Since some uses of acrylamide could cause ground water contamination, potential hazards were assessed by evaluating the degradation and leaching of 14C‐acrylamide (labelled at the carboxyl position) in four soils: silt loam, clay loam, loamy fine sand, and loam. The soil degradation study utilized the biometer flask method. Acrylamide half‐life (t1/2) was estimated by the time required for release of one‐half the evolved 14CO2. Half‐life was influenced by incubation temperature, acrylamide concentration, and the season at which the soil was collected. At ambient temperature (22°C), half‐lives ranged from 18 to 45 hours for 25 ppm acrylamide (on a soil basis). Decreasing temperature or increasing acrylamide concentration increased half‐life. Half‐life was two and one‐half times greater in soil gathered in spring than the same soil gathered in summer. When acrylamide was incubated in anaerobically maintained soil, it apparently metabolized more slowly. Leaching was evaluated by soil TLC. Rf values, which ranged from 0.64 to 0.88, place acrylamide into the “mobile class.”

A comparison of the human health risk to consumers using one of two types of toilet rimblock products, either a p-dichlorobenzene-based rimblock or two newer fragrance/surfactant-based alternatives, was conducted. Rimblock products are designed for global use by consumers worldwide and function by releasing volatile compounds into indoor air with subsequent exposure presumed to be mainly by inhalation of indoor air. Using the THERdbASE exposure model and experimentally determined emission data, indoor air concentrations and daily intake values were determined for both types of rimblock products. Modeled exposure concentrations from a representative p-dichlorobenzene rimblock product are an order of magnitude higher than those from the alternative rimblock products due to its nearly pure composition and high sublimation rate. Lifetime exposure to p-dichlorobenzene or the subset of fragrance components with available RfD values is not expected to lead to non-cancer-based adverse health effects based on the exposure concentrations estimated using the THERdbASE model. A similar comparison of cancer-based effects was not possible as insufficient data were available for the fragrance components.

This toxicological profile is prepared in accordance with guidelines developed by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The original guidelines were published in the Federal Register on April 17, 1987. Each profile will be revised and republished as necessary. The ATSDR toxicological profile succinctly characterizes the toxicologic and adverse health effects information for these toxic substances described therein. Each peer-reviewed profile identifies and reviews the key literature that describes a substance's toxicologic properties. Other pertinent literature is also presented, but is described in less detail than the key studies. The profile is not intended to be an exhaustive document; however, more comprehensive sources of specialty information are referenced. CAS# 7439-92-1

No abstract

facility is classified under Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes 20-39; and if their facility produces, imports, or processes ≥25,000 pounds of any TRI chemical or otherwise uses >10,000 pounds of a TRI chemical in a calendar year (EPA 1997).Bromoform and dibromochloromethane have been identified in a variety of environmental media (air, surface water, groundwater, soil, and sediment) collected at 140 and 174 of the 1,662 NPL hazardous waste sites, respectively (HazDat 2005). AirEstimated releases of 12 pounds (0.01 metric tons) of bromoform to the atmosphere from 3 domestic manufacturing and processing facilities in 2002, accounted for about 3% of the estimated total environmental releases (TRI02 2004). These releases are summarized in Table 6-1.Bromoform has been identified in air samples collected at 7 of the 140 NPL hazardous waste sites where it was detected in some environmental media (HazDat 2005). Dibromochloromethane has been identified in air samples collected at 1 of the 174 NPL hazardous waste sites where it was detected in some environmental media.The average concentration of dibromochloromethane in uncontrolled emissions from 40 medical waste incinerators in the United States and Canada was 0.96 µg/kg waste (Walker and Cooper 1992). The average concentration in controlled emissions was 536 µg/kg waste. Quack and Wallace (2003) estimated that the annual global flux of bromoform of 3-22 Gmol/year with the main source being sea-to-air emissions from macroalgal and planktonic bromoform production. The sum of fugitive and point source releases are included in releases to air by a given facility. f Surface water discharges, waste water treatment-(metals only), and publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) (metal and metal compounds). No other studies were located regarding the amount of bromoform and dibromochloromethane released into the atmosphere from laboratories, chemical plants, or chemical waste sites. However, since neither compound is produced or used in large quantities (Perwak et al. 1980), atmospheric emissions from these sources are probably small. WaterEstimated releases of 456 pounds (0.21 metric tons) of bromoform to surface water and publicly owned treatment works from three domestic manufacturing and processing facilities in 2002, accounted for about 97% of the estimated total environmental releases (TRI02 2004). These releases are summarized in Bromoform has been identified in surface water samples and groundwater samples collected at 14 and 103 of the 140 hazardous waste sites, respectively, where it was detected in some environmental media.Dibromochloromethane has been identified in surface water samples and groundwater samples collected at 15 and 146 of the 174 hazardous waste sites, respectively, where it was detected in some environmental media (HazDat 2005).The principal anthropogenic source of bromoform and dibromochloromethane in the environment is chlorination of water containing organic materials (Bellar et al. 1974; EPA 1980a; Peters et al. 1994; Rook 1977; Rodri...