Acetonitrile; Community Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical Release Reporting, 14241-14245 [2013-04933]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
free enterprise system impaired due to
diminished capital and credit
opportunities.
Specifically, the Petition fails to
provide evidence of the type MBDA
requires to establish a relationship
between any discriminatory treatment
and business impediments experienced
by Arab-American businesses as a group
that are not common to all business
people in the same or similar market
place. Section III of the Petition states
that:
Arab-Americans suffer from
discrimination, prejudice and cultural bias in
the workplace. This employment
discrimination has produced obstacles in the
business world for Arab-Americans—both as
employees and entrepreneurs. Members of
the group have no control over such
discrimination. Other entrepreneurs and
individuals, outside of the group, do not
suffer from such discrimination and bias.23
But, the Petition does not substantiate
this assertion by providing evidence to
support the statement, such as statistical
measures of the impact that
employment discrimination complaints
have on Arab-American business
success or workplace attainment. The
EEOC complaints discussed above must
be coupled with an analysis or study of
the impact of discrimination on ArabAmericans in the business world.
In addition, a 2008 Arab American
Institute Foundation study produced
results contrary to the Petitioner’s
arguments. This study found that ArabAmerican households’ mean individual
income is 27% higher than the national
average and that the group shows higher
than average educational attainment.24
These figures are not dispositive, but do
suggest that prejudice Arab-Americans
have faced may not have impacted their
economic opportunities to the extent
necessary to establish that ArabAmericans’ businesses require the
technical and outreach services that
MBDA provides.
The Petition also does not establish
with the necessary type of evidence that
Arab-Americans have experienced
diminished capital and credit
opportunities. The descriptions of
immigration controls, employment
discrimination complaints, and
post-9/11 programs that the Petition
states target Arab-Americans do not
demonstrate that Arab-Americans are
unable to compete in the free enterprise
system due to diminished capital and
credit opportunities. Statistical or
empirical evidence demonstrating a
relationship between the discrimination
suffered by the group and business
impediments, or impaired access to
capital, credit, contracts, and other
business opportunities experienced by
the group is necessary to show the
social or economic conditions required
to qualify the Petitioners for eligibility
for MBDA’s programs that assist
businesses in obtaining access to
capital, credit, contracting, and other
business opportunities. The comments
submitted in support of the Petition
similarly lack this supporting
information.
Accordingly, MBDA does not
currently have sufficient evidence to
recognize the Arab-American
community as a minority group that is
socially or economically disadvantaged
within the specific meaning of the
regulation because the Petition is not
supported by sufficient evidence to
meet the necessary elements of social or
economic disadvantage as required by
15 CFR 1400.4(a) of the MBDA
regulations and applicable case law. As
such, MBDA has returned the Petition to
ADC for further consideration consistent
with this response to petition.
Dated: February 27, 2013.
David Hinson,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2013–04955 Filed 3–4–13; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
14241
Denial of petition.
SUMMARY: EPA is denying a petition to
remove acetonitrile from the list of
chemicals subject to reporting
requirements under section 313 of the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) and
section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention
Act of 1990 (PPA). EPA has reviewed
the available data on this chemical and
has determined that acetonitrile does
not meet the deletion criterion of
EPCRA section 313(d)(3). Specifically,
EPA is denying this petition because
EPA’s review of the petition and
available information resulted in the
conclusion that acetonitrile meets the
listing criterion of EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B) due to its potential to cause
death in humans.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel R. Bushman, Environmental
Analysis Division, Office of Information
Analysis and Access (2842T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number: 202–566–
0743; fax number: 202–566–0677; email:
bushman.daniel@epa.gov, for specific
information on this notice. For general
information on EPCRA section 313,
contact the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Hotline, toll
free at (800) 424–9346 or (703) 412–
9810 in Virginia and Alaska or toll free,
TDD (800) 553–7672, https://
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hotline/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE P
I. General Information
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
[EPA–HQ–TRI–2006–0319; FRL–9787–1]
RIN 2025–AA19
A. Does this notice apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you manufacture, process,
or otherwise use acetonitrile. Potentially
affected categories and entities may
include, but are not limited to:
Acetonitrile; Community Right-toKnow Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Category
Examples of potentially affected entities
Industry .............................
Facilities included in the following NAICS manufacturing codes (corresponding to SIC codes 20 through 39): 311*,
312*, 313*, 314*, 315*, 316, 321, 322, 323*, 324, 325*, 326*, 327, 331, 332, 333, 334*, 335*, 336, 337*, 339*,
111998*, 211112*, 212324*, 212325*, 212393*, 212399*, 488390*, 511110, 511120, 511130, 511140*, 511191,
511199, 512220, 512230*, 519130*, 541712*, or 811490*.
*Exceptions and/or limitations exist for these NAICS codes.
23 Id.
at 21.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
24 Comment of Nicholas Legendre, https://
www.mbda.gov/sites/default/files/
AAPetitioncomments_asof062912.pdf at 56 (citing
13:45 Mar 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Arab American Institute Foundation, Quick Facts
About Arab Americans, https://aai.3cdn.net/
afbc33810b07728c5a_oim6bx98f.pdf).
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
14242
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Category
Examples of potentially affected entities
Federal Government .........
Facilities included in the following NAICS codes (corresponding to SIC codes other than SIC codes 20 through 39):
212111, 212112, 212113 (correspond to SIC 12, Coal Mining (except 1241)); or 212221, 212222, 212231,
212234, 212299 (correspond to SIC 10, Metal Mining (except 1011, 1081, and 1094)); or 221111, 221112,
221113, 221119, 221121, 221122, 221330 (Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of
generating power for distribution in commerce) (correspond to SIC 4911, 4931, and 4939, Electric Utilities); or
424690, 425110, 425120 (Limited to facilities previously classified in SIC 5169, Chemicals and Allied Products,
Not Elsewhere Classified); or 424710 (corresponds to SIC 5171, Petroleum Bulk Terminals and Plants); or
562112 (Limited to facilities primarily engaged in solvent recovery services on a contract or fee basis (previously
classified under SIC 7389, Business Services, NEC)); or 562211, 562212, 562213, 562219, 562920 (Limited to
facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.) (correspond to SIC 4953, Refuse Systems).
Federal facilities.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Some of the
entities listed in the table have
exemptions and/or limitations regarding
coverage, and other types of entities not
listed in the table could also be affected.
To determine whether your facility
would be affected by this action, you
should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in part 372 subpart
B of Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (SARA) (Pub. L. 99–499).
B. Background
Section 313 of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C.
11023, requires certain facilities that
manufacture, process, or otherwise use
listed toxic chemicals in amounts above
reporting threshold levels to report their
environmental releases and other waste
management quantities of such
chemicals annually. These facilities
must also report pollution prevention
and recycling data for such chemicals,
pursuant to section 6607 of the PPA, 42
U.S.C. 13106. Congress established an
initial list of toxic chemicals subject to
reporting that comprised more than 300
chemicals and 20 chemical categories.
B. How can I get copies of this document
EPCRA section 313(d) authorizes EPA
and other related information?
to add or delete chemicals from the list
and sets criteria for these actions.
EPA has established a docket for this
EPCRA section 313(d)(2) states that EPA
action under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
may add a chemical to the list if any of
TRI–2006–0319. All documents in the
the listing criteria in Section 313(d)(2)
docket are listed in the
are met. Therefore, to add a chemical,
www.regulations.gov index. Although
EPA must demonstrate that at least one
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other criterion is met, but need not determine
whether any other criterion is met.
information whose disclosure is
Conversely, to remove a chemical from
restricted by statute. Certain other
the list, EPCRA section 313(d)(3)
material, such as copyrighted material,
dictates that EPA must demonstrate that
will be publicly available only in hard
none of the listing criteria in Section
copy. Publicly available docket
313(d)(2) are met. The EPCRA section
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or 313(d)(2) criteria are:
(A) The chemical is known to cause
in hard copy at the OEI Docket, EPA/
or can reasonably be anticipated to
DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
cause significant adverse acute human
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
health effects at concentration levels
DC. This Docket Facility is open from
that are reasonably likely to exist
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
beyond facility site boundaries as a
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
result of continuous, or frequently
telephone number for the Public
recurring, releases.
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
the telephone number for the OEI
(B) The chemical is known to cause or
Docket is (202) 566–1752.
can reasonably be anticipated to cause
in humans—
II. Introduction
(i) cancer or teratogenic effects, or
A. Statutory Authority
(ii) serious or irreversible–
(I) reproductive dysfunctions,
This action is taken under sections
(II) neurological disorders,
313(d) and 313(e)(1) of EPCRA, 42
(III) heritable genetic mutations, or
U.S.C. 11023. EPCRA is also referred to
(IV) other chronic health effects.
as Title III of the Superfund
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:45 Mar 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(C) The chemical is known to cause or
can be reasonably anticipated to cause,
because of
(i) its toxicity,
(ii) its toxicity and persistence in the
environment, or
(iii) its toxicity and tendency to
bioaccumulate in the environment, a
significant adverse effect on the
environment of sufficient seriousness,
in the judgment of the Administrator, to
warrant reporting under this section.
EPA often refers to the section
313(d)(2)(A) criterion as the ‘‘acute
human health effects criterion;’’ the
section 313(d)(2)(B) criterion as the
‘‘chronic human health effects
criterion;’’ and the section 313(d)(2)(C)
criterion as the ‘‘environmental effects
criterion.’’
EPA issued a statement of petition
policy and guidance in the Federal
Register of February 4, 1987 (52 FR
3479) to provide guidance regarding the
recommended content and format for
submitting petitions. On May 23, 1991
(56 FR 23703), EPA issued guidance
regarding the recommended content of
petitions to delete individual members
of the section 313 metal compounds
categories. EPA has also published in
the Federal Register of November 30,
1994 (59 FR 61432) a statement
clarifying its interpretation of the
section 313(d)(2) and (d)(3) criteria for
modifying the section 313 list of toxic
chemicals.
III. What is the description of the
petition and the regulatory status of
acetonitrile?
Acetonitrile is on the list of toxic
chemicals subject to the annual release
reporting requirements of EPCRA
section 313 and PPA section 6607.
Acetonitrile was among the list of
chemicals placed on the EPCRA section
313 list by Congress. Acetonitrile is
listed under the Clean Air Act (CAA) as
a volatile organic compound (VOC) and
a hazardous air pollutant (HAP).
Acetonitrile is also on the list of
hazardous constituents (Appendix VIII
to Part 261) and can qualify as listed
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
hazardous waste (U003) under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA).
On February 4, 1998, EPA received a
petition from BP Chemicals Inc. (BP)
and GNI Chemicals Corporation
(GNICC) to delete acetonitrile from the
list of chemicals reportable under
EPCRA section 313 and PPA section
6607, stating that acetonitrile meets all
of the criteria for delisting under EPCRA
section 313(d)(3). On March 5, 1999 (64
FR 10597), EPA denied the petition
based on a determination that
acetonitrile meets the listing criteria of
EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B) and
(d)(2)(C) due to its potential to cause
neurotoxicity and death in humans and
its contribution to the formation of
ozone in the environment.
In September 2000, based on
additional reviews, EPA reversed its
previous position that acetonitrile was a
chronic neurotoxicant (Ref. 1).
On June 28, 2002, EPA received a
second petition from BP to delete
acetonitrile from the list of chemicals
reportable under EPCRA section 313.
Specifically, BP argues that acetonitrile
meets all of the criteria for delisting
under EPCRA section 313(d)(3) because:
(1) Under generally accepted scientific
principles, chronic mortality is not an
issue for concern; and (2) EPA’s Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards
(OAQPS) has concluded that
acetonitrile does not have sufficient
photochemical reactivity to contribute
to ozone formation. Subsequent to BP’s
filing of the petition on June 28, 2002,
BP formed Innovene USA LLC as its
olefin, derivatives and refining group,
which was then acquired from BP by
INEOS USA, LLC (INEOS), which has
taken over the petition.
IV. What is EPA’s technical review of
acetonitrile?
In response to the petition to delete
acetonitrile from the list of chemicals
reportable under EPCRA section 313
and PPA section 6607, EPA prepared a
Technical Review of Acetonitrile
(Methyl Cyanide) (Ref. 2). The sections
below summarize the human health
hazard information contained in the
Technical Review. The review did not
consider acetonitrile’s status as a
volatile organic compound (VOC) and
thus its contribution to the formation of
ozone in the environment since EPA no
longer considers these factors as a basis
for listing under EPCRA section
313(d)(2) (70 FR 37698).
A. Metabolism
Acetonitrile is metabolized to
inorganic cyanide through the
intermediate production of hydrogen
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:45 Mar 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
cyanide. Data demonstrate that the
metabolism to cyanide is oxygen- and
NADPH-dependent (Ref. 3), and
mediated by cytochrome P450 isozyme
2E1 (or P–450j) production of a reactive
intermediate, methyl cyanohydrine
(Refs. 4, 5, and 6). Formaldehyde and
formic acid are also by-products of
acetonitrile metabolism (Ref. 4).
Cyanide is further oxidized and
conjugated to thiocyanate, a less toxic
compound that is excreted in urine, but
one that has been shown to interfere
with thyroid function (Ref. 7).
B. Toxicity Evaluation
1. Effects of Acute Exposure
Humans acutely exposed to sublethal
doses of acetonitrile developed effects
that are generally attributed to
metabolism of acetonitrile to cyanide
(Ref. 8). Several cases were reported in
which children or adults ingested large
amounts of acetonitrile (≈250 to 4,000
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg)) (Ref. 9).
Symptoms exhibited by poisoning
victims include anxiety, confusion,
hyperpnea, dyspnea, rapid pulse,
unconsciousness, and convulsions (Ref.
9). Cyanide was detected in the blood of
these individuals. Case reports of acute
occupational exposure to acetonitrile
indicate that workers exhibited nausea,
shallow and/or irregular respiration,
and impaired motor activity. An
autopsy of a worker who died shortly
after exposure revealed cerebral,
thyroid, liver, splenic, and renal
congestion (Ref. 9). Gastric erosion has
been reported in individuals who
ingested acetonitrile (Refs. 10 and 11).
In animals, oral LD50 values (i.e., the
dose of a chemical that is lethal to 50
percent of the test organisms) have been
reported for the mouse (269–453 mg/kg)
and the rat (1,730–4,050 mg/kg) and
inhalation LC50 values (i.e., the
concentration of a chemical that is
lethal to 50 percent of the test
organisms) of 12,000, 16,000, and
7,551–12,435 parts per million (ppm)
have been reported for the rat for 2, 4,
and 8 hour exposures, respectively, and
for the mouse following 1–2 hour
exposures (2,300–5,700 ppm) (Ref. 9). A
1-hour LC50 estimate for acetonitrile in
mice was reported to be 2,693 ppm (Ref.
6). A recent study (Ref. 12) reported a
slightly higher oral LD50 of 617 mg/kg
for Crl:CD–1(ICR)BR mice and an
inhalation LC50 of 3,587 ppm for this
strain. Observational signs of toxicity
reported in animals after acute exposure
to acetonitrile include dyspnea,
tachypnea, tremors, and convulsions in
various studies (Ref. 9).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14243
2. Effects of Subchronic and Chronic
Exposure
Subchronic inhalation exposure to
acetonitrile resulted in an increase in
mortality in rats at 1,600 ppm
(calculates to approximately 505 mg/kgday) and in mice at 800 ppm (calculates
to approximately 402 mg/kg-day) (Ref.
13).
Following subchronic inhalation
exposure in rats, the mortality incidence
was 0/20 in each of the 0, 100, 200 and
400 ppm groups, 1/20 in the 800 ppm
group (one death occurring on day 5),
and 9/20 in the 1,600 ppm group (four
deaths occurring on day 2, one each on
days 7, 9, 10, 11, and 23) (Ref. 13).
Clinical signs at the two highconcentration groups included
hypoactivity and ruffled fur during the
first week. Ataxia, abnormal posture,
and clonic convulsions occurred in the
1,600 ppm males that died. In addition,
a decrease in hematocrit, hemoglobin,
and erythrocytes was observed in male
rats at 1,600 ppm and in female rats at
≥800 ppm. Changes in organ weights
were also observed, primarily at the
highest dose in male rats and at ≥800
ppm in female rats, and include
decreases in absolute and relative
thymus weight, increases in absolute
and/or relative liver and kidney weight,
and decreases and increases in brain
and heart weight, respectively.
Histopathologic effects were limited to
rats that died at 800 and 1,600 ppm;
effects observed include congestion,
edema, and hemorrhage in the lung
alveoli.
Following subchronic inhalation
exposure in mice, the mortality
incidence was 0/20 in each of the 0, 100
and 200 ppm groups, 1/20 in the 400
ppm group (death occurring on day 13),
5/20 in the 800 ppm group (deaths
occurring on days 20, 21, 45, 69, 89) and
20/20 in the 1,600 ppm group (all
deaths occurring by day 21) (Ref. 13).
Changes in organ weights were
observed, including increased absolute
and/or relative liver weight at ≥100 ppm
in males and ≥400 ppm in females and
increased relative lung weight at ≥200
ppm in males.
Effects were not observed in rats or
mice following chronic inhalation
exposure to 400 ppm (calculates to
approximately 126 mg/kg-day)
acetonitrile in rats and 200 ppm
(calculates to approximately 100 mg/kgday) acetonitrile in mice (Ref. 13). The
concentrations at which effects were
observed in the 13-week study were not
tested in the chronic study, and, in
addition, two of the three principal
reviewers of the study suggested that the
highest exposure concentrations applied
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
14244
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
in the chronic study (200 ppm-mouse;
400 ppm-rat) were too low and one
reviewer suggested concentrations
should have been as high as 800 ppm
(Ref. 13).
3. Carcinogenicity
There are no studies evaluating the
carcinogenicity of acetonitrile in
humans. Other data pertinent to the
assessment of potential carcinogenicity
include a National Toxicology Program
(NTP) cancer bioassay in mice and rats.
NTP concluded that the evidence for
carcinogenicity via inhalation of
acetonitrile in male F344/N rats was
equivocal (Ref. 13). Although there was
a statistically significant positive trend
in the incidences of hepatocellular
adenomas, carcinomas, and adenomas
and carcinomas (combined) in male rats
only, the incidences were not
statistically significant by pairwise
comparison or by life table analysis.
There was no evidence of
carcinogenicity in female rats or in
either male or female B6C3F1 mice (Ref.
13).
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
4. Developmental and Reproductive
Toxicity
Following acute inhalation exposure
to 3,800 ppm acetonitrile to hamsters on
a single day during gestation day 8
(GD8), an increase in maternal toxicity
and mortality was observed; at higher
exposure concentrations (≥5,000 ppm),
an increase in severe fetal abnormalities,
including exencephaly, encephalocoele,
and rib fusions was reported (Ref. 14).
Following acute oral ingestion of
acetonitrile in hamsters on a single day
at GD8, a decrease in fetal body weight
was observed at the lowest observed
adverse effect level (LOAEL) of 100 mg/
kg (the LOAEL for maternal toxicity was
300 mg/kg) (Ref. 14). In rats, a single
oral dose of 2,000 mg/kg on GD10
resulted in dysmorphogenic features,
including misdirected allantois and/or
trunk and caudal extremity (Ref. 15).
Mortality was not observed in dams
exposed to 2,000 mg/kg acetonitrile on
GD10; however, dams exhibited clinical
signs of toxicity including piloerection,
prostration, and/or tremors, and caused
unspecified maternal weight loss
between GDs 10 and 12 (Ref. 15). In a
oral gavage study, New Zealand white
rabbits were administered acetonitrile
on GDs 6–18, which resulted in a
decrease in the average number of live
fetuses per litter at 30 mg/kg-day, as
well as an increase in maternal
mortality and anorexia, ataxia,
decreased motor activity, bradypnea,
dyspnea, and impaired righting reflex
(Ref. 16).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:45 Mar 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
Inhalation and oral exposure in rats
and rabbits resulted in both maternal
and developmental toxicity. Maternal
mortality was observed in rats at
inhalation concentrations of 1,827 ppm
(Ref. 17) and oral doses of 275 mg/kgday (Ref. 18), and at 30 mg/kg-day in
rabbits (Ref. 16). In rats, inhalation
exposure to 1,827 ppm resulted in an
increase in the percentage of nonlive
implants per litter and early resorptions
(Ref. 17). In rats, there was an increase
in post-implantation loss and in the
number of fetuses with unossified
sternebrae and a decrease in number of
live fetuses per dam at the oral dose of
275 mg/kg-day (Ref. 18). A decrease in
the average number of live fetuses per
litter was observed in rabbits at 30 mg/
kg-day (Ref. 16). While developmental
toxicity was observed at doses that
produced maternal toxicity or mortality,
it is inadequate to assume that the
developmental effects result only from
maternal toxicity, and the results may
indicate that both lifestages, the adult
and developing offspring, are sensitive
to the dose level (Ref. 19).
V. What is EPA’s summary of the
technical review?
Based on the available data, and given
the severity of the effect, mortality, EPA
concludes that there is sufficient
evidence to support a concern for
moderately high toxicity from exposure
to acetonitrile. In assessing mortality
following acetonitrile exposure, the
patterns in the timing of death across
exposures demonstrates the chronic
nature of the effect. Mortality was
observed in the 13-week mouse
inhalation study in the 800 and 1600
ppm treatment groups (Ref. 13). The
first occurrence of mortality in the 800
ppm treatment group was not observed
until day 20 and single deaths
continued on days 21, 45, 69 and 89 of
the 13-week study. This pattern of
mortality is dissimilar to that observed
in the 13-week mouse inhalation study
at 1,600 ppm, where initial deaths were
observed in the first week and all mice
died by day 21 (Ref. 13).
Based on the observed pattern of
death in the 800 ppm treatment group
of the NTP 13-week mouse inhalation
study, beginning at the end of the third
week and extending through the
termination of the study, it can be
reasonably anticipated that additional
acetonitrile-induced mortality would
have continued beyond the termination
of the study and the sacrifice of
surviving animals. Because the
mortalities extended from the third
week of the study to study termination,
the data indicates that the mortality
observed in the 800 ppm treatment
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
group is not due to a single acute
exposure to sufficiently high acetonitrile
concentrations, but rather is best
explained as being the result of longterm repeated exposures. The observed
exposure-response relationship for
acetonitrile demonstrates that a
threshold exists at which acetonitrile
exposure levels are sufficient to cause
mortality from chronic exposure, and, as
such, mortality would not necessarily be
expected following chronic exposure at
the doses tested in the NTP 2-year study
because the acetonitrile exposure levels
in the study design were not sufficient
to cause mortality.
In addition, in 1999, EPA’s Integrated
Risk Information System (IRIS)
Toxicological Review of Acetonitrile
(Ref. 8) set the reference concentration
(RfC) for acetonitrile based on this same
13-week mouse inhalation study (Ref.
13). The IRIS Toxicological Review of
Acetonitrile identified the 400 ppm
concentration in the NTP (1996) mouse
study as a frank effect level (FEL) and
the critical effect in the derivation of the
reference concentration (RfC), given the
death of a mouse at week 2 at 400 ppm
and the increased mortality at 800 ppm.
The FEL is a level of exposure or dose
that produces irreversible, adverse
effects at a statistically or biologically
significant increase in frequency or
severity between those exposed and
those not exposed. The RfC is an
estimate of a continuous inhalation
exposure to the human population
(including sensitive subgroups) that is
likely to be without an appreciable risk
of deleterious effects during a lifetime.
Such a ‘‘lifetime’’ exposure value, set by
IRIS based on the 13-week mouse
inhalation study, is based on chronic
effects, and would be unnecessary if
IRIS found only acute effects.
VI. What is EPA’s rationale for the
denial?
EPA is denying the petition to delete
acetonitrile from the EPCRA section 313
list of toxic chemicals. This denial is
based on EPA’s conclusion that
acetonitrile can reasonably be
anticipated to cause serious or
irreversible chronic health effects in
humans. Based on the available data,
and given the severity of the effect,
mortality, EPA concludes that there is
sufficient evidence to support a concern
for moderately high toxicity from
chronic exposure to acetonitrile.
Because EPA believes that acetonitrile
has moderately high chronic toxicity,
EPA does not believe that an exposure
assessment is appropriate for
determining whether acetonitrile meets
the criteria of EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B). This determination is
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules
consistent with EPA’s published
statement clarifying its interpretation of
the section 313(d)(2) and (d)(3) criteria
for modifying the section 313 list of
toxic chemicals (59 FR 61432,
November 30, 1994).
VII. References
EPA has established an official public
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–TRI–2006–0319. The
public docket includes information
considered by EPA in developing this
action, including the documents listed
below, which are electronically or
physically located in the docket. In
addition, interested parties should
consult documents that are referenced
in the documents that EPA has placed
in the docket, regardless of whether
these referenced documents are
electronically or physically located in
the docket. For assistance in locating
documents that are referenced in
documents that EPA has placed in the
docket, but that are not electronically or
physically located in the docket, please
consult the person listed in the above
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
1. U.S. EPA. 2000. OPPT/RAD Decision
on Neurotoxicity Endpoint for
Acetonitrile. Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Washington,
DC.
2. U.S. EPA, 2012. Technical Review of
Acetonitrile (Methyl Cyanide).
Office of Environmental
Information. Washington, DC.
November 5, 2012.
3. Freeman, J.J. and E.P. Hayes. 1988.
Microsomal metabolism of
acetonitrile to cyanide. Biochem.
Pharmacol. 37:1153–1159.
4. Ahmed, A.E., J.P. Loh, B. Ghanayem
et al. 1992. Studies on the
mechanism of acetonitrile toxicity:
I. Whole body autoradiographic
distribution and macromolecular
interaction of 214C-acetonitrile in
mice. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 70:322–
330.
5. Feierman, D.E. and A.I. Cederbaum.
1989. Role of cytochrome P–450
IIE1 and catalase in the oxidation of
acetonitrile to cyanide. Chem. Res.
Toxicol. 2:359–66.
6. Willhite, C.C. and R.P. Smith. 1981.
The role of cyanide liberation in the
acute toxicity of aliphatic nitriles.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 59:559–
602.
7. Hartung, R. 1982. Cyanides and
nitriles. In: Patty’s Industrial
Hygiene and Toxicology, 3rd Rev.
Ed. Patty, F.A., G.D. Clayton, F.E.
Clayton et al., eds. New York:
Wiley. pp. 4845–4900.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:45 Mar 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
8. U.S. EPA. 1999. Toxicological Review
of Acetonitrile. Office of Research
and Development. Washington, DC.
January, 1999. Available at https://
www.epa.gov/iris/toxreviews/0205tr.pdf.
9. WHO (World Health Organization).
1993. Environmental Health Criteria
154: Acetonitrile. International
Programme on Chemical Safety,
Geneva, Switzerland. Available at
https://www.inchem.org/documents/
ehc/ehc/ehc154.htm.
10. Ballantyne, B. 1983. Artifacts in the
definition of toxicity by cyanides
and cyanogens. Fundam. Appl.
Toxicol. 3:400–408.
11. Way, J.L. 1981. Pharmacologic
aspects of cyanide and its
antagonism. In: Cyanide in Biology.
Vennesland, B., E.E. Conn, C.J.
Knowles et al., eds. New York, NY:
Academic Press. pp. 29–49.
12. Moore, N.P., R.J. Hilaaski, T.D.
Morris et al. 2000. Acute and
subacute toxicological evaluation of
acetonitrile. Int. J. Toxicol. 19:363–
364.
13. NTP (National Toxicology Program).
1996. Toxicology and
carcinogenesis studies of
acetonitrile (CAS NO. 75–05–8) in
F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice
(inhalation studies). NTP Technical
Report Series 447.
14. Willhite, C.C. 1983. Developmental
toxicology of acetonitrile in the
Syrian golden hamster. Teratology.
27:313–325.
´
15. Saillenfait, A.M. and J.P. Sabate.
2000. Comparative developmental
toxicities of aliphatic nitriles: In
vivo and in vitro observations.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 163:149–
163.
16. Argus Research Laboratories, Inc.
1984. Embryofetal toxicity and
teratogenicity study of acetonitrile
in New Zealand White rabbits
(Segment II evaluation).
Washington, DC: Office of Toxic
Substances submission. Microfiche
No. OTS 507279.
17. Saillenfait, A.M., P. Bonnet, J.P.
Guenier et al. 1993. Relative
developmental toxicities of inhaled
aliphatic mononitriles in rats.
Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 20:365–
375.
18. Johannsen, F.R., G.J. Levinskas, P.E.
Berteau et al. 1986. Evaluation of
the teratogenic potential of three
aliphatic nitriles in the rat.
Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 7:33–40.
19. U.S. EPA. 1991. Guidelines for
Developmental Toxicity Risk
Assessment. Risk Assessment
Forum, Washington, DC. EPA/600/
FR–91/001.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14245
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372
Environmental protection,
Community right-to-know, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, and
Toxic chemicals.
Dated: February 25, 2013.
Arnold E. Layne,
Director, Office of Information Analysis and
Access.
[FR Doc. 2013–04933 Filed 3–4–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0062;
4500030114]
RIN 1018–AW85
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Buena Vista Lake Shrew
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; revision and
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the comment period on the
July 10, 2012, revised proposal to
designate critical habitat for the Buena
Vista Lake shrew (Sorex ornatus
relictus) (shrew) under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We announce a revision of the unit map
labels. We provide maps with correct
labels for all proposed units herein. We
also announce the availability of a draft
economic analysis (DEA) of the revised
critical habitat proposal, and of an
amended required determinations
section of the revised proposal. We are
reopening the comment period for an
additional 60 days to allow all
interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the revised proposed rule,
the associated DEA, and the amended
required determinations section.
Furthermore, we announce a public
hearing for the purpose of taking oral or
written comments on those documents.
Comments previously submitted need
not be resubmitted, as they will be fully
considered in preparation of the final
rule.
Written Comments: We will
consider comments received on or
before May 6, 2013. Comments must be
received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the closing date. Any comments that we
receive after the closing date may not be
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 5, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14241-14245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04933]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
[EPA-HQ-TRI-2006-0319; FRL-9787-1]
RIN 2025-AA19
Acetonitrile; Community Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Denial of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is denying a petition to remove acetonitrile from the list
of chemicals subject to reporting requirements under section 313 of the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) and
section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA). EPA has
reviewed the available data on this chemical and has determined that
acetonitrile does not meet the deletion criterion of EPCRA section
313(d)(3). Specifically, EPA is denying this petition because EPA's
review of the petition and available information resulted in the
conclusion that acetonitrile meets the listing criterion of EPCRA
section 313(d)(2)(B) due to its potential to cause death in humans.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel R. Bushman, Environmental
Analysis Division, Office of Information Analysis and Access (2842T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-566-0743; fax number: 202-
566-0677; email: bushman.daniel@epa.gov, for specific information on
this notice. For general information on EPCRA section 313, contact the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline, toll free at
(800) 424-9346 or (703) 412-9810 in Virginia and Alaska or toll free,
TDD (800) 553-7672, https://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hotline/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this notice apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
process, or otherwise use acetonitrile. Potentially affected categories
and entities may include, but are not limited to:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially
Category affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry................................. Facilities included in the
following NAICS
manufacturing codes
(corresponding to SIC codes
20 through 39): 311*, 312*,
313*, 314*, 315*, 316, 321,
322, 323*, 324, 325*, 326*,
327, 331, 332, 333, 334*,
335*, 336, 337*, 339*,
111998*, 211112*, 212324*,
212325*, 212393*, 212399*,
488390*, 511110, 511120,
511130, 511140*, 511191,
511199, 512220, 512230*,
519130*, 541712*, or
811490*.
*Exceptions and/or
limitations exist for these
NAICS codes.
[[Page 14242]]
Facilities included in the
following NAICS codes
(corresponding to SIC codes
other than SIC codes 20
through 39): 212111, 212112,
212113 (correspond to SIC
12, Coal Mining (except
1241)); or 212221, 212222,
212231, 212234, 212299
(correspond to SIC 10, Metal
Mining (except 1011, 1081,
and 1094)); or 221111,
221112, 221113, 221119,
221121, 221122, 221330
(Limited to facilities that
combust coal and/or oil for
the purpose of generating
power for distribution in
commerce) (correspond to SIC
4911, 4931, and 4939,
Electric Utilities); or
424690, 425110, 425120
(Limited to facilities
previously classified in SIC
5169, Chemicals and Allied
Products, Not Elsewhere
Classified); or 424710
(corresponds to SIC 5171,
Petroleum Bulk Terminals and
Plants); or 562112 (Limited
to facilities primarily
engaged in solvent recovery
services on a contract or
fee basis (previously
classified under SIC 7389,
Business Services, NEC)); or
562211, 562212, 562213,
562219, 562920 (Limited to
facilities regulated under
the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, subtitle
C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.)
(correspond to SIC 4953,
Refuse Systems).
Federal Government....................... Federal facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Some of the entities listed in the table have exemptions and/or
limitations regarding coverage, and other types of entities not listed
in the table could also be affected. To determine whether your facility
would be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in part 372 subpart B of Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?
EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-TRI-2006-0319. All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. This
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OEI
Docket is (202) 566-1752.
II. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
This action is taken under sections 313(d) and 313(e)(1) of EPCRA,
42 U.S.C. 11023. EPCRA is also referred to as Title III of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) (Pub. L.
99-499).
B. Background
Section 313 of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. 11023, requires certain facilities
that manufacture, process, or otherwise use listed toxic chemicals in
amounts above reporting threshold levels to report their environmental
releases and other waste management quantities of such chemicals
annually. These facilities must also report pollution prevention and
recycling data for such chemicals, pursuant to section 6607 of the PPA,
42 U.S.C. 13106. Congress established an initial list of toxic
chemicals subject to reporting that comprised more than 300 chemicals
and 20 chemical categories.
EPCRA section 313(d) authorizes EPA to add or delete chemicals from
the list and sets criteria for these actions. EPCRA section 313(d)(2)
states that EPA may add a chemical to the list if any of the listing
criteria in Section 313(d)(2) are met. Therefore, to add a chemical,
EPA must demonstrate that at least one criterion is met, but need not
determine whether any other criterion is met. Conversely, to remove a
chemical from the list, EPCRA section 313(d)(3) dictates that EPA must
demonstrate that none of the listing criteria in Section 313(d)(2) are
met. The EPCRA section 313(d)(2) criteria are:
(A) The chemical is known to cause or can reasonably be anticipated
to cause significant adverse acute human health effects at
concentration levels that are reasonably likely to exist beyond
facility site boundaries as a result of continuous, or frequently
recurring, releases.
(B) The chemical is known to cause or can reasonably be anticipated
to cause in humans--
(i) cancer or teratogenic effects, or
(ii) serious or irreversible-
(I) reproductive dysfunctions,
(II) neurological disorders,
(III) heritable genetic mutations, or
(IV) other chronic health effects.
(C) The chemical is known to cause or can be reasonably anticipated
to cause, because of
(i) its toxicity,
(ii) its toxicity and persistence in the environment, or
(iii) its toxicity and tendency to bioaccumulate in the
environment, a significant adverse effect on the environment of
sufficient seriousness, in the judgment of the Administrator, to
warrant reporting under this section.
EPA often refers to the section 313(d)(2)(A) criterion as the
``acute human health effects criterion;'' the section 313(d)(2)(B)
criterion as the ``chronic human health effects criterion;'' and the
section 313(d)(2)(C) criterion as the ``environmental effects
criterion.''
EPA issued a statement of petition policy and guidance in the
Federal Register of February 4, 1987 (52 FR 3479) to provide guidance
regarding the recommended content and format for submitting petitions.
On May 23, 1991 (56 FR 23703), EPA issued guidance regarding the
recommended content of petitions to delete individual members of the
section 313 metal compounds categories. EPA has also published in the
Federal Register of November 30, 1994 (59 FR 61432) a statement
clarifying its interpretation of the section 313(d)(2) and (d)(3)
criteria for modifying the section 313 list of toxic chemicals.
III. What is the description of the petition and the regulatory status
of acetonitrile?
Acetonitrile is on the list of toxic chemicals subject to the
annual release reporting requirements of EPCRA section 313 and PPA
section 6607. Acetonitrile was among the list of chemicals placed on
the EPCRA section 313 list by Congress. Acetonitrile is listed under
the Clean Air Act (CAA) as a volatile organic compound (VOC) and a
hazardous air pollutant (HAP). Acetonitrile is also on the list of
hazardous constituents (Appendix VIII to Part 261) and can qualify as
listed
[[Page 14243]]
hazardous waste (U003) under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA).
On February 4, 1998, EPA received a petition from BP Chemicals Inc.
(BP) and GNI Chemicals Corporation (GNICC) to delete acetonitrile from
the list of chemicals reportable under EPCRA section 313 and PPA
section 6607, stating that acetonitrile meets all of the criteria for
delisting under EPCRA section 313(d)(3). On March 5, 1999 (64 FR
10597), EPA denied the petition based on a determination that
acetonitrile meets the listing criteria of EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B)
and (d)(2)(C) due to its potential to cause neurotoxicity and death in
humans and its contribution to the formation of ozone in the
environment.
In September 2000, based on additional reviews, EPA reversed its
previous position that acetonitrile was a chronic neurotoxicant (Ref.
1).
On June 28, 2002, EPA received a second petition from BP to delete
acetonitrile from the list of chemicals reportable under EPCRA section
313. Specifically, BP argues that acetonitrile meets all of the
criteria for delisting under EPCRA section 313(d)(3) because: (1) Under
generally accepted scientific principles, chronic mortality is not an
issue for concern; and (2) EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS) has concluded that acetonitrile does not have
sufficient photochemical reactivity to contribute to ozone formation.
Subsequent to BP's filing of the petition on June 28, 2002, BP formed
Innovene USA LLC as its olefin, derivatives and refining group, which
was then acquired from BP by INEOS USA, LLC (INEOS), which has taken
over the petition.
IV. What is EPA's technical review of acetonitrile?
In response to the petition to delete acetonitrile from the list of
chemicals reportable under EPCRA section 313 and PPA section 6607, EPA
prepared a Technical Review of Acetonitrile (Methyl Cyanide) (Ref. 2).
The sections below summarize the human health hazard information
contained in the Technical Review. The review did not consider
acetonitrile's status as a volatile organic compound (VOC) and thus its
contribution to the formation of ozone in the environment since EPA no
longer considers these factors as a basis for listing under EPCRA
section 313(d)(2) (70 FR 37698).
A. Metabolism
Acetonitrile is metabolized to inorganic cyanide through the
intermediate production of hydrogen cyanide. Data demonstrate that the
metabolism to cyanide is oxygen- and NADPH-dependent (Ref. 3), and
mediated by cytochrome P450 isozyme 2E1 (or P-450j) production of a
reactive intermediate, methyl cyanohydrine (Refs. 4, 5, and 6).
Formaldehyde and formic acid are also by-products of acetonitrile
metabolism (Ref. 4). Cyanide is further oxidized and conjugated to
thiocyanate, a less toxic compound that is excreted in urine, but one
that has been shown to interfere with thyroid function (Ref. 7).
B. Toxicity Evaluation
1. Effects of Acute Exposure
Humans acutely exposed to sublethal doses of acetonitrile developed
effects that are generally attributed to metabolism of acetonitrile to
cyanide (Ref. 8). Several cases were reported in which children or
adults ingested large amounts of acetonitrile ([ap]250 to 4,000
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg)) (Ref. 9). Symptoms exhibited by poisoning
victims include anxiety, confusion, hyperpnea, dyspnea, rapid pulse,
unconsciousness, and convulsions (Ref. 9). Cyanide was detected in the
blood of these individuals. Case reports of acute occupational exposure
to acetonitrile indicate that workers exhibited nausea, shallow and/or
irregular respiration, and impaired motor activity. An autopsy of a
worker who died shortly after exposure revealed cerebral, thyroid,
liver, splenic, and renal congestion (Ref. 9). Gastric erosion has been
reported in individuals who ingested acetonitrile (Refs. 10 and 11).
In animals, oral LD50 values (i.e., the dose of a
chemical that is lethal to 50 percent of the test organisms) have been
reported for the mouse (269-453 mg/kg) and the rat (1,730-4,050 mg/kg)
and inhalation LC50 values (i.e., the concentration of a
chemical that is lethal to 50 percent of the test organisms) of 12,000,
16,000, and 7,551-12,435 parts per million (ppm) have been reported for
the rat for 2, 4, and 8 hour exposures, respectively, and for the mouse
following 1-2 hour exposures (2,300-5,700 ppm) (Ref. 9). A 1-hour
LC50 estimate for acetonitrile in mice was reported to be
2,693 ppm (Ref. 6). A recent study (Ref. 12) reported a slightly higher
oral LD50 of 617 mg/kg for Crl:CD-1(ICR)BR mice and an
inhalation LC50 of 3,587 ppm for this strain. Observational
signs of toxicity reported in animals after acute exposure to
acetonitrile include dyspnea, tachypnea, tremors, and convulsions in
various studies (Ref. 9).
2. Effects of Subchronic and Chronic Exposure
Subchronic inhalation exposure to acetonitrile resulted in an
increase in mortality in rats at 1,600 ppm (calculates to approximately
505 mg/kg-day) and in mice at 800 ppm (calculates to approximately 402
mg/kg-day) (Ref. 13).
Following subchronic inhalation exposure in rats, the mortality
incidence was 0/20 in each of the 0, 100, 200 and 400 ppm groups, 1/20
in the 800 ppm group (one death occurring on day 5), and 9/20 in the
1,600 ppm group (four deaths occurring on day 2, one each on days 7, 9,
10, 11, and 23) (Ref. 13). Clinical signs at the two high-concentration
groups included hypoactivity and ruffled fur during the first week.
Ataxia, abnormal posture, and clonic convulsions occurred in the 1,600
ppm males that died. In addition, a decrease in hematocrit, hemoglobin,
and erythrocytes was observed in male rats at 1,600 ppm and in female
rats at >=800 ppm. Changes in organ weights were also observed,
primarily at the highest dose in male rats and at >=800 ppm in female
rats, and include decreases in absolute and relative thymus weight,
increases in absolute and/or relative liver and kidney weight, and
decreases and increases in brain and heart weight, respectively.
Histopathologic effects were limited to rats that died at 800 and 1,600
ppm; effects observed include congestion, edema, and hemorrhage in the
lung alveoli.
Following subchronic inhalation exposure in mice, the mortality
incidence was 0/20 in each of the 0, 100 and 200 ppm groups, 1/20 in
the 400 ppm group (death occurring on day 13), 5/20 in the 800 ppm
group (deaths occurring on days 20, 21, 45, 69, 89) and 20/20 in the
1,600 ppm group (all deaths occurring by day 21) (Ref. 13). Changes in
organ weights were observed, including increased absolute and/or
relative liver weight at >=100 ppm in males and >=400 ppm in females
and increased relative lung weight at >=200 ppm in males.
Effects were not observed in rats or mice following chronic
inhalation exposure to 400 ppm (calculates to approximately 126 mg/kg-
day) acetonitrile in rats and 200 ppm (calculates to approximately 100
mg/kg-day) acetonitrile in mice (Ref. 13). The concentrations at which
effects were observed in the 13-week study were not tested in the
chronic study, and, in addition, two of the three principal reviewers
of the study suggested that the highest exposure concentrations applied
[[Page 14244]]
in the chronic study (200 ppm-mouse; 400 ppm-rat) were too low and one
reviewer suggested concentrations should have been as high as 800 ppm
(Ref. 13).
3. Carcinogenicity
There are no studies evaluating the carcinogenicity of acetonitrile
in humans. Other data pertinent to the assessment of potential
carcinogenicity include a National Toxicology Program (NTP) cancer
bioassay in mice and rats. NTP concluded that the evidence for
carcinogenicity via inhalation of acetonitrile in male F344/N rats was
equivocal (Ref. 13). Although there was a statistically significant
positive trend in the incidences of hepatocellular adenomas,
carcinomas, and adenomas and carcinomas (combined) in male rats only,
the incidences were not statistically significant by pairwise
comparison or by life table analysis. There was no evidence of
carcinogenicity in female rats or in either male or female B6C3F1 mice
(Ref. 13).
4. Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity
Following acute inhalation exposure to 3,800 ppm acetonitrile to
hamsters on a single day during gestation day 8 (GD8), an increase in
maternal toxicity and mortality was observed; at higher exposure
concentrations (>=5,000 ppm), an increase in severe fetal
abnormalities, including exencephaly, encephalocoele, and rib fusions
was reported (Ref. 14). Following acute oral ingestion of acetonitrile
in hamsters on a single day at GD8, a decrease in fetal body weight was
observed at the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) of 100 mg/
kg (the LOAEL for maternal toxicity was 300 mg/kg) (Ref. 14). In rats,
a single oral dose of 2,000 mg/kg on GD10 resulted in dysmorphogenic
features, including misdirected allantois and/or trunk and caudal
extremity (Ref. 15). Mortality was not observed in dams exposed to
2,000 mg/kg acetonitrile on GD10; however, dams exhibited clinical
signs of toxicity including piloerection, prostration, and/or tremors,
and caused unspecified maternal weight loss between GDs 10 and 12 (Ref.
15). In a oral gavage study, New Zealand white rabbits were
administered acetonitrile on GDs 6-18, which resulted in a decrease in
the average number of live fetuses per litter at 30 mg/kg-day, as well
as an increase in maternal mortality and anorexia, ataxia, decreased
motor activity, bradypnea, dyspnea, and impaired righting reflex (Ref.
16).
Inhalation and oral exposure in rats and rabbits resulted in both
maternal and developmental toxicity. Maternal mortality was observed in
rats at inhalation concentrations of 1,827 ppm (Ref. 17) and oral doses
of 275 mg/kg-day (Ref. 18), and at 30 mg/kg-day in rabbits (Ref. 16).
In rats, inhalation exposure to 1,827 ppm resulted in an increase in
the percentage of nonlive implants per litter and early resorptions
(Ref. 17). In rats, there was an increase in post-implantation loss and
in the number of fetuses with unossified sternebrae and a decrease in
number of live fetuses per dam at the oral dose of 275 mg/kg-day (Ref.
18). A decrease in the average number of live fetuses per litter was
observed in rabbits at 30 mg/kg-day (Ref. 16). While developmental
toxicity was observed at doses that produced maternal toxicity or
mortality, it is inadequate to assume that the developmental effects
result only from maternal toxicity, and the results may indicate that
both lifestages, the adult and developing offspring, are sensitive to
the dose level (Ref. 19).
V. What is EPA's summary of the technical review?
Based on the available data, and given the severity of the effect,
mortality, EPA concludes that there is sufficient evidence to support a
concern for moderately high toxicity from exposure to acetonitrile. In
assessing mortality following acetonitrile exposure, the patterns in
the timing of death across exposures demonstrates the chronic nature of
the effect. Mortality was observed in the 13-week mouse inhalation
study in the 800 and 1600 ppm treatment groups (Ref. 13). The first
occurrence of mortality in the 800 ppm treatment group was not observed
until day 20 and single deaths continued on days 21, 45, 69 and 89 of
the 13-week study. This pattern of mortality is dissimilar to that
observed in the 13-week mouse inhalation study at 1,600 ppm, where
initial deaths were observed in the first week and all mice died by day
21 (Ref. 13).
Based on the observed pattern of death in the 800 ppm treatment
group of the NTP 13-week mouse inhalation study, beginning at the end
of the third week and extending through the termination of the study,
it can be reasonably anticipated that additional acetonitrile-induced
mortality would have continued beyond the termination of the study and
the sacrifice of surviving animals. Because the mortalities extended
from the third week of the study to study termination, the data
indicates that the mortality observed in the 800 ppm treatment group is
not due to a single acute exposure to sufficiently high acetonitrile
concentrations, but rather is best explained as being the result of
long-term repeated exposures. The observed exposure-response
relationship for acetonitrile demonstrates that a threshold exists at
which acetonitrile exposure levels are sufficient to cause mortality
from chronic exposure, and, as such, mortality would not necessarily be
expected following chronic exposure at the doses tested in the NTP 2-
year study because the acetonitrile exposure levels in the study design
were not sufficient to cause mortality.
In addition, in 1999, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) Toxicological Review of Acetonitrile (Ref. 8) set the reference
concentration (RfC) for acetonitrile based on this same 13-week mouse
inhalation study (Ref. 13). The IRIS Toxicological Review of
Acetonitrile identified the 400 ppm concentration in the NTP (1996)
mouse study as a frank effect level (FEL) and the critical effect in
the derivation of the reference concentration (RfC), given the death of
a mouse at week 2 at 400 ppm and the increased mortality at 800 ppm.
The FEL is a level of exposure or dose that produces irreversible,
adverse effects at a statistically or biologically significant increase
in frequency or severity between those exposed and those not exposed.
The RfC is an estimate of a continuous inhalation exposure to the human
population (including sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be without
an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. Such a
``lifetime'' exposure value, set by IRIS based on the 13-week mouse
inhalation study, is based on chronic effects, and would be unnecessary
if IRIS found only acute effects.
VI. What is EPA's rationale for the denial?
EPA is denying the petition to delete acetonitrile from the EPCRA
section 313 list of toxic chemicals. This denial is based on EPA's
conclusion that acetonitrile can reasonably be anticipated to cause
serious or irreversible chronic health effects in humans. Based on the
available data, and given the severity of the effect, mortality, EPA
concludes that there is sufficient evidence to support a concern for
moderately high toxicity from chronic exposure to acetonitrile.
Because EPA believes that acetonitrile has moderately high chronic
toxicity, EPA does not believe that an exposure assessment is
appropriate for determining whether acetonitrile meets the criteria of
EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B). This determination is
[[Page 14245]]
consistent with EPA's published statement clarifying its interpretation
of the section 313(d)(2) and (d)(3) criteria for modifying the section
313 list of toxic chemicals (59 FR 61432, November 30, 1994).
VII. References
EPA has established an official public docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2006-0319. The public docket includes
information considered by EPA in developing this action, including the
documents listed below, which are electronically or physically located
in the docket. In addition, interested parties should consult documents
that are referenced in the documents that EPA has placed in the docket,
regardless of whether these referenced documents are electronically or
physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating documents
that are referenced in documents that EPA has placed in the docket, but
that are not electronically or physically located in the docket, please
consult the person listed in the above FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
1. U.S. EPA. 2000. OPPT/RAD Decision on Neurotoxicity Endpoint for
Acetonitrile. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington,
DC.
2. U.S. EPA, 2012. Technical Review of Acetonitrile (Methyl Cyanide).
Office of Environmental Information. Washington, DC. November 5, 2012.
3. Freeman, J.J. and E.P. Hayes. 1988. Microsomal metabolism of
acetonitrile to cyanide. Biochem. Pharmacol. 37:1153-1159.
4. Ahmed, A.E., J.P. Loh, B. Ghanayem et al. 1992. Studies on the
mechanism of acetonitrile toxicity: I. Whole body autoradiographic
distribution and macromolecular interaction of 214C-acetonitrile in
mice. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 70:322-330.
5. Feierman, D.E. and A.I. Cederbaum. 1989. Role of cytochrome P-450
IIE1 and catalase in the oxidation of acetonitrile to cyanide. Chem.
Res. Toxicol. 2:359-66.
6. Willhite, C.C. and R.P. Smith. 1981. The role of cyanide liberation
in the acute toxicity of aliphatic nitriles. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
59:559-602.
7. Hartung, R. 1982. Cyanides and nitriles. In: Patty's Industrial
Hygiene and Toxicology, 3rd Rev. Ed. Patty, F.A., G.D. Clayton, F.E.
Clayton et al., eds. New York: Wiley. pp. 4845-4900.
8. U.S. EPA. 1999. Toxicological Review of Acetonitrile. Office of
Research and Development. Washington, DC. January, 1999. Available at
https://www.epa.gov/iris/toxreviews/0205-tr.pdf.
9. WHO (World Health Organization). 1993. Environmental Health Criteria
154: Acetonitrile. International Programme on Chemical Safety, Geneva,
Switzerland. Available at https://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc154.htm.
10. Ballantyne, B. 1983. Artifacts in the definition of toxicity by
cyanides and cyanogens. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 3:400-408.
11. Way, J.L. 1981. Pharmacologic aspects of cyanide and its
antagonism. In: Cyanide in Biology. Vennesland, B., E.E. Conn, C.J.
Knowles et al., eds. New York, NY: Academic Press. pp. 29-49.
12. Moore, N.P., R.J. Hilaaski, T.D. Morris et al. 2000. Acute and
subacute toxicological evaluation of acetonitrile. Int. J. Toxicol.
19:363-364.
13. NTP (National Toxicology Program). 1996. Toxicology and
carcinogenesis studies of acetonitrile (CAS NO. 75-05-8) in F344/N rats
and B6C3F1 mice (inhalation studies). NTP Technical Report Series 447.
14. Willhite, C.C. 1983. Developmental toxicology of acetonitrile in
the Syrian golden hamster. Teratology. 27:313-325.
15. Saillenfait, A.M. and J.P. Sabat[eacute]. 2000. Comparative
developmental toxicities of aliphatic nitriles: In vivo and in vitro
observations. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 163:149-163.
16. Argus Research Laboratories, Inc. 1984. Embryofetal toxicity and
teratogenicity study of acetonitrile in New Zealand White rabbits
(Segment II evaluation). Washington, DC: Office of Toxic Substances
submission. Microfiche No. OTS 507279.
17. Saillenfait, A.M., P. Bonnet, J.P. Guenier et al. 1993. Relative
developmental toxicities of inhaled aliphatic mononitriles in rats.
Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 20:365-375.
18. Johannsen, F.R., G.J. Levinskas, P.E. Berteau et al. 1986.
Evaluation of the teratogenic potential of three aliphatic nitriles in
the rat. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 7:33-40.
19. U.S. EPA. 1991. Guidelines for Developmental Toxicity Risk
Assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC. EPA/600/FR-91/001.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372
Environmental protection, Community right-to-know, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Toxic chemicals.
Dated: February 25, 2013.
Arnold E. Layne,
Director, Office of Information Analysis and Access.
[FR Doc. 2013-04933 Filed 3-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P