DOCSLIB.ORG

Toxicological Profile for Chlorpyrifos

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Toxicological Profile for Chlorpyrifos TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR CHLORPYRIFOS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry September 1997 CHLORPYRIFOS 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. CHLORPYRIFOS iii UPDATE STATEMENT A Toxicological Profile for chlorpyrifos was released in August 1995 for public comment. This edition supersedes any previously released draft or final profile. 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 vi *Legislative Background The toxicological profiles are developed in response to the Super-fund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 (Public Law 99-499) which amended the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfkd). This public law directed ATSDR to prepare toxicological profiles for hazardous substances most commonly found at facilities on the CERCLA National Priorities List and that pose the most significant potential threat to human health, as determined by ATSDR and the EPA. The availability of the revised priority list of 275 hazardous substances was announced in the Federal Register on April 29, 1996 (61 FR 18744). For prior versions of the list of substances, see Federal Register notices dated April 17, 1987 (52 FR 12866); October 20, 1988 (53 FR 41280); October 26, 1989 (54 FR 43619); October 17,199O (55 FR 42067); October 17, 1991 (56 FR 52166); October 28, 1992 (57 FR 48801); and February 28, 1994 (59 FR 9486). Section 104(i)(3) of CERCLA, as amended, directs the Administrator of ATSDR to prepare a toxicological profile for each substance on the list. CHLORPYRIFOS vii CONTRIBUTORS CHEMICAL MANAGER(S)/AUTHORS(S): John F. Risher, Ph.D. ATSDR, Division of Toxicology, Atlanta, GA Heman A. Navarro, Ph.D. Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC THE PROFILE HAS UNDERGONE THE FOLLOWING ATSDR INTERNAL REVIEWS: 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. Data Needs Review. The Research Implementation Branch reviews data needs sections to assure consistency across profiles and adherence to instructions in the Guidance. CHLORPYRIFOS ix PEER REVIEW A peer review panel was assembled for chlorpyrifos. The panel consisted of the following members: 1 . Dr. William Buck, Professor of Toxicology, University of Illinois, Tolono, IL 61880; 2 . Dr. Joel Coats, Professor, Department of Entomology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011; and 3 . Dr. Frederick Oehme, Professor, Comparative Toxicology Laboratories, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-5606 These experts collectively have knowledge of chlorpyrifos’ physical and chemical properties, toxicokinetics, key health end points, mechanisms of action, human and animal exposure, and quantification of risk to humans. All reviewers were selected in conformity with the conditions for peer review specified in Section 104(i)( 13) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended. Scientists from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) have reviewed the peer reviewers’ comments and determined which comments will be addressed in the profile. A listing of the peer reviewers’ comments not incorporated in the profile, with a brief explanation of the rationale for their exclusion, exists as part of the administrative record for this compound. A list of databases reviewed and a list of unpublished documents cited are also included in the administrative record. The citation of the peer review panel should not be understood to imply its approval of the profile’s final content. The responsibility for the content of this profile lies with the ATSDR. CHLORPYRIFOS 1 1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT This public health statement tells you about chlorpyrifos and the effects of exposure. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies the most serious hazardous waste sites in the nation. These sites make up the National Priorities List (NPL) and are the sites targeted for long-term federal cleanup. Chlorpyrifos has been found in at least 7 of the 1,428 current or former NPL sites. However, it’s unknown how many NPL sites have been evaluated for this substance. As more sites are evaluated, the sites with chlorpyrifos may increase. This information is important because exposure to this substance may harm you and because these sites may be sources of exposure. When a substance 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. This release does not always lead to exposure. You are exposed to a substance only when you come in contact with it. You may be exposed by breathing, eating, or drinking the substance or by skin contact. If you are exposed to chlorpyrifos, many factors determine whether you’ll be harmed. These factors include the dose (how much), the duration (how long), and how you come in contact with it. You must also consider the other chemicals you’re exposed to and your age, sex, diet, family traits, lifestyle, and state of health. 1.1 WHAT IS CHLORPYRIFOS? Chlorpyrifos is an organophosphorus insecticide that has been widely used in the home and on the farm. In the home, chlorpyrifos has been used to control cockroaches, fleas, and termites; it has also been an active ingredient in some pet flea and tick collars. On the farm, it is used to control ticks on cattle and as a spray to control crop pests. In 1997, chlorpyrifos was voluntarily withdrawn from most indoor and pet uses by the manufacturer, DowElanco. CHLORPYRIFOS 2 1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT Chlorpyrifos is a white crystal-like solid with a strong odor. It does not mix well with water, so it is usually mixed with oily liquids before it is applied to crops or animals. It may also be applied to crops in a microencapsulated form. Chlorpyrifos is the active ingredient of various commercial insecticides including Dursban® and Lorsban®. See Chapter 3 for more information on the chemical and physical properties of chlorpyrifos. See Chapter 4 for more information on the production and use of chlorpyrifos. 1.2 WHAT HAPPENS TO CHLORPYRIFOS WHEN IT ENTERS THE ENVIRONMENT? Chlorpyrifos enters the environment through direct application to crops, lawns, domesticated animals, and in the home and workplace. Chlorpyrifos may also enter the environment through volatilization, spills, and the disposal of chlorpyrifos waste. Chlorpyrifos that has been applied to the soil generally stays in the area where it has been applied because it sticks tightly to soil particles. Because of this, there is a low chance that chlorpyrifos will be washed off the soil and enter local water systems. Also, since it does not mix well with water, if it does get into the natural waters, it will be in small amounts and will remain on or near the surface and will evaporate. Volatilization is the major way in which chlorpyrifos disperses after it has been applied. Once in the environment (soil, air, or water), chlorpyrifos is broken down by sunlight, bacteria, or other chemical processes. Please refer to Chapters 4 and 5 for more information. 1.3 HOW MIGHT I BE EXPOSED TO CHLORPYRIFOS? You can be exposed to chlorpyrifos in many places because of its wide range of uses. You can be exposed to it in your home or office if chlorpyrifos has recently been used to control household pests such as fleas or cockroaches. Exposure can also occur outside your home if chlorpyrifos has been applied to the ground around the foundation to control termites. Chlorpyrifos degrades rapidly in the environment; however, low levels may persist for long CHLORPYRIFOS 3 1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT periods of time after it has been applied either inside or outside the home. Opening windows before and after chlorpyrifos spraying rapidly lowers airborne levels in a house. You can also be exposed to chlorpyrifos in a farm setting. The greatest risk occurs soon after a crop has been sprayed, because that is when its levels will be the highest. However, chlorpyrifos rapidly degrades and becomes bound to plants and the ground. The EPA recommends a 24-hour waiting period before entering fields where chlorpyrifos has been applied. In addition, there is the risk of exposure to chlorpyrifos when it is being prepared for use. Care should be taken to ensure that only a licensed applicator sprays chlorpyrifos, and that unnecessary or unprotected individuals remain away from the site of application during the spraying. Chlorpyrifos can also be found at some waste disposal sites, so exposure to higher levels than what is commonly found after home or commercial use may occur there. 1.4 HOW CAN CHLORPYRIFOS ENTER AND LEAVE MY BODY? Chlorpyrifos can enter your body through your mouth, lungs, and skin. After being eaten or drunk, chlorpyrifos quickly passes from the intestines to the bloodstream, where it is distributed to the rest of the body. It can also enter the body through the lungs by breathing chlorpyrifos sprays or dust. When chlorpyrifos enters the body this way, it passes quickly into the blood. It may also enter your body through the skin, but the chances of being exposed to harmful levels of chlorpyrifos this way are not as great as with inhalation and oral exposure, because the amount that gets through the skin is relatively small (less than 3% of what was put on the skin).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Global Insecticide Use for Vector-Borne Disease Control
    WHO/CDS/NTD/WHOPES/GCDPP/2007.2 GLOBAL INSECTICIDE USE FOR VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE CONTROL M. Zaim & P. Jambulingam DEPARTMENT OF CONTROL OF NEGLECTED TROPICAL DISEASES (NTD) WHO PESTICIDE EVALUATION SCHEME (WHOPES) First edition, 2002 Second edition, 2004 Third edition, 2007 © World Health Organization 2007 All rights reserved. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use. The named authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this publication. CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements i Introduction 1 Collection of information 2 Data analysis and observations on reporting 3 All uses in vector control 6 Malaria vector control 22 Dengue vector control 38 Chagas disease vector control 48 Leishmaniasis vector control 52 Other vector-borne disease control 56 Selected insecticides – DDT 58 Selected insecticides – Insect growth regulators 60 Selected insecticides – Bacterial larvicides 62 Country examples 64 Annex 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Propoxur United States Environmental Protection Agency
    United States Prevention, Pesticides EPA738-R-97-009 Environmental Protection And Toxic Substances August 1997 Agency (7508W) Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) PROPOXUR UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES CERTIFIED MAIL Dear Registrant: I am pleased to announce that the Environmental Protection Agency has completed its reregistration eligibility review and decisions on the pesticide chemical case propoxur. The enclosed Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) contains the Agency's evaluation of the data base of this chemical, its conclusions of the potential human health and environmental risks of the current product uses, and its decisions and conditions under which these uses and products will be eligible for reregistration. The RED includes the data and labeling requirements for products for reregistration. It may also include requirements for additional data (generic) on the active ingredient to confirm the risk assessments. To assist you with a proper response, read the enclosed document entitled "Summary of Instructions for Responding to the RED." This summary also refers to other enclosed documents which include further instructions. You must follow all instructions and submit complete and timely responses. The first set of required responses is due 90 days from the receipt of this letter. The second set of required responses is due 8 months from the date of receipt of this letter. Complete and timely responses will avoid the Agency taking the enforcement action of suspension against your products. If you have questions on the product specific data requirements or wish to meet with the Agency, please contact the Special Review and Reregistration Division representative Bonnie Adler (703) 308-8523.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Additives Safety and Maximum Use Level
    5/10/2017 FOOD ADDITIVES SAFETY & MAXIMUM USE LEVEL Nuri Andarwulan SEAFAST Center, IPB (Southeast Asian Food & Agr. Sci & Tech Center) Departemen Ilmu dan Teknologi Pangan, IPB [email protected] Outline Food additives Chemicals HOW are food additives regulated? Maximum use level of food additive [email protected] 1 5/10/2017 Food Additive is a substance (intentionally) added to food to alter the properties and/or the appearance of the food [email protected] As described by Paracelsus nearly 500 years ago, “All substances are poisons; there is none which is not a poison. The right dose differentiates a poison and a remedy”. This means that any chemical substance is likely to produce some form(s) of harmful effect, if taken in sufficient quantity. More addition of a chemical in food does not itself make food unsafe, but the quantity used in food, quantity of that food consumed and bodyweight will decide the safety. [email protected] 2 5/10/2017 The Codex definition of hazard is “a biological, chemical or physical agent with the potential to cause an adverse health effect”. The likelihood or risk of that hazard actually occurring in humans is dependent upon the quantity of chemical encountered or taken into the body, i.e. the exposure. [email protected] WHY do we need to regulate food additives? These chemicals may be harmful to your health (if consumed above the safety margin level) Benford, D. 2000, ILSI Europe [email protected] 3 5/10/2017 Food Additive (Codex Stan 192-1995) • Any substance not normally consumed as a food by itself and not normally used as a typical ingredient of the food, whether or not it has nutritive value, the intentional addition of which to food for a technological (including organoleptic) purpose in the manufacture, processing, preparation, treatment, packing, packaging and transport.
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of the Residual Efficacy of Carbamate and Organophosphate
    Yewhalaw et al. Malar J (2017) 16:471 DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-2122-3 Malaria Journal RESEARCH Open Access Determination of the residual efcacy of carbamate and organophosphate insecticides used for indoor residual spraying for malaria control in Ethiopia Delenasaw Yewhalaw1,2†, Meshesha Balkew3†, Josephat Shililu4, Sultan Suleman5, Alemayehu Getachew4, Gedeon Ashenbo4, Sheleme Chibsa6, Gunawardena Dissanayake6, Kristen George7, Dereje Dengela8, Yemane Ye‑Ebiyo4 and Seth R. Irish9* Abstract Background: Indoor residual spraying is one of the key vector control interventions for malaria control in Ethiopia. As malaria transmission is seasonal in most parts of Ethiopia, a single round of spraying can usually provide efective protection against malaria, provided the insecticide remains efective over the entire malaria transmission season. This experiment was designed to evaluate the residual efcacy of bendiocarb, pirimiphos-methyl, and two doses of pro‑ poxur on four diferent wall surfaces (rough mud, smooth mud, dung, and paint). Filter papers afxed to wall surfaces prior to spraying were analyzed to determine the actual concentration applied. Cone bioassays using a susceptible Anopheles arabiensis strain were done monthly to determine the time for which insecticides were efective in killing mosquitoes. Results: The mean insecticide dosage of bendiocarb applied to walls was 486 mg/m2 (target 400/mg). This treat‑ ment lasted 1 month or less on rough mud, smooth mud, and dung, but 4 months on painted surfaces. Pirimiphos- methyl was applied at 1854 mg/m2 (target 1000 mg/m2), and lasted between 4 and 6 months on all wall surfaces. Propoxur with a target dose of 1000 mg/m2 was applied at 320 mg/m2, and lasted 2 months or less on all surfaces, except painted surfaces (4 months).
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program
    U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program Stream water-quality analytes Major ions and trace elements­schedule 998 (20 constituents) Pesticides ­­schedule 2437 (229 compounds) Alkalinity 1H­1,2,4­Triazole Arsenic 2,3,3­Trichloro­2­propene­1­sulfonic acid (TCPSA) Boron 2,4­D Calcium 2­(1­Hydroxyethyl)­6­methylaniline Chloride 2­[(2­Ethyl­6­methylphenyl)amino]­1­propanol Fluoride 2­Amino­N­isopropylbenzamide Iron 2­Aminobenzimidazole Lithium 2­Chloro­2',6'­diethylacetanilide 2­Chloro­4,6­diamino­s­triazine {CAAT} Magnesium (Didealkylatrazine) pH 2­Chloro­4­isopropylamino­6­amino­s­triazine Potassium 2­Chloro­6­ethylamino­4­amino­s­triazine {CEAT} Total dissolved solids 2­Chloro­N­(2­ethyl­6­methylphenyl)acetamide Selenium 2­Hydroxy­4­isopropylamino­6­amino­s­triazine 2­Hydroxy­4­isopropylamino­6­ethylamino­s­triazin Silica e {OIET} Sodium 2­Hydroxy­6­ethylamino­4­amino­s­triazine Specific conductance 2­Isopropyl­6­methyl­4­pyrimidinol Strontium 3,4­Dichlorophenylurea Sulfate 3­Hydroxycarbofuran Turbidity 3­Phenoxybenzoic acid Vanadium 4­(Hydroxymethyl)pendimethalin 4­Chlorobenzylmethyl sulfoxide Suspended sediment 4­Hydroxy molinate 4­Hydroxychlorothalonil Nutrients­schedule 2430 (18 constituents) 4­Hydroxyhexazinone A Inorganic carbon, suspended Acephate Dissolved inorganic carbon Acetochlor ammonia + organic nitrogen (unfiltered­Kjeldahl) Acetochlor oxanilic acid ammonia + organic nitrogen (filtered­Kjeldahl) Acetochlor sulfonic acid Ammonia as N, filtered Acetochlor sulfynilacetic acid nitrite, filtered Alachlor
    [Show full text]
  • Florida State Emergency Response Commission
    Florida State Emergency Response Commission Sub-Committee on Training (SOT) HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MEDICAL TREATMENT PROTOCOLS Version 3.3 TOXIDROMES Toxidromes are clinical syndromes that the patient presents with. These patterns of signs and symptoms are essential for the successful recognition of chemical exposure. The toxidromes identified in this protocol are chemical exposure based while others such as the opioids are found within general medical protocol. These chemical toxidromes are identified clinically into five syndromes: Irritant Gas Toxidrome Asphyxiant Toxidrome Corrosive Toxidrome Hydrocarbon and Halogenated Hydrocarbons Toxidrome Cholinergic Toxidrome Each can present as a clinical manifestation of the chemical/poisoning involved with some cross-over between toxidromes. This list combines the toxic syndromes found within NFPA 473 (A.5.4.1(2) and traditional syndromes. Toxidrome Correlation to NFPA Standard 473 and Traditional Syndromes Toxidrome NFPA 473 A.5.4.1(2) Hazardous Materials Protocol Correlation Irritant Gas (j) Irritants Bronchospasm OC Pepper spray & lacrimants Asphyxiant (c) Chemical asphyxiants Carbon Monoxide (d) Simple asphyxiants Aniline dyes, Nitriles, Nitrares (h) Blood Agents Cyanide & Hydrogen Sulfide (n) Nitrogen Compounds Closed Space Fires Simple Asphyxants Corrosive (a) Corrosives Hydrofluroic Acid (g) Vesicants Chemical burns to the eye Choramine and Chlorine Hydrocarbon (e) Organic solvents Phenol and (q) Phenolic Compounds Halogenated Hydrocarbons Halogenated Hydrocarbons Cholinergic (b) Pesticides
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix H EPA Hazardous Waste Law
    Appendix H EPA Hazardous Waste Law This Appendix is intended to give you background information on hazardous waste laws and how they apply to you. For most U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements that apply to the University, the Safety Department maintains compliance through internal inspections, record keeping and proper disposal. In Wisconsin, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has adopted the EPA regulations, consequently EPA and DNR regulations are nearly identical. EPA defines This Appendix only deals with "hazardous waste" as defined by the EPA. hazardous waste as Legally, EPA defines hazardous waste as certain hazardous chemical waste. This hazardous chemical Appendix does not address other types of regulated laboratory wastes, such as waste; radioactive, infectious, biological, radioactive or sharps. Chapter 8 descibes disposal procedures infectious and biohazardous waste for animals. Chapter 9 describes disposal procedures for sharps and other waste that are regulated by can puncture tissue. Chapter 11 discusses Radiation and the Radiation Safety for other agencies. Radiation Workers provides guidelines for the disposal of radioactive waste. Procedures for medical waste are written by the UW Hospital Safety Officer. The Office of Biological Safety can provide guidance for the disposal of infectious and biological waste. EPA regulations focus on industrial waste streams. As a result, many laboratory chemical wastes are not regulated by EPA as hazardous chemical waste. However, many unregulated chemical wastes do merit special handling and disposal If a waste can be procedures. Thus, Chapter 7 and Appendix A of this Guide recommend disposal defined as: procedures for many unregulated wastes as if they were EPA hazardous waste.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticide Residue Monitoring in Sediment and Surface Water Within the South Florida Water Management District Volume 2
    Technical Publication 91-01 Pesticide Residue Monitoring in Sediment and Surface Water Within the South Florida Water Management District Volume 2 by Richard J. Pfeuffer January 1991 This publication was produced at an annual cost of $243.75 or $.49 per copy to inform the public. 500 191 Produced on recycled paper. Water Quality Division Research and Evaluation Department South Florida Water Management District West Palm Beach, Florida A IBSTRAC'I' Pesticide monitoring data are collected under the requirements of several permits and agreements as an indicator of water quality. The monitoring provides data to determine shifts or adverse trends in the quality of water being delivered to Lake Okeechobee, Everglades National Park, and the Water Conservation Areas. In addition, pesticide residue data are collected throughout the South Florida Water Management District at locations selected to determine water quality conditions at the major water control points. Special investigations are performed on selected pesticides as required and follow-up sampling is conducted based on the pesticides detected. Data were collected from 13 stations in 1984. By 1988, the network was expanded to 29 stations. Currently, water and sediment samples are collected quarterly and analyzed for 67 pesticides, herbicides and degradation products. Out of a total of 197 surface water samples, 13 percent had detectable residues, while 25 percent of the 208 sediment samples had detectable residues. The compounds detected in the water samples included atrazine and zinc phosphide while a variety of compounds, including DDT, have been detected in the sediment. None of the residues detected are considered to have adverse health or environmental effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Degradation of Benthiocarb in Soils As Affected by Soil Conditions*
    J. Pesticide Sci. 2, 7-16 (1977) Degradation of Benthiocarb in Soils as Affected by Soil Conditions* Yasuo NAKAMURA, ** Kanji ISHIKAWA** and Shozo KUWATSUKA Laboratory of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Nagoya University, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464, Japan (Received May 22, 1976) Some factors affecting the degradation of 14C-benthiocarb (S-4-chlorobenzylN, N- diethylthiocarbamate) labelled at the benzene-ring in soils were studied. The degra- dation rates of 14C-benthiocarb in three different soils under upland, oxidative flooded and reductive flooded conditions were compared. 14C-Benthiocarb wasrapidly degraded under oxidative conditions, but slowly under reductive conditions. Very small differences in the degradation rates were observed among different soils. Under oxidative conditions 14C-carbon dioxide was liberated remarkably with the degrada- tion of 14C-benthiocarb. The degradation was remarkably retarded by sterilizing the soils. The repeated application of benthiocarb, or its incorporation into the soil with simetryne, CNP or propanil had no significant effect on the degradation rate. Benthiocarb (Saturn(R),S-4-chlorobenzyl N, N-diethylthiolcarbamate), alone or in combing MATERIALS AND METHODS tion with simetryne, prometryne and CNP, is 1. Chemicals extensively used to control weeds mainly in 14C-Benthiocarb labelled at the benzene-ring paddy fields. was used as in the previous study. U The In the previous paper, ' the persistence of specific activity was 3. 21 mCi/mmole and the benthiocarb and its degradation products in radioactive purity was more than 99%. Non- a soil were reported, and its degradation path- radioactive pure chemicals were also described ways were also proposed. The behavior of the in the previous reports.
    [Show full text]
  • 162998571.Pdf
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Liverpool Repository Please do not adjust margins Investigating the breakdown of the nerve agent simulant methyl paraoxon and chemical warfare agents GB and VX using nitrogen containing bases Received 00th January 20xx, Accepted 00th January 20xx Craig Wilson,a Nicholas J. Cooper,b Michael E. Briggs,a Andrew I. Cooper,*a and Dave J. Adams*c DOI: 10.1039/x0xx00000x A range of nitrogen containing bases was tested for the hydrolysis of a nerve agent simulant, methyl paraoxon (MP), and www.rsc.org/ the chemical warfare agents, GB and VX. The product distribution was found to be highly dependant on the basicity of the base and the quantity of water used for the hydrolysis. This study is important in the design of decontamination technology, which often involve mimics of CWAs. production of EA-2192 Introduction (S-(2-diisopropylaminoethyl) methylphosphonothioic acid), which exhibits roughly the same toxicity as VX itself.12 The Chemical warfare agents (CWAs) have a devastating effect on blister agent HD (Fig. 1d) can also undergo deactivation via the body and will disable or kill on exposure. Blister agents, such hydrolysis.13 However, its poor water solubility reduces the as sulfur mustard (HD, bis(2-chloroethyl) sulfide), target the skin efficiency of this decontamination method.14 As a result, and respiratory system causing severe pain and damage to the oxidation to the sulfoxide, or the addition of a co-solvent is most body whereas nerve agents, such as sarin (GB, isopropyl commonly used for HD deactivation.15-17 methylphosphonofluoridate) and VX (O-ethyl The high toxicity of CWAs means that research into their S-[2-(diisopropylamino)ethyl] methylphosphonothioate), target deactivation is often carried out using simulants.
    [Show full text]
  • Past Use of Chlordane, Dieldrin, And
    The Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER Office) is part of the Hawai‘i Department of Health (HDOH) Environmental Health Administration, whose mission is to protect human health and the environment. The HEER Office provides leadership, support, and partnership in preventing, planning for, responding to, and enforcing environmental laws relating to releases or threats of releases of hazardous substances. Past Use of Chlordane, Dieldrin, and other Organochlorine Pesticides for Termite Control in Hawai‘i: Safe Management Practices around Treated Foundations or during Building Demolition This fact sheet provides building owners, demolition and construction contractors, developers, realtors, and others with an overview of the potential environmental concerns associated with the past use of organochlorine termiticides (pesticides used to control termites) in Hawai‘i. In addition, this fact sheet discusses methods for reducing exposure to organochlorine termiticides during building demolition or around the foundations of treated buildings and identifies resources for further information. What are organochlorine termiticides? Organochlorine termiticides are a group of pesticides that were used for termite control in and around wooden buildings and homes from the mid-1940s to the late 1980s. These organochlorine pesticides included chlordane, aldrin, dieldrin, heptachlor, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT). They were used primarily by pest control operators in Hawaii’s urban areas, but also by homeowners, the military, the state, and counties to protect buildings against termite damage. In the 1970s and 1980s, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned all uses of these organochlorine pesticides except for heptachlor, which can be used today only for control of fire ants in underground power transformers.
    [Show full text]
  • Chlorpyrifos (Dursban) Ddvp (Dichlorvos) Diazinon Malathion Parathion
    CHLORPYRIFOS (DURSBAN) DDVP (DICHLORVOS) DIAZINON MALATHION PARATHION Method no.: 62 Matrix: Air Procedure: Samples are collected by drawing known volumes of air through specially constructed glass sampling tubes, each containing a glass fiber filter and two sections of XAD-2 adsorbent. Samples are desorbed with toluene and analyzed by GC using a flame photometric detector (FPD). Recommended air volume and sampling rate: 480 L at 1.0 L/min except for Malathion 60 L at 1.0 L/min for Malathion Target concentrations: 1.0 mg/m3 (0.111 ppm) for Dichlorvos (PEL) 0.1 mg/m3 (0.008 ppm) for Diazinon (TLV) 0.2 mg/m3 (0.014 ppm) for Chlorpyrifos (TLV) 15.0 mg/m3 (1.11 ppm) for Malathion (PEL) 0.1 mg/m3 (0.008 ppm) for Parathion (PEL) Reliable quantitation limits: 0.0019 mg/m3 (0.21 ppb) for Dichlorvos (based on the RAV) 0.0030 mg/m3 (0.24 ppb) for Diazinon 0.0033 mg/m3 (0.23 ppb) for Chlorpyrifos 0.0303 mg/m3 (2.2 ppb) for Malathion 0.0031 mg/m3 (0.26 ppb) for Parathion Standard errors of estimate at the target concentration: 5.3% for Dichlorvos (Section 4.6.) 5.3% for Diazinon 5.3% for Chlorpyrifos 5.6% for Malathion 5.3% for Parathion Status of method: Evaluated method. This method has been subjected to the established evaluation procedures of the Organic Methods Evaluation Branch. Date: October 1986 Chemist: Donald Burright Organic Methods Evaluation Branch OSHA Analytical Laboratory Salt Lake City, Utah 1 of 27 T-62-FV-01-8610-M 1.
    [Show full text]