DOCSLIB.ORG

ANALYSIS of ALTERNATIVES Non-Confidential Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ANALYSIS of ALTERNATIVES Non-Confidential Report ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES non-confidential report Legal name of applicant(s): DEZA, a.s. Substance: Dibutyl phthalate Use title: Use in ceramic sheets and printing pastes for production of capacitors and lambda sensor elements Use number: Use 3 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Background to this Application for Authorisation ......................................................................................... 1 1.1.1. Applicant and Uses .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.2. The role of plasticizers ..................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2. Summary of Issues Considered When Determining the Approach to the AoA ............................................... 2 2. ANALYSIS OF SUBSTANCE FUNCTION.......................................................................................... 3 2.1. Background of the use of DBP in the manufacture of ceramic sheets and printing pastes ............................ 3 2.2. Descriptions of the use of DBP ...................................................................................................................... 4 2.3. Conditions of DBP use ................................................................................................................................... 9 2.3.1. Technical requirements for DBP and alternative substances ........................................................................ 11 3. IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES ................................................................... 11 3.1. Description of efforts made to identify possible alternatives .......................................................................11 3.1.1. Research and development ........................................................................................................................... 11 3.1.2. Data searches ................................................................................................................................................ 11 3.1.3. Consultations ................................................................................................................................................. 13 3.2. List of potential alternatives ........................................................................................................................13 4. SUITABILITY AND AVAILABILITY OF POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES ................................... 16 4.1. ALTERNATIVE 1 ............................................................................................................................................16 4.2. ALTERNATIVE 2 ............................................................................................................................................16 4.3. ALTERNATIVE 3 ............................................................................................................................................16 4.4. ALTERNATIVE 4 ............................................................................................................................................16 4.5. ALTERNATIVE 5 ............................................................................................................................................16 4.6. ALTERNATIVE 6 ............................................................................................................................................17 5. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS ON SUITABILITY AND AVAILABILITY OF POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES FOR USE 3 .................................................................................................................... 17 5.1. Conclusion on the technical feasibility of commercially proven alternatives ...............................................18 5.2. Conclusion on the economic feasibility of commercially proven alternatives ..............................................18 5.3. Conclusion on risk reduction potential of commercially proven alternatives ...............................................18 5.4. Overall conclusion........................................................................................................................................18 ii ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES FIGURES Figure 1: Description of production ceramic chip capacitors-part 1 (Johanson Dielectrics) .............. 4 Figure 2 Description of production ceramic chip capacitors-part 2 (Johanson Dielectrics) ................ 4 Figure 3: Description of production ceramic chip capacitors (Lee, 2008) ......................................... 5 Figure 4: The principle of ceramic slurry preparing ........................................................................... 6 Figure 5: Manufacture dielectric paste and sheet formation (TDK, 2008) ......................................... 6 Figure 6: Electrode printing and sheet layering (TDK, 2008) ............................................................ 7 Figure 7: Cutting and sintering ............................................................................................................ 8 Figure 8: Application of terminal electrode, inspection and packaging (TDK, 2008) ........................ 8 Figure 9: The structure of ceramic capacitor (With, 1993; He, 2004) ................................................. 8 TABLE Table 1. Parameters for DBP use in the manufacture of ceramic types............................................. 10 Table 2. Key information sources used in the identification of potential alternatives ....................... 12 Table 3. Key information sources used in the collection of information on the properties of potential alternatives ......................................................................................................................................... 12 Table 4. Identities and REACH registration status of alternative substances .................................... 14 Table 5. Comparison of selected potential alternative substances against key technical comparison criteria ................................................................................................................................................ 15 iii ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 1. SUMMARY 1.1. Background to this Application for Authorisation 1.1.1. Applicant and Uses The applicant, DEZA, a.s. (hereafter referred to as “the applicant” or “DEZA”), is a Czech manufacturer of dibutyl phthalate (DBP), EC No. 201-557-4, CAS No. 84-74-2. Dibutyl phthalate is manufactured at site in Otrokovice, approximately 60 km from Valašské Meziříčí. DBP made by DEZA is consumed in a number of uses; one of the smaller ones is the use of the substance by a small number of EU-based companies in production of ceramic sheets and printing pastes used for manufacture of capacitors and lambda sensor elements. The DBP is used as a plasticiser in slurry for ceramic sheets and printing pastes manufacture and the use for which Authorisation is sought is: 1. Use in ceramic sheets and printing pastes for production of capacitors and lambda sensor elements The hazard profile of DBP, together with the potential risks that this substance may pose, has been the subject of extensive expert assessment including a European risk assessment report (EU RAR 2003, Danish EPA 2011). This assessment reached a number of conclusions which indicated that concern was warranted with regard to human exposures (including workers, consumers and from exposure via the environment) and some environmental compartments. DBP was included in the candidate list for Authorisation following ECHA’s decision ED/67/2008 on 28 October 2008, based upon its classification as Toxic to Reproduction, Category 2 (i.e. Category 1B, under CLP); this was based largely on information from the EU RAR, supplemented by limited additional information (ECHA 2009). DBP was further reviewed in a background document prepared in support of its inclusion in Annex XIV (ECHA 2009), again drawing on the EU RAR together with data submitted by COWI, IOM and Entec and RCOM. Since DBP met the criteria in Article 57(c) and, according to available information, it was possible to determine a toxicological threshold, it was noted that if the risks to human health from the use of the substance arising from its toxicity to reproduction were to be demonstrated to be adequately controlled in accordance with Section 6.4 of Annex I and that this was documented in the applicant’s chemical safety report (CSR), an authorisation would be granted in accordance with Article 60(2) (‘adequate control route’); if not, an authorisation would be granted in accordance with Article 60(4) (‘socio-economic route’). Alongside the Authorisation process, the Danish authorities submitted in 2011 a proposal for a restriction (together with the justification and background information documented in an Annex XV dossier) on the placing on the market and use of certain articles containing four classified phthalates (DEHP, benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP) and diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP)) in articles that are intended for indoor use, or in articles that come into contact with skin or mucous membranes, on the grounds of the aforementioned Toxic to Reproduction, Category 1B CLP classification. The Annex XV report conforming to the requirements
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT This Statement Was Prepared to Give
    OTTO FUEL II AND ITS COMPONENTS 1 1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT This statement was prepared to give you information about Otto Fuel II and its components, and to emphasize the human health effects that may result from exposure to them. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has identified 1,397 hazardous waste sites as the most serious in the nation. These sites make up the National Priorities List (NPL) and are the sites targeted for long-term federal clean-up activities. Otto Fuel II has been found at two of the sites on the NPL. However, the number of NPL sites evaluated for Otto Fuel II and its components is not known. As EPA evaluates more sites, the number of sites at which Otto Fuel II and its components are found may increase. This information is important for you to know because Otto Fuel II and its components may cause harmful health effects and because these sites are potential or actual sources of human exposure to Otto Fuel II and its components. When a chemical is released from a large area, such as an industrial plant, or from a container, such as a drum or bottle, it enters the environment as a chemical emission. This emission, which is also called a release, does not always lead to exposure. You can be exposed to a chemical only when you come into contact with the chemical. You may be exposed to it in the environment by breathing, eating or drinking substances containing the chemical, or from skin contact with it. If you are exposed to a hazardous chemical such as Otto Fuel II and its components, several factors will determine whether harmful health effects will occur, and what the type and severity of those health effects will be.
    [Show full text]
  • Acetyl Tributyl Citrate | C20H34O8 - Pubchem
    12/31/2020 Acetyl tributyl citrate | C20H34O8 - PubChem COVID-19 is an emerging, rapidly evolving situation. Get the latest public health information from CDC: https://www.coronavirus.gov. Get the latest research from NIH: https://www.nih.gov/coronavirus. COMPOUND SUMMARY Acetyl tributyl citrate PubChem CID 6505 Structure 2D Find Similar Structures Chemical Safety Laboratory Chemical Safety Summary (LCSS) Datasheet Molecular Formula C20H34O8 ACETYL TRIBUTYL CITRATE 77-90-7 tributyl 2-acetoxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylate Synonyms Tributyl O-acetylcitrate Acetyltributyl citrate More... Molecular Weight 402.5 g/mol Modify Create Dates 2020-12-26 2005-03-26 https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/6505 1/46 12/31/2020 Acetyl tributyl citrate | C20H34O8 - PubChem 1 Structures 1.1 2D Structure Chemical Structure Depiction PubChem 1.2 3D Status Conformer generation is disallowed since too flexible PubChem https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/6505 2/46 12/31/2020 Acetyl tributyl citrate | C20H34O8 - PubChem 2 Names and Identifiers 2.1 Computed Descriptors 2.1.1 IUPAC Name tributyl 2-acetyloxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylate Computed by LexiChem 2.6.6 (PubChem release 2019.06.18) PubChem 2.1.2 InChI InChI=1S/C20H34O8/c1-5-8-11-25-17(22)14-20(28-16(4)21,19(24)27-13-10-7-3)15-18(23)26-12-9-6-2/h5-15H2,1-4H3 Computed by InChI 1.0.5 (PubChem release 2019.06.18) PubChem 2.1.3 InChI Key QZCLKYGREBVARF-UHFFFAOYSA-N Computed by InChI 1.0.5 (PubChem release 2019.06.18) PubChem 2.1.4 Canonical SMILES CCCCOC(=O)CC(CC(=O)OCCCC)(C(=O)OCCCC)OC(=O)C Computed
    [Show full text]
  • PINK BOOK 3 Sebacic Acid/Dicarboxylic Acids CIR EXPERT PANEL MEETING AUGUST 30-31, 2010
    PINK BOOK 3 Sebacic Acid/Dicarboxylic Acids CIR EXPERT PANEL MEETING AUGUST 30-31, 2010 Memorandum To: CIR Expert Panel Members and Liaisons From: Monice M. Fiume MMF Senior Scientific Analyst/Writer Bart A. Heldreth, Ph.D. BAH Chemist Date: July 30, 2010 Subject: Draft Report on Dicarboxylic Acids (previously called Diisopropyl Sebacate) The draft report on dicarboxylic acids was last reviewed in December 2009, under the title Diisopropyl Sebacate. At that time, the report was tabled for reorganization. Also at that time, it was determined that oxalic acid would not be part of the safety assessment. The entire report has been reorganized and rewritten. It will be obvious that the Chemistry section is now prepared in a way that allows you to view the dicarboxylic acids in order of increasing chain length. Also included are charts demonstrating the relationship between molecular weight and the log octanol – water partitioning coefficient. Additionally, the report, from the General Biology section on, is now divided into two sections, as was suggested by the Panel in December. The first section addresses dicarboxylic acids and their salts, while the second part addresses esters of dicarboxylic acids. These two subsets of ingredients have different functions in cosmetics, and this will allow the Panel to view the data on each subset separately. In addition to the reorganization, the report has change greatly in the extent of data included. A complete new search of the literature has been performed, and a substantial amount of new data has been added. A great deal of the information included in this report has come from summary documents, such as HPV robust summaries, that cite unpublished sources.
    [Show full text]
  • LOUS 2013 Hoering Phthalates
    Survey of selected phthalates Part of the LOUS-review Version of Public Hearing October 2013 1 Survey of selected phthalates 1 Title: Authors and contributors : Survey of selected phthalates Sonja Hagen Mikkelsen Jakob Maag Jesper Kjølholt Carsten Lassen Christian Nyander Jeppesen Anna Juliane Clausen COWI A/S, Denmark Published by: The Danish Environmental Protection Agency Strandgade 29 1401 Copenhagen K Denmark www.mst.dk/english Year: 2013 ISBN no. [xxxxxx] Disclaimer: When the occasion arises, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency will publish reports and papers concerning research and development projects within the environmental sector, financed by study grants provided by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency. It should be noted that such publications do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the Danish Environmental Protection Agency. However, publication does indicate that, in the opinion of the Danish Environmental Protection Agency, the content represents an important contribution to the debate surrounding Danish environmental policy. While the information provided in this report is believed to be accurate, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency disclaims any responsibility for possible inaccuracies or omissions and consequences that may flow from them. Neither the Danish Environmental Protection Agency nor COWI or any individual involved in the preparation of this publication shall be liable for any injury, loss, damage or prejudice of any kind that may be caused by persons who have acted based on
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Fuel Ii and Its Components
    TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR OTTO FUEL II AND ITS COMPONENTS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry June 1995 Additional Resources http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp77.html OTTO FUEL II AND ITS COMPONENTS ii DISCLAIMER The use of company or product name(s) is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. OTTO FUEL II AND ITS COMPONENTS iii UPDATE STATEMENT Toxicological profiles are revised and republished as necessary, but no less than once every three years. For information regarding the update status of previously released profiles, contact ATSDR at: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Division of Toxicology/Toxicology Information Branch 1600 Clifton Road NE, E-29 Atlanta, Georgia 30333 OTTO FUEL II AND ITS COMPONENTS vii CONTRIBUTORS CHEMICAL MANAGER(S)/AUTHOR(S): Henry Abadin, M.S.P.H. ATSDR, Division of Toxicology, Atlanta, GA Fernando Llados, Ph.D. Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC THE PROFILE HAS UNDERGONE THE FOLLOWING ATSDR INTERNAL REVIEWS: 1. Green Border Review. Green Bonier review assures consistency with ATSDR policy. 2. Health Effects Review. The Health Effects Review Committee examines the health effects chapter of each profile for consistency and accuracy in interpreting health effects and classifying end points. 3. Minimal Risk Level Review. The Minimal Risk Level Workgroup considers issues relevant to substance-specific minimal risk levels (MRLs), reviews the health effects database of each profile, and makes recommendations for derivation of MRLs. 4. Quality Assurance Review. The Quality Assurance Branch assures that consistency across profiles is maintained, identifies any significant problems in format or content, and establishes that Guidance has been followed.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Alternatives
    ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES NON-CONFIDENTIAL REPORT Legal name of applicant(s): DEZA, a.s. Submitted by: DEZA, a.s. Substance: Dibutyl phthalate Use title: Use in propellants Sub-scenario 1: F-2: Industrial use as a burning rate surface moderant, plasticiser and/or coolant in the formulation of nitrocellulose-based propellant grains Sub-scenario 2: IW-2: Industrial use of propellant grains in manufacture of ammunition for military and civilian uses, and pyrocartridges for aircraft ejection seat safety systems [excludes propellants intended for manual reloading of ammunition cartridges by civilian users] Use number: 2 Use number: 2 Legal name of applicant: DEZA, a.s. i ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES Use number: 2 Legal name of applicant: DEZA, a.s. ii ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY............................................................................................................................................................9 1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................9 1.2 Role of DBP in propellants and final products of concern .............................................................................9 1.3 Identification and screening of potential alternatives .....................................................................................10 1.4 Assessment of suitability and availability of potential alternative substances................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Resistance Chart Version 11/2018 | PDF Only | Bürkert Applied Marketing & Design Applied Marketing 11/2018 | PDF Only Bürkert Version
    Chemical Resistance Chart Version 11/2018 | PDF only | Bürkert Applied Marketing & Design Applied Marketing 11/2018 | PDF only Bürkert Version Check chemical resistance online. Download our mobile resistApp for free: Click to start the resistApp! Bürkert Fluid Control Systems Christian-Bürkert-Straße 13 -17 74653 Ingelfingen Germany Tel.: +49 7940 10 0 Fax: +49 7940 10 91204 [email protected] www.burkert.com Introduction 3 Introduction When dealing with aggressive fluids the user is continuously faced with the problem of finding compatible materials. In order to simplify the selection of suitable materials when using Bürkert products for aggressive fluids, the following tables provide useful information on the optimal choice of housing and gasket materials for a multitude of media. Since corrosion performance is influenced by several factors, the information contained Content in this brochure should be treated only as a guide and is not necessarily valid for all op- erating conditions. Increased temperatures, higher concentrations, and the inadvertent 3 Introduction ingress of water in originally pure chemicals can all lead to accelerated corrosion. 4 Structure and content of the chemical resistance charts Dependent on the purity of the fluid as well as the compounding and nature of vulca- 5 Interpretation of Symbols nisation of the gasket materials, deviations can result which affect the suitability and durability of the plastics and elastomers. 5 References 6 Overview The information quoted in this guide does not consider the effect of mechanical load- ing, which may also have a bearing on the material performance in the fluid. In cases 8 Resistance in basic chemicals of doubt when considering our products, we strongly recommend the prior testing of 32 Resistance in commercial products samples with various material combinations, in order to establish and check their suit- ability under the actual operating conditions of the application.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Selected Phthalates
    Survey of selected phthalates Part of the LOUS-review Environmental Project No. 1541, 2014 1 Survey of selected phthalates 1 Title: Authors and contributors: Survey of selected phthalates Sonja Hagen Mikkelsen Jakob Maag Jesper Kjølholt Carsten Lassen Christian Nyander Jeppesen Anna Juliane Clausen COWI A/S, Denmark Published by: The Danish Environmental Protection Agency Strandgade 29 1 401 Copenhagen K Denmark www.mst.dk/english Year: ISBN no. 2014 97 8-87-93026-95-7 Disclaimer: When the occasion arises, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency will publish reports and papers concerning research and development projects within the environmental sector, financed by study grants provided by the Danish Env ironmental Protection Agency. It should be noted that such publications do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the Danish Environmental Protection Agency. Howev er, publication does indicate that, in the opinion of the Danish Environmental Protection Agency, the conten t represents an important contribution to the debate surrounding Danish environmental policy. While the information provided in this report is believed to be accurate, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency disclaims any responsibility for possible inaccuracies or omissions and consequences that may flow from them. Neither the Danish Environmental Protection Agency nor COWI or any individual involved in the preparation of this publication shall be liable for any injury, loss, damage or prejudice of any kind that may be caused by persons who have acted based on their understanding of the information contained in this publication. Sources must be acknowledged. 2 Survey of selected phthalates Contents Preface ...................................................................................................................... 5 Conclusion and summary .......................................................................................... 9 Dansk resumé ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Toxicity Review for Diisononyl Adipate (DINA)”1 June 2019
    CPSC Staff Statement on University of Cincinnati Report “Toxicity Review for Diisononyl Adipate (DINA)”1 June 2019 The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) contracted with the University of Cincinnati to conduct toxicology assessments for nine dialkyl o-phthalate (o-DAP) substitutes: phenyl esters of C10-C18 alkylsulfonic acid esters (ASE); glycerides, castor-oil-mono-, hydrogenated, acetates (COMGHA); dibutyl adipate (DBA) and di-isobutyl adipate (DiBA); di (2-ethylhexyl) sebacate (DEHS)/dioctyl sebacate (DOS); a mixture of 98% di-2-ethylhexyl terephthalate (DEHT) and 2% 2-ethylhexyl methyl terephthalate (2-EHMT); dibutyl sebacate (DBS); diisononyl adipate (DINA); epoxidized soybean oil (ESBO); and tributyl citrate (TBC). The reports will be used to inform staff’s assessment of products that may contain these compounds and is the first step in the risk assessment process. CPSC staff assesses a product’s potential health effects to consumers under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA). The FHSA is risk-based. To be considered a “hazardous substance” under the FHSA, a consumer product must satisfy a two-part definition. First, it must be “toxic” under the FHSA, or present one of the other hazards enumerated in the statute. Second, it must have the potential to cause “substantial personal injury or substantial illness during or as a proximate result of any customary or reasonably foreseeable handling or use.” Therefore, exposure and risk must be considered in addition to toxicity when assessing potential hazards of products under the FHSA. The first step in the risk assessment process is hazard identification, which consists of a review of the available toxicity data for the chemical.
    [Show full text]
  • The Occurrence of Extractible Ink Residuals in Packaging Materials Used in the Czech Republic
    The occurrence of extractible ink residuals in packaging materials used in the Czech Republic. Zdeňka Dupáková, Jaroslav Dobiáš, Lenka Votavová, Kamila Klaudisová, Michal Voldřich To cite this version: Zdeňka Dupáková, Jaroslav Dobiáš, Lenka Votavová, Kamila Klaudisová, Michal Voldřich. The occur- rence of extractible ink residuals in packaging materials used in the Czech Republic.. Food Additives and Contaminants, 2009, 27 (01), pp.97-106. 10.1080/02652030903225765. hal-00573903 HAL Id: hal-00573903 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00573903 Submitted on 5 Mar 2011 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Food Additives and Contaminants For Peer Review Only The occurrence of extractible ink residuals in packaging materials used in the Czech Republic. Journal: Food Additives and Contaminants Manuscript ID: TFAC-2009-052.R1 Manuscript Type: Original Research Paper Date Submitted by the 23-Jul-2009 Author: Complete List of Authors: Dupáková, Zdeňka; Institute of Chemical Technology Prague, Department of Food Preservation and Meat Technology
    [Show full text]
  • Enzymatically Triggered Polymeric Drug Delivery Systems for Colon Targeting Youcef Benzine
    Enzymatically triggered polymeric drug delivery systems for colon targeting Youcef Benzine To cite this version: Youcef Benzine. Enzymatically triggered polymeric drug delivery systems for colon targeting. Human health and pathology. Université de Lille, 2019. English. NNT : 2019LILUS036. tel-03217727 HAL Id: tel-03217727 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-03217727 Submitted on 5 May 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Université de Lille Faculté des Sciences Pharmaceutiques et Biologiques Ecole Doctorale Biologie Santé ENZYMATICALLY TRIGGERED POLYMERIC DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS FOR COLON TARGETING FORMES GALÉNIQUES INNOVANTES SENSIBLES AUX BACTERIES POUR LE CIBLAGE DU COLON Thesis submitted to obtain the degree of Doctor in Pharmaceutical Sciences Defended on 18th December 2019 by Youcef BENZINE Supervised by Dr. Youness KARROUT Laboratoire de Pharmacotechnie Industrielle (INSERM U1008) 3, rue du Professeur Laguesse 59006 Lille, France Jury members: Dr. Mohamed SKIBA (referee) Prof. Dr. Amélie BOCHOT (referee) Prof. Dr. Juergen SIEPMANN (president of the jury, examinant) Dr. Youness KARROUT (supervisor) i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I would like to thank Prof. Juergen Siepmann, for his expertise, guidance and his funding of this thesis. This project has received funding from the Interreg 2 Seas programme 2014- 2020, co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund under subsidy contract 2S01- 059_IMODE.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3.1 Sediments and Water Quality
    3.1 Sediments and Water Quality MARIANA ISLANDS TRAINING AND TESTING FINAL EIS/OEIS MAY 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.1 SEDIMENTS AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................... 3.1-1 3.1.1 INTRODUCTION AND METHODS ......................................................................................................... 3.1-1 3.1.1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3.1-1 3.1.1.2 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 3.1-9 3.1.2 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................................... 3.1-12 3.1.2.1 Sediments .............................................................................................................................. 3.1-12 3.1.2.2 Water Quality ......................................................................................................................... 3.1-15 3.1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ................................................................................................... 3.1-18 3.1.3.1 Explosives and Explosive Byproducts ..................................................................................... 3.1-19 3.1.3.2 Metals ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]