParamNote:
Calculated from RfC using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


ParamNote:
for Chromic acid mists and dissolved Cr(VI) aerosols. Another value available for Cr(VI) particulates (1E-4)


ParamNote:
from an IRIS listing for a 2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluen mixture


ParamNote:
for a mixture of 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD and 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Indeno(1,2,3-cd) pyrene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated from CSFo using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(a)anthracene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(b)fluoranthene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(k)fluoranthene of 0.01 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for chrysene of 0.001 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Dibenz(a,h)anthracene of 1.0 (U.S. EPA 1993).


# ParamValsBackup

ParamNote:
Calculated from RfD using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


ParamNote:
for a mixture of 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD and 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD


ParamNote:
Calculated from RfC using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Indeno(1,2,3-cd) pyrene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated from CSFo using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


ParamNote:
Calculated as per RTI 2005 Log Kow (neutral) x Fraction Neutral + Log Kow (ionized) x {1 - Fraction Neutral}.   LogKow (neutral is the logKow listed in this database. Log Kow (ionized) is calculated by multiplying the neutral Log Kow by 0.015 (EPA 1996).  The Fraction Neutral was calculated usin the Lee et al. (1990) equation (1+ 10^(pH-pKa))^-1, with pH = 7 and a pKa of 10.61.


ParamNote:
for Chromic acid mists and dissolved Cr(VI) aerosols. Another value available for Cr(VI) particulates (1E-4)


ParamNote:
from an IRIS listing for a 2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluen mixture


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(a)anthracene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(b)fluoranthene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(k)fluoranthene of 0.01 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for chrysene of 0.001 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Dibenz(a,h)anthracene of 1.0 (U.S. EPA 1993).


# References

LongCitation:
Not Applicable; parameter value not applicable for particular contaminant


LongCitation:
No Data; used for some parameters to indicate value has been researched and is not available in the references at the time of review; typically not assigned to calculated parameter values.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  2000.  Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds.  Draft Final Report.  Office of Research and Development.  Washington, D.C.  EPA/600/P-00/001 Bc.  September.


LongCitation:
Baes, C.F., R.D. Sharp, A.L. Sjoreen, and R.W. Shor.  1984.  “Review and Analysis of Parameters and Assessing Transport of Environmentally Released Radionuclides through Agriculture.”  Oak Ridge National Laboratory.  Oak Ridge, Tennessee.


LongCitation:
Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC).  2005a.  CHEMFATE Database.  SRC.  Syracuse, NY.  (http://esc.syrres.com/efdb/chemfate.htm).


LongCitation:
Lide, D.R.  2003.  CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 83rd Edition.  CRC Press.  Boca Raton, Florida.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  2005a.  Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).  Values updated monthly on line at http://www.epa.gov/iris/.  Accessed July 2005


LongCitation:
Lyman, W.J., W.F. Reehl, and D.H. Rosenblatt.  1990.  Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods:  Environmental Behavior of Organic Compounds.  McGraw-Hill Book Company.  New York, New York.


LongCitation:
Howard, P.H., R.S. Boethling, W.F. Jarvis, W.M. Meylan, and E.M. Michalenko, 1991.  Handbook of Environmental Degradation Rates.  Lewis Publishers.  Chelsea, Michigan.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1997a.  Mercury Study Report to Congress.  Volume III: Fate and Transport in the Environment.  OAQPS and ORD.  EPA-452/R-97-005.  December.


LongCitation:
O’Neil, M., and A. Smith.  2001.  The Merck Index:  An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and Biologicals.  13th Edition.  Merck and Company, Inc.  Rahway,  New Jersey.


LongCitation:
Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC).  2005b.  PHYSPROP Database.  SRC.  Syracuse, NY.  (http://esc.syrres.com/interkow/physdemo.htm).


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  2004a.  Superfund Chemical Data Matrix.  OERR.  Washington, D.C.  January.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1996.  Soil Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document and User's Guide.  Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.  Washington, D.C.  EPA/540/R-95/128.  May.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  2004.  WATER9-Air Emissions Models Wastewater Treatment.  Version 2.0.0.  OAQPS.  Research Triangle Park.  North Carolina.  July 1.


LongCitation:
Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value.  EPA/ORD/NCEA. Accessed July 2005

Notes:
There is a PPRTV available which we recommend using.  Please contact your Permitting Authority for the value


LongCitation:
California EPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Chronic Reference Exposure Levels Database (http://www.oehha.ca.gov/risk/chemicalDB//index.asp), accessed July 2005


LongCitation:
"Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). Fiscal Year 1997 Update".  Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. EPA-540-R-97-036. July


LongCitation:
California EPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Acute Reference Exposure Levels Database (http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/acute_rels/acuterel.html#download), accessed June 2005


LongCitation:
U.S. Department of Energy, Subcommittee on Consequence Assessment and Protective Actions (SCAPA) Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits, Revision 20 (http://www.eh.doe.gov/chem_safety//teel.html), April


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA Acute Inhalation Exposure Guideline Levels - Level 1 (AEGL-1s) Database (http://www.epa.gov/oppt/aegl/chemlist.htm), Accessed June 2005


LongCitation:
U.S. Department of Energy, Subcommittee on Consequence Assessment and Protective Actions (SCAPA) Level 1 emergency planning guidelines (ERPG-1), Revision 20 (http://www.eh.doe.gov/chem_safety//teel.html), April


LongCitation:
Briggs, G.G., R.H. Bromilow, and A.A. Evans, 1982.  "Relationships Between Lipophilicity and Root Uptake and Translocation of Non-ionized Chemicals by Barley."  Pesticide Science.  Volume 13.  Pages 495-504.


LongCitation:
California Environmental Protection Agency (CEPA).  1993.  Parameter Values and Ranges for CALTOX.  Draft.  Office of Scientific Affairs.  California Department of Toxic Substances Control.  Sacramento, CA.  July.


LongCitation:
Junge, C. E.  1977.  Fate of Pollutants in the Air and Water Environments, Part I.  Suffet, I. H., Ed. Wiley.  New York.  Pages 7-26.


LongCitation:
Meylan, W., P.H. Howard, R.S. Boethling, D. Aronson, H. Printup, and S. Gouchie.  1999.  “Improved Method for Estimating Bioconcentration/Bioaccumulation Factor from Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient”.  Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.  18(4):664-672.


LongCitation:
Stephens, R.D., M. Petreas, and G.H. Hayward.  1995.  “Biotransfer and Bioaccumulation of Dioxins and Furans from Soil:  Chickens as a Model for Foraging Animals.”  The Science of the Total Environment.  175: 253-273.  July 20.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1992.  Technical Support Document for the Land Application of Sewage Sludge. Volumes I and II.  EPA 822/R-93-001a.  Office of Water.  Washington, D.C.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA. 1994.  Revised Draft Guidance for Performing Screening Level Risk Analyses at Combustion Facilities Burning Hazardous Wastes:  Attachment C, Draft Exposure Assessment Guidance for RCRA Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities.  OERR.  Office of Solid Waste.  December 14.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1995a.  Memorandum Regarding Further Studies for Modeling the Indirect Exposure Impacts from Combustor Emissions.  From Mathew Lorber, Exposure Assessment Group, and Glenn Rice, Indirect Exposure Team, Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office.  Washington, D.C.  January 20.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1995b.  Review Draft Development of Human Health-Based and Ecologically-Based Exit Criteria for the Hazardous Waste Identification Project.  Volumes I and II.  Office of Solid Waste.  March 3.


LongCitation:
Montgomery, J.H., and L.M. Welkom.  1991.  Groundwater Chemicals Desk Reference.  Lewis Publishers.  Chelsea, Michigan.


LongCitation:
CambridgeSoft. 2005.  Chemfinder database (http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/).  Accessed July.


LongCitation:
Howard, P.H.  1989-1993.  Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data For Organic Chemicals.  Volume I:  Large Production and Priority Pollutants (1989).  Volume II:  Solvents (1990).  Volume III:  Pesticides (1991).  Volume IV:  Solvents2 (1993).  Lewis Publishers.  Chelsea, Michigan.


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1993a.  Review Draft Addendum to the Methodology for Assessing Health Risks Associated with Indirect Exposure to Combustor Emissions.  Office of Health and Environmental Assessment.  Office of Research and Development.  EPA-600-AP-93-003.  November 10.


LongCitation:
World Health Organization (WHO).  1998.  “Assessment of the Health Risk of Dioxins: Re-evaluation of the Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI).”  World Health Organization, European Centre for Environment and Health; International Programme on Chemical Safety.  WHO Consultation. May 25-29, 1998.  Geneva, Switzerland.


LongCitation:
Travis, C.C. and A.D. Arms.  1988.  Bioconcentration of Organics in Beef, Milk, and Vegetation.  Environmental Science and Technology.  22:271-274.


LongCitation:
Lorber, M., and P. Pinsky.  1999.  “An Evaluation of Three Empirical Air-to-Leaf Models for Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and Dibenzofurans.”  National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA).  U. S. EPA, 401 M St. SW, Washington, DC.  Accepted for Publication in Chemosphere.


LongCitation:
Bacci E., M. Cerejeira, C. Gaggi, G. Chemello, D. Calamari, and M. Vighi.  1992.  “Chlorinated Dioxins:  Volatilization from Soils and Bioconcentration in Plant Leaves.”  Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.  Volume 48.  Pages 401-408.


LongCitation:
Research Triangle Institute (RTI).  2003.  Methodology for Predicting Cattle Biotransfer Factors.  Prepared for the U.S. EPA National Center for Environmental Assessment


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1999.  Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities. Volume III:  Appendices B-H.  Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. EPA530-D-99-001C.  Peer Review Draft.  August.


LongCitation:
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Minimal Risk Level database (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls.html). July


LongCitation:
U.S. EPA.  1993b.  Provisional Guidance for Quantitative Risk Assessment of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons.  EPA/600/R-93/089.  July.


# Synonyms

Notes:
CAS # and chemical name not found in chemfinder


Name:
methylphosphonothioic acid S-[2-[bis(1-methylethyl)amino]ethyl] O-ethyl ester


Name:
Isopropyl ester of methylphosphonofluoridic acid


Name:
DuPont Zonyl FSP Fluorinated Surfactants


Name:
DuPont Zonyl FSJ Fluorinated Surfactants


Name:
DuPont Zonyl FSA Fluorinated Surfactants


Name:
DuPont Zonyl FSN Fluorinated Surfactants


Name:
tert-Butyl hydroperoxide, 70% solution in water


Name:
Butyl stearate, mixture of ca. 55-65% stearyl- and 25-40% cetyl-chain


Name:
pentachlorophenol, dp-2; dow pentachlorophenol dp-2 antimicrobial


Name:
2,3,4,5,6,7,7-heptachloro-1a,1b,5,5a,6,6a-hexahydro-2,5-methano-2H-indeno(1,2-b)oxirene, (1aalpha, 1bbeta, 2alpha, 5alpha, 5abeta, 6beta, 6aalpha)-


Name:
2,5-Methano-2H-indeno[1,2b] oxirene, 2,3,4,5,6,7,7-heptachloro-1a,1b,5,5a,6,6a-hexahydro-(alpha, beta and gamma isomers)


Name:
Sodium, 30 wt% dispersion in toluene, <0.1 mm particle size


Name:
Strontium, 99% - 1/4 Inch Pieces Under Mineral Oil


Name:
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid butyl phenylmethyl ester


Name:
Xylene mixture (60% m-xylene, 9% o-xylene, 14% p-xylene, 17% ethylbenzene)


Name:
Xylene mixture (m-xylene, o-xylene, p-xylene);


Name:
Hydrogen Cyanide , anhydrous, stabilized (absorbed)


Name:
Hydrogen cyanide, anhydrous, stabilized (absorbed)


Name:
Hydrogen fluoride, 37 wt% solution in triethylamine


Name:
DuPont Zonyl FSO-100 Fluorinated Surfactants


Name:
Ortho Multi-Purpose Fungicide Daconil 2787


Name:
SA Lawn Ornamental & Vegetable Fungicide


Name:
Phosphoric acid 2,2-dichloroethenyl dimethyl ester


Name:
phosphoric acid 2,2-dichlorovinyl dimethyl ester


Name:
2,2-dichlorovinyl dimethyl phosphoric acid ester


Name:
2,2-dichloroethenyl phosphoric acid dimethyl ester


Name:
1-Ethyl-1-Nitrosourea, Stabilized With Dilute Acetic Acid Soln. - Carc.


Name:
ethyl ester of 4,4'-dichlorobenzilic acid


Name:
Phosphorothioic acid O,O-diethyl O-(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl) ester


Name:
3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol O-ester with O,O-diethyl phosphorothioate


Name:
Pyrindol, 3,5,6-trichloro-, O-ester with O,O-diethyl phosphorothioate


Name:
Phosphorothioic acid O,O-diethyl O-[6-methyl-2-(1-methylethyl)-4-pyrimidinyl] ester


Name:
thiophosphoric acid 2-isopropyl-4-methyl-6-pyrimidyl diethyl ester


Name:
Phosphorodithioic acid O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] ester


Name:
Sulfurous acid, cyclic ester with 1,4,5,6,7,7-hexachloro-5-norbornene-2,3-dimethanol


Name:
O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate ester of diethyl mercaptosuccinate


Name:
mercaptosuccinic acid diethyl ester S-ester with O,O-dimethyl phosphorothioate


Name:
diethyl mercaptosuccinate, O,O-dimethyl dithiophosphate, S-ester


Name:
diethyl mercaptosuccinate S-ester with O,O-dimethylphosphorodithioate


Name:
diethyl mercaptosuccinic acid O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate


Name:
phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-dimethyl ester, S-ester with diethyl mercaptosuccinate


Name:
Diethyl mercaptosuccinic acid, S-ester of O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate


Name:
Dimethyl dithiophosphate of diethyl mercaptosuccinate


Name:
Dimethyl phosphorodithioate of diethyl mercaptosuccinate


Name:
Phosphorothioic acid O,O-dimethyl O-(4-nitrophenyl) ester


Name:
Synonyms: Parathion-methyl; Phosphorothioic acid O,O-dimethyl O-(4-nitrophenyl) ester; O,O-dimethyl O-p-nitrophenyl phosphorothioate; O,O-dimethyl O-p-nitrophenyl thiophosphate


Name:
Phosphorodithioic acid O,O-diethyl S-[(ethylthio)methyl] ester


Name:
Phenol, 2,4,5-trichloro-, O-ester with O,O-dimethyl phosphorothioate


Name:
Benzeneacetic acid, 4-chloro-.alpha.-(4-chlorophenyl)-.alpha.-hydroxy-, ethyl ester


Name:
Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-diethyl O-(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridyl) ester


Name:
Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-diethyl O-(2-isopropyl-6-methyl-4-pyrimidinyl) ester


Name:
Phosphoric acid, 2,2-dichlorovinyl dimethyl ester


Name:
Phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl) ester


Name:
Phosphorodithioic acid, S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl)-, O,O-diethyl ester


Name:
S-(2-(Ethylthio)ethyl) O,O-diethyl ester of phosphorodithioic acid


Name:
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester


Name:
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-ethyl ester


Name:
Butanedioic acid, [(dimethoxyphosphinothioyl)thio]-, diethyl ester


Name:
O,O-Dimethyl dithiophosphate of diethyl mercaptosuccinate


Name:
O,O-Dimethyl phosphorodithioate of diethyl mercaptosuccinate


Name:
Succinic acid, mercapto-, diethyl ester, S-ester with O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate


# TargetOrgan_CriticalEffects

CriticalEffects:
Degeneration and inflammation of nasal respiratory epithelium; hyperplasia of mucous secreting cells


CriticalEffects:
Lack of toxicity (other effect: Mild spleen toxicity. )


CriticalEffects:
Longevity, blood glucose, and cholesterol


CriticalEffects:
Ocular exudate, inflamed and prominent Meibomian glands


CriticalEffects:
distorted growth of finger and toe nails


CriticalEffects:
decreased antibody (IgG and IgM) response to sheep erythrocytes


CriticalEffects:
Hyperpigmentation, keratosis and possible vascular complications


CriticalEffects:
Cardiac toxicity and moderate-to-severe dilation of the right atrium.


CriticalEffects:
Decreased sperm count; seminiferous tubule degeneration


CriticalEffects:
Beryllium sensitization and progression to CBD


CriticalEffects:
Significantly increased liver-to-body weight and liver-to-brain weight ratios


CriticalEffects:
Nonneoplastic lesions of splenic capsule


CriticalEffects:
Decreased stool quantity, food consumption and body weight gains; hyperirritability (maternal effects)


CriticalEffects:
Decreased plasma ChE activity after 9 days


CriticalEffects:
Hypertrophy/ hyperplasia of the nasal respiratory epithelium


CriticalEffects:
Heinz bodies and biliary tract hyperplasia


CriticalEffects:
Neurotoxicity, Heinz bodies and biliary tract hyperplasia


CriticalEffects:
marked progressive glomerulonephrosis and blood vessel aneurysms


CriticalEffects:
hematological alterations, and clinical effects


CriticalEffects:
Decreased RBC, packed cell volume and hemoglobin


CriticalEffects:
Reduced weight gain, histopathology in rats


CriticalEffects:
Atrophy and degeneration of the renal tubules


CriticalEffects:
Status spongiosis in brain and optic nerve


CriticalEffects:
Hyperplasia of nasal mucosa larynx and trachea


CriticalEffects:
Hand tremor; increases in memory disturbances; slight subjective and objective evidence of autonomic dysfunction


CriticalEffects:
Epithelial hyperplasia of the forestomach


CriticalEffects:
Degenerative and proliferative lesions of the olfactory epithelium of the nasal cavity


CriticalEffects:
Increased relative weight, increased urinary protein


CriticalEffects:
Reduced fetal body weight and increased fetal death


CriticalEffects:
RBC, ChE inhibition; reduced hemoglobin, hematocrit and RBCs


CriticalEffects:
Moderate/marked fatty cyst formation in the liver and elevated SGPT


CriticalEffects:
Hyperplasia and metaplasia in respiratory and olfactory epithelium


CriticalEffects:
Methemoglobinemia and other hematological effects


CriticalEffects:
Increased pigmentation of the reticuloendothelial cells


CriticalEffects:
Significant increase in methemoglobin and morphological changes in red blood cells


CriticalEffects:
Hepatocellular vauolization and increases in absolute and relative liver weights


CriticalEffects:
Increased liver weights and centrilobular hypertrophy


CriticalEffects:
Increased adrenal weights; vacuolization of zona fasciculata in the cortex


CriticalEffects:
Alterations in clinical chemistry and reduction in red cell mass


CriticalEffects:
Decrased weight gain, increased serum phosphorus levels


CriticalEffects:
Vertigo, headaches, drowsiness, chronic asthma-like bronchitis, anemia, altered blood clotting


CriticalEffects:
Methemoglobinemia and spleen-erythroid cell hyperplasia


CriticalEffects:
Decrease in erythrocyte superoxide dismutase (ESOD) concentration


CriticalEffects:
Increased accentuated lobule zonation; perivenous cytoplasmic vacuolation, hepatocyte endothelial nuclear prominence, hyperchromicity


CriticalEffects:
renal tubular pathology, decreased kidney weights


# ToxData

CriticalEffects:
Degeneration and inflammation of nasal respiratory epithelium; hyperplasia of mucous secreting cells


CriticalEffects:
Lack of toxicity (other effect: Mild spleen toxicity. )


CriticalEffects:
Longevity, blood glucose, and cholesterol


CriticalEffects:
Ocular exudate, inflamed and prominent Meibomian glands


CriticalEffects:
distorted growth of finger and toe nails


CriticalEffects:
decreased antibody (IgG and IgM) response to sheep erythrocytes


CriticalEffects:
Hyperpigmentation, keratosis and possible vascular complications


CriticalEffects:
Cardiac toxicity and moderate-to-severe dilation of the right atrium.


ToxParamNote:
Calculated from RfD using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


CriticalEffects:
Decreased sperm count; seminiferous tubule degeneration


CriticalEffects:
Beryllium sensitization and progression to CBD


ToxParamNote:
Calculated from RfC using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


CriticalEffects:
Significantly increased liver-to-body weight and liver-to-brain weight ratios


CriticalEffects:
Nonneoplastic lesions of splenic capsule


CriticalEffects:
Decreased stool quantity, food consumption and body weight gains; hyperirritability (maternal effects)


CriticalEffects:
Decreased plasma ChE activity after 9 days


ToxParamNote:
for Chromic acid mists and dissolved Cr(VI) aerosols. Another value available for Cr(VI) particulates (1E-4)


CriticalEffects:
Hypertrophy/ hyperplasia of the nasal respiratory epithelium


CriticalEffects:
Neurotoxicity, Heinz bodies and biliary tract hyperplasia


CriticalEffects:
Heinz bodies and biliary tract hyperplasia


ToxParamNote:
from an IRIS listing for a 2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluen mixture


CriticalEffects:
marked progressive glomerulonephrosis and blood vessel aneurysms


CriticalEffects:
hematological alterations, and clinical effects


CriticalEffects:
Decreased RBC, packed cell volume and hemoglobin


CriticalEffects:
Reduced weight gain, histopathology in rats


ToxParamNote:
for a mixture of 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD and 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD


CriticalEffects:
Atrophy and degeneration of the renal tubules


CriticalEffects:
Status spongiosis in brain and optic nerve


CriticalEffects:
Hyperplasia of nasal mucosa larynx and trachea


ToxParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Indeno(1,2,3-cd) pyrene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ToxParamNote:
Calculated from CSFo using an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a human body weight of 70 kg.


CriticalEffects:
Hand tremor; increases in memory disturbances; slight subjective and objective evidence of autonomic dysfunction


CriticalEffects:
Epithelial hyperplasia of the forestomach


CriticalEffects:
Degenerative and proliferative lesions of the olfactory epithelium of the nasal cavity


CriticalEffects:
Reduced fetal body weight and increased fetal death


CriticalEffects:
RBC, ChE inhibition; reduced hemoglobin, hematocrit and RBCs


CriticalEffects:
Moderate/marked fatty cyst formation in the liver and elevated SGPT


CriticalEffects:
Hyperplasia and metaplasia in respiratory and olfactory epithelium


CriticalEffects:
Methemoglobinemia and other hematological effects


CriticalEffects:
Increased pigmentation of the reticuloendothelial cells


CriticalEffects:
Significant increase in methemoglobin and morphological changes in red blood cells


CriticalEffects:
Hepatocellular vauolization and increases in absolute and relative liver weights


CriticalEffects:
Increased liver weights and centrilobular hypertrophy


CriticalEffects:
Increased adrenal weights; vacuolization of zona fasciculata in the cortex


CriticalEffects:
Alterations in clinical chemistry and reduction in red cell mass


CriticalEffects:
Decrased weight gain, increased serum phosphorus levels


CriticalEffects:
Vertigo, headaches, drowsiness, chronic asthma-like bronchitis, anemia, altered blood clotting


CriticalEffects:
Methemoglobinemia and spleen-erythroid cell hyperplasia


CriticalEffects:
Decrease in erythrocyte superoxide dismutase (ESOD) concentration


ToxParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(a)anthracene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ToxParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(b)fluoranthene of 0.1 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ToxParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Benzo(k)fluoranthene of 0.01 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ToxParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for chrysene of 0.001 (U.S. EPA 1993).


ToxParamNote:
Calculated by multiplying the CSFo for Benzo(a)pyrene by the relative potency factor for Dibenz(a,h)anthracene of 1.0 (U.S. EPA 1993).


CriticalEffects:
Increased accentuated lobule zonation; perivenous cytoplasmic vacuolation, hepatocyte endothelial nuclear prominence, hyperchromicity


CriticalEffects:
Increased relative weight, increased urinary protein


CriticalEffects:
renal tubular pathology, decreased kidney weights


