R331_0208_env

RISK ASSESSMENT 

OF 

ALKANES, C14-17, CHLORO 

CAS Number: 85535-85-9 

EINECS Number: 287-477-0

Environment Draft of August 2002 
R331_0208_env

Foreword 

This Draft Risk Assessment Report is carried out in accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) 

793/931 on the evaluation and control of the risks of “existing” substances. Regulation 793/93 

provides a systematic framework for the evaluation of the risks to human health and the 

environment of these substances if they are produced or imported into the Community in

volumes above 10 tonnes per year. 

There are four overall stages in the Regulation for reducing the risks: data collection, priority 

setting, risk assessment and risk reduction. Data provided by Industry are used by Member States 

and the Commission services to determine the priority of the substances which need to be 

assessed. For each substance on a priority list, a Member State volunteers to act as “Rapporteur”, 

undertaking the in-depth Risk Assessment and recommending a strategy to limit the risks of

exposure to the substance, if necessary. 

The methods for carrying out an in-depth Risk Assessment at Community level are laid down in 

Commission Regulation (EC) 1488/942 which is supported by a technical guidance document3

Normally, the “Rapporteur” and individual companies producing, importing and/or using the 

chemicals work closely together to develop a draft Risk Assessment Report, which is then

presented to the Competent Group of Member State experts for endorsement. Observers from 

Industry, Consumer Organisations, Trade Unions, Environmental Organisations and certain 

International Organisations are also invited to attend the meetings. The Risk Assessment Report 

is then peer-reviewed by the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Eco-toxicity and the

Environment (SCTEE) which gives its opinion to the European Commission on the quality of the 

risk assessment. 

This Draft Risk Assessment Report is currently under discussion in the Competent Group of 

Member State experts with the aim of reaching consensus. In doing so, the scientific 

interpretation of the underlying information may change, more information may be included and 

even the conclusions reached in this draft may change. Competent Group of Member State 

experts seek as wide a distribution of these drafts as possible, in order to assure as complete and

accurate an information basis as possible. The information contained in this Draft Risk 

Assessment Report therefore does not necessarily provide a sound basis for decision making 

regarding the hazards, exposures or the risks associated with the priority substance. 

This Draft Risk Assessment Report is the responsibility of the Member State rapporteur. In order 

to avoid possible misinterpretations or misuse of the findings in this draft, anyone wishing to cite 

or quote this report is advised to contact the Member State rapporteur beforehand. 

Rapporteur: United Kingdom 

 1 O.J. No L 084, 05/04/1993 p. 0001 - 0075

2 O.J. No. L 161, 29/06/1994 p. 0003 – 0011

3 Technical Guidance Document, Part I-V, ISBN 92-827-801[1234]
R331_0208_env

 

Contact for the environmental section: 

Environment Agency 

Chemicals Assessment Section 

Ecotoxicology and Hazardous Substances National Centre 

Isis House, Howbery Park, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, OX10 8BD 

Fax: + 44 1491 828 559 

The scientific work on the environmental sections was carried out by the Building Research

Establishment Ltd (BRE), under contract to the rapporteur. 
R331_0208_env

0 OVERALL RESULTS OF THE RISK ASSESSMENT 

CAS Number: 85535-85-9 

EINECS Number: 287-477-0 

IUPAC name: Alkanes, C14-17, chloro 

Overall results of the Risk Assessment 

Environment 

(X) i) There is a need for further information and/or testing. 

 

The estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for surface water are >1 for most of the life-stages of

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The PNEC is based on two NOECs and an assessment 

factor of 50. A long-term toxicity (early life stage) study with fish could allow this to be refined. 

If the PNEC were derived using a factor of 10 on the daphnia NOEC, then most of the endpoints 

would give ratios less than 1. There is some uncertainty about whether the current fish toxicity 

database contains sufficient information on long-term toxicity to sensitive life stages to allow a 

reduced assessment factor to be used without the need for further testing. However, given the 

available database for chlorinated paraffins as a whole, and the conclusions found for other

endpoints in this assessment, it is currently difficult to justify further testing with vertebrate 

species. Therefore, the need for this test should be reviewed once the outcome of the risk 

reduction measures proposed elsewhere in this assessment are known. 

From the estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for sediment and the terrestrial compartments, further

testing on sediment and soil organisms is required to refine the PNECs for these compartments. 

It is recommended that a long-term sediment toxicity study with a third species such as Hyalella 

azteca and a soil respiration inhibition test is considered. However, given the risks identified for

other endpoints in this risk assessment the need for these tests should be reviewed once the likely 

effect of any risk reduction measures are known. 

(X) ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing, or for risk 

reduction measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

A low risk to waste water treatment plants and the atmospheric compartment4 have been

identified from both the production and use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. It also 

applies to the assessment of surface water for local releases from some production sites, some

PVC compounding sites, plastics/rubber compounding sites, formulation and use of sealants, 

domestic application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal cutting fluids and from regional 

sources. 

For sediment, this applies to the assessment of local releases from formulation and use of 

sealants and from regional sources. 

 4 Some components of the commercial products might have properties that may mean that long-range transport via 

the atmosphere is a possibility. This issue should be considered further in the appropriate international fora. 

i 
R331_0208_env

For soil, this applies to the assessment of local releases from production sites, some PVC

compounding sites, some plastics/rubber compounding sites, formulation and use of sealants, 

industrial and domestic application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids 

(not intermittent release scenario), formulation of leather fat liquors, and from regional sources 

on agricultural land. 

For secondary poisoning via the fish food chain, a low risk was identified from production sites, 

some sites using medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the production of PVC (plastisol coating 

sites, and sites carrying out extrusion/other compounding and/or processing using open or closed 

systems, and sites carrying out conversion in partially open systems), the use in production of 

rubber and polymers other than PVC, formulation and use of sealants, formulation and use in 

paints, use in oil-based metal cutting/working fluids and emulsifiable metal cutting/working

fluids where spent fluids are not discharged to waste water, the formulation of leather fat liquors 

and sites where recycling of carbonless copy paper occurs. A low risk of secondary poisoning via 

the earthworm food chain is also indicated for production (sites where no application of sewage 

sludge onto land occurs), formulation and use in sealants, and domestic application of paints. 

(X) iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which 

are already being applied shall be taken into account. 

For surface water, a risk is identified from the following applications: 

• Use in the production of PVC in some processes (particularly where compounding or 

compounding and conversion is carried out in partially open systems). 

• Formulation of metal cutting fluids, and use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids 

where the spent fluid is discharged to waste water. 

• Use in leather fat liquors. 

For sediment, a risk is identified from the following applications: 

 

• Use in PVC: plastisol coating – conversion sites or sites carrying out both compounding and 

conversion. 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other – compounding sites using partially open processes or sites

carrying out both compounding and conversion using open, partially open or closed 

processes. 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other – conversion sites using open, partially open or closed 

processes. 

• Use in plastics/rubber: sites carrying out both compounding and conversion. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: formulation sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in oil-based fluids at large and small sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in emulsifiable fluids at sites with intermittent 

release (disposal) to sewer/drain. 

• Use in leather fat liquors: use at sites carrying out processing of hides/leather. 

• Use in carbonless copy paper: sites carrying out paper recycling. 

ii 
R331_0208_env

For the terrestrial compartment, a risk is identified from: 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other - sites carrying out both compounding and conversion using 

partially open systems. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: formulation sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in emulsifiable fluids at sites with intermittent 

release (disposal) to sewer/drain. 

• Use in leather fat liquors: use at sites carrying out processing of hides/leather. 

• Regional assessment of “waste remaining in the environment”. 

For secondary poisoning, a risk is identified from all uses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

for the earthworm food chain (other than for production (sites where there is no spreading of 

sewage sludge to land), formulation and use of sealants, and domestic application of paints). Six

scenarios also indicate a concern for the fish food chain: 

• Use in the production of PVC in some processes (particularly where compounding or 

compounding and conversion is carried out in partially open systems). 

• Formulation of metal cutting fluids. 

• Use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids where the spent fluid is discharged to waste

water. 

• Use in leather fat liquors. 

When the possible effects of the proposed risk reduction measures on short chain chlorinated 

paraffins on the consumption and use of medium chain chlorinated paraffins are taken into 

account, the PEC/PNEC ratios for secondary poisoning also indicate that a risk from use in 

oil-based metal cutting fluids may also need to be considered if the typical concentration of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in the fluid is increased to around 10%. 

iii 
R331_0208_env

CONTENTS 

0 OVERALL RESULTS OF THE RISK ASSESSMENT ................................I 

1 GENERAL SUBSTANCE INFORMATION ..................................................9 

1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBSTANCE 9 

1.2 PURITY/IMPURITIES, ADDITIVES 9 

1.2.1 Purity........................................................................................................................... 9 

1.2.2 Additives................................................................................................................... 11 

1.2.3 Medium-chain impurities present in other chlorinated paraffin products ................ 11 

1.3 PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 11 

1.3.1 Physical state (at ntp)................................................................................................ 12

1.3.2 Melting point............................................................................................................. 12 

1.3.3 Boiling point ............................................................................................................. 13 

1.3.4 Relative density......................................................................................................... 13 

1.3.5 Vapour pressure ........................................................................................................ 13

1.3.6 Water solubility......................................................................................................... 14 

1.3.7 Partition coefficient................................................................................................... 14 

1.3.8 Flash point................................................................................................................. 15 

1.3.9 Autoflammability...................................................................................................... 15 

1.3.10 Explosivity ................................................................................................................ 15 

1.3.11 Oxidising properties.................................................................................................. 15

1.4 CLASSIFICATION 15 

1.4.1 Current classification ................................................................................................ 15 

1.4.2 Proposal of rapporteur............................................................................................... 15 

1.4.2.1 Environment .......................................................................................................... 15

1.4.2.2 Human health......................................................................................................... 16

2 GENERAL INFORMATION ON EXPOSURE ...........................................17 

2.1 PRODUCTION 17 

2.2 USES 17 

2.2.1 Use as a plasticiser.................................................................................................... 19 

2.2.1.1 PVC ....................................................................................................................... 19 

2.2.1.2 Paints and varnishes............................................................................................... 22 

2.2.1.3 Adhesives/sealants................................................................................................. 23 

2.2.2 Use as a flame retardant plasticiser........................................................................... 23 

2.2.2.1 Rubber ................................................................................................................... 23 

2.2.2.2 Plastics................................................................................................................... 24 

2.2.2.3 Adhesives/sealants................................................................................................. 24 

2.2.3 Extreme pressure additive (Metal cutting/working fluids)....................................... 24 

1 
R331_0208_env

2.2.4 Fat liquors (for leather)............................................................................................. 25 

2.2.5 Carbonless copy paper.............................................................................................. 25 

2.3 EXISTING CONTROL MEASURES 26 

2.4 NATURAL SOURCES 26 

3 ENVIRONMENT.............................................................................................27 

3.1 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 27 

3.1.0 General discussion .................................................................................................... 27 

3.1.0.1 Releases from production ...................................................................................... 27 

3.1.0.1.1 Default release estimate.................................................................................... 27 

3.1.0.1.2 Industry-specific release information ............................................................... 27 

3.1.0.1.3 Transportation losses........................................................................................ 28 

3.1.0.2 Release from use.................................................................................................... 28 

3.1.0.2.1 Release from use in PVC.................................................................................. 28 

3.1.0.2.2 Releases from use as a plasticiser/flame retardant in other plastics and 

 rubber................................................................................................................ 37 

3.1.0.2.3 Releases from use as a plasticiser/flame retardant in sealants/adhesives......... 41 

3.1.0.2.4 Release from use as a plasticiser in paints and varnishes................................. 42 

3.1.0.2.5 Release from use as an extreme pressure additive in metal cutting/working 

fluids................................................................................................................. 45 

3.1.0.2.6 Release from use in leather fat liquors............................................................. 53 

3.1.0.2.7 Release from production of carbonless copy paper.......................................... 56 

3.1.0.2.8 Release from recycling of carbonless copy paper............................................ 57 

3.1.0.2.9 Release from use in plastics/other polymers over their service life ................. 58 

3.1.0.2.10 Waste in the environment and ultimate disposal ............................................ 62 

3.1.0.3 Summary of release estimates ............................................................................... 64 

3.1.0.4 Degradation ........................................................................................................... 68 

3.1.0.4.1 Abiotic degradation .......................................................................................... 68 

3.1.0.4.2 Biodegradation ................................................................................................. 68 

3.1.0.4.3 Summary of degradation .................................................................................. 70 

3.1.0.5 Uptake and accumulation ...................................................................................... 71 

3.1.0.5.1 Bioconcentration from water............................................................................ 71 

3.1.0.5.2 Accumulation from sediment and soil.............................................................. 78 

3.1.0.5.3 Dietary accumulation........................................................................................ 83 

3.1.0.5.4 Summary of accumulation................................................................................ 87 

3.1.0.6 Adsorption ............................................................................................................. 87 

3.1.0.7 Environmental distribution.................................................................................... 88 

3.1.1 Aquatic compartment (inc. sediment)....................................................................... 89 

3.1.1.1 Calculation of PEClocal........................................................................................... 89 

3.1.1.1.1 Production sites ................................................................................................ 90 

3.1.1.1.2 Use in PVC....................................................................................................... 91 

3.1.1.1.3 Use in rubber/plastics (other than PVC)........................................................... 93 

3.1.1.1.4 Use in sealants/adhesives ................................................................................. 93 

3.1.1.1.5 Use in paints and varnishes .............................................................................. 93 

2 
R331_0208_env

3.1.1.1.6 Formulation and use in metal cutting/working fluids....................................... 94 

3.1.1.1.7 Formulation and use in leather fat liquors........................................................ 95 

3.1.1.1.8 Recycling of carbonless copy paper................................................................. 96 

3.1.1.2 Calculation of PECregional and PECcontinental ............................................................ 97 

3.1.1.3 Measured levels in water and sediment................................................................. 98 

3.1.1.3.1 Levels in water ................................................................................................. 98 

3.1.1.3.2 Measured levels in sediment .......................................................................... 106 

3.1.1.3.3 Comparison of measured and predicted concentrations................................. 113 

3.1.2 Terrestrial compartment.......................................................................................... 115 

3.1.2.1 Predicted levels.................................................................................................... 115

3.1.2.2 Measured levels................................................................................................... 117 

3.1.2.3 Comparison of measured and predicted concentrations...................................... 118 

3.1.3 Atmospheric compartment...................................................................................... 119 

3.1.3.1 Predicted levels.................................................................................................... 119

3.1.3.2 Measured levels................................................................................................... 121 

3.1.4 Non-compartmental specific exposure relevant to the food chain.......................... 121 

3.1.4.1 Predicted levels.................................................................................................... 121

3.1.4.2 Measured levels................................................................................................... 123 

3.1.4.3 Comparison of predicted and measured levels.................................................... 128 

3.2 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND DOSE 

(CONCENTRATION) - RESPONSE (EFFECT) ASSESSMENT 130 

3.2.1 Aquatic compartment.............................................................................................. 130 

3.2.1.1 Toxicity to fish..................................................................................................... 130 

3.2.1.2 Toxicity to aquatic invertebrates ......................................................................... 134 

3.2.1.2.1 Daphnia magna............................................................................................... 134 

3.2.1.2.2 Other species .................................................................................................. 139 

3.2.1.2.3 Discussion of invertebrate results................................................................... 140 

3.2.1.3 Toxicity to algae .................................................................................................. 141 

3.2.1.4 Microorganisms................................................................................................... 143 

3.2.1.5 Sediment organisms............................................................................................. 143 

3.2.1.5.1 Chironomus riparius ...................................................................................... 143 

3.2.1.5.2 Lumbriculus variegatus.................................................................................. 145 

3.2.1.6 Predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) for the aquatic compartment ............ 147 

3.2.1.6.1 Surface water.................................................................................................. 147 

3.2.1.6.2 Sewage treatment processes........................................................................... 148 

3.2.1.6.3 Sediment......................................................................................................... 148 

3.2.2 Terrestrial compartment.......................................................................................... 149 

3.2.2.1 Toxicity to microorganisms................................................................................. 149 

3.2.2.2 Plants ................................................................................................................... 149 

3.2.2.3 Toxicity to earthworms........................................................................................ 151 

3.2.2.4 Predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) for the terrestrial compartment ........ 153 

3.2.3 Atmosphere ............................................................................................................. 153 

3.2.4 Non-compartmental specific effects relevant for the food chain............................ 154 

3.2.4.1 Bioaccumulation.................................................................................................. 154 

3.2.4.2 Avian toxicity ...................................................................................................... 154

3.2.4.3 Mammalian toxicity............................................................................................. 155 

3 
R331_0208_env

3.2.4.4 Predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) for secondary poisoning................... 155 

3.3 RISK CHARACTERISATION 156 

3.3.1 Aquatic compartment (incl. sediment).................................................................... 156 

3.3.1.1 Water ................................................................................................................... 156 

3.3.1.2 Sediment .............................................................................................................. 159 

3.3.1.3 Sewage treatment processes................................................................................ 162 

3.3.2 Terrestrial compartment.......................................................................................... 163 

3.3.3 Atmosphere ............................................................................................................. 166 

3.3.4 Non-compartment specific effects relevant to the food chain (secondary 

 poisoning) ............................................................................................................... 167 

3.3.5 Areas of uncertainty in the environmental risk assessment.................................... 170 

3.3.6 Waste disposal ........................................................................................................ 171

3.3.7 Medium-chain impurities present in other chlorinated paraffins............................ 171 

4 HUMAN HEALTH ....................................................................................... 172 

4.1 172 

4.1.1...................................................................................................................................... 172 

4.1.1.1................................................................................................................................ 172 

4.1.1.2................................................................................................................................ 172 

4.1.1.3 Indirect exposure via the environment ................................................................ 172 

5 RESULTS....................................................................................................... 175

175

175

178

179

186

257

260

267

273

5.1 INTRODUCTION 

5.2 ENVIRONMENT 

5.3 HUMAN HEALTH 

6 REFERENCES..............................................................................................

APPENDIX A EUSES MODELLING 

APPENDIX B ESTIMATED VAPOUR PRESSURES FOR C14-17 CHLORINATED

PARAFFINS 

APPENDIX C GENERIC LEVEL III FUGACITY MODELLING 

APPENDIX D ANALYTICAL METHODS USED TO DETERMINE C14-17

CHLORINATED PARAFFINS IN ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA 

APPENDIX E ASSESSMENT OF POSSIBLE REPLACEMENT OF SHORT-CHAIN 

CHLORINATED PARAFFINS WITH MEDIUM-CHAIN 

CHLORINATED PARAFFINS

4 
R331_0208_env

APPENDIX F ESTIMATION OF WASTE REMAINING IN THE ENVIRONMENT 

AND FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF DIFFUSIVE EMISSIONS 

FROM ARTICLES 287

302

312

APPENDIX G VOLATILITY LOSSES FROM PVC 

APPENDIX H EFFECTS OF VARIABILITY IN PHYSICO-CHEMICAL 

PROPERTIES AND DEGRADATION RATE ON THE 

ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING OF MEDIUM-CHAIN 

CHLORINATED PARAFFINS

TABLES

Table 1.1 Theoretical chlorine content of some medium-chain chlorinated paraffins.............. 10 

Table 1.2 Physico-chemical properties of some medium-chain chlorinated paraffins.............. 12 

Table 2.1 Use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU .............................................. 18 

Table 2.2 Exhaust air treatment in Western Europe by process in 1990 (Kirk-Othmer, 1996) 21 

Table 2.3 Chlorinated paraffin content of paints (BCF, 1999).................................................. 22 

Table 3.1 Estimated amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used at flexible 

PVCprocessing sites .................................................................................................. 30 

Table 3.2 Estimated worst case emissions of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to air from

processing sitesd

......................................................................................................... 36 

Table 3.3 Estimated volatilisation losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from 

polymeric materials ................................................................................................... 61 

Table 3.4 Estimated leaching losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from polymeric 

materials .................................................................................................................... 62

Table 3.5 Summary of environmental release estimates for medium-chain chlorinated 

 paraffins..................................................................................................................... 65 

Table 3.6 BOD5 and COD values for various medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (Hoechst 

AG, 1976 and 1977) .................................................................................................. 68 

Table 3.7 BOD values for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (Madeley and Birtley, 1980) 69 

Table 3.8 Bioconcentration of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in rainbow trout 

(Thompson et al., 2000)............................................................................................. 74 

Table 3.9 Uptake and accumulation of 14C-labelled chlorinated paraffin by Lumbriculus 

variegatus .................................................................................................................. 79 

Table 3.10 Uptake of n-pentadecane-8-14C, 51% wt. Cl by earthworms .................................... 80 

Table 3.11 Uptake of n-pentadecane-8-14C, 51% wt. Cl from soil by plants.............................. 83 

Table 3.12 Dietary accumulation of C14 chlorinated paraffins in rainbow trout (Fisk et al., 

1988a) ........................................................................................................................ 85 

Table 3.13 Fugacity modelling for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins.................................... 89 

Table 3.14 Summary of PECs estimated for production sites..................................................... 91 

Table 3.15a PEClocal(water) and PEClocal(sediment) for use in PVC ..................................................... 91 

Table 3.15bPEClocal(water) and PEClocal(sediment) for use in PVC ..................................................... 92 

Table 3.16 PEClocal for water and sediment for use in rubber and plastics.................................. 93 

Table 3.17 PEClocal for water and sediment for formulation and use in paints............................ 94 

5 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.18 PEClocal for water and sediment for use in metal cutting/working fluids.................. 94 

Table 3.19 PEClocal for water and sediment for formulation and use of leather fat liquors......... 96 

Table 3.20 PEClocal for water and sediment for recycling of carbonless copy paper .................. 97 

Table 3.21 Estimated PECregional and PECcontinental for the aquatic compartment......................... 98 

Table 3.22 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in surface water in the United 

Kingdom, related to sources...................................................................................... 99 

Table 3.23 Measured levels of medium-chain (and short-chain) chlorinated paraffins in 

surface water in the United Kingdom (ICI, 1992)................................................... 102 

Table 3.24 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in surface water in Germany 

(Hoechst AG, 1987; Ballschmiter, 1994) ................................................................ 102 

Table 3.25 Concentration of total short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in 

marine waters in and around the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 1980)................ 103 

Table 3.26 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in fresh and other non-marine waters remote from industry in the United 

Kingdom (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) ........................................................... 104 

Table 3.27 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in waters in industrialised areas in the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 

 1980)........................................................................................................................ 104 

Table 3.28 Measured levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins near a production site 

in the United States (Murray et al., 1987a and 1987b)............................................ 105 

Table 3.29 Levels of chlorinated paraffins in sediment in the United Kingdom, related to 

 sources (CEFAS, 1999) ........................................................................................... 107 

Table 3.30 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in German sediments..................... 110 

Table 3.31 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in marine sediments around the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 1980)..... 111 

Table 3.32 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in fresh and other non-marine sediments remote from industry in the UK 

(Campbell and McConnell, 1980) ........................................................................... 111 

Table 3.33 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in sediments in industrialised areas in the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 

1980)........................................................................................................................ 112 

Table 3.34 Estimated concentrations in soil .............................................................................. 115 

Table 3.35 Levels in sewage sludge, agricultural land and earthworms from the United 

Kingdom (CEFAS, 1999)........................................................................................ 117 

Table 3.34 Estimated air concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins..................... 120 

Table 3.37 Estimated concentrations in fish and earthworms for secondary poisoning............ 121 

Table 3.38 Levels of chlorinated paraffins in fish and benthos in the United Kingdom, 

related to sources (CEFAS, 1999) ........................................................................... 123 

Table 3.39 Concentrations of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in aquatic organisms (Campbell and McConnell, 1980)............................. 125 

Table 3.40 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in seabirds' eggsa

 (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) .................................. 125 

Table 3.41 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in birds (Campbell and McConnell, 1980).................................................. 125 

Table 3.42 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in human foodstuffs (Campbell and McConnell, 1980).............................. 126 

6 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.43 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

 (C10-20) in sheep from areas near to and remote from a chlorinated paraffin 

production plant (Campbell and McConnell, 1980)................................................ 126 

Table 3.44 Concentrations of chlorinated paraffins (unspecified chain length) in pooled 

samples from in and around Sweden (Jansson et al., 1993).................................... 127 

Table 3.45 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in biota from Canada (Bennie et 

 al., 2000).................................................................................................................. 128 

Table 3.46 Toxicity to fish......................................................................................................... 131 

Table 3.47 Exposure concentrations and uptake in Medaka eggs and larvae of 14C-C14, 

55% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin............................................................................... 134 

Table 3.48 Toxicity to aquatic invertebrates and algae ............................................................. 135 

Table 3.49 Results of microorganism toxicity tests................................................................... 143 

Table 3.50 Toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance to Chironomus riparius ....................... 144 

Table 3.51 Toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance to Lumbriculus variegatus................... 146 

Table 3.52 Effects of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance on emergence and plant growth............. 150 

Table 3.53 Toxicity of a 52% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to earthworm .......... 152 

Table 3.54 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for surface water........................................................ 156 

Table 3.55 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for sediment............................................................... 159 

Table 3.56 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for waste water treatment plants ............................... 162 

Table 3.57 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for agricultural soil (30 day average)........................ 164 

Table 3.58 Estimated concentrations in fish and earthworms for secondary poisoning............ 167 

Table 3.36 Estimated concentrations in food for human daily intake ....................................... 173

258

273

277

279

281

282

283

284

299

300

301

302

303

304

309

311

313

314

315

Table B1 Estimated vapour pressures for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins .....................

Table E.1 Trends in use of chlorinated paraffins in the EU.....................................................

Table E.2 Revised releases for the regional and continental environment ..............................

Table E.3 PECregional and PECcontinental for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins for the 

current situation and possible future increased use as a result of risk reduction 

measures on short-chain chlorinated paraffins........................................................

Table E4 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for surface water (PNEC = 0.2 μg/l).........................

Table E5 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for sediment (PNEC = 1 mg/kg wet wt.)...................

Table E.6 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for soil (PNEC = 2.12 mg/kg wet wt.)......................

Table E7 Estimated concentrations in fish and earthworms for secondary poisoning 

(PNEC = 0.5 mg/kg)................................................................................................

Table F1 Estimation of waste remaining in the environment ................................................

Table F 2 Summary of diffusive losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from PVC 

(and other polymers) during product lifetimes and disposal ...................................

Table F3 Summary of waste remaining in the environment during product lifetimes and 

disposal ....................................................................................................................

Table G1 Ageing loss from PVC (BS 2782 methods 465A and B) ........................................

Table G2 Weight loss on heating of plasticiser.......................................................................

Table G3 Exposure estimates for C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance ..............................................

Table G4 Local PEC calculations for a C14-17, 52% Cl substance...........................................

Table G5 Predicted regional concentrations for a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance.....................

Table H1 Input data for EUSES model for the various scenarios considered.........................

Table H2 Resulting concentrations for the various scenarios considered ...............................

Table H3 Resulting PEC/PNEC ratios for the various scenarios considered..........................

7 
R331_0208_env

Table H4 Effects of varying the biodegradation half-life on predicted regional 

 concentrations.......................................................................................................... 317 

8 
R331_0208_env

1 GENERAL SUBSTANCE INFORMATION 

1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBSTANCE 

 CAS No: 85535-85-9 

 EINECS No: 287-477-0 

 IUPAC Name: Alkanes, C14-17, chloro 

 Molecular formula: CxH(2x-y+2)Cly, where x = 14-17 and y = 1-17 

Example structural 

formulae: 

 C14H24Cl6 

C17H29Cl7

Molecular weight: see Section 1.2.1 

Synonyms: chlorinated paraffin (C14-17); chloroalkanes, C14-17; chloroparaffin;

chloroparaffine, C14-17; medium-chain chlorinated paraffins;

paraffine clorurate (C14-17); paraffine clorurate a catena media. 

In this assessment the name medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (or MCCP) will be used for the 

substance, as this is the more common name. The commercially supplied products are usually 

mixtures of different carbon chain lengths (reflecting the carbon chain length distribution in the 

parent n-paraffin feedstocks used), and have different degrees of chlorination, although all have a 

common structure in that no secondary carbon atom carries more than one chlorine atom. Two 

other groups of chlorinated paraffins are made commercially. These are known as short-chain 

(typically C10-13) and long-chain (typically ≥C18 or C20-30). This assessment is only concerned 

with the medium-chain (C14-17) chlorinated paraffins, but some information on the other types is

included when it is considered to be useful and relevant to the assessment. The short-chain 

chlorinated paraffins have been assessed previously under Regulation (EEC) 793/93. 

1.2 PURITY/IMPURITIES, ADDITIVES 

1.2.1 Purity 

Table 1.1 shows the theoretical % weight chlorine content of several compounds that can be 

considered as medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The amount of chlorine present in the 

commercial products is usually expressed as a percentage by weight (% wt. Cl), but since the 

commercial products contain a number of components with different carbon chain lengths, it is 

not possible to identify exactly which compounds are present in a given product, although 

Table 1.1 can be used as a guide. Wherever possible in this report, the actual carbon chain length 

(or range of chain length) and the degree of chlorination (% wt. Cl) will be given. 

9 
R331_0208_env

Although it is theoretically possible to produce medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with chlorine 

contents up to 70% wt. Cl, such products are not manufactured commercially. The highest 

chlorine content of the commercial medium-chain chlorinated paraffins normally available is 

around 58-60% wt. Cl, although products with chlorine contents of up to 62-63% have recently

been developed. The lowest chlorine content of the commercial medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins is around 40% wt. Cl, but the largest tonnage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

have chlorine contents between 45 and 52% wt. Cl (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

The purity of the produced chlorinated paraffin is related to the purity of the n-paraffin 

feedstock. In Western Europe, chlorinated paraffins are made from purified n-paraffin feedstocks 

containing no more than 1-2% isoparaffins and <100 mg aromatics/kg (the aromatics are 

removed by treatment of the n-paraffin with sulphuric acid). For some high-stability applications,

n-paraffin fractions with <1% isoparaffins and <10-100 mg aromatics/kg are used (BUA, 1992). 

Table 1.1Theoretical chlorine content of some medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

Formula Molecular

weight 

% Cl by 

weight 

Formula Molecular

weight 

% Cl by 

weight 

Formula Molecular

weight 

% Cl by 

weight 

C14H29Cl 232.5 15.3 C15H24Cl8 488.0 58.2 C16H18Cl16 778.0 73.0

C14H27Cl3 301.5 35.3 C15H20Cl12 626.0 68.1

C14H24Cl6 405.0 52.6 C15H17Cl15 729.5 73.0 C17H35Cl 274.5 12.9

C14H21Cl9 508.5 62.8 C17H32Cl4 378.0 37.6

C14H18Cl12 612.0 69.6 C16H33Cl 260.5 13.6 C17H29Cl7 481.5 51.6

C14H16Cl14 681.0 73.0 C16H30Cl4 364.0 39.0 C17H26Cl10 585.0 60.7

C16H27Cl7 467.5 53.2 C17H23Cl13 688.5 67.0

C15H31Cl 246.5 14.4 C16H24Cl10 571.0 62.2 C17H21Cl15 757.5 70.3

C15H28Cl4 350.0 40.6 C16H21Cl13 674.5 68.4 C17H19Cl17 826.5 73.0

Commercial products are complex mixtures of isomers and standard analytical methods do not 

permit separation and identification of these. Work by Könnecke and Hahn (1962) provides a 

basis for estimating the distribution of the chlorine contents present in a given product (although 

this work was actually carried out with C26 chlorinates, it is thought that similar distributions will 

apply to all chlorinated paraffins). This work gives a prediction of approximately 80% of the 

isomers present lying within ±10% of the stated average chlorine content and 90% within ±15%. 

Thus in a medium-chain 50% wt. Cl product, there is likely to be only around 5% of mono- and 

dichloro isomers present (with a corresponding low percentage of highly chlorinated material) 

(ICI, 1995). 

Any impurities present in the commercial chlorinated paraffins are likely to be related to those

present in the n-paraffin feedstock, in which the major non-paraffinic impurity is a small

proportion of aromatics (generally in the range 50-100 ppm (mg/kg)). However, there is some

evidence that the chlorination reaction does not favour chlorination of aromatics. No specific 

analytical methods are currently available for the detection of possible impurities present in the 

commercial products (ICI, 1995). 

10 
R331_0208_env

The levels of chlorinated paraffins of chain lengths other than C14-17 present in the current 

commercial products are <1%. The producers of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

(represented by Euro Chlor) have, since 1991, used paraffin feedstocks in the production process 

with a C10-13 content of <1% (the actual levels are often much lower than this), and a 

>C18 content of <1% (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

1.2.2 Additives 

It is known that additives/stabilisers such as long-chain epoxidised soya oil or glycidyl ether are 

added to some chlorinated paraffins to inhibit the release of hydrogen chloride at elevated 

temperatures. These are used at concentrations of <1% by weight. For some high thermal

stability formulations other additives, e.g. organophosphorus compounds, have been reported to 

be used in conjunction with these (BUA, 1992). 

1.2.3 Medium-chain impurities present in other chlorinated paraffin products 

It has recently been reported that some long-chain chlorinated paraffins based on a C18-20 carbon 

chain length may contain a substantial proportion of C17 chlorinated paraffins, with only very 

small amounts of chlorinated paraffins of shorter chain lengths (EA, 2001). The typical levels

reported were 17% C17 and <1% C16, although the range of the C17 impurity was given as 

10-20%. The amounts of chlorinated paraffins with carbon chain lengths of C15 or lower present 

in the C18-20 liquid products would be negligibly small. 

These impurities are considered later in the regional exposure estimates for C14-17 chlorinated

paraffins, and the risk characterisation. 

1.3 PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

The physico-chemical properties of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are discussed below and 

summarised in Table 1.2. 

Since the products produced contain many components, the physico-chemical properties of the 

various products can vary, reflecting the different components of the products. Representative 

values have therefore been selected for the key parameters used for environmental modelling. 

The effect of the variation of these properties on the risk characterisation is analysed in 

Appendix H. 

11 
R331_0208_env

Table 1.2Physico-chemical properties of some medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

Property Chlorine content (% wt) Value Remarks 

Physical state (at ntp) 40-63 liquid 

Pour point -45oC to 25oC commercial mixtures - no distinct 

melting point 

Boiling point (at ntp) >200oC decomposition with release of HCl 

Density 41 1.095 g/cm3 at 20oC

56 1.315 g/cm3 at 20oC

40-58 1.1-1.38 g/cm3 at 25oC

56 1.28-1.31 g/cm3 at 60oC

2.27×10-3 Pa at 40 45 oC 

0.16 Pa at 80oC 

1.3×10-4-2.7×10-4 Pa at 20oC 

1.07×10-3 Pa at 45oC 

6.0×10-3 Pa at 60oC 

Vapour pressure

52 

0.051 Pa at 80oC 

a value of 2.7×10-4 Pa at 20oC is 

used in the Environmental 

Assessment 

Water solubility 51 0.005-0.027 mg/l a value of 0.027 mg/l is used in the 

Environmental Assessment 

Log octanol-water partition 45 5.52-8.21

coefficient 

52 5.47-8.01

measured by a high performance 

thin layer chromatography method; a 

value of 7 is used in the 

Environmental Assessment 

Flash point >40 >210oC closed cup

Autoflammability not stated

Explosivity not applicable

Oxidising properties none 

Note: ntp = Normal temperature and pressure. 

1.3.1 Physical state (at ntp) 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are liquids at room temperature. 

1.3.2 Melting point 

Commercial medium-chain chlorinated paraffins do not have a distinct melting point. Pour 

points in the range -40o

C to -7oC and -45oC to 0oC have been reported for these materials in 

IUCLID. BUA (1992) reports a similar pour point range of -50o

C to 0oC. It has been reported 

that a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin with a very high chlorine content (62-63% wt. Cl) has a

pour point of around 25o

C (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

12 
R331_0208_env

1.3.3 Boiling point 

The exact boiling point of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is unknown as they start to

decompose (with liberation of hydrogen chloride) at temperatures of around 200o

C. The boiling 

point can therefore be considered to be >200o

C. 

1.3.4 Relative density 

The density varies with chlorine content of the product. Values reported in IUCLID include 

1.095 g/cm3

 for 41% wt. Cl product and 1.315 g/cm3 for 56% wt. Cl product at 20oC, 

1.1-1.38 g/cm3

 at 25oC for products with chlorine contents in the range 40-58% wt. Cl and 

1.275-1.305 g/cm3

 at 60oC for a 56% wt. Cl product. 

Kirk-Othmer (1993) gives the following similar values for the density of C14-17 chlorinated

paraffins at 25o

C: 1.10 g/cm3 for a 40% wt. Cl product; 1.16 g/cm3 for a 45% wt. Cl product; 

1.25 g/cm3

 for a 52% wt. Cl product; and 1.36 g/cm3 for a 58% wt. Cl product. 

1.3.5 Vapour pressure 

A vapour pressure of 2.27×10-5 hPa (2.27×10-3 Pa) at 40oC has been reported in IUCLID for 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with a chlorine content of 45% wt. Cl. A vapour pressure of 

0.16 Pa has been reported for a similar chlorinated paraffin at 80o

C (BUA, 1992). 

The vapour pressure of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product has been reported as 1×10-6-2×10-6 mmHg

(1.3×10-4-2.7×10-4 Pa) at 20o

C by Campbell and McConnell (1980). Vapour pressures for a 

C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product at elevated temperatures have been reported as 1.07 ×10-3 Pa at 45o

C, 

6×10-3 Pa at 60o

C and 0.051 Pa at 80oC (BUA, 1992). 

It has been reported that the volatility of chlorinated paraffins in general decreases with

increasing chlorine content (Kirk-Othmer, 1993), and this is borne out by the above figures. 

Recently, Drouillard et al. (1998) determined the vapour pressures of a series of short-chain

(C10-13) chlorinated paraffins at 25o

C using a vapour pressure - gas-liquid chromatography 

technique. They found that vapour pressures of the short-chain chlorinated paraffins decreased 

with both increasing carbon chain length and degree of chlorination. They derived the following 

equation relating vapour pressure (in Pa at 25o

C) to the number of carbon and chlorine atoms

present in a molecule: 

 

log (vapour pressure) = -(0.353×no. of C atoms) - (0.645×no. of Cl atoms) + 4.462 

Using this equation vapour pressures for all possible medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

congeners can be estimated. This is shown in Appendix B for all possible combinations of 

carbon and chlorine numbers. It should be noted that the reliability of this equation for the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is unknown, however the values estimated for C14-17, 

~51-53% Cl chlorinated paraffins are in the region of 5×10-5 Pa for C14, 2×10-5 Pa for C15, 

2×10-6 Pa for C16 and 9×10-7 Pa for C17, which agrees reasonably well with the measured data

13 
R331_0208_env

above, particularly as the measurements on the commercial mixture will be dominated by the 

more volatile components (shorter chain length, lower chlorinated components). 

For the environmental assessment, the vapour pressure of 2.7×10-4 Pa at 20o

C measured by

Campbell and McConnell (1980) will be used as a representative value for a commercial 

product. The vapour pressures of individual isomers are likely to cover a large range of values, 

being dependent on the carbon chain length and number of chlorine atoms present. 

1.3.6 Water solubility 

The water solubility of a 14C-labelled chlorinated n-pentadecane (51% wt. Cl) has been 

determined to be 0.005 mg/l by parent compound measurement and 0.027 mg/l by 14C analysis

after 6 months at 20o

C. The test substance was prepared by mixing n-pentadecane-8-14C with 

unlabelled C14-17 paraffin prior to chlorination to 51% wt. Cl. Approximately 50 mg of the test 

substance was weighed out onto a glass microscope slide and this was then placed in 5 litres of 

water. The test was carried out by stirring the chlorinated paraffin in water for 91 days and then 

allowing the solution to settle (no stirring) for a further 87 days to ensure that equilibrium was

reached. Light was excluded from the test solution. The authors suggested that the discrepancy 

between the water solubility obtained by the two methods may indicate that some degradation 

had occurred during the test (Madeley et al., 1983a). However, this discrepancy could also, in 

part, be due to the different analytical methods used. Given that the substance tested is a complex 

mixture, the solubility values obtained by the different methods are in reasonable agreement. 

Campbell and McConnell (1980) reported the solubility at 16-20o

C of a C16, 52% wt. Cl 

chlorinated paraffin to be 10 μg/l in freshwater and 4 μg/l in seawater, based on radioactivity 

measurements. Few other details are available about the method used, but the results obtained are 

comparable with those reported by (Madeley et al., 1983a) above. 

A water solubility value of 0.027 mg/l will be used in the assessment. It is likely that the water 

solubility will vary with both carbon chain length and degree of chlorination. 

1.3.7 Partition coefficient 

Calculated values for log Kow between 5.5 and >6 are reported in IUCLID for medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins. 

Log Kow values of 6.95 for C14H26Cl4 (42.2% wt. Cl), 6.37 for C14H23Cl7 (56.5% wt. Cl), 8.54 

for C17H32Cl4 (37.5% wt. Cl) and 7.94 for C17H27Cl9 (58.0% wt. Cl) have been calculated using 

the CLOGP 3.4 computer program (BUA, 1992). 

Renberg et al. (1980) determined the octanol-water partition coefficients for medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins using a high performance thin layer chromatography (HPTLC) method. The

partition coefficients determined (log values) were 5.52-8.21 for a C14-17, 45% wt. Cl product and 

5.47-8.01 for a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product. The range quoted reflects the different HPTLC 

retention times, and hence octanol-water partition coefficients, of the various components of the 

14 
R331_0208_env

commercial products. These measured values are in good agreement with the values estimated 

above. 

Fisk et al. (1998b) determined the octanol-water partition coefficients of two 14C-labelled 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins of single carbon chain length (C16). The two compounds

used were C16H21.7Cl3.3, 35% wt. Cl and C16H20.6Cl13.4, 69% wt. Cl. The mean log Kow values 

determined by a HPLC method were reported to be 7.2 for the 35% wt. Cl substance (range of 

log Kow was 4.7-6.6, 6.6-7.8, 7.8-8.0 and 8.0-8.3 for the four main components of this 

substance) and 7.4 for the 69% wt. Cl substance (range of log Kow was 6.9-7.8). These are 

consistent with the other values determined above. 

For the environmental assessment, a log Kow value of 7 (approximately the middle of the range 

of measured values) will be used as a representative value. 

1.3.8 Flash point 

A flash point of >210o

C (closed cup) is reported in IUCLID for a C14-17, >40% wt. Cl product. 

1.3.9 Autoflammability 

Decomposition starts to occur above 200o

C with liberation of hydrogen chloride. 

1.3.10 Explosivity 

On the basis of chemical structure the substance is not explosive. 

1.3.11 Oxidising properties 

On the basis of chemical structure the substance has no oxidising properties. 

1.4 CLASSIFICATION 

1.4.1 Current classification 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are currently not classified with respect to their effects on

human health or the environment. 

1.4.2 Proposal of rapporteur 

1.4.2.1 Environment 

Based on the toxicity seen with daphnids and the lack of biodegradability in standard test 

systems, the following classification is proposed for environmental effects: 

 

15 
R331_0208_env

N – Dangerous for the environment 

R50/53 – Very toxic to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the 

aquatic environment. 

This proposal is based on the acute toxicity seen with Daphnia magna (48-hour EC50

= 0.0059 mg/l), a high fish bioconcentration factor of 1,087 and the lack of degradation expected 

in standard ready biodegradation tests. 

1.4.2.2 Human health 

To be added. 

16 
R331_0208_env

2 GENERAL INFORMATION ON EXPOSURE 

2.1 PRODUCTION 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are currently manufactured at five sites in the EU. The 

current total production capacity as reported in IUCLID is in the range 

45,000-160,000 tonnes/year. 

Chlorinated paraffins are manufactured by adding chlorine gas into the starting paraffin in a

stirred reactor. Depending on the chain length of the paraffin feedstock, the temperature of the 

reaction is maintained between 80 and 100o

C, with cooling if necessary. Catalysts are not usually 

needed for the reaction to proceed, but ultraviolet light may be used to aid the reaction. Once the 

desired degree of chlorination has been reached (as determined by density, viscosity or refractive 

index measurements), the flow of chlorine gas into the reaction is stopped. Air or nitrogen is then 

used to purge the reactor of excess chlorine and hydrochloric acid gas and small quantities of a 

stabiliser (e.g. epoxidised vegetable oil) may be added to the product. The product is then 

typically filtered and piped to batch storage tanks for filling drums, tankers or bulk storage tanks. 

The main by-product from the process is hydrogen chloride gas. This is collected by absorption 

in water and re-used as hydrochloric acid (BUA, 1992). 

2.2 USES 

The main uses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are as secondary plasticisers in polyvinyl 

chloride (PVC), as extreme pressure additives in metal working fluids, as plasticisers in paints, 

as additives to adhesives and sealants, in fat liquors used in leather processing and as flame

retardant plasticisers in rubbers and other polymeric materials. 

Estimates for the amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in the various applications 

within the EU are given in Table 2.1 (Euro Chlor, 1998). 

Figures have been provided for the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU in 1998 

(Euro Chlor, 1999). These were provided in a slightly different form to those in Table 2.1 but

indicate that the overall use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins during 1998 had fallen from 

the 1997 level to a similar level as in 1994. The reduction in use of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins compared with 1997 was generally spread over all the uses, with the exception of metal 

cutting working/cutting fluids, which showed a small increase in use, and paints, sealants and 

adhesives, which remained approximately at the 1997 level. The 1997 consumption figures are

used in the environmental assessment to represent a realistic worst case for the amounts used in 

the various applications. 

In a previous assessment of the short-chain (C10-13) chlorinated paraffins, risk reduction measures 

were identified for use in metal cutting/working fluids and leather fat liquors. The medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins have similar uses, and can be considered as replacements for the

short-chain chlorinated paraffins in some of these applications. Any reduction in use of the 

short-chain chlorinated paraffins in these areas could lead to an increased use of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins as a replacement. The effect of such substitutions on the amounts of 

17 
R331_0208_env

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins likely to be used in the future as a result of risk reduction

measures applied to the short-chain chlorinated paraffins is currently unknown, although an 

increasing trend in use in metal working/cutting fluids is evident from Table 2.1. Appendix E

considers this issue further. 

 

Table 2.1Use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU 

Application Industry category Use category Quantity used (tonnes/year) 

(Percentage of total use given in brackets) 

1994 1995 1996 1997

PVC 11 (polymers industry) 47 (softeners) or 22 

(flame retardant and fire 

preventing agents) 

45,476 

(80.2%) 

48,640 

(82.9%) 

49,240 

(83.0%) 

51,827 

(79.4%) 

Metal working/ 

cutting 

8 (metal extraction, refining 

and processing industry 

35 (lubricants and 

additives) 

2,611 

(4.6%) 

2,765 

(4.7%) 

3,302 

(5.6%) 

5,953 

(9.1%) 

Paints, adhesives

and sealants* 

14 (paints, lacquers and 

varnishes industry) and 15 

(others) 

47 (softeners) or 22 

(flame retardant and fire 

preventing agents) 

3,079 

(5.4%) 

2,392 

(4.1%) 

2,638 

(4.4%) 

3,541 

(5.4%) 

Rubber/polymers

(other than PVC)

11 (polymers industry) 47 (softener) or 22 (flame 

retardant and fire

preventing agents) 

2,497 

(4.4%) 

2,767 

(4.7%) 

2,324 

(3.9%) 

2,146 

(3.3%) 

Leather fat liquors 7 (leather processing 

industry) 

47 (softeners) or 31 

(impregnation agents) 

1,614 

(2.8%) 

1,270 

(2.2%) 

1,172 

(2.0%) 

1,048 

(1.6%) 

Carbonless copy 

paper 

12 (pulp, paper and board 

industry) 

48 (solvent) 1,296 

(2.3%) 

837 

(1.4%) 

630 

(1.1%) 

741 

(1.1%) 

Total 56,673 58,671 59,306 65,256

Note: *Approximate split is 2/3 used in sealants and 1/3 used in paints (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

It is thought that around 50% of the leather fat liquor formulations produced in the EU are 

exported for use outside the EU (Euro Chlor, 1998). 

For use in PVC and other polymers, it is possible that pellets (masterbatch) containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins could be manufactured outside the EU and then imported 

into the EU for further processing to give the final product. Similarly, such pellets could be 

manufactured within the EU and exported for subsequent processing. A similar situation may

also exist with finished products containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The actual 

amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins imported into and exported out of the EU in this 

way are very difficult to estimate. For the purpose of this assessment it will be assumed that net 

import into the EU of these products will be small compared with the amount presented in

Table 2.1. 

Some information is available on the amounts of total PVC (flexible and rigid) manufactured and 

imported into the EU (ECVM, 2000) that is useful in this issue. The total Western European 

market for PVC was estimated to be 5,594,000 tonnes/year in 1997, compared to the total 

amount of PVC produced in Western Europe of 5,528,000 tonnes/year in the same year. This 

gives a net import of PVC into the EU of around 66,000 tonnes/year, or 1.2% of the total 

18 
R331_0208_env

produced. This indicates that the net import of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins into the EU in

PVC or masterbatch is likely to be small compared to the amounts produced in the EU presented 

in Table 2.1. 

In Sweden, the use of all chlorinated paraffins in metal working fluid has been reduced by 80% 

overall (a 95% reduction in water-oil emulsions (i.e. 160 tonnes in 1986 and 8.5 tonnes in 1993) 

and a 75% reduction in straight oil based cutting fluids (i.e. 520 tonnes in 1986 and 130 tonnes in 

1993)) between 1986 and 1993, and is expected to reduce further (Stenhammar and Björndal, 

1994). More than 80% of the chlorinated paraffins used in emulsion cutting fluids and at least 

20% of the chlorinated paraffins used in straight oil applications were reported to be C10-13

chlorinated paraffins (the remainder would include the C14-17 chlorinated paraffins). 

Further information on the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has been obtained from the

Danish product register. In the register, 28 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

were reported in a total of 42 products. The product types identified included fillers/sealants 

(typically 10-20% chlorinated paraffin content), cutting fluids, process regulators (e.g. hardeners) 

and paints, lacquers and varnishes (typically 1-5% chlorinated paraffin content). Most products 

contained medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in the range 10-20% by weight of the formulation. 

Information has been provided on the breakdown of use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

by country (Euro Chlor, 1999). This information is considered confidential but did indicate that 

the main user countries are Italy and the United Kingdom, with use in the United Kingdom 

accounting for just over 25% of the total EU use. The use pattern in the main user countries was

broadly in line with that outlined in Table 2.1. 

2.2.1 Use as a plasticiser 

2.2.1.1 PVC 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used as secondary plasticisers mainly in PVC. The

primary plasticisers used are generally phthalates or phosphate esters (Kirk-Othmer, 1993). The 

phosphate esters are normally used only when flame retardant benefits are needed (Euro Chlor, 

1999). The medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may also be used in some other plastics, but here 

the major function is likely to be as a flame retardant rather than as a plasticiser (see 

Section 2.2.2.2). 

Primary plasticisers in PVC are used to increase the elongation properties and softness of the 

polymer. Secondary plasticisers, when used in combination with primary plasticisers, cause an 

enhancement of the plasticising effects and so are also known as extenders. The majority of 

secondary plasticisers used in PVC applications are medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with

chlorine contents around 45% wt. Cl or 50-52% wt. Cl, with only very small amounts (<1% of 

total sales) of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with higher (e.g. 56-58% wt. Cl) or lower (e.g.

~40% wt. Cl) chlorine contents being used in PVC (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

There are two main types of PVC produced e.g. suspension and paste-forming (emulsion) PVC, 

and the methods for incorporation of plasticisers in the two types are different. World-wide 

19 
R331_0208_env

approximately 70% of PVC resin is suspension, with 20% emulsion and small amounts of bulk 

(9% of total resin production; produces irregular particles with little or no impurities) and 

solution (1% of total resin production; used to make specialised resins for metal coatings, record 

manufacture, powder coatings and surface coatings) (Rubin, 1990). 

Polymers of suspension PVC (also known as pearl, bead or granular) are produced by 

suspending vinyl chloride monomer in water and carrying out the polymerisation using a 

monomer-soluble initiator. This results in the PVC particles formed having a relatively large 

particle size (e.g. 100-150 μm). These particles are highly porous and so can absorb large 

amounts of plasticiser. The PVC particles are typically processed using a dry-blend cycle. In this

cycle, all the polymer formulation ingredients, including plasticisers, are heated to around 

70-110o

C and mixed to form a dry powder product. This can be either stored or further processed 

immediately. Processing of the dry powder can take the form of extrusion, injection moulding or 

calendering. The powder can also be extruded and chipped to form pellets of PVC compound 

which can subsequently be further processed to give the final product. Many producers of PVC 

products purchase PVC compound as it is easy to store and similarly many companies exist that 

produce PVC compound (Kirk-Othmer, 1996). 

Paste-forming (plastisol) PVC polymers are produced as a paste or plastisol rather than a dry

powder (a plastisol is a suspension of a solid in a liquid in which it does not dissolve, but does 

form an homogenous mixture at elevated temperatures; the term organosol is used for a plastisol 

that contains more than 10 parts of a solvent per 100 parts of resin (Rubin, 1990)). 

Microsuspension polymerisation or emulsion polymerisation is usually used to form the PVC for

these applications. Both these processes result in the formation of PVC particles with a much 

smaller particle size than produced by suspension polymerisation processes. The small particle 

size means that the initial product has low porosity and so formulation with additives (e.g. 

plasticisers) is not possible using a dry-blending cycle, and instead a paste is formed. This paste 

or plastisol can then be spread, coated, rotationally cast or sprayed onto the desired item, or may 

be semi-gelled for storage (i.e. heat is applied to convert it into a semi-solid form). A wide range 

of plasticisers are used in these applications as the choice affects the viscosity of the plastisol,

which is important in the further processing steps, and it is common for 2 or 3 different

plasticisers to be used in a single formulation to achieve the desired final properties 

(Kirk-Othmer, 1996). 

During the formation of finished products, the PVC formulation may be exposed to temperatures 

of 180o

C for up to several minutes. In some processes, for example sheet and film production by 

calendering or spread coating there is the potential for volatilisation of the plasticiser as the hot 

plastic is exposed to the surrounding air. Processes involving injection moulding and extrusion 

are carried out in closed equipment and so little exposure of the hot product to air occurs and so 

the potential for volatilisation of the plasticiser is reduced. In some facilities filtering or

incineration of the exhaust gas is used to reduce the air emissions from the process. It has been 

reported that concentrations of primary plasticiser (e.g. di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)) are 

typically 500 mg/m3

 in air extracted from spread coating ovens, which can be reduced to 

<20 mg/m3 by the use of filtration equipment, with exhaust air incineration reducing the

emission to practically zero (Kirk-Othmer, 1996). It has been reported (Kirk-Othmer, 1996) that 

the use of filters and/or incinerators in calendering and spread coating plants has been steadily

20 
R331_0208_env

increasing in recent years. Figures for 1990 are shown in Table 2.2. The figures refer to the 

percentage of the total phthalate plasticiser processed in each application. Of the processes listed 

in Table 2.2, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used mainly in spread coating (e.g. for wall 

coverings and PVC “leather cloth”) and calendered flooring. 

Table 2.2Exhaust air treatment in Western Europe by process in 1990 (Kirk-Othmer, 1996) 

Process Amount of phthalate plasticiser used 

in process (tonnes/year) 

Percentage of phthalate use undergoing 

exhaust air treatment 

Filter treatment Incineration

Spread coating 192,000 53% 22% 

Slush, dip and rotational moulding 17,000 26% 6% 

Automotive underseal 67,000 100% 

Calendered sheet and film 138,000 23% 25% 

Calendered flooring 31,000 15% 56% 

The majority of flexible PVC is thought to be used in applications such as flooring, wall 

covering, upholstery, and sheaths for wire and cable. 

The properties and compatibility of the chlorinated paraffin with both PVC and the primary 

plasticiser vary with both the carbon chain length and the degree of chlorination. Generally, as 

the chain length of the chlorinated paraffin is increased, its volatility decreases and so the 

potential for migration from the finished PVC is reduced. At the same time, however, the 

compatibility with PVC and the primary plasticiser is reduced. On the other hand, the

compatibility of chlorinated paraffins with PVC and the primary plasticiser increases with

increasing chlorination, and so the potential for migration is reduced, but the flexibility of the 

final product is also reduced. As a result of these properties, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

with varying degrees of chlorination are used in most applications (BUA, 1992). 

For soft PVC products that require a high flexibility at normal and low temperatures, 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with chlorine contents around 40-45% wt. Cl are used as 

secondary plasticiser. Examples of applications for this type of PVC include coatings, some

types of flooring, garden hose and shoe compounds. The secondary plasticiser is added at 

10-15% by weight of the total plastic (BUA, 1992; Euro Chlor, 1999). 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with higher degrees of chlorination (typically around 

50-52% wt. Cl) are more compatible with PVC and have a lower volatility than lower

chlorinated analogues. They are used as secondary plasticisers in calendered flooring, cable 

sheathing and insulation and in general purpose PVC compounds. In heavily filled products, 

such as some types of calendered flooring, they can be used as the sole plasticiser at levels of 

around 10% in the finished product (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

The more highly chlorinated medium-chain paraffins (e.g. 56-58% wt. Cl) are less volatile still

and are used for softening plastics that are subject to higher temperatures during processing

(BUA, 1992). 

21 
R331_0208_env

2.2.1.2 Paints and varnishes 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, with chlorine contents around 50-60% wt. Cl are used as 

plasticisers in some paints, varnishes and other coatings. The main areas of application appear to 

be in corrosion or weather resistant coatings/paints for steel constructions, ships, industrial 

flooring, containers, swimming pools, facades and road markings (BUA, 1992). 

The medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be used as plasticisers in paints based on many

resins, but are most commonly used in chlorinated rubber or vinyl copolymer-based paints. The 

chlorinated rubber-based paints are used in aggressive marine and industrial environments 

whereas the vinyl copolymer-based paints are used principally for the protection of exterior 

masonry. 

A survey of the use of chlorinated paraffins in paints and coatings in the United Kingdom has

been carried out (BCF, 1999). A total of 141 companies were contacted and initial responses 

were obtained from 106 of these. Of the companies responding, 22 (~21%) indicated that they 

used medium-chain chlorinated paraffins or other chlorinated paraffins. More detailed 

information on the use of chlorinated paraffins was obtained from 12 (~55%) of the

22 companies. The chlorine content of the chlorinated paraffins used range from around 

40% wt. Cl to 70% wt. Cl (with the 70% wt. Cl substances being long-chain length 

(≥C18 products)). The types of paint/coating and the typical chlorinated paraffin contents are 

shown in Table 2.3. 

Table 2.3Chlorinated paraffin content of paints (BCF, 1999) 

Coating type Chlorinated paraffin content 

(% by weight) 

Organic solvent borne chlorinated rubber primers and topcoats 1-5 

Organic solvent borne chlorinated rubber systems for swimming 

pools/fishponds 

5-20 

Organic solvent borne zinc rich (epoxy) primers 2-5 

Organic solvent borne acrylic container coatings 2-10 

Organic solvent borne chemical and water resistant coatings 5-20 

Organic solvent borne vacuum metallising lacquers 1-5 

Organic solvent borne flame retardant coating for wood 1-5 

Organic solvent borne intumescent coating for structural steel 20-30 

Organic solvent borne floor paints 5-10 

Organic solvent borne water-proofing coatings for walls 5 

Euro Chlor (1999) reported that the typical level of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in the 

formulated paint would be 4-15% by weight. After drying (evaporation of solvent) the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content of the coating would be around 5-20% by weight. 

22 
R331_0208_env

In tonnage terms, the amount of chlorinated paraffins used in the United Kingdom in 

paints/coatings appears to be small, with a total of up to around 34 tonnes/year being identified 

in the BCF survey (it is not possible to extrapolate this figure to give the total United Kingdom 

or EU usage). Further, it was found that paints containing chlorinated paraffins make up only a 

very small proportion of the total paint manufactured at a site (typically <1-2% of the total, up to 

5% in some cases). The total number of sites in the United Kingdom manufacturing paints and 

coatings containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is estimated at around 30 (BCF, 1999). 

The BCF (1999) survey also tried to identify the number of sites where coatings containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins might be used in the United Kingdom, but this did not prove

to be possible. The major users of the paints are professional painters and specialist applicators, 

but some DIY paints containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may be used by the general 

public. In the United Kingdom, it was estimated that there would be around 40,000 users of 

coatings containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins for water proofing of walls, with around 

1,000-1,500 users of paints and coatings for other uses. 

2.2.1.3 Adhesives/sealants 

Chlorinated paraffins, including medium-chain ones, are used as plasticisers/flame retardants in

adhesives and sealants. Examples include polysulphide, polyurethane, acrylic and butyl sealants 

used in building and construction and in sealants for double and triple glazed windows. The

chlorinated paraffins are typically added at amounts of 10-14% wt. of the final sealant but could 

be added at amounts up to 20% wt. of the final sealant in exceptional cases. The medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins used in these applications generally have a chlorine content of 

50-58% wt. Cl (BUA, 1992; Euro Chlor, 1999). 

The difference between an adhesive and sealant can be fairly blurred in that some sealants are

used as adhesives and vice versa. Generally, sealants are considered to be materials that are 

installed into a gap or joint to prevent water, wind, dirt or other contaminants from passing 

through the joint or crack. Adhesives, on the other hand, are used to transfer loads and are 

typically designed with much higher tensile and shear strength than sealants (Palmer and 

Klosowski, 1997). The main use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in this area is in sealants. 

2.2.2 Use as a flame retardant plasticiser 

Chlorinated paraffins are used as flame retardant additives in some applications. However, when 

used primarily as a flame retardant, chlorinated paraffins with a high chlorine content (e.g. 

70% wt. Cl) are used. As medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are not produced with these high 

chlorine contents, they are not considered primarily as flame retardants. However, some 

applications make use of both their plasticising and flame retardant properties. 

2.2.2.1 Rubber 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used as softener (or process oil) additives with flame 

retardant properties for rubber. The chlorinated paraffins used generally have a high chlorine 

23 
R331_0208_env

content and are present at up to 15% wt. of the total rubber. The rubber is used in conveyor belts 

and also in building and automotive applications (BUA, 1992). 

2.2.2.2 Plastics 

As well as acting as (secondary) plasticisers in PVC and plastics, chlorinated paraffins also act as 

flame retardants in these materials. When used as a plasticiser, the chlorinated paraffin with

moderate chlorine contents (e.g. >50% wt. Cl) will reduce to some extent the flammability of the 

final product, but when used specifically as a flame retardant, chlorinated paraffins with a high 

degree of chlorination (e.g. >C20 70-72% wt. Cl) are used, along with a synergist e.g. antimony 

trioxide. When used as a flame retardant additive, up to around 5% wt. for PVC and up to 15% 

wt. for polystyrene and unsaturated polyester resins of the chlorinated paraffin may be added 

(BUA, 1992; Euro Chlor, 1999). 

There are no medium-chain chlorinated paraffins available with 70-72% wt. Cl. contents and so 

they are not considered as specific flame retardant additives in plastics. The medium-chain

chlorinated paraffins are generally used as flame retardant plasticisers (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

2.2.2.3 Adhesives/sealants 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used as flame retardant additives in some sealants. They 

also act as plasticisers and so have a dual function and no distinction is made between the two

functions in this report as the amount (and types) of chlorinated paraffin used in a given sealant 

is similar regardless of whether the primary function is as a plasticiser or as a flame retardant 

(chlorinated paraffins with higher chlorine contents may be more effective as flame retardants). 

2.2.3 Extreme pressure additive (Metal cutting/working fluids) 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in a wide variety of cooling and lubricating fluids 

used during metal cutting, grinding and forming operations. The two main types of lubricants 

used are water-based emulsions, whose function is mainly cooling, and oil-based lubricants. The 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used generally have a chlorine content of between 40 and 

55% wt. Cl. The amount of chlorinated paraffin present in a given fluid depends on the final 

application (BUA, 1992). 

For oil-based fluids the chlorinated paraffin content of the fluid ranges from about 5% wt. for 

light machining to up to 70% wt. for heavy drawing processes (metal forming fluids) (BUA, 

1992). 

The market for metal forming fluids in the United Kingdom is around 500 tonnes/year. These 

contain up to 70% by weight of chlorinated paraffin, but the average content is around 50% by 

weight. (Euro Chlor, 1998). The chlorinated paraffin used in these applications is likely to be

short-chain (C10-13), for which no suitable alternative appears to be currently available.

The amount of chlorinated paraffin present in the water-based cooling lubricant concentrate is up 

to 4% as chlorine (i.e. up to around 8% as chlorinated paraffin). This is diluted with water to give 

24 
R331_0208_env

a 3-5% aqueous emulsion that is used in grinding, rough machining and sawing applications 

(BUA, 1992). Thus the concentration of chlorinated paraffin in the final water-based fluid is 

around 0.2-0.4% wt. 

2.2.4 Fat liquors (for leather) 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in fat liquors for leather. They are used in 

conjunction with sulphated or sulphonated oils (Kirk-Othmer, 1993), chlorosulphonated 

paraffins, natural fats and oils (Euro Chlor, 1998). Typically, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

with a relatively low chlorine content (e.g. 40% wt. Cl) are used in these applications. 

In general the chlorinated paraffins are used in leathers for the top end of the quality range and 

give the following advantages (Euro Chlor, 1998): 

High light-fastness 

Strong binding to the leather compared to other additives (low migration)

Dry feel surface finish with excellent suppleness. 

The formulation of leather fat liquors is by a simple mixing process using an enclosed system at 

ambient temperature. The main components of the fat liquor are water, natural fats (e.g. fish 

oils), surfactants and the chlorinated paraffin. The chlorinated paraffin accounts for about 10% 

(range 5-15%) by weight of the formulated fat liquor. 

The fat liquor is applied to the leather as a diluted solution. The fat liquoring step is the last stage 

of leather preparation. The amount of fat liquor used in this step is around 7-12%, based on the 

shaved weight of the leather to be treated (i.e. around 70-120 g of fat liquor/kg of leather). Since 

the fat liquor typically contains around 10% (range 5-15%) chlorinated paraffin, the amount of 

chlorinated paraffin used in this step is around 7-12 g chlorinated paraffin/kg leather (range

3.5-18 g chlorinated paraffin/kg leather). The process itself takes place in enclosed rotating 

drums at temperatures in the region of 40-60o

C, with each batch taking around 1-4 hours 

depending on the end-product being produced. The pH of the reaction is carefully controlled 

throughout the process by the addition of formic acid to the emulsion (pH is changed from 

around 5.5 at the start to 3.6 at the end of the process). The pH is used to affect the nature of the 

leather surface, the rate of absorption of the fat liquor and the stability of the emulsion. The high

binding efficiency of the leather for the chlorinated paraffin means that the relative composition 

of the additives in the fat liquor solution change with time during the process. It is believed that 

not more than 2% of the original amount of chlorinated paraffin is present in the spent fat liquor

solution at the end of the process (Industry estimate based on experience of the process (Euro 

Chlor, 1998)). 

2.2.5 Carbonless copy paper 

Another use that has been reported for chlorinated paraffins in general is as a solvent used in 

carbonless copy paper (BUA, 1992). The European consumption of carbonless copy paper was

around 710,000 tonnes/year in 1996, but was predicted to fall to around 660,000 tonnes/year by 

1998. Only a small proportion of this paper will contain medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The 

25 
R331_0208_env

most common applications for carbonless copy paper include delivery dockets, credit card slips 

and business forms 

Carbonless copy paper consists of at least 2 sheets of paper. It is produced by coating the back 

side of the top piece of paper with gelatine (or synthetic polymer) capsules containing a colour 

former in a solvent. Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be used as the solvent in some 

applications. Binders, such as modified starch, polyvinyl alcohols, acrylates or carboxylated 

styrene-butadiene rubber latices, are used to attach the gelatine capsules to the paper. The upper 

surface of the bottom sheet is coated with reactive montmorillonite clay. For copy paper with 

three or more sheets, the middle sheets would be coated with the reactive clay on the upper 

surface and the gelatine capsules on the lower surface. Writing pressure results in breakage of the 

gelatine capsule which releases the colour former. This then reacts with the clay to form the 

colour on the surface of the lower sheet. 

The majority of European manufacturers of carbonless copy paper are members of the

Association of European Manufacturers of Carbonless Paper (AEMCP). Around 1992, all 

members of the AEMCP agreed to stop using chlorinated paraffins in the production of 

carbonless copy paper, and this agreement still remains in force today. Members of the AEMCP 

account for around 95% of the carbonless copy paper that is used in Europe. 

Based on the figures reported, the amount of carbonless copy paper containing medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in the EU is at most 5% of the 660,000 tonnes/year i.e. 33,000 tonnes/year. 

This assumes that the 5% of companies not covered by the AEMCP agreement use 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in all the carbonless copy paper that they produce, which 

would appear to be unlikely. 

2.3 EXISTING CONTROL MEASURES 

In Germany, chlorinated paraffin-containing wastes, e.g. metal working fluids with 

>2 g halogen/kg and halogen-containing plasticisers, are classified as potentially hazardous

waste and are incinerated (BUA, 1992). 

2.4 NATURAL SOURCES 

It is impossible to say categorically that naturally occurring chlorinated paraffins do not exist. A 

large number of organohalogen compounds are known to be produced naturally in the 

environment (especially in the marine environment, where there is an abundance of chlorine and 

bromine), and a comprehensive review of these has been published (Gribble, 1996). This study 

reported around 2,570 naturally occurring organohalogen compounds (detected up to mid-1994). 

A number of naturally occurring compounds with straight carbon chains in the C14 to C20 range 

were identified in this study, but none were paraffinic, and all contained one or more functional 

groups such as acid (COOH) or ester (COOR) groups, and none contained more than one

halogen atom. Therefore although there is a possibility of natural formation, there is currently no 

evidence of any significant natural source of the medium chain chlorinated paraffins currently in 

commercial production. 

26 
R331_0208_env

3 ENVIRONMENT 

3.1 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

3.1.0 General discussion 

In this assessment, releases to the environment are considered in various scenarios. The

background to these is explained more fully in the Technical Guidance Document. The local

environment is considered to be the environment near to a site of release (e.g. a production, 

formulation or processing site). The regional environment is taken to represent a highly 

industrialised area (the size is 200 km × 200 km, with 20 million inhabitants) and it is assumed 

that 10% of the total EU production and use takes place in this area. The continental environment 

is the size of the EU and is generally used to obtain “background” concentrations of the 

substance. 

In the following Sections, releases to the environment have been estimated using both the default

emission factors given in Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document and industry-specific 

information where available. The industry-specific information is used in preference to derive 

the PECs later in this report. The PECs have been calculated using the EUSES program, which 

implements the methods given in the Technical Guidance Document. 

3.1.0.1 Releases from production 

3.1.0.1.1 Default release estimate 

Default release estimates for production can be obtained using the emission factors contained in 

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance document. These are carried out for a typical production

site, assuming a production of around 10,000-20,000 tonnes/year. 

The default emissions factors (Table A1.1 of Appendix 1 of the TGD: Main Category 1c; vapour 

pressure <1 Pa) are 0 to air and 0.003 (0.3%) to waste water. The number of days of release can 

be estimated as 300 (Table B1.1 of Appendix 1 of the TGD). 

Therefore, using these figures, the default release estimates for the (10,000-20,000 tonnes/year) 

production site are: 

 0 kg/day to air 

100-200 kg/day to waste water (over 300 days) 

3.1.0.1.2 Industry-specific release information 

There are currently five production sites for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU. Site 

specific release information has been received for four of these sites. The detailed information is 

contained in a confidential Annex and will be used to derive PECs for these sites. The estimated

releases to water from the sites are as follows: 

27 
R331_0208_env

Site A: 65 kg/year in effluent to waste water treatment plant 

Site B: 19 kg/year to surface water after treatment 

Site C: 18 kg/year to surface water after effluent treatment 

Site D: 3 g/year after effluent treatment 

A further site in the EU is understood to have started production recently. Qualitative 

information has been received from this site indicating that the releases to surface water/waste

water from the production process will be similarly low as found at the other sites. 

Releases to air from the production process are thought to be negligible due to the low vapour 

pressure of the substance. 

For regional releases, normally 10% of the total production is assumed to occur within a region. 

However, in the case of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, there are only five production sites, 

and so as a worst case approach the highest known release figure from a single plant will be 

assumed to occur in the region. Therefore, the regional release from production will be assumed 

to be 65 kg/year to waste water. 

3.1.0.1.3 Transportation losses 

In theory chemicals can be released to the environment during loading of transport containers at 

productions site and unloading containers at the sites where the substance is used. These losses 

can take the form of spillages (to waste water) or volatilisation losses. Medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins have a low vapour pressure and so any losses to the atmosphere should be negligible 

from loading or emptying containers. Losses to waste water could occur but these are considered 

as part of the general losses from production sites or use (formulation sites) and are already 

included in the release estimates reported in Sections 3.1.0.1.2 and 3.1.0.2 and so are not 

considered separately here. 

3.1.0.2 Release from use 

3.1.0.2.1 Release from use in PVC 

Around 51,800 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used as (secondary) 

plasticisers in PVC in 1997. They are usually added at 10-15 parts per hundred resin (phr), 

although some of the more highly chlorinated substances (e.g. >52% wt. Cl) are more compatible

with the PVC and can be used at concentrations of around 25 phr in e.g. a cable compound. 

Taking into account the other additives present in the PVC such as primary plasticiser, filler, 

stabiliser, lubricant etc., these loadings on a resin basis equate to a medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin content of around 6-10% by weight based on the PVC compound for the typical 

10-15 phr loading and 15% by weight based on the PVC compound for the higher 25 phr 

loading. For some applications higher loadings of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins on a resin 

basis may be used, for example where a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl is used as sole plasticiser in a flooring 

composition, the rate of addition may be around 40-45 phr. However, in such cases the amounts 

of other additives, particularly fillers are also high (e.g. filler content may be as high as 300 or 

28 
R331_0208_env

400 phr) and this loading equates to a medium-chlorinated paraffin content of around 8-10% 

based on the final compound weight (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

Medium-chain length chlorinated paraffins are not used as flame retardant additives in their own 

right but as secondary plasticisers with flame retardant properties, often in conjunction with other 

plasticisers such as phosphate esters (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

From the above discussion it can be seen that a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content of 

10-15% by weight of the PVC compound/product is a reasonable worst case value, with a lower 

limit of around 6% by weight of the PVC. The higher medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

contents of 15% by weight of the PVC are usually found in extrusion compounds, with lower 

levels being used in PVC for coating processes (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

Default release estimation

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document gives default release estimates for substances 

used in the polymers industry. The release factors for plasticisers (Use Category 47) during the 

polymer processing step for thermoplastics are 0.01 (1%) to air (boiling point <400o

C/unknown)

and 0.001 (0.1%) to waste water (Table A.3.11 of Appendix 1 of the TGD). 

Assuming around 51,800 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in PVC in

the EU at 10-15% by weight, then the amount of PVC containing them produced in the EU is

345,333-518,000 tonnes/year (medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content of 6% by weight 

would give a higher total of 863,300 tonnes/year of PVC). According to the Technical Guidance 

Document, 10% of this i.e. 34,500-51,800 tonnes/year would be produced in a region. Using 

Table B3.9 of Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document, the amount of PVC containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced on a site would be 5% of this 

i.e. 1,725-2,590 tonnes/year over 300 days. The amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

used to produce this plastic on a site would be 259 tonnes/year. 

Based on the above figures, the following default release estimates can be calculated: 

 Local release: 259 kg/year or 0.86 kg/day to waste water 

2,590 kg/year or 8.6 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 5,180 kg/year to waste water 

 51,800 kg/year to air 

Total EU release: 51,800 kg/year to waste water 

 518,000 kg/year to air 

Industry-specific release information

The Use Category Document on plastics additives (UCD, 1998) considers the possible release of 

additives from use in PVC. Around 220,000 tonnes/year of flexible PVC is produced in the 

United Kingdom in closed, partially open and open systems, depending on the processing 

method used to produce the final product. Thus possible releases of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins from many different processes have to be considered. According to UCD (1998) the 

29 
R331_0208_env

worst case amounts of flexible PVC processed at a site are 744 tonnes/year for a site using open 

processing systems, 3,990 tonnes/year for a site using partially open processing systems and 

341 tonnes/year for a site using closed processing systems. These are based on the known 

production volume of flexible PVC in the United Kingdom, along with information on the

number and size distribution of production sites. It is thought that these figures will also be

representative of the situation throughout the EU. 

In the following calculations it will be assumed that all the flexible PVC produced at a site 

contains the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin at either 10% by weight (for coating processes) 

or 15% by weight (for extrusion and other processes). These represent the situations where the

chlorinated paraffin acts as a secondary plasticiser, which is the major use of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in this area. 

The amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins estimated to be used on a polymer

processing site are shown in Table 3.1. 

Table 3.1Estimated amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used at flexible PVC processing sites 

Type of processing Amount of PVC Amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used per site

processed 10% MCCP in resins 

(coating process) 

15% MCCP in resins 

(extrusion/other process) 

Open system 744 tonnes/year 74.4 tonnes/year 112 tonnes/year 

Partially open system 3,990 tonnes/year [399 tonnes/year]a 599 tonnes/year 

Closed system 341 tonnes/year [34.1 tonnes/year]

a 51 tonnes/year 

Note: a) Coating processes are usually carried out in open systems as defined in UCD (1998). 

Raw materials handling (formulation – step 1)

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are liquids of low vapour pressure. Losses to the atmosphere 

are likely to be negligible when the substance is handled at ambient temperature. The liquid 

plasticisers are usually transported and handled in bulk, using enclosed storage systems and so a 

minimal loss by spillage can occur. The worst case release figure for loss through spillage is 

estimated at 0.01% (UCD, 1998). 

Using this figure, the release to the environment from sites using the various processing types are 

(note: coating operations are usually carried out only in open processing systems as defined in 

UCD (1998)): 

 Open processing: coating 7.4 kg/year (0.025 kg/day) 

 extrusion/other 11.2 kg/year (0.037 kg/day) 

 

Partially open processing: extrusion/other 59.9 kg/year (0.20 kg/day) 

 

 Closed processing: extrusion/other 5.1 kg/year (0.017 kg/day) 

 

30 
R331_0208_env

The total usage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU in this application is

51,800 tonnes. The EU-wide release from raw materials handling can therefore be estimated at 

5.18 tonnes/year. According to the Technical Guidance Document, the regional release will be 

10% of this figure, around 518 kg/year. 

As these release figures refer to spillage, the releases can be assumed to enter the waste water

stream as a worst case approach. 

Compounding (formulation – step 2)

There are two general methods used for compounding PVC: dry blending and plastisol blending 

(UCD, 1998; see Section 2.2.1.1). 

Dry blending is used to prepare blends for extrusion, injection moulding and sometimes

calendering (Banbury blending is also occasionally used to prepare blends for calendering, but 

the emissions from this processes are similar to those associated with dry blending (UCD, 

1998)). Dry blending accounts for the compounding of around 65-70% of all plasticisers used in 

PVC. Dry blending involves mixing the PVC powder/granules with the plasticiser using a high 

speed rotating agitator which heats the material by friction (maximum temperature reached is

100-120o

C). The plasticiser is completely absorbed by the PVC in the process, and the only 

source of release to air is from the hot material. The loss to air of a plasticiser such as

di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) from the process is estimated to be a maximum of 0.01%. 

However, some medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in PVC are slightly more volatile that

DEHP (e.g. vapour pressure of DEHP is around 2.2×10-5 Pa at 20o

C, compared with around 

2.7×10-4 Pa for medium-chain chlorinated paraffin with a 52% wt. Cl content). In this situation, 

it is suggested that the release to air could be around 5 times higher (UCD, 1998). 

Information is available from Industry comparing the loss (volatility) of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins with that of DEHP from PVC (Euro Chlor, 1999). This is summarised 

below: 

a) weight loss on heating plasticiser alone 

 Weight loss after 4 hours Weight loss after 4 hours 

 heating at 150o

C heating at 180oC 

DEHP 0.3% 1.9% 

C14-17, 45% wt. Cl 0.7% 2.8% 

C14-17, 52% wt. Cl 0.5% 1.4% 

C14-17, 58% wt. Cl 0.3% 0.8% 

b) weight loss from PVC 

 Ageing loss from PVC compounds 

 (BS 2782 methods 465A and B, 1979) 

56 parts DEHP: 0 parts C14-17, 45% wt. Cl 0.55% 

50 parts DEHP: 10 parts C14-17, 45% wt. Cl 0.85% 

43 parts DEHP: 20 parts C14-17, 45% wt. Cl 1.0% 

31 
R331_0208_env

36 parts DEHP: 30 parts C14-17, 45% wt. Cl 1.15% 

51 parts DEHP: 10 parts C14-17, 52% wt. Cl 0.6% 

43 parts DEHP: 20 parts C14-17, 52% wt. Cl 0.7% 

37 parts DEHP: 30 parts C14-17, 52% wt. Cl 0.85% 

From this data, although not directly comparable to the losses expected from dry blending of 

PVC, it can be seen that the C14-17, 45% wt. Cl substance appears to be around 3 times more

volatile than DEHP and the C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance appears to be around 1.4 times more

volatile than DEHP from PVC (see Appendix G for further details of these calculations). The

C14-17, 58% wt. Cl substance is of similar or slightly lower volatility to DEHP. When the data for 

heating of the plasticiser alone are considered, it appears that the 45% wt. Cl substance is around 

twice as volatile as DEHP. However, the relative volatility of the two plasticisers from PVC will 

depend to some extent on their compatibility (or solubility) in the PVC, as well as their vapour

pressure. As discussed in Section 2.2.1.1, the compatibility of the chlorinated paraffin with both 

PVC and the primary plasticiser varies with both the carbon chain length and degree of 

chlorination. Therefore a factor of 3 rather than a factor of 5 as suggested in UCD (1998) appears 

to represent a reasonable worst case in order to take into account the slightly higher volatility of 

the 45% wt. Cl substance compared to DEHP. This value will be used as a basis for the local 

PEC calculations as a worst case. For the 52% wt. Cl substance, a factor of 1.4 appears to be 

reasonable in order to take into account its slightly higher volatility compared to DEHP. This

will be taken into account in the estimation of regional releases. The effect of the lower volatility

of the 52% wt. Cl product on the local releases is considered further in Appendix G. 

Based on these data, and the information reported in UCD (1998), the worst case release factor 

for a 45% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from the dry blending process will be taken 

as 0.03% to air [the equivalent emission factor for a 52% wt. Cl substance will be 0.014%]. 

Approximately 30-35% of all plasticiser use in PVC is in plastisol applications. Plastisol 

blending takes place in stirred vessels at ambient temperature. Cooling is used to remove any 

heat generated by friction. The releases to the air from this process are thought to be negligible 

due to the lower temperatures involved. Losses due to raw materials handling in this process are 

covered in the previous Section. 

The estimated worst case emissions of a 45% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to the air 

from the dry blending process are shown below: 

 Open processing: extrusion/other 33.6 kg/year (0.11 kg/day) 

Partially open processing: extrusion/other 180 kg/year (0.60 kg/day) 

 Closed processing: extrusion/other 15.3 kg/year (0.051 kg/day) 

The releases to air from plastisol blending for coating processes are negligible. 

The total usage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU in this application is

51,800 tonnes. Of this, 52% wt. Cl products (emission factor 0.014% to air) are thought to make

up around 2/3 of the total, with the remainder being more volatile (e.g. 45% wt. Cl) products 

(emission factor 0.03%). If it is assumed that the split of this use between dry blending and 

32 
R331_0208_env

plastisol blending is the same as for plasticisers in general, then up to 70% of this could be used

in the dry blending process. Thus the EU-wide release from compounding can be estimated at 

7.01 tonnes/year (3.38 tonnes/year of 52% wt. Cl product and 3.63 tonnes/year of 45% wt. Cl 

product). According to the Technical Guidance Document, the regional release will be 10% of 

this figure, around 0.70 tonnes/year. These releases are initially to the air. 

Conversion (processing) 

This Section considers the releases from several processing methods. The release estimates 

assume that some fume reduction equipment is used. Such equipment is generally found at large 

sites (using >250 tonnes of plasticiser/year). The equipment is less common at smaller plants 

(using <250 tonnes of plasticiser/year) and the releases for some processes could be around 

10 times higher at plants where fume reduction equipment is not present (UCD, 1998). The 

250 tonne plasticiser limit is considered to be a reasonable criterion to distinguish between large 

plants and smaller plants. This figure refers to the total plasticiser use in the flexible PVC 

(medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are usually used with other plasticisers). According to the 

UCD (1998), the typical total plasticiser level in flexible PVC is 30-50%. Thus 250 tonnes/year

plasticiser is equivalent to a production of around 500-830 tonnes/year of flexible PVC. As can 

be seen from the figures derived in Table 3.1, the size of the open system site and partially open 

system sites can be taken to represent large sites, where fume reduction equipment is used,

whereas the closed system site use falls into the size of site where fume reduction equipment

may not always be used. This will be taken into account in the release estimates derived for 

closed systems. The following Sections describe the possible losses to the environment 

(atmosphere) from the various processes. The resulting release estimates for the worst case sites,

region and the total EU are shown in Table 3.2. 

Calendering (open system) 

A reasonable worst case emission of plasticiser (e.g. DEHP) from a calendering process is 

around 0.05% to air. For a more volatile plasticiser such as a 45% wt. Cl medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin, it is suggested that the emission factor is increased by a factor of around 3 

(see Compounding Section). Thus, the air emission factor for a 45% wt. Cl medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin is around 0.15% [the equivalent emission factor for a 52% wt. Cl product 

would be 0.07%]. This assumes emission reduction equipment is used (UCD, 1998). 

Extrusion (partially open or closed system) 

The major types of flexible PVC products produced by extrusion are wire, cable and hoses, and 

blow moulded film. For wire, cable and hose production, there is no emission/exposure from the

extruder itself. The main source of release is likely when the hot material leaves the die. As the

surface area and exposure (of the hot plastic to air) time is lower than for calendering processes, 

a release factor of 0.01% to air is estimated for a typical plasticiser (e.g. DEHP). Again, for a 

45% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin, the emission factor to air will be around 3 times 

this value (0.03%), to take into account its higher volatility (see Compounding Section) [the 

equivalent factor for a 52% wt. Cl product would be 0.014%]. This figure assumes emission 

reduction equipment is used. For applications where this equipment is not generally used, the 

33 
R331_0208_env

emission factor for a 45% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin could be around 10 times 

this value (i.e. 0.3%) [the equivalent factor for a 52% wt. Cl product would be 0.14%]. 

Injection moulding (closed system) 

Injection moulding can be considered to be comparable to extrusion except that both the 

moulding and cooling phases of the process take place in closed systems. Therefore, losses 

should be lower than for extrusion. However, as a worst case UCD (1998) recommends a release 

factor of 0.01% for a general plasticiser (e.g. DEHP). Again, for a more volatile plasticiser such 

as a 45% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin the release factor would be 0.03% for site 

with emission reduction equipment and 0.3% for sites with no emission reduction equipment [the 

equivalent factors for a 52% wt. Cl product would be 0.014% and 0.14% respectively]. 

Plastisol spread-coating (open system) 

Spread coating products include articles such as cushioned flooring, wall coverings, tarpaulins 

etc. These products are gelled in tunnel ovens heated with hot air at about 180o

C. The release 

figure for a typical plasticiser for the process is thought to be around 1% to air within the oven 

(not all of this will reach the external environment), based on both calculation and laboratory 

experiments (UCD, 1998). This figure refers to the air leaving the equipment. Not all of this 

reaches the environment since condensation takes place in cooler pipes, ducts and stacks. Air 

treatment is thought to be relatively commonplace within the industry (75% of activity in 1989;

approaching 100% in 1998 (UCD, 1998)). The two types of air treatment used are air filtration 

(removes 95% of the plasticiser in the air) and incineration. Thus the overall emission factors for 

a typical plasticiser such as DEHP is between 0-0.05% to air for the vast majority of sites with 

air emission treatment and 0.5% to air from a plant with no air treatment. Again, these figures

refer to a plasticiser like DEHP. For a more volatile plasticiser such as a 45% wt. Cl

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (see Compounding Section), the emission factors could be 

around 3 times higher, i.e. 0-0.15% to air assuming air emission treatment and 1.5% to air 

assuming no air emission treatment [the equivalent factor for a 52% wt. Cl product would be 

0.07% assuming air emission treatment and 0.7% assuming no air emission treatment]. 

Other plastisol processes 

Other processing methods for plastisol PVC include car underbody coating and sealing, 

rotational coating, dipping and slush moulding. Of these, car underbody coating and sealing is 

the most important in terms of volume, but it is thought that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

are not used in this application. In these processes, the coatings are dried in long air-heated

tunnel ovens at temperatures of 130-160o

C. The ovens in this industry have integrated air 

incinerators since the same process is used to simultaneously dry paint coats (UCD, 1998). 

Therefore, the releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from this process, if they are used, 

should be near zero. 

The other possible plastisol processing steps are all small volume applications. The releases from 

dip coating and slush moulding are likely to be similar to those from spread coating and so will 

34 
R331_0208_env

not be considered separately in the release estimation. Rotational moulding takes place in closed 

moulds and so the loss of plasticiser to the atmosphere from this process will be low.

Summary of worst case release estimates from PVC conversion (processing) 

The estimated worst case releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to air from plastic 

processing obtained for various sites using the information reported above are shown in 

Table 3.2. As can be seen from the emission estimates, the actual estimated releases from the 

various sites are very similar. This is because although the overall emission factors at large sites 

may be lower than small sites, due to use of emission controls on air releases, this is counteracted

to some extent by the higher amounts of plastics processed at such sites. The emissions have

been estimated based on a 45% wt. Cl product as a worst case. The emissions for a 52% wt. Cl 

product would be expected to be lower than these figures due to the lower volatility. Appendix G 

considers the releases from sites using this type of product. 

For the regional release estimate, the relative proportion of the two main plasticiser types 

(e.g. ≤45% wt. Cl products and ≥52% wt. Cl products) have to be taken into account as emission

factors have been derived for both types of product. Of the total plasticiser use in PVC, 

52% wt. Cl products make up around 2/3 of the total, the remainder being more volatile 

(e.g. 45% wt. Cl) products. 

The actual breakdown of the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins between the various 

processes is not known. However, UCD (1998) gives the following breakdown of the production 

of flexible PVC: 25% in closed systems; 49% in partially open systems and 26% in open 

systems. If the same approximate breakdown applies to the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

then a worst case release figure of 204.3 tonnes/year to air for the polymer processing step can be 

estimated for the EU (assuming a release of 1.5% from open systems and 0.3% from partially

open and closed systems for the 45% wt. Cl product and a release of 0.7% from open systems 

and 0.14% from partially open and closed systems for the 52% wt. Cl product, and an EU 

consumption of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins of 51,800 tonnes/year). The regional release 

will be 10% of this figure, 20.4 tonnes/year. These figures assume that no air emission control is 

applied. The estimated emissions would be a factor of 10 lower if this was taken into account. 

The actual overall proportion of the industry with such controls is currently unknown, but the use 

of such equipment is relatively common place, particularly at large sites, and is becoming 

increasingly common at other sites. 

According to the Use Category Document (UCD, 1998), the releases to air are as hot gases. For 

substances with low vapour pressures such as medium-chain chlorinated paraffins the possibility 

of condensation as the gas cools needs to be considered. This may lead to some of the releases 

initially to air entering other waste streams such as water. The Use Category Document gives no 

guidance as to the fraction of the air release that could eventually end up in waste water. As a 

worst case approach it could be assumed that 50% of the release to air would eventually reach

waste water. In the absence of other information, this assumption will be used later in the PEC 

calculations.

35 
Table 3.2Estimated worst case emissions of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to air from processing sitesd 

Release factor to air Amount of MCCP used/site Release of MC

Pro 

cess Type of system 

Air emission 

control 

No air emission 

control 

 (tonnes/year) Air emission control 

Calendering Open 0.15% 1.5% 112 168 kg/year (0.56 kg/day) Extrusion Partially open 0.03% 0.3% 599 180 kg/year (0.6 kg/day) 

closed 0.03% 0.3% 51 

Injection moulding 

closed 0.03% 0.3% 51 

Plastisol spread-coatinga

open 0.15% 1.5% 74.4 112 kg/year (0.37 kg/day) 

Notes: a) Release from other plastisol processes such as dip coating and slush moulding is expected to be similar. Release from processes such as car u

(if medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used), and rotational moulding are thought to be negligible. 

b) In the PEC calculations it will be assumed that 50% of the air emissions eventually reach waste water at the site. c) Taken to represent a small site using closed processing where fume reduction equipment may not always be used. 

d) Estimated based on 45% wt. Cl products. The equivalent estimate for 52% wt. Cl products are given in Appendix G. 

36 
R331_0208_env

3.1.0.2.2 Releases from use as a plasticiser/flame retardant in other plastics and 

rubber 

Chlorinated paraffins are used as additives in plastics other than PVC, mainly as flame retardant

additives. Although they will also have some plasticising properties in these materials, 

plasticisers are not generally used in plastics other than flexible PVC. According to UCD (1998)

over 98% of plasticiser use is in flexible PVC, thus the use of chlorinated paraffins in plastics 

other than PVC can be considered to be primarily as a flame retardant additive. However, the 

types of chlorinated paraffins used in these applications are the solid products (e.g. >C20) with

around 70% wt. Cl chlorine contents and so are not subject to this risk assessment (Euro Chlor, 

1999). The use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins as a plasticiser (in PVC) is considered in 

detail in Section 3.1.0.2.1. 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used as a flame retardant softener (or process oil) in 

rubber and are added at a maximum content of around 15% by weight of the final rubber. It is 

also possible that small amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may be used for similar 

functions in other polymeric materials. 

The amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used for this purpose in the EU is currently

2,146 tonnes/year. The individual amounts used in the various plastic types and rubber are not 

known, although the main use in this area is in rubber (Euro Chlor, 1999). However, since the

processes involved for both rubber and plastic are generally similar (in that a compounding step 

involving mixing of the plasticiser with the polymer, followed by a shaping/curing operation 

involving heat are used), a generic approach to this area can be undertaken.

For rubber, a typical loading of up to 15% by weight of the chlorinated paraffin in the rubber is 

used. This is similar to the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in PVC (see 

Section 3.1.0.2.1) and it will be assumed that this would also apply to any use of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in other plastics. Thus, the amount of rubber and plastic (other than PVC)

containing the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin produced in the EU would be around 

14,307 tonnes/year. 

Default release estimation

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document gives default release estimates for substances 

used in the polymers industry. The release factors for flame retardants (Use Category 22) during 

the polymer processing step for thermoplastics are 0.001 (0.1%) to air (boiling point 

<300o

C/unknown; vapour pressure <1 Pa) and 0.0005 (0.05%) to waste water (Table A.3.11 of 

Appendix 1 of the TGD). For thermosetting resins the release factor to air is zero and the release

factor to waste water is 0.0005 (0.05%). The default release factors assuming that the main 

function is as a plasticiser are similar to those reported for plasticiser use in PVC in 

Section 3.1.0.2.1. 

Assuming around 2,146 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used as a flame 

retardant in rubber and plastics in the EU at 15% by weight, then the amount of 

elastomer/polymer containing them produced in the EU is 14,307 tonnes/year. According to the 

37 
R331_0208_env

Technical Guidance Document, 10% of this i.e. 1,431 tonnes/year would be produced in a

region. Using Table B3.9 of Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document, the amount of

polymer/elastomer containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced on a site would be 

15% of this i.e. 215 tonnes/year over 86 days. The amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

used to produce the polymer/elastomer on a site would be 32.3 tonnes/year. 

Based on the above figures, the following default release estimates can be calculated: 

 Local release: 16.2 kg/year or 0.19 kg/day to waste water 

32.3 kg/year or 0.38 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 107 kg/year to waste water 

 215 kg/year to air 

 Total EU release: 1,073 kg/year to waste water 

 2,146 kg/year to air 

Industry-specific release estimation

The Use Category Document on plastics additives (UCD, 1998) details possible releases to the 

environment from the use of flame retardants in plastics. These will be used here to determine 

the possible releases for use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in plastics. Although the 

processing (curing/vulcanisation) of natural and synthetic rubber takes place at lower 

temperatures (e.g. 125-150o

C) than for many polymers, the same sorts of processes as for 

plastics (e.g. injection moulding, extrusion calendering etc.) can be used (Bouton, 1992; 

Kirk-Othmer, 1997). Therefore, as the compounding and subsequent processing of plastics and 

rubber are essentially similar, and use similar equipment a similar (but possibly smaller) releases 

would be expected from the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in rubber. 

In Section 2.2.2, it was reported that chlorinated paraffins could be used as a flame retardant in 

polystyrene. This will be used here as an example for estimating the releases to the environment 

from plastics other than PVC in general. The releases from use in PVC are given in 

Section 3.1.0.2.1. Although the calculations are carried out for polystyrene, the release estimates 

detailed in the UCD (1998) depend more on the processes used than the type of plastic being 

processed and so the figures obtained are likely to be reasonably representative of the polymers 

industry as a whole. As mentioned above, the processes used in manufacture of rubber are 

essentially similar to those used in plastic manufacture, except that they may be carried out at 

lower temperatures (and hence may lead to lower emissions). As many of the releases during 

plastic processing are to the atmosphere, these can also be considered to be a worst case estimate 

for the releases from rubber processing. 

According to UCD (1998) nearly all plastics containing flame retardants are processed using 

closed systems (these are defined as methods in which the materials are converted in almost 

completely enclosed environments and include injection and compression moulding and 

extrusion). A reasonable estimate for the amount of polystyrene processed at a large site would 

be 623 tonnes/year for a site using closed systems. This size of site would use around 

93 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin if all the plastic contained it at 15% by 

weight. 

38 
R331_0208_env

Raw materials handling (formulation – step 1)

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are liquids of low vapour pressure. Losses to the atmosphere 

are likely to be negligible when the substance is handled at ambient temperature. The liquid 

plasticisers are usually transported and handled in bulk, using enclosed storage systems and so 

minimal loss by spillage can occur. The worst case release figure for loss through spillage is 

estimated at 0.01% (UCD, 1998). 

Using this figure, the release to the environment from a polymer processing site can be estimated 

at 9.3 kg/year (0.031 kg/day) to waste water. 

The total usage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU in this application is

2,146 tonnes. Thus, the EU-wide release from raw materials handling can be estimated at 

215 kg/year. According to the Technical Guidance Document, the regional release will be 10% 

of this figure, around 21.5 kg/year. 

As these release figures refer to spillage, the releases can be assumed to enter into waste water as

a worst case approach. 

Compounding (formulation – step 2)

Compounding of plastics is usually by a dry process, where the base polymer and additives are 

mixed together. The mixing process generates heat or is heated externally and so there is a 

possibility for volatilisation from the process. The main source of loss from the process is dust 

generated when adding solid components. Since medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are liquids, 

no dust will be generated from them and so the only source of loss is volatilisation to the

atmosphere. This is estimated at 0.002% for organic flame retardants (UCD, 1998). This figure is 

based on the assumption that the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used as plasticiser/flame 

retardants in plastic and rubber are of similar volatility to the least volatile phthalate plasticisers 

used in PVC (e.g. of similar volatility to DIDP (vapour pressure ~3.3×10-6 Pa at 20o

C)).

However, the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in rubber/other plastic all have chlorine 

contents >50% wt. Cl. In Section 3.1.0.2.1, it was seen that these plasticisers are of similar or

slightly lower volatility than DEHP, and so it seems reasonable to base the release figure for the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin on those for DEHP rather than the less volatile DIDP. This 

assumption is reasonable since medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with chlorine contents 

>50% wt. Cl have estimated vapour pressures of the order of <4×10-5 Pa (see Appendix B), 

which is similar to that of DEHP (vapour pressure ~3.4×10-5 Pa at 20o

C). The figure for loss to 

air of DEHP during compounding is 0.01% (UCD, 1998) and this figure will be applied here for

loss of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

The estimated release of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from a polymer compounding site 

is 9.3 kg/year (0.031 kg/day), initially to air. 

The total usage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU in this application is

2,146 tonnes. Thus the EU-wide release from polymer/elastomer compounding can be estimated 

39 
R331_0208_env

at 215 kg/year. According to the Technical Guidance Document, the regional release will be 10% 

of this figure, around 21.5 kg/year. 

These releases are thought to occur initially to air. Similar to the case discussed above for PVC, 

the possibility exists that as the gases cool, the medium-chain paraffin could condense out and 

eventually enter into waste water during cleaning etc. To take this into account in the PEC 

calculations, it will again be assumed that 50% of the releases initially to air will enter into waste

water and 50% will remain in the air.

Conversion (processing) 

The losses to the atmosphere during polymer processing in closed processes are estimated at 

0.01% for an additive of similar volatility to DEHP (UCD, 1998). However, for sites producing

<750 tonnes/year of plastic, it is recommended that the release factor is increased by a factor of

10 to allow for the fact that air emission control equipment may not be present. Thus a worst 

case release figure of 0.1% to air will be assumed during polymer conversion. 

The estimated release of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to air from conversion at a polymer 

processing site is thus 93 kg/year (0.31 kg/day) to air. 

The total usage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EU in this application is

2,146 tonnes. Thus the EU-wide release from polymer/elastomer conversion (processing) can be 

estimated at 2,146 kg/year. According to the Technical Guidance Document, the regional release

will be 10% of this figure, around 215 kg/year. 

Again, it will be assumed that these air emissions will distribute 50:50 between air and water at

the site as the gases cool.

Other information

Another estimate for the release to the environment from use of chlorinated paraffins in rubber 

has been reported (Government of Canada, 1993). This gave a Swedish estimate for the total 

release from the process as <0.001% of that used. No indication as to whether this was a release 

to waste water or air was given. 

No information is available as to the amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used in 

rubber alone in the EU. Using the default estimate for the amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin used on a site of 32.3 tonnes/year (see above) over 86 days, then the amount of

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin released to the environment from such a site can be estimated 

at <0.323 kg/year (or <0.004 kg/day). This figure is around a factor of 10 lower than the values 

estimated above, based on the worst case releases from plastics processing. This may indicate

that, due to the generally lower processing temperatures involved, the losses of the flame 

retardant from manufacture of rubber are lower than those associated with the manufacture of

plastic. 

40 
R331_0208_env

3.1.0.2.3 Releases from use as a plasticiser/flame retardant in sealants/adhesives 

Around 3,541 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are thought to be used in the 

production of paints and sealants/adhesives in the EU (see Section 2.2). No information on the

amounts used in sealants/adhesives alone is available. However, Euro Chlor (1999) indicate that 

around 2/3 of the total are used in sealants/adhesives, and so as a worst case it will be assumed 

that 2,360 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in sealants/adhesives alone. 

The main function of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin is as a plasticiser and/or flame 

retardant additive. It is thought that the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used have a chlorine 

content of around 55-60% by weight and are used at a typical concentration of 10-14%, with a 

maximum of around 20% by weight of the sealant/adhesive. This means that the amount of 

sealant/adhesive containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffin can be estimated as around 

11,800-23,600 tonnes/year. 

Default release estimation

No default release figures are given in the Technical Guidance document for this use. 

Industry-specific information

Sealants are produced by mixing the required additives with a viscous liquid polymer. Both low 

and high shear mixers may be used, depending on the surface area of the filler used in the 

formulation (Palmer and Klosowski, 1997). As most sealants are moisture sensitive (particularly 

the one-part sealants), no water use is likely in the process and so releases to waste water are 

likely to be very low. 

Information has been received from several sealant manufacturers in the United Kingdom. Of the 

22 companies contacted, responses were received from 10. Not all companies reported using 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins but where they were used, a consistent picture of the 

industry was obtained. Only minor amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins appear to be 

used in adhesives. 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in both 1-part and 2-part sealants, and similar 

methods are used to produce both types. 

Typically, sealants are made in a batch process of around 1,000 kg at a time. The process is 

simple mixing, sometimes under gentle heat (e.g. up to around 40o

C) and is usually carried out 

under vacuum to avoid moisture entering the process. A typical medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin content of the sealant would be 5-20% by weight and typically 1-2 tonnes of a sealant 

containing the chlorinated paraffin may be manufactured at a site per week. The amount of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used on a site is typically of the order of 10-30 tonnes/year. 

Once formulated, the sealant is pumped directly from the mixing vessel to fill cartridges (e.g. for 

1-part sealants) or tins (e.g. 2-part sealants). 

41 
R331_0208_env

Losses to waste water during the manufacture of sealants are reported to be low or zero as water 

is not used in the process (most sealants are moisture sensitive). Scrap material and machine 

cleaning can account for up to 5% solid waste. Cleaning between batches is minimised by the

use of dedicated equipment or by starting with light coloured product and progressing through to 

darker coloured products. Generally, solid material is removed from the equipment by hand. 

Solvent cleaning of the equipment can also occur. These solvents are collected and disposed of at 

the end of their useful life by registered waste contractors. Due to its physico-chemical 

properties, the chlorinated paraffin is likely to be associated with the solid waste phases during

the cleaning of equipment and so releases to waste water from the process are likely to be very 

low (the releases to water due to leaching from the sealant are considered in Section 3.1.0.2.9). 

Some sealants (e.g. 1-part) are supplied in the form of cartridges typically containing around 

500 g of sealant. In use, around 2-3 cm3

 of sealant are estimated to remain in the nozzle and tube

when the cartridge has been emptied. This will quickly skin over and be protected inside the 

packaging. The final destination of these discarded cartridges will be as waste to landfill. 

Other sealants (e.g. 2-part) are supplied in tins. Immediately before use, a curing agent is added 

to the tin and mixed with the sealant. The sealant is then filled into a cartridge on-site prior to

application. Again, any unused material will quickly cure and set hard and will be disposed of in 

an appropriate manner. For industrial applications in the United Kingdom, the waste sealants are 

treated as special waste rather than general building waste. 

3.1.0.2.4 Release from use as a plasticiser in paints and varnishes 

The amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in paints is unknown. A combined 

figure of 3,541 tonnes/year has been reported for the amounts used in the EU in paints and 

sealants/adhesives, and Euro Chlor (1999) indicate that 1/3 of this total is used in paints, 

although other industry sources (BCF, 1999) have indicated that the actual amount may be lower 

than this. As a worst case approach it will be assumed that 1,180 tonnes/year is used in paints. 

The function of the chlorinated paraffin in paint is to act mainly as a plasticiser. The chlorinated 

paraffin content of paint is usually between 5-25% by weight, with most in the region 5-15% by 

weight. The most common paint types in which medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may be used 

are chlorinated rubber-based and vinyl copolymer-based paints. 

Assuming a 5-25% chlorinated paraffin content, the amount of paint produced in the EU 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be estimated at around 

4,720-23,600 tonnes/year. 

Default release estimation

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document gives default emission factors for both the

formulation and use of paints. 

42 
R331_0208_env

Formulation 

The default emission factors for formulation of paints are given in Table A2.1 of Appendix 1 of 

the TGD and are 0.001 (0.1%) to air (vapour pressure <10 Pa; use of dedicated equipment) and 

0.003 (0.3%) to waste water. 

The amount of paint formulated in a region is estimated to be between 472 and 2,360 tonnes/year 

(contains 118 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins at between 5 and 25% by weight of 

paint). From Table B2.3 of Appendix 1 of the TGD, the amount of paint formulated on one site 

can be estimated as 2,360 tonnes/year over 300 days (5% chlorinated paraffin content) or 

472 tonnes/year over 300 days (25% chlorinated paraffin content). Thus the amount of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin formulated at a site is 118 tonnes/year over 300 days. 

Based on the above information, the default release estimates for medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins from formulation of paints are shown below: 

 Local release: 354 kg/year or 1.2 kg/day to waste water 

 118 kg/year or 0.39 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 354 kg/year to waste water 

 118 kg/year to air 

 Total EU release: 3,540 kg/year to waste water 

 1,180 kg/year to air 

Processing (application of paints)

The default emission factors from industrial use of paints containing medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins are given in Table A3.15. The emission factors are 0 to air (Use Category 47; vapour 

pressure <10 Pa) and 0.001 (0.1%) to waste water (solvent based paint; Use Category 47; water 

solubility <10 mg/l). The amount of paint used on an industrial site can be estimated from 

Table B3.13. Based on a regional paint use of 472-2,360 tonnes year, the amount used per site is

354 tonnes/year (5% chlorinated paraffin) or 70.8 tonnes/year (25% chlorinated paraffin) over 

300 days. The amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin contained within this paint is 

17.7 tonnes. 

Based on the above information, the default release estimates for medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins from industrial paints are: 

Local release: 17.7 kg/year or 0.059 kg/day to waste water 

Regional release: 118 kg/year to waste water 

Total EU release: 1,180 kg/year to waste water 

Default emission factors for private (domestic) use of construction and maintenance paints are 

given in Table A4.5 of the Technical Guidance Document. Here the emission factor for air is 0 

(Use Category 47, vapour pressure <10 Pa) and the emission factor for release to waste water is

0.001 (0.1%) (Use Category 47; water solubility <10 mg/l; solvent based paint). The domestic 

usage of this type of paint is unknown but likely to be very limited (Table B4.5 of the Technical 

43 
R331_0208_env

Guidance Document indicates that the fraction used in domestic applications is of the order of

0.00002-0.0004 (0.002-0.04%) of the total used). This gives the amount of paint for domestic use

in a region as 0.009 tonnes/year (25% chlorinated paraffin) or 0.9 tonnes/year (5% chlorinated 

paraffin content). According to the Technical Guidance Document, the fraction of this paint used 

in the local scenario is 0.002 (i.e. 0.2%) and so the amount of paint used in the local scenario can 

be estimated as 1.8 kg/year (5% chlorinated paraffin) or 0.018 kg/year (25% chlorinated 

paraffin), over 300 days (Table B4.5 of the Technical Guidance Document). The amount of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used within this paint is 0.005 or 0.09 kg/year. Thus, using 

the emission factor to water of 0.1%, the worst case estimate for release of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins to waste water from use of paints is 5×10-6 kg/year or 9×10-5 kg/year. 

Industry-specific information

Formulation 

Information on the releases to the environment from formulation and use of paints has been 

obtained from industry. 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used only in solvent-based paints, mainly for industrial 

applications. Releases to the environment from formulation and use are likely to be minimal 

(Government of Canada, 1993; BCF, 1999). This is because the chlorinated paraffin is likely to

be associated with the solid phase (e.g. dried paint) of any waste generated and so is very 

unlikely to enter into the aqueous effluent streams. This is also indicated to be the case in the 

Emission Scenario Document for Paints, lacquers and varnishes industry in Chapter 7 of the

Technical Guidance Document. 

Information on possible releases during formulation of paints has been obtained for the United 

Kingdom (BCF, 1999). This indicates that releases to the atmosphere and waste water are 

expected to be very low during paint formulation. The amount of (solid) waste generated during 

the manufacturing process was estimated as 0-2% of the total use, with the waste going mainly to 

landfill, with a smaller amount being incinerated. 

BCF (1999) indicated that paints and coatings containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

typically make up only a small fraction (typically <1-2%, maximum 5%) of the total amount of 

paint formulated on a site. The information obtained also indicated that the amount of 

chlorinated paraffin used at a site was very small (a total of 34 tonnes/year of chlorinated 

paraffins was reported to be used over 12 sites (average usage/site = 2.8 tonnes/site); with an 

estimated 30 sites in total in the United Kingdom manufacturing paints containing chlorinated 

paraffins). This figure is much less than the default calculations given above would indicate are 

used on a site. 

Euro Chlor (1999) also indicated that the number of sites manufacturing paints containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins was of the order of 10-50 in a country/region, leading to a 

lower consumption of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins at a worst case site than would be

indicated by the default calculations above. 

44 
R331_0208_env

Based on this information, a worst case estimate for the amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins used on a formulation site will be taken to be around 15 tonnes/year (~5 times the 

average usage/site determined by BCF (1999)). The total amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins used in paint in the EU is estimated at 1,180 tonnes/year, with 10% of this (i.e. 

118 tonnes/year) being used in a region. Using the default emission factors given above (the 

default emission factors for formulation of paints are given in Table A2.1 of Appendix 1 of the 

TGD and are 0.001 (0.1%) to air (vapour pressure <10 Pa; use of dedicated equipment) and 

0.003 (0.3%) to waste water), the following local, regional and total EU releases can be 

estimated from a site formulating paint containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins: 

Local release: 45 kg/year or 0.15 kg/day to waste water 

15 kg/year or 0.05 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 354 kg/year to waste water 

 118 kg/year to air 

 Total EU release: 3,540 kg/year to waste water 

 1,180 kg/year to air 

These values will be used later in the PEC calculations. 

Processing (application of paints)

During application of the paint, losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to air should be 

minimal due to the low vapour pressure of the substance. Losses to water are also expected to be 

low (due to the low water solubility of the substance) from industrial application of paints. This 

is also indicated in the Emission Scenario Document for paints and the default calculations given 

above. 

In the absence of information on the releases to the environment from the use of paints

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, the default release estimates calculated earlier 

will be used in the PEC determinations. 

The release from subsequent leaching from paint is considered later in Section 3.1.0.2.9. 

3.1.0.2.5 Release from use as an extreme pressure additive in metal 

cutting/working fluids 

Formulation of metal cutting/working fluids

From Table 2.1, around 5,950 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were used in the 

EU to make metal cutting/working fluids. Assuming that the formulated cutting fluid contains 

around 5-10% chlorinated paraffin, then the total amount of cutting fluid formulated in the EU is

59,500-119,000 tonnes/year. 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in both oil-based and water-based (emulsion) metal 

cutting/working fluids. In most oil-based cutting fluids, the chlorinated paraffin content is around 

5-10% (typically 5%), but can be up to 70% in some heavy drawing applications. In water-based 

45 
R331_0208_env

metal cutting/working fluids, the chlorinated paraffin may be present typically at around 5% in

the formulation. In use, this formulation is diluted (emulsified) in water to give the final metal 

cutting/working fluid. The typical dilution is around 1:20 with water. Thus if the chlorinated 

paraffin is present at 5% in the formulation, the concentration in the fluid in use is around 0.25%. 

Default release information 

The default release estimates from the Technical Guidance Document for the formulation of 

metal cutting/working fluids can be obtained from Table A2.2 [Industry Category 8 (metal 

extraction, refining and processing industry); Use Category 35 (lubricants and additives); vapour

pressure <1 Pa]. The default release factor to air is 0.00005 (5×10-3%) and the default release

factor to waste water is 0.002 (0.2%). Assuming the total amount of metal cutting/working fluid 

formulated in the EU is 119,000 tonnes/year (containing 5% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin) 

then the amount formulated in a region can be estimated at 10% of this value i.e. 

11,900 tonnes/year of fluid. The amount of cutting/working fluid formulated at a site can then be 

estimated from Table B2.3 of Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document as 8,330 tonnes 

of metal cutting/working fluid (containing 417 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins) 

over 300 days. Thus from the default release figures given in the Technical Guidance Document, 

the following estimates for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be obtained: 

 Local release: 834 kg/year or 2.8 kg/day to waste water 

20.9 kg/year or 0.07 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 1,190 kg/year to waste water 

 29.8 kg/year to air 

Total EU release: 11,900 kg/year to waste water 

 298 kg/year to air 

Industry-specific release information 

Information on the releases to the environment from this application is given in UCD (1997), 

supplemented by information provided by Euro Chlor (1998). This information will form the

basis of the release estimation for this use, and will be used to derive the PECs for the various 

environmental compartments. 

Formulation or blending of metal cutting/working fluids is normally carried out in a batch

process. Firstly, the base oils to be used are metered into the mixing vessel and the oils are 

blended together. This is usually carried out at ambient temperature, but higher temperatures of 

up to 60o

C can be used. Then the additives are added to the base oil either by meter from a bulk 

storage tank or directly (either in neat form or diluted in base oil). Many additives are difficult to 

handle due to their high viscosity. Such additives may be pre-heated prior to blending. The 

blending vessels are normally mixed using paddle mixers or jet mixers, but other methods such 

as air sparging, pulse-air mixing, high shear mixing and passing the fluid through a convoluted 

chamber to induce turbulence are sometimes used (UCD, 1997). 

It has been estimated that the highest likely loss of lubricant from a formulation site would be 

typically in the region of 1%, with a maximum of 2% (UCD, 1997). Of this, the greatest amount

46 
R331_0208_env

would be controlled losses, for instance off-specification material that could not be re-used. This

would be collected and sent for disposal. Another possible source of loss would be residues in 

drums sent for recycling. Losses to the atmosphere may occur from pre-heating and blending but 

are thought to be very low, typically 16 kg of lubricant/year for an average size blending plant 

(this figure refers to the release of all lubricants, not just metal cutting/working fluids containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins). As the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin has a lower

vapour pressure than the base oils used in the lubricants, the atmospheric release of the 

chlorinated paraffin will be much lower than this figure, and can be considered to be of 

negligible importance in terms of environmental exposure. Typical losses of the lubricant to 

waste water are thought to be around 0.25%. The maximum concentration of oil in the effluent 

from a well controlled plant, after treatment in an oil/water separator system would be around

5 mg/l. This figure is derived from information in the discharge consents for oil for blending 

sites in the United Kingdom (UCD, 1997). Similar discharge consents apply in other EU 

countries (Euro Chlor, 1998). The oil in the effluent is likely to also contain the chlorinated 

paraffin. 

In the United Kingdom there are thought to be 6 large lubricant blending plants for all types of 

lubricants (UCD, 1997). Assuming that each plant produces cutting fluids containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (there is evidence to suggest that most formulators do or 

have used chlorinated paraffins (RPA, 1996)), the quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

used at any one site can be estimated as a sixth of that estimated to be used in a country/region.

Since 5,950 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in this application in the 

EU, then the regional use can be estimated as 595 tonnes/year. Thus the amount of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used at a large blending plant can be estimated at around

100 tonnes/year. Release is likely to occur over 300 days. From the release figure given above of 

0.25% to waste water, the following release estimates can be obtained: 

 Local release: 250 kg/year or 0.83 kg/day to waste water 

Regional release: 1,488 kg/year to waste water 

Total EU release: 14,875 kg/year to waste water 

The amounts released to waste water are estimated to be before any on-site treatment. Well

controlled plants typically have oil capture and recovery systems prior to discharge to the 

drainage system and thereby to the sewage treatment plant. As mentioned above, such equipment

is designed to lower the concentration of dissolved oil to 5 mg/l or less. However, these lower

emissions associated with well controlled plants may not be applicable to all, particularly smaller 

blenders (which make up around 20% of the market in the UK; Euro Chlor, 1998) and so the 

figures estimated above based on a 0.25% release to waste water also need to be taken into 

account in the assessment as a worst case approach. 

47 
R331_0208_env

Use in metal cutting/working fluids

Default release information 

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document gives release factors to waste water for metal 

cutting/working fluid additives of 0.185 (18.5%) from oil-based fluids and 0.316 (31.6%) from 

water-based (emulsifiable) fluids (Table A3.7; Industry Category 8; Use Category 35). The

emissions to air are estimated at 0.0002 (0.02%) from both types of fluid. 

If it is assumed that the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin use is split 50:50 between the two 

types of fluid (industry-specific information below indicates that the split may actually be around 

67:33 oil-based:water based), then 2,975 tonnes/year of the chlorinated paraffins can be 

estimated to be used in each type in the EU. Similarly, the regional usage of medium-chain

chlorinated paraffin in each type of metal cutting/working fluid can be estimated as

298 tonnes/year. Thus, for oil-based fluids, the regional usage of the fluid can be estimated at 

5.950 tonnes/year (containing 5% medium-chain chlorinated paraffins). From Table B3.5 of 

Appendix 1 of the TGD the amount of fluid used on one site can be estimated as 

4,463 tonnes/year of cutting fluid (for steelworks) or 1,785 tonnes/year (for other applications), 

both over 300 days. These amounts of metal cutting/working fluids would contain 223 and 

89 tonnes/year of the chlorinated paraffins for the two applications respectively. 

Similarly, for the water-based (emulsion) metal cutting/working fluids, the regional usage of the 

fluid can be estimated at approximately 119,000 tonnes/year of emulsion (containing 0.25%

chlorinated paraffin). From Table B3.5 of Appendix 1 of the TGD the amount of fluid used on 

one site can be estimated as 71,400 tonnes/year (for steelworks) or 23,800 tonnes/year (for other 

applications), both over 300 days. These amounts of metal cutting/working fluids would contain 

179 tonnes and 59.6 tonnes/year of the chlorinated paraffin for the two applications respectively. 

Based on these default release estimates, the following releases of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins can be calculated: 

Oil-based fluids

Local release (steelworks): 41.3 tonnes/year or 138 kg/day to waste water 

44.6 kg/year or 0.15 kg/day to air 

Local release (other sites): 16.5 tonnes/year or 54.9 kg/day to waste water 

17.8 kg/year or 0.06 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 55.1 tonnes/year to waste water 

 59.6 kg/year to air 

Total EU release: 550 tonnes/year to waste water 

 595 tonnes/year to air 

Water-based (emulsion) fluids

Local release (steelworks): 56.6 tonnes/year or 189 kg/day to waste water 

35.8 kg/year or 0.12 kg/day to air 

Local release (other sites): 18.8 tonnes/year or 62.7 kg/day to waste water 

11.9 kg/year or 0.040 kg/day to air 

48 
R331_0208_env

Regional release: 94.2 tonnes/year to waste water 

 59.6 kg/year to air 

Total EU release: 940 tonnes/year to waste water 

 595 tonnes/year to air 

Industry-specific release information 

The major uses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are as additives in oil-based metal 

cutting/working fluids (neat oils). However, they may also be used in water-based emulsions and

so both types need to be considered. 

Oil-based fluids (Neat oils) 

Information on the use of and release from metal working fluids in the United Kingdom has been 

obtained (UCD, 1997). Losses of fluid, and hence any additive contained within it, are dependent 

on the type of equipment available for separating the fluid from the swarf. In the United 

Kingdom it is thought that around 40% of the metal working activity is carried out in large 

machine shops with sophisticated swarf treatment, 30% in medium sized machine shops with 

basic swarf treatment and the remaining 30% in small machine shops with no swarf treatment. 

Little information is available on the size distributions in other EU countries, although the 

distribution in Spain is thought to be similar to that in the United Kingdom, and in Italy the 

proportion of large machine shops is slightly higher (60% in large machine shops, 30% in 

medium machine shops and 10% in small machine shops) (RPA, 1996). The estimated annual 

losses of cutting fluid, based on the replacement rates in the United Kingdom, are thought to be 

near to 50% for a large machine shop, 75% for a medium sized machine shop and 100% from a

small machine shop. Not all of this loss, however, is released to the environment. A breakdown 

of the total losses for a large and small machine shop using oil-based cutting fluids is shown 

below: 

 Large facility with Small facility 

 swarf reprocessing - no swarf reprocessing 

Misting/evaporation 2%/year to air 2%/year to air 

Overalls 1%/year to water 2%/year to water 

Leaks 1%/year to water* 3%/year to water* 

Dragout/workpiece 1%/year to water 1%/year to water 

2%/year to chemical waste 2%/year to chemical 

 waste

Internal reprocessing 1%/year to water* not applicable 

External reprocessing 10%/year reused/discarded not applicable 

 as waste oil

Dragout-swarf 30%/year (of which 90% 90%/year (of which 90% 

 burnt, 10% landfill) burnt, 10% landfill) 

Total losses 48%/year 100%/year 

*the losses may be further minimised by collecting the cutting fluid for re-use. 

49 
R331_0208_env

The major losses of oil-based metal cutting/working fluids are associated with the swarf. It is 

thought that the vast majority (90%) of swarf produced (and the adhering cutting fluid) is melted 

for re-use. Thus the cutting fluid and any additive will be destroyed in this process. In some

situations, the swarf may undergo solvent cleaning prior to melting, and so some medium-chain

chlorinated paraffin could end up in waste solvent in such sites. The remaining 10% of swarf is

thought to be disposed of to landfill. 

As can be seen from the above figures, the losses to waste water from a large and small machine

shop can be estimated at 4% and 6% respectively. However, some other losses have the potential

for entering waste water. For instance, misting/evaporation losses are initially to air. However, 

these have the potential to settle within the facility and reach waste water as a result of cleaning

equipment etc. The losses due to external reprocessing of spent cutting fluid are due to line 

flushing etc. In a well controlled facility, this will be collected and re-used or discarded as waste

oil. However, in a less well controlled facility, there remains the possibility that this could be 

discharged to waste water. 

Another source of loss is dragout of the cutting fluid on the workpiece. This is generally 

removed by either alkaline washing or solvent washing and it is thought that in both cases the 

remaining cutting fluid is distributed between emissions to water and chemical waste. In a worst

case it could be assumed that all this dragout loss occurs to waste water. 

From the above discussion, it can be seen that a worst case loss from a metal working facility 

could be in the region of 18%. Since these worst case loss figures are more likely to apply to a 

small facility than a large facility, where suitable reprocessing is usually carried out, an

assessment will be made of both a large facility (release to waste water 4%) and a small facility 

(release to waste water 18%). The situation at a medium sized facility is likely to be between 

these two extremes. 

It is thought that a typical large-scale metal cutting/working plant in the United Kingdom would 

contain around 50,000 litres of cutting oil. This size will be used as the basis for the local 

emission scenario for a large site. Assuming that the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin makes

up around 5% of the cutting fluid, then 50,000 litres of cutting fluid would contain around 

2,500 kg of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. The possible emissions of medium-chain 

paraffin to waste water can be estimated at 100 kg/year, using the 4% release figure. These 

emissions are equivalent to 0.33 kg/day, assuming use on 300 days/year. 

Information reported in RPA (1996) indicates that a small company may use <20% of the metal 

cutting/working fluid at a large company. Therefore, an assessment will also be carried out for a

small metal cutting/working plant containing 10,000 litres of cutting fluid. Assuming a 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content of 5%, then 10,000 litres of cutting fluid would

contain around 500 kg of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. The possible emissions of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to waste water from such a plant can be estimated at 

90 kg/year, using the 18% release figure. These emissions are equivalent to 0.3 kg/day over 

300 days. 

The local release estimates for use of oil-based cutting fluids are summarised below: 

50 
R331_0208_env

Local release: large site = 0.33 kg/day to waste water over 300 days 

small site = 0.3 kg/day to waste water over 300 days 

Emulsifiable cutting fluids

Similar to the situation with the neat oil cutting fluids, the losses of emulsifiable cutting fluids to 

the environment depend on the type of equipment available for separating the fluid from the

swarf. However, there are some differences between the two types of fluids that have to be taken 

into account. Firstly, losses by evaporation and by mist generation with emulsifiable fluids are 

higher than those associated with neat oils. However, since the emulsifiable cutting fluid is 

mainly water, which is more volatile than the additives present, the vapours and mists generated 

tend to have higher water contents than the bulk material. Thus the losses of additives may not be 

in proportion to the total losses of fluid. Also, the adhesion of emulsifiable cutting fluids to the 

swarf is less than that with neat cutting fluids (due to lower viscosity). However, recovery of

emulsifiable cutting fluids from swarf is not generally practised (UCD, 1997). 

A breakdown of the potential losses to the environment of emulsifiable metal working/cutting

fluids is shown below (UCD, 1997). 

 Misting/evaporation 5% to air 

 Overalls 2% to water 

 Leaks 3% to waste oil/water 

Dragout/workpiece 1% to water 

 2% to chemical waste 

 Dragout-swarf 87% (of which 90% 

 burnt, 10% landfill)

 Total losses 100% 

In use, it is important to maintain the correct oil/water ratio and an average replenishment rate of

around 10% per week can be considered typical to compensate for loss of fluid by dragout and 

evaporative losses etc. Since there is preferential evaporative loss of water, the replenishment 

package used is often a diluted version of the original fluid, typically containing around 50% of 

the normal working concentration of the oil component. In addition, emulsifiable cutting fluids

are subject to (bacterial) degradation during use and the whole system has to be replenished at a 

much higher frequency than with neat oils, typically at intervals of between 1 and 6 months. A 

typical worst case volume of cutting fluid present in the holding tanks at a site using emulsifiable 

cutting fluids is around 10,000 litres of fluid (UCD, 1997). 

The emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids are made by adding the oil component (containing 

the chlorinated paraffin at typically 5% of the oil) to water at a dilution of around 1:20 oil:water. 

Thus, 10,000 litres of the emulsified fluid will contain 500 litres of oil and approximately 25 kg 

of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. These concentrations will be approximately maintained in

the cutting fluid by weekly additions of half-strength emulsion (to take into account the 

preferential evaporation of the water phase), at a rate of around 10% of the total cutting fluid

volume present (i.e. 1,000 litres/week). The losses to water are likely to have a similar 

composition to the cutting fluid as used. From the loss figures reported above, the losses to water

51 
R331_0208_env

are estimated to be around 6% (due to overalls, leaks and dragout from the workpiece). Thus the 

weekly loss of cutting fluid to waste water during use can be estimated as 60 litres/week. This 

volume of cutting fluid would contain around 0.15 kg/week or 0.025 kg/day assuming 6 working 

days/week (300 days/year) of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (UCD, 1997). 

In addition to the weekly loss of fluid during use, the whole system (10,000 litres of fluid 

containing 25 kg of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin) will be replaced every 1-6 months 

(UCD, 1997). Before disposal, water-based (emulsion) cutting fluids can be treated by separating 

the oil and water phases before disposal by methods such as ultrafiltration. The oil phase can be 

collected for disposal (e.g. incineration) and the water phase then discharged to waste water. 

Given the physical properties of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, it is likely that most of the 

chlorinated paraffin will be associated with the oil phase and so will not be released to the 

environment. However, it is thought that around 50% of waste emulsion is discharged to the 

sewage treatment plant without any pre-treatment. Thus as a worst case, as well as the 

0.025 kg/day release of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin from losses in use discussed 

above, an intermittent (2-6 times/year) discharge to waste water of 25 kg medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin/event during final disposal of the cutting fluid needs to be considered. 

Information is also available on the likely residual oil content of the water phase after treatment 

by ultrafiltration prior to disposal to waste. The typical residual oil content of such water is 

around <10-40 mg/l (BUA, 1992). If it is assumed that the chlorinated paraffin composition of 

this residual oil is the same as the content in the oil used to produce the cutting fluid (i.e. 5% of 

the oil), then the chlorinated paraffin content of the waste water can be estimated as 0.5-2 mg/l. 

The local release estimates for use of emulsifiable cutting fluids are summarised below:

Local release: use of cutting fluid = 0.025 kg/day to waste water over 300 days 

disposal of cutting fluid = 25 kg/day to waste water on 2-6 days/year 

Total EU and regional release estimate 

Since the loss and disposal patterns of oil-based and emulsion cutting fluids are different this 

needs to be taken into account in the estimation of the regional and continental release of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from use of metal cutting/working fluids. 

The amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins currently used in metal cutting/working 

fluids is currently 5,953 tonnes/year. The split between use in oil-based and emulsion fluids is 

not known. The UCD (1997) indicates that the amount of base oil used to produce oil-based and 

emulsion fluids in the United Kingdom is in the ratio 15,750:7,700 tonnes/year. Since the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin is present at a similar concentration in both the oil-based and 

emulsifiable cutting fluids (before dilution to the working strength), the same ratio could be used 

to determine the relative amounts of chlorinated paraffin used in each type. Thus, it will be 

assumed that of the 5,953 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used, 

approximately 3,969 tonnes/year can be expected to be used in oil-based fluids and 

1,984 tonnes/year can be expected to be used in emulsion based fluids. 

52 
R331_0208_env

The total worst case EU release from emulsion-based fluids can be estimated assuming that 50% 

of the fluid is eventually released to waste water without any pre-treatment (UCD, 1997). Thus 

the total EU release of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from emulsion-based fluids is 

estimated at 992 tonnes/year. The regional release will be 10% of this figure, 99.2 tonnes/year. 

For the oil-based fluids, the release to the environment depends on the size of the facility. As

discussed above, around 60% of oil-based fluids can be assumed to be used in large (and 

medium) facilities with swarf reprocessing, and the realistic worst case release to waste water

from such facilities is estimated at 4%. This gives as a total release of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins from large sites using oil-based fluids of 3,969×0.6×0.04 = 95.3 tonnes/year. For the 

remaining 40% of oil, this will be assumed to be used in small and medium facilities, where little

or no swarf reprocessing is carried out. For both these facilities, a worst case release figure of 

18% to waste water will be assumed. This gives a total release of medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins from small and medium sized facilities using oil-based fluids of

3,969×0.4×0.18 = 285.7 tonnes/year. Thus the overall EU release of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins to waste water from use in oil-based cutting fluids is 381 tonnes/year. The regional 

release will be 10% of this figure, 38.1 tonnes/year. 

Appendix E considers the possible effects on the releases to the environment of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins resulting from the proposed risk reduction measures on short-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in this application. 

 

3.1.0.2.6 Release from use in leather fat liquors 

Around 1,048 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in the EU in the 

formulation of leather fat liquors. The chlorinated paraffin content of the formulation is around 

10%, therefore the amount of leather fat liquor containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

produced in the EU is 10,480 tonnes/year. Around 50% of this is exported from the EU. 

Default release estimation

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document provides default release estimates for the 

formulation and processing (use) of substances used in the leather processing industry (Industry 

Category 7). 

Formulation 

For the formulation stage, Table A2.1 of the Appendix is appropriate. The default emission 

factors for this process are 0.001 (0.1%) to air (vapour pressure <10 Pa; produced in dedicated 

equipment) and 0.003 (0.3%) to waste water. The amount of leather fat liquor formulated on one 

site can be estimated from Table B2.3. Assuming an EU production of 10,480 tonnes of leather 

fat liquors, the amount used in a region would be 1,048 tonnes of fat liquor. All of this 

1,048 tonnes of fat liquor is estimated to be used on one site over 300 days. This amount of fat

liquor contains 105 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The following figures can 

therefore be estimated for release of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from the formulation 

step: 

53 
R331_0208_env

 Local release: 315 kg/year or 1.1 kg/day to waste water 

105 kg/year or 0.35 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 315 kg/year to waste water 

 105 kg/year to air 

Total EU release: 3,144 kg/year to waste water 

 1,048 kg/year to air 

Processing (use of leather fat liquors)

Around 5,240 tonnes of leather fat liquors are used in the EU each year. The amount used in a

region is therefore 524 tonnes of fat liquor. According to Table B3.4 of Appendix 1 of the 

Technical Guidance Document, the amount used at a site is 262 tonnes/year of leather fat liquor

(containing 26.2 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins), over 105 days. 

Table A3.6 of Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document gives default emission factors 

for the use of substances during the processing step. For medium-chain chlorinated paraffins the 

emission factors are 0.001 (0.1%) to air (solubility <100 mg/l; vapour pressure <100 Pa) and 

0.05 (5%) to waste water (Main Category 2 (inclusion into matrix; solubility <100 mg/l)). 

The following figures can therefore be estimated for release of medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins from the leather fat liquoring step: 

Local release: 1,310 kg/year or 12.5 kg/day to waste water 

26.2 kg/year or 0.25 kg/day to air 

Regional release: 2,620 kg/year to waste water 

 52.6 kg/year to air 

Total EU release: 26,200 kg/year to waste water 

 526 kg/year to air 

Industry-specific release estimation

Formulation of fat liquors 

Information on the formulation of leather fat liquors has been provided by a major formulator 

(Euro Chlor, 1998). This site complies with a discharge consent of <0.5 ppm of adsorbable 

organic halogen (AOX) (chlorinated paraffins are the only source of halogen in this discharge). 

Industry indicated that a similar situation with regards to discharge is likely to exist for all 

European formulators (Euro Chlor, 1998). In France, the discharge limit is 1 ppm for total AOX, 

but other halogen sources other than medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may contribute to this 

limit. 

A small amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is sold directly to tanneries who then 

make their own fat liquors. The emissions from this processes are likely to be small compared to

the emissions associated with the fat liquoring process itself (default release factor for 

54 
R331_0208_env

formulation is 0.3% compared with the estimated 2% release factor for fat liquoring) and so will 

not be considered further here. 

Processing (fat liquoring) 

An emission scenario document is available for the leather industry (Chapter 7 of the Technical 

Guidance Document). This recommends a value of 15 tonnes/day as a reasonable worst case for 

the mass of leather processed at a site, based on production data for Germany. Figures for typical 

water use are also available. These depend on whether the site carries out all stages of leather 

production (from processing of raw skins to production of the final leather), where a water 

consumption of 35 l/kg raw hide is typical, or is specialised in the refining of “wet blue” (leather 

produced after the tanning step), where a water consumption of 18 l/kg leather is typical. 

Processing of 1 tonne of raw hides produces a maximum of 250 kg of “wet blue”. Since the fat 

liquoring step follows the tanning stage, both types of site have the potential to use fat liquors 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

Information on the amount of fat liquor used in treating leather has been provided (Euro Chlor, 

1998). The typical application rate is around 70-120 g of fat liquor/kg of leather treated. Since 

the fat liquor typically contains around 10% by weight of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin, 

the amount of the chlorinated paraffin used in this process is around 7-12 g/kg leather treated. 

The amount of chlorinated paraffin present in the treatment solution at the end of the process is 

thought to be around 2% of that used (Euro Chlor, 1998). This will be discharged to waste water. 

Using this information, the following release estimates can be made, using the methods outlined

in Chapter 7 of the Technical Guidance document. 

Complete processing: 

 

Mass of raw leather processed/day = 15 tonnes 

Mass of “wet blue” leather produced = 3.75 tonnes/day 

Mass of MCCPs used = 12 kg/tonne “wet blue” = 45 kg/day 

Percentage released to waste water = 2% 

Mass of MCCPs released to waste water = 0.9 kg/day 

 

Processing of “wet blue”: 

Mass of “wet blue” processed/day = 15 tonnes 

Mass of MCCPs used = 12 kg/tonne “wet blue” = 180 kg/day 

Percentage released to waste water = 2% 

Mass of MCCPs released to waste water = 3.6 kg/day 

As the overall release figure for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from the process is around 

2%, then the total release to waste water in the EU is 10.48 tonnes/year. The estimated regional

release will be 10% of this figure, 1.05 tonnes/year. 

55 
R331_0208_env

Appendix E considers the possible effects on the releases to the environment of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins resulting from the proposed risk reduction measures on short-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in this application. 

3.1.0.2.7 Release from production of carbonless copy paper 

Around 741 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in the EU to 

manufacture carbonless copy paper (see Section 2.2). The medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

content of the paper is around 3-4% by weight. This would give a total for the amount of paper 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins of 18,525-24,700 tonnes/year (Euro Chlor, 1999). 

This is consistent with the information given in Section 2.2.5, where it was estimated that at 

most, 5% of the carbonless copy paper used in the EU (i.e. 33,000 tonnes of paper out of the total 

usage of 660,000 tonnes) could contain medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

Default release estimation

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document gives default emission factors from printing, 

and production of pulp, paper and board. Neither of these scenarios is appropriate to the use of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the manufacture of carbonless copy paper. 

Industry-specific release estimation

Chapter 7 of the Technical Guidance Document contains an emission scenario document for the 

paper industry. In this document it is stated that the environmental impact of the application 

stage of coatings and the production of carbonless copy paper is considered low in comparison 

with the impact of release during paper recycling. The releases from recycling of carbonless 

copy paper containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are considered in Section 3.1.0.2.8. 

Euro Chlor (1999) indicated that there are no available estimates or industry-specific information 

regarding the release to the environment from production of carbonless copy paper. Based on 

knowledge of the industry, it was thought that there is only a small potential for release to the 

environment during the coating stage of paper production. The production of the microcapsules 

(containing the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins) is carried out in essentially closed systems. 

The microcapsules are coated onto the paper as an aqueous suspension and it is possible that 

some of this suspension may be discharged to water after appropriate treatment, but it is not 

possible to estimate the quantity involved. 

56 
R331_0208_env

3.1.0.2.8 Release from recycling of carbonless copy paper 

Default release estimation

Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance Document gives default release factors for recycling 

(recovery) of paper (Table A5.2). The release factors are 0 to air and are around 0.1-0.2 

(10-20%) to water for toners and colourants. No release factors are given for carbonless copy 

papers. 

Around 741 tonnes of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in carbonless copy paper in 

the EU. The actual amount of paper containing the chlorinated paraffin used in the EU is 

unknown, and so it is not possible to use Table B5.2 of Appendix 1 of the Technical Guidance 

Document to determine how much of the carbonless copy paper could be recycled at one site. 

The total release in the EU from recycling of carbonless copy paper can be estimated at around 

74.1-148 tonnes/year, based on the release factors given above for toners and colourants. The

estimated regional release would be 10% of these figures, 7.4-14.8 tonnes/year. 

Industry-specific release estimation

The emission scenario document for the pulp, paper and board industry (Chapter 7 of the 

Technical Guidance Document) does contain some information on the possible releases to the

environment from the recycling of carbonless copy paper. It is reported that the recycling of 

carbonless copy paper is perceived to cause problems for mills using waste paper because the 

constituents of the coatings used can prove to be difficult to remove from the paper in the 

de-inking process. 

For carbonless copy paper it is reported that most of the colour former is hydrolysed during 

alkaline pulping and is released into the water. Since medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are 

used as carrier solvent for these colour formers, it could be assumed that all the medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin will also enter into the water phase. The emission scenario document also

states that at least primary sedimentation is carried out at all paper mills and that this process will 

remove up to 90% of poorly water soluble substances and that sludges produced in the 

clarification/sedimentation process are dewatered and disposed of to landfill. Thus the overall 

release of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to waste water from the process could be around 

10% of that used. 

The emission scenario document suggests that as a worst case approach, a recycling rate of 50% 

of the paper should be used, and the paper containing a given substance is recycled at 10 sites 

(i.e. a maximum of 5% of the substance at a site). Thus the amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin in carbonless copy paper at a paper mill using recycled paper could be 

37.05 tonnes/year. The number of days of recycling is given as 250 days. 

From the above discussion, the following emissions of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to the 

environment from recycling of carbonless copy paper can be estimated: 

 

57 
R331_0208_env

Local release: 3,705 kg/year or 14.8 kg/day to waste water 

Regional release: 3,705 kg/year to waste water 

Total EU release: 37,050 kg/year to waste water 

 333.5 tonnes/year to landfill on sludges 

These figures assume that 50% of the carbonless copy paper is recycled. This may overestimate

the recycling rate as much of the paper is used in commercial documents that will be retained

and filed, or sent for destruction (e.g. incineration in waste). However, figures on the actual 

recycling rate are unavailable. 

Other information is available on the recycling of paper in the EU that may be useful to estimate 

the amount of paper containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins that might be recycled on a

site. Within the EU, it is estimated that 30 million tonnes of recycled fibres are used for paper

making each year (IPPC, 2000), and that recycled fibres account for 45% of the total paper 

production in the EU. In addition it is reported that there are 1,064 paper mills in the EU, 

although not all of these will use recycled fibre. Assuming a 50% recycling rate for carbonless

copy paper, then the amount of carbonless copy paper recycled each year 

(i.e. 330,000 tonnes/year) is 1.1% of the total recycled paper. 

A large paper production site in the EU may produce >250,000 tonnes/year of paper (IPPC, 

2000). If it is assumed that 1.1% of this is carbonless copy paper, the amount of carbonless copy 

paper recycled at a site of this size is 2,750 tonnes/year. This calculation effectively averages out 

the carbonless copy paper amongst all the paper recycled. It is possible that some sites take a 

higher proportion of carbonless copy paper and so as a worst case it could be assumed that five 

times this amount of the paper recycled at the site is carbonless copy paper, 

i.e. 13,750 tonnes/year. In terms of the total EU consumption of carbonless copy paper, this 

figure is 4.17% of that recycled (330,000 tonnes/year) or 2.08% of the total carbonless copy 

paper (660,000 tonnes/year). Since the amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in 

carbonless copy paper is 741 tonnes/year, the amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

recycled at the site is 15.4 tonnes/year. With a release rate to waste water of 10%, the local 

emission in this case would be: 

Local release: 1,541 kg/year or 6.17 kg/day (assuming 250 days recycling) 

This gives a broadly similar estimate to above and will be used in the local PEC calculation. 

3.1.0.2.9 Release from use in plastics/other polymers over their service life 

Although medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are of low vapour pressure at ambient 

temperatures, the vapour pressure is not so low as to preclude the possibility of volatilisation 

from plastics and other polymers during their service life. This is particularly true of the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with lower chlorine contents (see Appendix B for estimates 

of how vapour pressure varies with chlorine content). 

58 
R331_0208_env

Volatilisation

The loss to air of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl paraffin from PVC has been determined by Campbell and 

McConnell (1980). In the experiment, a plasticised PVC sheet (area 1.05 m2) containing 8% by 

weight of the chlorinated paraffin was placed in a box (volume 0.125 m3

) and air (total volume

12.75 m3

) was passed through the system over 21 days. The air was scrubbed using a suitable 

solvent and around 1 mg of chlorinated paraffin was found to be removed (volatilised) in the air 

from the system. Based on the amount volatilised, the effective vapour pressure of the 

chlorinated paraffin was estimated to be 3×10-9 mmHg (4×10-7 Pa). An emission rate for the 

chlorinated paraffin of around 5×10-4 μg/s/m2

 can be estimated from this data, which is similar to

the emission rates estimated for DEHP (1.8-3.0×10-4 μg/s/m2

) from PVC (see below). This

emission factor for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is considered further in Appendix F 

The Use Category Document on plastics additives (UCD, 1998) summarises the work that has 

been carried out on plasticiser leaching and volatilisation from PVC products. 

For volatilisation from PVC the following equation was derived for thin film applications: 

 

rate of volatilisation (% per year) = 1.1×106 × vapour pressure (mmHg). 

In Section 1.3.5, it was shown that the vapour pressure of the components of medium chain 

chlorinated paraffins depends markedly on the carbon chain length and degree of chlorination.

For example, the vapour pressure of a ~51-53% wt. Cl medium-chain, chlorinated paraffin was

estimated to vary between 5.5×10-5 Pa for the C15 component to around 1×10-6 Pa for the 

C17 component. The vapour pressure for a 52% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin has 

been measured as 2.0×10-6 mmHg (2.7×10-4 Pa) at 20oC, but this probably reflects the vapour 

pressure of the most volatile components rather than being representative of the whole 

commercial product and so would overestimate the total loss of medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins from thin films. Since the majority of medium-chain length chlorinated paraffins are 

represented by products having between 45% wt. Cl and 52% wt. Cl, a reasonable worst case 

value for a representative vapour pressure can be taken as around 5×10-5 Pa = 3.75×10-7 mmHg

(based on the estimates reported in Appendix B). Based on this vapour pressure, the rate of

volatilisation estimated using the equation above is 0.4% per year. This applies to losses from 

thin film applications. 

For general articles an emission factor of 0.05% of the annual consumption of plasticiser is

recommended (UCD, 1998). This figure is appropriate for a plasticiser such as DEHP, and is 

based on the estimated amount volatilised (approximately 140 tonnes/year) from the major

applications, related to the annual consumption of the substance. Thus although the amount of

the substance present in articles will be higher than the annual consumption (the lifetime of many 

PVC products is >1 year), this is accounted for in the way the emission factor has been 

estimated. The figure of 140 tonnes/year for the amount of DEHP volatilised was estimated from 

the results of theoretical and semi-experimental studies on the volatilisation rate from PVC, 

along with the estimated surface area of PVC articles/products present in the EU, taking into 

account the lifetime of the product. The studies gave a volatilisation rate in the range 

1.8×10-4-3.0×10-4 μg/s/m2

, with an average value of 2.3×10-4 μg/s/m2 for DEHP (Cadogan et al., 

59 
R331_0208_env

1994). A similar volatilisation rate was derived earlier in this Section for a medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin, indicating that the general emission factor of 0.05% of the annual 

consumption may also be applicable for some medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

For most applications medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with chlorine contents of around 45% 

and 52% wt. Cl are used. These are usually of slightly higher volatility (for the 45% wt. Cl) or of 

a similar volatility (for the 52% wt. Cl) as DEHP (see Section 3.1.0.2.1 and Appendix B) and so 

the release factor could be increased by a factor of 2-3 to take this into account. In addition, the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used as plasticiser/flame retardant additives in polymers

other than PVC generally have higher chlorine contents (e.g. >50% wt. Cl). These substances are 

of similar volatility or slightly lower volatility than DEHP and so the release factor could be

decreased by a similar factor. Overall, the release factor estimated for DEHP of 0.05% over the 

lifetime could be considered representative for the whole range of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins, taking into account some products are more and some products are less volatile than 

this. 

Information provided by industry indicates that a polyurethane coating is typically applied to 

cushioned PVC flooring produced by spread coating to improve the wear properties and staining

resistance (Personal Communication, 2000). It is estimated that around 50-60% of the cushion 

vinyl flooring may have such coatings. These coatings may reduce the potential for volatilisation

loss from the flooring. This is considered further in Appendix F. 

Other products, such as paints, sealants, etc., can also be expected to lose medium-chain

chlorinated paraffin by volatilisation. A similar rate of volatilisation to that in PVC will be 

assumed. The estimated loss rate of 0.4% per year from thin films may be appropriate for paints 

(although as paints form a surface skin of low permeability, this should reduce the emissions 

compared to those from a thin film of plastic), but will overestimate the releases from sealants

(loss rate of 0.05% over the lifetime would appear more appropriate here). The release figure of 

0.4% per year for thin films should be applied to the total amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin present in painted articles in the EU, rather than the yearly consumption figure in this

area. In Table 3.3 the releases from paints using this figure have been estimated based on a 

seven year lifetime for painted surfaces. It is likely that the actual releases from painted surfaces

will be lower than this figure due to formation of a surface skin of low permeability. 

Table 3.3 summarises that possible volatilisation losses from articles containing medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins. 

An alternative approach to estimating the volatilisation losses of medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins from PVC and other polymer use, based on the measured emission rate of 

5×10-4 μg/s/m2

 is considered in Appendix F. This gives a release to air of around 

38-61 tonnes/year over the products lifetime (and a further 2.86 tonnes/year from waste 

disposal), which is in good agreement with the figures derived in Table 3.3. The approach taken 

in Appendix F requires a large number of assumptions and so there is considerable uncertainty in

the figures derived. Therefore the figures from Table 3.3 will be used in the environmental 

modelling to estimate the regional concentrations. 

60 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.3Estimated volatilisation losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from polymeric materials 

Use Amount used in EU Release factor to air Release to air 

PVC 51,827 tonnes/year 0.05% over lifetimea 25.9 tonnes/year

Paints, adhesives and sealants 1,180 tonnes/year – paints 0.4%/year over a 7 year 

lifetimeb 

33.0 tonnes/year

2,360 - sealants 0.05% over lifetimea 1.18 tonnes/year

Rubber/polymers 2,146 tonnes/year 0.05% over lifetimea 1.07 tonnes/year

Total EU 61.15 tonnes/year 

Regional total 6.12 tonnes/year

Note: a) Emission factor applies to yearly consumption figure. 

b) Emission factor applies to total amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in painted articles (= amount 

used/year × lifetime of painted surface) 

Volatilisation could also occur from other products containing medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins, such as leather articles. However, there is insufficient information available about the 

emission rates from these types of products to make a reasonable attempt to estimate the overall

releases. 

Leaching

Information has been reported on the leaching of plasticiser from PVC flooring during washing 

(UCD, 1998). Again, this information has generally been generated for a phthalate plasticiser 

such as DEHP. Since leaching losses are likely to depend to some extent of the water solubility,

the difference in solubility between DEHP (45-340 μg/l (Brooke et al., 1991); recommended 

value from Draft DEHP ESR Assessment 3 μg/l) and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

(5-27 μg/l) needs to be considered. Thus the potential for leaching of medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins is similar to that determined for DEHP. Information provided by industry indicates that 

a polyurethane coating is typically applied to around 50-60% of cushioned PVC flooring. These 

coatings may reduce the potential for leaching loss from washing of the flooring. 

The worst case losses to water were estimated at 0.05% for washing of interior products and 

0.7% for exterior products such as roofing (UCD, 1998). The factor of 0.05% for washing 

interior products applies to the annual consumption of plasticiser rather than the total amount 

present in articles (this is accounted for in the way the emission factor was derived). 

The factor of 0.7% for outdoor use was determined for loss of total phthalate plasticiser from 

roofing material over 4 years. Thus the average loss rate/year in the study is 0.15%/year. This 

factor should be applied to the actual amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin present in 

products, taking into account the products lifetime. It should also be noted that the derived 

emission factor will also include contributions from loss of particulates, degradation etc. from

the material due to weathering or erosion and so is likely to overestimate the actual leaching loss

of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. 

61 
R331_0208_env

Since a major use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is in flooring the 0.05% release factor is 

appropriate. As indicated above, some cushioned PVC products may have coatings that reduce 

the potential for leaching loss from the product, but the extent of this reduction is unknown and 

so adds further uncertainty to the estimates presented, and is considered further in Appendix F. 

For paints and, to a lesser extent, sealants, the external release factor may be more appropriate, as 

they are sometimes used in applications where significant exposure to water may occur 

(e.g. marine paints, masonry paints). For the other polymer applications, e.g. as a flame retardant

in rubber and polymers other than PVC, the potential for exposure to water appears to be limited.

The worst case release to the environment from leaching of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

from paints/sealants and PVC is shown in Table 3.4. 

Table 3.4Estimated leaching losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from polymeric materials 

Use Amount used in EU Release factor to water Release to water 

PVC 51,827 tonnes/year 0.05% over lifetimea 25.9 tonnes/year

Paints, adhesives and sealants 1,180 tonnes/year – paints 0.15%/year over 5-7 year 

lifetime 

8.9-12.4 tonnes/year 

2,361 tonnes/year – sealants 0.15%/year over 10-30 

year lifetime 

35.4-106 tonnes/year 

Total EU 70.2-147.9 tonnes/year 

Regional total 7.0-14.79 tonnes/year 

Note: a) Emission factor applies to yearly consumption figure 

b) Emission factor applies to total amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in article 

(= amount used/year × lifetime of article) 

An alternative approach to estimating the leaching losses from PVC and other polymer use is 

considered in Appendix F. This gives a release to water of around 73-93 tonnes/year (plus a loss 

of around 30-37 tonnes/year to soil, and 2 tonnes/year to waste water from leaching from 

landfills), which is in reasonable agreement with the figures derived in Table 3.3. The approach 

taken in Appendix F requires a large number of assumptions and so there is a large degree of 

uncertainty in the figures derived. Therefore the figures from Table 3.3 will be used in the

environmental modelling to estimate the regional concentrations. The figures estimated for the 

leaching loss are likely to overestimate the actual loss as not all the PVC, paint or sealant 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffin will come into contact with water. There are also

uncertainties in determining representative lifetimes of products such as sealants, which have a 

large bearing on the resulting release estimate. In addition, some of the emission factors used

also include losses of particulates etc. due to weathering effects and erosion, as well as leaching 

loss. The environmental behaviour of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in these particulates is 

unknown (see also Section 3.1.0.2.10). 

3.1.0.2.10 Waste in the environment and ultimate disposal 

“Waste remaining in the environment”

As well as volatilisation and leaching losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from 

products/articles, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may also enter into the environment as a 

62 
R331_0208_env

result of “waste” from the products themselves during their useful lifetime and disposal. Such 

waste could include erosion/particulate losses of polymeric products, paints and sealants as a 

result of exposure to wind and rain or may occur as a result of their mode of use (e.g. wear on 

conveyor belts, flooring etc.). Similarly, when products/articles are dismantled or disposed of at

the end of their useful life there is again a potential for this type of particulate release. In either 

case the end result is that polymeric particles containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

could enter into the environment. 

No agreed method is currently included in the Technical Guidance Document for addressing 

these potential sources of release. These emissions were considered in the draft risk assessments 

of several “phthalate” plasticisers. Appendix F uses a similar approach as taken in the draft risk

assessment of DEHP to derive the overall release figures for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

as particulates: 

Release to air = 1.1-1.3 tonne/year 

Release to surface water = 275-324 tonnes/year 

Release to waste water = 100-166 tonnes/year 

 Release to urban/industrial soil = 826-973 tonnes/year 

As these releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin are essentially bound within a polymer 

matrix, the actual bioavailabilty and environmental behaviour of the medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin is unknown. There are no agreed methods available in the current Technical Guidance 

for dealing with these types of releases in the risk assessment. 

Ultimate disposal

Since medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are not generally reacted or changed during their 

lifecycle, ultimately all the chlorinated paraffin used in products will be disposed of at the end of

the products’ useful life. Disposal by landfill or incineration is likely to be the ultimate

destination of much of the chlorinated paraffin. For some applications, e.g. metal working fluids, 

some of the chlorinated paraffin could be destroyed in processes such as recycling of metal 

swarf. For other processes e.g. recycling of carbonless copy paper, the majority of the

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin present is likely to end up in the sludge produced in the 

process, which will again most likely be disposed of by incineration or landfill. 

As a first approximation, it can be assumed that the annual consumption of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin is used to replace the articles disposed of each year, and so the amount of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins disposed of to landfill and incineration each year is of the

order of 60,000 tonnes. The vast majority of this amount is likely to be present in PVC articles, 

as this is the major use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

Of the possible disposal methods, incineration is likely to completely destroy the medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin. In landfills, chlorinated paraffins may be expected to be relatively stable for 

a number of years and so could be subject to leaching or volatilisation from the landfill. It is

currently not possible to quantify these releases. However, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

are expected to adsorb strongly onto soil and so leaching and volatilisation from landfill would 

63 
R331_0208_env

not be expected to be significant processes for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins compared 

with other sources of release (see Sections 3.1.0.6 and 3.1.0.7 and Appendix F). 

3.1.0.3 Summary of release estimates 

The releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to the environment from their production and 

use are summarised in Table 3.5. In most cases the releases are based on information specific to 

the industry, supplemented with default release estimates from the Technical Guidance 

Document where appropriate. 

The effects of the proposed risk reduction measures on short-chain chlorinated paraffins on the 

possible consumption, and hence release, of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are considered 

in Appendix E. 

In addition to these releases, there is also the possibility of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

being released to the environment as a result of weathering/erosion of particulate materials. 

These potential releases are estimated in Appendix F and summarised in Section 3.1.0.2.10. 

There is currently no agreed methodology available within the Technical Guidance Document to 

quantify or deal with these potential sources in the risk assessment as the actual bioavailability

and environmental behaviour of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin within the particles is

unknown. As a result, any environmental modelling of these releases is highly uncertain. For this 

reason, the regional PEC calculations have been carried out both with and without these releases 

and the possible effect of including these releases on the PECs is discussed in the following

Sections where appropriate. 

As mentioned in Section 1.2.3, C17, and to a much lesser extent, C16 chlorinated paraffins are

present as impurities in some types of long-chain chlorinated paraffins based on a C18-20 carbon

chain length. These substances are used in PVC applications, paints and leather fat liquors. 

A draft risk assessment of these products has recently been carried out (EA, 2001), using the 

TGD methodology. This estimated the total regional emissions of C16-17 chlorinated paraffins

from production and use of these long-chain chlorinated paraffins as 1,160-1,616 kg/year to air, 

226-254 kg/year to waste water treatment plants, 214-378 kg/year direct to surface water and 

351-808 kg/year to industrial/urban soil. The corresponding continental emissions were 

10,439-14,542 kg/year to air, 2,033-2,288 kg/year to waste water treatment plants, 

1,922-3,398 kg/year direct to surface water and 3,160-7,275 kg/year to industrial/urban soil.

These emission estimates include contributions from the emissions over the lifetime of products 

and also “waste remaining in the environment”. 

Based on these estimates, the C16-17 impurities present on long-chain chlorinated paraffins would 

only contribute around 0.5% to the total estimated environmental release of C14-17 chlorinated

paraffins. As the regional concentrations used in the risk characterisation (see Section 3.3) are 

based on actual monitoring data, these will already include the contributions from the C16-17

impurities present in long-chain chlorinated paraffins and so it is not necessary to consider these 

releases further here. 

64 
Table 3.5Summary of environmental release estimates for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins Use Comment Estimated local release Estimated regional release 

(kg/year) 

Site A 0.22 kg/day to waste water over 300 days 65 kg/year to waste water Site B 0.06 kg/day to surface water over 300 days Site C 0.06 kg/day to surface water over 300 days 

Production (4 sites) 

Site D 1×10-5 kg/day to surface water over 300 days 

Compounding site(formulation) 

0.025a kg/day to waste water over 300 days 

Conversion site (processing) 0.185a kg/day to waste water; 

0.185a kg/day to air, over 300 days 

Use in PVCe – 

plastisol coatingh 

Combined compounding and conversion site 

0.21a kg/day to waste water; 0.185a kg/day to air, over 300 days 

869 kg/year to waste water and 35kg/year to air from compounding 10,215 kg/year to waste water and 10,215 kg/year to air from convers

Compounding site(formulation) 

0.092a, 0.50b and 0.0425c kg/day to waste water; 

0.055a, 0.3b and 0.0255c kg/day to air, over 300 days 

Conversion site (processing) 0.28a, 0.3b and 0.255c kg/day to waste water; 

0.28a, 0.3b and 0.255c kg/day to air, over 300 days 

Use in PVCe – 

extrusion/other 

Combined compounding and conversion site 

0.372a, 0.80b and 0.298c kg/day to waste water; 

0.335a, 0.6b and 0.281c kg/day to air, over 300 days 

Compounding site(formulation) 

0.0465 kg/day to waste water; 0.0155 kg/day to air, over 300 days 

Conversion site (processing) 0.155 kg/day to waste water; 

0.155 kg/day to air, over 300 days

Use in rubber/plasticse

Combined compounding and conversion site 

0.202 kg/day to waste water; 0.171 kg/day to air, over 300 days

32.25 kg/year to waste water and10.75 kg/year to air from compounding107.5 kg/year to waste water and107.5 kg/year to air from conversio

Sealants/ adhesives 

Formulation/use negligible negligible 

Table 3.5 continued overleaf. 

65 
Table 3.5 continued

Use Comment Estimated local release Estimated regional release 

(kg/year) 

Formulation 0.15 kg/day to waste water; 

0.05 kg/day to air, over 300 days 

{354 kg/year to waste water 118 kg/year to air} 

Industrial application of paints (Processing) 

{0.059 kg/day to waste water, over 300 days} {118 kg/year to waste water} 

Paints and varnishes 

Application by general public (private use)

3×10-7 kg/day to waste water, over 365 days 

Formulation 0.83 kg/day to waste water, over 300 days 1,488 kg/year to waste water Use in oil based fluids (processing) 

0.33 kg/day to waste water (large site); 0.3 kg/day to waste water (small site), over 300 days 

38,100 kg/year to waste water 

Metal cutting/working fluids 

Use in emulsifiable fluids (processing) 

0.025 kg/day to waste water, over 300 days plus an intermittent discharge of 25 kg/event to waste water 

99,200 kg/year to waste water 

Leather fat liquors Formulation {1.1 kg/day to waste water; 

0.35 kg/day to air, over 300 days}i 

{315 kg/year to waste water and 1kg/year to air} 

Use – complete processing 

of raw hides 

0.9 kg/day to waste water 1,050 kg/year to waste water 

Use – processing of “wet 

blue”

3.6 kg/day 

Carbonless copy paper 

Recycling 14.8 kg/day to waste water 3,705 kg/year to waste water 

Polymers (PVC, other plastics, paints, sealants etc.) 

Service life not applicable 14,790 kg/year to waste water and 

6,120 kg/year to air 

Table 3.5 continued overleaf. 

66 
Table 3.5 continued Use Comment Estimated local release Estimated regional release 

(kg/year) 

“Waste remainingin the environment” 

Service life and disposal not applicable 111-113 kg/year to air 

10,000-16,600 to waste water (sp7,000-11,620 kg/year to wwtp and 3,000-4,980 to surface water)g27,500-32,400 kg/year direct tosurface water 82,600-97,300 kg/year to urban/industrial soil 

Total (not including “waste remaining in the environment”) 

 17,027 kg/year to air 

 170,408 kg/year to water (split 119,286 kg/year to wwtp and 51,1kg/year to surface water)g 

Total (including“waste remaining in the environment) 

17,138-17,140 kg/year to air 207,908-219,408 kg/year to water (split 126,286-130,906 kg/year to wwtp and 81,622-88,502 kg/year tsurface water)82,600-97,300 kg/year to urban/industrial soil. 

Notes: a) Open systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

b) Partially open systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

c) Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

d) Continental release = total EU release-regional release . e) Releases estimated from UCD, 1998 assuming that 50% of the initial release to air will condense and eventually reach waste water. 

f) Regional and continental releases from conversion assume no air emission control is applied. The estimated emissions would be 10 times lower 

but the actual overall proportion of the industry with such controls is unknown. 

g) Releases to waste water assume a 70% connection rate to wwtp. h) Releases from car underbody coating and sealing, and rotational moulding are thought to be negligible during the processing step. i) Industry-specific release information is also available and has been used to estimated the PEClocal in preference to these default values. 

{ } – Denotes estimates are based on the Technical Guidance default values only. 

67 
R331_0208_env

3.1.0.4 Degradation 

3.1.0.4.1 Abiotic degradation 

Second order rate constants (kOH) for reaction with atmospheric hydroxyl radicals of 

8.0-14.4×10-12

 cm3 molecule-1 s

-1 have been calculated for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

with chlorine contents between 40% wt. Cl and 56% wt. Cl using the method of Atkinson 

(Hoechst AG, 1988 and 1991). Similar values for the hydroxyl radical rate constant can be 

estimated from structure using the Syracuse AOP estimation programme. 

Assuming an atmospheric concentration of hydroxyl radicals of 5×105

 molecules cm-3 allows

atmospheric half-lives of 1-2 days to be estimated. 

For the EUSES modelling used in this risk assessment, a value for kOH of 

8×10-12

 cm3 molecule-1s

-1 was used. This corresponds to an atmospheric half-life of 2 days. 

Howard et al. (1975) reported that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with chlorine contents of

45% wt. Cl and 52% wt. Cl were not decomposed when exposed to high energy light (13% of 

energy in the 220-280 nm range) in petroleum ether. They concluded that direct photolysis of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is unlikely to be a significant degradation pathway in the 

environment. 

In aqueous systems, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are not expected to degrade 

significantly by abiotic processes such as hydrolysis. 

3.1.0.4.2 Biodegradation 

Hoechst AG (1976 and 1977) reported 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) values for 

various medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. Few details of how the tests were carried out are

given. The results are reported in Table 3.6 and show little or no biodegradation when compared 

with the measured chemical oxygen demand (COD) values. 

Table 3.6 BOD5 and COD values for various medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (Hoechst AG, 1976 and 1977) 

Chemical COD (mg O2/g) BOD5 (mg O2/g) Percentage biodegradation

C14-17, 41% Cl* 1,140 <10 <0.8% 

C14-17, 41% Cl 590 <10 <1.6% 

C14-17, 49% Cl 1,380 20 1.4% 

Note: *Preparation containing chlorinated paraffin and polyethylene glycol. 

Madeley and Birtley (1980) determined the biodegradability of several commercial

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins using extended BOD tests. The substances were tested as 

emulsions at concentrations of 2, 10 and 20 mg/l. Both acclimated and unacclimated 

microorganisms were used in the tests. Acclimated microorganisms were cultured from soil 

collected close to a chlorinated paraffin production plant and these were acclimated to 

68 
R331_0208_env

chlorinated paraffins by incubation for 8 weeks with a basal medium containing 20-50 mg/l of

each chlorinated paraffin being tested. Non-acclimated microorganisms were obtained from the 

effluent of a laboratory-scale activated sludge unit treating domestic sewage. The results of the 

tests are shown in Table 3.7. From these results, the potential for degradation of the chlorinated

paraffin appears to increase with decreasing chlorination. 

Table 3.7BOD values for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (Madeley and Birtley, 1980) 

Substance Microorganism BOD (g O /g substance)

source day 5 day 25 

0.02 0.32 0.41 0.29 15% 

acclimated 0.30 0.49 0.54 0.42 22%

C14-17, 45% Cl non-acclimated 0.05 10% 

0.37 0.49 0.57

2 biodegradationa at day 

25 day 10 day 15 day 20 

C14-17, 40% Cl non-acclimated 0.37 

0.10

0.14 0.19 0.18 

acclimated 0.20 32%

C14-17, 52% Cl non-acclimated 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.07 5% 

acclimated 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.09 0.10 7%

C14-17, 58% Cl non-acclimated no significant oxygen uptake 0% 

acclimated no significant oxygen uptake 0% 

Note: a) The approximate percentage biodegradation has been estimated from the BOD/ThOD ratio. The ThOD (theoretical oxygen 

demand) has been estimated (ThOD (g O /g substance) = 16[2×c+0.5×(h-cl)]/mw; where c=number of carbon atoms, 

h=number of hydrogen atoms, cl=number of chlorine atoms and MW = molecular weight) for an example formula for each 

commercial substance as follows: 40% Cl - C H Cl - ThOD=1.92 g O /g substance; 45% Cl - C H Cl - ThOD=1.77 g O /g 

substance; 52% Cl - C H Cl - ThOD=1.50 g O /g substance; 58% Cl - C H Cl - ThOD=1.25 g O /g substance. Slightly 

different degradation percentages would be obtained if other example formulae were used. 

2

15 28 4 2 16 29 5 2

17 29 7 2 15 24 8 2

The removal of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has been studied using non-adapted 

activated sludge. Few experimental details of the test conditions used are reported. However,

removal was determined by chemical oxygen demand determination, presumably of effluent or

water in the system. The substances tested were Chlorparaffin 40 fl nv (C14-17, 41% wt. Cl), and 

Hordalub 70 VT (C14-17, 41% wt. Cl + polyethylene glycol). In both cases, removal was reported 

to be >90% over 5 and 10 days, but it was also indicated that the majority of the removal was by 

adsorption onto the sludge rather than biodegradation (Hoechst AG, 1976 and 1977). 

The degradation of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has been studied by Omori et al. (1987) 

using a variety of bacterial cultures. The medium-chain chlorinated paraffins studied had average 

chemical formulae of C14.5H26.6Cl4.4 (43% wt. Cl) and C15.4H25.4Cl5.6 (50% wt. Cl) and 

degradation was studied by monitoring the release of chloride ion. Firstly, degradation of the 

50% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin was studied using resting cell cultures of Pseudomonas

aeroginosa, Achromobacter delmarvae, A. cycloclastes, Micrococcus sp. and Corynebacterium 

hydrocarboclastus grown on glycerol. These bacteria had previously been shown to degrade 

1-chlorohexadecane as well as some other mono- and dichlorinated alkanes. Little or no 

degradation (chloride release) was observed when the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin was 

incubated with the bacteria for 24 hours at 30o

C. 

69 
R331_0208_env

For the cometabolic degradation studies, bacterial strains (designated HK-3, HK-6, HK-8 and 

HK-10) were isolated from soil using an enrichment culture containing n-hexadecane as the sole 

carbon source. The cometabolic biodegradation experiments were carried out using the single 

bacterial strains (HK-3, HK-6 or HK-8) incubated at 30o

C for 48 hours in mineral medium 

containing 0.05% (i.e. 500 mg/l) n-hexadecane and 0.1% (i.e. 1,000 mg/l) of the 50% wt. Cl

product. In addition, biodegradation of both the 43.5% wt. Cl and 50% wt. Cl products

(concentration equivalent to 180 mg Cl/l) was studied under similar conditions (36 hour 

incubations) utilizing a mixed bacterial inoculum (containing all 4 strains) previously exposed to

5,000 mg/l of n-hexadecane. In the experiments using the pure bacterial strains, both HK-3 and 

HK-8 showed appreciable degradation of the 50% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin, 

releasing 53 and 38 mg/l of chloride into the mineral medium (as the starting concentration of the 

chlorinated paraffin was around 1,000 mg/l, these figures indicate that around 8-11% of the 

chlorine present was released). The third strain tested, HK-6, showed less degradation (10 mg/l

(2%) chloride released). It was noted that the pH fell as the dechlorination proceeded and this 

increase in acidity may have caused bacterial growth and hence degradation to reduce during the 

experiment. In the experiments using all four strains of bacteria, both medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins tested showed significant degradation, with 77 mg/l and 85 mg/l of chloride being 

released from the 50% wt. Cl and 43.5% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffins respectively. In this case 

the starting chlorinated paraffin concentration was 180 mg Cl/l, and so around 43-47% of the

chlorine present was released during the degradation. In further experiments using activated 

sludge from a municipal waste water treatment plant that had been acclimatized to n-hexadecane 

for 60 days, only a small amount of dechlorination (2% of the chlorine present was released) of 

the 50% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin was seen over 48 hours at 30o

C (Omori et al.,

1987). The authors concluded that the degradation seen was consistent with that previously 

observed for other chlorinated alkanes in that a variety of enzymes are required to degrade 

chlorinated paraffins and that the most likely mode of degradation involves firstly dechlorination 

of the terminal methyl groups, with subsequent oxidation to form chlorinated fatty acids, which 

are then broken down to 2- or 3- chlorinated fatty acids via β-oxidation. 

Fisk et al. (1998b) estimated half-lives for biodegradation of 12 days for 14C-labelled C16H31Cl3

and 58 days for C16H21Cl13 in an aerobic sediment system containing oligochaetes (Lumbriculus 

variegatus). The extent of degradation was determined at day 0 and day 14 of the experiments 

based on the difference between toluene-extractable 14C measurements (taken to represent 

unchanged chlorinated paraffin) and total 14C measurements (taken to represent degraded 

chlorinated paraffin). However, the results of this test should be treated with caution as the

identity of the 14C present in the samples was not determined, and it was only assumed that the 

non-extractable 14C represented metabolites. 

3.1.0.4.3 Summary of degradation 

No standard ready or inherent biodegradation tests results are available for medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins. From the available information, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be 

considered to be not biodegradable in such test systems and so a biodegradation rate constant of 

0 day-1 will be used in the risk assessment. Adsorption onto sludge is likely to be the major 

removal mechanism for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins during waste water treatment 

processes. Similar results on biodegradation were obtained for short-chain (C10-13) chlorinated 

70 
R331_0208_env

paraffins. For the short-chain chlorinated paraffin, an equilibrium removal percentage of 93% by 

adsorption onto the sludge was determined in a Coupled Units test (see the short-chain

chlorinated paraffins assessment for further details). Since the medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins have similar, but slightly higher log Kow values (and hence Koc values) to the C10-13

chlorinated paraffins, then a similar degree of removal by adsorption onto the sludge as found for

the short-chain chlorinated paraffins would also be expected for the medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins during waste water treatment. Therefore a removal rate of 93% by adsorption onto 

sewage sludge during waste water treatment will be used in this assessment. This value agrees 

well with the value of 91% removal by adsorption obtained in the SIMPLETREAT model. 

There is evidence that some microorganisms may be capable of degrading medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in the environment in acclimated or cometabolic systems. The potential for 

biodegradation appears to increase with decreasing chlorine content. However, it is not possible 

from the available data to derive rate constants for biodegradation in soil, surface water and

sediment systems. As a worst case approach, no biodegradation will be assumed in these media 

in the PEC calculations. The effect of varying the biodegradation rate on the risk characterisation 

is analysed in Appendix H. 

Hydrolysis is not expected to be a significant degradation process for medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins in the environment. An atmospheric half-life of 1-2 days is estimated for medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins for reaction with hydroxyl radicals. A value for the rate constant for the 

reaction (kOH) of 8×10-12

 cm3 molecule-1 s

-1 will be used for the environmental modelling in the

risk assessment. 

3.1.0.5 Uptake and accumulation 

3.1.0.5.1 Bioconcentration from water 

Fish

The accumulation of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl paraffin in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) has

been studied over 60 days in a GLP study (Madeley et al., 1983b). The substance tested was a 

commercial product mixed with a n-pentadecane-8-14C that had been chlorinated to a similar 

degree. Two concentrations were tested; 1.05 mg/l and 4.5 mg/l, both based on mean measured

concentrations over the 60 day period. Acetone (500 ppm v/v - this concentration was required to 

maintain the test substance in suspension) was used as cosolvent and a flow-through system was

used for the test. Concentrations of chlorinated paraffin were measured by both parent compound 

analysis and by radioactivity measurements and similar concentrations in the fish were obtained 

by both methods. The bioconcentration factors obtained were 32-45 l/kg on a wet weight basis at 

the 1.05 mg/l exposure concentration and 42-67 l/kg on a wet weight basis at the 4.5 mg/l 

exposure concentration. The concentrations of chlorinated paraffin used in these tests were above 

the water solubility of the substance in pure water. A high concentration of acetone was used in 

order to prepare stable test solutions, and the actual water solubility of the substance in the test

system is not known. It is possible that not all the chlorinated paraffin present was in true 

solution during the test and so the measured BCF values may represent the lower limit of the true

BCF.

71 
R331_0208_env

The results of a preliminary study using a C14-17, 45% wt. Cl paraffin with rainbow trout 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) have been reported (Madeley and Pearson, 1980). The chlorinated 

paraffin was introduced into the test medium as an acetone solution (the actual concentration of 

acetone present in the test solution was not given). In the study, the fish were exposed to nominal 

concentrations of either 0.1 mg/l or 1 mg/l of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin for 28 days

using flow-through conditions. The mean measured concentrations of the chlorinated paraffin in 

the test solutions were reported to be 0.01 mg/l and 0.18 mg/l for the two exposures, however, 

there was a long delay before the samples could be analysed and bacterial growth was present in 

the media. This casts some doubt over the validity of these measurements. The concentrations 

found in the fish after 28 days were 6.0 mg/kg wet weight for fish exposed to the lower 

concentration, and 50 mg/kg wet weight for fish exposed to the higher concentration. Thus BCFs

of 50-60 l/kg were obtained based on the nominal exposure concentrations and 280-600 l/kg 

when based on the measured water concentrations. It is possible that not all the chlorinated 

paraffin present was in true solution during the test and there is some uncertainty over the 

measured levels in water and so the values reported may represent the lower limit of the true

BCF.

Fisk et al. (1999) studied the uptake of a 14C-labelled medium-chain chlorinated paraffin by eggs

and larvae of Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) as part of a 20-day embryo-larval toxicity study. 

The substance tested had an average formula of C14H23.3Cl6.7, 55% wt. Cl. The measured 

exposure concentrations used were 1.4, 12, 120, 420 and 1,600 μg/l. The resulting concentrations 

in the larvae at approximately 3-days post hatch were 0.24, 8.2, 45, 84, and 51 mg/kg, 

respectively, leading to BCF values of approximately 32-680 l/kg (the BCF generally decreasing 

with increasing concentration). Similar results were found for the eggs. Further details of this 

study are given in Section 3.2.1.1. The exposure period in this experiment is relatively short and 

no indication is available as to whether equilibrium was reached. The BCF values measured 

probably represent the lower limit of the true value for fish in this system. 

Bengtsson et al. (1979) studied the uptake of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin by Bleak 

(Alburnus alburnus). The chlorinated paraffin tested was a C14-17, 50% wt. Cl substance. The 

tests were performed at 10oC using a semi-static procedure in which the test solutions containing 

125 μg/l of the test substance were renewed every two to three days over the 14 day exposure 

period. A seven day depuration period followed the 14 day exposure period. The water used in 

the experiment was Baltic Sea water with a salinity of 7‰, and acetone was present in all 

aquaria, including controls, at a concentration of 0.1 ml/l. The fish used in the experiment had an 

average weight of 4.5 g and were not fed during the exposure period. Six groups of 15 fish were

used for both the exposure and control solutions. No mortalities or effects on behaviour were 

seen in fish exposed to the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin during the test. Uptake of the 

chlorinated paraffin occurred during the exposure period, with whole body levels of the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin of around 5 mg/kg fresh body weight (read from graph) being 

determined at 14 days. From this value a BCF of around 40 l/kg can be estimated. Little 

reduction in the body concentration appeared to occur during the 7 day depuration period. The 

analytical method used (neutron activation analysis) is not specific for the chlorinated paraffin 

and so may also include any chlorinated metabolites present in the fish, which may result in an 

overestimate of the actual chlorinated paraffin concentration in the fish if substantial metabolism 

was occurring. Again, in this experiment the concentration tested was slightly above the water

72 
R331_0208_env

solubility of the substance in pure water, leading to the possibility that not all the test substance

was present in true solution in the experiment. Also, the exposure period in the study is relatively 

short and so it is not certain that equilibrium would have been reached. 

As a result of the inadequacies of the above tests, the Chlorinated Paraffins Sector Group of Euro

Chlor voluntarily agreed to perform a new fish BCF test for use in this risk assessment. The 

study was carried out using rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and the method used was 

based on the OECD 305 test guideline, using a flow-through system (Thompson et al., 2000). 

The test substance was a chlorinated n-pentadecane-8-14C (chlorine content was 51% by weight) 

mixed with a non-radio-labelled C14-17, 51% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin. The mixture tested

contained 49% of the 14C-labelled component and 51% of the non-labelled component. The test

vessels used in the experiment were glass tanks with a working volume of 87 litres. One test 

vessel was used for each treatment group (two concentrations were tested; 1 μg/l and 5 μg/l), 

control and solvent control group. A continuous flow-rate of dilution water of 500 ml/min was

used throughout the test. 

Stock solutions of the test substance were prepared in acetone and were continually dosed, by

syringe pumps, into glass chambers where they were mixed (with stirring) with the in-flowing 

dilution water prior to delivery to the test vessel. The same flow rate of the test substance stock 

solution (0.00139 ml/min or 2.0 ml/day) was used for both the 1 μg/l and 5 μg/l test 

concentrations. The final acetone concentration in the test solutions was 0.0028 ml/l, and this 

concentration was also used in the solvent control. The vessels were equilibrated to the test

solutions for 6 days before the fish were added to the vessels. The concentrations present in the 

test vessels were measured on day -5, -4, -2 and -1 of this equilibration period (2 samples from 

each exposure concentration were taken on each sampling day). For the 1 μg/l concentration, the 

measured values were 0.86 and 1.1 μg/l, 1.0 and 1.3 μg/l, 1.3 and 1.5 μg/l, and 1.1 and 1.1 μg/l 

on the four sampling days respectively, and the values for the 5 μg/l concentration were 3.3 and

3.7 μg/l, 4.8 and 4.8 μg/l, 4.3 and 6.0 μg/l, and 4.8 and 5.9 μg/l respectively. These results 

indicated that the diluter system used was functioning correctly prior to the start of the test. 

At the start of the exposure phase groups of 85 rainbow trout were added to each vessel and the 

exposure phase was continued for 35 days. After the exposure phase, the fish were transferred to 

a set of identical vessels, but which received dilution water only, for a further 42 days in order to 

study the depuration of the substance. The fish were analysed for the presence of the test 

substance using a radiochemical method (the method used would include any parent compound 

and any radiolabelled metabolites present). This was carried out on days 3, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35 

of the exposure phase and days 3, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 of the depuration phase of the 

experiment. In addition, water samples were also analysed (again by a radiochemical method) for

the presence of the test substance. These analyses were carried out on 4 days prior to the start of 

the fish exposure (to ensure that the test substance delivery system was functioning correctly), 

and then on days 0, 1, 3 and at least once per week thereafter during the exposure part of the

study. The mean measured water concentrations in the test vessels during the exposure phase 

were 0.93 μg/l (93% of nominal 1 μg/l) and 4.9 μg/l (98% of 5 μg/l nominal), and the mean 

measured exposure concentrations were used in the BCF calculations. The measured water 

concentrations were generally ≥87% of the nominal value on all sampling dates except for on 

day 28 of the experiment, where the levels fell to around 46% of nominal in the low exposure 

73 
R331_0208_env

group and 23% of nominal in the high exposure group. The measured levels had increased on 

day 29, but were still less than expected. By day 30 the measured levels recovered to be again 

≥87% of the nominal values. There was no obvious reason why the levels declined on day 28, as 

all equipment appeared to be functioning normally. 

During the test the fish were fed with a commercial fish food at a rate of 2% of their body 

weight/day. The dissolved oxygen concentration was in the range 7.8 to 10.2 mg/l throughout the 

test and the temperature was maintained at 14.7-15.3o

C. The water hardness was 43-50 mg/l as 

CaCO3 and the pH was 6.96-7.87. One fish mortality occurred in the higher treatment group on 

day 3 of the study (indicating that the mortality criterion for a valid test had been met). 

The analysis of the fish concentrations carried out during the experiment indicated that a steady 

state was being reached at both exposure concentrations (the increase in concentration between 

day 14 and day 21 was <6%). This was also indicated by the day 28 fish analyses, but these may 

have been influenced by the apparent fall in water concentration at this time. However, the

day 35 data indicated that the concentrations may still have been increasing, and it was less 

certain that the steady state had been reached. The measured fish concentrations and the resulting 

BCF values are shown in Table 3.8. The concentrations are also shown graphically in Figure 3.1. 

Table 3.8Bioconcentration of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in rainbow trout (Thompson et al., 2000) 

Mean measured exposure 

concentration (mg/l) 

Exposure period (days) Mean measured tissue 

concentration during uptake 

phase (mg/kg fresh weight) 

BCF (l/kg)c 

0.00093±0.00025 3 0.36±0.04 387

7 0.43±0.02 462

14 0.54±0.02 581

21 0.57±0.06 613

28 0.55±0.20 591

35 0.80±0.08 860

0.0049±0.0017 3 0.71±0.34 145

7 0.52±0.07 106

14 0.97±0.10 198

21 1.0±0.17a 204 

28 1.1±0.17 224

35 1.3±0.19b 265 

Note: a) The results for the analysis of 1 out of the 4 fish sampled was considered to be an outlier (exceeding the mean 

concentration of the remaining fish by a factor >3) and so was not used in calculation of the mean. The mean if this value is 

included is 2.96±3.89, which is equivalent to a BCF of 604 l/kg. 

b) The results for the analysis of 2 out of the 8 fish sampled were considered to be outliers (exceeding the mean 

concentration of the remaining fish by a factor >3) and so were not used in calculation of the mean. The mean if these values 

are included is 2.86±3.42, which is equivalent to a BCF of 583 l/kg. 

c) The standard deviations of the individual BCF values were not given.

74 
R331_0208_env

Figure 3.1: Accumlation in rainbow trout

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Exposure period (days)

Tissue concentration (mg/kg)

Low exposure concentration

High exposure concentration

Fitted using kinetic data

Uptake Depuration

Note: Error bars represent the mean value +/- the standard deviation.

As the data indicated that steady state may not have been reached during the 35 day exposure 

period, the BCF was also determined by the kinetic method given in the OECD 305 test 

guideline. The uptake rate constant was determined to be 48.7 day-1 for the lower exposure 

concentration and 14.2 day-1 for higher exposure concentration. The depuration rate constant was 

determined to be 0.0448 day-1 and 0.0407 day-1 for the two exposure groups respectively. The 

fitted kinetic data are shown in Figure 3.1. Thus the kinetic BCF can be determined as 1,087 for

the lower exposure group and 349 for the higher exposure group. The kinetic data also allowed 

estimates for the depuration half-life of 15-17 days and the time to 95% of steady state of 

67-74 days to be made. The estimate for the time to 95% of steady state indicates that the 

exposure period employed in this study may not have been long enough for steady state to have 

been reached and so the kinetic BCF data is considered more reliable. It should be noted that the 

analytical method used does not distinguish between the radio-labelled parent compound and any 

radio-labelled metabolites formed (including radio-labelled carbon that is incorporated into fish

tissues) and so the BCF determined may overestimate the actual accumulation potential of the

substance. 

Darnerud et al. (1983) studied the disposition of a radiolabelled medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin (n-hexadecane-1-14C, 34% wt. Cl) in carp (Cyprinus carpio) and bleak (Alburnus 

alburnus). Two series of experiments were carried out with carp. In the first experiment, 3 carp 

were injected with the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (as a fat emulsion) in the dorsal aorta 

and were then transferred to tubes filled with water. The 14CO2 excreted by the fish was then 

collected over a 96 hour period. In the second experiment with carp, fish were again injected 

with the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin and then placed in tanks with a continuous flow of 

water. Fish were subjected to whole-body autoradiography after 1, 5 and 13 days. In the

experiments with bleak, 10 fish were exposed to a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

concentration of 125 μg/l in the water (salinity 7‰) for 14 days. After this time the fish were

75 
R331_0208_env

placed in clean water for 35 days. At various times during the experiment, fish were removed 

from the tanks for whole-body autoradiography. 

In the carp experiments, the cumulative excretion of 14CO2 was found to be 6.4% of the injected 

dose over 96 hours. Whole-body autoradiography indicated that high levels of radioactivity were 

found in bile and intestinal contents at all post-injection times. The highest concentrations of

radioactivity were found in kidney, liver, nasal mucosa and fat 1 day after injection. After 5 days, 

the radioactivity at these sites was still elevated, but in addition, marked uptake of radioactivity

had occurred in the gills, testis and brain. At 13 days after injection, the concentrations of 

radioactivity in tissues had generally reduced, although elevated levels were still present in liver. 

In the experiments with bleak, marked uptake of radioactivity was seen in the gills, nasal cavity, 

skin, liver and fat, with radioactivity also present in brain, bile and intestinal contents, after 1 day 

exposure. After 14 days exposure the amount of radioactivity in liver and gills had increased 

considerably, and radioactivity was also present in brain, nasal cavity, skin and eye (particularly

the outer layer of the lens). The distribution pattern of radioactivity between the various organs 

was found to be similar in fish placed in clean water, but by day 35 of depuration the amount of 

radioactivity present had decreased markedly. The presence of 14C in bile and intestine of all fish

indicated that bile was a significant excretion route in fish (Darnerud et al., 1983). 

Invertebrates

Madeley and Thompson (1983) determined bioconcentration factors in mussels (Mytilus edulis) 

at the end of a 60 day toxicity study with a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (GLP study). The 

substance used in the test was a commercial C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product that was mixed with a 

small amount of radiolabelled chlorinated paraffin (n-pentadecane-8-

14C, 51% wt. Cl). The test 

substance was dissolved in acetone before dilution with sea water (salinity 34.0-35.5‰, 

pH 8.1-8.3, dissolved oxygen 6.15-8.0 mg/l, and temperature 15oC). The test used a flow-through 

system in order to maintain the concentration in the exposure vessels but, as the study was 

actually designed to determine the toxicity to mussels, relatively high nominal concentrations of 

0.56 and 5.6 mg/l of the test substance were used (these are greater than the reported water 

solubility of 0.005-0.027 mg/l). The acetone concentration in the exposure vessels was 500 ppm 

(v/v) (0.5 ml/l) and a solvent control containing acetone at this concentration was run. The mean 

measured concentrations were 0.22 and 3.8 mg/l in the two exposure groups based on 

radiochemical analysis. The higher concentration tested was reported to be cloudy in appearance, 

indicating that undissolved test substance may have been present. The organisms were fed with 

algae (Platymonas suecica) at a rate of 1.0-1.1×109 cells/day. The alga were continuously dosed 

to the in-flowing dilution water. No mortality occurred in the test, but a reduction in filter 

feeding activity was seen at the higher test concentration. The bioconcentration factors (BCF 

(mg/kg wet mussel)/(mg/l test solution)) were found to depend on the exposure concentration, 

with higher BCFs being determined at the lower exposure concentration. This is probably the 

result of incomplete dissolution of the test substance at the higher concentration, and to a lesser 

extent at the lower concentration. The BCFs were determined as 2,182 l/kg (based on parent 

compound analysis) or 2,856 l/kg (based on 14C-measurements) in the organisms exposed to 

0.22 mg/l, and 339 l/kg (parent compound analysis) or 429 l/kg (14C measurements) in the 

organisms exposed to 3.8 mg/l. The similarity between the values obtained by the two analytical 

76 
R331_0208_env

methods indicates that the majority of the 14C present in the organism must have been as parent 

compound rather than metabolites. 

Consideration of available data

The most reliable fish BCF value comes from the recent Thompson et al. (2000) study with

rainbow trout using low concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. Here, the 

kinetically determined BCFs were in the range 349-1,087 l/kg but the analytical method used did 

not distinguish between parent compound and metabolites and so these represent the realistic 

upper limit for the true BCF of the substance. 

In the majority of the other bioconcentration experiments, the concentrations of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin tested were above the solubility in pure water. Acetone was used as

co-solvent in the experiments, but it is likely that not all the chlorinated paraffin present in the 

test systems was in true solution. If this was the case then the BCF values obtained may 

underestimate the true BCF value. This was seen in the experiments with mussels, where the 

BCF was found to increase with decreasing test concentration, and so the BCF at the lower test 

concentration (BCF 2,182-2,856 l/kg) is considered to be more reliable. For the 60-day 

experiments with fish, no such concentration dependence was seen, and similar values of 

32-67 l/kg were determined in all tests (using two different fish species and a test concentration

range of 36). However, it is still possible that these values may underestimate the true value. One 

possible approach to this problem would be to assume that the organisms were only exposed to 

the substance at its solubility, even though the nominal concentrations were much higher. Using 

the solubility of 27 μg/l, for the three fish exposure concentrations of 125 μg/l, 1.05 mg/l and 

4.5 mg/l (Bengtsson et al. (1979) and Madeley et al. (1983b) studies) the BCF values would be 

185 l/kg, 1,244-1,750 l/kg and 7,000-11,200 l/kg respectively. It should be noted that if exposure 

were limited to the solubility in each case then the levels in fish might be expected to be similar 

for each exposure, and the BCF based on nominal concentrations should decrease with 

increasing exposure concentration - neither of these were seen. A possible explanation of this 

would be if the “undissolved” fraction was contributing to the total level in fish (e.g. if it was

absorbed onto external surfaces) or if the substance did not have long enough to equilibrate and

the lower test concentrations had a dissolved fraction below the water solubility. From the

available bioconcentration data it is not possible to determine which, if any, of these effects are 

occurring. 

Other experiments with fish or fish larvae (e.g. Fisk et al. (1999) and Madeley and Pearson 

(1980) studies) gave BCF values around 600 l/kg for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins when

tested at concentrations around the water solubility, but again there are some uncertainties 

around the results from these studies. 

According to the Technical Guidance Document, the bioconcentration factor (BCF) for fish can 

be estimated from the following equations: 

log BCF = 0.85 log Kow – 0.70 for log Kow <6 

or log BCF = -0.20×(log Kow)2

 + 2.74×log Kow – 4.72 for log Kow >6 

 

77 
R331_0208_env

Since for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins the log Kow is generally >6 then the second of 

these two equations is more applicable. Using a log Kow value of 7 as being representative of

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, a BCF value of 45,710 l/kg can be estimated. 

An alternative predictive method is available in the SRC BCFWIN program. Using the formula 

C15H26Cl6 as an example, and using the log Kow value of 7, gives a predicted BCF of 1,549 l/kg. 

This program makes a correction for large numbers of CH2 groups in a molecule, which reduces 

the predicted BCF. 

From the available data, a fish BCF of 1,087 l/kg is the most reliable for use in the risk 

assessment. This was obtained by a kinetic method from an experiment using low concentrations 

of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. This value is supported by other experimental studies 

(e.g. Fisk et al. (1999) and Madeley and Pearson (1980)) and is also in line with the prediction 

obtained from the SRC BCFWIN program. 

There are some limited data available for bioconcentration in mussels. In this study, BCFs of 

339-2,865 l/kg were determined. However, the concentrations tested (0.22 mg/l and 3.8 mg/l) 

were again well above the reported water solubility of the substance, and indeed there was visual 

evidence of undissolved test substance in the test solution of the highest concentration. Since 

mussels are filter feeders, there is the possibility that some of the uptake found could have been

as a result of ingestion of particles/droplets of undissolved test substance. Also in this study, the 

alga used as a food source appeared to have been constantly dosed in the inflow dilution water, 

which also contained the test substance. Thus there is the possibility that adsorption of the 

substance onto the alga prior to ingestion could have occurred and provided a further route of

uptake. Therefore the results of the mussel bioconcentration study, although they clearly show 

that uptake of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can occur, are difficult to interpret. This is

compounded by the fact that there are no standard test methods (e.g. OECD guidelines) for 

carrying out reliable mussel BCF studies, and there are currently no agreed methods within the 

Technical Guidance Document for dealing with this sort of data. Therefore, these data are not

considered further in this risk assessment. 

3.1.0.5.2 Accumulation from sediment and soil 

Worms

An experiment to investigate the uptake of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins by oligochaetes 

(Lumbriculus variegatus) from sediment has been carried out (Fisk et al., 1998b). The 

chlorinated paraffins used were synthesised by chlorination of 14C-hexadecane (labelled in the 

1-position for the 35% wt. Cl product, and uniformly labelled for the 69% wt. Cl product), and 

had the following average formulas: C16H30.7Cl3.3 35% wt. Cl and C16H20.6Cl13.4 69% wt. Cl. The

sediment used had the following composition: 76% sand, 21% silt and 3% clay; organic carbon

content 1.3-1.5% of dry weight. For each exposure concentration, 36 jars were filled with spiked

sediment to provide a 100:1 organic carbon:oligochaete lipid ratio (15 animals per jar) and the

jars were placed in flow-through aquaria maintained at 11.6o

C. The uptake period of the 

experiment was for 14 days (this was extended to 21 days in some cases), followed by a 42 day 

depuration period, where the animals were placed in clean sediment. Analysis of the 

78 
R331_0208_env

concentrations present in sediment, interstitial water and the oligochaetes was by 

14C measurements using a variety of extraction methods. Biota-sediment bioaccumulation factors 

were determined both from the rates of uptake and depuration, and also the equilibrium 

concentrations found in the organisms and sediment (equilibrium was reached within 

14-21 days). For the determination of the bioaccumulation factors, concentrations in the 

organisms were normalised to the lipid content and the sediment concentrations were normalised 

to the organic carbon content (also corrected for loss of 14C (possibly by biodegradation or 

metabolism)) as determined by the difference between toluene-extractable and total 

14C measurements. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 3.9. 

Table 3.9Uptake and accumulation of 14C-labelled chlorinated paraffin by Lumbriculus variegatus 

Substance Sediment

conc. at

14 days

(dry wt) 

Sediment 

organic 

carbon 

contentb 

Pore

water 

conc. 

Lipid 

conc.c 

Uptake 

rate 

constant 

(g/g/d) 

Depuration 

rate 

constant 

(d-1) 

Depuration 

half-life 

Kinetic 

BAFd 

“Steady 

state” 

BAFd 

C16H30.7Cl3.3 47.1 μg/kg 1.4% - 2.5% 9.3×10-2 2.1×10-2 33 days 4.4 0.7 

135 μg/kg 1.3% 0.1

μg/l 

2.3% 7.6×10-2 -a -a -a 

C16H20.6Cl13.4 263 μg/kg 1.5% 0.1

μg/l 

2.0% 1.3×10-2 2.3×10-2 30 days 0.6 0.2 

Notes: a) The depuration data for this treatment did not show a significant linear relationship with time. 

b) On a dry sediment weight basis. 

c) Mean lipid concentration of exposed organisms. 

d) BAF is the bioaccumulation factor – defined as [concentration in organisms (μg/kg lipid (wet wt.))]/[concentration in 

sediment (μg/kg organic carbon (dry wt.))]. Kinetic BAF based on rate of uptake and rate of depuration. “Steady state” BAF 

based on concentration measurements in organism and sediment at equilibrium (14 days). 

The interpretation of these results is complicated by the fact that the measurements are based on

14C-determinations and there was evidence that biotransformation was occurring in both the 

sediments and oligochaetes. Therefore, the results could indicate uptake, accumulation and

elimination of metabolites rather than the parent compound. This may particularly be the case 

with the measured depuration rates and half-life, and so the kinetic BAF probably represents the 

upper limit of the true bioaccumulation factor of the chlorinated paraffin. However, from the 

results available it can be seen that the potential for uptake by organisms from sediment is 

reduced as the chlorine content is increased. For the determination of concentrations in the 

worms, the organisms were not cleansed of gut contents prior to analysis. As the sediment

concentrations were higher than the tissue levels, this may have lead to a significant 

overestimation of the actual concentration in the organism and hence the actual uptake of the 

substances 

Thompson et al. (2001b) determined the uptake of a n-pentadecane-8-

14C, 51% wt. Cl substance 

by earthworms (Eisenia fetida) from soil as part of an earthworm toxicity study. The substance 

had a radiochemical purity of >96.6% and was mixed with a commercial C14-17, 52% wt. Cl

substance to give nominal test concentrations of 100, 1,000 and 10,000 mg/kg dry weight in the 

test soil. The soil used was an artificial soil consisting of 10% sphagnum moss peat, 70% quartz

sand, 20% kaolinite clay and 0.25% calcium carbonate. The soil had an organic carbon content 

of 4.7%, a pH of 6.66-7.09 and was maintained at moisture content of 26% (a soil wet 

79 
R331_0208_env

weight:dry weight ratio of 1.35) throughout the test. At the start of the test, 4 replicates of 

10 adult worms each were exposed to the test substance in 500 g of soil. After 28 days, the 

remaining adult worms were removed and any cocoons present were allowed to hatch over the 

following 28 days. The concentration of the chlorinated paraffin present in the soil phase (on 

days 0, 28 and 56), the adult worms (on day 28) and the hatched juvenile worms (on day 56) was 

determined by a radiochemical method. The results are shown in Table 3.10. 

Table 3.10 Uptake of n-pentadecane-8-14C, 51% wt. Cl by earthworms

Exposure concentrations Measured concentrations in 

earthworms 

BCFearthworma 

Nominal Mean measured

over day 0-28 

Mean measured 

over day 28-56 

Adults at day 

28 

Juveniles at 

day 56 

Adults Juveniles

100 mg/kg dry 

wt.) 

70 mg/kg wet wt. 

(79 mg/kg dry 

wt.) 

61 mg/kg wet wt. 

(69 mg/kg dry 

wt.) 

169 mg/kg wet

wt. 

140 mg/kg wet

wt. 

2.4 2.3

1,000 mg/kg dry 

wt. 

800 mg/kg wet

wt. 

(900 mg/kg dry 

wt.) 

748 mg/kg wet

wt. 

(845 mg/kg dry 

wt.) 

802 mg/kg wet

wt. 

1,011 mg/kg 

wet wt. 

1.0 1.4

10,000 mg/kg dry

wt. 

8,200 mg/kg wet 

wt. 

(9,300 mg/kg dry 

wt.) 

8,050 mg/kg wet 

wt.

(9,100 mg/kg dry 

wt.) 

732 mg/kg wet

wt. 

b 0.089 b 

Note: a) Earthworm BCF calculated as concentration in earthworm (mg/kg wet wt.)/concentration in soil (mg/kg wet wt.) 

b) No offspring were produced at this concentration.

As can be seen from Table 3.10, the BCFearthworm as calculated directly from the ratio of 

concentration in earthworm/concentration in soil decreases with increasing soil concentration.

Although limited in number, the data appear to show that at high concentrations, the 

concentration in earthworm is not dependent on the bulk concentration of the substance present 

in soil. A possible explanation of this finding is that the uptake by the earthworm may be solely 

via the pore water, and at the high soil concentrations used in this study, the pore water becomes 

saturated with the test substance. For example, assuming a Koc value of 588,844 l/kg for 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (see Section 3.1.0.6) a Kp value of 27,676 l/kg can be 

estimated for a soil of 4.7% organic carbon content. Using this value to estimate the equilibrium

concentration of the substance present in soil pore water indicates that the pore water would 

contain 2.9 μg/l, 32.5 μg/l or 336 μg/l of the test substance at soil concentrations of 79, 900 and 

9,300 mg/kg dry weight respectively. The water solubility of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

is around 27 μg/l (see Section 1.3.6) and so clearly it is possible that at the high concentrations 

used in this study, the soil pore water could have become saturated with the chlorinated paraffin. 

The other possible mode of uptake of the substance by earthworms from soil is direct ingestion 

of soil-bound substance. If direct ingestion of soil-bound substance was a major uptake route, 

then the concentration of substance present in the earthworm would be expected to be directly

related to the soil concentration. The available information appears to indicate that this route of 

uptake is negligible compared with uptake via pore water. 

80 
R331_0208_env

Although the data from this study are limited in number, they do appear to indicate that the major 

route of uptake of the substance from soil by earthworms is via the soil pore water. Since the soil 

used in this study had a higher organic carbon content than the default value of 2% suggested in 

the TGD, and organic carbon content has a bearing on the resulting pore water concentrations in

soil, it is important to take account of this fact when considering the data from the Thompson et 

al. (2001b) study. For example, the highest BCFearthworm obtained from the study was from the

79 mg/kg dry wt. treatment. As shown above, the estimated equilibrium pore water concentration 

present in the soil would be 2.9 μg/l. However, for a soil with a lower organic carbon content 

(e.g. 2%) the same pore water concentration would be obtained from a soil concentration of

34.2 mg/kg dry wt., or 30.2 mg/kg wet wt. Thus the BCFearthworm for a soil of 2% organic carbon 

content would be estimated to be 5.6 on a wet weight basis. 

In the Technical Guidance Document, uptake by earthworm from soil is considered using the

following method: 

soil-water

soil

earthworm- porewater

soil

earthworm

earthworm K

RHO 10

K

C

C BCF

−3 × = = × 

where BCFearthworm = bioconcentration factor for earthworms on a wet weight basis 

Cearthworm = concentration in earthworm (mg/kg wet wt.) 

 Csoil = concentration in soil (mg/kg wet wt.) 

Kearthworm-porewater = earthworm-porewater partition coefficient (l/kg wet wt.) 

Ksoil-water = soil-water partition coefficient = 17,666 m3

/m3 for medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins (see Section 3.1.0.6). 

 RHOsoil = bulk density of wet soil = 1,700 kg/m3

According to the Technical Guidance Document, the value for Kearthworm-porewater can be estimated 

by the following equation for substances with a log Kow ranging from 1.0-6.5 (for substances 

above this range, the maximum value of log Kow of 6.5 is used): 

Kearthworm-porewater = 0.25 × Kow × 0.16 

Thus for medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (log Kow value of 7), the value of Kearthworm-porewater

predicted is 126,491 l/kg wet wt. The subsequent value for the BCFearthworm = 12.2 on a wet 

weight basis. 

The bioaccumulation factors measured above of L. variegatus can be compared directly with the 

estimated Kearthworm-porewater if they are converted to represent the concentration in wet 

organism/pore water concentration. In order to do this, the lipid concentration of the organism 

(Table 3.9) and the Koc value for the chlorinated paraffins tested are needed. From the data 

given in Table 3.9, Koc values of 103,846 and 175,333 l/kg can be estimated for the

C16H30.7Cl3.3 35% wt. Cl and C16H20.6Cl13.4 69% wt. Cl compounds respectively (log Koc = 5.0 

and 5.2). Thus the measured “steady state” Kworm-porewater for L. variegatus (expressed as 

[μg/kg wet worm]/[μg/l pore water]) = 1,817 l/kg wet wt. for the C16H30.7Cl3.3 35% wt. Cl 

compound and 701 l/kg wet wt. for the C16H20.6Cl13.4 69% wt. Cl compound (higher values would 

81 
R331_0208_env

be obtained if the kinetic measurements are used). Thus, the measured partition coefficients in

this case are around a factor 100 less than the one predicted from log Kow. 

Further information on the Fisk et al. (1998b) study has been provided by industry (Euro Chlor, 

1999). They obtained from the authors the actual concentrations in the worms at 14 days as 

52.9 μg/kg wet wt. for the C16H20.6Cl13.4 69% wt. Cl compound and 109.6 μg/kg wet wt. for

worms exposed to the higher concentration of the C16H30.7Cl3.3 compound. As the sediment pore 

water concentration in both these experiments was determined at around 0.1 μg/l (see Table 3.9), 

the equivalent values for Kworm-porewater are 1,096 l/kg for the C16H30.7Cl3.3 35% wt. Cl compound 

and 529 l/kg for the C16H20.6Cl13.4 69% wt. Cl compound. These are similar to the values 

estimated above assuming an equilibrium partitioning, and indicate that this process may 

adequately account for the uptake seen from sediment. Fisk et al. (1998b) also concluded that, at 

least for the C16H20.6Cl13.4 69% wt. Cl compound, the uptake could be explained in terms of 

uptake from pore water and that there was little evidence for additional uptake by direct

ingestion of sediment. 

The substances tested in the Fisk et al. (1998b) paper represent the extremes of the typical 

chlorine contents of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in commercial production 

(i.e. 35% wt. Cl and 69% wt. Cl compounds were tested whereas the commercial products are 

typically in the range 45-52% wt. Cl. (up to 63% wt. Cl)). It is clear from the available data that 

uptake of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins by worms decreases with increasing chlorine

content. However, there is insufficient information available to estimate if the uptake of the most 

common commercial medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (e.g. 45% wt. Cl. and 52% wt. Cl) is

likely to be less than that determined for the C16H30.7Cl3.3 35% wt. Cl compound and so for the 

risk assessment of secondary poisoning, a Kworm-porewater value of 1,817 l/kg wet wt. can be

estimated from this data. The corresponding value for BCFearthworm would be 0.17 on a wet 

weight basis. From the available data, the potential for uptake by worms from soil and sediment 

is likely to reduce with increasing chlorine content. 

Overall, the available uptake data for worms in both soil and sediment indicate that accumulation 

can best be explained by exposure mainly via the pore water, with only a minor contribution 

from sediment- or soil-bound substance. Based on the available experimental data BCF values of 

5.6 using the earthworm data and 0.17 using the sediment worm (L. variegatus) data can be 

estimated (both on a wet weight basis). The earthworm value is in good agreement with the value 

of 12.2 on a wet weight basis estimated from log Kow using the Technical Guidance 

methodology. A BCFearthworm of 5.6 on a wet weight basis will be used in the risk assessment. 

Plants

As part of a plant toxicity study, Thompson et al. (2001a) examined the concentration of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin present in above ground parts of seedlings of wheat (Triticum

aestivum), oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and mung bean (Phaseolus aureus) after exposure for 

28-days via soil. The soil used in the test had an organic carbon content of 2.3% and groups of 

9 seeds were exposed to nominal medium-chain chlorinated paraffin concentrations of 50, 500 or 

5,000 mg/kg dry weight. The substance tested was a commercial C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance, 

mixed with a radio-labelled n-pentadecane-8-

14C, 51% wt. Cl (radiochemical purity was 

82 
R331_0208_env

>96.6%). Water was provided primarily by sub-irrigation but additional water was provided by 

top-down watering twice a day. The test was carried out in a glass house where the temperature 

ranged from 16-31.8o

C. Initially, 4 replicates of 9 seeds per pot were exposed per concentration. 

After day 14 the emerged seedlings were randomly thinned to 5 per pot. A day 28 the plants

were cropped at soil level and the concentration of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin present in 

the above ground shoots was determined by radiochemical analysis, and a plant BCF 

(concentration in shoots (mg/kg wet wt.)/concentration in soil (mg/kg wet wt.)) was calculated 

for each species. Further details of the test system used can be found in Section 3.2.2.2. The 

results are shown in Table 3.11. 

Table 3.11 Uptake of n-pentadecane-8-14C, 51% wt. Cl from soil by plants 

Plant species Concentration in soil 

mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg wet wt.a 

Concentration in shoots 

(mg/kg wet weight) 

Plant BCF (wet wt. basis) 

50 44 1.5 0.034

500 442 14 0.032

Wheat 

(Triticum aestivum) 

5,000 4425 79 0.018

50 44 0.48 0.011

500 442 2.6 0.0059

Oilseed rape 

(Brassica napus) 

5,000 4425 27 0.0061

50 44 1.1 0.025

500 442 6.3 0.014

Mung bean 

(Phaseolus aureus) 

5,000 4425 30 0.0068

Note: a) The concentrations in the soil were determined on a dry soil weight basis. The concentration on a wet weight basis is 

estimated using the TGD default water content for soil. 

Similar to the case with the earthworm study discussed above, the plant BCF appears to decrease 

with increasing soil concentration. This is as would be expected if the uptake was via the soil 

pore water and this became saturated at high soil concentrations. In this case, however, because 

the soil used has a similar organic carbon content to the TGD default, it is not necessary to 

correct the results to the properties of the standard default soil. A value of 0.034 will be

considered as a realistic worst case value for the BCF for uptake by plants from soil. 

3.1.0.5.3 Dietary accumulation 

The dietary accumulation of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has been studied in juvenile 

rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Trout (initial weights 2-7 g) were fed with 14C-labelled

chlorinated paraffins (either C16 35% wt. Cl or C16 69% wt. Cl) spiked into food. The experiment 

consisted of a 40 day exposure period followed by a 160-173 day depuration period. The daily 

feeding rate was 1.5% of the mean body weight and two or three exposure concentrations for 

each substance were used (29 and 296 μg/kg food for the 35% wt. Cl substance and 21, 198 and 

2,000 μg/kg food for the 69% wt. Cl substance). At these feeding rates, neither substance was 

found to have any negative effect on the growth of juvenile rainbow trout. At various times 

during the exposure and depuration phases of the experiment fish were analysed for the presence 

83 
R331_0208_env

of chlorinated paraffin by 14C-measurements (parent compound analysis by HPLC was also 

carried out on day 40 of the uptake phase and day 20 of the depuration phase). Uptake of both 

chlorinated paraffins was found to occur and had not reached steady state by day 40 of the 

experiment (exposure to the high concentration of the 69% wt. Cl substance was continued up to

day 80, where steady state still was not reached). Bioaccumulation factors of 0.9-1.07 for the

35% wt. Cl substance and 0.44-0.72 for the 69% wt. Cl substance were estimated based on the 

rates of uptake and depuration, expressed on a lipid weight basis. The assimilation efficiencies

were 33-35% for the 35% wt. Cl substance and 9.4-30% for the 69% wt. Cl substance. The 

carcass was found to contain the highest amounts of the 14C assimilated and the whole body 

half-lives were determined as 37-50 days for the 35% wt. Cl substance and 58-77 days for the 

69% wt. Cl substance. The HPLC analyses carried out indicated that substantial metabolism of

the chlorinated paraffin was occurring, and so the determined bioaccumulation factors represent 

the total uptake of parent compound and metabolites, rather than just the parent compound (Fisk

et al., 1996). 

 

The dietary accumulation of various C14 chlorinated paraffins in juvenile rainbow trout 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) has been investigated in a study by Fisk et al. (1998a). The chlorinated 

paraffins used in the experiment were synthesised by the gas-phase free-radical chlorination of 

1,13-tetradecadiene. The main product from this reaction was 1,2,13,14-tetrachlorotetradecane 

(C14H26Cl4; 42% wt. Cl), but other 1,2,13,14-substituted products were also formed including 

two pentachlorotetradecane isomers (C14H25Cl5; 48% wt. Cl) and two hexachlorotetradecane 

isomers (C14H24Cl6; 53% wt. Cl). In the study, the products from this reaction were combined

with those from the chlorination of 1,9-decadiene before being spiked onto proprietary fish food. 

The concentration of each isomer in the food was determined by GC analysis. The fish (initial 

weight 2-7 g) were then exposed to the spiked food for 40 days, followed by 80 days depuration. 

At various times during the experiment, 3 fish were sampled and analysed for the presence of the 

chlorinated paraffin isomers. No significant effects on the health of the fish (growth rate, lipid

content, liver somatic indices and mortality) were seen during the experiment, and no chlorinated 

paraffin was detected in the control fish (detection limit ~1 μg/kg). Uptake of the C14 chlorinated

paraffins was seen to occur during the experiment, although steady state had not been reached 

during the 40 days exposure. The estimated bioaccumulation factors based on kinetic 

measurements and the tissue concentrations after 40 days are shown in Table 3.12. The half-life 

for depuration was found to be around 29-53 days. The results from all the C10-, C11- and 

C14-chlorinated paraffins studied suggested that chlorine position along the carbon chain may 

have a significant influence on the bioaccumulation of chlorinated paraffins. The C14 chlorinated 

paraffins used in this study differ from those in the commercial products in that they all contain 

chlorine atoms on adjacent and terminal carbon atoms (such a substitution pattern is chemically

and energetically unfavourable under the reaction conditions used to produce the commercial 

products). Nevertheless, the results indicate that at least some C14 chlorinated paraffins have the 

potential to accumulate through the diet (BAF>1). 

84 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.12 Dietary accumulation of C14 chlorinated paraffins in rainbow trout (Fisk et al., 1988a) 

Substance Concentration Bioaccumulation factor (BAF) 

in food

Depuration 

half-life 

(days) 

Assimilation 

efficiency - α

BAFcalc BAFequil BAFss

C14H26Cl4 92 μg/kg 39±6.4 33±2.4% 1.7 2.1 0.82 

C14H25Cl5 (a) 66 μg/kg 53±12.3 51±3.9% 3.6 3.0 1.4

C14H25Cl5 (b) 54 μg/kg 46±9.2 46±3.5% 2.9 2.6 1.2

C14H24Cl6 (a) 63 μg/kg 29±7.2 130±12% 5.0 1.9 2.8 

C14H24Cl6 (b) 40 μg/kg 43±8.1 27±2.4% 1.6 2.9 0.74 

Note: (a) and (b) denote different isomers. 

 BAFcalc is estimated from rate of uptake (α×feeding rate on lipid basis)/depuration rate. 

 BAFequil is estimated from rate of uptake (α×feeding rate on lipid basis)/depuration rate - using a value for α of 0.5.

BAFss = concentration in fish at 40 days (lipid corrected, not growth corrected)/concentration in food (lipid corrected) - steady 

state was not reached in 40 days, so the actual steady state values will be higher than this. 

 

The metabolism and distribution of a radio-labelled medium-chain chlorinated paraffin has been 

studied in Japanese Quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). The substance tested was a 

C16 compound and had an average formula C16H30.7Cl3.3 (34.5% wt. Cl) and contained a 14C-label 

in the 1-position (specific activity was 22.7 Ci/mole). The chlorinated paraffin was dissolved in a 

lipid emulsion before administration by gavage. The birds used in the study had an average body 

weight of 164.5 g. The distribution of the radio-label was determined by whole body 

autoradiography 1 hour, 4 hours, 1 day, 4 days and 12 days after administration of a single dose. 

Initially, high uptake of radioactivity was seen in tissues with high metabolic activity and high

cell turnover rate (e.g. liver, kidney, gall bladder, intestinal mucosa, spleen, bone marrow and 

oviduct). The radioactivity found in fat generally increased with time. By days 4 and 12 the 

dominant levels of radioactivity were found to be in fat, follicle yolk and the contents of the 

uropygial gland. The excretion of 14CO2 from the dosed birds was studied over an eight hour

period after dosing. Around 38.8% of the administered dose was found in the exhaled air as 

14CO2 and 13.5% of the administered radio-label was found in faeces and urine. The amounts of 

radio-label present in egg yolk, albumen and eggshells were determined 5 to 10 days after 

administration, with 6.6% of the administered radioactivity being present in egg yolk after 

10 days, 0.8% present in albumen after 5 days and 0.6% present in eggshells after 5 days 

(Biessmann et al., 1982). 

Darnerud and Brandt (1982) investigated the distribution and metabolism of the same

radiolabelled C16H30.7Cl3.3 (34.5% wt. Cl) substance in mice. The medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin was dissolved in intralipid or dimethyl sulphoxide and administered to the mice either 

intravenously in a tail vein or perorally by gastric intubation. Autoradiography showed that the 

distribution of radioactivity after administration was characterised by high uptake in tissues 

associated with high metabolic activity, with comparatively low levels of radioactivity seen in

white fat deposits. A marked uptake of radioactivity was seen within 24 hours of administration 

in liver, kidney, spleen, bone marrow, brown fat, intestinal mucosa, pancreas, salivary glands and 

harderian gland. After 12 days elevated levels of radioactivity were also seen in adrenal cortex, 

abdominal fat and bile, and after 30 days the level of radioactivity in brain was prominent and 

equalled that of the liver. No significant differences were seen in the distribution patterns in mice 

85 
R331_0208_env

given the peroral dose compared with the intravenous dose, except that higher levels of 

radioactivity were seen in the stomach and intestinal contents of the perorally administered mice. 

It was found that 32.8-44.3% of the administered dose of radioactivity was excreted as 14CO2

within 12 hours of administration. The retention of radioactivity in the adrenal cortex and brain 

was thought to be as result of incorporation of radioactivity into the synthesis of endogenous 

substances via 14C-acetyl CoA. 

In another study by Biessmann et al. (1983), the distribution and metabolism of a more highly 

chlorinated C16 paraffin (average formula C16H20.6Cl13.4 69% wt. Cl) was studied using female 

quail (average weight 165 g) and mice (average weight 22 g). In this case the 14C-label was 

uniformly distributed throughout the carbon chain. The chlorinated paraffin was dissolved in 

lipid emulsion administered either intravenously or per orally. In quail, uptake of radioactivity 

4 hours after administration was seen in liver, intestine, gall bladder, egg yolk, kidney, ovary, 

blood, hypophysis and retina, but 12 days after administration significant radioactivity was seen 

only in the uropygial gland, white fat, liver and yolk. A similar pattern was seen in mice, with the 

addition that corpora lutea also showed a high uptake of radioactivity. In contrast with the

34.5% wt. Cl substance tested above, only a small amount (0.9-1.6% of the total) of the 

radioactivity was exhaled as 14CO2 over the first 8 hours after dosing in both quail and mice. This 

could indicate that the 69% wt. Cl substance is metabolised to a lesser extent than the

34.5% wt. Cl substance, but this interpretation is complicated by the fact that the 34.5% wt. Cl 

substance was 14C-labelled in the 1-position, whereas the 69% wt. Cl substance was uniformly 

labelled and so the results for the two substances are not directly comparable. Elimination of 

radioactivity after 96 hours was found to be mainly in faeces (43-66% of the total), with a 

smaller amount in urine (2.9-3.2%). A difference in excretion rate via faeces over the first 

8 hours was found between the p.o. dosed and the i.v. dosed mice and quail which indicated that

the substance was incompletely adsorbed by the p.o. route. 

Birtley et al. (1980) studied the uptake of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in rats. The 

substance tested was a commercial C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product mixed with a 36Cl-labelled product 

(again C14-17, 52% wt. Cl) synthesised by chlorination of a n-paraffin feedstock. In this study, the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin was administered in the diet at 0.4 mg/kg food for 10 weeks 

or 40 mg/kg food for 8 weeks. Equilibrium levels of radioactivity in liver and abdominal fat were 

found to be reached within 1 week and 7 weeks respectively. No radioactivity was found in brain

or adrenal glands. The half-life for removal of radioactivity from abdominal fat was around 

8 weeks, and the level of radioactivity in the liver was below the detection limit within 1 week, 

when the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin was removed from the diet. The equilibrium 

concentration of radioactivity in the abdominal fat was similar to, but never exceeded, the 

concentration in diet. 

Poon et al. (1995) also studied the uptake of a commercial C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product by rats via 

the diet. In this case parent compound analysis was used to determine the concentrations of the

chlorinated paraffin in fat and liver. In the study, both male and female rats were given food 

containing either 5, 50, 500 or 5,000 mg/kg food of the chlorinated paraffin for 13 weeks. At the 

end of the study, the concentrations found in body fat were again found to be similar to the 

concentration in the diet, reaching 4, 30-39, 417-642, and 5,430-5,581 mg/kg lipid for the four 

doses respectively. The concentrations found in the liver were much lower than found in the fat. 

86 
R331_0208_env

3.1.0.5.4 Summary of accumulation 

The available data indicate that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are taken up by organisms

from water sediment/soil and food. 

For uptake from water it is difficult to derive a reliable value for the fish BCF from some of the

available data. A recent study designed to address many of the problems associated with the 

earlier studies has determined a BCF of 1,087 l/kg and this will be used in the assessment. The 

value was derived using radiochemical analyses and so represents the accumulation of the parent 

compound itself and any metabolites formed and so may overestimate the true BCF of the 

substance. 

For uptake from soil, a BCFearthworm of 5.6 on a wet weight basis has been derived from the

available uptake data and will be used in the risk assessment of secondary poisoning. From the

available data, the potential for uptake by worms from soil and sediment appears to reduce with 

increasing chlorine content of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. 

Uptake from soil into above-ground parts of plants has also been observed, and a BCF of 0.034 

on a wet weight basis has been determined for this process. 

The available food uptake studies indicate that the 35% wt. Cl, 52% wt. Cl and 69% wt. Cl 

products can be taken up by organisms from food. The potential for uptake from food appears to 

reduce with increasing chlorine content. The majority of the studies are based on 

14C-measurements and indicate that substantial metabolism is occurring in the organisms. This 

means that although radioactivity was found in the organisms, the concentrations found do not

necessarily represent those of the parent compound. 

3.1.0.6 Adsorption 

The Koc value for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be estimated using the QSAR 

equation for predominantly hydrophobic chemicals given in the Technical Guidance Document: 

log Koc = 0.81 log Kow + 0.10 

Using a log Kow value of 7.0, a Koc value of 588,844 l/kg can be estimated. This is in 

reasonable agreement with the Koc values determined by Fisk et al. (1998b) in sediment 

(Koc = 103,846 l/kg for the C16H30.7Cl3.3 35% wt. Cl and 175,333 l/kg for C16H20.6Cl13.4

69% wt. Cl), based on 14C measurements. Recent definitive determinations of Koc values using

short-chain chlorinated paraffins has indicated that the above equation is applicable to 

chlorinated paraffins (Thompson et al., 1998), and so the predicted value with be used here in the 

assessment. 

Using the 588,844 l/kg value the following partition coefficients can be estimated for soil, 

sediment and suspended sediment using the methods given in the Technical Guidance

Document. These values will be used in the environmental modelling for medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins. 

87 
R331_0208_env

Soil (2% organic carbon) Kpsoil = 11,777 l/kg Ksoil-water = 17,666 m3/m3 

Sediment (5% organic carbon) Kpsediment = 29,442 l/kg Ksed-water = 14,721 m3/m3 

Suspended sediment (10% Kpsusp = 58,884 l/kg Ksusp-water = 14,721 m3/m3

organic carbon)

For medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, a range of octanol-water partition coefficients would be 

expected, representing the differing hydrophobic nature of the various components of the 

commercial product. For the assessment, a log Kow value of 7 is taken as being representative 

for the group as a whole. The actual measured values vary between log Kow ~5.5 and 8.2. Thus 

some components of the commercial products may have values for the adsorption partition 

coefficients higher or lower than the values shown above, but in all cases, a high degree of 

adsorption onto soil, sediment and suspended sediment would be predicted. Appendix H 

considers the effect of varying the Koc value on the predicted environmental concentrations. 

The high Koc value estimated for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins indicates that the 

substance is expected to be relatively immobile in soil and would not be expected to leach from

soil into groundwater. Vertical movement of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins adsorbed onto 

soil particulates via macropores may provide a transport mechanism in soil. 

3.1.0.7 Environmental distribution 

The potential environmental distribution of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has been studied 

using a generic level III fugacity model. The model used was a four compartment model 

(FUGMOD version 1, January 1992) that has been circulated for use within the OECD HPV 

program. The model was run using the default settings in the model and the following chemical 

specific input data were used: 

 water solubility 0.027 mg/l 

 vapour pressure 0.00027 Pa 

 log Kow 7

 Degradation half-life in air 48 hours 

Degradation half-life in other media very large (e.g. 1×1011 hours) 

The model was run four times with a nominal release rate of 1000 kg/hour initially entering the 

air, soil or water compartments in different proportions. The results of the modelling exercise are 

shown in Table 3.13. The full model output is given in Appendix C. The same results were 

obtained when the distribution was calculated with the EQC model (version 1.0). 

88 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.13 Fugacity modelling for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

Release compartment Percentage distribution 

Air Water Soil Sediment

100% to air 0.001% 0.004% 99.6% 0.38% 

100% to water 7×10-4% 0.44% 55.5% 44.1%

100% to soil 1×10-5% 0.003% 99.7% 0.34%

50% to air and 50% to water 0.001% 0.012% 98.3% 1.7% 

The results of the fugacity modelling indicate that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are likely

to be associated with the soil and sediment compartments. When the substance is released to air,

the model predicts that this will end up mainly in soil, probably as a result of atmospheric 

deposition processes. When the substance is released to water, the model predicts that a 

substantial amount of the substance will be associated with sediment, but some would also be

expected to occur in the water phase. A substantial amount of the substance released to water is 

predicted to enter the soil phase, presumably as a result of volatilisation to the atmosphere and 

subsequent deposition. When the substance is released to soil, it is predicted to remain mainly in 

the soil compartment, but a small amount may also enter the sediment compartment, possibly as 

a result of wash-off from the soil to water. 

3.1.1 Aquatic compartment (inc. sediment) 

3.1.1.1 Calculation of PEClocal

Using the emission data given in Table 3.5 for the estimated amounts released at a site for 

production and the various uses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin, it is possible to estimate a 

PEC for surface water by assuming that the amount released/site enters into waste water and this 

enters into a waste water treatment plant. The Technical Guidance Document suggests that the 

size of the waste water treatment plant should be around 2,000 m3

/day, and the effluent from the

plant will be diluted by a factor of 10 in the receiving water. It is assumed that no biodegradation 

occurs during waste water treatment. 

Based on the physico-chemical properties of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (vapour

pressure = 2.7×10-4 Pa; water solubility = 0.027 mg/l; Henry’s law constant ~4.9 Pa m3

 mol-1; 

octanol water partition coefficient (log value) = 7) the predicted behaviour of the substance 

during waste water treatment (as estimated in EUSES) is: 

 

 % to air 0.107% 

 % to sludge 90.8% 

 % degraded 0% 

 % to water 9.08% 

However, information on the short-chain chlorinated paraffins indicates that the removal by 

adsorption onto sludge may be higher, around 93%, based on the results of a coupled unit test. 

Since medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are likely, if anything, to adsorb more strongly onto 

89 
R331_0208_env

sludge, then the results obtained for the short-chain chlorinated paraffins will be used in

preference to the values obtained by EUSES, i.e. for the PEC calculations in the following 

sections, 7% release to surface water from the waste water treatment plant will be assumed. 

Where site specific information is available on the size of waste water treatment plant and 

subsequent dilution, these will be used in preference to the generic information. This is currently 

only the case for production sites. For many of the down-stream uses of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins, several sites are likely to be involved and so a generic approach to the size 

of waste water treatment plant and dilution in the receiving water is appropriate. 

(1 Kp SUSP 10 ) DILUTION

C C 6 + × × × = − susp water

eff

water

local local

Once released to surface water, the substance will adsorb onto suspended sediment. The 

following equation from the Technical Guidance has been used in all calculations to take this 

into account: 

where Clocalwater = local concentration in surface water during an emission episode 

Clocaleff = concentration in effluent from waste water treatment plant 

 Kpsusp = solids-water partition coefficient for suspended matter = 58,884 l/kg for 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

SUSPwater = concentration of suspended matter in surface water = 15 mg/l 

DILUTION = dilution factor for effluent in receiving water = 10 for generic 

scenarios (site specific information used where appropriate). 

The final PEClocal(water) is estimated from: 

PEClocal(water) = Clocalwater + PECregional(water)

where PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l (based on the EUSES calculation: see Section 

3.1.1.2) or 0.1 μg/l (based on measured data: see Section 3.1.1.3) 

Finally the PEC for sediment is estimated from: 

susp

susp-water local(water)

local(sed) RHO

K PEC 1000

PEC

× × =

where Ksusp-water = suspended matter – water partition coefficient = 14,721 m3/m3 

 RHOsusp = bulk density of suspended matter = 1,150 kg/m3 

 

3.1.1.1.1 Production sites 

Site specific emission information is currently available for four of the five current production 

sites in the EU (releases from the remaining site are likely to be similar to the other four). The 

estimated releases at the four sites are given in Section 3.1.0.1.2. The resulting PECs estimated 

from these values, using the known dilution rates at the sites, are shown in Table 3.14. 

90 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.14 Summary of PECs estimated for production sites 

Site A Site B Site C Site D

Clocalwater (μg/l) 0.0064 0.09 0.17 6.4×10-6

PEClocal(water) (μg/l) 0.39a or 0.11b 0.48a or 0.19b 0.56a or 0.27b 0.39a or 0.1b 

PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg 

wet wt.) 

5.05a or 1.41b 6.14a or 2.44b 7.14a or 3.46b 4.97a or 1.28b 

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l.

b) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. 

3.1.1.1.2 Use in PVC 

In Section 3.1.0.2.1, releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to water have been 

estimated from several stages of production of PVC. These release estimates have been used 

here, along with the behaviour in the generic waste water treatment plant to estimate the PEClocal

water for these stages. The calculations are summarised in Table 3.15a and Table 3.15b. 

Table 3.15a PEClocal(water) and PEClocal(sediment) for use in PVC 

Use in PVC – plastisol processes

Compounding site 

(formulation) 

Conversion site 

(processing) 

Combined compounding 

and conversion site 

Local release to waste water 

(g/day) 

25 185 210

No of days of release/year 300 300 300 

Size of WWTP (m3/day) 2000 2000 2000

Influent concentration (μg/l) 12.5 92.5 105 

% to water during WWTP 7 7 7 

Clocaleff (μg/l) 0.88 6.48 7.35

Dilution factor 10 10 10

Clocalwater (μg/l) 0.047 0.344 0.39 

PEClocal(water) (μg/l) 0.44a or 0.147b 0.73a or 0.44b 0.78a or 0.49b 

PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg wet wt.) 5.57a or 1.88b 9.37a or 5.68b 9.96a or 6.27b 

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l. 

b) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. 

O = Open system; PO = Partially open system; C = Closed system (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

91 
Table 3.15b PEClocal(water) and PEClocal(sediment) for use in PVC 

Use in PVC – primary plasticiser

Compounding site (formulation) Conversion site (processing) Combined c

conve

O PO C O PO C O 

Local release to waste water (g/day) 92 500 42.5 280 300 255 372 No of days of release/year 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 Size of WWTP (m3/day) 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 Influent concentration (μg/l) 46 250 21.25 140 150 127.5 186 % to water during WWTP 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Clocaleff (μg/l) 3.22 17.5 1.49 9.80 10.5 8.93 13.0 Dilution factor 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Clocalwater (μg/l) 0.171 0.93 0.079 0.52 0.56 0.47 0.69 PEClocal(water) (μg/l) 0.56a or 

0.27b 

1.32a or 

1.03b 

0.47a or 

0.18b 

0.91a or 

0.62b 

0.95a or 

0.66b 

0.86a or 

0.57b 

1.08a or 

0.79b 

1

PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg wet wt.) 7.16a or 

3.46b 

16.9b or 

13.2b 

5.98a or 

2.30b 

11.6a or 

7.94b 

12.1a or 

8.45b 

11.0a or 

7.30b 

13.8a or 

10.1b 

2

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l. 

b) based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. O = Open system; PO = Partially open system; C = closed system (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

92 
R331_0208_env

3.1.1.1.3 Use in rubber/plastics (other than PVC) 

In Section 3.1.0.2.2, releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to water have been 

estimated from the use in rubber and plastics other than PVC. These release estimates have been 

used here, along with the behaviour in the generic waste water treatment plant to estimate the 

PEClocal water for these uses. The calculations are summarised in Table 3.16. The calculations

are based on the releases expected from plastic processing. The releases, and hence PECs 

expected from the processing of rubber would be expected to be lower than these values due to

the lower processing temperatures generally used. 

Table 3.16 PEClocal for water and sediment for use in rubber and plastics 

Compounding site

(formulation) 

Conversion site 

(processing) 

Combined conversion and 

processing site

Local release to waste water (g/day) 46.5 155 202 

No of days of release/year 300 300 300 

Size of WWTP (m3/day) 2000 2000 2000

Influent concentration (μg/l) 23.3 77.5 101 

% to water in WWTP 7 7 7 

Clocaleff (μg/l) 1.63 5.43 7.07 

Dilution factor 10 10 10

Clocalwater (μg/l) 0.086 0.29 0.38 

PEClocal(water) (μg/l) 0.47a or 0.19b 0.68a or 0.39b 0.77a or 0.48b

PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg wet wt.) 6.07a or 2.38b 8.68a or 4.99b 9.83a or 6.14b

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l b) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. 

3.1.1.1.4 Use in sealants/adhesives 

The releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to water from sites formulating or using 

sealants/adhesives are likely to be very low. No PEClocal is therefore calculated for this use. 

3.1.1.1.5 Use in paints and varnishes 

In Section 3.1.0.2.4, releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to water have been 

estimated from formulation and use of paints using the default release estimates from the 

Technical Guidance Document, along with knowledge of the likely amounts of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins formulated on a site. These default release estimates have been used here,

along with the behaviour in the generic waste water treatment plant to estimate the PEClocal water 

for these stages. The data available so far indicates that the releases of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins to water from the formulation and use of paints should be very low. The default 

calculations are summarised in Table 3.17. 

93 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.17 PEClocal for water and sediment for formulation and use in paints.

Paint formulation site 

(formulation) 

Industrial application of 

paints (processing) 

Application of paints by

general public (private use) 

Local release to waste water (kg/day) 0.15 0.059 3×10-7

No of days of release/year 300 300 365 

Size of WWTP (m3/day) 2000 2000 2000

Influent concentration (μg/l) 75 29.5 1.5×10-4

% to water in WWTP 7% 7 7% 

Clocaleff (μg/l) 5.25 2.07 1.05×10-5

Dilution factor 10 10 10 

Clocalwater (μg/l) 0.28 0.11 5.6×10-7

PEClocal(water) (μg/l) 0.67a or 0.38b 0.50a or 0.21b 0.39a or 0.1b 

PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg wet wt.) 8.55a or 4.86b 6.37b or 2.69b 4.97a or 1.28b

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l. b) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. 

3.1.1.1.6 Formulation and use in metal cutting/working fluids 

In Section 3.1.0.2.5, releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to water have been 

estimated from formulation and use in metal cutting/working fluids. These release estimates have 

been used here, along with the behaviour in the generic waste water treatment plant to estimate 

the PEClocal water for these stages. The calculations are summarised in Table 3.18. 

Table 3.18 PEClocal for water and sediment for use in metal cutting/working fluids 

Formulation site

(formulation) 

Use in oil-based fluids 

(processing) 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 

(processing) 

Large site Small site Continuous 

use 

Intermittent 

discharge 

Local release to waste water 

(kg/day) 

0.83 0.33 0.30 0.025 25

No of days of release/year 300 300 300 300 2-6 

Size of WWTP (m3/day) 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000

Influent concentration (μg/l) 415 165 150 12.5 12,500 

% to water in WWTP 7 7 7 7 7 

Clocaleff (μg/l) 29.1 11.6 10.5 0.88 875 

Dilution factor 10 10 10 10 10 

Clocalwater (μg/l) 1.54 0.61 0.56 0.046 46.5 

PEClocal(water) (μg/l) 1.93a or 1.64b 0.998a or 0.71b 0.95a or 0.66b 0.43a or 0.15b 46.9a or 46.6b

PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg wet wt.) 24.7a or 21.0b 12.8a or 9.09b 12.1a or 8.45b 5.56a or 1.92b 600a or 597b

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l. b) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. 

94 
R331_0208_env

For the intermittent release scenario for metal cutting/working fluids, the Technical Guidance

Document does not provide any guidance on how this should be treated. The value reported in 

Table 3.18 assumes that the substance in water instantly equilibrates with the sediment. 

However, in reality, this is unlikely to occur as the release will be over a short period of time. An 

alternative approach would be to average the concentration over the year and add this to the 

concentration arising from the continuous use in the metal working fluids (5.56 mg/kg wet

weight or 1.92 mg/kg wet weight). This would give a PEClocal(sediment) of 15.4 mg/kg wet weight 

or 11.7 mg/kg wet weight, assuming that the intermittent disposal occurs 6 times/year. 

In addition to the information given in Table 3.18, it is possible to estimate PECs from other 

sources. From Section 3.1.0.2.5, it was reported that at well controlled formulation sites, oil 

capture and recovery systems will be used prior to discharge of effluent to the sewage treatment 

plant. The equipment used is designed to lower the dissolved oil concentration to 5 mg/l or less.

If it is assumed that the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content of this oil is the same as in 

the lubricant being blended at the site (e.g. 5%), then the chlorinated paraffin content of the 

effluent could be 250 μg/l. A typical aqueous discharge from a formulation site could be of the

order of 1×106 l/year (or 3,333 l/day over 300 days) (UCD, 1997). Thus if this discharge is to the

“standard” sewage treatment plant of 2,000 m3

/day, the effluent from the site will be diluted by a 

factor of 600 in the total influent to the plant. Thus the influent concentration in the waste water 

treatment plant would be 0.42 μg/l. Using the same methodology as outlined in Table 3.18, the 

Clocaleff = 0.029 μg/l, Clocalwater = 0.0015 μg/l, PEClocal(water) = 0.39 μg/l or 0.1 μg/l and 

PEClocal(sediment) = 4.98 mg/kg wet wt. or 1.30 mg/kg wet wt. In this case the release from the site 

would make only a minor contribution to the PEClocal for water and sediment, which are 

dominated by the regional concentrations. 

The potential effects of the proposed risk reduction measures for short-chain chlorinated 

paraffins in this use on the PECs for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are considered in 

Appendix E. 

3.1.1.1.7 Formulation and use in leather fat liquors 

In Section 3.1.0.2.6, releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to water have been 

estimated from formulation and use of leather fat liquors containing medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins. These release estimates have been used here, along with the behaviour in the generic 

waste water treatment plant to estimate the PEClocal water for these stages. The calculations are 

summarised in Table 3.18. 

The potential effects of the proposed risk reduction measures for short-chain chlorinated 

paraffins in this use on the PECs for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are considered in 

Appendix E.

95 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.19 PEClocal for water and sediment for formulation and use of leather fat liquors 

Formulation site (formulation) Use site (processing) 

industry-specific

information 

default generic 

calculation 

complete 

processing of raw 

hides (processing) 

processing of “wet 

blue” (processing) 

Local release to waste water 

(kg/day) 

1.1 0.9 3.6

No of days of release/year 300 300 300 

Size of WWTP (m3/day) 2000 2000 2000 2000

Influent concentration (μg/l) 50c 550 450 1,800

% to water in WWTP 7 7 7 7 

Clocaleff (μg/l) 3.5 38.5 31.5 126 

Dilution factor 10 10 10 10

Clocalwater (μg/l) 0.19 2.04 1.67 6.69 

PEClocal(water) (μg/l) 0.58a or 0.29b 2.43a or 2.14b 2.06a or 1.77b 7.08a or 6.79b

PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg wet wt.) 7.40a or 3.71b 31.1a or 27.4b 26.3a or 22.7b 90.6a or 86.9b

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l. 

b) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. 

c) Industry-specific information indicates that the maximum concentration of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the waste 

water from a formulation site is likely to be <500 μg/l. In the absence of water flow rates from a typical site, it has been 

assumed that the waste water from a site is diluted by a factor of 10 in the influent to the waste water treatment plant. This 

value will be used in the risk assessment. 

3.1.1.1.8 Recycling of carbonless copy paper 

In Section 3.1.0.2.8, releases of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to water have been 

estimated from the recycling of carbonless copy paper containing medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins. This estimated release of medium chain chlorinated paraffins from a large site 

(250,000 tonnes/year of paper) was 6.17 kg/day to waste water. 

In order to calculate the PEC for recycling of carbonless copy paper, knowledge of the water use 

in the process is needed. The emission scenario document for the pulp, paper and board industry 

gives water usage figures of 5-15 m3

/tonne paper recycled from the flotation processes, whereas

washing can use between 5-100 m3/tonne paper. The total water usage for the production of 

specific types of paper are 40-75 m3

/tonne for printing and writing paper, 57 m3/tonne for tissue

paper and 24-35 m3/tonne for newsprint. 

In order to estimate the worst case concentration at a recycling site it will be assumed that a 

water consumption rate of 35 m3

/tonne is applicable, giving a total water usage rate of 

8.75×106

 m3/year for this volume of paper. According to the emission scenario document, some 

paper recycling plants may carry out only primary treatment before discharge of effluent to 

surface water via a municipal waste water treatment plant (the release estimate is based on the 

amount released after this primary treatment process (see Section 3.1.0.2.8)). Further, the 

96 
R331_0208_env

emission scenario document also indicates that if the effluent is emitted to a waste water

treatment plant off-site, the size of the treatment plant is likely to be larger than average due to

the large volume of waste water generated. PECs are therefore calculated assuming that no 

further waste water treatment other than primary treatment occurs on-site, and that the effluent

from the plant is treated at an off-site waste water treatment plant where the effluent is further 

diluted by a small amount (2 times), i.e. the waste water from the paper recycling site is a major 

contributor to the off-site waste water treatment plant, which is in line with the approach

recommended in the Technical Guidance Document. The resulting PECs are shown in 

Table 3.20. 

Table 3.20 PEClocal for water and sediment for recycling of carbonless copy paper 

Recycling of carbonless copy paper 

Local release to waste water (kg/day) 6.17 

No of days of release 250 

Volume of waste water 8,750,000 m3/year = 35,000 m3/day 

Clocaleff from site 0.176 mg/l 

Dilution factor of site effluent in influent to 

waste water treatment plant 

2 

Influent concentration to WWTP 0.088 μg/l 

% to water in WWTP 7% 

Clocaleff from WWTP 6.2 μg/l 

Dilution factor 10 

Clocalwater 0.33 

PEClocal(water) 0.72 μg/la or 0.43 μg/lb 

PEClocal(sediment) 9.19 mg/kg wet wt.a or 5.50 mg/kg wet wt.b

Note: a) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.389 μg/l. b) Based on PECregional(water) = 0.1 μg/l. 

3.1.1.2 Calculation of PECregional and PECcontinental

The predicted concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the regional and 

continental scenarios have been estimated by EUSES, using the release data outlined in 

Table 3.5. As explained in Section 3.1.0.3, the calculations have been carried out both with and 

without the regional contribution from “waste remaining in the environment”, as the applicability 

of the current modelling methods to this contribution is highly uncertain. A print out of the 

results for the calculation (not including the “waste remaining in the environment”) is given in 

Appendix A. 

The estimated PECregional and PECcontinental are shown in Table 3.21. 

97 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.21 Estimated PECregional and PECcontinental for the aquatic compartment 

Compartment PEC Value (not including “waste 

remaining in the environment”) 

Value (including “waste remaining 

in the environment”) 

Surface water PECregional(water) 0.389 μg/l 0.682-0.745 

PECcontinental(water) 0.053 μg/l 0.093-0.10 

Sediment PECregional(sed) 8.80 mg/kg wet wt 15.4-16.9 

PECcontinental(sed) 1.21 mg/kg wet wt 2.11-2.31

The potential effects of the proposed risk reduction measures for short-chain chlorinated 

paraffins in this use on the PECs for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are considered in 

Appendix E. Appendix H considers the potential effects of the uncertainties and variability in

some of the physico-chemical properties on the estimated concentrations. 

3.1.1.3 Measured levels in water and sediment 

The analysis of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in environmental media is complicated by 

the fact that there are a large number of possible chlorinated paraffins (of different carbon chain 

length, degrees of chlorination and position of the chlorine atoms along the carbon chain) present

in any given commercial product. Thus care has to be taken when comparing the results from 

one survey with those of another, since different reference compounds may have been used and 

hence different chemical species may have been measured. The main analytical methods used in 

the environmental analyses are discussed in Appendix D. 

3.1.1.3.1 Levels in water 

The levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins measured in surface water are summarised in 

Tables 3.22 to 3.28. 

Recently an in-depth study of the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in industrial areas 

of the United Kingdom has been carried out (CEFAS, 1999). The main purpose of the study was 

to determine the concentrations of medium-chain (and short-chain where found) chlorinated 

paraffins in surface water, sediment, biota and soil associated with their industrial use. The 

sampling sites were chosen with regards to their proximity to known sources/users of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. Samples were collected during early summer 1998 and were 

filtered (<0.45 μm) before analysis and so the reported values represent the dissolved

concentration in water. It is possible that the filtering (glass microfibre pre-filter in series with a 

0.45 μm PTFE filter) may have also removed some of the dissolved medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin from solution (by adsorption). However, recovery experiments were carried out using 

pure water spiked with the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin, which were filtered in the same

way as the environmental samples, and these recoveries in the range 47-83% (mean value

68±12%) for the method overall (CEFAS, 2000), indicating that the method used was acceptable.

The levels found in surface water are shown in Table 3.22. The levels found in sediment, biota 

and soil are reported later in the appropriate sections of this report. 

98 
R331_0208_env

In this study, medium chain chlorinated paraffins were not detected in any of the surface water 

samples taken. Chlorinated paraffins were found at levels of 0.2-1.7 μg/l in some samples from a

site near to engineering (metal working) activity, but these were identified as being short chain 

length chlorinated paraffins. 

Table 3.22 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in surface water in the United Kingdom, related to sources 

Industry Sampling site Concentration of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin (μg/l ) 

Polymers/tarpaulins 1.8 km upstream from STP <0.1 

400 m upstream from STP <0.1 

100 m downstream from STP <0.1 

300 m downstream from STP <0.1 

1.8 km downstream from STP <0.1 

Synthetic rubber manufacture 1 km upstream of STP <0.1 

STP outfall on canal <0.1 

100 m downstream from STP on canal <0.1 

300 m downstream from STP on canal <0.1 

300 m downstream from STP on river <0.1 

700 m downstream from STP on river <0.1 

1.8 km downstream <0.1 

Metal working stream, 400 m downstream of site <0.1 

stream, 800 m downstream of site <0.1 

estuary, 10 sites <0.1 

Lubricant blending/ metal Upstream of STP <0.1 

working 100m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream of STP <0.1 

downstream of STP <0.1 

Sealant and adhesive Upstream of STP <0.1 

manufacture 100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream of STP <0.1 

downstream of STP <0.1 

Rubber product manufacturer Upstream of STP <0.1 

100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream <0.1 

Downstream of STP <0.1

Downstream of STP <0.1

Table 3.22 continued overleaf. 

99 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.22 continued 

Industry Sampling site Concentration of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin (μg/l ) 

Manufacturer of building Upstream of STP <0.1 

sealants/lubricant blending 100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream of STP <0.1 

Downstream of STP <0.1

Control site - no known uses Upstream of STP <0.1 

100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream of STP <0.1 

1.2 km downstream of STP <0.1 

Manufacturer of chlorinated 2 km from STP discharge point <0.1 

paraffins Lock <0.1

400 m from lock <0.1 

1.8 km from lock <0.1 

2 km from lock <0.1 

Bank, opposite lock <0.1 

Upstream of lock <0.1 

Paint manufacturer Upstream of discharge <0.1 

500 m downstream of discharge <0.1 

600 m downstream of discharge <0.1 

800 m downstream of discharge <0.1 

1 km downstream of discharge <0.1 

Downstream of discharge <0.1 

Lubricant manufacturer (and Canal, 1 km west of discharge <0.1 

other industries) Canal, 500 m west of discharge <0.1 

Canal, 4 km east of discharge <0.1 

Brook, 300 m upstream of STP <0.1 

PVC cable manufacturer Upstream of STP <0.1 

100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream of STP <0.1 

Downstream of STP <0.1

Metal working/leather finishing Upstream of STP <0.1 

100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream of STP <0.1 

Downstream of STP <0.1

Table 3.22 continued overleaf.

100 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.22 continued 

Industry Sampling site Concentration of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin (μg/l ) 

PVC production/paint Upstream of STP <0.1 

manufacture At STP outfall <0.1 

100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

800 m downstream of STP <0.1 

Leather finishing chemicals 2.3 km upstream of STP <0.1 

formulation site 100 m upstream of STP <0.1 

600 m downstream of STP <0.1 

1.7 km downstream of STP <0.1 

Producer of PVC compound Upstream of STP <0.1 

100 m downstream of STP <0.1 

300 m downstream of STP <0.1 

Background site 3 sites <0.1 

The analysis of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins was also carried out at several locations in 

the United Kingdom in the summer of 1986 (ICI, 1992). The results are shown in Table 3.23, 

along with the levels of the short-chain (C10-13) chlorinated paraffins. [The levels of the 

short-chain chlorinated paraffins are included here to enable some conclusions to be drawn about 

the likely concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the measurements of 

Campbell and McConnell included later in this Section (Tables 3.25-3.27).] As can be seen

from Table 3.23, the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were found in all the samples analysed 

at concentrations ranging between 0.62 and 3.75 μg/l. The majority of the samples appear to

have been collected in urban/industrial areas. 

Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins have been measured at several sites in Germany 

and the results are shown in Table 3.24 (Ballschmiter, 1994; Hoechst AG, 1987). The levels 

measured in 1987 are similar to, but slightly higher than, those found in the United Kingdom in 

1986. However the levels measured in 1994 are generally lower, indicating that reduced usage 

and/or improved handling of these products had occurred over that period. It should also be born 

in mind that different analytical methods were used for the two sets of measurements, which 

could also account for some of the differences seen between the 1987 and 1994 data. 

Levels of total short- and medium-chain (i.e. C10-20) chlorinated paraffins have been measured in 

marine and freshwaters remote from industry and freshwaters in industrialised areas in the 

United Kingdom (Campbell and McConnell, 1980). These results are shown in Tables 3.25 to

3.27. As these levels refer to the total chlorinated paraffin in the C10-20 range, it is not possible to 

say anything definite about the amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present.

However, analysing the results reported in Table 3.23, it can be seen that the C14-17 chlorinated 

paraffins make up around 2/3-

3

/4 of the combined total for short- and medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins in those samples. Therefore, if the same approximate distribution applies to the data in 

101 
R331_0208_env

Tables 3.25 to 3.27, then the likely concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

present can be inferred. 

Table 3.23 Measured levels of medium-chain (and short-chain) chlorinated paraffins in surface water in the United

Kingdom (ICI, 1992) 

Location Concentration (μg/l)

Medium-chain (C14-17) Short-chain (C10-13) 

Derwent Reservoir, UK, 1986. 1.46 

River Trent, Newark, UK, 1986. 0.86 

Trent and Mersey Canal, UK, 1986. 0.62 

River Derwent, Derby, UK, 1986. 0.64 

Walton on Trent, UK, 1986. 1.07 0.41 

River Ouse, Goole, UK, 1986. 0.94 

River Don, Rotherham, UK., 1986. 1.13 0.72 

River Aire/Ouse, UK, 1986. 1.13 0.12 

River Ouse, York, UK, 1986. 1.36 0.46 

River Cover, Wilton, UK, 1986. 0.84 0.19 

River Ure, Mickley, UK, 1986. 1.46 

River Trent, Gainsborough, UK, 1986. 2.49 0.65 

River Trent, Burton, UK, 1986. 2.46 1.45 

River Rother, UK, 1986. 2.11 

River Trent/Humber, UK, 1986. 3.75 0.29 

Hull Docks, UK, 1986. 2.69 0.71 

Table 3.24 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in surface water in Germany (Hoechst AG, 1987; Ballschmiter, 

1994) 

Location Concentration (μg/l) 

1987 1994

River Lech at Augsburg <0.05 

River Lech at Gersthofen (upstream from a chlorinated 

paraffin production plant) 

4.5 0.094

River Lech at Langweid (downstream from a chlorinated 

paraffin production plant) 

4.0 0.185

River Lech at Rain 0.170 

River Danube at Marxheim (downstream from the mouth of 

the River Lech) 

20 0.072

River Danube at Marxheim (upstream from the mouth of the 

River Lech) 

4.0 ≤0.055 

 

102 
R331_0208_env

The C10-20 chlorinated paraffins were detected in around half of the marine waters sampled, in the 

range 0.5-4 μg/l. By inference, the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are probably in

the range 0.3-3 μg/l. 

In fresh and other non-marine water samples from areas remote from industry, the 

C10-20 chlorinated paraffins were detected in just under half the samples in the range 0.5-1 μg/l. 

This corresponds to probable medium-chain chlorinated paraffin concentrations of 0.3-0.7 μg/l. 

In surface waters in industrialised areas, the levels of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins are higher than 

those found in marine and remote waters, and the frequency of detection is also higher. The

levels measured for the combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are in the range

0.5-6.0 μg/l. This corresponds to probable medium-chain chlorinated paraffin concentrations in 

the range 0.3-4 μg/l. Although it is not clear if any of the samples were taken near to sources of 

discharge of chlorinated paraffins, it is thought that the Wyre estuary did receive chlorinated 

paraffin production plant effluent at the time of sampling. 

Table 3.25 Concentration of total short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in marine waters in and around

the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Location Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins (μg/l) 

Irish Sea: Site a 1.0 

Irish Sea: Site b 0.5 

Irish Sea: Site c 0.5 

Irish Sea: Site d 0.5 

Irish Sea: Site e ND 

Irish Sea: Site f ND 

Barmouth Harbour 0.5

Menai Straights, Caernarvon 0.5 

Tremadoc Bay, Llandanwg ND 

North Minch, Ardmair 0.5 

North Minch, Port Bùn a’ Ghlinne ND 

North Minch, Port of Ness 0.5 

Goile Chròic, Lewis 0.5 

Sound of Taransay, Harris 4.0 

Sound of Arisaig 1.0 

North Sea: N55o 5.7' W1o 9.3' ND 

North Sea: N57o 26.2' W1o 17.0' ND 

North Sea: N57o 56.5' W1o 22.0' ND 

Notes: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 0.5 μg/l). 

103 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.26 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in fresh and other

non-marine waters remote from industry in the United Kingdom (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Location Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins (μg/l) 

River Banwy, Llangadfan 0.5 

River Lea, Welwyn ND* 

River Lea, Batford ND* 

River Clwyd, Ruthin ND 

Bala Lake 1.0 

River Dee, Corwen ND 

River Wnion, Merioneth 0.5 

Firth of Lorne, Ganevan 0.5 

Loch Linnhe, Corran Narrows ND 

Firth of Clyde, Ashcraig ND 

Firth of Clyde, Girvan 0.5 

An Garbh Allt 0.5 

Five drinking water reservoirs, Manchester area ND 

 Notes: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 0.5 μg/l). 

ND*= Not detected (detection limit 1.0 μg/l). 

Table 3.27 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in waters in industrialised 

areas in the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Location Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffin (μg/l)

River Aire, Leeds 2.0 

River Aire, Woodlesford 2.0 

River Ouse, Boothberry edge 1-2 

River Trent, West Bromwich 1-2 

River Trent, Walton-upon-Trent 2-3 

River Trent, Swarkestone 1-2 

River Trent, Newark 4.0 

River Trent, Gainsborough 2.0 

River Trent, confluence with Humber 6.0 

Humber Estuary, Hull 1-2 

Humber Estuary, Grimsby 3.0 

Mersey Estuary, New Brighton 3.0 

Mersey Estuary, Liverpool Pier Head 4.0 

River Thames, Oxford 2.0 

Table 3.27 continued overleaf. 

104 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.27 continued 

Location Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffin (μg/l)

River Thames, Sanford 1-2 

Wyre Estuary ND-1.5 

River Tees, Low Dinsdale ND 

River Tees, North Gare breakwater 0.5 

River Tees, Middlesbrough ND 

Note: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 0.5 μg/l). 

Murray et al. (1987a and 1987b) reported the results of monitoring studies carried out near to a

chlorinated paraffin manufacturing site in the United States. The effluent from the plant, after

undergoing physical treatment, was discharged into Sugar Creek, via a surface impoundment 

lagoon and small ditch. The results are shown in Table 3.28. 

Table 3.28 Measured levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins near a production site in the United States (Murray et 

al., 1987a and 1987b) 

Location Concentration

Surface lagoon near to its effluent to ditch not detected (<0.15 μg/l) – dissolved 

3.3 μg/l – particulate 

Surface lagoon near to influent from plant trace (0.15-0.5 μg/l) – dissolved 

2.4 μg/l – particulate 

Middle of surface lagoon trace (0.15-0.5 μg/l) – dissolved 

2.6 μg/l – particulate 

Ditch, immediately above point of discharge into Sugar Creek trace (0.15-0.5 μg/l) – dissolved 

1.5 μg/l – particulate 

Sugar Creek, upstream of discharge not detected (<0.05 μg/l) – dissolved 

not detected (<0.05 μg/l) – particulate 

Sugar Creek, just upstream of discharge not detected (<0.05 μg/l) – dissolved 

trace (0.05-0.17 μg/l) – particulate

Sugar Creek, just downstream of discharge not detected (<0.05 μg/l) – dissolved 

0.16-0.20 μg/l – particulate 

Sugar Creek, downstream of discharge not detected (<0.05 μg/l) – dissolved 

0.20-0.24 μg/l – particulate 

Note: dissolved - Concentration in dissolved phase. 

particulate - Concentration in particulate phase (>0.45 μm). 

As can be seen from Table 3.28, the highest concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins are associated with the surface impoundment lagoon. The concentrations in the river 

downstream from the plant are around 0.2 μg/l, with the majority of the substance associated

with the particulate matter (>0.45 μm). 

A similar study was also undertaken by Murray et al. (1987a and 1987b) near to a metal working 

facility that was thought to be using lubricating oils containing chlorinated paraffins. Due to 

105 
R331_0208_env

analytical interferences, it was not possible to detect chlorinated paraffins in surface water at the 

site, however, a level of C14-17 chlorinated paraffins of 1.3 μg/l was detected in process waste 

streams inside the plant.

Tomy et al. (1998) report the results of Metcalfe-Smith et al. (1995), who measured levels of 

C10-C17 chlorinated paraffins of 12.7 μg/l in the effluent from a chlorinated paraffin 

manufacturing plant in Canada. The level of C14-17 chlorinated paraffin reported in the receiving 

water (St. Lawrence River) downstream of the plant was <1 μg/l. 

Surveys of levels of chlorinated paraffins (unspecified chain length) in surface waters have been

carried out at numerous sites in Japan in 1979 and 1980. Chlorinated paraffins were not detected 

(detection limit 10 μg/l) in any of the 51 surface water samples taken in 1979 or any of the 120 

surface water samples taken in 1980 (Environment Agency Japan, 1991).

A study of the inputs of chlorinated paraffins to a sewage treatment plant in Germany has been 

published (Rieger and Ballschmiter, 1995). The sewage treatment plant processed 

100,000 m3

/day of municipal, industrial and mixed waste water. Medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins were not detected (detection limit 0.1 mg/kg dry matter) in any of the sewage sludge

samples taken at the plant (only short-chain chlorinated paraffins were found). Water samples

taken from upstream and downstream of the plant also showed no detectable concentrations of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (detection limit 5 μg/l). 

3.1.1.3.2 Measured levels in sediment 

The levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in sediment are summarised in 

Table 3.29-3.33. 

Recently an in-depth study of the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in industrial areas 

of the United Kingdom has been carried out (CEFAS, 1999). The main purpose of the study was 

to determine the concentrations of medium-chain (and short-chain where found) chlorinated 

paraffins in surface water, sediment, biota and soil associated with their industrial use. The 

sampling sites were chosen with regards to their proximity to known sources/users of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. Samples were collected during early summer 1998. The 

levels found in sediment are shown in Table 3.29. The levels found in surface water, biota and

soil are reported in the appropriate sections of this report. 

The levels measured in the CEFAS (1999) study are reported on a dry weight basis. In order to 

make these levels comparable with the PEC estimates, they need to be expressed on a wet weight

basis. No details of the water contents were given in the paper and so the default water content 

from the Technical Guidance Document (80% by volume, 62% by weight). Thus dry weight 

values can be converted to approximate wet weight values by dividing by 2.6. The estimated wet 

weight values are shown in Table 3.29 alongside the measured dry weight values. 

106 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.29 Levels of chlorinated paraffins in sediment in the United Kingdom, related to sources (CEFAS, 1999) 

Industry Comment Sampling site Measured

concentration of

chlorinated paraffin 

(mg/kg dry weight) 

Estimated

concentration 

(mg/kg wet weight) 

1.8 km upstream from STP <0.2 <0.08 

400 m upstream from STP 0.7 0.27 

Polymers/ 

tarpaulins 

Identified as 

medium- or

long-chain 

100 m downstream from STP 0.5 0.19 

300 m downstream from STP 0.6 0.23 

1.8 km downstream from STP 0.8 0.31 

1 km upstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

STP outfall on canal 0.5 0.19 

Synthetic 

rubber 

manufacture 

Identified as 

medium-chain,

~50% wt. Cl 

100 m downstream from STP on canal 0.3 0.12 

300 m downstream from STP on canal 2.8 1.1 

300 m downstream from STP on river 2.0 0.77 

700 m downstream from STP on river 1.3 0.5 

1.8 km downstream 2.7 1.0 

Upstream of STP 6.0 2.3 

100m downstream of STP 3.8 1.5 

300 m downstream of STP 60.2 23.2 

Lubricant 

blending/ metal 

working 

Identified as 

medium-chain 

~50% wt. Cl. 

Actual levels may

be higher as 

destructive 

interference was 

seen in the 

analyses. downstream of STP 65.1 25.0 

Upstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

100 m downstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

300 m downstream 43.9 16.9 

Downstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

Rubber product 

manufacturer 

Identified as 

medium-chain,

~40-50% wt. Cl 

Downstream of STP 16.2 6.2 

Upstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

100 m downstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

300 m downstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

Manufacturer of 

building 

sealants/ 

lubricant 

blending 

No chlorinated 

paraffins 

detected 

Downstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

Upstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

100 m downstream of STP 32.2 12.4 

300 m downstream of STP 60.4 23.2 

Control site - no

known uses. 

Identified as 

medium chain, 

~45% wt. Cl 

1.2 km downstream of STP 45.0 17.3 

Table 3.29 continued overleaf. 

107 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.29 continued 

Industry Comment Sampling site Measured

concentration of

chlorinated paraffin 

(mg/kg dry weight) 

Estimated

concentration 

(mg/kg wet weight) 

2 km from STP discharge point 39.4 15.2 

Lock 53.3-63.0 20.5-24.2

400 m from lock 3.8 1.5 

Manufacturer of 

chlorinated 

paraffins 

Identified as a 

mixture of shortand 

medium-chain 

1.8 km from lock 2.0 0.77 

2 km from lock 1.6 0.62 

Bank, opposite lock 

Upstream of lock 6.3 2.4 

Identified as Upstream of discharge <0.2 <0.08 

medium-chain 500 m downstream of discharge <0.2 <0.08 

600 m downstream of discharge 0.3 0.12 

800 m downstream of discharge 6.1 2.3 

1 km downstream of discharge 6.4 2.5 

Downstream of discharge 0.4 0.15 

Identified mainly Canal, 1 km west of discharge 0.6 0.23 

as short- chain, 

medium- chain

also present 

1.5 0.58 

Paint 

manufacturer 

Canal, 500 m west of discharge n.q. - 

Canal, 4 km east of discharge 0.5 0.19 

Lubricant 

manufacturer 

(and other 

industries) 

Brook, 300 m upstream of STP 1.6 0.62 

Brook, 100 m downstream of STP 0.5 0.19 

Brook, 300 m downstream of STP 1.0 0.38 

Upstream of STP <0.3 <0.12 

100 m downstream of STP 5.7 2.2 

PVC cable 

manufacturer 

Identified as 

medium-chain,

~52% wt. Cl 

300 m downstream of STP 12.8 4.9 

Downstream of STP 19.0 7.3

Upstream of STP 0.8 0.31 

100 m downstream of STP 1.8 0.69 

300 m downstream of STP 1.8 0.69 

Downstream of STP 4.9 1.9 

Metal working/ 

leather finishing 

Mixture of shortand 

medium-chain,

~<60% wt. Cl. 

Actual levels may

be higher as 

destructive 

interference was 

seen in the 

analyses. Downstream of STP 2.5 0.96 

Table 3.29 continued overleaf. 

108 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.29 continued 

Industry Comment Sampling site Measured

concentration of

chlorinated paraffin 

(mg/kg dry weight) 

Estimated

concentration 

(mg/kg wet weight) 

Upstream of STP 0.7 0.27 

At STP outfall n.q. - 

100 m downstream of STP 21.1 8.12 

PVC

production/

paint 

manufacture 

Identified as a 

mixture of shortand 

medium-chain 

800 m downstream of STP <0.2 <0.08 

2.5 km downstream of STP 5.3 2.0 

2.3 km upstream of STP 1.1 0.42 

100 m upstream of STP 13.5 5.2 

600 m downstream of STP 1.1 0.42 

Leather 

finishing 

chemicals 

formulation site 

Identified mainly 

as medium-chain

1.7 km downstream of STP 0.8 0.31 

2.0 km downstream of STP 1.9 0.73 

Downstream of STP 1.0 0.38

3.0 km downstream of STP <0.4 <0.15 

Producer of Upstream of STP 1.3 0.5 

PVC compound 

Identified as 

mainly 

medium-chain 100 m downstream of STP 18.0 6.9 

300 m downstream of STP 25.6 9.8 

500 m downstream of STP 58.4 22.5 

Background site No chlorinated 

paraffins 

identified 

 4 sites <0.2 <0.08 

Note: n.q. - Not quantifiable. 

The levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins have been measured in several sediments in 

Germany (Ballschmiter, 1994). The results are shown in Table 3.30. Medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins were detected in a wide range of locations at concentrations up to 370 μg/kg dry 

weight. 

The levels of medium-chain (C14-18) chlorinated paraffins have been also measured near to a 

chlorinated paraffin production site in Germany (Hoechst AG, 1987; Ballschmiter, 1994). The 

results are shown in Table 3.30. The levels measured in the River Lech in 1987 were similar in 

upstream (2,200 μg/kg dry wt.) and downstream (1,700 μg/kg dry wt.) samples, and similar 

concentrations were also found in another sample taken from the River Danube, down stream of 

the confluence of the River Lech (1,800 μg/kg dry wt.). A similar trend was also seen in the 

measured levels found in water in the area (see Section 3.1.1.3.1). The results indicate that the 

production plant was only a minor contributor to the levels found. The levels present in the area 

were found to have reduced in the 1994 survey. 

109 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.30 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in German sediments 

Location Concentration (μg/kg dry weight) 

1987a 1994b

Bodensee (middle) 70 (0-5 cm depth)

<10 (5-12 cm depth) 

River Rhein (141 km) at Rheinfelden 60 

River Rhein (152 km) at Rheinfelden, upper layer 140 

River Rhein (152 km) at Rheinfelden, lower layer 85 

River Rhein (853.8 km), near German-Dutch border 205 

River Rhein (863.8 km), near German-Dutch border 145 

River Main (16.2 km) 260 

River Main (at Griesheim) 190 

River Main (55 km) 160 

Outer Alster, Hamburg 370 

River Elbe, Hamburg (610 km) 130 

River Elbe, Hamburg (629.9 km) 230 

River Lech, upstream from chlorinated paraffin production plant 2,200 <10 

River Lech, downstream from chlorinated paraffin production plant 1,700 325 

Note: a) Hoechst AG, 1987. b) Ballschmiter, 1994. 

 

The levels of total chlorinated paraffin (short-, medium- and long-chain) have been determined 

in estuarine sediments from Western Europe. In all, samples from 22 locations were analysed

and the mean total levels found in the <63 μm sediment fraction was 10.5 μg/kg dry weight in 

the Mersey and Seine estuaries, 5.5 μg/kg dry weight in the Schelde estuary, 4.8 μg/kg dry 

weight in the Liffey river estuary, 3.3 μg/kg dry weight in the Forth estuary and 1.2 μg/kg dry 

weight in the Humber estuary. Chlorinated paraffins were not detected (detection limit 0.5 μg/kg 

dry weight) at the remaining 16 sites. Long-chain length chlorinated paraffins were thought to be 

the predominant type of chlorinated paraffin found in the samples, with only traces of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins being seen in the samples (no indication was given in the

report as to what the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were) (van Zeijl, 1997). 

The levels of combined short- and medium-chain (i.e. C10-20) chlorinated paraffins have been 

measured in several types of sediment in the United Kingdom, often from the same areas where 

water concentrations were also measured (Campbell and McConnell, 1980). The results of these

analyses are shown in Tables 3.31 to 3.33. It is not clear from the paper if the levels found are 

expressed on a wet weight or dry weight of sediment basis. 

110 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.31 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in marine sediments 

around the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Location Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins (μg/kg) 

Irish Sea: Site a 100 

Irish Sea: Site b ND 

Irish Sea: Site c NM 

Irish Sea: Site d 100 

Irish Sea: Site e ND 

Irish Sea: Site f ND 

Barmouth Harbour 500 

Menai Straights, Caernarvon ND 

Tremadoc Bay, Llandanwg ND 

North Minch, Ardmair ND 

North Minch, Port Bùn á Ghlinne ND 

North Minch, Port of Ness ND 

Goile Chròic, Lewis ND 

Sound of Taransay, Harris ND 

Sound of Arisaig ND 

North Sea: N55o 5.7' W1o 9.3' ND 

North Sea: N57o 26.2' W1o 17.0' ND 

North Sea: N57o 56.5' W1o 22.0' 50 

Notes: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 50 μg/kg). NM = Not measured. 

Table 3.32 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in fresh and other

non-marine sediments remote from industry in the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Location Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins (μg/kg) 

River Banwy, Llangadfan ND 

River Lea, Batford 1,000 

River Clwyd, Ruthin ND 

River Dee, Corwen 300 

River Wnion, Merioneth ND 

Five drinking water reservoirs, Manchester area ND* 

 Notes: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 50 μg/kg). ND*= Not detected (detection limit 250 μg/kg). 

111 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.33 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in sediments in

industrialised areas in the UK (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Location Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffin (μg/kg) 

River Aire, Leeds 10,000 

River Ouse, Goole 2,000 

River Trent, West Bromwich 6,000 

River Trent, Walton-upon-Trent 1,000 

River Trent, Swarkestone 14,000 

River Trent, Newark 8,000 

River Trent, Gainsborough 3,000 

Humber Estuary, Hull 2,000 

Humber Estuary, Stone Creek 2,000 

Mersey Estuary, New Brighton 3,000 

Mersey Estuary, Liverpool Pier Head 8,000 

River Thames, Sanford 1,000 

Wyre Estuary ND-1,600 

Mersey Estuary, 14 sediment samples ND 

River Tees, Low Dinsdale 300 

River Tees, North Gare breakwater 50 

River Tees, Middlesbrough 15,000 

Note: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 50 μg/kg). 

The highest levels (up to 15 mg/kg) of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

have been found in sediments from industrialised areas, but they have also been detected in 

several samples from areas remote from industry. The sediment levels from industrial areas are 

around 1,000 times the levels found in water in the same area. When considering the monitoring 

data, it should be borne in mind that the detection limit for sediment (50 μg/kg) is approximately 

100 times that for water (0.5 μg/l) in these experiments. 

Short- and medium-chain (C10-20) chlorinated paraffins have been detected at levels between

4,000 and 10,000 μg/kg in sewage sludge from the Liverpool area, but levels were below the 

detection limit (50 μg/kg) in sewage sludge from the Manchester area (Campbell and

McConnell, 1980). 

Chlorinated paraffins (no information given as to type or chain length) were found in 24 out of 

51 sediment samples from Japan in 1979 at levels of 600-10,000 μg/kg dry wt. In a similar 

survey for 1980, chlorinated paraffins were found in 31 out of 120 sediment samples at levels of 

500-8,500 μg/kg dry wt. For both sets of analyses, the detection limit was 500 μg/kg dry wt.

(Environment Agency Japan, 1991). 

112 
R331_0208_env

Murray et al. (1987a and 1987b) reported the results of monitoring studies carried out near to a

chlorinated paraffin manufacturing site and an industry using metal working fluids in the United 

States. Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C14-17, 50-60% wt. Cl) were detected at levels of

21,000-50,000 μg/kg dry weight in sediment from an impoundment lagoon at the production site. 

Much lower levels (6.8-8.2 μg/kg dry weight) were detected in stream sediments downstream 

from the site. Due to analytical interferences, it was not possible to detect chlorinated paraffins at 

the site using metal working fluids. 

Tomy et al. (1998) report the results of Metcalfe-Smith et al. (1995), who found that levels of 

C14-C17 chlorinated paraffins were below the detection limit (<3.5 mg/kg dry weight) in 

sediments from the St. Lawrence River, Canada, taken downstream from a chlorinated paraffin 

manufacturing plant. 

Chlorinated paraffin levels of 30 mg/kg in sewage sludge (containing 5% solid matter) from an 

industrialised area of Zürich and 5 μg/kg in sediment from Lake Zürich have been measured, 

based on reference to a commercial C14-18, 52% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin. Chlorinated paraffin 

levels of 200 μg/kg were also determined in a sample of human adipose tissue (Schmid and 

Müller, 1985). 

Greenpeace (1995) published the results of a survey of total chlorinated paraffin levels in mud 

samples from Rotterdam Harbour, Hamburg Harbour and from mud flats at Kaiser Wilhelm 

Koog and Den Helder. The total levels measured ranged between 25 and 125 μg/kg.

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were thought to account for 13-78% of the total chlorinated

paraffins present. Using these percentages, the concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin can be estimated as 7-10 μg/kg in Rotterdam Harbour samples, 8 μg/kg in the Hamburg 

Harbour sample, 3 μg/kg in the sample from Den Helder and 98 μg/kg in the sample from Kaiser

Wilhelm Koog. It is not clear from the paper if the levels are reported on a wet or dry weight 

basis. 

3.1.1.3.3 Comparison of measured and predicted concentrations 

Bearing in mind the possible limitations in the analytical methods used, there is reasonably good 

agreement between the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins found in surface waters in 

the various surveys. It can be concluded that the levels found in the 1980’s in areas close to

industrial activity were of the order of 0.5-4 μg/l, with lower levels of the order of 0.1-0.5 μg/l

being found in areas more remote from industry. These levels are reasonably consistent with the 

PECs estimated for local sources and at the region level (around 0.389 μg/l). It should be born in 

mind that, for many of the measurements, it is not clear if the reported levels refer to the

concentration in the dissolved phase or to the total (i.e. dissolved phase + particulate phase). 

More recent measurements (1994 in Germany and 1998 in the United Kingdom), indicate that 

the concentration of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the dissolved phase in surface water 

is much lower than found in the older surveys. Possible reasons for this include the use of better 

analytical methods (that are less prone to interferences from other substances) and/or a general 

reduction in the amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins entering into the environment as 

a result of improved waste management practices at sites where they are produced or used. 

113 
R331_0208_env

A monitoring survey of concentrations in water and sediment associated with several industrial

uses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has recently been completed in the United Kingdom.

The results of this survey are summarised in Tables 3.22 and 3.29. The concentrations found in 

surface water were generally lower (<0.1 μg/l in the dissolved phase) than the predicted levels.

This may indicate that the assumptions used in this assessment overestimate the releases to the 

environment (however the same assumptions were also used for the predicted sediment 

concentrations, where good agreement was found between calculated and measured 

concentrations), or may reflect the fact that the water measurements were taken on single spot 

samples, which would be highly dependent on the disposal activities in operation at the site at the

time of sampling. Therefore, although these samples are suggestive of lower releases, they 

cannot be used to overwrite the local release estimates at all sites of release in the EU. However, 

the measured levels in water do indicate that the regional concentration in the United Kingdom is

around 0.1 μg/l as a worst case as the samples were taken from industrial areas and the regional 

background concentration would not be susceptible to temporal changes in site activity. 

Although smaller in scope, a similar “background” level is evident from the 1994 levels

measured in Germany. Information on the breakdown of use of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins by country has been provided (see Section 2) and indicates that the United Kingdom is

a major (but not the highest) user of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins and so the situation

found in the United Kingdom may be representative of a reasonable worst case for the PECregional

for surface water for Europe as a whole. 

For the sediment level, reasonably good agreement is obtained between the measured 

concentrations and the predicted concentrations, particularly in the recent survey of the United 

Kingdom. The levels measured upstream from the sites of discharge were generally in the range 

<0.08-5.2 mg/kg wet weight (approximate mean level of 0.7 mg/kg wet wt) and could be taken 

to represent the “background” level in industrialised areas. These levels can be compared with 

the estimated PECregional of 8.80 mg/kg wet wt., and are consistent with a regional water 

concentration of around 0.1 μg/l (e.g. using the equations given in the Technical Guidance 

Document, a surface water concentration of 0.1 μg/l leads to estimated sediment concentrations

of around 1.3 mg/kg wet wt. for suspended sediment and 1.1 mg/kg wet wt. for bulk sediment).

For the sediment samples taken downstream from sources of release the levels were in the range 

1-25 mg/kg wet wt. These values compare reasonably well with the estimated PEClocals for these 

activities, even though the water samples taken at the site indicated that the levels in water were 

generally not detectable. This may reflect the fact that sediment levels are much less dependent

on the releases occurring at the time of sampling than are the water samples.

In summary, the PECregional for surface water could be taken as 0.1 μg/l rather than the estimated

value of 0.389 μg/l. At present both values will be considered in the PEC calculations in order

that the significance of the values on the overall results of the assessment can be clearly seen, but 

the value of 0.1 μg/l will be used in the risk characterisation. Similarly for sediment, both the

estimated PECregional of 8.80 mg/kg/wet wt. and measured value of around 0.7 mg/kg wet wt. will 

be taken into account in the calculations in the risk assessment. For the local assessment the 

estimated PEClocals will be used, supported by the measured values where appropriate. 

114 
R331_0208_env

Some concerns have been raised about the possibility of natural organohalogens or other 

substances interfering with analytical measurement of environmental concentrations. These are 

addressed in Section 3.3.5 

3.1.2 Terrestrial compartment 

3.1.2.1 Predicted levels 

The estimated concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in soil are shown in 

Table 3.34. These have been estimated using the EUSES programme. The vast majority of the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin is likely to enter soil via adsorption onto and subsequent 

spreading of sewage sludge, but for uses where atmospheric emissions occur (e.g. PVC and 

plastics), then these releases can also contribute to the concentrations found in soil over time. 

Table 3.34 Estimated concentrations in soil 

Scenario Step Conc. in dry Predicted soil concentration (mg/kg wet wt) 

sewage sludge 

(mg/kg) Agric. soil 30 

days ave. 

Agric. soil 

180 days ave. 

Grassland 

180 days ave. 

Production Site A 0a negligibled negligibled negligibled 

Site B 0a negligibled negligibled negligibled 

Site C 0a negligibled negligibled negligibled 

Site D 0a negligibled negligibled negligibled 

Compounding - O 28.7 1.52 (0.51)b 1.52 (0.51)e 1.27 (0.26)e 

Conversion – O 213 4.23 (3.21)b 4.23 (3.21)e 2.36 (1.35)e

Use in PVC – 

plastisol 

applications 

Combined compounding/ 

conversion – O 

241 4.65 (3.64) b 4.65 (3.64)e 2.53 (1.51)e

Compounding - O 106 2.65 (1.64)b 2.65 (1.64)e 1.72 (0.71) Use in PVC – e 

extrusion/other Compounding – PO 575 9.54 (8.53)b 9.54 (8.53)e 4.49 (3.48)e

Compounding – C 48.9 1.82 (0.81)b 1.82 (0.81)e 1.39 (0.38)e 

Conversion – O 322 5.83 (4.82)b 5.83 (4.82)e 3.00 (1.99)e 

Conversion – PO 345 6.17 (5.16)b 6.17 (5.16)e 3.14 (2.13)e 

Conversion – C 293 5.41 (4.40)b 5.41 (4.40)e 2.83 (1.82)e 

Compounding/conversion – O 428 7.38 (6.37)b 7.38 (6.37)e 3.63 (2.61)e 

Compounding/conversion – PO 920 14.6 (13.6)b 14.6 (13.6)e 6.53 (5.51)e 

Compounding/conversion – C 343 6.13 (5.12)b 6.13 (5.12)e 3.12 (2.11)e 

Compounding 53.5 1.88 (0.87)b 1.88 (0.87)e 1.41 (0.40) Use in e 

plastics/rubber Conversion 178 3.72 (2.71)b 3.72 (2.71)e 2.15 (1.14)e

Compounding/conversion 232 4.51 (3.5)b 4.51 (3.5)e 2.47 (1.46)e 

Use in sealants Formulation and use - negligibled negligibled Negligibled 

Table 3.34 continued overleaf. 

115 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.34 continued 

Scenario Step Conc. in dry Predicted soil concentration (mg/kg wet wt) 

sewage sludge 

(mg/kg) Agric. soil 30 

days ave. 

Agric. soil 

180 days ave. 

Grassland 

180 days ave. 

Formulation 172 3.63 (2.62)b 3.63 (2.62)e 2.11 (1.10)e 

Industrial application 67.8 2.09 (1.08)b 2.09 (1.08)e 1.50 (0.49)e 

Use in paints 

Domestic application 3.45×10-4 negligibled negligibled Negligibled 

Formulation 954 15.1 (14.1)b 15.1 (14.1)e 6.7 (5.68)e 

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 379 6.67 (5.66)b 6.67 (5.66)e 3.32 (2.31)e

Use in metal 

cutting/working 

fluids 

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 345 6.16 (5.15)b 6.16 (5.15)e 3.12 (2.11)e

Use in emulsifiable fluids 28.7 1.52 (0.51)b 1.52 (0.51)e 1.27 (0.26)e 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

3,120 47 (46)b 47 (46)e 19.4 (18.4)e 

Formulation 115 2.80 (1.78)b 2.80 (1.78)e 1.79 (0.78) Use in leather fa e t 

liquors Use – complete processing of 

raw hides 

1,030 16.3 (15.3)b 16.3 (15.3)e 7.17 (6.16)e

Use – processing of wet blue 4,140 61.8 (60.8)b 61.8 (60.8)e 25.4 (24.4)e 

Use in carbonless 

copy paper 

Paper recycling 203c 4.07c (3.06)b,c 4.07c

(3.06)b,c 

2.29c

(1.28)b,c 

Note: a) Sewage sludge from production sites is not applied to agricultural land. 

b) Values in ( ) recalculated using the measured regional natural soil concentration of 0.088 mg/kg wet wt. (see Section 

3.1.2.2). 

c) Primary treatment (sludge to landfill) followed by biological waste water treatment (sludge to soil). 

d) The process makes no significant contribution to the levels in soil. 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

No degradation in soil was assumed in the model, and the local concentrations are calculated

based on 10 years continual application of sewage sludge containing the chlorinated paraffin. 

After this time period the fraction of the steady state concentration reached is estimated as 

4.1×10-3 (0.4%) for agricultural soil and 5.6×10-3 (0.6%) for grassland. This indicates that over 

prolonged periods of exposure (either through atmospheric deposition and/or sewage sludge 

application) higher concentrations than predicted here could theoretically build up in the soil 

compartment if there is no removal mechanism for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from 

soil. 

For the intermittent release scenario in Table 3.34, the calculation of the concentration on sludge 

assumes that 93% the chemical released on that day is adsorbed onto the amount of sludge 

produced in the waste water treatment plant on that day. However, the sludge retention time of 

sludge in the default waste water treatment plant is 9.2 days and so the calculation has assumed 

that this sludge is diluted by a factor of around 9.2 prior to being spread onto the land (the 

instantaneous estimated concentration on sludge is 28,700 mg/kg dry weight and so a value of 

3,120 mg/kg dry weight is used in the subsequent calculations). 

116 
R331_0208_env

For the regional sources the following concentrations in soil were calculated (see Appendix A):

agricultural soil PECregional(soil) = 50.4 mg/kg wet wt.

 industrial/natural soil PECregional(soil) = 1.10 mg/kg wet wt. 

The above regional concentrations do not include the contribution from “waste remaining in the 

environment”. When this is included in the calculation the regional concentrations become:

agricultural soil PECregional(soil) = 53.8-55.8 mg/kg wet wt.

 industrial soil/urban PECregional(soil) = 147-173 mg/kg wet wt

 natural soil PECregional(soil) = 1.85-2.01 mg/kg wet wt. 

In the regional model, agricultural soil received input from both sewage sludge and aerial 

deposition, whereas the natural soil received input from aerial deposition only. Higher 

concentrations have been estimated in the regional model than in some of the local scenarios

given in Table 3.34. This is because the concentrations calculated in the regional model are 

“steady-state” concentrations, and reflect the possible build up in soil due to continuous 

application over many years (rather than 10 years as is used in the local calculations). The model

does not give any indication as to the time period that may be necessary for these concentrations

to be reached (for instance if 0.4% of steady-state is reached in 10 years, then the time taken to

reach steady-state concentrations could be of the order of several thousands of years).

3.1.2.2 Measured levels 

No measured levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in soil were located in the literature.

A monitoring survey of concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (and other

chlorinated paraffins) in sewage sludge, soil and earthworms associated with some uses of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the United Kingdom has recently been completed

(CEFAS, 1999) and the results are summarised in Table 3.35. The samples used in the study 

were collected in the early summer of 1998. The levels found in digested sewage sludge prior to 

application onto soil were in the range 2.9-93 mg/kg dry weight and the levels found in soil 

where the sludge was applied were generally not detected (<0.1 mg/kg dry weight which is 

equivalent to <0.088 mg/kg on a wet weight basis). 

Table 3.35 Levels in sewage sludge, agricultural land and earthworms from the United Kingdom (CEFAS, 1999) 

Location Comment Sample type Concentrationa 

Digested sewage sludge 2.9 mg/kg dry weight 

Dried digested sewage sludge 

(fertiliser) 

27.7 mg/kg dry weight 

Soil receiving fertiliser <0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

South West Sewage treatment plant associated with 

polymers/tarpaulin industry. Soil received 

repeated application of fertiliser made from

sludge. 

Earthworms <0.1 mg/kg fresh weight 

Digested sewage sludge 12.1 mg dry weight 

Soil receiving sewage sludge <0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

South East Sewage treatment plant associated with 

synthetic rubber and other varied 

industries. Digested sewage frequently 

applied to soil. Earthworms 0.7 mg/kg fresh weight 

Table 3.35 continued overleaf. 

117 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.35 continued 

Location Comment Sample type Concentrationa 

Digested sewage sludge 11.8 mg/kg dry weight 

Soil receiving sewage sludge <0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

Wales Sewage treatment plants associated with 

formulation and use of metal working fluids. 

Digested sewage applied to soil January 

1998. Tentatively identified as short-chaina. 

Earthworms <0.1 mg/kg fresh weight 

Digested sewage sludge 17.1 mg/kg dry weight 

Soil receiving sewage sludge <0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

West Midlands Sewage treatment plant associated with 

formulation and use of metal working fluids. 

Digested sewage frequently applied to soil. 

Known to have been applied January 1998. Earthworms 0.3 mg/kg fresh weight 

Digested sewage sludge 3.4 mg/kg dry weight 

<0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

East Midlands Sewage treatment plant associated with 

rubber production. Several applications of 

sludge made during February 1998. 

Earthworms <0.1 mg/kg fresh weight 

Digested sewage sludge 1.8 mg/kg dry weight 

Soil receiving sewage sludge <0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

East Anglia Industry source unknown. Digested sewage 

frequently applied to soil. 

Earthworms 0.5 mg/kg fresh weight 

Digested sewage sludge 6.7 mg/kg dry weight 

Soil receiving sewage sludge <0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

North West Sewage treatment plant associated with 

formulation and use of metal working fluids, 

and other industries. Digested sewage 

frequently applied to soil. Several 

applications made during 1997/1998 Earthworms <0.1 mg/kg fresh weight 

Digested sewage sludge 93.1 mg/kg dry weight 

Soil receiving sewage sludge <0.1 mg/kg dry weight 

Earthworms 1.7 mg/kg fresh weight 

Soil receiving sewage sludge 

North East Sewage treatment plant associated with 

PVC/other industries. Digested sewage 

frequently applied to soil. 

Note a) The actual identity of the residues present (i.e. medium-chain or short-chain chlorinated paraffin) were difficult to assign 

due to the high concentration of co-extracted lipid-soluble material. 

3.1.2.3 Comparison of measured and predicted concentrations 

The concentrations measured in sewage sludge are in reasonable agreement with some of the

predicted levels given in Table 3.34, but the resulting measured concentration in agricultural soil 

is lower than the predicted concentration. This is particularly marked for the predicted regional 

concentration. One reason for this is may be due to an unrealistic removal (degradation) rate for 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the EUSES model. The calculations in the model, 

particularly at the regional level, are very sensitive to the degradation rate (the default 

degradation rate constant is 6.93×10-7 days-1, corresponding to a half-life of 2,740 years). The 

effect of varying the degradation rate in the regional model are shown in Appendix H. From this

analysis, a biodegradation half-life of the order of 2 years results in the predicted concentrations

that are consistent with the available monitoring data. Information on the actual degradation of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in soil would be useful to indicate whether or not the 

substance is likely to build up in the soil as indicated by the current model. 

118 
R331_0208_env

Since the actual time from the last application of sludge to the soil and the collection of soil 

samples is unknown, it is not possible to estimate from the measured data the likely 

concentration resulting 30 days after application (as is needed for the PEClocal) for agricultural 

soil. Therefore the predicted PEClocals given in Table 3.34 will be used at present in the risk 

characterisation. However, it is clear from the measured data from fields where sludge 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has been applied over many years that the 

regional “background” concentration is <0.1 mg/kg dry weight (or <0.088 mg/kg wet weight) in 

agricultural soil, which is much lower than the predicted value. Similar to the case with the

surface water and sediment compartments, this value will be used for the estimated PECregionals 

for agricultural and natural soil in the further calculations and in the risk characterisation. 

3.1.3.1 Predicted levels 

The estimated regional concentration in industrial/urban soil is very high (147-173) when the 

“waste remaining in the environment” contribution is included in the calculation, which reflects

potentially high emissions from this source. However, there are some uncertainties over the 

actual (bio)availability of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins released to the environment in 

this form, and over the applicability of the available models to predict the resulting 

environmental concentrations. As discussed above, the half-life for degradation/removal in soil 

has a large impact on the predicted concentrations for soil. If a removal half-life of 2 years is

used in the calculation (as suggested by the analysis carried out in Appendix H), then these 

regional concentrations in industrial/urban soil would be reduced to 0.7-0.8 mg/kg wet wt. 

Again, there are large uncertainties inherent in this calculation. 

3.1.3 Atmospheric compartment 

The concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the atmosphere have been predicted 

using EUSES. The local concentrations arise from direct emissions of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins from the various industrial processes involved (emissions to air from waste water 

treatment plants are considered to be negligible due to the physico-chemical properties of the 

substance). At the regional and continental level, diffuse source releases have also been

considered in the model. These releases were identified in Section 3.1.0. The full output of the

model is given as Appendix A. The predicted atmospheric concentrations are shown in 

Table 3.36. The regional air concentration is estimated as 3.35×10-6 mg/m3 or

5.64-6.12×10-6 mg/m3

 when the contribution from “waste remaining in the environment” is 

included. 

119 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.34 Estimated air concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

Air concentrations (Clocal) (mg/m3 Scenario Step Estimated )

Atmospheric 

release Emission episode Annual average 

PECair, ann 

(mg/m3)

Production 5 Sites 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Compounding - O 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligible Use in PVC – a 

plastisol coating Conversion – O 0.185 kg/day 5.1×10-5 4.2×10-5 4.5×10-5

Compounding/conversion - O 0.185 kg/day 5.1×10-5 4.2×10-5 4.5×10-5

Compounding - O 0.055 kg/day 1.5×10-5 1.3×10-5 1.6×10 Use in PVC – -5

extrusion/other 

Compounding - PO 0.3 kg/day 8.3×10-5 6.9×10-5 7.2×10-5

Compounding – C 0.026 kg/day 7.1×10-6 5.8×10-6 9.2×10-6

Conversion – O 0.28 kg/day 7.8×10-5 6.4×10-5 6.7×10-5

Conversion – PO 0.3 kg/day 8.3×10-5 6.9×10-5 7.2×10-5

Conversion – C 0.255 kg/day 7.1×10-5 5.8×10-5 6.1×10-5

Compounding/conversion – O 0.335 kg/day 9.3×10-5 7.7×10-5 8.0×10-5

Compounding/conversion - PO 0.6 kg/day 1.7×10-4 1.4×10-4 1.4×10-4

Compounding/conversion - C 0.281 kg/day 7.8×10-5 6.4×10-5 6.7×10-5

Use in plastics/rubber Compounding 0.016 kg/day 4.3×10-6 3.5×10-6 6.9×10-6

Conversion 0.155 kg/day 4.3×10-5 3.5×10-5 3.8×10-5

Compounding/conversion 0.171 kg/day 4.8×10-5 3.9×10-5 4.2×10-5

Use in sealants Formulation and use 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Use in paints Formulation 0.05 kg/day 1.4×10-5 1.1×10-5 1.4×10-5

Industrial application 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Domestic application 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Formulation 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligible Use in metal a 

cutting/working fluids Use in oil-based fluids (large) 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Formulation 0.35 kg/day 9.7×10-5 8.0×10-5 8.3×10 Use in leather fa -5 t 

liquors Use – complete processing of 

raw hides 

0 kg/day negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea

Use – processing of wet blue 0 negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Use in carbonless 

copy paper 

Paper recycling 0 negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Note: a) The process makes no significant contribution to the levels in air. 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998).

120 
R331_0208_env

3.1.3.2 Measured levels 

No measured levels for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in air have been found in the

literature. 

3.1.4 Non-compartmental specific exposure relevant to the food chain 

3.1.4.1 Predicted levels 

Table 3.37 Estimated concentrations in fish and earthworms for secondary poisoning 

The levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in fish and earthworms for the secondary

poisoning assessment have been calculated by EUSES using the methods given in the Technical 

Guidance Document. The calculations have been carried out twice: firstly using the estimated 

PECregionals of 0.389 μg/l for surface water and 50.4 mg/kg wet wt. for agricultural soil (slightly 

higher values would be obtained if the estimated PECregionals with the contribution from “waste 

remaining in the environment” were used); and secondly using regional concentrations based on 

the measured data of 0.1 μg/l for surface water and 0.088 mg/kg wet wt. for agricultural soil. The 

latter values are considered to be most appropriate for consideration in the risk characterisation. 

For the concentration in fish, a measured BCF of 1,087 l/kg was used in the calculations. For the 

levels in earthworms, an earthworm-soil bioaccumulation factor of 5.6 kg/kg wet wt. was used, 

as estimated in Section 3.1.0.5. As was noted in Section 3.1.0.5, the bioaccumulation potential of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, although still appreciable, appears to be lower than would 

be expected based on the high log Kow value, and also appears to reduce with increasing degree

of chlorination. The predicted concentrations are shown in Table 3.37. 

The concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in food and other media for human 

consumption have been estimated using EUSES and are shown in Table 4.1 in Section 4. 

Predicted concentration in fish

(mg/kg wet wt)

Predicted concentration in

earthworms(mg/kg wet wt) 

Scenario Step

Based on 

estimated 

regional water 

conc.d 

Based on 

measured 

regional water 

conc.e 

Based on 

estimated 

regional soil 

conc.d 

Based on 

measured 

regional soil 

conc.e 

Site A 0.43 0.11 negligiblec negligiblec 

0.46 0.15 negligiblec negligiblec 

Site C 0.50 0.19 negligiblec negligiblec 

Site D 0.42 0.11 negligiblec negligiblec 

Compounding - O 0.43 0.13 145 1.7 

Conversion – O 0.58 0.26 153 9.3 

Use in PVC – 

plastisol coating 

Compounding/conversion – O 0.60 0.28 154 10.4 

Site B 

Production 

Table 3.37 continued overleaf. 

121 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.37 continued 

Predicted concentration in fish

(mg/kg wet wt)

Predicted concentration in

earthworms(mg/kg wet wt) 

Scenario Step

Based on 

estimated 

regional water 

conc.d 

Based on 

measured 

regional water 

conc.e 

Based on 

estimated 

regional soil 

conc.d 

Based on 

measured 

regional soil 

conc.e 

Compounding - O 0.50 0.19 149 4.8 

Compounding – PO 0.84 0.52 168 24.1 

Compounding – C 0.46 0.14 146 2.5 

0.66 157 13.7 

Conversion – PO 0.67 0.36 158 14.7

Conversion – C 0.63 0.32 156 12.6 

Compounding/conversion – O 0.73 0.42 162 18.1 

Compounding/conversion – PO 1.09 0.77 182 38.3

Use in PVC – 

extrusion/other 

Compounding/conversion – C 0.67 0.36 158 14.6 

0.15 146 2.7

Conversion 0.55 0.24 152 7.8

Use in 

plastics/rubber 

Compounding/conversion 0.59 0.28 154 10.0

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligiblec negligiblec negligiblec negligiblec 

Formulation 0.55 0.23 151 7.6

Industrial application 0.47 0.16 147 3.3 

Use in paints 

Domestic application negligiblec negligiblec negligiblec negligiblec 

Formulation 1.11 0.80 183 39.7

0.70 0.38 160 16.1 

0.67 158 14.7 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.44 0.13 145 1.7 

Use in metal 

cutting/working 

fluids 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

0.84 0.52 272a 129a 

Formulation 0.51 0.19 149 5.2

Use – complete processing of 

raw hides 

1.17 0.86 187 43.0

Use in leather fat 

liquors 

Use – processing of wet blue 3.41 3.10 314 171 

Use in carbonless 

copy paper 

Paper recycling 0.54b 0.23b 152b 8.8b 

Conversion – O 0.34 

Compounding 0.46 

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 0.36 

Note: a) Assumes dilution of sewage sludge at wwtp before application to soil (see Section 3.1.2.1). 

b) Primary treatment (sludge to landfill) followed by biological waste water treatment (sludge to soil). 

c) The process makes no significant contribution to the levels in fish/earthworms.

d) Using the estimated PECregionals of 0.389 μg/l for water and 50.4 mg/kg wet wt. for soil. 

e) Using the measured regional concentrations of 0.1 μg/l for water and 0.088 mg/kg wet wt. for soil. 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

122 
R331_0208_env

3.1.4.2 Measured levels 

Recently an in-depth study of the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in industrial areas 

of the United Kingdom has been carried out (CEFAS, 1999). The main purpose of the study was 

to determine the concentrations of medium-chain (and short-chain where found) chlorinated 

paraffins in surface water, sediment, biota and soil associated with their industrial use. The 

sampling sites were chosen with regards to their proximity to known sources/users of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. Samples were collected during early summer 1998. The 

levels found in biota are shown in Table 3.38. The levels found in surface water, sediment and 

soil (including earthworms) are reported in the appropriate Sections of this report. 

Table 3.38 Levels of chlorinated paraffins in fish and benthos in the United Kingdom, related to sources (CEFAS, 1999) 

Industry Comment/tentative

identificationa 

Sample Concentration of chlorinated 

paraffin (mg/kg fresh weight) 

Polymers/ tarpaulins Fish: roach muscle <0.2 

Synthetic rubber

manufacture 

Fish: perch muscle <0.2

Metal working Fish: flounder muscle <0.1 

Benthos: 90% Hindinae + Lymnaeidae 0.3 

Fish: roach muscle 0.6 

Fish: eel muscle 0.7 

Lubricant blending/ 

metal working 

Possibly medium-chain 

- levels could not be 

accurately quantified 

due to interferences. 

Fish: pike liver 2.8 

Benthos: 25% Spaeridae, 13% 

Hindinae, 9% Gammanidae, 25% 

Asellidae, 17% Planerbidae, 9% 

Valvatidae, 2% Sialidae 

Sealant and adhesive 0.3 

manufacture 

Possibly short-chain. 

Fish: roach liver <0.1 

Benthos: 2% Viviparidae, 16% 

Lymnaeidae, 5% Gammanidae, 16% 

Asellidae, 3% Zygoptera, 5% Corixidae, 

16% Chironomidae, 8% Caddis, 3%

Beetle, 16% Hindinae, 8% Hydrobiidae. 

0.1 

Fish: roach muscle <0.1 

Rubber product 

manufacturer 

Possibly 

medium-chain. 

Fish: eel liver <0.2 

Manufacturer of 

building sealants/

lubricant blending

Fish: roach muscle <0.1

Benthos: 18% Chironomidae, 71% 

Lymnaeidae, 7% Asellidae, 4%

Sphaendae 

Control site - no known 0.5 

uses. 

Possibly medium-chain 

Fish: carp muscle 0.5 

Table 3.38 continued overleaf.

123 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.38 continued 

Industry Comment/tentative

identificationa 

Sample Concentration of chlorinated 

paraffin (mg/kg fresh weight) 

Benthos: 90% Chironomidae, 8% 

Gamanidae, 2% Lymnaeidae 

Manufacturer of 0.1 

chlorinated paraffins 

Possibly mixture of 

short- and mediumchain Fish: eel liver 0.2 

Lubricant 

manufacturer(and other 

industries) 

Possibly short-chain. Benthos: 95% Gammanidae, 5% 

Chironomidae 

0.1 

PVC cable 

manufacturer 

Possibly 

medium-chain. 

Benthos: 90% Spaeridae, 5%

Lymnaeidae, 5% Hirudinae 

0.8 

Metal working/ leather 

finishing 

Possibly mixture of 

short- and 

medium-chain. 

Benthos: 50% Asellidae, 40% 

Chironomidae, 5% Tipulidae, 4% 

Hirudinae, 1% Lymnaeidae 

0.5 

Metal working sites Possibly short-chain. Benthos: 60% Oligochaetes, 20% 

Chironomidae, 16% Lymnaeidae, 4% 

Sphaeridae. 

<0.05 

Fish: whole, Stone Loach 5.2 

Possibly mixture of 

short- and medium

chain. 

Benthos: 95% Asellidae, 5% 

Oligochaetes 

0.7 

Leather finishing 

chemicals formulation 

site 

Benthos: 65% Sphaeridae, 265 

Lymnaeidae, 3% Planorbidae, 2%

Corixidae, 2% Sialidae, 2% Hinidinae, 

2% Valvatidae 

<0.05 

<0.05

Fish: eel liver <0.05 

Background site Fish: eel muscle <0.05 

PVC production/ paint 

manufacture 

 Fish: roach muscle 

Note a) The actual identity of the residues present were difficult to assign due to the high concentration of co-extracted

lipid-soluble material. Tentative identity based on the chlorinated paraffins found in sediment in the area. 

Levels of combined short- and medium-chain (i.e. C10-20) chlorinated paraffins have been 

measured in seal, marine shellfish and salt and freshwater fish from around the United Kingdom 

(Campbell and McConnell, 1980). The results of the analyses are shown in Table 3.39. The

same authors also determined the levels of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins in several other parts of 

the (human) food chain. The results of these analyses are shown in Table 3.40 to 3.43. 

124 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.39 Concentrations of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in aquatic organisms 

(Campbell and McConnell, 1980). 

 Species No. of specimens Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffin 

Mean (μg/kg) Range (μg/kg) 

Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) 6 30 ND-200

Pouting (Trisopterus luscus) 4 100 ND-200

3,250 100-12,000

Pike (Esox lucius) 2 25 ND-50

Grey seal (liver and blubber) 

(Halichoerus grypus) 

4 75 40-100

Mussel (Mytilus edulis) 9

Note: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 50 μg/kg). 

Table 3.40 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in seabirds' eggsa

(Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Concentration (μg/kg) No of eggs containing C10-20 chlorinated paraffins 

7 

50 3

100 3

200 5

300 1

400 2

600 1

>600 (=2,000 μg/kg) 1 

Not detected (<50 μg/kg) 

Note: Species included in study were: Cormorant (Phalocrocorax carbo); Gannet (Morus bassanus); Great skua (Catharacta skua); 

Guillemot (Uria aalge); Kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla); Puffin (Fratecula arctica); Manx shearwater (Puffinus puffinus); Razorbill 

(Alca torda) and Shag (Phalacrocorax aristotelis).

Table 3.41 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in birds (Campbell and

McConnell, 1980) 

Species Organ Concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins (μg/kg wet weight) 

Heron (Ardea cinerea) Liver 100-1,200

Guillemot (Uria aalge) Liver 100-1,100

Herring gull (Larus 

argentatus) 

Liver 200-900

125 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.42 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C10-20) in human foodstuffs 

(Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Foodstuff class No of samples

analysed*

Average concentration of C10-20 chlorinated paraffins 

(μg/kg) 

Dairy products 13 300 

Vegetable oils and derivatives 6 150 

Fruit and vegetables 16 5 

Beverages 6 ND

Note: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 50 μg/kg), *detected in approximately 70% of samples analysed. 

Table 3.43 Concentration of combined short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (C from areas near

to and remote from a chlorinated paraffin production plant (Campbell and McConnell, 1980) 

Organ analysed

10-20) in sheep

Location of sheep Average concentration of C10-20 chlorinated 

paraffin (μg/kg)

Remote from industry Liver, brain, kidney, 

mesenteric fat 

ND 

Close to a chlorinated paraffin production plant Heart ND

Liver 200 

Lung ND

Mesenteric fat 50

Kidney 50

Perinephritic fat ND

Note: ND = Not detected (detection limit = 50 μg/kg). 

Levels of total (C10-24) chlorinated paraffins in food, fish and marine animals have been reported 

by Greenpeace (1995). The total levels measured (on a fat weight basis) were 271 μg/kg in 

mackerel, 62 μg/kg in fish oil (herring), 98 μg/kg in margarine containing fish oil, 16-114 μg/kg 

in common porpoise, 963 μg/kg in fin whale, 69 μg/kg in pork, 74 μg/kg in cows milk and 

45 μg/kg in human breast milk. Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were thought to make up 

between 6 and 29% of the total chlorinated paraffins found. The concentrations of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins present can be estimated from the data as 46 μg/kg in mackerel, 12 μg/kg in 

fish oil, 28 μg/kg in margarine, 3-7 μg/kg in porpoise, 144 μg/kg in fin whale, 11 μg/kg in pork

fat, 16 μg/kg in cows milk and 7 μg/kg in mothers’ milk. Further details of the analysis of the

mothers’ milk samples have recently become available (UBA, 2001). The analysis of mothers’ 

milk was carried out on pooled samples from six fish-eaters (who ate fish a minimum of once per

week) and two non-fish-eaters (who ate fish a maximum of once a month). Similar results were 

obtained for both groups (the total chlorinated paraffin content of the fish-eating group was 

50.4 μg/kg lipid, compared to 40.5 μg/kg lipid in the non-fish-eaters; the low sample size meant

that it was not possible to determine if any significant differences were apparent between the two

groups). The fat content of the mothers milk was 2.8% in the fish-eaters and 4.3% in the 

non-fish-eaters. The average chlorine content of the chlorinated paraffins detected was reported 

to be around 33% (although a value of 50% appears to have been assumed in the determination 

126 
R331_0208_env

of chlorinated paraffin concentrations of the samples). The occurrence of medium-chain

chlorinated paraffins in mothers milk and cows milk are considered further in the Human Health 

Assessment. Industry commissioned an independent critique of the analytical method used in this 

study. This highlighted the potential uncertainties with the method and the findings are

summarised in Appendix D. 

Concentration* 

(μg/kg lipid) 

In a survey of 108 fish samples from Japan, chlorinated paraffins (of unspecified type) were not 

found in any of the samples analysed (detection limit 500 μg/kg wet wt.) (Environment Agency 

Japan, 1991). 

Murray et al. (1987a) reported the results of monitoring of chlorinated paraffin levels in mussels 

(Unionidae sp.) collected downstream of a chlorinated paraffin manufacturing site in the United

States. The level of medium-chain (C14-17, 50-60% Cl) chlorinated paraffin detected was 

170 μg/kg compared with <7 μg/kg upstream of the discharge. 

Jansson et al. (1993) reported the occurrence of chlorinated paraffins (of unspecified chain 

length, with 6-16 chlorine atoms/molecule) at levels of 570-1,600 μg/kg lipid in fish and 

130-280 μg/kg lipid in seal from in and around Sweden. In addition they also reported levels of 

chlorinated paraffins of 2,900 μg/kg lipid in rabbit muscle, 4,400 μg/kg lipid in moose muscle, 

140 μg/kg in reindeer suet and 530 μg/kg in osprey muscle in pooled samples from the same

area. The results are shown in Table 3.44. 

Table 3.44 Concentrations of chlorinated paraffins (unspecified chain length) in pooled samples from in and around

Sweden (Jansson et al., 1993) 

Sample Number of

samples

Location/date lipid

content 

Whitefish muscle 35 Lake Storvindeln, Lapland, 1986 0.66% 1,000 

Arctic char muscle 15 Lake Vättern, Central Sweden, 1987 5.3% 570 

Herring muscle 100 Bothnian Sea, 1986 5.4% 1,400 

Herring muscle 60 Baltic proper, 1987 4.4% 1,500 

Herring muscle 100 Skagerrak, 1987 3.2% 1,600 

Ringed seal blubber 7 Kongsfjorden, Svalbard, 1981 88% 130 

Grey seal blubber 8 Baltic Sea, 1979-85 74% 280 

Rabbit muscle 15 Revingehed, Skåne, 1986 1.1% 2,900 

Moose muscle 13 Grimsö, Västtmanland, 1985-86 2.0% 4,400 

31 Ottsjö, Jämtland, 1986 56% 140 

Osprey muscle 35 Sweden, 1982-1986 4.0% 530 

Reindeer suet 

Note: *Refers to chlorinated paraffins with 6-16 chlorine atoms and so may contain chlorinated paraffins other than C14-17. 

Tomy et al. (1998) report the results of Metcalfe-Smith et al. (1995), who found that levels of 

C14-C17 chlorinated paraffins were below the detection limit (<3.5 mg/kg) in Zebra Mussel from 

127 
R331_0208_env

the St. Lawrence River, Canada, taken downstream from a chlorinated paraffin manufacturing 

plant. 

Recent data on the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in beluga whale (Delphinapterus 

leucas), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and carp (Cyprinus carpio) from Canada have 

been reported (Bennie et al., 2000). For the whale, 37 blubber samples and 6 liver samples from 

25 individuals were analysed for C e samples were taken from 

dead animals from the St. Lawrence River between 1987 and 1991. The fish samples were all 

taken from Lake Ontario in 1996 and 3 carp and 10 trout were analysed (whole body 

homogenates). The levels are shown in Table 3.45. The authors indicated that method used 

(involving low resolution mass spectrometry) may be more subject to analytical interferences 

from other organohalogen compounds than some of the methods used in other analyses (for

example the authors indicate that analytical interferences may explain why their data for shortchain chlorinated paraffins in Beluga whale samples obtained using this method were one or two 

orders of magnitude higher than those obtained by other workers using high resolution mass 

spectrometry on the same samples). Therefore the results of this study should be treated with 

caution.

14-17 chlorinated paraffins and th

Table 3.45 Levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in biota from Canada (Bennie et al., 2000) 

Species Sample Lipid content Concentration of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin (mg/kg wet wt.) 

Blubber samples from 15 females taken 

from mid depth of the subcutaneous fat 

81-91% range 

86.2% mean 

1.78-79.0 range 

20.5 mean

68-96% range 

83.5% mean 

15.8-80.0 range 

39.1 mean

Liver samples from 3 females 11-32% range 0.55-20.9 range 

Liver samples from 3 males 20-52% range 2.74-5.82 range 

Carp

(Cyprinus carpio) 

Whole body homogenates from 3 

individuals 

12-19% range 

16% mean 

0.276-0.563 range 

0.393 mean 

Trout

(Oncorhynchus 

mykiss) 

Whole body homogenates from 10

individuals 1.23 mean

18-30% range 

24% mean 

0.257-4.39 range

Beluga whale

(Delphinapterus 

leucas) Blubber samples from 10 males taken 

from mid depth of the subcutaneous fat 

3.1.4.3 Comparison of predicted and measured levels 

Little information appears to be available on the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

alone in biota samples. Most samples have been analysed for a range of chlorinated paraffins that 

includes the medium-chain ones combined with other types. This means that the levels found of 

total (e.g. C10-20) chlorinated paraffins cannot be compared directly with the predicted 

concentrations in fish and food. 

A monitoring survey has recently been completed within the United Kingdom, looking 

specifically at the levels of the medium-chain (and short-chain) chlorinated paraffins in biota 

samples collected near to possible sources of release. The results of this survey are summarised 

in Table 3.38. In this survey, the levels found in aquatic organisms were in the range 

128 
R331_0208_env

<0.1-5.2 mg/kg wet weight (with the highest levels being tentatively identified as short-chain

chlorinated paraffin) which is slightly lower than, but in reasonable agreement with, the 

predictions. Further, the survey also included monitoring of earthworms from soil where sewage 

sludge containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins had been applied. The levels found in the 

earthworms were in the range <0.1-1.7 mg/kg wet weight, which is in reasonable agreement with 

the levels predicted. However, it should be noted that the method used could not unambiguously 

determine the exact identity (e.g. medium-chain or short-chain) of the chlorinated paraffin 

present in all of these samples. 

 

The predicted concentrations will be used in the risk assessment. 

129 
R331_0208_env

3.2 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND DOSE 

(CONCENTRATION) - RESPONSE (EFFECT) ASSESSMENT 

3.2.1 Aquatic compartment

3.2.1.1 Toxicity to fish 

The toxicity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to fish is summarised in Table 3.46.

Lindén et al. (1979) studied the toxicity of three medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to the Bleak 

(Alburnus alburnus) in brackish water. The tests were carried out under static conditions without 

aeration at 10oC. Acetone was used as cosolvent (up to 500 μl/l). The water used for the test was 

taken from a nearby bay and had a pH of 7.8, a salinity of 7‰ and a dissolved oxygen 

concentration of 5 mg/l at the end of the test. Based on the concentrations of test substance 

initially added, the 96-hour LC50’s were determined as >10,000 mg/l for a C14-17, 52% 

chlorinated paraffin, >5,000 mg/l for a C14-17, 50% chlorinated paraffin, and >5,000 mg/l for a 

C15.5, 40% Cl chlorinated paraffin (the C15.5 probably refers to the mean carbon chain length in 

the commercial medium-chain chlorinated paraffin). 

Bengtsson et al. (1979) also studied the toxicity of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to 

Bleaks (Alburnus alburnus) as part of a bioaccumulation study. The chlorinated paraffin tested

was a C14-17, 50% wt. Cl substance. The tests were performed at 10oC using a semi-static 

procedure in which the test solutions containing 125 μg/l of the substance were renewed every 

two to three days over the 14-day exposure period. The water used in the experiment was Baltic 

Sea water with a salinity of 7‰, and acetone was present in all aquaria, including controls at a 

concentration of 0.1 ml/l. The fish used in the experiment had an average weight of 4.5 g and 

were not fed during the exposure period. Six groups of 15 fish were used for both the exposure 

and control solutions. No mortality or effect on behaviour was seen in fish exposed to the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin during the test. 

Hoechst AG (1976 and 1977) reported the results of acute toxicity tests using several 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins with Golden Orfe (Leuciscus idus). Few details of the tests

are available and so it is not possible to validate these data. The results are reported in

Table 3.46 as supporting information. 

The toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl paraffin to Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) has been 

studied over 60 days in a GLP study (Madeley et al., 1983b). The substance tested was a 

commercial product mixed with a n-pentadecane-8-14C that had been chlorinated to a similar 

degree. Two concentrations were tested; 1.05 mg/l and 4.5 mg/l, both based on mean measured

concentrations over the 60 day period and 30 fish (approximate weight/fish = 2 g at start of test)

were used per concentration. Acetone (500 ppm v/v - this concentration was required to maintain 

the test substance in suspension) was used as cosolvent and a flow-through system was used for

the test. 

130 
Table 3.46 Toxicity to fish 

Species Substance tested Comments Result Alburnus alburnus (bleak) C15.5, 40% Cl Nominal concentration; acetone 

cosolvent (0.5 ml/l); static test

96h-LC50 >5,000 mg/l 

14-17, 50% Cl Nominal concentration; acetone 

cosolvent (0.5 ml/l); static test

50 

14-17, 52% Cl Nominal concentration; acetone 

cosolvent (0.5 ml/l); static test

96h-LC50 >10,000 mg/l 

14-17, Nominal concentration; brackish water; 

acetone cosolvent (0.1 mg/l); semi-static limit test 

Not toxic at 0.125 mg/l over 14 days 

Leuciscus idus (golden orfe) C14-17, 41% Cl 

(Chlorparaffin 40 fl.nv) 

Substance added directly to test medium Harmful threshold (48 hour) = 400 mg

 C14-17, 41% Cl* 

(Hordalub 70 VT)

Harmful threshold (48 hour) = >500 m

 C14-17, 49% Cl 

(Hordalub 80 EM) 

Harmful threshold (48 hour) = >500 m

Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout)

C14-17, 52% Cl, mixed with a n-pentadecane-8-14C, 51% Cl 

Acetone cosolvent (500 ppm v/v); measured concentrations; flow-through system; 

No adverse effects at 4.5 mg/l over 60 days 

Oryzias latipes (Japanese medaka) C14H23.3Cl6.7, 55% Cl, 

14C-labelled 

Static test; measured concentrations No adverse effects on embryos or larv

at up to 1.6 mg/l over 20 days 

14H24.9Cl5.1, 48% Cl Static test; concentrations estimated 

from measurements with 14C-C14H23.3Cl6.7 

No adverse effects on embryos or larvat up to 3.4 mg/l over 20 days 

C 96h-LC >5,000 mg/l CC 50% Cl C

Note: * Preparation containing chlorinated paraffin and PEG also. 

131 
R331_0208_env

The other test conditions were pH=7.4-8.6, dissolved oxygen=9.4-11.4, temperature=12±1oC and 

water hardness=42-71 mg/l as CaCO3. As well as mortality in the test, the “normal” behaviour of

the fish was qualitatively assessed (by comparison with controls) in terms of a) swimming 

behaviour; b) general behaviour of individuals (e.g. intense activity, sluggishness, quiescence, 

position in test vessel); c) response to presence of food; d) skin pigmentation changes. During the

test, an insignificant number of fish died (2 fish escaped from the tanks - one from the acetone 

control and one from the 4.5 mg/l treatment; one death occurred in the 4.5 mg/l treatment). 

Further, overall no significant difference in the behaviour of the exposed fish compared with the 

control populations was seen. On days 5, 8 and 9, a few individuals in the 4.5 mg/l treatments 

showed a sluggish response to the presence of food but this was transient and disappeared after

day 9 and was not considered treatment related. The report also gave information on the fish 

growth (weights and length) during the study. Although the data was not analysed statistically in 

the report, it did show that little or no effect on growth (compared with controls) occurred during 

the experiment (mean weights at end of study were 9.46 g in controls, 9.23 g in acetone control, 

8.76 g in 1 mg/l exposure group and 8.41 g in 5.6 mg/l exposure group; mean length at end of 

study were 84.2 mm in controls, 81.2 mm in acetone controls, 82.0 mm in 1 mg/l exposure group

and 78.0 mm in 5.6 mg/l exposure group). Overall, little or no effect was seen on fish exposed 

for 60 days at 4.5 mg/l. 

A toxicity test using embryos of Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) is also available (Fisk et al.,

1999). This study used a series of chlorinated paraffins with single carbon chain lengths and 

known chlorine contents. Two C14-compounds were synthesised. The first compound was 

synthesised by the chlorination of 1,13-tetradecadiene, and so the positions of the chlorine atoms

along the molecule were generally known. The composition of this product was: 

45% C

1.9% C

Average formula C14H24.9Cl5.1 48% wt. Cl consisting of; 

10.5% 1,2,13,14-tetrachlorotetradecane (42.3% wt. Cl) 

74.3% x,1,2,13,14-pentachlorotetradecane (47.7% wt. Cl) 

14.2% x,y,1,2,13,14-hexachlorotetradecane (52.6% wt. Cl) 

1.0% x,y,z,1,2,13,14-heptachlorotetradecane (56.4% wt. Cl) 

where x,y, and z are unidentified positions on the carbon chain. 

The second compound was synthesised by the free radical chlorination of 1-14C-tetradecane, and

resulted in a more complex mixture. The composition of this product was: 

 Average formula 14C-C14H23.3Cl6.7 55% wt. Cl consisting of;

0.2% C14H26Cl4 (42.3% wt. Cl)

4.4% C14H25Cl5 (47.7% wt. Cl) 

 34% C14H24Cl6 (52.6% wt. Cl)

14H23Cl7 (56.4% wt. Cl) 

 14% C14H22Cl8 (59.9% wt. Cl)

14H21Cl9 (62.8% wt. Cl) 

In the experiment, fertilised eggs from the fish were individually exposed to the test substance in

1.8 ml vials with teflon-lined caps. The chlorinated paraffins were added to the vials by firstly 

dissolving the substance in a mixture of dichloromethane and hexane and then adding the 

132 
R331_0208_env

required amount of solution to the vial and allowing the solvent to evaporate for 24 hours. Then 

1 ml of the medaka rearing solution was added to the vial and the mixture was sonicated for 

30 minutes before the fertilised egg was added. The vials were then sealed and incubated at 25oC 

for the test period (20 days). The concentrations of chlorinated paraffin tested were based on 

their estimated water solubility, along with concentrations of 1/100, 1/10, 10× and 100× the 

estimated water solubility. Separate experiments were used to determine the extent of the 

adsorption of the 14C-labelled chlorinated paraffin onto the glass vials and these data were used 

to determine the amount of chlorinated paraffin that was needed in order to achieve the desired 

test concentration in the test medium. Sets of 10 vials/eggs were used for each test concentration, 

and 1 control group of 10 vials/eggs was established for every 5 treatments. 

The analytical methodology used was only sufficiently sensitive enough to determine the

concentrations of the 14C-labelled compound. Therefore, the actual concentration of the 

unlabelled 48% wt. Cl substance in the test media was estimated from the measurements with the 

14C-labelled substance, along with knowledge of the amounts added to the vials. Similarly, the 

concentration of the chlorinated paraffin present in the eggs and larvae could only be determined 

with the 14C-labelled substance. The measured concentrations of the 14C-labelled chlorinated 

paraffin in the test media were found to be close to the desired concentration in the low

concentration vials, but was lower than expected in the high test concentration vials, possibly due 

to increased adsorption onto the glass vial. The measured concentrations for the 14C-labelled 

chlorinated paraffins are shown in Table 3.47. The estimated concentrations for the C14, 

48% wt. Cl substance were 2.9, 25, 250, 880 and 3,400 μg/l. 

No significant deaths or recognisable lesions occurred in the eggs, and no effects were seen in 

the larvae, at any of the concentrations of the two C14-chlorinated paraffins tested. However, the 

hatching success in the exposed and control vials was low and variable, and in almost all cases 

unhatched eggs were still alive on the last observation day (day 20). Further observation on 

day 40 indicated that the majority of eggs had hatched by this time. The average hatching time in 

this study was >15 days, which was longer than normal for this species (11-13 days). It was 

thought that the variable hatching rate was unlikely to be related to the chlorinated paraffin 

exposure. 

Larvae and eggs from the same treatment concentration were found to have similar 

concentrations of the 14C-chlorinated paraffin, suggesting that the substance could diffuse

through the egg shell. With the exception of the very highest exposure concentration, the 

concentration in larvae increased in proportion with the water concentration. The measured 

concentrations are shown in Table 3.47. 

Similar experiments were carried out with short-chain length chlorinated paraffins (C10-, C11- 

and C12-). In these experiments, toxic effects were seen in the eggs and larvae that were 

consistent with a narcotic mode of action. In addition, much higher uptake by the eggs and larvae 

was seen than in the experiments with the C14- chlorinated paraffin. It was concluded that in 

these experiments, the C14-chlorinated paraffins did not reach the narcotic tissue concentration

(estimated to be 2-8 μmol/g) in the eggs or larvae. 

133 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.47 Exposure concentrations and uptake in Medaka eggs and larvae of 14C-C14, 55% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin 

Nominal water 

concentration (μg/l) 

Measured water 

concentration (μg/l) 

Measured 

concentration in eggs 

(mg/kg) 

Measured 

concentration in

larvae (mg/kg) 

Larvae BCF 

0.5 1.4 0.94 0.24 170

5.0 12 8.4 8.2 680

50 120 63 45 380

500 420 110 84 200

5,000 1,600 72 51 32

This study is similar in some ways to the OECD 210 fish early life-stage test, but falls short of 

the current guidelines in some areas as follows: 

-this study was carried out for approximately 3 days post-hatch, but the OECD guideline 

recommends a test duration of 30 days post-hatch for Oryzias latipes; 

-the test was carried out as a static test in sealed vials - no indication was given as to 

whether the dissolved oxygen level was maintained at a suitable level throughout the test 

period; 

-the rate of hatching was slow in controls and so it is difficult to determine if any effects 

were seen on this endpoint; and 

-the number of eggs/test concentration was only 10 compared with at least 60 

recommended in the OECD guidelines. 

3.2.1.2 Toxicity to aquatic invertebrates 

The toxicity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to invertebrates is summarised in Table 3.48. 

3.2.1.2.1 Daphnia magna 

The acute toxicity of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to Daphnia magna has been studied 

using OECD method 202, part 1 (GLP study). The substance tested was a commercially 

produced C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product (containing 0.3% epoxy soya bean oil stabiliser) that was 

mixed with radiolabelled n-pentadecane-8-

14C, 51% Cl. The daphnids used in the test were 

<24 hours old and the test was carried out using 250 ml beakers (5 daphnids/beaker with 

4 replicates/concentration) covered with loose fitting glass lids. Stock solutions of the test 

substance were made up in acetone and each test solution was prepared by adding 0.2 ml of the 

appropriate stock solution to 2 litres of water. 

134 
Table 3.48 Toxicity to aquatic invertebrates and algae 

Species Substance tested Comments Result Water flea (Daphnia magna)

50 ed) 

C14-17, 52% wt. Cl (containing 0.3%

epoxy soya bean oil stabiliser), mixed with n-pentadecane-8-14C 51% wt. Cl 

OECD 202 method Static test system

48h-EC50 = 7.7 μg/l (nominal)

48h-EC = 5.9 μg/l (measur

 C14-17, 52% wt. Cl OECD 202 – dilutions of 

water soluble fractions tested Static test system

48h-EC0 = 140 μg/l (measured)

48h-EC25 = 339-423 μg/l (measured) 

 C14-17, 52% wt. Cl (containing 0.3%

epoxy soya bean oil stabiliser), mixed with n-pentadecane-8-14C 51% wt. Cl 

OECD 202 method. Semi-static test system 

21-day NOEC = 10 μg/l (measured) 21-day LOEC = 18 μg/l (measured)

 C14-17, 52% wt. Cl OECD 202 method 

Dilutions of water soluble fraction testedSemi-static test system 

21d-NOEC = 12.6-15.6 μg/l (measured) 21d-LOEC = 25.3-31.3 μg/l (measured) 

C14-17, 52% wt. Cl OECD 202 method. 

Dilutions of water soluble fraction testedSemi-static test system 

21-day NOEC = 0.18 vol. % (dilution of water soluble fraction) ~ 4-8 μg/l (measured approx.) 

Crustacean (Gammarus pulex) Static test system 

C14-17, 52% wt. Cl 96h-LC50 > 1.0 mg/l 

Harpacticoid (Nitocra spinipes) C14-17, 45% wt. Cl Static test system 96h-LC50 = 9 mg/l  C14-17, 52% wt. Cl Static test system 96h-LC50 = >10,000 mg/l Mussel (Mytilus edulis) C14-17, 52% wt. Cl, mixed with Flow-through system 

n-pentadecane-8-14C 51% wt. Cl 

60-day NOEC = 0.22 mg/l (measured 

concentration) 

Alga (Selenastrum capricornutum) C14-17, 52% wt. Cl (containing 0.3%

epoxy soya bean oil stabiliser), mixed with n-pentadecane-8-14C 51% wt. Cl 

OECD 201 96h-NOECbiomass = 0.1 mg/l

96h-EC50(biomass) = >3.2 mg/l72h-NOECgrowth rate = 0.049 mg/l 

72h-EC50(growth rate) = >3.2 mg/l 

(nominal concentrations) 

135 
R331_0208_env

Thus, each test solution contained 0.1 ml/l of acetone as cosolvent. A solvent control 

(containing acetone at 0.1 ml/l) and control solution was also tested. The nominal chlorinated 

paraffin concentrations tested were 0.0032, 0.0056, 0.01, 0.018, 0.032, 0.056 and 0.1 mg/l. 

The actual concentration of test substance was determined by radiochemical methods. The

measured concentrations at the start of the test were found to be in the range 91-116% of the 

nominal value, but these had fallen to between 41-79% of the nominal value by the end of the

test. The mean measured values over the test period were 73-95% of the nominal. At 

24 hours, no immobilisation of the Daphnia was seen at concentrations of 0.01 mg/l 

(nominal) and below, and the immobilisation at the higher concentrations did not exceed 

40%. At 48 hours, no immobilisation was seen at 0.0032 mg/l (nominal) and complete 

immobilisation was seen at concentrations of 0.056 mg/l (nominal) and above. The 48h-EC50

was determined as 0.0077 mg/l based on nominal concentrations or 0.0059 mg/l based on the 

mean measured concentrations. It was also noted that a number of animals exposed at each

test concentration displayed a red colouration on parts of the exoskeleton. The significance of 

this effect is uncertain (Thompson et al., 1996). 

The effects of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin on reproduction of Daphnia magna have 

been studied over 21 days using the OECD 202 method (GLP study) (Thompson et al., 

1997b). The study was carried out using a static-renewal procedure (renewal 3 times/week)

using 10 replicates for each test concentration, with each replicate containing 1 organism.

The test was carried out at 19.5-20.3o

C at a pH of 7.41-8.13 and the dissolved oxygen 

concentration was maintained at 6.2-9.2 mg/l. The substance tested was the same as in the 

acute toxicity study above. In the test, acetone (0.025 ml/l) was used as cosolvent. The

nominal concentrations tested were 0.0056, 0.01, 0.018, 0.032, 0.056 and 0.1 mg/l. The

concentrations were measured at the start and end of each renewal period and were 78-94% 

of nominal at the start and 7.3-61% of nominal at the end of each renewal period. The overall 

mean concentrations were 50-60% of the nominal concentration i.e. mean measured 

concentrations were 0.0037, 0.0050, 0.010, 0.018, 0.032 and 0.065 mg/l. For the parent 

mortality end-point the following LC easured 

concentrations: 3-day LC g/l; 4-day LC mg/l; 7-day 

LC g/l; 14-day LC g/l and 21-day LC

50 values were obtained based on m

50 = >0.065 m 50 = 0.046 

50 = 0.028 m 50 = 0.027 m 50 = 0.025 mg/l. 

For the reproduction endpoints, the number of live offspring in the control was significantly 

less (p=0.05) than seen in the acetone control and so the test substance treatments were 

compared with the acetone control only. A significant decrease in the number of live 

offspring was seen at measured concentrations at or above 0.018 mg/l. Also, at higher 

concentrations the release of first offspring was delayed (e.g. at 0.032 mg/l (measured) first 

offspring were produced on day 11 compared with day 8 at lower concentrations and in 

controls). The NOEC for reproduction was therefore 0.010 mg/l (measured) and the LOEC 

was 0.018 mg/l (measured). 

The mean length of the parent animals was found to be significantly (p=0.05) reduced 

compared to solvent controls at measured concentrations of 0.018 mg/l and above. The 

NOEC for this endpoint was therefore 0.010 mg/l (measured) and the LOEC was 0.018 mg/l 

(measured) (Thompson et al., 1997b). 

Another study has looked at the toxicity of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to Daphnia 

magna over short and long term exposures (Frank, 1993; Frank and Steinhäuser, 1994). The

chlorinated paraffin used in these studies was a commercial C14-17 product with a 52% by 

weight chlorine content. In the test, stock solutions of the chlorinated paraffins were made up 

136 
R331_0208_env

in water to give nominal concentrations of either 100 mg/l or 10 g/l. The 100 mg/l solution 

was sonicated for 1 hour and then left to stand in the dark for 48 hours before use. The 10 g/l 

solution also stood for 48 hours in the dark before use, but this time without sonication. After 

this period, both solutions were filtered firstly with glass filters and then with membrane 

filters to remove undissolved test substance (microscopic and spectroscopic investigations of 

the filtered solutions gave no indication of the presence of droplets) to give the respective

water soluble fractions. The concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in the water 

soluble fractions were then determined by AOX (adsorbable organic halogen) analysis 

(detection limit of 10 μg/l Cl was equivalent to around 20 μg/l of the chlorinated paraffin). 

This analysis showed that the concentration of chlorinated paraffin present in the water 

soluble fraction was around 404-500 μg/l for the 10 g/l nominal solution and 71-142 μg/l for 

the 100 mg/l stock solution. The results for the 10 g/l nominal solution are considered more 

reliable as the concentrations found in the 100 mg/l nominal stock solution were close to the 

detection limit for the method. Experiments were carried out to show that in the test vessels,

although the concentration present fell over time, it remained within 80% of the initial 

concentration over 2-3 days. This time period was used in the long-term test as the renewal 

period for the solutions (semi-static method). 

Acute (48-hour) toxicity tests were carried out using dilutions of the two prepared water 

soluble fractions. The method used was DIN 38 412, Teil 11, which is equivalent to 

OECD 202. In the tests using the water soluble fraction from the 100 mg/l nominal solutions 

no toxicity was seen at concentrations up to the undiluted stock solution (i.e. no effects up to 

around 71-142 μg/l). In experiments using the water soluble fraction from the 10 g/l stock 

solution, an EC0 of 140 μg/l (also reported as 100-110 μg/l in the paper) and an EC25 of 

423 μg/l (also reported as 420-470 μg/l in the paper) was determined (maximum mortality 

seen was 25%) (Frank, 1993). The latter results for the 10 g/l stock solution were reported by 

Frank and Steinhäuser (1994) as EC0 = 140 μg/l and EC25 = 339 μg/l, and it was noted that

some of the Daphnia were floating on the surface of the test solution. In the later study 

(Frank and Steinhäuser, 1994), the results of further acute toxicity studies were reported 

using the same test method. In this case an EC50 of 37 μg/l and an EC0 of 9 μg/l were 

determined using the water soluble fraction from the 100 mg/l stock solution and no toxic 

effects were seen in tests with the water soluble fraction from the 10 g/l stock solution 

(approx. EC0 ≥525 μg/l). The authors noted that the effects seen in the acute tests showed

poor reproducibility, probably because effects were seen only around the water solubility

limit of the substance. However, the authors’ thought that the possibility of undissolved 

droplets affecting the results could be ruled out, as floating Daphnia were only sporadically 

observed in the test. Nevertheless, the results of these studies should be treated with caution, 

as the effects were mainly seen in the saturated solutions only.

Long-term (21-day) reproduction studies were also performed using dilutions of the water 

soluble fractions of the two stock solutions (dilutions used 1:2 to 1:32). In these experiments, 

the test medium was changed 3 times/week and 10 animals per concentration were used. The 

tests were carried out at 20o

C and a pH 7.79-8.44. Two end-points were determined in the 

study: effects on parent mortality and effects on reproduction (number of offspring/adult). 

Parent mortality in the controls was 0%. Elevated parent mortality was seen in the exposed 

populations and all the organisms exposed to the highest dilutions (1:2 dilution of the

100 mg/l stock solution or 1:2 and 1:4 dilution of the 10 g/l stock solution) died during the 

test. Further details of the dose-response seen in this study have been provided by UBA 

(2001). In the experiments using the 100 mg/l stock solution the mortality seen in the exposed 

137 
R331_0208_env

populations was 0% at 1:32 dilution, 0% at 1:16 dilution, 20% at 1:8 dilution, 90% at 1:4 

dilution and 100% at 1:2 dilution. In the experiments using the 10 g/l stock solution the 

mortality seen in the exposed populations was 0% at 1:32 dilution, 30% at 1:16 dilution, 70% 

at 1:8 dilution and 100% at lower dilutions. Based on the known measured concentrations in 

the stock solutions and the dilution rates used the NOEC for mortality was determined as 

around 4.4-8.9 μg/l (i.e. 1:16 dilution) for the 100 mg/l nominal stock solution experiments 

and 12.6-15.6 μg/l (i.e.1:32 dilution) for the 10 g/l nominal stock solution experiments. The 

corresponding LOECs were 8.9-17.8 μg/l (100 mg/l nominal stock) and 25.3-31.3 μg/l (10 g/l 

nominal stock). 

For the reproduction end point the average number of young/adult in controls was 82.1 

(variability 25.2%) in the 100 mg/l nominal stock solution series of experiments and 74 

(variability 17%) in the 10 g/l nominal stock solution experiments. A significant reduction in

the number of young/adult was seen in some of the exposed organisms. Further details of the 

dose-response seen in this study have been provided by UBA (2001). In the experiments

using the 100 mg/l stock solution the average number of young/adult was 82 in the 

1:32 dilution, 89 in the 1:16 dilution, 80 in the 1:8 dilution, 15 in the 1:4 dilution and 0 in the 

1:2 dilution (all parents died). Similarly in the experiments using the 10 g/l stock solution the 

average number of young/adult was 74 in the 1:32 dilution, 64 in the 1:16 dilution., 43 in the 

1:8 dilution and 0 in the 1:4 and 1:2 dilutions (all parents died). The NOEC for this effect 

were determined as 8.9-17.8 μg/l (i.e. 1:8 dilution) for the 100 mg/l nominal stock 

experiments and 12.6-15.6 μg/l (i.e. 1:32 dilution) for the 10 g/l nominal stock solution

experiments. The LOECs for this endpoint were 17.8-35.5 μg/l (100 mg/l nominal stock) and 

25.3-31.3 μg/l (10 g/l nominal stock). 

As mentioned above, the measured concentrations in the 10 g/l nominal stock solution are 

considered to be more reliable than those in the 100 mg/l nominal stock solution and so the 

overall NOEC for this study is taken to be 12.6-15.6 μg/l (Frank, 1993). The same results 

(with minor differences to some of the reported (no)effect concentrations) were reported by

Frank and Steinhäuser (1994). In addition, a limit test using the water soluble fraction from a

1 mg/l nominal stock solution was also tested. This showed no effects on parent mortality or

reproduction in the test (Frank and Steinhäuser, 1994). 

A third 21-day Daphnia magna reproduction study (OECD 202) has been reported by TNO 

(1993). The test substance was a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product and a semi-static test procedure 

(replacement 3 times per week) was used, with 4 replicates, each containing 10 daphnids, per 

test concentration. The test solutions were prepared by stirring 20 g of the test substance in 

2 litres of heated water (60o

C) with stirring and then filtration through a 0.8 μm and 0.2 μm

filter to give a saturated solution (water soluble fraction). From this solution, dilutions of 

0.18, 0.32, 0.56, 1.0, 1.8 and 3.2 volume (vol.) % were tested. The test solutions (0.18, 1.0 

and 3.2 vol. % only) were analysed directly, both before and after renewal, for the presence 

of the chlorinated paraffin by a total extractable organic halogen (EOX) method. The EOX 

concentrations in the 1.0 vol. % and 3.2 vol. % test solutions were similar and corresponded 

to the concentration present in a saturated solution prepared by a column technique. This 

indicated that the solubility limit of the chlorinated paraffin in the test system was in the 

region of 36 μg/l. The test was carried out at 20±1o

C and solutions were gently aerated from

day 9 onwards. The pH of the test water varied between 7.7 and 8.3, the dissolved oxygen 

concentration was >7.0 mg/l, and the hardness was 214 mg/l as CaCO3. All test solutions 

were reported to be completely clear throughout the test. 

138 
R331_0208_env

No mortality was seen in the control populations. A significant (p=0.01) effect on Daphnia

survival was seen at the 1.0, 1.8 and 3.2 vol. % solutions, with no significant effects seen in

the 0.56, 0.32 and 0.18 vol. % tests concentrations. Thus, the NOEC and LOEC for this 

endpoint were estimated at 0.56 vol. % and 1.0 vol. % respectively. A 21-day LC50 for this

endpoint of 1.48 vol. % was estimated. Observations of the effects on size and condition of 

the animals (swimming behaviour, colour etc.) indicated that no significant effects were 

occurring at the 0.18, 0.32 and 0.56 vol. % concentrations. The NOEC and LOEC for these 

endpoints were thus estimated at 0.56 vol. % and 1.0 vol. % respectively. For the 

reproduction endpoints, no reduction in reproduction in terms of cumulative number of young 

per living female were seen at the 0.18, 0.32 and 0.56 vol. % concentrations, but an increase 

over controls in the numbers of dead young and aborted eggs were seen in the 0.32 and 

0.56 vol. % exposure groups. Thus, the NOEC and LOEC for reproduction were estimated as

0.18 vol. % and 0.32 vol. % respectively. The approximate 21-day LC50 for the reproductive 

endpoints was around 1.86 vol. % (TNO, 1993). The analytical results obtained using the 

EOX method are too erratic to allow precise determinations of the actual exposure 

concentrations in the test, however, the EOX concentrations found in the 0.18 vol. % (i.e.

overall NOEC) solution were generally around 2-4 μg/l. This is equivalent to an approximate

chlorinated paraffin concentration of around 4-8 μg/l, which agrees well with the NOEC 

results from the other tests. 

3.2.1.2.2 Other species 

The results of tests with the brackish water harpacticoid Nitocra spinipes have been reported 

(Tarkpea et al.., 1981; as quoted in WHO, 1996). The results reported were a 96h-LC50 of 

9 mg/l for a C14-17, 45% wt. Cl compound and a 96h-LC50 of >10,000 mg/l for a C14-17, 

52% wt. Cl compound. No other details of the test were reported by WHO (1996), but the test

method was probably the same as reported by Tarkpea et al. (1986), where a static method 

was employed using water of salinity 7‰ at a temperature of 20-22oC without aeration, 

probably using acetone as cosolvent.

The toxicity of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to common mussel (Mytilus edulis) has 

been determined over 60 days. A flow-through test system with filtered natural seawater

(salinity 35‰, pH 8.1-8.3, dissolved oxygen 6.15-8.0 mg/l) at 15oC was employed. Acetone, 

at a concentration of 0.5 ml/l, was present in the test. The chlorinated paraffin used was a 

C14-17, 52% wt. Cl commercial substance, mixed with a small amount of a radiolabelled

chlorinated paraffin (n-pentadecane-8-

14C, 51% wt. Cl). Two chlorinated paraffin 

concentrations were tested and the mean measured concentrations were determined as 0.22 

and 3.8 mg/l over the 60 day period (by 14C measurements). The test solution at the higher 

concentration tested was reported to be cloudy in appearance, possibly indicating the 

presence of undissolved test substance. No significant mortality was seen at either of the two 

test concentrations. Non-quantitative visual observation indicated that the filtering activity

was reduced in the 3.8 mg/l treatment but was generally normal at 0.22 mg/l. The solubility 

limit for the substance in the test system was reported to be <3.8 mg/l and so the effects on 

filtering activity at the higher concentration could have been due to the presence of

undissolved test substance rather than a true toxic effect. No effects on mean shell length 

were seen in either of the two exposure concentrations when compared to the control

populations (data on tissue weights were not reported) (Madeley and Thompson, 1983). 

The acute toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance has been tested using the freshwater 

crustacean Gammarus pulex. The medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used was dissolved in 

139 
R331_0208_env

acetone and then added to beakers containing Gammarus to give nominal concentrations of 

0.1, 0.32 and 1.0 mg/l. A control and solvent control (containing 0.1 ml/l acetone) were also

run. The test was carried out for 96 hours at 15o

C, with the solutions being renewed after 

48 hours. The water used in the study had a hardness of 220 mg/l as CaCO3 and had a pH of 

8.0-9.2. No mortalities of the Gammarus were seen in any of the test substance solutions or 

control. One animal died in the solvent control. Therefore, no significant toxic effects were 

seen with the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin over the concentration range tested. This 

contrasted markedly to the situation when Daphnia magna were exposed using the same test 

system at 20o

C over 48 hours, where complete immobilisation was seen at the lowest test

concentration (0.1 mg/l) (Thompson and Gore, 1999). 

The experiments carried out by Frank (1993), Frank and Steinhäuser (1994) and TNO (1993)

essentially created a saturated solution of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin and tested 

dilutions of this on Daphnia. Thus if the original medium-chain chlorinated paraffin tested 

had a small amount of the C an impurity, this would also 

have been present in the test solution at a saturated concentration (a large excess of 

chlorinated paraffin was used to make up the test solution) which may account for the

toxicity seen in the experiment, and also the much lower toxicity seen when a small excess of

the chlorinated paraffin was used to make up the water soluble fraction (e.g. the 1 mg/l 

nominal stock solution). [Industry has indicated verbally that the test material used in early 

studies in Germany may have contained up to 10% C

production contains <1% (personal communication).] However, the method used in the 

Thompson et al. (1997b) study to make up the test solutions would mean that the substance in 

solution represented the composition of the original test substance. Thus, in these 

experiments, if a small percentage of the C rinated paraffin was present in the test

substance, it would still only contribute a similarly small percentage of the total chlorinated

paraffin present in the test solution and would be unlikely to account for all the toxicity seen 

in the test (for instance the long-term NOEC for a C μg/l 

and so would have to be present at around 50% of the commercial medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin tested in this study in order to account for the toxicity seen here). From the available 

long-term studies on Daphnia, it has to be concluded that the effects seen are likely to be due 

to the C14-17 chlorinated paraffin tested, but any C ffin present would 

contribute to this toxicity (and could even account for the toxicity seen in the Frank (1993)

and TNO (1993) studies, but not the Thompson et al. (1997b) study). 

3.2.1.2.3 Discussion of invertebrate results 

From the available invertebrate toxicity data, it appears that medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins are toxic to Daphnia. No toxicity has been seen in the available experiments with

fish (see Section 3.2.1.1), other invertebrates or algae (see Section 3.2.1.3). Thus the toxicity 

profile for the C14-17 chlorinated paraffins appears to be different from that of the short-chain 

(C10-13) chlorinated paraffins, where long-term toxicity was seen in algae, fish and mussels 

(see the assessment of that substance for further details). 

10-13 chlorinated paraffin present as

10-13 chlorinated paraffin – current 

10-13 chlo

10-13 chlorinated paraffin is around 5 

10-13 chlorinated para

Another possible explanation for the toxicity seen purely with Daphnia is that a significant 

part of their exposure comes from adsorption on the food used in the study. This was 

postulated by Frank (1993) as an explanation for the toxicity seen in that series of tests. The 

Daphnia in these tests were fed with live algae (Scenedesmus subspicatus) at a rate of 

0.1-0.2 mg C/Daphnia/day. However, the later paper by Frank and Steinhäuser (1994) found 

140 
R331_0208_env

that the adsorption of the chlorinated paraffin to the food (algae) in the test was small and 

probably would not be able to account for the toxicity seen. 

It should also be born in mind that feeding was also carried out in the other long-term tests 

available. In the Thompson et al. (1997b) series of experiments with Daphnia, a daily diet of 

algae (Chlorella vulgaris) and a commercially available microencapsulated diet were used,

and the TNO (1993) Daphnia studies used a daily diet of algae (Chlorella) and yeast. In the 

long-term fish study, daily feeding of 2% body weight of a commercial trout food was used 

(Madeley et al., 1983) and in the long-term study with mussels, the organisms were 

continuously fed with algae (Platymonas suecica) dosed by peristaltic pump (around 

1×109

 cells were added each day). Thus, although uptake via food could be an explanation for 

the particular toxicity to Daphnia of this substance, it is likely that such uptake would have 

also occurred in the fish and mussel tests. This again indicates that Daphnia appear to be 

particularly sensitive to medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

A further explanation for the toxicity seen with Daphnia could be due to a physical effect due

to the adsorption of the test substance onto Daphnia. This is more likely to be the case in the

acute studies, where higher test concentrations are used. Although this remains a possibility 

for the effects seen in the acute and long-term studies, direct toxic effects of the chlorinated 

paraffins themselves cannot be ruled out in the studies. 

The toxicity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to algae is summarised in Table 3.48. 

There is a potential conflict between the acute toxicity data for Daphnia and the results 

obtained in the longer term tests as one study (Thompson et al., 1996) gave a 48-hour EC50 of 

5.9 μg/l which is lower than the NOEC seen in the long-term test. The reason for this 

discrepancy is unknown, and several other studies indicate that the acute EC50 is higher than 

found in this study (e.g. effects were seen with saturated solutions only in the experiments of 

Frank (1993) and Frank and Steinhäuser (1994), and a 72h-LC50 of >65 μg/l was determined 

during the Thompson et al. (1997b) study). Work is currently being undertaken by the 

Chlorinated Paraffins Industry Association (CPIA, 2000) in the United States to investigate

the reproducibility of the acute Daphnia toxicity tests using a variety of different

administration methods. At present, few details of these tests are available. Preliminary 

results from the tests (the analytical verification of the test concentrations has not yet been 

completed) indicate that when the tests were carried out with acetone as cosolvent the EC50

was around 14 μg/l, but when dimethylformamide was used as cosolvent or no cosolvent was 

used, the EC50 was >100 μg/l. Once available, the results of these studies may explain some

of the discrepancies seen in the acute test data. 

For the current risk assessment, the long-term NOEC of 10 μg/l determined for Daphnia in 

the Thompson et al. (1997b) study will be considered to be reliable and will be used in the 

PNEC determination. The NOECs obtained from the two other Daphnia studies using the 

water soluble fraction give very similar results to this value. 

3.2.1.3 Toxicity to algae 

The toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl paraffin to the green alga Selenastrum capricornutum has

been determined using OECD method 201 (GLP study) (Thompson et al., 1997a). The test 

substance was a commercial product containing 0.3% epoxy soya bean oil stabiliser and was 

mixed with a small amount of radiolabelled n-pentadecane-8-14C (51% chlorinated). Stock 

141 
R331_0208_env

solutions of the test substance were prepared in acetone and each test solution was prepared 

by addition of 0.1 ml of the appropriate stock solution to 1 litre of culture medium. The 

nominal chlorinated paraffin concentrations tested were 0.10, 0.18, 0.32, 0.56, 1.0, 1.8 and 

3.2 mg/l. Control and solvent control (containing 0.1 ml/l acetone) exposures were also 

carried out. Visual inspection of the test solutions indicated that the 0.10, 0.18, 0.32 and 

0.56 mg/l test solutions were clear and colourless, whereas the 1.0, 1.8 and 3.2 mg/l test 

solutions contained a transparent, faint, white homogeneous suspension. The initial cell 

density used in each test was 1×104 cells/ml and 6 replicates for solvent control and 

3 replicates for control and each test concentration were used. Radiochemical analysis was

used to verify the exposure concentrations (detection limit for the method = 0.025 mg/l). The 

concentrations measured at the start of the test ranged from 75-120% of the nominal. The 

concentrations in solutions without the presence of algae were found to reduce to <4-8% of 

the nominal value after 96 hours. The overall mean measured concentrations in these 

solutions were found to be between 38 and 49% of the nominal over the 96 hour period. No 

measurements were carried out in the test vessels containing algae at 96 hours. 

At the start of the test, the pH was 7.4-7.5, but had reached 10.0-10.3 by the end of the test. 

The shift in pH was thought to be a function of the high growth rates observed in the test (e.g. 

the mean solvent control cell density increased by a factor of 566 over the 4 day period). 

Overall, very little effect on algal growth was observed in the test. The maximum inhibition 

in the growth rate seen was 3%, and the maximum inhibition of biomass was 18%. No clear 

dose-response curve was determined. The NOEC from the test is around 0.1 mg/l (nominal), 

but it should be noted that no statistically significant effects were seen at some higher 

concentrations. The low levels of inhibition seen mean that it is not possible to derive an EC50

from the test. Although there is some uncertainty in this test over the actual exposure 

concentrations, particularly with regard to the dissolved fraction (stable emulsions appear to

It was not possible to estimate the EC50 (biomass) after 4 days exposure as the maximum 

inhibition seen was 18% compared with controls. A significant (p=0.05) inhibition in growth 

was seen at a nominal concentration of 0.18 mg/l, but no effects were seen at 0.10 mg/l. 

Similar results were seen after 3 days exposure, with a small but statistically significant 

inhibition of growth at concentrations of 0.1-0.18 mg/l (nominal), but there was no significant 

effect at the two highest concentrations tested (1.8 and 3.2 mg/l). It was suggested that the 

low level of effects seen over a wide range of exposure concentrations and the lack of 

concentration-related response indicate that the effects seen may have been due to 

undissolved test substance present as a dispersion. Based on the biomass data, the 

NOEC = 0.1 mg/l (nominal), LOEC = 0.18 mg/l (nominal) and the EC50 is >3.2 mg/l 

(nominal). A mean measured concentration of 1.2 mg/l was found in the 3.2 mg/l (nominal) 

test solution. 

Effects on the algal growth rate were determined over 72 hours. No effects were seen at the 

two highest test concentrations (1.8 and 3.2 mg/l nominal), but small but statistically 

significant reductions in growth rate (up to 3% reduction) were seen at lower concentrations. 

The LOEC for this endpoint was 0.18 mg/l nominal and the NOEC was 0.1 mg/l nominal. 

Analysis of the growth data over 96 hours showed a statistically significant difference 

between the solvent control and all test substance concentrations. However, because of a 

marked decline in the growth rate of all control and test substance treatments between days 3 

and 4, these statistics were not considered reliable. This is supported by the fact that the 

growth rate determined after 96 hours in the test substance treatments was not significantly 

different from the control. 

142 
R331_0208_env

have been present at the high exposure concentrations), and hence the true NOEC value, it is 

clear that little or no toxic effect was seen on the algal growth in the test. 

The toxicity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to anaerobic bacteria from a domestic 

waste water treatment plant has been studied using the ETAD fermentation tube method 

(Hoechst AG, 1976 and 1977). The full details of the test are not available and so it is not 

possible to fully validate the results. The reported results are shown in Table 3.49. 

The toxicity of a C wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin has been tested in a 3-hour 

respiration inhibition test (unpublished study). The chlorinated paraffin was emulsified in 

water using 0.5 g/l nonylphenol ethoxylate surfactant and then incubated for 3 hours with 

activated sludge from a municipal sewage treatment plant. No effect on respiration was seen 

up to the highest concentration tested (2,000 mg/l) (Hoechst AG; as reported in BUA, 1992). 

3.2.1.4 Microorganisms 

14-17, 52% 

Table 3.49 Results of microorganism toxicity tests 

Substance Comments Result Reference

C14-17, 41% Cl* Anaerobic bacteria: ETAD 

fermentation tube method 

Harmful threshold (24 hour) = 2,500 mg/l Hoechst AG 

(1977) 

C14-17, 41% Cl Anaerobic bacteria: ETAD 

fermentation tube method 

Harmful threshold (24 hour) = 800 mg/l Hoechst AG 

(1976) 

C14-17, 52% Cl Mixed bacterial culture: respiration

inhibition test

3h-EC0 >2,000 mg/l Hoechst AG 

Note: * Preparation containing the chlorinated paraffin and possibly PEG also. 

3.2.1.5.1 Chironomus riparius 

3.2.1.5 Sediment organisms 

Industry has recently carried out two prolonged toxicity studies on sediment organisms. The

results are discussed in the following Sections. 

A prolonged toxicity study with spiked sediment has been carried out with the midge 

Chironomus riparius (Thompson et al., 2001c). The test protocol was based on the

OECD 218 draft guideline (February 2000 version). The substance used in the test was a 

commercial C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance containing no stabilisers (the substance was 

reported to have a C14-17 content of 99.06% with 0.67% of C10-13 chain length substances) that 

was mixed with a small amount of a radiolabelled n-pentadecane-8-14C, 51% wt. Cl 

substance (radiochemical purity >96.6%). 

The sediment used in the test was an artificial sediment consisting of 10% sphagnum moss

peat, 70% quartz sand, 20% kaolinite clay and <0.1% calcium carbonate. The sediment had a 

mean organic carbon content of 4.9% and a pH of 6.0. The sediment was spiked with the test 

substance by firstly mixing a solution of the test substance in acetone with the dry sand 

component of the sediment and allowing the acetone to evaporate overnight under an air 

stream. Finally the treated sand was mixed into the other components of the sediment for

16 hours. A solvent control and control sediment were prepared in a similar way. 

143 
R331_0208_env

In the test, groups of midge larvae (<48 hours post hatch) were exposed to a series of 6 

concentrations of the chlorinated paraffin, plus a control and solvent control sediment, for

28 days at 20o

C using a static system. The test vessels were 600 ml beakers containing 60 g 

of sediment (providing a sediment depth of approximately 12-15 mm) and dilution water to 

give a total volume of 300 ml. Gentle aeration was provided to the water phase during the

test. The dissolved oxygen concentration in the overlying water was in the range 7.3 to 

8.6 mg/l throughout the test. The sediment-water system was allowed to equilibrate for 8 days 

prior to the start of the experiment. At the start of the test 15 larvae were added to each test

vessel, with 3 replicate vessels being used for each treatment. Feeding (fish food) was carried

out daily at a rate of 0.25 mg per animal per day for the first seven days and then 0.5 mg per

animal per day. The test substance was not added to the food. The number of emerged adults

was counted daily. 

The concentration of the test substance in the sediment phase was determined at the start of

the equilibrium period (day -8), the day before the test began (day -1) and at the end of the

test (day 28). Analysis was by a radiochemical method. The measured concentrations were

93-95% of the nominal values at day -8, 86-93% of nominal at day -1 and 71-86% of nominal 

at day 28. The mean measured values between day -1 and day 28 are shown in Table 3.50

and are taken to represent the actual exposure during the test. 

Table 3.50 Toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance to Chironomus riparius

Exposure concentrations 

(mg/kg dry wt.) 

Emergence 

Time to first 

emergence 

Mean emergence 

time 

Mean number 

emerged/replicate 

after 28 days 

Sex ratio of emerged 

adults (proportion of 

males) 

Control 0 16.7 days 19.2 days 14.7 55% 

Solvent control 0 16.0 days 19.1 days 12.3 53% 

44 36 15.7 days 18.3 days 12.0 43% 

140 110 16.0 days 18.7 days 13.0 52% 

440 370 16.0 days 19.2 days 13.3 50% 

1,400 1,200 16.0 days 19.2 days 13.0 55% 

4,400 3,800 16.0 days 18.9 days 13.7 42% 

14,000 13,000 18.3 days 20.8 days 9.7* 40% 

Nominal Mean 

measured 

Note: * Significantly different (p=0.05) from pooled control and solvent control group (there were no significant differences 

when compared to the solvent control group alone). 

The biological data from the study are summarised in Table 3.50. The time to first 

emergence was 16.7 days and 16.0 days in the controls and solvent controls respectively,

which is normal for this type of test. No statistically significant differences (p=0.05) were

found between the time to first emergence in the treatment groups when compared to either 

the control or solvent control group. Therefore the NOEC for time to first emergence is 

≥13,000 mg/kg dry wt. 

The mean emergence time in the control and solvent control groups was 19.2 and 19.1 days

respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in mean emergence time at 

144 
R331_0208_env

any treatment level when compared with the control or solvent control populations. Therefore 

the NOEC for mean emergence time (development rate) is ≥13,000 mg/kg dry wt. 

3.2.1.5.2 Lumbriculus variegatus 

The adult emergence in the control and solvent controls after 28 days was 98% and 82% 

respectively. The mean number of adults emerged in the treatments were not statistically

significantly (p=0.05) different from the solvent control group at any concentration, but when 

compared with the control group, a statistically significant reduction in the mean number of 

adults emerged was seen at the highest concentration tested (13,000 mg/kg dry wt.). Since no 

statistically significant differences were found in the mean number of adults emerged in the 

control and solvent control groups, the emergence in the treatments was also compared with 

the pooled control groups. This again showed a statistically significant difference in the mean 

number of adults emerged in the 13,000 dry wt. treatment group. Thus the NOEC for number 

of adults emerged is 3,800 mg/kg dry wt. and the LOEC is 13,000 mg kg dry wt. (this NOEC 

and LOEC should be considered as borderline as no effects were seen at the highest 

concentration tested when compared to the solvent control group alone). 

The sex ratio, expressed as the percentage males of the emerged adults, was determined to be

55% in the control population and 53% in the solvent control population. No statistically 

significant differences (p=0.05) in the sex ratios of the treatment groups were found when 

compared with the control or solvent control groups. Therefore the NOEC for sex ratio is 

≥13,000 mg/kg dry wt. 

The overall NOEC from this study is 3,800 mg/kg dry wt. Using the default water content for 

sediment given in the TGD, this is equivalent to a NOEC of 1,460 mg/kg on a wet wt. basis. 

A prolonged toxicity test using spiked sediment has been carried out with the oligochaete 

Lumbriculus variegatus using a static system at 20oC (Thompson et al., 2001d). The

substance tested was the same C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance mixed with a radiolabelled npentadecane as used in the midge study discussed in Section 3.2.1.5.1. The test method was

based on that described by Phipps et al. (1993). 

An artificial sediment was used in the test, comprising 10% sphagnum moss peat, 70% quartz 

sand, 20% kaolinite clay and <0.1% calcium carbonate. The pH of the sediment was 6.0 and 

the organic carbon content was 4.9%. The test sediments were made up by adding the test 

substance to the sand phase as a solution in acetone, evaporating the acetone overnight and 

mixing the spiked sand with the rest of the sediment for 16 hours. A solvent control and 

control sediment were also prepared. 

The organisms used in the test were adults approximately 20 to 40 mm in length. The tests 

were carried out in 600 ml beakers containing 40 g dry sediment (giving a sediment depth of 

12 to 13 mm) and dilution water was added to provide a total volume of 300 ml. Six replicate

vessels, each containing 10 organisms, were used for each treatment level. The water was 

aerated gently throughout the test and the dissolved oxygen concentration was maintained at 

7.7-8.7 mg/l. The spiked sediment-water system was equilibrated for seven days prior to

addition of the organisms at the start of the test. Around 90 mg of fish food was also present 

in the sediment during this equilibration period to allow the food to reach equilibrium with 

the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in the sediment. This was the only food supplied for 

the first seven days of the test, after which the organisms were fed uncontaminated fish food 

145 
R331_0208_env

for 18 days at a rate of 5 mg/kg/day (incorporation of the entire food supply was not feasible 

(based on earlier trials) because it would have resulted in an excessive oxygen demand (and 

possibly excessive ammonia loading) in the sediment). Overall, the contaminated food 

present at the start of the test amounted to 50% of the total food supplied to the organisms

during the test. The total exposure period was 28 days. Observations for abnormal behaviour 

and appearance of the worms were made two times per week during the experiment. 

The sediment concentrations of the test substance were measured by a radiochemical method 

at the start of the equilibration period (day -7), at the start of the test (day 0) and at the end of

the test (day 28). The measured values were 93-95% of the nominal concentration at day -7 

and day 0, and were 84-89% of the nominal value at day 28, indicating that the exposure

concentrations had been well maintained throughout the test. The mean measured 

concentrations over the exposure period (day 0 to day 28) are shown in Table 3.51. 

Table 3.51 Toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance to Lumbriculus variegatus

Exposure concentrations 

(mg/kg dry wt.) 

Nominal Mean measured

Mean number of

worms/replicate at day 

28 

Mean total dry wt. of 

worms/replicate at day 

28 (mg)

0 28.2±3.2 39.1±7.7 1.40±0.33 

Solvent control 0 27.3±2.7 34.5±4.1 1.27±0.18 

44 39 24.8±4.4 28.1±3.7 1.16±0.22 

140 130 25.7±1.8 30.8±6.4 1.22±0.31 

440 410 19.0±2.4** 19.5±3.8** 1.02±0.09 

1,400 1,300 13.7±1.6** 15.4±1.8** 1.13±0.09 

4,400 4,000 14.7±4.1** 17.1±8.0** 1.18±0.56 

14,000 13,000 14.5±2.1** 14.2±2.9** 0.99±0.18 

Mean dry weight/worm 

at day 28 (mg) 

Control

Note: ** Significantly different from solvent control group (p=0.01). 

The biological data determined in the study are summarised in Table 3.51. Two main

endpoints were determined: mortality/reproduction as determined by the total number of 

worms present at the end of the study (it is not possible to distinguish adult and young 

organisms in this test and so the total number of worms at the end of the study is a

combination of the mortality rate and the reproductive success of adults during the test); and 

growth as determined by weight of worms. 

At the end of the study the number of worms in the control and solvent control groups had 

increased by a factor of 2.7 and 2.8 respectively, which was considered to be satisfactory. A 

statistically significant (p=0.01) reduction in the mean final number of worms/replicate was 

seen at exposure concentrations of 410 mg/kg dry weight and above when compared to the 

solvent control or the control groups. Therefore the NOEC for mortality/reproduction is 

130 mg/kg dry wt. 

The mean total weight of worms/replicate was 39.1 mg dry wt. in the control group and 

34.5 mg dry wt. in the solvent control group. A statistically significant (p=0.01) reduction in 

the mean total weight of worms/replicate was seen at exposure concentrations of 410 mg/kg 

dry wt. and above. Therefore the NOEC for total weight of worms is 130 mg /kg dry wt.

146 
R331_0208_env

When the data for dry wt. per worm are considered, no statistically significant differences 

were seen between the control or solvent control groups and the treatment groups. This 

indicates that the effects on total weight of worms is mainly due the number of worms

present, rather than the size of the worms. 

Overall, the NOEC from this study is 130 mg/kg wet wt. Using the default water content for 

sediment given in the TGD, this is equivalent to a NOEC of 50 mg/kg on a wet wt. basis. 

3.2.1.6 Predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) for the aquatic 

compartment 

3.2.1.6.1 Surface water 

There is a complete “base set” of acute toxicity data for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins.

There are reported long-term no observed effect concentrations (NOECs) for fish, Daphnia, 

mussels and algae. From the available database, effects have so far almost exclusively been

observed on Daphnia. No effects on other organisms have been seen in short term tests; this 

includes tests with other aquatic invertebrates. Daphnia are also the only species to show 

effects below the solubility in long term tests; these effects include mortality as well as 

effects on reproduction. Although it is possible that, at least in the acute toxicity tests, the 

effects seen with Daphnia were due to physical adsorption of the substance onto the test 

organism, direct toxic effects of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins themselves cannot be 

ruled out with the current database. Effects were seen on algal biomass and growth at 

concentrations above solubility, and a NOEC determined which is an order of magnitude 

greater than that for Daphnia. Two 60-day tests are available, with fish and mussels, at test 

concentrations significantly higher than the solubility. Measurements show that in both these

tests the substance was accumulated in the organism. Fish showed no effects on mortality, 

growth or behaviour at 1 and 4.5 mg/l. Mussels showed some effect on filtration rate at the

higher exposure concentration, so the NOEC is taken as 0.22 mg/l. These long-term studies 

with fish and mussels, although showing little or no effects over extended time periods, do 

not necessarily cover possible effects on several life stages (i.e. only adults were exposed and 

reproductive endpoints were not covered). A 20-day embryo-larval fish test is available 

which covers some reproductive endpoints. However, although no effects were seen with 

medium chain chlorinated paraffins, the method was deficient in some aspects when 

compared to the current test guidelines for such a study. Therefore, the PNEC is based on the

NOEC of 10 μg/l from the long-term Daphnia study, using an assessment factor of 50 (as two 

NOECs are available, including the most sensitive species from the short-term studies). Thus, 

the PNECwater for surface water is 0.2 μg/l. 

In this case the PNEC could be further refined if a fully valid long-term fish test is carried out 

covering all the relevant endpoints. Using the QSAR given in the Technical Guidance 

Document, a long-term NOEC for fish of around 1-1.3 μg/l can be estimated (based on a 

molecular weight of 400-500 g/mole for a 52% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin and a log Kow of 

7). This indicates that effects would be predicted to occur at concentrations above 1 μg/l if 

the accumulation was as expected for a substance with log Kow of 7. However, there is some

indication from the available data that Daphnia may be the most sensitive species for this 

substance, possibly due to lower uptake of the substance by fish than might be indicated by a

log Kow of 7 (the measured fish BCF is 1,087 l/kg compared to the value of 45,710 l/kg 

estimated for a substance with a log Kow of 7 using the methodology outlined in the

Technical Guidance Document (see Section 3.1.0.5.1)). 

147 
R331_0208_env

Further evidence for Daphnia being a more sensitive organism than fish for chlorinated 

paraffins comes from the available data on short-chain chlorinated paraffins. Here the 21-day 

NOEC for Daphnia was 5 μg/l, and this compared with a NOEC of 280 μg/l in a fish early 

lifestage study (ECB, 2000). If it is assumed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are 

unlikely to be more toxic to fish early lifestages than found for the more bioaccumulative 

short-chain chlorinated paraffins, then it is probable that Daphnia would be the most sensitive 

species for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, and so an assessment factor of 10 could be 

justified, giving a tentative PNECwater of 1 μg/l. This is considered further in the risk 

characterisation. 

3.2.1.6.2 Sewage treatment processes 

There are toxicity data available for the effects of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins on 

bacteria. In these experiments, the lowest threshold concentration reported to cause effects 

(approximates to a NOEC/LOEC) was 800 mg/l. The Technical Guidance Document

suggests that an assessment factor of 10 can be applied to the NOEC or EC10 from a test

using mixed bacterial populations. Therefore, the PNEC for waste water treatment plants can 

be estimated at 80 mg/l. 

3.2.1.6.3 Sediment 

A PNEC for sediment can be estimated using the equilibrium partitioning method as follows: 

 PNECsed = Ksusp-water × PNECwater × 1000

RHOsusp

 RHO atter = 1,150 kg/m3

 

Sediment toxicity data are also available for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The lowest 

NOEC from two prolonged toxicity studies is 50 mg/kg wet wt. for Lumbriculus variegatus. 

An assessment factor of 50 is appropriate for this data set. Thus the PNEC g/kg wet

wt. 

where Ksusp-water = suspended matter – water partition coefficient = 14,721 m3/m3

susp = bulk density of suspended m

Thus, the PNECsed = 2.6 mg/kg wet wt. However, the ingestion of sediment-bound substance 

by the exposed organisms may not be sufficiently explained by this relationship for 

substances with a log Kow >5. The Technical Guidance Document suggests that in such 

cases, the PEC/PNEC ratio derived by the equilibrium partitioning method should be 

increased by a factor of 10. 

sed = 1 m

As this PNEC is derived from actual sediment data using a sediment with a similar organic 

carbon content to the TGD default value (4.9% compared with the TGD default of 5%), there

is no need to normalise the value to the default organic carbon content and there is no need to

increase the resulting PEC/PNEC ratios by a factor of 10 to take into account direct ingestion, 

i.e. the organisms in the test would have been exposed via both pore water and sedimentbound substance and so if direct ingestion was important it would be already taken account of 

in the toxicity results obtained. The study from which the PNEC was derived was carried out 

in such a way that the organisms were provided with food that did not contain chlorinated 

paraffin, and so could possibly have reduced the potential exposure via the ingestion route. 

148 
R331_0208_env

However, the results obtained are consistent with this route of exposure being of only minor

importance. 

sed

3.2.2 Terrestrial compartment 

Industry has recently carried out two prolonged toxicity studies on terrestrial organisms. The

results are discussed in the following Sections. 

There is currently no information available on the toxicity of medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins to soil microorganisms. 

3.2.2.2 Plants 

14-17

10-13

The concentrations of test substance in the solvent controls and the low, middle and highest 

test concentration were determined at the start and end of the test using a radiochemical

method. The results of these analyses were variable due to difficulties in obtaining 

For each treatment, 4 replicate pots were prepared, each containing 9 seeds at the start of the 

test. On day 7 a preliminary assessment of germination was undertaken and after a further 

7 days a definitive assessment of germination was carried out and the seedlings were 

randomly thinned to 5 seedlings/replicate where possible. On day 28 of the study, plants were 

cropped at soil level and the total fresh weight of the shoots from each replicate was 

determined. A visual assessment of the condition of the plants was made on day 14 and 

day 28 of the test. The tests were carried out in glass houses and the overall temperature 

range during the study was 16 to 31.8o

C. 

The PNEC of 1 mg/kg wet wt. derived from the available experimental data will be 

considered in the risk characterisation. 

3.2.2.1 Toxicity to microorganisms 

The toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance to wheat (Triticum aestivum; monocotyledon), 

oilseed rape (Brassica napus; dicotyledon) and mung bean (Phaseolus aureus; 

dicotyledonous legume) has been studied using OECD guideline 208 (the protocol is based 

on the July 2000 proposal for revision of the guideline) (Thompson et al., 2001). The

substance used in the test was a commercial product that contained no stabilisers. The C

content of the product was 99.06%, with only trace amounts (0.67%) of C congeners 

present. The nominal concentrations tested were 50, 158, 500, 1,580 and 5,000 mg/kg dry wt.

A small amount of 14C-labelled n-pentadecane, 51% wt. Cl substance (radiochemical purity 

>96.6%) was mixed with the test substance at the lowest, middle and highest concentrations 

tested to allow radiochemical analysis of the concentrations present in the soil and plants to 

be determined during the study. 

The soil used in the test was a commercial formulation consisting of 50% sterilised Surrey 

loam and 50% gravel (4 mm) with appropriate nutrient additions. The test soils were prepared 

by firstly adding a solution of the test substance in acetone to dry silver sand (sieved to

1 mm) and allowing the acetone to evaporate overnight under an air stream. Secondly, this 

spiked sand was mixed with the soil (10% sand:90% soil) to give the desired nominal test 

concentrations. Control and solvent control soils were prepared in a similar way. The soil had 

an organic carbon content of 2.3%. 

149 
R331_0208_env

representative small subsamples of soil as a result of the relatively large proportion of soil 

particles >2 mm present in the soils. The results, however, were generally close to the 

nominal values (e.g. the mean measured values (on a dry wt. basis) were 49 mg/kg, 

520 mg/kg. and 5,800 mg/kg for the nominal 50 mg/kg, 500 mg/kg and 5,000 mg/kg 

treatments respectively) and so the results were expressed in terms of the nominal 

concentrations. 

The endpoints determined in the study were seed germination and emergence, vegetative 

growth (dry shoot weight), and visual condition of the seedlings. The results of the study are 

shown in Table 3.52. All seedlings in the treatments appeared normal (as compared to the 

control groups) throughout the test. 

Table 3.52 Effects of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance on emergence and plant growth 

Treatment Wheat Oilseed rape Mungbean

Emergencea Growthb Emergencea Growthb Emergencea Growthb 

Control 81% 0.45±0.02 g 39% 1.16±0.24 g 92% 1.08±0.19 g 

Solvent control 78% 0.45±0.06 g 50% 0.88±0.18 g 92% 0.91±0.18 g 

50 mg/kg dry wt. 83% 0.44±0.08 g 47% 0.94±0.27 g 86% 0.92±0.14 g 

158 mg/kg dry wt. 92% 0.45±0.07 g 53% 0.97±0.16 g 97% 0.96±0.04 g 

500 mg/kg dry wt. 75% 0.44±0.07g 58% 0.89±0.15 g 97% 0.90±0.03 g 

1,580 mg/kg dry wt. 94% 0.43±0.05 g 42% 1.25±0.42 g 97% 0.83±0.14 g 

5,000 mg/kg dry wt. 78% 0.39±0.06 g 56% 0.98±0.29 g 94% 0.75±0.07 g 

Note: a) Emergence determined as percentage of emerged plants on day 14. 

b) Growth determined as mean shoot dry weight per plant. 

For wheat, no statistically significant (p=0.05) differences were found in emergence of 

seedlings or growth of seedlings at any treatment level when compared with control and 

solvent control populations. The NOEC for this species was therefore ≥5,000 mg/kg dry 

weight. 

For oilseed rape, the emergence in the control and solvent control groups was 39% and 50%

respectively. These values are below the recommended minimum emergence rate of 65% in 

the test guideline. The emergence in the treatment groups ranged from 42% to 58%, and was 

greater than the solvent control group at the highest concentration tested. There was no 

statistically significant (p=0.05) differences in growth of seedlings at any treatment level 

when compared to the control and solvent control populations. The test report indicates that 

the low emergence seen was not considered to have affected the validity of the results and so

the NOEC is tentatively given as ≥5,000 mg/kg dry weight for this species. 

For mung bean, no statistically significant (p=0.05) effects were seen in emergence rate 

between the treatment groups and the control and solvent control groups. For growth, no 

statistically significant effects (p=0.05) were seen between treatment groups and the solvent 

control group but a statistically significant reduction in growth was seen at the highest two 

concentrations tested when compared with the control group. The growth in the solvent 

control group was less than found in the control group, but this difference was not statistically 

significant and so the data for the control and solvent control groups were pooled. When

150 
R331_0208_env

compared with this pooled control group, no statistically significant effects were seen in 

growth at any treatment level. Thus the NOEC for this species is ≥5,000 mg/kg dry wt. 

Overall, no statistically significant effects were seen with any species in this study. The low 

emergence rate for oilseed rape means that the results obtained for this species are not fully 

valid and so should be treated with caution. However, even so, it is clear that little or no 

effect was occurring in the treatments with this species. 

3.2.2.3 Toxicity to earthworms 

The toxicity of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin has been studied in a reproduction test 

using earthworms (Eisenia fetida) (Thompson et al., 2001b). The test guideline used was

based on the draft OECD guideline (2000 version) for the reproduction test, along with 

OECD 207 guideline for the acute toxicity to earthworms. The substance tested was a 

commercial C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance containing no stabilisers. The substance had a C14-17

content of 99.06% and a C10-13 content of 0.67%. The nominal concentrations tested were 

100, 320, 1,000, 3,200 and 10,000 mg/kg dry weight. The substance was mixed with 

n-pentadecane-8-14C (radiochemical purity >96.6%) at the lowest, middle and highest 

concentrations tested, to facilitate radiochemical analysis of the exposure concentrations. 

The soil used in the test was an artificial soil consisting of 10% sphagnum moss peat, 70% 

quartz sand, 20% kaolinite clay and 0.25% calcium carbonate. The soil had an organic carbon 

content of 4.7% and a pH of 6.66-7.09. Before use, distilled water was added to the dry soil 

to provide a soil wet:dry ratio of 1.35. 

The test concentrations were made up by firstly adding the chlorinated paraffin as a solution 

in acetone to a portion of the soil and allowing the solvent to evaporate overnight under a 

stream of compressed air. This soil was then mixed with the rest of the test soil to give the

desired nominal concentrations. A solvent control soil was prepared in the same way. The 

tests were carried out in beakers containing 500 g of soil. Four replicate beakers were used 

for each treatment level, with each replicate containing 10 worms. The test was carried out at 

20o

C. A cereal-based food was added to the test to the soil surface at weekly intervals at 

approximately 1.25 g dry weight/week. The test substance was not added to the food. The

vessels were weighed every 7 days to determine the amount of water evaporated and this 

amount of water was then added to maintain the desired soil moisture content. 

Adult worms (300-400 mg wet wt.) were used at the start of the test. On day 28, all remaining 

parent (adult) worms were counted and removed from the test vessels and the total wet 

weight of worms was determined. After removal of the adult worms, each test vessel was

incubated for a further 28 days to allow hatching of any egg cocoons produced by the parent 

worms. At the end of this time period, the number of offspring (juveniles) present was 

determined. 

The soil concentrations in the lowest, middle and highest treatments were determined on 

days 0, 28 and 56 of the experiment using a radiochemical technique. The mean measured 

concentrations were 84-95% of nominal at day 0, 74-90% of nominal at day 28 and 64-92% 

of nominal at day 56. The results indicate that there may have been a decline in the exposure 

concentration, particularly at the lower concentrations, during the test. As the test measured 

primarily survival and reproductive output of parent worms exposed during the first 28 days 

of the experiment, the mean measured concentrations over the first 28 days of the test were 

151 
R331_0208_env

thought to best represent the exposure of these animals. These concentrations are shown in 

Table 3.53. The measured concentrations over the day 0 to day 28 period were, on average, 

87% of the nominal concentration. This value was used to correct the nominal concentrations 

of 320 mg/kg dry wt. and 3,200 mg/kg dry wt., for which no analysis was undertaken, to give

“equivalent measured concentrations” of 280 and 2,800 mg/kg dry wt. respectively. 

The survival, growth and reproduction results of the study are shown in Table 3.53. Parent 

survival was 100% in solvent control and control groups. Parent survival in the treatment

groups was found to be statistically significantly reduced (p=0.05) at the highest 

concentration tested. Thus the NOECsurvival = 2,800 mg/kg dry wt. 

Growth of the parent organisms was determined as the percentage weight gain over days 0 to 

28. The mean weight gain in the control and solvent control groups was 19%, however, there 

was a relatively large variability between replicates, reflecting the fact that the worms used in

the study were adults at the start of the test and their weight would be expected to be 

influenced by their recent reproductive output. A dose-responsive reduction in weight gain 

was seen in the treatment groups. This reduction was statistically significant (p=0.01) at 

2,800 mg/kg dry wt. and 9,300 mg/kg dry wt., where the weight/worm had decreased in all 

replicates. Thus the NOECgrowth = 900 mg/kg dry wt. 

Reproduction of the earthworms was investigated in terms of number of live offspring (the

number of remaining full and empty cocoons was also determined but this did not provide 

any relevant data). In determining the number of offspring produced, no correction was made 

for parent mortality. This data showed that a dose-related decrease in the number of live 

offspring occurred, with this decrease being statistically significant (p=0.01) at concentrations 

of 900 mg/kg dry weight and above. The NOECreproduction = 280 mg/kg dry weight. 

Thus the overall NOEC from this study is 280 mg/kg dry weight. Using the default water 

contents for soil recommended in the TGD, this is equivalent to 248 mg/kg on a wet weight 

basis. 

Table 3.53 Toxicity of a 52% wt. Cl medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to earthworm

Exposure concentration (mg/kg dry wt.)

Nominal Measureda

Parent survival Change in weight of 

parents 

Number of live 

offspring 

Control 0 100% 19% 34.2±13.8 

Solvent control 0 100% 19% 41.5±12.8 

100 79 100% 18% 32.3±5.9 

320 280b 100% 10% 26.3±11.1 

1,000 900 100% 6% 14.5±7.7** 

3,200 2,800b 97.5% -15%** 1.5±1.7** 

10,000 9,300 85%* -34%** 0** 

Notes: * Value significantly different from the solvent control population (p=0.05). 

** Value significantly different from the solvent control population (p=0.01). 

a) Mean measured concentration over days 0 to day 28 of the exposure. 

b) No actual measurements were carried out for these treatments. The concentrations represent “Equivalent measured 

concentration” using the mean % of nominal (87%) determined in the other treatments.

152 
R331_0208_env

3.2.2.4 Predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) for the terrestrial 

compartment 

 A PNECsoil may be estimated using the equilibrium partitioning method as follows: 

 PNECsoil = Ksoil-water × PNECwater × 1000

 RHOsoil 

where Ksoil-water = soil – water partition coefficient = 17,666 m3/m3

 RHOsoil = bulk density of soil = 1,700 kg/m3

 

The PNECsoil is estimated as 2.1 mg/kg wet wt. However, the ingestion of soil-bound 

substance by soil dwelling organisms may not be sufficiently explained by this relationship 

for substances with log Kow >5. The TGD suggests that the PEC/PNEC ratio derived by the 

equilibrium partitioning method should be increased by a factor of 10 to take account of this. 

Terrestrial toxicity data are also available for plants and earthworms. The lowest NOEC from 

the studies is 248 mg/kg wet wt. for the earthworm. According to the TGD an assessment 

factor of 50 is appropriate for this data set, giving a PNECsoil of 4.96 mg/kg wet wt. 

The TGD indicates that for soil organisms, the NOEC should be normalised to the standard

organic matter or organic carbon content used in the TGD (2% organic carbon content). The 

organic carbon content of the soil used in the earthworm study was 4.7%, and so this would 

lead to a NOECstandard of 106 mg/kg wet wt. and a PNECsoil(standard) of 2.12 mg/kg wet wt. 

It should be noted that such a normalisation is only valid if the majority of the exposure of the

organism occurs via the soil pore water. For substances with high log Kow values such as

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins it is possible that direct ingestion of soil-bound substance 

may become an important route of exposure. However, a limited amount of uptake data was 

obtained as part of the toxicity study with earthworms. This is discussed in detail in Section

3.1.0.5.2, and the data are best explained in terms of the uptake (and hence exposure) 

occurring mainly via the soil pore water. Therefore, as a realistic worst case approach the 

PNECsoil(standard) of 2.12 mg/kg wet wt. will be taken forward to the risk characterisation. 

3.2.3 Atmosphere 

No data are available on possible effects of the substance on the atmosphere. However, given 

the low volatility of the substance, neither biotic nor abiotic effects are likely. 

Chlorinated paraffins, particularly the short-chain ones, have been raised as a possible 

concern with regards to long-range atmospheric transport and subsequent bioaccumulation in

remote regions. This issue is currently being discussed within the appropriate international 

fora, but no agreement has yet been reached. The potential for long-range transport (and 

subsequent accumulation) of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins appears to be less than 

that for the short-chain. This is because the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins generally 

have lower vapour pressures, and are likely to adsorb more strongly to soil and sediment.

However, the substance is a complex mixture with components exhibiting a range of 

physico-chemical properties. Some components of the commercial products might have 

properties that may mean that long-range transport via the atmosphere is a possibility. This

issue should be considered further in the appropriate international fora.

153 
R331_0208_env

3.2.4 Non-compartmental specific effects relevant for the food chain 

3.2.4.1 Bioaccumulation 

The high log Kow values reported for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins indicate a high 

potential for bioaccumulation. The available measured bioconcentration factors with aquatic 

organisms generally shows lower accumulation than would be expected based on the log 

Kow, but there are uncertainties over the actual exposure concentrations in some of these 

studies. Studies with fish and with worms in sediment and soil show some uptake of the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins into the organisms. A recent study measured a 

bioconcentration factor for fish of 1,087 l/kg and this value is considered reliable and has

been used in the assessment. Uptake in mammals is also evident through the diet, although 

the concentrations reached within the animal do not appear to exceed those in the diet. There 

is some evidence that the bioaccumulative properties of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

may depend on carbon chain length and degree of chlorination (lower accumulation potential 

for highly chlorinated, longer-chain length components), but the available information 

indicates that at least some components of the commercial products have the potential to be 

taken up by organisms from surface water, sediment or soil pore water or diet. 

3.2.4.2 Avian toxicity 

The toxicity of a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl chlorinated paraffin has been determined using mallard 

ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) and ring-necked pheasants (Phasanius colchius). In the first part 

of the test, single oral doses of 10,280 mg/kg body weight for the mallard and 24,606 mg/kg 

body weight for pheasant were administered (the chlorinated paraffin was administered neat 

as the undiluted liquid; controls were given an equal volume of water) to groups of 5 males 

and 5 females, and the birds were observed for 14 days. No mortality or abnormal clinical 

symptoms were observed during the 14-day period (Madeley and Birtley, 1980). 

In the second test, groups of one-day old male and female mallards and pheasants were 

administered the chlorinated paraffin in their diet for 5 days, with a further 3 days observation 

period. The dietary doses used were 1,000 or 24,063 mg/kg feed, and the chlorinated paraffin 

was dissolved in a fixed volume of corn oil before mixing in with the food. Control groups 

received feed mixed with corn oil alone. All test animals were found to remain in good health 

throughout the experiment and no mortalities were seen. In the mallard, depressed food 

intake was seen at the 24,063 mg/kg feed dose, but this did not lead to a significant effect on 

weight gain. No effects were seen with the pheasant. No abnormalities were observed on 

autopsy (Madeley and Birtley, 1980). 

Madeley and Birtley (1980) also analysed the distribution of the chlorinated paraffin within 

the bodies of adult mallards given a single oral dose of 10,000 mg/kg body weight and 

pheasant chicks given a dietary dose of 1,000 mg/kg feed for 5 days. Three days after the last 

treatment, elevated levels of the chlorinated paraffin were found in fat (both intestinal and 

subcutaneous), gut and heart (67, 15 and 7 mg/kg wet weight respectively) in the duck and 

very low levels in all tissues tested in the pheasant (although the test animals were too young 

to show any fat for analysis). High levels of the chlorinated paraffin (115 mg/kg wet weight) 

were found in feathers from the mallard. This may indicate a major sink for the substance, 

with contamination of the feathers occurring via the preen gland, but the measured level 

could also be an artefact as a result of contamination from gloves, etc., during handling of the 

birds. 

154 
R331_0208_env

3.2.4.3 Mammalian toxicity 

The mammalian toxicity data is reviewed in detail in Section 4. The relevant repeated-dose 

end-points for secondary poisoning can be summarised as follows: 

NOAEL = 5 mg/kg food in diet (or 0.4 mg/kg body weight/day) in a 90-day feeding 

study with rats 

NOAEL = 10 mg/kg body weight/day in a 90-day feeding study with dogs 

NOAEL = 100 mg/kg food in diet (or 8 mg/kg body weight/day) in reproductive 

studies with rats 

The main effects seen in repeated dose studies are on the liver, thyroid and kidneys. The 

NOAEL for effects on kidneys (inner medullary tubular dilatation and “chronic nephritis”) 

was 0.4 mg/kg body weight/day in a 90-day study. The changes seen at the next exposure 

level (4 mg/kg body weight or 50 mg/kg food in diet) were slight and increased only 

marginally in severity at higher levels, indicating a shallow dose-response curve. 

In reproductive studies, effects were seen on neonatal offspring exposed via the lactating 

mother. The NOAEL for these effects was 100 mg/kg food in diet as a maternal dose. 

Using the conversion factors given in the Technical Guidance Document, a dose of 10 mg/kg 

body weight is equivalent to a dose of 100-200 mg/kg food. 

3.2.4.4 Predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) for secondary poisoning 

The Technical Guidance Document recommends that the NOAEL from dietary toxicity tests 

with fish-eating birds or mammals are used to determine the PNECoral. The most relevant

study for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is the dietary study with the mallard. No 

significant effects were seen in this study, other than a slight depression of food intake at the

high dose level of 24,063 mg/kg food. 

The Technical Guidance Document suggests that an assessment factor of 1,000 should be

applied to the LC50 from a 5-day avian study. However, no effects were seen in the available 

study with two avian species and so it is not appropriate to apply this factor to the NOAEL

from the study. 

The PNECoral will be derived from the available mammalian data. From the available data,

the NOAEL of around 5 mg/kg food could be used to derive a PNEC, along with an 

assessment factor of 10 (data is from both repeated dose and reproductive studies). This gives 

a PNEC of 0.5 mg/kg food. It should be noted that the dose-response curve for the effects 

seen in this study was shallow, and that the effects seen at the next highest concentration 

tested (50 mg/kg food) were slight (based on this concentration a PNEC of 5 mg/kg food 

could be derived). 

The Technical Guidance Document also indicates that a correction factor of 3 can be applied 

if the laboratory food used is grain (the factor accounts for the difference in calorific content 

of the diet of the laboratory animals and the diet of fish-eating birds or mammals). However,

the Technical Guidance Document also indicates that the use of such a factor is open to 

debate and, since in this study details of the actual diet used are not available, the factor is not 

applied. 

155 
R331_0208_env

3.3 RISK CHARACTERISATION 

3.3.1 Aquatic compartment (incl. sediment) 

The PEC/PNEC ratios for the PVC applications given for surface water and sediment are 

based on a 45% wt. Cl substance. The corresponding PECs for a 52% wt. Cl substance are 

shown in Appendix G. These are generally similar, but slightly lower than those determined 

for the 45% wt. Cl substance.

3.3.1.1 Water 

The PNECwater has been estimated as 0.2 μg/l. The resulting PEC/PNEC ratios for the various

scenarios considered in this assessment are shown in Table 3.54. 

Table 3.54 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for surface water 

Scenario Step Using measured regional concentration of 0.1 μg/l 

PEC (μg/l) PEC/PNEC

Site A 0.11 0.55 

Site B 0.19 0.95 

Site C 0.27 1.35 

Production 

Site D 0.10 0.50 

Compounding - O 0.15 0.75 

Conversion – O 0.44 2.20 

Use in PVC – plastisol coating 

Compounding/conversion – O 0.49 2.45 

Compounding - O 0.27 1.35 

Compounding – PO 1.03 5.15 

Compounding – C 0.18 0.90 

Conversion – O 0.62 3.10 

Conversion – PO 0.66 3.30 

Conversion – C 0.57 2.85 

Compounding/conversion – O 0.79 3.95 

Compounding/conversion – PO 1.59 7.95 

Use in PVC – extrusion/other 

Compounding/conversion – C 0.65 3.25 

Compounding 0.19 0.95

Conversion 0.39 1.95

Use in plastics/ rubber 

Compounding/conversion 0.48 2.40

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligibleb <1 

Table 3.54 continued overleaf. 

156 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.54 continued 

Scenario Step Using measured regional concentration of 0.1 μg/l 

PEC (μg/l) PEC/PNEC

Formulation 0.38 1.90

Industrial application 0.21 1.05 

Use in paints 

Domestic application 0.10 0.50 

Formulation 1.64 8.20

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 0.71 3.55 

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 0.66 3.30 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.15 0.75 

Use in metal cutting/ working 

fluids 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

46.6 233

Formulation 0.29 1.45

Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

1.77 8.85

Use in leather fat liquors 

Use – processing of wet blue 6.79 34.0 

Use in carbonless copy paper Paper recycling 0.43c 2.15

Regional sources 0.1 0.5 

Note: a) For the intermittent scenario an assessment factor can be applied to the acute EC50. However, from the available data 

set this would result in a lower PNEC than that derived from the long-term data. The PEC is greater than the EC50

determined in acute and long-term invertebrate studies. 

b) Process makes no significant contribution to levels in water. 

c) Primary treatment (sludge to landfill) followed by biological waste water treatment (sludge to soil) 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

The results are reported using the measured regional concentration of 0.1 μg/l as the 

background concentration. This is considered to be a more representative value than the 

predicted regional concentration of 0.389 μg/l or 0.682-0.745 μg/l when the “waste 

remaining in the environment” is included. 

Recent measurements in the United Kingdom indicate that the concentrations at some sites

may be lower than predicted, at around 0.1 μg/l at most (see Section 3.1.1.3). The survey 

analysed spot water samples taken from downstream of a range of industries where 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were thought to be being used. However, as these results 

only provide a snapshot of the concentration of the time of sampling and could be influenced 

by the type of activity being carried out at that time, they cannot be considered to be 

representative of the possible local concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins that 

may occur throughout the EU. 

The local calculations for PVC are based on a 45% wt. Cl product. The equivalent PECs

based on a less volatile 52% wt. Cl product are given in Appendix G and are in the range 

0.15-0.99 μg/l. This gives PEC/PNEC ratios in the range 0.75-4.95. 

For formulation of metal cutting fluids it was reported in Section 3.1.0.2.5 that at well 

controlled formulation sites, oil capture and recovery systems will be used prior to discharge 

of effluent to the sewage treatment plant. The equipment used is designed to lower the 

dissolved oil concentration to 5 mg/l or less. In this case the release from the site would make

157 
R331_0208_env

only a minor contribution to the PEClocal for water, which is dominated by the regional

background concentration. 

It should also be noted that for some uses, particularly in metal cutting/working fluids, there 

is an increasing trend in the amounts of medium chain chlorinated paraffins used, which 

could result in an increase in the PECregional. This is considered further in Appendix E and, as 

a worst case could increase the calculated PECregional to around 0.71 μg/l. 

Result

i) There is a need for further information and/or testing. 

The estimated PEC/PNEC ratios are >1 for most of the life-stages of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins when the measured value of 0.1 μg/l is taken to represent the regional 

concentration. The PNEC is based on two NOECs and an assessment factor of 50. A 

long-term toxicity study with fish (early life stage) could allow this to be refined. Some

long-term toxicity data are available for fish, which show no effects, but these tests do not 

meet all the requirements of the current test guidelines. The available information on

short-chain chlorinated paraffins indicates that it is unlikely that fish would be more sensitive 

to medium-chain chlorinated paraffin than Daphnia. If the PNEC were derived using a factor 

of 10 on the daphnia NOEC, then most of the endpoints would give ratios less than 1. Similar

overall conclusions are obtained if the predicted regional concentration of 0.389 μg/l is used. 

In summary, there is a need to consider a new long-term fish test carried out to current test 

guidelines. However, given the available database for chlorinated paraffins as a whole, and 

the conclusions found for other endpoints in this assessment, it is currently difficult to justify 

further testing with vertebrate species. Therefore, the need for this test should be reviewed 

once the outcome of the risk reduction measures proposed elsewhere in this assessment are 

known. 

ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction 

measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

This conclusion currently applies to the assessment of local releases from some production 

sites, some PVC compounding sites, plastics/rubber compounding sites, formulation and use 

of sealants, domestic application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids

and from regional sources. 

iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which are already being 

applied shall be taken into account. 

The PECs derived are based, as far as possible, on release information relevant to the 

industry. These indicate that risk reduction measures may be required for the following areas 

(irrespective of the results of a fish test, or whether or the measured or predicted regional 

concentration is used): 

• Use in the production of PVC in some processes (particularly where compounding or 

compounding and conversion is carried out in partially open systems). 

• Formulation of metal cutting fluids, and use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids 

where the spent fluid is discharged to waste water. 

158 
R331_0208_env

• Use in leather fat liquors. 

When the possible effects of the proposed risk reduction measures on short chain chlorinated

paraffins on the consumption and use of medium chain chlorinated paraffins are taken into 

account, the PEC/PNEC ratios also indicate that a risk from use in oil-based metal cutting 

fluids may also need to be considered if the typical concentration of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins present in the fluid is increased to around 10% (see Appendix E). 

3.3.1.2 Sediment 

There are two toxicity studies available on sediment-dwelling organisms. A PNECsed for the 

sediment compartment of 1 mg/kg wet wt. has been estimated using these data and an 

assessment factor of 50. The resulting PEC/PNEC ratios for medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins are shown in Table 3.55. 

Table 3.55 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for sediment 

Scenario Step Using measured regional concentrations 

PEC (mg/kg wet wt.) PEC/PNEC

Site A 1.41 1.4 

Site B 2.44 2.4 

Site C 3.46 3.5 

Production 

Site D 1.28 1.3 

Compounding - O 1.88 1.9 

Conversion – O 5.68 5.7 

Use in PVC – plastisol coating 

Compounding/conversion - O 6.27 6.3 

Compounding - O 3.46 3.5 

Compounding – PO 13.2 13.2 

Compounding – C 2.30 2.3 

Conversion – O 7.94 7.9 

Conversion – PO 8.45 8.5 

Conversion – C 7.30 7.3 

Compounding/conversion – O 10.1 10.1 

Compounding/conversion - PO 20.4 20.4 

Use in PVC – extrusion/other 

Compounding/conversion - C 8.32 8.3 

Compounding 2.38 2.4

Conversion 4.99 4.99

Use in plastics/rubber 

Compounding/conversion 6.14 6.1

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligibleb <1 

Formulation 4.86 4.9

Industrial application 2.69 2.7 

Use in paints 

Domestic application 1.28 1.3 

Table 3.55 continued overleaf. 

159 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.55 continued 

Scenario Step Using measured regional concentrations 

PEC (mg/kg wet wt.) PEC/PNEC

Formulation 21.0 21.0

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 9.09 9.1 

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 8.45 8.5 

Use in metal cutting/working 

fluids 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 1.92 1.9 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

[597 or 11.7]a [597 or 11.7]a 

Formulation 3.71 3.71

Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

22.7 22.7

Use in leather fat liquors 

Use – processing of wet blue 86.9 86.9 

Use in carbonless copy paper Paper recycling 5.50c 5.5

Regional sources 0.7 0.7 

Note: a) [ ] Intermittent release scenario - it is not clear how this is dealt with in the TGD for sediment. 

b) Process makes no significant contribution to levels in sediment. 

c) Primary treatment (sludge to landfill) followed by biological waste water treatment (sludge to soil). 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

The results are reported using the regional concentrations based on the measured 

concentrations in surface water and sediment (0.1 μg/l and 0.7 mg/kg wet wt. respectively).

The local calculations for PVC are based on a 45% wt. Cl product. The equivalent PECs

based on a less volatile 52% wt. Cl product are given in Appendix G and are in the range 

1.9-12.7 mg/kg wet wt. This gives PEC/PNEC ratios in the range 1.9-12.7. 

In general the most recent monitoring data for sediment is consistent with the predicted local 

concentrations. Indeed, there are several areas in the United Kingdom with measured 

sediment levels are >5 mg/kg wet wt., indicating that risk reduction measures are required 

from some uses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

The PEC/PNEC ratios obtained for sediment currently indicate a risk to the environment 

from all the local scenarios considered except for the local scenario formulation and use in

sealants. The regional PEC/PNEC ratio is currently <1, indicating a low risk to the 

environment from regional sources. The PNECsed is based on the results from prolonged 

toxicity tests from two species with an assessment factor of 50. It is possible to further refine 

the PNECsed by carrying out a further prolonged toxicity test with a third species. The results 

from a third species would allow an assessment factor of 10 to be used on the lowest NOEC.

and would mean that the PNECsed would be 5 mg/kg wet wt. or possibly lower. From 

Table 3.55 it can be seen that several local PECseds are ≥5 mg/kg wet wt. and so it is possible 

to conclude that a risk to the environment exists from these sources. For the scenarios where 

the PECsed are between 1 and 5 mg/kg (i.e. production, use in PVC (plastisol coating 

compounding in open systems; extrusion/other compounding in open and closed systems),

compounding and conversion in plastics/rubber, formulation and industrial/domestic 

application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids and formulation of 

leather fat liquors) a toxicity test with a third species would allow it to be seen if a risk 

actually exists or not. 

160 
R331_0208_env

For formulation of metal cutting fluids it was reported in Section 3.1.0.2.5 that at well 

controlled formulation sites, oil capture and recovery systems will be used prior to discharge 

of effluent to the sewage treatment plant. The equipment used is designed to lower the 

dissolved oil concentration to 5 mg/l or less. In this case the release from the site would make

only a minor contribution to the PEClocal for sediment, which is dominated by the regional 

concentrations. 

Result

i) There is a need for further information and/or testing. 

It is possible to further refine the PNECsed by carrying out a further prolonged toxicity test 

with a third species, such as Hyalella azteca. This would be important for refining the 

PEC/PNEC ratios for sediment where the current ratio is in the range 1 to <5 (i.e. production, 

use in PVC (plastisol coating compounding in open systems; extrusion/other compounding in 

open and closed systems), compounding and conversion in plastics/rubber, formulation and 

industrial/domestic application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids and

formulation of leather fat liquors). Similar to the case with surface water the need for this test 

should be reviewed once the effects of the risk reduction measures proposed elsewhere in this 

assessment are known. 

The same overall conclusions would be obtained using the predicted regional water

concentrations. 

ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction 

measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

This conclusion currently applies to the assessment of local release from formulation and use 

of sealants and from regional sources. 

iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which are already being 

applied shall be taken into account. 

Although a further sediment toxicity test may reduce the PNEC and hence PEC/PNEC ratio 

for sediment, this would not affect the outcome of the assessment for the scenarios where the 

current PEC/PNEC ratios are ≥5. Therefore risk reduction measures are required for local 

release from the following sources: 

• Use in PVC: plastisol coating – conversion sites or sites carrying out both compounding 

and conversion. 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other – compounding sites using partially open processes or sites 

carrying out both compounding and conversion using open, partially open or closed 

processes. 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other – conversion sites using open, partially open or closed 

processes. 

• Use in plastics/rubber: sites carrying out both compounding and conversion. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: formulation sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in oil-based fluids at large and small sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in emulsifiable fluids at sites with intermittent

release (disposal) to sewer/drain. 

161 
R331_0208_env

• Use in leather fat liquors: use at sites carrying out processing of hides/leather. 

• Use in carbonless copy paper: sites carrying out paper recycling. 

This conclusion is supported by the more recent monitoring data from the United Kingdom, 

which found measured concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins at several

locations close to industry in the United Kingdom. 

C

3.3.1.3 Sewage treatment processes 

A PNEC of 80 mg/l has been estimated for sewage treatment microorganisms. The resulting

PEC/PNEC ratios for the various scenarios are shown in Table 3.56. 

Table 3.56 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for waste water treatment plants 

Scenario Step effluent (μg/l) PEC/PNEC 

0.88 

Conversion – O 6.48 8.1×10-5

Use in PVC – plastisol coating 

Compounding/conversion – O 7.35 9.2×10-5

Compounding - O 3.22 4.0×10-5

Compounding – PO 17.5 2.2×10-4

Compounding – C 1.49 1.9×10-5

Conversion – O 9.80 1.2×10-4

Conversion – PO 10.50 1.3×10-4

Conversion – C 8.93 1.1×10-4

13.0 1.6×10-4

Compounding/conversion – PO 28.0 3.5×10-4

Use in PVC – extrusion/other 

Compounding/conversion – C 10.4 1.3×10-4

Compounding 1.63 2.0×10-5

Conversion 5.43 6.8×10-5

Use in plastics/rubber 

Compounding/conversion 7.07 8.8×10-5

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligiblea <<1 

Formulation 5.25 6.6×10-5

Industrial application 2.07 2.6×10-5

Use in paints 

Domestic application 1.05×10-5 1.3×10-10 

Formulation 29.1 3.6×10-4

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 11.6 1.5×10-4

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 10.5 1.3×10-4

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.88 1.1×10-5

Use in metal cutting/working 

fluids 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

875 0.011

Compounding - O 1.1×10-5

Compounding/conversion – O 

Table 3.56 continued overleaf. 

162 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.56 continued 

Scenario Step Ceffluent (μg/l) PEC/PNEC 

Formulation 3.5 4.4×10-5

Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

31.5 3.9×10-4

Use in leather fat liquors 

Use – processing of wet blue 126 1.6×10-3

Use in carbonless copy paper Paper recycling 6.2 7.8×10-5

Note: a) Process makes no significant contribution to the levels in waste water. 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

For the four production sites for which information is available, the Ceffluent is in the range 

0.12-5.3 μg/l at sites where biological treatment is carried out. These concentrations also 

result in PEC/PNEC <1. The risk to waste water treatment plants from the production and use

of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is therefore low. 

Result

ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction 

measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

This applies to the assessment of waste water treatment plants from all sources. 

3.3.2 Terrestrial compartment 

Soil organisms could be exposed to medium-chain chlorinated paraffins following application 

of sewage sludge to agricultural soils. A PNECsoil of 2.12 mg/kg wet wt. has been derived. 

The resulting PEC/PNEC ratios obtained for agricultural soil are shown in Table 3.57. 

The results are reported using the measured concentration of 0.088 mg/kg wet wt. to 

represent the regional concentration in all soil types (natural soil (which acts as the 

background to the local calculations in agricultural soil) and agricultural soil). Similar to the

situation with surface water, the measured regional soil concentration is considered to be

representative of the situation throughout the EU. However, in the case of soil, the database 

available is smaller than in the case with surface water, and so the measured soil data needs to 

be used with caution. The predicted regional concentration in agricultural soil is 

50.4-55.8 mg/kg wet wt. and the predicted regional concentration in natural soil is 1.1 mg/kg 

wet wt. It should be noted that the predicted concentrations are much higher than the levels 

that have so far been measured in the environment, and indicates that there are some 

uncertainties in the levels predicted. These could arise from overestimation of the actual

emissions to soil, or an underestimation of the removal (biodegradation) rate in soil. This 

latter point is considered in detail in Section 3.1.2.3 and Appendix H and the overall 

uncertainties in the assessment are discussed in Section 3.3.5. 

Emissions of particulates containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (from weathering of 

PVC for example) could add to the burden in soil, particularly the urban/industrial soil 

compartment. There are currently no agreed methods within the Technical Guidance 

Document for assessing these emissions, but tentative calculations indicate that the resulting

regional concentration in industrial/urban soil could be of the order of 147-173 mg/kg wet wt. 

163 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.57 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for agricultural soil (30 day average) 

Scenario Step Using measured regional concentrations 

PEC (mg/kg wet wt.) PEC/PNEC

Production 4 Sites negligiblec <1 

Compounding - O 0.51 0.24 

Conversion – O 3.21 1.5 

Use in PVC – plastisol coating 

Compounding/conversion – O 3.64 1.7 

Compounding - O 1.64 0.77 

Compounding – PO 8.53 4.0 

Compounding – C 0.81 0.38 

4.82 2.3 

Conversion – PO 5.16 2.4 

Conversion – C 4.40 2.1 

Compounding/conversion – O 6.37 3.0 

Compounding/conversion – PO 13.6 6.4 

Use in PVC – extrusion/other 

Compounding/conversion – C 5.12 2.4 

Compounding 0.87 0.41

Conversion 2.71 1.3

Use in plastics/rubber 

Compounding/conversion 3.5 1.7

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligiblec <1

Formulation 2.62 1.2

1.08 0.51 

Use in paints 

Domestic application negligiblec <1

Formulation 14.1 6.7

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 5.66 2.7 

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 5.15 2.4 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.51 0.24 

Use in metal cutting/working 

fluids 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

46a 21.7a 

Formulation 1.78 0.84

Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

15.3 7.2

Use in leather fat liquors 

Use – processing of wet blue 60.8 28.6 

Use in carbonless copy paper Paper recycling 3.02b 1.4b

Regional sources 0.088 0.042 

Conversion – O 

Industrial application 

Note: a) Assumes dilution of sewage sludge at wwtp before application to soil (see Section 3.1.2.1). 

b) Primary treatment (sludge to landfill) followed by biological waste water treatment (sludge to soil) 

c) Process makes no significant contribution to levels in soil. 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

164 
R331_0208_env

There are large uncertainties inherent in these estimates, particularly over the actual 

(bio)availability of the substance, and the actual residence time of the substance in the soil 

compartment (the predicted regional concentration in soil is very sensitive to the removal rate

assumed in the calculation (see Section 3.1.2.3 and Appendix H). For example if a half-life of 

2 years in soil is assumed (as suggested by the analysis in Appendix H) this predicted 

regional concentration would be reduced to 0.7-0.8 mg/kg wet weight). No monitoring data 

are currently available that could be considered representative of this scenario. If these 

emissions do lead to actual exposure of the urban/industrial soil compartment to levels 

similar to those predicted, then the PEC/PNEC ratio would be >1 in the worst case

calculation. 

In summary, when the measured regional soil concentration is used, the PEC/PNEC ratios for 

most local scenarios are >1. Similar results are obtained using the predicted regional 

concentrations, but in this case the PEC/PNEC ratio is also >1 for the regional concentration 

in agricultural soil. When the emissions of “waste remaining in the environment” to 

urban/industrial soil are considered, the predicted PEC/PNEC ratio would be >1. 

It is possible to further refine the PNECsoil by carrying out a third toxicity test with soil 

microorganisms. This would allow an assessment factor of 10 to be used to derive the PNEC.

Since the majority of the current PEC/PNEC ratios are between 1 and 5, such a test is 

important to establish if a risk actually exists or not in these cases. For the scenarios where 

the current PEC/PNEC ratio is ≥5 such a test would reduce the PEC/PNEC ratios but would 

still lead to PEC/PNEC ratios ≥1 and so a risk to the environment can be deduced for these 

scenarios. 

Result

i) There is a need for further information and/or testing. 

A further prolonged soil toxicity test with soil microorganisms is recommended to refine the 

PNECsoil and hence the PEC/PNEC ratios. This would be important for refining the

PEC/PNEC ratios for soil where the current ratio is in the range 1 to >5 (i.e. use in PVC 

(conversion and compounding/conversion in open systems for plastisol coating; 

extrusion/other: compounding in partially open systems, conversion in open, partially open 

and closed systems, and compounding/conversion in open and closed systems), conversion 

and compounding/conversion in plastics/rubber, formulation of paints, use in oil-based metal

cutting/working fluids at large and small sites, recycling of carbonless copy paper). The need 

for this test should be reviewed in light of the risk reduction measures proposed elsewhere in 

this assessment. 

It is possible that the PECs could also be refined. The concentrations of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins are predicted to build up in soil over time as no biodegradation was

assumed in the EUSES model. This results in high concentrations being predicted in soil, 

particularly in the regional model, but there may also be some impact on the predicted local 

levels. These predicted regional concentrations have not been confirmed in the available soil 

monitoring data and so the monitoring data have been used to represent the regional 

concentrations. A soil degradation study (from which a reliable half-life for degradation 

(mineralisation) in soil could be derived) could be considered, to define a reliable removal 

rate for the substance. A relatively crude analysis (see Appendix H) suggests that a

degradation half-life of around 2 years in soil would be consistent with the estimated 

165 
R331_0208_env

emission rates and the measured regional concentrations in soil. A degradation half-life of 

this order would have the effect of reducing the local PECs for soil by around a factor of 2-3. 

Since the majority of the PEC/PNEC ratios are larger than this factor, a soil degradation study 

on its own would not necessarily be enough to refine the risk characterisation for this

compartment. In addition to this, it would also be very difficult to carry out such a study. 

Thus, although a soil degradation study would provide useful information for the risk 

assessment, and would potentially allow the local PECs for soil (and any other local 

concentrations that rely on the soil concentrations such as those for earthworms (for

secondary poisoning) and food for human consumption) to be refined, obtaining such 

information within a reasonable timescale would be problematical, and the results on their 

own would not necessarily allow the assessment for the soil compartment to be completed.

This option is therefore not recommended. 

ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction 

measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

This conclusion currently applies to the assessment of local releases from production sites,

some PVC compounding sites, some plastics/rubber compounding sites, formulation and use 

of sealants, industrial and domestic application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal 

cutting/working fluids (not intermittent release scenario), formulation of leather fat liquors, 

and from regional sources on agricultural land. 

iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which are already being 

applied shall be taken into account. 

The PEC/PNEC ratios indicate that risk reduction measures are required for local releases 

from the following sources: 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other - sites carrying out both compounding and conversion using 

partially open systems. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: formulation sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in emulsifiable fluids at sites with intermittent

release (disposal) to sewer/drain. 

• Use in leather fat liquors: use at sites carrying out processing of hides/leather. 

In these cases, the major source of release to soil is predicted to come from the spreading of

sewage sludge onto agricultural land. 

The regional assessment of “waste remaining in the environment” also indicates a possible 

risk to industrial soil. The major source of release to soil in this scenario is direct particulate

release to industrial soil. There are many uncertainties inherent in this scenario. 

3.3.3 Atmosphere 

Neither biotic nor abiotic effects on the atmosphere are likely because of the limited 

atmospheric release and low volatility of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

Chlorinated paraffins, particularly the short-chain ones, have been raised as a possible 

concern with regards to long-range atmospheric transport and subsequent bioaccumulation in

remote regions. This issue is currently being discussed within the appropriate international 

166 
R331_0208_env

fora, but no agreement has yet been reached. The potential for long-range transport (and 

subsequent accumulation) of the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins appears to be less than 

that for the short-chain. This is because the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins generally 

have lower vapour pressures, and are likely to adsorb more strongly to soil and sediment.

However, the substance is a complex mixture with components exhibiting a range of 

physico-chemical properties. Some components of the commercial products might have 

properties that may mean that long-range transport via the atmosphere is a possibility. This

issue should be considered further in the appropriate international fora.

Result

ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction 

measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

3.3.4 Non-compartment specific effects relevant to the food chain 

(secondary poisoning) 

The PNEC for secondary poisoning has been determined as 0.5 mg/kg food. The estimated 

PEC/PNEC ratios are shown in Table 3.58. The results are reported using the measured 

concentration of 0.1 μg/l to represent the regional concentration in surface water and 

0.088 mg/kg wet wt. to represent the regional concentration in all soil types. 

Table 3.58 Estimated concentrations in fish and earthworms for secondary poisoning 

Scenario Step Fish Earthworms

Using measured regional 

concentrations

Using measured regional 

concentrations

PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC

Production Site A 0.11 0.22 negligiblec <1

Site B 0.15 0.30 negligiblec <1

C 0.19 0.38 negligiblec <1

Site D 0.11 0.22 negligiblec <1

Compounding - O 0.13 0.26 1.7 3.4

Conversion – O 0.26 0.52 9.3 18.6 

Compounding/conversion - O 0.28 0.56 10.4 20.8

Use in PVC – Compounding - O 0.19 0.38 4.8 9.6

extrusion/ other Compounding - PO 0.52 1.04 24.1 48.2 

Compounding – C 0.14 0.28 2.5 5.0 

Conversion – O 0.34 0.68 13.7 27.4

Conversion – PO 0.36 0.72 14.7 29.4

Conversion – C 0.32 0.64 12.6 25.2

Compounding/conversion – O 0.42 0.84 18.1 36.2

Compounding/conversion - PO 0.77 1.54 38.3 76.6

Compounding/conversion – C 0.36 0.72 14.6 29.2

 Site 

Use in PVC – 

plastisol coating 

Table 3.58 continued overleaf.

167 
R331_0208_env

Table 3.58 continued 

Scenario Step Fish Earthworms

Using measured regional 

concentrations

Using measured regional 

concentrations

PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC

Use in plastics/ 0.15 5.4

rubber Conversion 0.24 0.48 7.8 15.6

Compounding/conversion 0.28 0.56 10.0 20.0

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligiblec <1 negligiblec <1

Use in paints Formulation 0.23 0.46 7.6 15.2

Industrial application 0.16 0.32 3.3 6.6

Domestic application negligiblec <1 negligiblec <1

Formulation 0.80 1.60 39.7 79.4

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 0.38 0.76 16.1 32.2 

Use in metal 

cutting/working 

fluids 

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 0.36 0.72 14.7 29.4 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.13 0.26 1.7 3.4

Use in emulsifiable fluids – 

intermittent release 

0.52 1.04 129a 258a 

Use in leather fat Formulation 0.19 0.38 5.2 10.4

liquors Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

0.86 1.72 43.0 86.0

Use – processing of wet blue 3.10 6.2 171 342 

Use in 

carbonless copy 

paper 

Paper recycling 0.23b 0.46b 8.8b 17.6b 

Compounding 0.30 2.7 

Note: a) assumes dilution of sewage sludge at wwtp before application to soil (see Section 3.1.2.1) 

b) primary treatment (sludge to landfill) followed by biological waste water treatment (sludge to soil) 

c) process makes no significant contribution to the levels in fish/earthworms 

O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998). 

For the aquatic food chain, most of the PEC/PNEC ratios are <1 when the measured regional 

surface water concentration is used. For six out of the 32 scenarios, the PEC/PNEC ratio is 

>1. 

For the terrestrial food chain, all of the scenarios give PEC/PNEC ratios greater than 1 when 

the measured regional soil concentration is taken into account. The PECs for this endpoint are

generally much higher than have so far been found in earthworms in the environment, and 

depend crucially on the predicted soil concentrations. As discussed in Section 3.3.2, the

predicted concentrations are dependent on the rate of biodegradation of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins, as well as the estimated emissions via sewage sludge to the soil 

compartment. Any refinement to this information for the local soil compartment would

therefore alter the PECs and PEC/PNEC ratios for this endpoint. Such refinement may 

include a soil biodegradation test, but as explained in Section 3.3.2, any such test would be 

difficult to carry out and on its own may not address all the possible concerns identified in the 

soil compartment. 

168 
R331_0208_env

There is some uncertainty over the PNEC of 0.5 mg/kg food used for the secondary poisoning 

assessment, due to the shallow dose-response curve seen in the study from which it was 

derived. However if the next highest dose tested is considered (where slight effects were 

seen; see Section 3.2.4), this would lead to a PNEC of 5 mg/kg food and essentially the same

conclusions would be obtained for the earthworm food chain (in this case most, but not all, 

scenarios considered would still indicate a risk). 

Result

ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction 

measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

This applies to the assessment of secondary poisoning via the fish food chain from production 

sites, some sites using medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the production of PVC 

(plastisol coating sites, and sites carrying out extrusion/other compounding and/or conversion 

using open or closed systems, and sites carrying out conversion in partially open systems),

use in production of rubber and polymers other than PVC, formulation and use of sealants,

formulation and use in paints, use in oil-based and emulsifiable metal cutting fluids (except 

for the intermittent release scenario), formulation of leather fat liquors and sites where

recycling of carbonless copy paper occurs. 

This also applies to the assessment of secondary poisoning via the earthworm food chain for 

production (sites where no sewage sludge is applied to land), formulation and use of sealants, 

and domestic application of paints. 

iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which are already being 

applied shall be taken into account. 

For the fish food chain this applies to: 

• Use in the production of PVC in some processes (particularly where compounding or 

compounding and conversion is carried out in partially open systems). 

• Formulation of metal cutting fluids. 

• Use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids where the spent fluid is discharged to

waste water. 

• Use in leather fat liquors. 

When the possible effects of the proposed risk reduction measures on short chain chlorinated

paraffins on the consumption and use of medium chain chlorinated paraffins are taken into 

account, the PEC/PNEC ratios also indicate that a risk from use in oil-based metal cutting 

fluids may also need to be considered if the typical concentration of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins present in the fluid is increased to around 10% (see Appendix E). The 

risk reduction measures proposed for the aquatic compartment for these applications should 

also address the possible risks identified here. 

For the earthworm foodchain, this conclusion applies to all the uses of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin (with the exception of production (sites where no sewage sludge is 

applied to land), formulation and use of sealants, and domestic application of paints). 

169 
R331_0208_env

3.3.5 Areas of uncertainty in the environmental risk assessment 

As with any “generic” risk assessment there are uncertainties inherent in the approach taken.

For medium-chain chlorinated paraffins these uncertainties are compounded by the fact that 

the substance is a complex mixture and is difficult to test in many of the standard assays 

which means that derivation of the physico-chemical properties and other data necessary for 

the environmental modelling is difficult. In this assessment, a set of data that is considered to 

be representative of the substance has been chosen, and the effect of variation of these 

properties on the environmental modelling has been investigated. However, there are still 

some areas where reliable information is lacking. 

One area where this is particularly apparent is in the actual degradation/removal rate in the 

environment. This is a vital input into the regional (and to a lesser extent) local 

concentrations, and has a major impact on the predicted concentrations in soil. This is 

discussed in detail in Appendix H and Section 3.1.2.3. 

Another area of uncertainty is over the actual emission estimates. For most of the scenarios 

considered, the best information available to the specific industries has been used in 

preference to the default values. However, in many cases, this information was not generated 

for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins but has been extrapolated from other substances. This 

necessarily introduces uncertainties into the estimates. 

Another area where information is lacking is in the assessment of the “waste remaining in the 

environment”. Here, there are no agreed methodologies available in the Technical Guidance 

Document for estimating PECs for this type of release, and there are uncertainties associated

with the actual (bio)availability and environmental behaviour of the substance when released

in this form, which is essentially polymer particulates containing the substance. 

Some concerns have also been raised about the possibility of natural organohalogens or other 

substances interfering with analytical measurement of environmental concentrations. It 

should be stressed that analysis of chlorinated paraffins itself is very difficult. The individual 

chlorinated paraffin peaks do not separate cleanly during the chromatographic process and 

essentially a broad ‘hand-shaped’ peak is obtained over quite a wide retention time window.

Any other compound, whether naturally occurring or not, that goes through the clean up 

method in a similar way to the chlorinated paraffin (the clean up method used is usually 

designed to remove some of the more common organohalogen pollutants such as dioxins, 

furans, PCBs, etc.) and has a similar chromatographic retention time could cause interference.

The susceptibility of the analysis to this type of interference will depend, to some extent, on

the specificity of the detection method used (for example Bennie et al. (2000) indicated that 

their low resolution mass spectrometric method may be more susceptible to such 

interferences than a high resolution mass spectrometric method). Another method that is

sometimes used (as was the case with the Greenpeace breast milk analysis) involves 

reduction of the chlorinated paraffin to the parent paraffin and analysis of these (the parent 

paraffins can be readily separated by standard GC methods). This method provides much 

more information on the actual carbon chain lengths present, but has the potential for 

interference from both naturally occurring and anthropogenic n-paraffins (it will also still be 

subject to interference from naturally occurring chlorinated paraffins). The analytical 

methods used in the various studies are summarised in Appendix D. 

170 
R331_0208_env

If chlorinated paraffins are naturally produced that are identical to the anthropogenic ones 

then they would of course interfere in any analysis. It is possible that some complex natural 

organohalogen compounds could also interfere with the analysis, although there is no 

evidence that this occurs in practice. It is impossible to say categorically that naturally

occurring chlorinated paraffins do not exist, although if there is any significant source it is 

most likely to be found in the marine environment. It is highly unlikely that the 

concentrations measured in, for example, sediment close to sites of production/use are natural 

rather than anthropogenic. 

In any case, the environmental risk assessment conclusions are based on the calculated PECs 

based on the industrial use and release of chlorinated paraffins. A natural source would only 

add to the background (regional) levels. The monitoring data in the assessment have been 

used to support the PECs, but a risk would still be identified even if the monitoring data did 

not exist. In other words, even if medium-chain chlorinated paraffins occur naturally there is 

still a risk from the use of the anthropogenic substance. 

3.3.6 Waste disposal 

Similar to chlorinated compounds in general, chlorinated paraffins can act as a source of 

chlorine during incineration processes. This chlorine can then lead to the formation of 

polychlorinated dioxins and furans, and is a well known problem with incineration. 

In most cases, controls are already in place on incinerators to minimise the formation of these 

dioxins and furans, and so the presence of the chlorinated paraffins should not lead to 

increased emissions. However, other processes involving chlorinated paraffins may not be so 

well controlled. One specific example is when metal swarf from metal working is re-melted. 

In this case the swarf may be contaminated with metal working/cutting fluids containing 

chlorinated paraffins which could theoretically contribute to the formation of chlorinated 

dioxins and furans in the process. There is insufficient information available on this issue to 

make an assessment of the significance this processes in terms of a risk for the environment. 

3.3.7 Medium-chain impurities present in other chlorinated paraffins 

As discussed earlier, certain types of long-chain chlorinated paraffins can contain substantial 

amounts of C17, and to a much lesser extent C16, chlorinated paraffin impurities. Thus these 

long-chain chlorinated paraffins can contribute to the total regional release of C14-17

chlorinated paraffins. The contribution of these impurities present in the long-chain 

chlorinated paraffins has been quantified and shown to make only a very small (c.a. 0.5%) 

contribution to the total regional releases of C14-17 chlorinated paraffins. The approach taken 

in the risk assessment is based, in the main, on regional concentrations based on the available 

environmental monitoring data. These values will necessarily already include the contribution 

of C14-17 chlorinated paraffins from all sources. 

At a local level, the emissions to the environment of the C16-17 impurities present in certain 

types of long-chain chlorinated paraffins are related to the use of the long-chain chlorinated 

paraffin and so are considered in the risk assessment of that substance (EA, 2001). 

171 
R331_0208_env

4 HUMAN HEALTH 

To be added. 

4.1 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins have several uses that could result in releases to air and

water. The uptake of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins into organisms, although it does 

occur, may be less than the very high log Kow values for this group of substances would 

indicate. The potential for bioaccumulation in the environment appears to decrease with

increasing chlorine content in the group. This is discussed further in Section 3.1.0.5. 

The EUSES model has been used to estimate various concentrations of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in food, air and drinking water. These are shown in Table 4.2. The 

calculations have been carried out twice: firstly using the estimated regional background 

concentrations of 0.388 μg/l for surface water and 50.4 mg/kg wet wt. for agricultural soil; 

and secondly using regional concentrations based on measured data of 0.1 μg/l for surface 

water and 0.088 mg/kg wet wt. for agricultural soil (as used in the environmental parts of the 

risk assessment). The measured data are taken from representative industrial areas in the 

United Kingdom and the agricultural soil samples were from sites that were known to receive 

sewage sludge from treatment plants where chlorinated paraffins were known to be released 

(further details of these sites are given in Table 3.22 in Section 3.1.1.3.1 for surface water 

and Table 3.35 in Section 3.1.2.2 for soil)

4.1.1 

4.1.1.1 

4.1.1.2 

4.1.1.3 Indirect exposure via the environment 

.

In the EUSES model, a log Kow value of 7 has been used as being representative for the 

group as a whole. A fish bioconcentration factor of 1,087 l/kg (see Section 3.1.0.5) has been 

used in the EUSES model to estimate the concentration in wet fish. For other parts of the

food chain, particularly root crops, leaf crops, meat and milk, EUSES estimates the

concentrations in these using methods that rely on log Kow as no equivalent measured 

accumulation factors exist for medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. It is not known if these

methods would be applicable to medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

A accumulation factor of 0.034 on a wet weight basis for uptake into above ground parts of 

plants from soil has been determined for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (see 

Section 3.1.0.5.2), showing that the substance can be taken up into plant tissues. Using this 

factor, and the concentrations of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins estimated to be present 

in soil (around 1.5-62 mg/kg wet weight for the scenarios considered in Section 3.1.2.1) the

estimated concentration in above ground plant parts would be in the range 0.05-2.1 mg/kg 

wet weight. These data are reasonably consistent with the concentrations predicted by 

EUSES to occur in leaf crops, but it is not possible to compare these data with the 

concentrations predicted by EUSES for root crops. 

172 
Table 4.2Estimated concentrations in food for human daily intake Scenario Step Estimated concentration in human intake media

Wet fish 

(mg/kg) 

Root crops 

(mg/kg) 

Leaf crops 

(mg/kg) 

Drinking water (mg/l) Meat (mg/k

Site A 0.43 (0.11)b negligiblea negligiblea 1.1×10-4 (2.6×10-5)b negligiblea Site B 0.50 (0.19)b 

negligiblea negligiblea 1.2×10-4 (4.4×10-5)b negligiblea 

Site C 0.57 (0.26)b 

negligiblea negligiblea 1.3×10-4 (6.0×10-5)b negligiblea 

Production 

Site D 0.42 (0.11)b negligiblea negligiblea 1.1×10-4 (2.5×10-5)b negligiblea 

Compounding - O 0.46 (0.15)b 0.14 (0.10)

9.33 (3.13)b 0.017 (0.017)b 1.5×10-4 (4.9×10-5)b 

Conversion – O 0.73 (0.42)b 25.9 (19.7)b 0.23 (0.23)b 4.1×10-4 (3.1×10-4)b 1.32 (1.28)

Use in PVC – plastisol coating 

Compounding/conversion - O 0.77 (0.46)b 28.5 (22.3)b 0.23 (0.23)b 4.5×10-4 (3.5×10-4)b 1.32 (1.29)

Compounding - O 0.58 (0.26)b 16.3 (10.1)b 0.080 (0.080)b 

2.6×10-4 (1.6×10-4)b 0.49 (0.46)

Compounding – PO 1.25 (0.94)b 2.11 (2.07)

58.6 (52.4) 0.36 (0.36)b 9.2×10-4 (8.2×10-4)b 

Compounding – C 0.49 (0.18)b 11.2 (4.95)b 0.046 (0.046)b 

1.8×10-4 (7.8×10-5)b 0.30 (0.26)

Conversion – O 0.89 (0.57)b 35.8 (29.6)b 0.34 (0.34)b 5.6×10-4 (4.6×10-4)b 1.93 (1.89)Conversion – PO 0.92 (0.61)b 37.9 (31.6)b 2.05 (2.02)

0.36 (0.36)b 5.9×10-4 (5.0×10-4)b 

0.85 (0.53)b 33.2 (27.0)b 0.31 (0.31)b 5.2×10-4 (4.2×10-4)b 1.77 (1.73)

Compounding/conversion – O 1.04 (0.73)b 45.3 (39.1)b 0.40 (0.40)b 7.1×10-4 (6.1×10-4)b 2.29 (2.25)Compounding/conversion - PO 1.75 (1.44)b 89.7 (83.5)b 0.70 (0.70)b 1.4×10-3 (1.3×10-4)b 

4.03 (3.99)

Use in PVC – extrusion/other 

Compounding/conversion - C 0.92 (0.60)b 1.94 (1.90)

37.6 (31.4)b 0.34 (0.34)b 5.9×10-4 (4.9×10-4)b 

Compounding 1.8×10-4 (8.4×10-5) 0 b .50 (0.19)b 11.6 (5.36)b 0.035 (0.035)b 0.24 (0.20)Conversion 

0.68 (0.37)b 22.8 (16.6)b 0.19 (0.19)b 3.6×10-4 (2.6×10-4)b 1.12 (1.09)

Use in plastics/rubber 

Compounding/conversion 0.21 (0.21)b 

0 

.76 (0.44)b 27.7 (21.5)b 4.3×10-4 (3.4×10-4)b 1.24 (1.20)

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea negligiblea 

Conversion – C 

173 
22.3 (16.1)b 

Formulation 0.67 (0.36)b 0.074 (0.074)b 3.5×10-4 (2.5×10-4)b 0.48 (0.44)

0.52 (0.21)b 12.9 (6.7)b 0.017 (0.017)b 2.0×10-4 (1.0×10-4)b 

Use in paints 

Domestic application 0.42 (0.11)b 6.75 (0.54)b 0.017 (0.017)b 1.1×10-4 (2.5×10-5)b 0.13 (0.094

1.80 (1.49)b 92.7 (86.5)b 0.018 (0.018)b 0.35 (0.31)

Use in oil-based fluids (large) 0.97 (0.66)b 40.9 (34.7)b 0.017 (0.017)b 6.4×10-4 (5.4×10-4)b 0.22 (0.18)Use in oil-based fluids (small) 0.92 (0.61)b 0.21 (0.17)

37.8 (31.6)b 0.017 (0.017)b 5.9×10-4 (5.0×10-4)b 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.46 (0.15)b 9.33 (3.13)b 0.017 (0.017)b 1.5×10-4 (4.9×10-5)b 0.14 (0.10)

Use in metal cutting/working fluids 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – intermittent release 

1.25c (0.94)b,c 288c (282)b,c 0.020c (0.019)b,c 4.5×10-3c (4.4×10-3)b,c 0.83c (0.79)

Formulation 0.42 (0.42)b 

0 

.59 (0.28)b 17.2 (11.0)b 2.7×10-4 (1.7×10-4)b 2.3 (2.3)b 

Use – complete processing of raw hides 

1.92 (1.6)b 99.9 (93.7)b 0.018 (0.018)b 1.6×10-3 (1.5×10-3)b 0.36 (0.33)

Use – processing of wet blue 6.40 (6.08)b 379 (373)b 0.020 (0.020)b 6.0×10-3 (5.9×10-3)b 1.06 (1.02)

Use in carbonless copy paper 

Paper recycling 0.67 (0.35)b 25.0 (18.8)b 0.017 (0.017)b 3.9×10-4 (2.9×10-4)b 0.18 (0.14)

Regional sources 

309 (0.541)b 

0.42 (0.11)b 0.020 (0.017)b 4.9×10-3 (2.5×10-5)b 1.99 (0.094

Industrial application 0.15 (0.11)Formulation 1.5×10-3 (1.4×10-3)b 

Use in leather fat liquors Note: a) The process makes no significant contribution to the concentration in food/air. 

b) Figures in ( ) are recalculated based on the measured regional water and soil concentrations of 0.1 μg/l and 0.088 mg/kg wet wt. respective

c) Assumes dilution of sewage sludge at wwtp before application to soil (see Section 3.1.2.1).O = Open systems; PO = Partially open systems; C = Closed systems (as defined in UCD, 1998).

174 
R331_0208_env

5 RESULTS 

5.1 INTRODUCTION 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are produced at five sites in the EU. The main area of 

use is as a secondary plasticiser in PVC, but substantial amounts are also used in other 

plastics/rubber products, sealants, paints, metal cutting/working fluids, leather fat liquors and 

carbonless copy paper. They are viscous liquids of very low volatility. 

5.2 ENVIRONMENT 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins have a high acute toxicity towards aquatic organisms, a 

high fish bioconcentration factor and are poorly degradable. For surface water, the estimated 

PEC/PNEC ratios are >1 for most of the life-stages of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

The PNEC is based on two NOECs and an assessment factor of 50. A long-term toxicity 

study with fish (early life stage) could allow this to be refined. Some long-term toxicity data 

are available for fish, which show no effects, but these tests do not meet all the requirements 

of the current test guidelines. However, even if an assessment factor of 10 is used, some

PEC/PNEC ratios are still >1. Therefore a risk to surface water exists from some uses of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. 

The PEC/PNEC ratios obtained for sediment currently indicate a risk to the environment 

from all the local scenarios considered except for the local scenarios for formulation and use 

in sealants. The regional PEC/PNEC ratio is also currently <1, indicating a low risk to the 

environment from regional sources. The PNECsed is based on the results from prolonged 

toxicity tests from two species with an assessment factor of 50. It is possible to refine the

PNECsed by carrying out a further prolonged toxicity test with a third species. The results 

would allow an assessment factor of 10 to be used on the lowest NOEC. However, similar to 

the case with surface water, a risk from some uses can be deduced even if this further data 

were generated. 

No risk to the environment is identified from the assessment of waste water treatment plants

or the atmosphere. 

For the soil compartment the PEC/PNEC ratios are all >1 for the majority of local scenarios.

When the emissions of “waste remaining in the environment” to urban/industrial soil are

considered, the predicted regional PEC/PNEC ratio would be >1 for that type of soil. It is 

possible to further refine the PNECsoil by carrying out a third toxicity test with soil 

microorganisms. This would allow an assessment factor of 10 to be used to derive the PNEC.

However, as is the case with surface water and sediment, it is possible to deduce that a risk

exists from some uses based on the current data set. 

For secondary poisoning, almost all uses of medium chain chlorinated paraffins lead to a 

possible risk of secondary poisoning via the earthworm food chain. Some uses also indicate a 

risk via the fish food chain. No risk of secondary poisoning was identified from production 

(sites where sewage sludge was not applied to land), formulation and use in sealants, and 

domestic application of paints. 

175 
R331_0208_env

(X) i) There is a need for further information and/or testing. 

 

The estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for surface water are >1 for most of the life-stages of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The PNEC is based on two NOECs and an assessment

factor of 50. A long-term toxicity (early life stage) study with fish could allow this to be 

refined. If the PNEC were derived using a factor of 10 on the daphnia NOEC, then most of

the endpoints would give ratios less than 1. There is some uncertainty about whether the 

current fish toxicity database contains sufficient information on long-term toxicity to 

sensitive life stages to allow a reduced assessment factor to be used without the need for

further testing. However, given the available database for chlorinated paraffins as a whole,

and the conclusions found for other endpoints in this assessment, it is currently difficult to 

justify further testing with vertebrate species. Therefore, the need for this test should be 

reviewed once the outcome of the risk reduction measures proposed elsewhere in this 

assessment are known. 

(X) ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing, or for risk 

reduction measures beyond those which are being applied already. 

 

From the estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for sediment and the terrestrial compartments, further 

testing on sediment and soil organisms is required to refine the PNECs for these endpoints. It 

is recommended that a long-term sediment toxicity study with a third species such as 

Hyalella azteca and a soil respiration inhibition test is considered. However, given the risks 

identified for other endpoints in this risk assessment the need for these tests should be 

reviewed once the likely effect of any risk reduction measures are known. 

A low risk to waste water treatment plants and the atmospheric compartment5 have been 

identified from both the production and use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. It also 

applies to the assessment of surface water for local releases from some production sites, some

PVC compounding sites, plastics/rubber compounding sites, formulation and use of sealants, 

domestic application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal cutting fluids and from regional 

sources. 

For sediment, this applies to the assessment of local releases from formulation and use of 

sealants and from regional sources. 

For soil, this applies to the assessment of local releases from production sites, some PVC 

compounding sites, some plastics/rubber compounding sites, formulation and use of sealants, 

industrial and domestic application of paints, use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids

(not intermittent release scenario), formulation of leather fat liquors, and from regional 

sources on agricultural land. 

For secondary poisoning via the fish food chain, a low risk was identified from production 

sites, some sites using medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the production of PVC 

(plastisol coating sites, and sites carrying out extrusion/other compounding and/or processing 

using open or closed systems, and sites carrying out conversion in partially open systems),

the use in production of rubber and polymers other than PVC, formulation and use of 

sealants, formulation and use in paints, use in oil-based metal cutting/working fluids and 

5 Some components of the commercial products might have properties that may mean that long-range transport

via the atmosphere is a possibility. This issue should be considered further in the appropriate international fora. 

176 
R331_0208_env

emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids where spent fluids are not discharged to waste 

water, the formulation of leather fat liquors and sites where recycling of carbonless copy 

paper occurs. A low risk of secondary poisoning via the earthworm food chain is also 

indicated for production (sites where no application of sewage sludge onto land occurs), 

formulation and use in sealants, and domestic application of paints. 

(X) iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which 

are already being applied shall be taken into account. 

For surface water, a risk is identified from the following applications: 

• Use in the production of PVC in some processes (particularly where compounding or 

compounding and conversion is carried out in partially open systems). 

• Formulation of metal cutting fluids, use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids

where the spent fluid is discharged to waste water. 

• Use in leather fat liquors. 

For sediment, a risk is identified from the following applications: 

 

• Use in PVC: plastisol coating – conversion sites or sites carrying out both compounding 

and conversion. 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other – compounding sites using partially open processes or sites 

carrying out both compounding and conversion using open, partially open or closed 

processes. 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other - sites carrying out both compounding and conversion using 

partially open systems. 

• Use in PVC: extrusion/other – conversion sites using open, partially open or closed 

processes. 

• Use in plastics/rubber: sites carrying out both compounding and conversion. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: formulation sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in oil-based fluids at large and small sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in emulsifiable fluids at sites with intermittent

release (disposal) to sewer/drain. 

• Use in leather fat liquors: use at sites carrying out processing of hides/leather. 

• Use in carbonless copy paper: sites carrying out paper recycling. 

For the terrestrial compartment, a risk is identified from: 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: formulation sites. 

• Use in metal cutting/working fluids: use in emulsifiable fluids at sites with intermittent

release (disposal) to sewer/drain. 

• Use in leather fat liquors: use at sites carrying out processing of hides/leather. 

• Regional assessment of “waste remaining in the environment”. 

For secondary poisoning, a risk is identified from all uses of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins for the earthworm food chain (other than for production (sites where there is no 

spreading of sewage sludge to land), formulation and use of sealants, and domestic 

application of paints). Six scenarios also indicate a concern for the fish food chain: 

177 
R331_0208_env

• Use in the production of PVC in some processes (particularly where compounding or 

compounding and conversion is carried out in partially open systems). 

• Formulation of metal cutting fluids. 

• Use in emulsifiable metal cutting/working fluids where the spent fluid is discharged to

waste water. 

• Use in leather fat liquors. 

When the possible effects of the proposed risk reduction measures on short chain chlorinated

paraffins on the consumption and use of medium chain chlorinated paraffins are taken into 

account, the PEC/PNEC ratios for secondary poisoning also indicate that a risk from use in 

oil-based metal cutting fluids may also need to be considered if the typical concentration of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in the fluid is increased to around 10%. 

5.3 HUMAN HEALTH 

To be added. 

178 
R331_0208_env

6 REFERENCES 

Ballschmiter K. (1994). Bestimmung von kurz- und mittelkettigen Chlorparaffinen in 

Wasser- und Sedimentproben aus Oberflächenwässern. Universität Ulm. Abt. Analytische 

Chemie und Umweltchemie, 10 May, 1994. 

BCF (1999). British Coatings Federation Ltd. Personal communication. 

Bengtsson B.-E., Svanberg O. and Lindén E. (1979). Structure related uptake of chlorinated 

paraffins in bleaks (Alburnus alburnus L). Ambio, 8, 121-122. 

Bennie D. T., Sullivan C. A. and Maguire R. J. (2000). Occurrence of chlorinated paraffins in 

beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) from the St. Lawrence River and rainbow trout 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) and carp (Cyprinus carpio) from Lake Ontario. Water Qual. Res. J. 

Canada, 35, 263-281. 

Biessmann A., Brandt I. and Darnerud P. O. (1982). Comparative distribution and 

metabolism of two 14C-labelled chlorinated paraffins in Japanese Quail Coturnix coturnix 

japonica. Environ. Pollut. A28, 109-120. 

Biessmann A., Darnerud P. O. and Brandt I. (1983). Chlorinated paraffins: Disposition of a

highly chlorinated polychlorohexadecane in mice and quail. Arch. Toxicol., 53, 79-86. 

 

Birtley R. D. N., Conning D. M., Daniel J. W., Ferguson D. M., Longstaff E. and Swan A. A.

B. (1980). The toxicological effects of chlorinated paraffins in mammals. Toxicol. Appl. 

Pharmacol., 54, 514-525. 

BUA (1992). Chlorinated paraffins. GDCh-Advisory Committee on Existing Chemicals of 

Environmental Relevance (BUA). BUA Report 93, June 1992. 

Bouton T. C. (1992). Rubber. Riegel’s Handbook of Industrial Chemistry. 9th Edition. Van 

Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp598-622. 

Brooke D. N., Nielsen I. R., Dobson S. and Howe P. D. (1991). Environmental Hazard 

Assessment: Di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate. TSD/2. Building Research Establishment. 

Cadogan D. F., Papez M., Poppe A. C., Pugh D. M. and Scheubel J. (1994). An assessment of

the release, occurrence and possible effects of plasticisers in the environment. Progress

Rubber Plastic Technol., 10, 1-19. 

Campbell I. and McConnell G. (1980). Chlorinated paraffins in the environment. 1.

Environmental occurrence. Environ. Sci. Technol., 10, 1209-1214. 

CEFAS (1999). Sampling the levels of short and medium chain length chlorinated paraffins

in the environment. Final report for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the 

Regions. The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, 

Burnham-on-Crouch. 

CEFAS (2000). Personal Communication. 

179 
R331_0208_env

CPIA (2000). Personal Communication from the Chlorinated Paraffins Industry Association. 

Darnerud P. O. and Brandt I. (1982). Studies on the distribution and metabolism of a 

14C-labelled chlorinated alkane in mice. Environ. Pollut. (Series A), 27, 45-46. 

ECB (2000). European Union Risk Assessment Report. Alkanes, C chloro. 1st Priority

List, Volume 4. European Chemicals Bureau, European Commission. 

Euro Chlor (1999). Chlorinated Paraffins Sector Group. Letter dated 03/10/99 and E-mail

dated 29/10/99. 

Fisk A. T., Tomy G. T. and Muir D. C. G. (1999). The toxicity of C

polychlorinated alkanes to Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) embryos. Environ. Toxicol.

Chem., 18, 2894-2902. 

Darnerud P. O., Bengtsson B.-E., Bergman Å. and Brandt I. (1983). Chlorinated paraffins:

disposition of a polychloro-[1-14C] hexadecane in carp (Cyprinus carpio) and bleak 

(Alburnus alburnus). Toxicol. Letters, 19, 345-351. 

Drouillard K. G., Tomy G. T., Muir D. C. G. and Friesen K. J. (1998). Volatility of 

chlorinated n-alkanes (C10-12): vapour pressures and Henry’s Law constants. Environ. 

Toxicol. Chem., 17, 1252-1260. 

EA (2001). Long-chain chlorinated paraffins. Draft Environmental Risk Assessment Report, 

October 2001. Produced for Chemicals Assessment Section, Environment Agency. 

10-13,

ECVM (2000). European Council of Vinyl Manufacturers web site, 05/01/2000. 

Environment Agency Japan (1991). Chemicals in the Environment. Report on Environmental 

Survey and Wildlife Monitoring of Chemicals in F.Y. 1988 and 1989. Office of Health 

Studies, Department of Environmental Health, Environment Agency Japan.

Euro Chlor (1998). Chlorinated Paraffins Sector Group. Personal communication. 

Fisk A. T., Cymbalisty C. D., Bergman A. and Muir D. C. G. (1996). Dietary accumulation 

of C12- and C16-chlorinated alkanes by juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). 

Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 15, 1775-1782. 

Fisk A. T., Cymbalisty C. D., Tomy G. T. and Muir D. C. G. (1998a). Dietary accumulation 

and depuration of individual C10-, C11- and C14-polychlorinated alkanes by juvenile rainbow 

trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Aquat. Toxicol., 43, 209-221. 

Fisk A. T., Wiens S. C., Webster G. R. B., Bergman Å. and Muir C. G. (1998b). 

Accumulation and depuration of sediment-sorbed C12- and C16- polychlorinated alkanes by 

oligochaetes (Lumbriculus variegatus). Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 17, 2019-2026. 

10-, C11-, C12- and C14- 

Frank U. (1993). Ökotoxizität von Chloroparaffinen. Institut für Wasser- Boden und 

Lufthygiene, 23 November, 1993. 

180 
R331_0208_env

Frank U. and Steinhäuser F. G. (1994). Ökotoxizität schwerlöslicher Stoffgemische am

Biespiel der Daphnientoxizität von Chlorparaffinen. Vom Wasser, 83, 203-211. 

Government of Canada (1993). Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Priority Substances 

List Assessment Report. Chlorinated Paraffins. Government of Canada, Environment Canada 

and Health and Welfare Canada. 

Greenpeace (1995). Greenpeace Zur Sache: Chlorparaffine. May 1995. 

Gribble G. W. (1996). Naturally occurring organohalogen compounds - a comprehensive 

survey. Prog. Chem. Org. Nat. Prod., 68, 1. 

Hoechst AG (1988 and 1991). Einstufungsbergruendung TA-Luft der Abt. UCV (20.05.1988 

und 18.10.1991). 

Hoechst AG. Bakterientoxizität von Chlorparaffinen. Unveröffentlichte 

Untersuchungsberichte der Hoechst AG (as published in BUA, 1992). 

Hoechst AG (1976). Unpublished results. 19.5.1976. 

Hoechst AG (1977). Unpublished results. 28.11.1977. 

Hoechst AG (1987). Unveröffenlichte Messungen in der Umbebung des Werkes Gersthofen 

der Hoechst AG. Unveröffentlichte Meßmethode der ICI, modifiziert. Hoechst AG, 

Frankfurt/Main (as reported in BUA, 1992). 

Howard P. H., Santodonato J. and Saxena J. (1975). Investigation of selected potential 

environmental contaminants. Chlorinated paraffins. Syracuse University Research

Corporation, EPA 68-01-3101, November 1975. 

IPPC (2000). Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC). Draft Reference Document

on Best Available Techniques in the Pulp and Paper Industry. Draft dated February 2000, 

European Commission Joint Research Centre, European IPPC Bureau, Institute for 

Prospective Technological Studies (Seville), 

ICI (1992). Personal communication. As reported in Willis et al. (1994).

ICI (1995). Personal Communication for SCCPs, 12th June 1995. 

Jansson B., Andersson R., Asplund L., Litzén K., Nylund K., Sellström U., Uvemo U.-B.,

Wahlberg C., Wideqvist U., Odsjö T. and Olsson M. (1993). Chlorinated and brominated 

persistent organic compounds in biological samples from the environment. Environ. Toxicol. 

Chem., 12, 1163-1174. 

Kirk-Othmer (1993). Chlorocarbons, -Hydrocarbons (paraffins). Encyclopedia of Chemical 

Technology. Volume 6. Fourth Edition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 

Kirk-Othmer (1996). Plasticisers. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Volume 4. Fourth 

Edition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 

181 
R331_0208_env

Kirk-Othmer (1997). Rubber compounding. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Volume

21. Fourth Edition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 

Könnecke H. G. and Hahn P. (1962). Chlorination of alkanes. I. Chromatographic separation 

of chloroalkanes derived in the chlorination of hexacotane. J. Prakt. Chem., 16, 37-41. 

Lindén E., Bengtsson B-E., Svanberg O. and Sundström G. (1979). The acute toxicity of 78 

chemicals and pesticide formulations against two brackish water organisms, the bleak 

(Alburnus alburnus) and the harpacticoid Nitocra spinipes. Chemosphere, 8, 843-851. 

Madeley J. R. and Birtley R. D. N. (1980). Chlorinated paraffins and the environment. 2.

Aquatic and avian toxicology. Environ. Sci. Technol., 14, 1215-1221. 

Madeley J. R. and Pearson C. R. (1980). Initial Investigations into the aquatic toxicity of 

chlorinated paraffins. ICI Chemical Industries Limited, Brixham Laboratory, July 1980. 

Madeley J. R. and Thompson R. S. (1983). Toxicity of chlorinated paraffin to mussels

(Mytilus edulis) - 52% chlorination of intermediate chain length n-paraffin. ICI Confidential 

Report BL/B/2289. 

Madeley J. R., Gillings E. and Reynolds L. F. (1983a). Determination of the solubility of four 

chlorinated paraffins in water. ICI Confidential Report BL/B/2301. 

Madeley J. R., Maddock B. G. and Reynolds L. F. (1983b). Toxicity of a chlorinated paraffin 

to rainbow trout over 60 days. ICI Confidential Report BL/B/2202. 

Metcalfe-Smith J. L., Maguire R. J., Batchelor S. P. and Bennie D. T. (1995). Occurrence of 

chlorinated paraffins in the St. Lawrence river near a manufacturing plant in Cornwall, ON.

Aquatic ecosystem protection branch. National Water Research Institute. Department of the 

Environment, Burlington, ON. 

Murray T., Frankenberry M., Steele D. H. and Heath R. G. (1987a). Chlorinated paraffins: A 

report on the findings from two field studies, Sugar Creek, Ohio, Tinkers Creek, Ohio. 

Volume 1, Technical report. United States Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA 

560/5-87-012. 

Murray T., Frankenberry M., Steele D. H., and Heath R. G. (1987b). Chlorinated paraffins: A 

report on the findings from two field studies, Sugar Creek, Ohio, Tinkers Creek, Ohio. 

Volume 2. Appendix D. The Quality Assurance Project Plan. United States Environmental 

Protection Agency Report EPA 560/5/87-012. 

Omori T., Kimura T. and Kodama T. (1987). Bacterial cometabolic degradation of 

chlorinated paraffins. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 25, 553-557. 

Palmer R. A. and Klosowski J. M. (1997). Sealants. Kirk-Othmer Encylopedia of Chemical 

Technology. Volume 21, pp650-666. 

Personal Communication (2000). Letter from Mike Walker dated 25 July 2000. 

182 
R331_0208_env

Phipps G. L., Ankley G. T., Benoit D. A. and Mattson V. R. (1993). Use of aquatic 

oligochaete Lumbriculus variegatus for assessing the toxicity and bioaccumulation of 

sediment associated contaminants. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 12, 269-179. 

Thompson R. S. and Gore N. R. (1999). Chlorinated Paraffin (52% chlorinated, C

Acute toxicity to two freshwater crustaceans, Gammarus pulex and Daphnia magna. Zeneca, 

Unpublished Report, BLS2643/B. 

Poon R., Lecavalier P., Chan P., Viau C., Håkansson H., Chu I. and Valli V. E. (1995).

Chronic toxicity of a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in the rat. J. Appl. Toxicol., 15, 

455-463. 

Renberg L., Sundström G. and Sundh-Nygård K. (1980). Partition coefficients of organic

chemicals derived from reverse phase thin layer chromatography. Evaluation of methods and 

application on phosphate esters, polychlorinated paraffins and some PCB-substitutes.

Chemosphere, 9, 683-691. 

Rieger R. and Ballschmiter K. (1995). Semivolatile organic compounds – polychlorinated 

dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDD), dibenzofurans (PCDF), biphenyls (PCB), hexachlorobenzene 

(HCB), 4,4’-DDE and chlorinated paraffins (CP) – as biomarkers in sewer films. Fresenius J.

Anal. Chem., 352, 715-724. 

RPA (1996). Risk-benefit analysis on the use of short-chain chlorinated paraffins in cutting

fluids in the metalworking industry. Risk and Policy Analysts Limited, August 1996. 

Rubin I. I. (1990). Handbook of Plastic Materials and Technology. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 

Schmid P. P. and Müller M. D. (1985). Trace level detection of chlorinated paraffins in 

biological and environmental samples, using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with 

negative-ion chemical ionization. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem., 68, 427-430. 

Stenhammar S. and Björndal H. (1994). Chloroparaffins in Metal Working. Status Report No.

4372. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency in cooperation with the National Chemicals 

Inspectorate. 

Tarkpea M., Lindén E., Bengtsson B.-E., Larsson Å. and Svanberg O. (1981). Product control

studies at the Brackish Water Toxicology Laboratory 1979-1980. Nyköping, Swedish 

Environmental Protection Agency, NBL Report 1981-03-23 (in Swedish; as reported in 

WHO, 1996). 

Tarkpea M. Hansson M. and Samuelsson B. (1986). Comparison of the Microtox Test with 

the 96-hr LC50 test for the Harpacticoid Nitocra spinipes. Ecotox. Environ. Safety., 11, 

127-143. 

14-17): 

Thompson R. S., Williams N. J. and Gillings E. (1996). Chlorinated paraffin (52%

chlorinated, C14-17): Acute toxicity to Daphnia magna. Zeneca Confidential Report, 

BL5871/B. 

183 
R331_0208_env

Thompson R. S., Smyth D. V. and Gillings E. (1997a). Chlorinated paraffin (52% 

chlorinated, C : Toxicity to the green alga Selenastrum capricornutum. Zeneca 

Confidential Report, BL5791/B. 

14-17)

Thompson R. S., Williams N. J. and Gillings E. (1997b). Chlorinated paraffin (52% 

chlorinated, C14-17): Chronic toxicity to Daphnia magna. Zeneca Confidential Report,

BL5875/B. 

Thompson R. S., Gillings E. and Cumming R. I. (1998). Short-chain chlorinated paraffin 

(55% chlorinated): Determination of organic carbon partition coefficient (Koc). Zeneca 

Confidential Report BL6426/B. 

Thompson R. S., Windeatt A. J. and Gillings E. (2001a). Medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

(52% chlorinated, C14-17): Effects in soil on seed germination and vegetative growth of wheat 

(Triticum aestivum), oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and mung bean (Phaseolus aureus).

AstraZeneca Confidential Report BL7128/B. 

Thompson R. S., Hutchings M. J. and Gillings E. (2001b). Medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin (52% chlorinated, C14-17): Effects in soil on the survival, growth and reproduction of 

the earthworm, Eisenia fetida. AstraZeneca Confidential Report BL7115/B. 

Thompson R. S., Hutchings M. J. and Gillings E. (2001c). Medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

(52% chlorinated, C14-17): Effects in sediment on emergence of the midge, Chironomus

riparius. AstraZeneca Confidential Report BL7093/B. 

Thompson R. S., Hutchings M. J. and Gillings E. (2001d). Medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin (52% chlorinated, C14-17): Effects in sediment on the survival, growth and 

reproduction of the freshwater oligochaete, Lumbriculus variegatus. AstraZeneca 

Confidential Report BL7090/B. 

TNO (1993). Semi-static reproduction test with Chlorparaffin Hoechst 52 flüssig and 

Daphnia magna (OECD Guideline no 202). TNO Environmental and Energy Research. TNO 

report IMW-R-93/020. 

Tomy G. T., Fisk A. T., Westmore J. B. and Muir D. C. G. (1998). Environmental chemistry 

and toxicology of polychlorinated n-alkanes. Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 158, 53-128. 

UBA (2001). Personal communication from the Umweltbundesamt dated 12/12/01. 

UCD (1997). Use Category Document – Lubricants and Lubricant Additives. D. J. 

Margaroni, C. W. Lea, D. J. Neadle and M Gavin. BRE Client Report CR213/95, produced 

under contract to the Department of the Environment. January 1997. 

UCD (1998). Use Category Document – Plastics Additives. Revised Draft for Discussions, 

June 1998. Building Research Establishment, produced under contract to the Environment

Agency. 

van Zeijl H. (1997). Report of the results of the one-off DIFFCHEM-project. Oslo and Paris 

Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution. Environmental Assessment and 

Monitoring Committee (ASMO), Copenhagen, 7-11 April 1997. 

184 
R331_0208_env

WHO (1996). Environmental Health Criteria 181. Chlorinated Paraffins. International 

Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS). World Health Organization, Geneva. 

Willis B., Crookes M. J., Diment J. and Dobson S. D. (1994). Environmental Hazard 

Assessment: Chlorinated Paraffins. TSD/19. Building Research Establishment. 

185 
R331_0208_env

Appendix A EUSES modelling 

This appendix contains a copy of the EUSES printout for medium chain length chlorinated 

paraffins. The results from the following scenarios from the main report are included in the 

printout. 

EUSES Printout Scenario

USE PATTERN 1 Use in PVC – plastisol applications 

formulation compounding site – open system

processing conversion site – open system

private use combined compounding/conversion site – open system

USE PATTERN 2 Use in PVC – extrusion/other 

formulation compounding site – open system

processing compounding site – partially open system

private use compounding site – closed system

private use conversion site – closed system

processing combined compounding/conversion site - partially open system 

formulation compounding site 

USE PATTERN 3 Use in PVC – extrusion/other 

formulation conversion site – open system

processing conversion site – partially open system 

USE PATTERN 4 Use in PVC - extrusion other 

formulation combined compounding/conversion site - open system

private use combined compounding/conversion site - closed system

USE PATTERN 5 Use in plastics/rubber 

processing conversion site 

private use combined compounding/conversion site 

USE PATTERN 6 Use in paints and varnishes 

formulation formulation site 

processing industrial application of paints 

private use domestic application of paints 

USE PATTERN 7 Use in metal cutting/working fluids 

formulation formulation site 

processing use in oil-based fluids (large site) 

private use use in emulsifiable fluids 

recovery use in emulsifiable fluids – intermittent release 

186 
R331_0208_env

USE PATTERN 8 Use in metal cutting/working fluids 

processing use in oil-based fluids (small site) 

USE PATTERN 9 Use in leather fat liquors 

formulation formulation site 

processing use - complete processing of raw hides 

private use use – processing of “wet blue” 

USE PATTERN 10 Use in carbonless copy paper 

recovery paper recycling 

187 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 C15H24Cl8 C15H24Cl8

CAS-No 85535-85-9 85535-85-9 S 

Explanation status column 'O' = Output; 'D' = Default; 'S' = Set; 'I' = Imported 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBSTANCE 

General name MCCPs - e.g. MCCPs - e.g. S 

EC-notification no. D 

EINECS no. 287-477-0 287-477-0 S 

Molecular weight 488 488 [g.mol-1] S 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 1 

188 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

 

 PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

Melting point 0 0 [oC] S 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

Boiling point >200 >200 [oC] S 

Vapour pressure at 25 [oC] 2.7E-04 2.7E-04 [Pa] S 

Water solubility 0.027 0.027 [mg.l-1] S 

Octanol-water partition coefficient. 7 7 [log10] S 

Henry's law constant 4.88 4.88 [Pa.m3.mol-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 2 

189 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Regional production volume of substance 6.53E+03 6.53E+03 [tonnes.yr-1] O 

Use category 47 Softeners 47 Softeners S 

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Intermittent release No No D 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

Tonnage of substance in Europe 6.53E+04 6.53E+04 [tonnes.yr-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 1] 

Industry category 11 Polymers industry 11 Polymers industry S 

Extra details on use category Polymer processing Polymer processing S 

Extra details on use category Thermoplastics: Thermoplastics: S 

 plasticizers plasticizers

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2.5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 5.43801 0 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 43.5041 0.025 [kg.d-1] S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 1E-02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 1E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 5E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.15 0.15 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 39 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 24.5313 0.185 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 2.45313 0.185 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 1 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0.185 [kg.d-1] S 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 3 

190 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Intermittent release No No D 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 0.21 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 2] 

Industry category 11 Polymers industry 11 Polymers industry S 

Use category 47 Softeners 47 Softeners S 

Extra details on use category Polymer processing Polymer processing S 

Extra details on use category Thermoplastics: Thermoplastics: S 

 plasticizers plasticizers

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2.5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 5.43801 0.055 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 43.5041 0.092 [kg.d-1] S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 1E-02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 1E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 5E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.15 0.15 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 39 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 24.5313 0.3 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 2.45313 0.5 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 1 300 [-] S 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 4 

191 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 1E-02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0.0255 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 0.0425 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 3] 

Industry category 11 Polymers industry 11 Polymers industry S 

Use category 47 Softeners 47 Softeners S 

Extra details on use category Polymer processing Polymer processing S 

Extra details on use category Thermoplastics: Thermoplastics: S 

 plasticizers plasticizers

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2.5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 5.43801 0.28 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 43.5041 0.28 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 1E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 5E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.15 0.15 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 39 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 24.5313 0.3 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 2.45313 0.3 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 5 

192 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Extra details on use category Thermoplastics: Thermoplastics: S 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 5E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Number of emission days per year 1 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0.255 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 0.255 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 4] 

Industry category 11 Polymers industry 11 Polymers industry S 

Use category 47 Softeners 47 Softeners S 

Extra details on use category Polymer processing Polymer processing S 

 plasticizers plasticizers

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2.5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 5.43801 0.335 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 43.5041 0.372 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 1E-02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 1E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.15 0.15 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 39 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 24.5313 0.6 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 2.45313 0.8 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 6 

193 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 1 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0.281 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 0.298 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 5] 

Industry category 11 Polymers industry 11 Polymers industry S 

Use category 47 Softeners 47 Softeners S 

Extra details on use category Polymer processing Polymer processing S 

Extra details on use category Thermoplastics: Thermoplastics: S 

 plasticizers plasticizers

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2.5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 5.43801 0.0155 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 43.5041 0.0465 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 1E-02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 1E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 5E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.15 0.15 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 39 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 24.5313 0.155 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 2.45313 0.155 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 7 

194 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Use category 47 Softeners 47 Softeners S 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 1 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0.171 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 0.202 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 6] 

Industry category 14 Paints, lacquers and 14 Paints, lacquers and S 

varnishes industry varnishes industry

Extra details on use category Water based Water based D 

Extra details on use category Do it yourself Do it yourself D 

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2.5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 5.43801 0.05 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 43.5041 0.15 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.15 0.15 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 1.59453 0.059 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 8 

195 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 2E-03 2E-03 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0.0212604 3E-07 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 7] 

Industry category 8 Metal extraction, 8 Metal extraction, S 

refining and processing refining and processing 

 ind. ind. 

Use category 35 Lubricants and 35 Lubricants and S 

 additives additives

Extra details on use category Pure oils Pure oils D 

Extra details on use category Primary steelworks Primary steelworks D 

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 5E-05 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 2E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-05 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 0.109 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 4.35041 0.83 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.185 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 0.434 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 401.584 0.33 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 9 

196 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 1 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 0.025 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [RECOVERY] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 1 6 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 25 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No Yes S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 8] 

Industry category 8 Metal extraction, 8 Metal extraction, S 

refining and processing refining and processing 

 ind. ind. 

Use category 35 Lubricants and 35 Lubricants and S 

 additives additives

Extra details on use category Pure oils Pure oils S 

Extra details on use category Others Others S 

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.185 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.8 0.8 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 0.348 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 321.93 0.3 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 10 

197 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 9] 

Industry category 7 Leather processing 7 Leather processing S 

 industry industry

Use category 47 Softeners 47 Softeners S 

Extra details on use category No extra details No extra details D 

 necessary necessary

Extra details on use category No extra details No extra details D 

 necessary necessary

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [FORMULATION] 

Main category formulation III Multi-purpose III Multi-purpose D 

 equipment equipment 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 2.5E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 1 1 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 300 300 [-] O 

Local emission to air during episode 5.43801 0.35 [kg.d-1] S 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 43.5041 1.1 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PROCESSING] 

Main category processing III Non-dispersive use III Non-dispersive use D 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 1E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0.9 0 [-] S 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 1E-02 0 [-] S 

Fraction of the main local source 0.5 0.5 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 131 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 2.43 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 2.19096E+03 0.9 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0 0 [-] O 

Number of emission days per year 1 300 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 3.6 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 11 

198 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

[USE PATTERN 10] 

Industry category 12 Pulp, paper and 12 Pulp, paper and S 

board industry board industry

Use category 55/0 Others 55/0 Others S 

Extra details on use category Printing and allied Printing and allied S 

 processes processes

Extra details on use category One company One company S 

Fraction of tonnage for application 0.1 0.1 [-] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

 [RECOVERY] 

Fraction of tonnage released to air 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to waste water 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of tonnage released to industrial soil 0 0 [-] O 

Fraction of the main local source 0.4 0 [-] S 

Number of emission days per year 200 250 [-] S 

Local emission to air during episode 0 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Local emission to wastewater during episode 0 6.17 [kg.d-1] S 

Intermittent release No No D 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

TOTAL REGIONAL EMISSIONS TO COMPARTMENTS

Total regional emission to air 4.42416E+04 1.7027E+04 [kg.yr-1] S 

Total regional emission to wastewater 6.42222E+05 1.19286E+05 [kg.yr-1] S 

Total regional emission to industrial soil 40.9 0 [kg.d-1] O 

Total regional emission to surface water 2.75238E+05 5.1122E+04 [kg.yr-1] S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 RELEASE ESTIMATION 

TOTAL CONTINENTAL EMISSIONS TO COMPARTMENTS 

Total continental emission to air 3.98174E+05 1.53193E+05 [kg.yr-1] S 

Total continental emission to wastewater 5.78E+06 1.07348E+06 [kg.yr-1] S 

Total continental emission to surface water 2.47714E+06 4.60101E+05 [kg.yr-1] S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 PARTITION COEFFICIENTS 

BIOTA-WATER PARTITION COEFFICIENTS 

Bioconcentration factor for aquatic biota 4.57088E+04 1.087E+03 [l.kg-1] S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

DEGRADATION AND TRANSFORMATION 

Characterization of biodegradability Not biodegradable Not biodegradable D 

Degradation calculation method in STP First order, standard First order, standard D 

OECD/EU tests OECD/EU tests 

Rate constant for biodegradation in STP 0 0 [d-1] O 

Rate constant for biodegradation in surface water 0 0 [d-1] O 

Rate constant for biodegradation in bulk soil 6.93E-07 6.93E-07 [d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 12 

199 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

DEGRADATION AND TRANSFORMATION 

Rate constant for biodegradation in aerated sediment 6.93E-07 6.93E-07 [d-1] O 

Rate constant for hydrolysis in surface water 6.93E-07 6.93E-07 [d-1] O 

Rate constant for photolysis in surface water 6.93E-07 6.93E-07 [d-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 21.8 0.0125 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 1.98 8.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+04 28.7 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 1.98 8.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 1.23 0.0925 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 0.111 6.48E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 2.82E+03 213 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 0.111 6.48E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 0.105 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 7.35E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 241 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 7.35E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 13 

200 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 21.8 0.046 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 1.98 3.22E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+04 106 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 1.98 3.22E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 1.23 0.25 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 0.111 0.0175 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 2.82E+03 575 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 0.111 0.0175 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 0.0213 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 1.49E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 48.9 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 1.49E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 21.8 0.14 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 14 

201 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

 OUTPUT 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 1.98 9.8E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+04 322 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 1.98 9.8E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 1.23 0.15 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 0.111 0.0105 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 2.82E+03 345 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 0.111 0.0105 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 0.128 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 8.93E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 293 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 8.93E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 21.8 0.186 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 1.98 0.013 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+04 428 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 1.98 0.013 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 15 

202 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 1.98 1.63E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 1.23 0.4 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 0.111 0.028 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes Yes O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 2.82E+03 920 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 0.111 0.028 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 0.149 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 0.0104 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 343 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 0.0104 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 21.8 0.0232 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 1.98 1.63E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+04 53.5 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 1.23 0.0775 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 16 

203 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

 OUTPUT 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+04 172 [mg.kg-1] O 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 0.111 5.42E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 2.82E+03 178 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 0.111 5.42E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 0.101 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 7.07E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 232 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 7.07E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 21.8 0.075 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 1.98 5.25E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 1.98 5.25E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0.797 0.0295 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 0.0724 2.07E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 1.83E+03 67.8 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 0.0724 2.07E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 17 

204 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 18.2 0.0116 [mg.l-1] O 

 OUTPUT 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 0.0125 [mg.l-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0.0106 1.5E-07 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 9.66E-04 1.05E-08 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 24.4 3.45E-04 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 9.66E-04 1.05E-08 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 2.18 0.415 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 0.198 0.029 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes Yes O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+03 954 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 0.198 0.029 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 201 0.165 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 18.2 0.0116 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 4.62E+05 379 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 18 

205 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 28.7 [mg.kg-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

 OUTPUT 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 21.752 0.05 [mg.l-1] S 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 8.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 8.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 12.5 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 0.875 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No Yes O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 3.12E+03 [mg.kg-1] S 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 12.5 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 161 0.15 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 14.6 0.0105 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 3.7E+05 345 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 14.6 0.0105 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 1.98 3.5E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 5E+04 115 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 1.98 3.5E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 19 

206 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP 1.06976E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP 0.0908436 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP 0.908087 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP 0 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 1.1E+03 0.45 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent 99.5 0.0315 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility Yes Yes O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge 2.52E+06 1.03E+03 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP 99.5 0.0315 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Fraction of the emission degraded in STP ?? 0 [-] O 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 1.8 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 0.126 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No Yes O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 4.14E+03 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 0.126 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

LOCAL STP[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

 OUTPUT 

Fraction of emission directed to air by STP ?? 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water by STP ?? 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge by STP ?? 0.93 [-] S 

Concentration in untreated wastewater 0 0.0881 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration of chemical (total) in the STP-effluent ?? 6.17E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in effluent exceeds solubility No No O 

Concentration in dry sewage sludge ?? 203 [mg.kg-1] O 

PEC for micro-organisms in the STP ?? 6.17E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

 REGIONAL STP 

Fraction of emission directed to air 1.00843E-03 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water 0.0908632 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge 0.908128 0.93 [-] S 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 20 

207 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.107 4.35E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 3.9E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 SEWAGE TREATMENT 

 CONTINENTAL STP 

Fraction of emission directed to air 8.4919E-04 0 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to water 0.0909141 0.07 [-] S 

Fraction of emission directed to sludge 0.908237 0.93 [-] S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION]

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.51E-03 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 1.24E-03 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.105 4.64E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.0862 3.82E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0883 4.27E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.37E+03 5.57 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 739 1.52 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 739 1.52 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 299 1.27 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.0711 1.46E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 6.82E-03 5.14E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 7.29E-04 4.23E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 5.91E-03 3.44E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 6.32E-04 2.82E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 8.05E-03 7.32E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.77E-03 6.71E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 103 9.38 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 46.8 4.23 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 46.8 4.23 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 22 2.36 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 4.5E-03 4.06E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 5.14E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 4.23E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 3.21E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 7.79E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 21 

208 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 5.91E-03 9.29E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 46.8 9.54 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 7.09E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 9.98 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 4.65 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 4.65 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 2.53 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 4.47E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION]

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.51E-03 1.53E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 1.24E-03 1.26E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.105 1.71E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.0862 1.4E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.107 5.6E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0883 5.29E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.37E+03 7.17 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 739 2.65 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 739 2.65 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 299 1.72 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.0711 2.55E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 6.82E-03 8.34E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 7.29E-04 6.85E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Annual average concentration in surface water 6.32E-04 7.63E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 8.05E-03 1.32E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.77E-03 1.15E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 103 16.9 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 46.8 9.54 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 22 4.49 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 4.5E-03 9.18E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 7.09E-06 [mg.m-3] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 22 

209 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.0862 4.28E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 739 5.83 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE ( Continued ) 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 5.83E-06 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 7.9E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 6.49E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 4.68E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 4.54E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 5.99 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 1.82 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 1.82 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 1.39 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 1.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION]

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.51E-03 7.78E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 1.24E-03 6.4E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.105 5.2E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.107 9.09E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0883 8.16E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.37E+03 11.6 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 739 5.83 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 299 3 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.0711 5.61E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 6.82E-03 8.34E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 7.29E-04 6.85E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 5.91E-03 5.57E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 6.32E-04 4.58E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 8.05E-03 9.46E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.77E-03 8.47E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 103 12.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 46.8 6.17 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 46.8 6.17 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 22 3.14 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 4.5E-03 5.93E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 23 

210 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 8.62E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 11 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.77E-03 1.61E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 24 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 7.09E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 5.83E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 4.74E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 3.89E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 7.78E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 5.41 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 5.41 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 2.83 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 5.2E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION]

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.51E-03 9.31E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 1.24E-03 7.65E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.105 6.91E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.0862 5.68E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.107 1.08E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0883 9.57E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.37E+03 13.8 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 739 7.38 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 739 7.38 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 299 3.63 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.0711 7.1E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 6.82E-03 1.67E-04 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 7.29E-04 1.37E-04 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 5.91E-03 1.49E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 6.32E-04 1.22E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 8.05E-03 1.87E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 103 24 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 46.8 14.6 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 46.8 14.6 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 22 6.53 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 4.5E-03 1.41E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

211 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 Defaults Standard 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.0862 7.1E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 299 1.41 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 source

Annual average concentration in surface water 6.32E-04 2.37E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 4.5E-03 3.58E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 25 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 7.81E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 6.42E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 5.54E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 4.55E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 9.42E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 8.44E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 12.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 6.13 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 6.13 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 3.12 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 5.9E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION]

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.51E-03 4.31E-06 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 1.24E-03 3.54E-06 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.105 8.64E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.107 4.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0883 4.6E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.37E+03 6.09 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 739 1.88 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 739 1.88 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.0711 1.81E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 6.82E-03 4.31E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 7.29E-04 3.54E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 5.91E-03 2.88E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 8.05E-03 6.77E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.77E-03 6.25E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 103 8.67 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 46.8 3.72 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 46.8 3.72 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 22 2.15 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

212 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 6.97E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.37E+03 8.55 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 DISTRIBUTION 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 4.75E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 3.91E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 3.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 3.08E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 7.64E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 9.79 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 4.51 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 4.51 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 2.47 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 4.34E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION]

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.51E-03 1.39E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 1.24E-03 1.14E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.105 2.79E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.0862 2.29E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.107 6.67E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0883 6.18E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 739 3.63 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 739 3.63 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 299 2.11 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.0711 3.49E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 4.74E-07 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 3.9E-07 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 3.84E-03 1.1E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 3.16E-03 9.01E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 5.98E-03 4.98E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 5.3E-03 4.79E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 76.6 6.38 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 32.2 2.09 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 32.2 2.09 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 16.1 1.5 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 3.1E-03 2.01E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 26 

213 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 5.44E-04 1.06E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 6.32E-09 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 5.2E-09 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 5.13E-05 5.57E-10 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 4.21E-05 4.58E-10 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 2.19E-03 3.89E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.18E-03 3.89E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 28 4.98 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 5.66 1.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 5.66 1.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 5.45 1.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION]

Concentration in air during emission episode 3.02E-05 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 2.49E-05 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.0105 1.54E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 8.62E-03 1.27E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.0126 1.93E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0108 1.66E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 162 24.7 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 78.7 15.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 78.7 15.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 34.6 6.7 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 7.57E-03 1.45E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.21E-04 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 9.92E-05 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.968 6.13E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.796 5.04E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.97 1E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.798 8.93E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.24E+04 12.8 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 6.78E+03 6.67 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 6.78E+03 6.67 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 2.71E+03 3.32 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.652 6.41E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 27 

214 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 source

 DISTRIBUTION 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 9.97E+03 12.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 5.44E+03 6.16 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 4.64E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 3.82E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 4.35E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 4.27E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 5.57 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 1.52 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 1.52 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 1.27 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 1.46E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 0.0464 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 7.63E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 0.0468 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 1.15E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 600 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 46.9 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 46.9 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 19.4 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 4.51E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 9.68E-05 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 7.95E-05 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.776 5.57E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.638 4.58E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.778 9.46E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.64 8.47E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 5.44E+03 6.16 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 2.18E+03 3.12 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.523 5.92E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 28 

215 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Concentration in air during emission episode 1.51E-03 9.73E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 0.105 1.86E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 0.0862 1.53E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 0.0711 2.69E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode 5.28 1.67E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil 3.55 1.57E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

 DISTRIBUTION 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 61.8 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 29 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION]

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 1.24E-03 8E-05 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 0.107 5.74E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 0.0883 5.41E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 1.37E+03 7.36 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 739 2.8 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 739 2.8 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 299 1.79 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in air during emission episode 6.77E-04 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point 2.43E-04 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water 1.9 1.37E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode 5.28 2.06E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) 1.9 1.76E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode 6.77E+04 26.4 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days 3.7E+04 16.3 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days 3.7E+04 16.3 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days 1.48E+04 7.17 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 LOCAL SCALE 

[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 6.69E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 5.5E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 7.08E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 5.89E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 90.7 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 61.8 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 25.4 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 5.95E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

216 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Local PEC in grassland (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 2.29 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 DISTRIBUTION 

Continental PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.92E-04 5.33E-05 [mg.l-1] O 

Continental PEC in industrial soil (total) 4.34 0.338 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 DISTRIBUTION 

Regional PEC in surface water (dissolved) 2.14E-03 3.89E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Regional PEC in industrial soil (total) 31.5 1.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 DISTRIBUTION 

[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

Concentration in air during emission episode ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

Annual average concentration in air, 100 m from point ?? 0 [mg.m-3] O 

 source

Concentration in surface water during emission episode ?? 3.27E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average concentration in surface water ?? 2.24E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in surface water during emission episode ?? 7.16E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Annual average local PEC in surface water (dissolved) ?? 6.13E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local PEC in sediment during emission episode ?? 9.18 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 30 days ?? 4.07 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in agric. soil (total) averaged over 180 days ?? 4.07 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Local PEC in groundwater under agricultural soil ?? 3.92E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

REGIONAL AND CONTINENTAL SCALE 

 CONTINENTAL 

Continental PEC in air (total) 5.04E-06 1.03E-06 [mg.m-3] O 

Continental PEC in agricultural soil (total) 27.8 5.31 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Continental PEC in pore water of agricultural soils 2.68E-03 5.1E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Continental PEC in natural soil (total) 1.65 0.338 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Continental PEC in sediment (total) 6.62 1.21 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

REGIONAL AND CONTINENTAL SCALE 

 REGIONAL 

Regional PEC in air (total) 1.62E-05 3.35E-06 [mg.m-3] O 

Regional PEC in agricultural soil (total) 265 50.4 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Regional PEC in pore water of agricultural soils 0.0254 4.85E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Regional PEC in natural soil (total) 5.3 1.1 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Regional PEC in sediment (total) 48.4 8.8 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

 BIOCONCENTRATION 

Bioconcentration factor for fish 4.57088E+04 1.087E+03 [l.kg-1] S 

Partition coefficient worm-porewater 1.26491E+05 1.817E+03 [l.kg-1] S 

Bioconcentration factor for earthworms 12.1641 0.17 [kg.kg-1] S 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 2.07E+03 0.443 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 6.11E+03 4.41 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 30 

217 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Base set complete No

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 4.68 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 4.44 [mg.kg-1] O 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 2.07E+03 0.655 [mg.kg-1] O 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 112 0.576 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 1.89E+03 4.64 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.597 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 2.07E+03 0.499 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 6.11E+03 4.51 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 112 0.837 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 1.89E+03 5.09 [mg.kg-1] O 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.458 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 6.11E+03 4.78 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 112 0.671 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 1.89E+03 4.81 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.634 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 4.74 [mg.kg-1] O 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 2.07E+03 0.731 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 6.11E+03 4.91 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 112 1.09 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 1.89E+03 5.53 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 31 

218 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 Defaults Standard 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 4.67 [mg.kg-1] O 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 2.07E+03 0.547 [mg.kg-1] O 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 170 0.471 [mg.kg-1] O 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 1.83E+04 0.696 [mg.kg-1] O 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.67 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 4.8 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 2.07E+03 0.461 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 6.11E+03 4.44 [mg.kg-1] O 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 112 0.551 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 1.89E+03 4.6 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.59 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 6.11E+03 4.59 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 1.81E+03 4.46 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 98.7 0.422 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 1.64E+03 4.38 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 295 1.11 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 2.09E+03 5.57 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 4.28E+04 4.85 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.443 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 4.41 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 32 

219 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 Defaults Standard 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.837 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 8.27 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 1.47E+04 0.671 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 3.47E+04 4.81 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 2.07E+03 0.505 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 6.11E+03 4.52 [mg.kg-1] O 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators 4.34E+04 1.17 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil 2.26E+05 5.67 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

SECONDARY POISONING[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 3.41 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 9.54 [mg.kg-1] O 

 ENVIRONMENT-EXPOSURE 

Concentration in fish from surface water for predators ?? 0.544 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in earthworms from agricultural soil ?? 4.63 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 33 

220 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Base set complete No

NOEC for micro-organisms in a STP 800 800 [mg.l-1] S 

ENVIRONMENT - EFFECTS 

PNEC for aquatic organisms, intermittent releases 4E-03 4E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - EFFECTS 

 MICRO-ORGANISMS 

EC50 for micro-organisms in a STP ?? ?? [mg.l-1] D 

EC10 for micro-organisms in a STP ?? ?? [mg.l-1] D 

PNEC for micro-organisms in a STP 80 80 [mg.l-1] O 

Assessment factor applied in extrapolation to PNEC micro 10 10 [-] O 

 AQUATIC ORGANISMS 

EC50 for algae 0.49 0.49 [mg.l-1] S 

L(E)C50 for Daphnia 0.4 0.4 [mg.l-1] S 

LC50 for fish 5E+03 5E+03 [mg.l-1] S 

LC50 for other aquatic species ?? ?? [mg.l-1] D 

NOEC for algae 0.49 0.49 [mg.l-1] S 

NOEC for Daphnia 0.01 0.01 [mg.l-1] S 

NOEC for fish 4.5 4.5 [mg.l-1] S 

NOEC for other aquatic species ?? ?? [mg.l-1] D 

PNEC for aquatic organisms 1E-03 2E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Assessment factor applied in extrapolation to PNEC Aqua 10 50 [-] S 

PNEC for aquatic organisms with statistical method ?? ?? [mg.l-1] O 

NOEC for other terrestrial species ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

PNEC for terrestrial organisms with statistical method ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

ENVIRONMENT - EFFECTS 

 TERRESTRIAL ORGANISMS 

LC50 for plants ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

LC50 for earthworms ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

EC50 for microorganisms ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

LC50 for other terrestrial species ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

NOEC for plants ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

NOEC for earthworms ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

NOEC for microorganisms ?? ?? [mg.kgwwt-1] D 

PNEC for terrestrial organisms 10.4 2.08 [mg.kgwwt-1] O 

Equilibrium partitioning used for PNEC in soil? Yes Yes O 

Assessment factor applied in extrapolation to PNEC Terr 1 1 [-] O 

PNEC for sediment-dwelling organisms 11.3342 2.6 [mg.kgwwt-1] S 

ENVIRONMENT - EFFECTS 

SEDIMENT DWELLING ORGANISMS 

LC50 in avian dietary study (5 days) 2.4606E+04 2.4606E+04 [mg.kg-1] S 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 34 

ENVIRONMENT - EFFECTS 

BIRDS AND MAMMALS 

NOAEL ?? ?? [mg.kg-1.d-1] D 

NOEC via food ?? ?? [mg.kg-1] O 

Duration of (sub-)chronic oral test Chronic Chronic S 

Oral NOAEL 0.4 0.4 [mg.kg-1.d-1] S 

NOEC via food 5 5 [mg.kg-1] S 

Duration of (sub-)chronic oral test Chronic Chronic S 

221 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

BIRDS AND MAMMALS 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - EFFECTS ( Continued ) 

PNEC for secondary poisoning of birds and mammals 0.5 0.5 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 35 

222 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 4.14E+03 0.886 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local water compartment 107 2.18 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 711 7.31 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.21E+03 21.4 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.0247 1.09E-05 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 1.22E+04 8.82 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 224 1.15 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 8.05 3.66 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 45 20.3 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 91 36.1 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 1.39E-03 8.09E-05 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 3.79E+03 9.28 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 3.89 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 22.3 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 38.4 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 9.19E-05 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 1.19 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 9.36 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 711 12.8 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local water compartment 107 2.8 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.21E+03 27.6 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.0247 4.03E-05 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 4.14E+03 0.998 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 1.22E+04 9.02 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 8.05 6.59 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 45 45.9 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 91 64.9 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 1.39E-03 2.19E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 224 1.67 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 3.79E+03 10.2 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 2.34 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 8.74 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 23 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 1.86E-05 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 36 

223 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION ( Continued ) 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 0.915 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 8.88 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local water compartment 107 4.54 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 711 28 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.21E+03 44.8 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.0247 1.23E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 4.14E+03 1.31 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 1.22E+04 9.56 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 91 46.6 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 8.05 4.73 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 45 29.7 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 1.39E-03 1.31E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 224 1.34 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 3.79E+03 9.61 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 9.49 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 4.31 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 26 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 42.5 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 1.12E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 1.27 [-] O 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.21E+03 53.2 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

RCR for the local water compartment 107 5.4 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 711 35.5 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.0247 1.63E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 4.14E+03 1.46 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 1.22E+04 9.82 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 3.79E+03 11.1 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 8.05 9.37 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 45 70.3 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 91 92.4 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 1.39E-03 3.5E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 224 2.17 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 37 

224 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 4.71 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 29.5 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 46.4 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 1.3E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 1.34 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 9.61 [-] O 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.21E+03 23.4 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

RCR for the local water compartment 107 2.38 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 711 9.06 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.0247 2.03E-05 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 4.14E+03 0.922 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 1.22E+04 8.89 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 8.05 3.38 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 45 17.9 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 91 33.3 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 1.39E-03 6.78E-05 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 224 1.1 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 3.79E+03 9.2 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 21.7 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 9.33 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 3.82 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 37.6 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 8.84E-05 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 1.18 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local water compartment 107 3.34 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 711 17.5 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.21E+03 32.9 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.0247 6.56E-05 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 4.14E+03 1.09 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 1.22E+04 9.18 [-] O 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 9.05E-04 2.58E-05 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

RCR for the local water compartment 5.98 2.49 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 31 10.1 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 67.6 24.6 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 38 

225 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION ( Continued ) 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 340 0.943 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 3.61E+03 8.92 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment 2.19 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 5.44 5.29 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 24.7 19.2 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 1.21E-05 1.31E-10 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 197 0.845 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 3.29E+03 8.75 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 589 2.22 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local water compartment 12.6 9.65 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 75.7 72.6 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 143 95.1 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 2.47E-03 3.63E-04 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 4.18E+03 11.1 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 970 5.01 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 6.52E+03 32.1 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.1E+04 49.4 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.228 1.44E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 3.66E+04 1.39 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 8.57E+04 9.7 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 21.4 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 1.09E-05 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 2.18 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 7.31 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 0.886 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 8.82 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 1.67 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 11.7 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 225 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 2.31E+03 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 0.156 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 16.5 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 39 

226 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 Defaults Standard 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 778 4.73 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 6.93E+04 9.61 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

RCR for the local soil compartment 5.23E+03 29.6 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 8.8E+03 46.6 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.183 1.31E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 2.94E+04 1.34 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 0.0247 4.38E-05 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION] 

RCR for the local water compartment 107 2.87 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 711 13.4 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 1.21E+03 28.3 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 4.14E+03 1.01 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 1.22E+04 9.04 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals 4.53E+05 11.3 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

RCR for the local water compartment 5.28E+03 10.3 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment 3.56E+04 78.3 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment 5.97E+04 102 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant 1.24 3.94E-04 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals 8.69E+04 2.34 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 297 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 349 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 1.58E-03 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 35.4 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 6.82 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 19.1 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

RCR for the local water compartment ?? 3.58 [-] O 

RCR for the local soil compartment ?? 19.6 [-] O 

RCR for the local sediment compartment ?? 35.3 [-] O 

RCR for the sewage treatment plant ?? 7.71E-05 [-] O 

RCR for fish-eating birds and mammals ?? 1.09 [-] O 

RCR for worm-eating birds and mammals ?? 9.26 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 1] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 40 

227 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 2] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 3] 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 4] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 5] 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 6] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 7] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 8] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 9] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 10] 

RCR for the regional water compartment 2.14 1.94 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 41 

228 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

ENVIRONMENT - RISK CHARACTERIZATION ( Continued ) 

REGIONAL[USE PATTERN 10] 

RCR for the regional soil compartment 254 242 [-] O 

RCR for the regional sediment compartment 42.7 33.8 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 42 

229 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Purification factor for surface water 0.25 0.25 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

BIOCONCENTRATION AND BIOACCUMULATION FACTORS 

Bioconcentration factor for fish 4.57088E+04 1.087E+03 [l.kg-1] S 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 4.04E+03 0.464 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.54E+03 9.33 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 6.35 0.0169 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 6.32 0.0169 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.0711 1.46E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 45.3 0.138 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 14.3 0.0436 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.03E-03 4.18E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 6.63 7.62E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.109 2.89E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 24.9 0.0512 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.195 5.93E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.115 3.5E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.7E-04 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

 LOCAL SCALE 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.36E-05 7.86E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.208 0.0143 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.41E-03 5.43E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.779 0.962 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 6.1E-03 0.0112 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 3.59E-03 6.57E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.44E-06 1.35E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 31.9 0.0532 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 43 

230 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 127 0.729 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 287 25.9 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 3.73 0.229 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 3.73 0.229 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 4.5E-03 4.06E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 20.9 1.32 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 6.6 0.416 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 1.57 0.142 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 1.29E-04 1.16E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.208 1.2E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.064 3.92E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.0898 5.66E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.0529 3.34E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 1.6E-04 9.78E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0322 0.0251 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.46E-05 7.42E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.105 7.66E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.791 0.91 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 0.0451 0.0362 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 0.0266 0.0213 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.02E-05 6.25E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 1.99 0.156 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.229 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 0.771 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 28.5 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.229 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 4.47E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 1.32 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.418 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 44 

231 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 1.28E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 1.27E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 3.92E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.156 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 5.69E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 3.35E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 9.78E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 7.42E-03 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 7.48E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 0.023 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.916 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 0.0333 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 0.0196 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 5.73E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 0.171 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

 LOCAL SCALE 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 4.04E+03 0.575 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.54E+03 16.3 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 6.35 0.0799 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 6.32 0.0798 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.0711 2.55E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 45.3 0.493 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 14.3 0.156 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.03E-03 7.29E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 6.63 9.45E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.109 1.37E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 24.9 0.0893 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.195 2.12E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.115 1.25E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.7E-04 3.41E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 45 

232 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.36E-05 7.67E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.208 9.95E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.41E-03 0.0144 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.779 0.94 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 6.1E-03 0.0223 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 3.59E-03 0.0132 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.44E-06 3.59E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 31.9 0.095 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 127 1.25 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 287 58.6 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 3.73 0.361 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 3.73 0.36 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 4.5E-03 9.18E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 20.9 2.11 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 6.6 0.666 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 1.29E-04 2.62E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.208 2.06E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.064 6.18E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 1.57 0.321 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.0898 9.05E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.0529 5.34E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 1.6E-04 1.54E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 0.0451 0.0263 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.46E-05 7.62E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.105 5.98E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0322 0.018 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.791 0.934 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 0.0266 0.0155 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.02E-05 4.48E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 1.99 0.344 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 46 

233 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 0.493 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 11.2 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.0461 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.046 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 1.75E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 0.299 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.0946 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 4.99E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 8.1E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 7.9E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.0612 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 1.29E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 7.59E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 1.97E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 7.7E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 0.0125 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 0.0122 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.944 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 0.0199 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 0.0117 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 3.03E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 0.0648 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 4.04E+03 0.887 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.54E+03 35.8 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 6.35 0.338 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 6.32 0.337 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.0711 5.61E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 45.3 1.93 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 14.3 0.609 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 47 

234 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.03E-03 1.6E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 6.63 1.46E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.109 5.79E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 24.9 0.196 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.195 8.28E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.115 4.88E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.7E-04 1.44E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.36E-05 7.39E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.208 6.73E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.41E-03 0.0267 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.779 0.906 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 6.1E-03 0.0382 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 3.59E-03 0.0225 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.44E-06 6.66E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 31.9 0.217 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 127 0.92 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 287 37.9 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 3.73 0.36 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 3.73 0.36 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 4.5E-03 5.93E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 20.9 2.05 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 6.6 0.649 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 1.29E-04 1.69E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.208 1.51E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.064 6.18E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 1.57 0.208 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.0898 8.83E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.0529 5.2E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 1.6E-04 1.54E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 48 

235 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.46E-05 7.39E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.105 6.59E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0322 0.0269 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.791 0.905 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 0.0451 0.0385 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 0.0266 0.0227 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.02E-05 6.72E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 1.99 0.229 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 0.846 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 33.2 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.309 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.309 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 5.2E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 1.77 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.558 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 1.49E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 1.39E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 5.3E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.182 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 7.59E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 4.47E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 1.32E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 7.4E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 6.92E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 0.0264 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.906 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 0.0378 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 0.0223 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 6.57E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 0.201 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 49 

236 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 4.04E+03 1.04 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.54E+03 45.3 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 6.35 0.401 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 6.32 0.4 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.0711 7.1E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 45.3 2.29 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 14.3 0.723 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.03E-03 2.03E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 6.63 1.71E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.109 6.87E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 24.9 0.249 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.195 9.84E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.115 5.8E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.7E-04 1.71E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.36E-05 7.44E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.208 6.26E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.41E-03 0.0252 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.779 0.911 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 6.1E-03 0.0361 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 3.59E-03 0.0213 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.44E-06 6.28E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 31.9 0.273 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 127 1.75 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 287 89.7 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 3.73 0.704 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 3.73 0.704 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 4.5E-03 1.41E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 20.9 4.03 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 6.6 1.27 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 50 

237 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 1.29E-04 4.01E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.208 2.88E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.064 0.0121 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 1.57 0.492 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.0898 0.0173 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.0529 0.0102 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 1.6E-04 3.01E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.46E-05 7.51E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.105 5.38E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0322 0.0226 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.791 0.92 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 0.0451 0.0324 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 0.0266 0.0191 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.02E-05 5.63E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 1.99 0.534 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 0.917 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 37.6 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.339 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.339 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 5.9E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 1.94 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.612 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 1.69E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 1.51E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 5.81E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.206 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 8.33E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 4.91E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 1.45E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 51 

238 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 7.42E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 6.63E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 0.0256 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.909 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 0.0367 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 0.0216 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 6.38E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 0.227 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 4.04E+03 0.5 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.54E+03 11.6 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 6.35 0.0346 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 6.32 0.0346 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.0711 1.81E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 45.3 0.239 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 14.3 0.0755 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.03E-03 5.18E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 6.63 8.21E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.109 5.94E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 24.9 0.0634 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.195 1.03E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.115 6.05E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.7E-04 1.48E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.36E-05 7.79E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.208 0.0123 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.41E-03 8.93E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.779 0.954 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 6.1E-03 0.0154 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 3.59E-03 9.1E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.44E-06 2.22E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 31.9 0.0665 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 52 

239 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 127 0.68 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 287 22.8 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 3.73 0.194 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 3.73 0.194 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 4.5E-03 3.58E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 20.9 1.12 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 6.6 0.356 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 1.29E-04 1.02E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.208 1.12E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.064 3.33E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 1.57 0.125 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.0898 4.84E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.0529 2.85E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 1.6E-04 8.31E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.46E-05 7.44E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.105 8.13E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0322 0.0243 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.791 0.911 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 0.0451 0.0352 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 0.0266 0.0208 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.02E-05 6.05E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 1.99 0.137 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 0.758 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 27.7 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.213 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.213 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 4.34E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 1.24 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.391 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 53 

240 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 1.24E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 1.24E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 3.65E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.152 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 5.31E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 3.13E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 9.09E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 7.5E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 7.53E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 0.0221 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.919 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 0.0321 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 0.0189 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 5.5E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 0.165 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 4.04E+03 0.671 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.54E+03 22.3 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 6.35 0.0742 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 6.32 0.0741 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.0711 3.49E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 45.3 0.478 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 14.3 0.151 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.03E-03 9.98E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 6.63 1.1E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.109 1.27E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 24.9 0.122 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.195 2.05E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.115 1.21E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.7E-04 3.17E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 54 

241 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.208 8.62E-03 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.36E-05 7.8E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.41E-03 9.95E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.779 0.956 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 6.1E-03 0.0161 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 3.59E-03 9.47E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.44E-06 2.48E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 31.9 0.128 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 0.334 0.0464 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 242 0.52 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 198 12.9 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 0.0847 0.0169 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 0.0838 0.0169 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 3.1E-03 2.01E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 1.06 0.147 [mg.kg-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 1.45E-03 2.9E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 8.85E-05 5.76E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.398 8.55E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 1.08 0.0705 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 4.54E-03 6.31E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 2.68E-03 3.72E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 3.55E-06 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 5.94E-05 7.92E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.267 0.0118 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 9.75E-04 3.99E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.727 0.97 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 3.05E-03 8.68E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 1.8E-03 5.12E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 2.38E-06 9.88E-06 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 1.49 0.0727 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 55 

242 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

 

Local concentration in wet fish 99.6 0.422 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 0.0813 0.0168 [mg.kg-1] O 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 34.7 6.75 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 0.0813 0.0168 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 5.45E-04 1.06E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 0.64 0.132 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 0.202 0.0416 [mg.kg-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 3.46E-06 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 1.56E-05 3.02E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.164 6.94E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 1.39E-03 2.89E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 0.191 0.037 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 2.75E-03 5.66E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 1.62E-03 3.33E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 4.32E-05 7.77E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.455 0.0178 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.87E-03 7.42E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.529 0.952 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 7.64E-03 0.0145 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 4.51E-03 8.57E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 9.62E-06 1.85E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 0.36 0.0389 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 492 1.8 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 483 92.7 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 0.21 0.0177 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 0.207 0.0172 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 7.57E-03 1.45E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 2.43 0.346 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 0.767 0.109 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 56 

243 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.808 2.96E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 8.79E-06 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.16E-04 4.15E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 3.6E-03 3.03E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 2.65 0.508 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.0104 1.49E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 6.15E-03 8.76E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 3E-03 2.89E-03 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.22E-05 8.07E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.232 5.75E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 1.03E-03 5.89E-04 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.762 0.989 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 1.77E-03 1.7E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 2.53E-06 1.4E-06 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 3.48 0.514 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 3.65E+04 0.97 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.16E+04 40.9 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 0.969 0.0172 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 0.734 0.017 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.652 6.41E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 107 0.217 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 33.8 0.0685 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 0.0186 1.83E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 59.9 1.59E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0166 2.94E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 228 0.224 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.46 9.32E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.271 5.49E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.47E-05 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 57 

244 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.207 7E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.56E-08 3.15E-06 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.45E-05 8.04E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 5.75E-05 1.29E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.79 0.985 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 1.59E-03 4.09E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 9.38E-04 2.41E-03 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 289 0.228 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 0.464 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 9.33 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.0169 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.0169 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 1.46E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 0.138 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.0436 [mg.kg-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.0512 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 4.18E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 7.62E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 2.89E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 5.93E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 3.5E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 7.86E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 0.0143 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 5.43E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.962 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 0.0112 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 6.57E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 1.35E-05 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 0.0532 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 58 

245 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 1.25 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 288 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.0195 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.0179 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 4.51E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 0.832 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.263 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 1.29E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 2.06E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 3.34E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 1.58 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 3.58E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 2.11E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 8.12E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 1.3E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 2.11E-04 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.995 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 2.26E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 1.33E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 4.52E-07 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 1.59 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 85.9 0.209 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in wet fish 2.93E+04 0.92 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 3.34E+04 37.8 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 0.793 0.0171 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 0.605 0.017 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.523 5.92E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 27.2 0.0661 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 59 

246 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Daily dose through intake of fish 48.1 1.51E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 0.0149 1.69E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0136 2.94E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 183 0.207 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.369 8.98E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.218 5.3E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.05E-05 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.45E-05 8.04E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.207 7.18E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 5.87E-05 1.39E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.79 0.985 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 1.59E-03 4.27E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 9.39E-04 2.51E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.85E-08 3.41E-06 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 232 0.211 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION] 

Local concentration in wet fish 4.04E+03 0.588 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 4.54E+03 17.2 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 6.35 0.417 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 6.32 0.417 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 0.0711 2.69E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 45.3 2.31 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 14.3 0.73 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 2.03E-03 7.68E-06 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 6.63 9.67E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.109 7.16E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 24.9 0.0941 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.195 9.93E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.115 5.85E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 2.7E-04 1.79E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 60 

247 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 3.41E-03 0.0606 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 6.36E-05 6.51E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.208 8.19E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.779 0.797 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 6.1E-03 0.0841 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 3.59E-03 0.0496 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 8.44E-06 1.51E-04 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 31.9 0.118 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Local concentration in wet fish 8.68E+04 1.92 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant 3.43 0.0177 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) 573 0.364 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant 2.27E+05 99.9 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) 2.15 0.0172 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water 3.55 1.57E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) 181 0.115 [mg.kg-1] O 

 LOCAL SCALE 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 0.102 4.47E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 143 3.15E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 0.0588 3.04E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 1.24E+03 0.548 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 2.46 1.56E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 1.45 9.22E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 5.55E-05 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 7.3E-05 8.07E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.102 5.68E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 4.23E-05 5.48E-04 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.895 0.989 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 1.77E-03 2.82E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 1.04E-03 1.66E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 3.99E-08 1.3E-06 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans 1.39E+03 0.554 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 61 

248 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

 Defaults Standard 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 6.4 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 379 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.0204 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.0182 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 5.95E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 1.06 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.335 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 1.7E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 0.0105 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 3.49E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 2.08 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 4.56E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 2.69E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 8.09E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 5.01E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 1.66E-04 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.991 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 2.17E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 1.28E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 3.42E-07 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 2.1 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

 LOCAL SCALE 

Local concentration in wet fish ?? 0.666 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

Local concentration in root tissue of plant ?? 25 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in leaves of plant ?? 0.017 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in grass (wet weight) ?? 0.0169 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in drinking water ?? 3.92E-04 [mg.l-1] O 

Local concentration in meat (wet weight) ?? 0.177 [mg.kg-1] O 

Local concentration in milk (wet weight) ?? 0.056 [mg.kg-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 62 

249 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Daily dose through intake of milk ?? 4.49E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water ?? 1.12E-05 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish ?? 1.09E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 2.92E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.137 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat ?? 7.61E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air ?? 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water ?? 8.01E-05 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 LOCAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish ?? 7.83E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops ?? 2.09E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops ?? 0.981 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat ?? 5.45E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk ?? 3.21E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air ?? 5.14E-06 [-] O 

Local total daily intake for humans ?? 0.14 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 REGIONAL SCALE 

CONCENTRATIONS IN INTAKE MEDIA 

Regional concentration in wet fish 97.7 0.422 [mg.kg-1] O 

Regional concentration in root tissue of plant 1.62E+03 309 [mg.kg-1] O 

Regional concentration in leaves of plant 0.0962 0.0197 [mg.kg-1] O 

Regional concentration in grass (wet weight) 0.0962 0.0197 [mg.kg-1] O 

Regional concentration in drinking water 0.0254 4.85E-03 [mg.l-1] O 

Regional concentration in meat (wet weight) 10.4 1.99 [mg.kg-1] O 

Regional concentration in milk (wet weight) 3.29 0.628 [mg.kg-1] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 REGIONAL SCALE 

DOSES IN INTAKE MEDIA 

Daily dose through intake of drinking water 7.27E-04 1.38E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of fish 0.16 6.94E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of leaf crops 1.65E-03 3.38E-04 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of root crops 8.91 1.7 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of meat 0.0447 8.54E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of milk 0.0263 5.04E-03 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

Daily dose through intake of air 3.46E-06 7.18E-07 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 63 

250 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Base set complete No

Fraction of total dose through intake of fish 0.0176 4.06E-04 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of root crops 0.974 0.991 [-] O 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 REGIONAL SCALE 

FRACTIONS OF TOTAL DOSE 

Fraction of total dose through intake of drinking water 7.95E-05 8.09E-05 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of leaf crops 1.8E-04 1.97E-04 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of meat 4.89E-03 4.99E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of milk 2.88E-03 2.94E-03 [-] O 

Fraction of total dose through intake of air 3.79E-07 4.2E-07 [-] O 

Regional total daily intake for humans 9.14 1.71 [mg.kg-1.d-1] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 64 

251 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

HUMAN HEALTH - EFFECTS ASSESSMENT 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

 (SUB)CHRONIC DATA 

Oral NOAEL ?? ?? [mg.kg-1.d-1] D 

Oral LOAEL ?? ?? [mg.kg-1.d-1] D 

Dermal NOEC in a medium ?? ?? [mg.cm-3] D 

Dermal LOEC in a medium ?? ?? [mg.cm-3] D 

Inhalatory (fibre) NOAEL ?? ?? [fibres.m-3] D 

Inhalatory (fibre) LOAEL ?? ?? [fibres.m-3] D 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 65 

252 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

 CURRENT CLASSIFICATION 

Corrosive (C, R34 or R35) No No D 

Irritating to skin (Xi, R38) No No D 

Irritating to eyes (Xi, R36) No No D 

Risk of serious damage to eyes (Xi, R41) No No D 

Irritating to respiratory system (Xi, R37) No No D 

May cause sensitisation by inhalation (Xn, R42) No No D 

May cause sensitisation by skin contact (Xi, R43) No No D 

May cause cancer (T, R45) No No D 

May cause cancer by inhalation (T, R49) No No D 

Possible risk of irreversible effects (Xn, R40) No No D 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.201 2.56 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 1][FORMULATION] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.48E+03 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.0125 7.52 [-] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 1][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, exposure via air 2.51E+03 4.09E+04 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 1][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 4.09E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 2.34 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 2][FORMULATION] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.48E+03 1.17E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.0125 4.21 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 2][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, exposure via air 2.51E+03 2.6E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.201 1.16 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 2][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 2.03E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 6.17 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 66 

253 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 3][FORMULATION] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.48E+03 2.77E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.0125 1.85 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.201 1.74 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 3][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, exposure via air 2.51E+03 2.6E+04 [-] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 3][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 3.03E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 1.99 [-] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 4][FORMULATION] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.48E+03 2.34E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.0125 1.47 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 4][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, exposure via air 2.51E+03 1.33E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.201 0.748 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 1.76 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 4][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 2.76E+04 [-] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 5][FORMULATION] 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.48E+03 2.71E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.0125 6.02 [-] O 

MOS local, exposure via air 2.51E+03 4.82E+04 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 5][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.201 2.91 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 67 

254 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 5][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 4.4E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 2.42 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.268 5.5 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 6][FORMULATION] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.48E+03 1.26E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.0125 3.13 [-] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 6][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.13E+05 5.57E+05 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 6][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.15E+05 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 1.11 10.3 [-] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][FORMULATION] 

MOS local, exposure via air 4.55E+04 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.115 0.778 [-] O 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][PROCESSING] 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.62E+04 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 1.38E-03 1.76 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 7.52 [-] O 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 7][RECOVERY] 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 0.252 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 68 

255 
R331_0208_env

EUSES Summary report Single substance 

Printed on 10/08/00 13:51:48 

Assessment types 1A, 1B, 2, 3A, 3B 

 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.95E+04 5.57E+05 [-] O 

Study MCCPs - ESR ASSESSMENT - ALL SCENARIOS 

Substance MCCPs - e.g. C15H24Cl8 

 Defaults Standard 

Base set complete No

 Name Reference Value Units Status

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 8][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 1.73E-03 1.9 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 9][FORMULATION] 

MOS local, exposure via air 1.48E+03 2.24E+04 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 0.0125 3.39 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 5.57E+05 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 9][PROCESSING] 

MOS local, exposure via air 7.21E+03 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media 2.88E-04 0.722 [-] O 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 9][PRIVATE USE] 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 0.191 [-] O 

LOCAL[USE PATTERN 10][RECOVERY] 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

MOS local, exposure via air ?? 5.57E+05 [-] O 

MOS local, total exposure via all media ?? 2.86 [-] O 

MOS regional, total exposure via all media 0.0438 0.234 [-] O 

HUMAN HEALTH - RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT 

 REGIONAL 

MOS regional, exposure via air 1.16E+05 5.57E+05 [-] O 

EUSES 10/08/00 13:51:48 Page: 69 

256 
R331_0208_env

Appendix B Estimated vapour pressures for C14-17 chlorinated paraffins 

log (vapour pressure) = -(0.353×no. of C atoms) – (0.645×no. of Cl atoms) + 4.462 

 

Vapour pressures have been estimated for each combination of number of carbon atoms and 

number of chlorine atoms for the medium chain-chlorinated paraffins. The results are shown

in Table B1. The QSAR used is that determined for the short-chain (C10-13) chlorinated 

paraffins by Drouillard et al. (1998)6: 

where the vapour pressure units are Pa at 25o

C. 

6 Drouillard K. G., Tomy G. T., Muir D. C. G. and Friesen K. J. (1998). Volatility of chlorinated n-alkanes 

(C10-12): vapour pressures and Henry’s Law constants. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 17, 1252-1260. 

257 
R331_0208_env

Table B1 Estimated vapour pressures for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

No.carbon atoms No. chlorine 

atoms 

No. hydrogen 

atoms 

Molecular weight %Cl Vapour pressure 

(Pa) 

14 1 29 232.5 15.3 0.074989421

14 2 28 267 26.6 0.016982437 

14 3 27 301.5 35.3 0.003845918

14 4 26 336 42.3 8.70964E-04

14 5 25 370.5 47.9 1.97242E-04

14 6 24 405 52.6 4.46684E-05

14 7 23 439.5 56.5 1.01158E-05

22 474 2.29087E-06

14 9 21 508.5 62.8 5.18800E-07

14 10 20 543 65.4 1.17490E-07

14 11 19 577.5 67.6 2.66073E-08

14 12 18 612 69.6 6.02560E-09

14 13 17 646.5 71.4 1.36458E-09

14 14 16 681 73.0 3.09030E-10

15 1 31 246.5 14.4 0.033265955

15 2 30 281 25.3 0.007533556

15 3 29 315.5 33.8 0.001706082 

15 4 28 350 40.6 3.86367E-04

15 5 27 384.5 46.2 8.74984E-05

15 6 26 419 50.8 1.98153E-05

15 7 25 453.5 54.8 4.48745E-06

15 8 24 488 58.2 1.01625E-06

15 9 23 522.5 61.1 2.30144E-07

15 10 22 557 63.7 5.21195E-08

15 11 21 591.5 66.0 1.18032E-08

15 12 20 626 68.1 2.67301E-09

15 13 19 660.5 69.9 6.05341E-10

15 14 18 695 71.5 1.37088E-10

17 729.5 73.0 3.10456E-11

33 260.5 13.6 0.014757065

16 2 32 295 24.1 0.00334195

16 3 31 329.5 32.3 7.56833E-04

16 4 30 364 39.0 1.71396E-04

16 5 29 398.5 44.5 3.88150E-05

16 6 28 433 49.2 8.79023E-06

14 8 59.9

15 15 

16 1 

Table B1 continued overleaf 

258 
R331_0208_env

Table B1 continued 

No.carbon atoms No. chlorine 

atoms 

No. hydrogen 

atoms 

Molecular weight %Cl Vapour pressure 

(Pa) 

16 7 27 467.5 53.2 1.99067E-06

26 502 56.6 4.50817E-07

16 9 25 536.5 59.6 1.02094E-07

16 10 24 571 62.2 2.31206E-08

16 11 23 605.5 64.5 5.23600E-09

16 12 22 640 66.6 1.18577E-09

16 13 21 674.5 68.4 2.68534E-10

16 14 20 709 70.1 6.08135E-11

16 15 19 743.5 71.6 1.37721E-11

16 16 18 778 73.0 3.11889E-12

17 1 35 274.5 12.9 0.006546362

17 2 34 309 23.0 0.001482518

33 343.5 31.0 3.35738E-04

17 4 32 378 37.6 7.60326E-05

17 5 31 412.5 43.0 1.72187E-05

17 6 30 447 47.7 3.89942E-06

17 7 29 481.5 51.6 8.83080E-07

17 8 28 516 55.0 1.99986E-07

27 58.0 4.52898E-08

17 10 26 585 60.7 1.02565E-08

17 11 25 619.5 63.0 2.32274E-09

24 654 65.1 5.26017E-10

17 13 23 688.5 67.0 1.19124E-10

17 14 22 723 68.7 2.69774E-11

21 70.3 6.10942E-12

17 16 20 792 71.7 1.38357E-12

17 17 19 826.5 73.0 3.13329E-13

16 8 

17 3 

17 9 550.5

17 12 

17 15 757.5

259 
R331_0208_env

Appendix C Generic level III fugacity modelling 

 

The potential environmental distribution of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has been 

studied using a generic level III fugacity model. The level III model used was a four 

compartment model (FUGMOD version 1, January 1992) that has been circulated for use 

within the OECD HPV program. The program also carries out level I and level II modelling 

of the substance. The model was run using the default settings in the model and the following 

chemical specific input data: 

 water solubility 0.027 mg/l 

 vapour pressure 0.00027 Pa 

 log Kow 7

 degradation half-life in air 48 hours 

 degradation half-life in other media very large (e.g. 1×1011 hours) 

The level III model was run four times with a nominal release rate of 1,000 kg/hour initially 

entering the air, soil or water compartments in different proportions. 

260 
R331_0208_env

FUGACITY LEVEL I, II AND III PROGRAMS FOR OECD WORKSHOP VERSION 1 - JAN 1992 

GENERIC PARAMETERS 

 

Fugacity ratio 1.000E+00 

Density kg/m3 1.185413 1000 2400 2400 1500 1000 

SIX COMPARTMENT FUGACITY LEVEL I CALCULATION 

Properties of MCCPs 

Temperature deg C 25 

Molecular mass g/mol 488 

Melting point deg C 0 

Vapor pressure Pa .00027 

Sub-cooled liquid vapor press Pa .00027 

Solubility g/m3 .027 

Solubility mol/m3 5.533E-05 

Henry's law constant Pa.m3/mol 4.88 

Log octanol-water p-coefficient 7 

Octanol-water partn-coefficient 1E+07 

Organic C-water ptn-coefficient 4100000 

Fish-water partition coefficient 500000 

Air-water partition coefficient 1.969E-03 

Soil-water partition coefficient 196800 

Sedt-water partition coefficient 393600 

Susp sedt-water partn coeffnt 1230000 

Aerosol-air partition coeff 2.222222E+10 

Aerosol Z value 8964843 

Aerosol density kg/m3 2000 

 

Amount of chemical moles 204918 

Amount of chemical kilograms 100000 

Fugacity Pa 5.517889E-10 

Total of VZ products 3.714E+14 

 

Phase properties and compositions 

 

Phase Air Water Soil solids Sedt solids Susp sedt Fish 

Volume m3 1.000E+14 2.000E+11 9.000E+09 1.000E+08 1.000E+06 2.000E+05 

Depth m 1000 20 .1 .01 

Area m2 1E+11 1E+10 9E+10 1E+10 

Area fraction 1 .1 .9 .1 

Frn org carb .02 .04 .2 

Z mol/m3.Pa 4.034E-04 2.049E-01 4.033E+04 8.066E+04 2.520E+05 1.025E+05 

VZ mol/Pa 4.034E+10 4.098E+10 3.630E+14 8.066E+12 2.520E+11 2.049E+10 

Fugacity Pa 5.518E-10 5.518E-10 5.518E-10 5.518E-10 5.518E-10 5.518E-10 

Conc mol/m3 2.226E-13 1.131E-10 2.225E-05 4.450E-05 1.391E-04 5.654E-05 

Conc g/m3 1.086E-10 5.518E-08 1.086E-02 2.172E-02 6.787E-02 2.759E-02 

Conc ug/g 9.164E-08 5.518E-08 4.525E-03 9.049E-03 4.525E-02 2.759E-02 

Amount mol 22.26015 22.6143 200272.3 4450.494 139.0779 11.30715 

Amount kg 10.86295 11.03578 97732.86 2171.841 67.87003 5.517889 

Amount % 1.086295E-02 1.103578E-02 97.73286 2.171841 6.787003E-02 5.517889E-03 

261 
R331_0208_env

SIX COMPARTMENT FUGACITY LEVEL II CALCULATION MCCPs 

 

Emission rate of chemical mol/h 2049.18 

Adv.flow m3/h 1E+12 2E+08 0 2000 

Conc g/m3 3.395E-07 1.725E-04 3.394E+01 6.788E+01 2.121E+02 8.623E+01 

Conc ug/g 2.864E-04 1.725E-04 1.414E+01 2.828E+01 1.414E+02 8.623E+01 

D adv mol/Pa.h 4.034E+08 4.098E+07 0.000E+00 1.613E+08 

Advection % 33.95344 3.449363 0 13.57669 

 

Total reaction D value 5.824E+08 

Output by advection mol/h 1044.662 

Total output by reaction and advection mol/h 2049.18 

Reaction residence time h 637614.3 

 Susp sedt .000005 2.520E+05 

 Fish .000001 1.025E+05 

 Soil water .3 2.049E-01 

Sedt solids .2 8.066E+04 

Emission rate of chemical kg/h 1000 

Fugacity Pa 1.725E-06 

Total of VZ products 3.714E+14 

Total amount of chemical mol 6.404954E+08 

Total amount of chemical kg 3.125617E+08 

 

Phase properties,compositions and rates 

 

Phase Air Water Soil solids Sedt solids Susp sedt Fish 

Adv.restime h 100 1000 0 50000 

Rct halflife h 48 1E+11 1E+11 1E+11 

Rct rate c.h-1 .0144375 6.93E-12 6.93E-12 6.93E-12 

Fugacity Pa 1.725E-06 1.725E-06 1.725E-06 1.725E-06 1.725E-06 1.725E-06 

Conc mol/m3 6.958E-10 3.534E-07 6.955E-02 1.391E-01 4.347E-01 1.767E-01 

Amount mol 69576.73 70683.66 6.259745E+08 1.391054E+07 434704.5 35341.83 

Amount kg 33953.44 34493.63 3.054756E+08 6788346 212135.8 17246.81 

Amount % 1.086296E-02 1.103578E-02 97.73287 2.171841 6.787004E-02 5.51789E-03 

D rct mol/Pa.h 5.824E+08 2.840E-01 2.515E+03 5.589E+01 

Rct rate mol/h 1004.514 4.898378E-07 4.338004E-03 9.640007E-05 

Adv rate mol/h 695.7673 70.68366 0 278.2109 

Rct rate kg/h 490.2029 2.390408E-07 2.116946E-03 4.704324E-05 

Adv rate kg/h 339.5344 34.49363 0 135.7669 

Reaction % 49.02028 2.390408E-08 2.116946E-04 4.704323E-06 

Total advection D value 6.057E+08 

Total D value 1.188E+09 

 

Output by reaction mol/h 1004.518 

 

Output by reaction kg/h 490.205 

Output by advection kg/h 509.795 

Total output by reaction and advection kg/h 1000 

 

Advection residence time h 613112.6 

Overall residence time h 312561.7 

Bulk phase volume fractions and pure phase Z values used in Level III calculation 

Phase Volume fraction Z value 

Air 1 4.034E-04 

 Aerosol 2.000E-11 8.965E+06 

Water .999994 2.049E-01 

Soil solids .5 4.033E+04 

 Soil air .2 4.034E-04 

 Pore water .8 2.049E-01

262 
R331_0208_env

 FOUR COMPARTMENT FUGACITY LEVEL III CALCULATION MCCPs 

Bulk phase properties,compositions and rates 

 

Phase Air Water Soil Sediment Total Fish 

Bulk vol m3 1E+14 2E+11 1.8E+10 5E+08 

Density kg/m3 1.185413 1000.003 1500.237 1280 

Bulk Z value 5.827E-04 1.568E+00 2.016E+04 1.613E+04 1.025E+05 

Bulk VZ 5.827E+10 3.135E+11 3.630E+14 8.066E+12 3.714E+14 

Emission mol/h 2049.18 0 0 0 2049.18 

Emission kg/h 1000 0 0 0 1000 

Fugacity Pa 1.045E-06 5.944E-07 1.335E-05 2.321E-06 5.944E-07 

Conc mol/m3 6.091E-10 9.319E-07 2.691E-01 3.744E-02 6.091E-02 

Conc g/m3 2.972E-07 4.547E-04 1.313E+02 1.827E+01 2.972E+01 

Conc ug/g phase 2.507E-04 4.547E-04 8.754E+01 1.427E+01 2.972E+01 

Conc ug/g solids 2.286E+03 4.874E+01 1.094E+02 3.806E+01 

Amount mol 60905.64 186370.9 4.844276E+09 1.871971E+07 4.863243E+09 

Amount kg 29721.95 90948.98 2.364007E+09 9135217 2.373262E+09 

Amount % 1.252367E-03 3.832234E-03 99.60999 .3849223 

Adv.flow m3/h 1E+12 2E+08 0 10000 

D rct mol/Pa.h 8.413E+08 2.173E+00 2.515E+03 5.590E+01 

D adv mol/Pa.h 5.827E+08 3.135E+08 0.000E+00 1.613E+08 

Rct rate mol/h 879.3252 1.29155E-06 3.357083E-02 1.297276E-04 879.3589 

Rct rate kg/h 429.1107 6.302765E-07 1.638257E-02 6.330706E-05 429.1271 

Adv rate mol/h 609.0564 186.3709 0 374.3941 1169.821 

Adv rate kg/h 297.2195 90.94899 0 182.7043 570.8729 

Intermedia Data. Half times Equiv flows D values Rates of transport 

 h m3/h mol/Pa.h mol/h kg/h 

Soil to air 2.776E+08 4.493E+01 9.060E+05 1.209E+01 5.901E+00 

 3 rain rate .0001 .876 

 4 aerosol deposition velocity 6E-10 5.256E-06 

 10 sediment resuspension velocity .0000002 .001752 

 11 soil water runoff rate .00005 .438 

Reaction % 42.91107 6.302766E-08 1.638257E-03 6.330706E-06 

Advection % 29.72195 9.094899 0 18.27044 

Residence Times h : Overall 2373263 Reaction 5530442 Advection 4157252 

Air to water 5.700E+02 1.216E+11 7.085E+07 7.405E+01 3.614E+01 

Air to soil 8.295E+01 8.355E+11 4.869E+08 5.089E+02 2.483E+02 

Water to air 1.289E+04 1.075E+07 1.685E+07 1.002E+01 4.889E+00 

Water to sediment 1.724E+02 8.041E+08 1.260E+09 7.493E+02 3.656E+02 

Soil to water 6.758E+06 1.846E+03 3.722E+07 4.967E+02 2.424E+02 

Sediment to water 3.461E+04 1.001E+04 1.615E+08 3.749E+02 1.829E+02 

 Transport velocity parameters m/h m/year 

 1 air side air-water MTC 5 43800 

 2 water side air-water MTC .05 438 

 5 soil air phase diffusion MTC .02 175.2 

 6 soil water phase diffusion MTC .00001 .0876 

 7 soil air boundary layer MTC 5 43800 

 8 sediment-water diffusion MTC .0001 .876 

 9 sediment deposition velocity .0000005 .00438 

 12 soil solids runoff rate 1E-08 .0000876 

Individual process D values 

Air-water diffusion (air-side) 2.017E+07 Air-water diffusion (water-side) 1.025E+08 

Air-water diffusion (overall) 1.685E+07 

Rain dissolution to water 204918 Aerosol deposition to water 5.378906E+07 

Rain dissolution to soil 1844262 Aerosol deposition to soil 4.841015E+08 

Soil-air diffusion (air-phase) 726152.3 Soil-air diffusion (water-phase) 184426.2 

Soil-air diffusion (bndry layer) 1.815381E+08 Soil-air diffusion (overall) 906033.9 

Water-sediment diffusion 204918 

Water-sediment deposition 1.260246E+09 Sediment-water resuspension 1.613115E+08 

Soil-water runoff (water) 922131.1 Soil-water runoff (solids) 3.629508E+07 

263 
R331_0208_env

Bulk vol m3 1E+14 2E+11 1.8E+10 5E+08 

Emission mol/h 0 2049.18 0 0 2049.18 

Emission kg/h 0 1000 0 0 1000 

Fugacity Pa 1.834E-08 2.145E-06 2.343E-07 8.373E-06 2.145E-06 

Rct rate kg/h 7.53154 2.27383E-06 2.875387E-04 2.28391E-04 7.532059 

Individual process D values 

Air-water diffusion (air-side) 2.017E+07 Air-water diffusion (water-side) 1.025E+08 

Water-sediment deposition 1.260246E+09 Sediment-water resuspension 1.613115E+08 

 FOUR COMPARTMENT FUGACITY LEVEL III CALCULATION MCCPs 

Bulk phase properties,compositions and rates 

 

Phase Air Water Soil Sediment Total Fish 

Density kg/m3 1.185413 1000.003 1500.237 1280 

Bulk Z value 5.827E-04 1.568E+00 2.016E+04 1.613E+04 1.025E+05 

Bulk VZ 5.827E+10 3.135E+11 3.630E+14 8.066E+12 3.714E+14 

Conc mol/m3 1.069E-11 3.362E-06 4.724E-03 1.351E-01 2.197E-01 

Conc g/m3 5.217E-09 1.641E-03 2.305E+00 6.591E+01 1.072E+02 

Conc ug/g phase 4.401E-06 1.641E-03 1.536E+00 5.150E+01 1.072E+02 

Conc ug/g solids 4.013E+01 1.759E+02 1.921E+00 1.373E+02 

Amount mol 1068.986 672364.8 8.502434E+07 6.753454E+07 1.532323E+08 

Amount kg 521.6651 328114 4.149188E+07 3.295686E+07 7.477738E+07 

Amount % 6.976243E-04 .4387878 55.48721 44.0733 

Adv.flow m3/h 1E+12 2E+08 0 10000 

D rct mol/Pa.h 8.413E+08 2.173E+00 2.515E+03 5.590E+01 

D adv mol/Pa.h 5.827E+08 3.135E+08 0.000E+00 1.613E+08 

Rct rate mol/h 15.43348 4.659488E-06 5.892187E-04 4.680144E-04 15.43455 

Adv rate mol/h 10.68986 672.3648 0 1350.691 2033.746 

Adv rate kg/h 5.216651 328.114 0 659.1371 992.4678 

Reaction % .7531541 2.27383E-07 2.875388E-05 2.28391E-05 

Advection % .5216652 32.81141 0 65.91372 

Residence Times h : Overall 74777.38 Reaction 9927880 Advection 75344.88 

Intermedia Data. Half times Equiv flows D values Rates of transport 

 h m3/h mol/Pa.h mol/h kg/h 

Air to water 5.700E+02 1.216E+11 7.085E+07 1.300E+00 6.342E-01 

Air to soil 8.295E+01 8.355E+11 4.869E+08 8.931E+00 4.358E+00 

Water to air 1.289E+04 1.075E+07 1.685E+07 3.614E+01 1.764E+01 

Water to sediment 1.724E+02 8.041E+08 1.260E+09 2.703E+03 1.319E+03 

Soil to air 2.776E+08 4.493E+01 9.060E+05 2.122E-01 1.036E-01 

Soil to water 6.758E+06 1.846E+03 3.722E+07 8.718E+00 4.255E+00 

Sediment to water 3.461E+04 1.001E+04 1.615E+08 1.352E+03 6.600E+02 

 Transport velocity parameters m/h m/year 

 1 air side air-water MTC 5 43800 

 2 water side air-water MTC .05 438 

 3 rain rate .0001 .876 

 4 aerosol deposition velocity 6E-10 5.256E-06 

 5 soil air phase diffusion MTC .02 175.2 

 6 soil water phase diffusion MTC .00001 .0876 

 7 soil air boundary layer MTC 5 43800 

 8 sediment-water diffusion MTC .0001 .876 

 9 sediment deposition velocity .0000005 .00438 

 10 sediment resuspension velocity .0000002 .001752 

 11 soil water runoff rate .00005 .438 

 12 soil solids runoff rate 1E-08 .0000876 

Air-water diffusion (overall) 1.685E+07 

Rain dissolution to water 204918 Aerosol deposition to water 5.378906E+07 

Rain dissolution to soil 1844262 Aerosol deposition to soil 4.841015E+08 

Soil-air diffusion (air-phase) 726152.3 Soil-air diffusion (water-phase) 184426.2 

Soil-air diffusion (bndry layer) 1.815381E+08 Soil-air diffusion (overall) 906033.9 

Water-sediment diffusion 204918 

Soil-water runoff (water) 922131.1 Soil-water runoff (solids) 3.629508E+07 

264 
R331_0208_env

 FOUR COMPARTMENT FUGACITY LEVEL III CALCULATION MCCPs 

Bulk phase properties,compositions and rates 

 

Phase Air Water Soil Sediment Total Fish 

Bulk vol m3 1E+14 2E+11 1.8E+10 5E+08 

Density kg/m3 1.185413 1000.003 1500.237 1280 

Bulk Z value 5.827E-04 1.568E+00 2.016E+04 1.613E+04 1.025E+05 

Bulk VZ 5.827E+10 3.135E+11 3.630E+14 8.066E+12 3.714E+14 

Emission mol/h 0 0 2049.18 0 2049.18 

Emission kg/h 0 0 1000 0 1000 

Fugacity Pa 4.275E-08 2.108E-06 5.429E-05 8.229E-06 2.108E-06 

Conc mol/m3 2.491E-11 3.304E-06 1.095E+00 1.327E-01 2.159E-01 

Conc g/m3 1.216E-08 1.612E-03 5.343E+02 6.478E+01 1.054E+02 

D adv mol/Pa.h 5.827E+08 3.135E+08 0.000E+00 1.613E+08 

Adv rate kg/h 12.15557 322.4563 0 647.7716 982.3835 

Conc ug/g phase 1.025E-05 1.612E-03 3.561E+02 5.061E+01 1.054E+02 

Conc ug/g solids 9.350E+01 1.728E+02 4.452E+02 1.350E+02 

Amount mol 2490.894 660771.1 1.970603E+10 6.637004E+07 1.977307E+10 

Amount kg 1215.556 322456.3 9.616545E+09 3.238858E+07 9.649256E+09 

Amount % 1.259741E-05 3.341774E-03 99.66099 .3356588 

Adv.flow m3/h 1E+12 2E+08 0 10000 

D rct mol/Pa.h 8.413E+08 2.173E+00 2.515E+03 5.590E+01 

Rct rate mol/h 35.96229 4.579144E-06 .1365628 4.599444E-04 36.09932 

Rct rate kg/h 17.5496 2.234623E-06 6.664265E-02 2.244529E-04 17.61647 

Adv rate mol/h 24.90895 660.7712 0 1327.401 2013.081 

Reaction % 1.75496 2.234622E-07 6.664265E-03 2.244529E-05 

Advection % 1.215557 32.24563 0 64.77716 

Residence Times h : Overall 9649256 Reaction 5.477408E+08 Advection 9822291 

Intermedia Data. Half times Equiv flows D values Rates of transport 

 h m3/h mol/Pa.h mol/h kg/h 

Air to water 5.700E+02 1.216E+11 7.085E+07 3.028E+00 1.478E+00 

Air to soil 8.295E+01 8.355E+11 4.869E+08 2.081E+01 1.016E+01 

Water to air 1.289E+04 1.075E+07 1.685E+07 3.552E+01 1.733E+01 

Water to sediment 1.724E+02 8.041E+08 1.260E+09 2.656E+03 1.296E+03 

Soil to air 2.776E+08 4.493E+01 9.060E+05 4.919E+01 2.401E+01 

Soil to water 6.758E+06 1.846E+03 3.722E+07 2.021E+03 9.861E+02 

Sediment to water 3.461E+04 1.001E+04 1.615E+08 1.329E+03 6.486E+02 

 Transport velocity parameters m/h m/year 

 1 air side air-water MTC 5 43800 

 2 water side air-water MTC .05 438 

 3 rain rate .0001 .876 

 4 aerosol deposition velocity 6E-10 5.256E-06 

 5 soil air phase diffusion MTC .02 175.2 

 6 soil water phase diffusion MTC .00001 .0876 

 7 soil air boundary layer MTC 5 43800 

 8 sediment-water diffusion MTC .0001 .876 

 9 sediment deposition velocity .0000005 .00438 

 10 sediment resuspension velocity .0000002 .001752 

 11 soil water runoff rate .00005 .438 

 12 soil solids runoff rate 1E-08 .0000876 

Individual process D values 

Air-water diffusion (air-side) 2.017E+07 Air-water diffusion (water-side) 1.025E+08 

Air-water diffusion (overall) 1.685E+07 

Rain dissolution to water 204918 Aerosol deposition to water 5.378906E+07 

Rain dissolution to soil 1844262 Aerosol deposition to soil 4.841015E+08 

Soil-air diffusion (air-phase) 726152.3 Soil-air diffusion (water-phase) 184426.2 

Soil-air diffusion (bndry layer) 1.815381E+08 Soil-air diffusion (overall) 906033.9 

Water-sediment diffusion 204918 

Water-sediment deposition 1.260246E+09 Sediment-water resuspension 1.613115E+08 

Soil-water runoff (water) 922131.1 Soil-water runoff (solids) 3.629508E+07 

265 
R331_0208_env

 FOUR COMPARTMENT FUGACITY LEVEL III CALCULATION MCCPs 

Bulk phase properties,compositions and rates 

 

Phase Air Water Soil Sediment Total Fish 

Bulk vol m3 1E+14 2E+11 1.8E+10 5E+08 

Air to water 5.700E+02 1.216E+11 7.085E+07 3.767E+01 1.839E+01 

 6 soil water phase diffusion MTC .00001 .0876 

 12 soil solids runoff rate 1E-08 .0000876 

Density kg/m3 1.185413 1000.003 1500.237 1280 

Bulk Z value 5.827E-04 1.568E+00 2.016E+04 1.613E+04 1.025E+05 

Bulk VZ 5.827E+10 3.135E+11 3.630E+14 8.066E+12 3.714E+14 

Emission mol/h 1024.59 1024.59 0 0 2049.18 

Emission kg/h 500 500 0 0 1000 

Fugacity Pa 5.318E-07 1.369E-06 6.791E-06 5.347E-06 1.369E-06 

Conc mol/m3 3.099E-10 2.147E-06 1.369E-01 8.625E-02 1.403E-01 

Conc g/m3 1.512E-07 1.048E-03 6.682E+01 4.209E+01 6.847E+01 

Conc ug/g phase 1.276E-04 1.048E-03 4.454E+01 3.288E+01 6.847E+01 

Conc ug/g solids 1.163E+03 1.123E+02 5.568E+01 8.769E+01 

Amount mol 30987.31 429367.8 2.46465E+09 4.312713E+07 2.508237E+09 

Amount kg 15121.81 209531.5 1.202749E+09 2.104604E+07 1.22402E+09 

Amount % 1.235422E-03 1.711831E-02 98.26223 1.71942 

Adv.flow m3/h 1E+12 2E+08 0 10000 

D rct mol/Pa.h 8.413E+08 2.173E+00 2.515E+03 5.590E+01 

D adv mol/Pa.h 5.827E+08 3.135E+08 0.000E+00 1.613E+08 

Rct rate mol/h 447.3794 2.975519E-06 1.708003E-02 2.98871E-04 447.3968 

Rct rate kg/h 218.3211 1.452053E-06 8.335053E-03 1.45849E-04 218.3296 

Adv rate mol/h 309.8731 429.3678 0 862.5425 1601.783 

Adv rate kg/h 151.2181 209.5315 0 420.9207 781.6703 

Reaction % 21.83212 1.452053E-07 8.335053E-04 1.458491E-05 

Advection % 15.12181 20.95315 0 42.09208 

Residence Times h : Overall 1224020 Reaction 5606293 Advection 1565903 

Intermedia Data. Half times Equiv flows D values Rates of transport 

 h m3/h mol/Pa.h mol/h kg/h 

Air to soil 8.295E+01 8.355E+11 4.869E+08 2.589E+02 1.263E+02 

Water to air 1.289E+04 1.075E+07 1.685E+07 2.308E+01 1.126E+01 

Water to sediment 1.724E+02 8.041E+08 1.260E+09 1.726E+03 8.424E+02 

Soil to air 2.776E+08 4.493E+01 9.060E+05 6.152E+00 3.002E+00 

Soil to water 6.758E+06 1.846E+03 3.722E+07 2.527E+02 1.233E+02 

Sediment to water 3.461E+04 1.001E+04 1.615E+08 8.636E+02 4.215E+02 

 Transport velocity parameters m/h m/year 

 1 air side air-water MTC 5 43800 

 2 water side air-water MTC .05 438 

 3 rain rate .0001 .876 

 4 aerosol deposition velocity 6E-10 5.256E-06 

 5 soil air phase diffusion MTC .02 175.2 

 7 soil air boundary layer MTC 5 43800 

 8 sediment-water diffusion MTC .0001 .876 

 9 sediment deposition velocity .0000005 .00438 

 10 sediment resuspension velocity .0000002 .001752 

 11 soil water runoff rate .00005 .438 

Individual process D values 

Air-water diffusion (air-side) 2.017E+07 Air-water diffusion (water-side) 1.025E+08 

Air-water diffusion (overall) 1.685E+07 

Rain dissolution to water 204918 Aerosol deposition to water 5.378906E+07 

Rain dissolution to soil 1844262 Aerosol deposition to soil 4.841015E+08 

Soil-air diffusion (air-phase) 726152.3 Soil-air diffusion (water-phase) 184426.2 

Soil-air diffusion (bndry layer) 1.815381E+08 Soil-air diffusion (overall) 906033.9 

Water-sediment diffusion 204918 

Water-sediment deposition 1.260246E+09 Sediment-water resuspension 1.613115E+08 

Soil-water runoff (water) 922131.1 Soil-water runoff (solids) 3.629508E+07 

266 
R331_0208_env

Appendix D Analytical methods used to determine C14-17 chlorinated paraffins in 

environmental media 

Campbell and McConnell, 1980

Murray et al., 1987a and b

Ballschmiter, 1994

Several studies have been undertaken to measure the levels of chlorinated paraffins in water 

and sediment. However, the analyses are complicated by the fact that there are a wide number 

of possible chlorinated paraffins (of different carbon chain length, degrees of chlorination and 

position of the chlorine atoms along the carbon chain) present in any given commercial 

product. Thus, care has to be taken when comparing the results of one survey with those of 

another, since different reference compounds may have been used and hence different 

chemical species may have been measured. The main analytical methods used for

determining the concentrations of C14-17 chlorinated paraffins in environmental samples are 

discussed in the following paragraphs. The methods have been referred to by the author 

names that appear in the sections on environmental levels in the main part of the report. The 

results from all the methods used are dependent to some extent on the substance(s) used as 

reference. 

This method combines solvent extraction/partition, column chromatography and finally TLC 

with argentation. Quantitation is by visual comparison of the intensity of the TLC ‘spot’ with 

those from standards. The intensity of the spot is chlorine dependent and so, in order to err on 

the high side of the possible concentration, a low chlorine content paraffin e.g.

42-45% wt. Cl, is used as reference. The method is relatively insensitive to chemical structure 

and cannot distinguish between short-chain (C10-13) and medium-chain (C14-20) chlorinated 

paraffins. This method, therefore, is likely to detect all medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

present in a sample, but may overestimate the concentration.

This method is based on a gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC-MS) method using 

negative chemical ionisation (NCI). The analysis is carried out by monitoring selected mass 

ranges of the mass spectrum for ions indicative of chlorinated paraffins. The mass ranges 

scanned for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are 399-419, 439-453, and 475-487 amu.

The commercial product, Paroil 152 (C14-17, 50-60% Cl), was used as reference material. This

method is reasonably specific for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, but will only identify 

the components which give rise to ions in the mass spectrometer in the ranges scanned. 

This method also uses gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with negative chemical 

ionisation, and is similar to that of Murray et al. (1987a and b). In this case the following 

masses were monitored in the mass spectrum: m/z = 402 and 404 (C14H24Cl6, 56% Cl), 416 

and 418 (C15H26Cl6, 51% Cl), 436 and 438 (C14H23Cl7, 57%). Again, the method will only 

detect components that give rise to ions in the mass spectrometer in these ranges. Hordaflex 

SP (C14-17, 56% Cl) was used as reference. This method was used for the results obtained in 

1994 and is reasonably specific for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The 1987 data 

reported for some areas of Germany were apparently obtained using a different analytical

method, involving a hydrogenation/dehydrochlorination step (similar to ICI, 1992), however 

few other details are available. 

267 
R331_0208_env

Jansson et al., 1993

This method is based on GC-MS with NCI. The method does not appear to distinguish 

between chlorinated paraffins of different chain length and uses Dechlorane as an internal 

standard and several unspecified commercial chlorinated paraffin products as reference 

compounds. The method can probably be considered to give an approximation of the

concentration of total (i.e. short-, medium and long-chain length) chlorinated paraffins 

present in a sample. 

Environment Agency Japan, 1991 

Very few experimental details are given. It is probably based on a GC-MS technique, but no 

indication is given as to what types of chlorinated paraffin were measured. Again, the method 

can probably be considered to give an approximation of the concentration of total chlorinated 

paraffins present in a sample. 

ICI, 1992

This method uses on-column reduction of the chlorinated paraffins to the parent hydrocarbon 

using palladium/hydrogen, followed by quantification using gas chromatography. Calibration 

uses known mixtures of paraffins or chlorinated paraffins. Preliminary work-up of samples

involved separation of water and suspended solids, then extraction and cleanup of each phase 

followed by gel permeation separation of the chlorinated paraffin components. The method 

takes no allowance for chlorine content and an average value of 50% is assumed for 

calibration purposes, thus the method may slightly underestimate the chlorinated paraffin 

concentration if high chlorine content material is present. This method will, however, 

unambiguously identify the presence of C14-17 chlorinated paraffins, provided any interfering

n-paraffins are removed from the sample prior to analysis. 

Greenpeace, 1995

The method used is similar to the ICI, 1992 method above. After sample cleanup, the analysis 

was carried out using on-column reduction to the parent hydrocarbon , followed by GC-MS 

quantification of the parent hydrocarbon. The masses used for quantification were m/z = 57, 

71, 85 and 99. A range of alkanes between C10 and C24 were used as external standards, with 

cyclododecane being used as an internal standard. The total chlorinated paraffin contents 

were calculated as from the measured alkane concentrations assuming an average chlorine 

content of 50% . The method could distinguish between individual chlorinated paraffins with 

different carbon chain lengths, thus the concentration of C14, C15, C16 and C17 chlorinated

paraffins could be determined separately. Again, this method may slightly underestimate the

chlorinated paraffin concentration if high chlorine content material is present, and may also 

be subject to interference from other alkanes present in the sample if they were not removed 

sufficiently in the sample clean-up stage. There is no information available on the efficiency 

of the sample clean-up steps employed. 

As this method was used to determine the levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in 

breast milk (which is considered in detail in the human health risk assessment) Industry have

commissioned an independent critique of this method (A. J. Hanley. 1995 Greenpeace Report 

on Chloroparaffins in the Environment. LGC (North West) Ltd. Report Number

LGCNW4613, May 2002). The report concluded that there was a need for more work to be

268 
R331_0208_env

done on the validation of this analytical method since, although differentiating between 

various types of chlorinated paraffins, it does not specifically detect chlorinated paraffins and 

so would be subject to interferences from any alkanes of similar backbone to the chlorinated

paraffins present in the sample. In addition it was concluded that more information was

needed on the robustness of the method particularly with regard to the results of method 

blanks, the lifetime of the catalyst used in the reduction and the effectiveness of the sample 

clean-up method. This needs to be addressed along with the accuracy and precision of the

method in order to fully validate the method. The report also indicated that the relatively 

limited sample size used in this study makes it difficult to make informed judgements on the 

levels and occurrence of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in breast milk samples 

throughout Europe. 

Schmid and Müller, 1995 

Rieger and Ballschmiter, 1995

Analysis was carried out using a GC method with a NCI/mass spectrometer detector. The 

masses used for quantification were m/z = 416 and 430 and m/z = 465 and 487. Results were 

expressed in terms of equivalents to a commercial C14-18, 52% Cl chlorinated paraffin 

(Witachlor 352), assuming that the masses chosen for detection were representative of the

chlorinated paraffins present in the samples and also the commercial chlorinated paraffin 

used as standard. 

Sample clean-up using a silica-gel column was employed. Hordaflex 60 (C10-13, 62% Cl) was 

used as a standard (as only peaks corresponding to C10-13 chlorinated paraffins were detected). 

Analysis was carried out using GC-ECD (electron capture detector) and GC-MS with 

negative chemical ionisation. The following masses were monitored in the analysis: 

m/z = 402 and 404 (C14H24Cl6); 416 and 418 (C15H26Cl6); 436 and 438 (C14H23Cl7). The 

method is similar to that used by Ballschmiter (1994) and Murray et al. (1987a and b). 

CEFAS, 1999 

A gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) method using negative ion chemical 

ionisation (NCI) was used for the analysis. Several commercial short- and medium-chain 

commercial products were used for identification and quantification. The ion fragmentation 

patterns of commercial formulations where highly dependent on the instrumental conditions 

but featured characteristic ion clusters that allowed some information on carbon-chain length 

and degree of chlorination to be obtained. This information, along with the retention 

characteristics of the various formulations, was used as the basis of identification of shortand medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the environmental samples. 

Both short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins showed characteristic ion clusters in the 

m/z range 70-75, corresponding to Cl2

.

 and HCl2

.

. The detector response for this mass range 

was used to estimate the sample concentration. Calibration curves were derived for several 

short- and medium-chain commercial substances, and that of the commercial substance 

corresponding most closely to the substances identified in the environment was used for 

quantification. In cases where the identity of the chlorinated paraffins found in the 

environment could not be identified reliably, an average response factor for 1 short-chain and

1 medium-chain chlorinated paraffin (with chlorine contents around 52-56% wt. Cl) was

used. This was particularly the case with the samples of fish, benthos and earthworms, where 

269 
R331_0208_env

the actual identity of the residues present were difficult to assign due to the high 

concentration of co-extracted lipid-soluble material. 

Since accurate calibration of the method is difficult to achieve in the absence of calibration 

standards for each component of the commercial mixtures, the results obtained can only be 

considered as estimates of the concentration. 

Bennie et al., 2000 

Analysis was by low resolution GC-MS with NCI. The MS detector was operated in full-scan 

mode from m/z=300 to 550. A commercial C10-13, 60% wt. Cl and C14-17, 52% wt. Cl product 

was used as reference material. Quantitation of the samples was carried out by selected ion

monitoring of a limited number of ions from the accumulated full scan (the most abundant 

ion cluster of the various components was used for quantification and the next most abundant 

cluster of the various components was used for confirmation). The paper indicates that the 

method used, as it uses low resolution mass spectrometry, may be more subject to 

interferences from other substances than some of the other methods. 

270 
R331_0208_env

van Zeijl, 1997 

The chlorinated paraffin-containing extracts were fractionated using High Performance

Liquid Chromatogaphy (HPLC) with gel permeation columns. The analysis was then carried 

out on the chlorinated paraffin fractions using GC-MS with electron capture negative 

ionisation. The following negative ions clusters were monitored in the analyses: m/z –35 and 

–37 (corresponding to Cl-

); m/z –70 and –72 (corresponding to Cl2

-

) and m/z –71 and –73 

(corresponding to HCl2). There are few details of the compounds used for analytical 

standards. A range of technical products appear to have been studied and the product whose

mass spectra resembled that of the sample most closely appears to have been used for 

quantification. This appears to have been a C22-26, 42% wt. Cl product as the majority of the

chlorinated paraffins found were thought to be long-chain length chlorinated paraffins. The 

report indicates that the choice of the reference compound was important as the detector

responses were found to vary by about 1 order of magnitude between the various products

studies. 

Metcalf-Smith et al., 1995

The method is similar to Bennie et al., 2000. 

Summary 

As can be seen from the above discussion, there are potential problems with all the methods

used. Most of the methods are likely to provide a rough estimate of the concentration of

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin, although some methods may not detect all the 

medium-chain length chlorinated paraffins present in a sample. The choice of the 

standard/reference compound used for quantification is important in these analysis, because if 

the composition of the reference compound is significantly different from that of the 

substance in the environment, then substantial errors could be introduced into the analysis 

and also mis-identification of the type of chlorinated paraffin present could occur. Thus the 

analytical methods should all be treated as giving only approximate concentrations in 

environmental samples. 

References

Ballschmiter K. (1994). Bestimmung von kurtz- und mittelkettigen chloroparaffinen in

Wasser- und Sedimentproben aus Oberflächenwässern. Universität Ulm. Abt. Analytische 

Chemie und Umweltchemie, 10 May, 1994. 

Bennie D. T., Sullivan C. A. and Maguire R. J. (2000). Occurrence of chlorinated paraffins in 

beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) from the St. Lawrence River and rainbow trout 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) and carp (Cyprinus carpio) from Lake Ontario. Water Qual. Res. J. 

Canada, 35, 263-281. 

Campbell I. and McConnell G. (1980). Chlorinated paraffins and the environment. 1. 

Environmental Occurrence. Environ. Sci. Technol., 9, 1209-1214. 

271 
R331_0208_env

CEFAS (1999). Sampling the levels of short and medium chain length chlorinated paraffins

in the environment. Final report for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the 

Regions. The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, 

Burnham-on-Crouch. 

Environment Agency Japan (1991). Chemicals in the Environment. Report on Environmental 

Survey and Wildlife Monitoring of Chemicals in F. Y. 1988 and 1989. Office of Health 

Studies, Department of Environmental Health, Environment Agency Japan.

Greenpeace (1995). Greenpeace Zur Sache: Chlorparaffine. May 1995. 

ICI (1992). Personal communication. 

Jansson B., Andersson R., Asplund L., Litzén K., Sellström U., Uvemo U-B., Wahlberg C.,

Wideqvist U., Odsjö T and Olsson M. (1993). Chlorinated and brominated persistent organic 

compounds in biological samples from the environment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 12, 

1163-1174. 

Murray T., Frankenberry M., Steele D. H. and Heath R. G. (1987a). Chlorinated paraffins: A 

report on the findings from two field studies, Sugar Creek, Ohio, Tinkers Creek, Ohio. 

Volume 1, Technical Report. United States Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA 

560/5-87-012. 

Murray T., Frankenberry M., Steele D. H., and Heath R. G. (1987b). Chlorinated paraffins: A 

report on the findings from two field studies, Sugar Creek, Ohio, Tinkers Creek, Ohio. 

Volume 2. Appendix D. The Quality Assurance Project Plan. United States Environmental 

Protection Agency Report EPA 560/5-87-12. 

Metcalfe-Smith J. L., Maguire R. J., Batchelor S. P. and Bennie D. T. (1995). Occurrence of 

chlorinated paraffins in the St. Lawrence river near a manufacturing plant in Cornwall, ON.

Aquatic ecosystem protection branch. National Water Research Institute. Department of the 

Environment, Burlington, ON. (as quoted in Tomy, 1998). 

Rieger R. and Ballschmiter K. (1995). Semivolatile organic compounds - polychlorinated 

dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDD), dibenzofurans (PCDF), biphenyls (PCB), hexachlorobenzene 

(HCB), 4,4’-DDE and chlorinated paraffins (CP) - as markers in sewer films. Fresenius J.

Anal. Chem., 352, 715-724. 

Schmid P. P. and Müller M. D. (1985). Trace level detection of chlorinated paraffins in 

biological and environmental samples, using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with 

negative-ion chemical ionization. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem., 68, 1985. 

Tomy G. T., Fisk A. T., Westmore J. B. and Muir D. C. G. (1998). Environmental chemistry 

and toxicology of polychlorinated n-alkanes. Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 158, 53-128. 

van Zeijl H. (1997). Report of the results of the one-off DIFFCHEM-project. Oslo and Paris 

Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution. Environmental Assessment and 

Monitoring Committee (ASMO), Copenhagen, 7-11 April 1997. 

272 
R331_0208_env

Appendix E Assessment of possible replacement of short-chain chlorinated paraffins 

with medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

Introduction

The current risk assessment report for short-chain chlorinated paraffins (CAS No: 

85535-84-8) recommended that risk reduction measures should be undertaken for two uses. 

The uses were formulation and use in metal cutting/working fluids and formulation and use in 

leather treatment (fat liquors). 

Draft risk reduction strategies have been developed for these two areas. In both cases 

marketing and use restrictions were recommended, and it was identified that the

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins could be used as an alternative in these applications. This

Appendix considers the possible effects of replacement of the short-chain by the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in these applications. 

Quantities and trends 

The available data on the amounts of both short-chain and medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins used in the EU in these applications are given in Table E.1. 

Table E.1 Trends in use of chlorinated paraffins in the EU 

Use Year Quantity of chlorinated paraffin supplied in EU (tonnes/year) 

Short-chain Medium-chain Total

Metal cutting/working fluids 1989 11,300a 

1990 10,050a 

1991 8,350a 

1992 7,300a 

1993 6,150a; 7,510c 

1994 9,380b; 8,690c 2,611b 11,301-11,991

1995 8,502c; 8,490c 2,765b 11,255-11,267 

1996 3,302b 

1997 5,953b 

1998 increasedd 

Leather treatment (fat liquors) 1994 390b 1,614b (ca 807) 2,004 (ca 1,000) 

1995 1,270b (ca 635) 

1996 decreasedd 1,172b (ca 586) decreasedd 

1997 1,048b (ca 524) 

1998 decreasedd 

Note: a) Figures refer to UK, Ireland and continental Western Europe, excluding Italy. 

b) CEFIC data for amounts supplied to the EU. For leather treatment, around 50% of the chlorinated paraffin supplied is 

exported from the EU after the formulation stage. The figures given in brackets represent the amount of chlorinated 

paraffin taking into account these exports. 

c) Reported in RPA, 1996 (figures for EU (excluding Luxembourg)).

d) Figures known but considered as confidential information

273 
R331_0208_env

Metal working/cutting fluids

The available data indicate that in 1994, a combined total of around 12,000 tonnes/year of 

short and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were used in this application in the EU. Before 

this date, the available information indicates that there was a general decrease in the amounts 

of chlorinated paraffin used in this application. Since this time, there has been a rapid

increase in the amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used. This increase is most

probably due to a move from the short-chain to medium-chain chlorinated paraffins for this 

application, rather than an increase in the total amounts of chlorinated paraffins used. 

The draft risk reduction strategy on short-chain chlorinated paraffins (RPA, 1996) indicates 

that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are most likely to be the preferred alternative for 

neat oil applications. With emulsion-based fluids, the majority of users are expected to move 

to chlorine-free alternatives, due to concerns over the stability of the fluid, although 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may also be used. 

The individual members of Euro Chlor have voluntarily agreed to reduce the use of 

short-chain chlorinated paraffins in metal cutting fluids to the following timetable: 80% 

reduction in use (from 1993 levels) by 1997, and elimination in use by year 2000. 

The switch to medium-chain chlorinated paraffins as replacements for the short-chain 

chlorinated paraffin may result in some changes in the fluid formulation for a given 

application. This arises because the relationship between chlorine content and viscosity is

slightly different for the two groups of additives. For a given chlorine content, the

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin generally has a higher viscosity than the short-chain 

chlorinated paraffin. Two important considerations in the formulation of metal 

cutting/working fluids are viscosity and chlorine content of the fluid. Thus, if short-chain 

chlorinated paraffins are replaced by medium-chain length chlorinated paraffins two 

approaches can be taken. Firstly for a given application, a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin 

of similar chlorine content to, but higher viscosity than, the short-chain chlorinated paraffin 

can be used. In this case, in order to maintain the viscosity of the final fluid, the base oil may 

have to be reformulated. The second approach would be to use a medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin of similar viscosity (and hence lower chlorine content) as the short-chain chlorinated

paraffin. In this case, the chlorine content of the fluid would be lower than the fluid 

containing short-chain chlorinated paraffin and so the result is that higher concentrations of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (up to 10% by weight rather than the typical level of 5%

by weight) may have to be used in the fluids (RPA, 1996). 

In order to take into account the possible replacement of short-chain chlorinated paraffins by 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, it can be assumed as a worst case that the total usage of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins could reach a total of around 12,000 tonnes/year (the 

sum of medium- and short-chain chlorinated paraffins for this use in 1994). This should 

represent the likely foreseeable maximum usage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in 

this area as other non-chlorinated alternatives for short-chain chlorinated paraffins may be

used, particularly in emulsifiable fluids (RPA, 1996). 

In addition, the effects of a possible increase in concentration of the chlorinated paraffin in 

the fluid from around 5% to 10% will also need to be taken into account.

274 
R331_0208_env

Leather fat liquors

The draft risk reduction strategy for short-chain chlorinated paraffins (RPA. 1997) indicated 

that the following substances could possibly be used as alternatives if marketing and use

restrictions were applied: 

- medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (and also longer chain length chlorinated 

paraffins); 

- animal oils (usually derived from beef tallow); 

- vegetable oils (e.g. corn, soya, palm and to some extent rapeseed). 

It is clear from the available data reported in Table E1 that there is a general decrease in the

amounts of chlorinated paraffins used in leather fat liquors in the EU. Further, the 

medium-chain length chlorinated paraffins are much more commonly used that the 

short-chain length chlorinated paraffins in this application. If all the short-chain were 

replaced by medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, then the amount supplied for formulation 

may reach around 2,000 tonnes/year, with around 1000 tonnes/year of this being

subsequently applied to leather in the EU. These figures relate to 1994, and represent the 

highest usage in recent years. These figures are likely to represent the foreseeable upper limit 

of the amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used in this application, as it is clear that

a decline in use of both medium- and short-chain chlorinated paraffins is occurring. 

Effect on predicted environmental concentrations 

Environmental releases for regional and continental modelling

Using the extrapolated use figures above, and the release factors detailed in the main report, 

the following releases to the environment can be estimated: 

Metal cutting/working fluids 

Assuming a total usage of 12,000 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins and the 

same split between oil-based and emulsion fluids as in the main report, gives around 

8,060 tonnes/year in oil-based fluids and 3,940 tonnes/year in emulsion fluids, then the 

following releases can be estimated: 

Formulation of fluids: 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used = 12,000 tonnes/year 

Release to the environment = 0.25% to waste water 

Total EU release = 30 tonnes/year to waste water

Regional release = 3 tonnes/year to waste water 

Continental release = 27 tonnes/year to waste water 

Use in Emulsifiable fluids: 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used = 3,940 tonnes/year 

Release to the environment = 50% to waste water 

Total EU release = 1,970 tonnes/year to waste water 

Regional release = 197 tonnes/year to waste water 

 Continental release = 1,773 tonnes/year to waste water 

275 
R331_0208_env

Use in Oil-based fluids: 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used = 8,060

Release to the environment = 4% (large/medium facility with swarf reprocessing) to 

waste water 

= 18% (small and medium sized facilities with no swarf 

reprocessing) to waste water 

Fraction of total use in large/medium facilities = 60% 

Fraction of total use in medium/small facilities = 40% 

Total EU release to environment = 8,060×((0.04×0.6)+(0.18×0.4)) = 774 tonnes/year 

to waste water 

Regional release = 77.4 tonnes/year to waste water 

 Continental release = 696.6 tonnes/year to waste water 

Leather fat liquors 

Assuming a total usage of 2,000 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the 

formulation of leather fat liquors, with around 50% of these liquors (containing 

1,000 tonnes/year of medium chain chlorinated paraffins) in the EU, then the following 

releases can be estimated: 

Formulation of leather fat liquors (default calculation): 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used = 2,000 tonnes/year 

Release to the environment = 0.1% to air 

 = 0.3% to waste water

Total EU release = 2.0 tonnes/year to air 

 = 6.0 tonnes/year to waste water 

Regional release = 0.2 tonnes/year to air 

 = 0.6 tonnes/year to waste water 

 Continental release = 1.8 tonnes/year to air 

 = 5.4 tonnes/year to waste water 

Use of leather fat liquors: 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used = 1000 tonnes/year 

Release to the environment = 2% to waste water 

Total EU release = 20 tonnes/year to waste water 

Regional release = 2 tonnes/year to waste water 

Continental release = 18 tonnes/year to waste water 

Overall regional and continental releases

Table E.2 shows the total regional and continental releases estimated from the main report 

for the current usage of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, and the estimated total taking

into account the revised figures for use in metal working/cutting and leather treatment,

assuming that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins will totally replace the short-chain

chlorinated paraffins in these applications. 

276 
Table E.2 Revised releases for the regional and continental environment 

Use Lifestage Estimated release from original report (current situation)a Estimated re

medium-cha

Regional Continental Reg

Metal cutting/working fluids Formulation 1,488 kg/year to water 13,875 kg/year to water 3,000 kg/y

Use in oil-based fluids 38,100 kg/year to water 342,900 kg/year to water 77,400 kg/y

Use in emulsifiable fluids 99,200 kg/year to water 892,800 kg/year to water 197,000 kg/

Leather fat liquors Formulation 315 kg/year to water 

105 kg/year to air

2,829 kg/year to water 

943 kg/year to air

600 kg/ye

200 kg/y

Use 1,050 kg/year to water 9,430 kg/year to water 2,000 kg/y

All other uses All 30,255 kg/year to water 

16,922 kg/year to air 

271,748 kg/year to water 

152,250 kg/year to air 

30,255 kg/y

16,922 kg

Total 170,408 kg/year to water (split 

119,286 kg/year to wwtp and 

51,122 kg/year direct to 

surface water)

17,027 kg/year to air 

1,533,582 kg/year to water 

(split 1,073,482 kg/year to 

wwtp and 460,101 kg/year 

direct to surface water) 

153,193 kg/year to air 

310,255 kg/ye

217,179 kg/ye

93,077 kg/y

surfac

17,122 kg

Note: a) Figures derived in main report 

277 
R331_0208_env

Local release estimates

In this Section, the local release estimates have been re-calculated using the methods given in 

the main report, but based on the extrapolated use volumes for medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins. 

Metal working/cutting fluids 

The releases estimated below are based on the same methods as used in the main report. In

addition, the possible increase in the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content from 5% (as 

assumed in the main assessment) to 10%, as may occur when they are used to replace 

short-chain chlorinated paraffins for some applications, is also taken into account. 

Formulation of fluids: 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used = 12,000 tonnes/year 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in region = 1,200 tonnes/year 

Fraction used at one site = 1/6 = 200 tonnes/year 

Release to the environment = 0.25% to waste water 

Number of days = 300 days/year 

Local release = 500 kg/year = 1.67 kg/day to waste water 

Use in Emulsifiable fluids: 

Concentration of chlorinated paraffin in oil phase = 10% 

Dilution rate of oil in water = 1:20 oil:water

Weekly loss rate of fluid = 60 litres/week to waste water 

Loss rate of chlorinated paraffin = 0.30 kg/week 

Number of days = 300 days/year = 6 days/week 

Local release = 0.050 kg/day 

In addition, there will be an intermittent loss of 50 kg/event of medium chain chlorinated

paraffin when the whole system (10,000 litres) is replaced 

 

Use in Oil-based fluids: 

Concentration of chlorinated paraffin in fluid = 10% 

Amount of cutting fluid contained at large site = 50,000 litres (containing 

 5,000 kg of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin) 

Amount of cutting fluid contained at small site = 10,000 litres (containing 

 1000 kg of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin) 

Release to environment from large site = 4% to waste water

Release to environment from small site = 18% to waste water

Number of days = 300 days/year 

Local release (large site) = 200 kg/year = 0.67 kg/day 

Local release (small site) = 180 kg/year = 0.6 kg/day 

Leather fat liquors 

The local release estimates and PEC calculations will be the same as in the main report as

they do not depend on the total amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in the 

application.

278 
R331_0208_env

PECregional and PECcontinental

Possible future situation 

The values for PECregional and PECcontinental estimated using the release data given in

Table E.2 are shown in Table E.3. The values for the current situation are taken from the 

main report. 

Table E.3 PECregional and PECcontinental for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins for the current situation and possible

future increased use as a result of risk reduction measures on short-chain chlorinated paraffins 

PEC Current situation (from main report)

PECregional(air) 3.35×10-6 mg/m3 5.45×10-6 mg/m3 

PECregional(surface water) 0.39 μg/l 0.71 μg/l 

PECregional(agricultural soil) 50.4 mg/kg wet wt. 91.6 mg/kg wet wt. 

PECregional(sediment) 8.80 mg/kg wet wt. 16.0 mg/kg wet wt. 

PECcontinental(air) 1.03×10-6 mg/m3 1.7×10-6 mg/m3 

PECcontinental(surface water) 0.053 μg/l 0.096 μg/l 

PECcontinental(agricultural soil) 5.31 mg/kg wet wt. 9.62 mg/kg wet wt. 

PECcontinental(sediment) 1.21 mg/kg wet wt. 2.18 mg/kg wet wt. 

From the PECs reported in Table E3, it can be seen that in a worst case, replacement of 

short-chain chlorinated paraffins by medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in metal 

working/cutting and leather fat liquoring applications could increase the regional 

concentrations by around a factor of 2. 

It should be born in mind that the available monitoring data indicate that the current regional 

concentrations in surface water, sediment and soil are less than predicted using the EUSES 

model. This indicates that the actual regional emissions may be overestimated and/or the 

actual removal rate in the environment may be underestimated in the model used. This adds 

uncertainty to the predicted future concentrations. 

PEClocal

The values obtained for the PEClocal for metal working/cutting use, taking into account the 

possible increased emissions of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are shown below. For 

most of the other uses a change in the PEClocal may result as a consequence of the increase in 

the PECregional. The consequence of these changes are considered in later. 

Metal cutting/working

The revised PEClocal for use in metal working fluids are as follows: 

 Formulation: PEClocal(water) = 3.81 μg/l

PEClocal(sediment) = 48.8 mg/kg wet wt.

PEClocal(soil) = 30.0 mg/kg wet wt.

PECfish(secondary poisoning) = 2.15 mg/kg wet wt.

PECworm(secondary poisoning) = 10.3 mg/kg wet wt. 

279 
R331_0208_env

Use in oil-based fluids: PEClocal(water) = 1.95 μg/l

 (large site) PEClocal(sediment) = 25.0 mg/kg wet wt.

PEClocal(soil) = 13.1 mg/kg wet wt.

PECfish(secondary poisoning) = 1.32 mg/kg wet wt.

PECworm(secondary poisoning) = 8.9 mg/kg wet wt. 

Use in oil-based fluids: PEClocal(water) = 1.82 μg/l

 (small site) PEClocal(sediment) = 23.3 mg/kg wet wt.

PEClocal(soil) = 11.9 mg/kg wet wt.

PECfish(secondary poisoning) = 1.26 mg/kg wet wt.

PECworm(secondary poisoning) = 8.8 mg/kg wet wt. 

Use in emulsifiable fluids: PEClocal(water) = 0.80 μg/l

PEClocal(sediment) = 10.2 mg/kg wet wt.

PEClocal(soil) = 2.63 mg/kg wet wt.

PECfish(secondary poisoning) = 0.81 mg/kg wet wt.

PECworm(secondary poisoning) = 8.01 mg/kg wet wt. 

Use in emulsifiable fluids: PEClocal(water) = 93.6 μg/l

 (intermittent release) PEClocal(sediment) = 1,200 mg/kg wet wt.

PEClocal(soil) = 93.5 mg/kg wet wt.

PECfish(secondary poisoning) = 1.6 mg/kg wet wt.

PECworm(secondary poisoning) = 15.7 mg/kg wet wt. 

Effect on PEC/PNEC ratios 

The effects of a total replacement of short-chain chlorinated paraffins by medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins in metal working and leather uses on the PEC/PNEC ratios for all uses 

are considered in Tables E4 to E7. The current situation is taken from the main risk

assessment report. The future situation includes the effects of the predicted increase in 

regional concentrations on the PEC/PNEC ratios for all uses. 

The results shown in Tables E.4 to E7 indicate that the biggest potential of the impact 

replacement occurs on the PEC/PNECs for the aquatic (surface water, sediment, fish) 

compartment, with very little change predicted to occur on the PEC/PNEC for the terrestrial 

compartment. 

For surface water and sediment, it can be seen that for many uses, the PEC is dominated by

the regional contribution. The use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in metal 

cutting/working fluids is predicted to have the highest contribution to the total releases of the 

substance to water. In the current situation, the regional contribution to water from this use is 

around 81% (138,788 kg/year out of a total of 170,408 kg/year), and this is predicted to 

increase to around 89% (277,400 kg/year out of a total of 310,255 kg/year). 

280 
R331_0208_env

Table E4 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for surface water (PNEC = 0.2 μg/l) 

Scenario Step Current situation using 

measured regional 

concentrations

Future situation

PEC (μg/l) PEC/PNEC PEC (μg/l) PEC/PNEC

Production 4 Sites 0.10-0.27 0.50-1.35 0.70-0.87 3.50-4.35

Use in PVC – plastisol Compounding - O 0.15 0.75 0.75 3.75

coating Conversion – O 0.44 2.20 1.05 5.25 

Compounding/conversion – O 0.49 2.45 1.10 5.50 

Use in PVC – Compounding - O 0.27 1.35 0.88 4.40 

extrusion/other Compounding – PO 1.03 5.15 1.63 8.15 

Compounding – C 0.18 0.90 0.78 3.90 

Conversion – O 0.62 3.10 1.23 6.15 

Conversion – PO 0.66 3.30 1.26 6.30

Conversion – C 0.57 2.85 1.18 5.90 

Compounding/conversion – O 0.79 3.95 1.40 7.00 

Compounding/conversion – PO 1.59 7.95 2.19 10.95

Compounding/conversion – C 0.65 3.25 1.26 6.30 

Use in plastics/rubber Compounding 0.19 0.95 0.79 3.95

Conversion 0.39 1.95 0.99 4.95

Compounding/conversion 0.48 2.40 1.08 5.40

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligible <1 negligible <1

Formulation 0.38 1.90 0.98 4.90 

Industrial application 0.21 1.05 0.82 4.10

Domestic application 0.10 0.50 0.71 3.55

Use in metal cutting/ Formulation 1.64 8.20 3.81 19.05

working fluids Use in oil-based fluids (large) 0.71 3.55 1.32a [1.95]b 6.60a [9.75]b

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 0.66 3.30 1.26a [1.82]b 6.30a [9.10]b 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.15 0.75 0.75a [0.80]b 3.75a [4.00]b 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – intermittent 

release 

46.6 233 47.1a [93.6]b 236a [468]b 

Use in leather fat Formulation 0.29 1.45 0.89 4.45

liquors Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

1.77 8.85 2.38 11.9

Use – processing of wet blue 6.79 34.0 36.95 

Use in carbonless copy 

paper 

Paper recycling 0.43 2.15 1.03 5.15

0.1 0.5 0.71 

Use in paints 

7.39 

Regional sources 3.55 

Note: a) Assuming a 5% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid. 

b) Assuming a 10% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid. 

281 
R331_0208_env

Table E5 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for sediment (PNEC = 1 mg/kg wet wt.) 

Scenario Step Current situation using 

measured regional 

concentrations

Future situation

PEC (mg/kg

wet wt.) 

PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg

wet wt.) 

PEC/PNEC 

Production 4 Sites 1.28-3.46 1.3-3.5 9.0-11.2 9.0-11.2

Use in PVC – plastisol Compounding - O 1.88 1.9 9.6 9.6 

coating Conversion – O 5.68 5.7 13.4 13.4 

Compounding/conversion - O 6.27 6.3 14.0 14.0 

Use in PVC – Compounding - O 3.46 3.5 11.2 11.2 

extrusion/other Compounding - PO 13.2 13.2 20.9 20.9

Compounding – C 2.30 2.3 10.0 10.0 

Conversion – O 7.94 7.9 15.7 15.7 

Conversion – PO 8.45 8.5 16.2 16.2

Conversion – C 7.30 7.3 15.1 15.1 

Compounding/conversion – O 10.1 10.1 17.9 17.9 

Compounding/conversion - PO 20.4 20.4 28.1 28.1

Compounding/conversion - C 8.32 8.3 16.1 16.1 

Use in plastics/rubber Compounding 2.38 2.4 10.1 10.1 

Conversion 4.99 5.0 12.7 12.7

Compounding/conversion 6.14 6.1 13.8 13.8

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligible <1 negligible <1

Use in paints Formulation 4.86 4.9 12.6 12.6 

Industrial application 2.69 2.7 10.4 10.4

Domestic application 1.28 1.3 9.04 9.04

Use in metal Formulation 21.0 21.0 48.8 48.8

cutting/working fluids Use in oil-based fluids (large) 9.09 9.1 16.9a [25.0]b 16.9a [25.0]b

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 8.45 8.5 16.2a [23.3]b 16.2a [23.3]b

Use in emulsifiable fluids 1.92 1.9 9.63a [10.2]b 9.6a [10.2]b

Use in emulsifiable fluids – intermittent 

release 

597 597 604a [1,200]b 604a [1,200]b

Formulation 3.71 3.7 11.4 11.4

Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

22.7 22.7 30.5 30.5

Use – processing of wet blue 86.9 86.9 94.7 94.7 

Use in carbonless copy 

paper 

Paper recycling 5.50 5.5 13.2 13.2

Regional sources 0.7 0.7 16.0 16.0 

Use in leather fat 

liquors 

Note: a) Assuming a 5% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid. 

b) Assuming a 10% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid. 

282 
R331_0208_env

Table E.6 Estimated PEC/PNEC ratios for soil (PNEC = 2.12 mg/kg wet wt.) 

Scenario Step Current situation using 

measured regional 

concentrations

Future situation

PEC (mg/kg

wet wt) 

PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg

wet wt.) 

PEC/PNEC 

Production 4 Sites negligible <1 negligible <1

Use in PVC – plastisol 0.51 0.24 2.21 1.0 

coating Conversion – O 3.21 1.5 4.92 

Compounding/conversion – O 3.64 5.34 2.5 

Use in PVC – 1.64 0.77 3.34 1.6 

extrusion/other Compounding – PO 8.53 4.0 10.2 4.8 

Compounding – C 0.81 0.38 2.51 1.2 

Conversion – O 4.82 2.3 6.52 3.1 

Conversion – PO 5.16 2.4 6.86

Conversion – C 4.40 2.1 6.10 2.9 

Compounding/conversion – O 6.37 3.0 8.07 3.8 

Compounding/conversion – PO 13.6 6.4 15.3 7.2

Compounding/conversion – C 5.12 2.4 6.82 3.2 

Use in plastics/rubber Compounding 0.87 0.41 2.57 1.2 

Conversion 2.71 1.3 4.41 2.1

Compounding/conversion 3.5 1.7 5.20 2.5

Use in sealants Formulation and use negligible <1 negligible <1

Use in paints Formulation 2.62 1.2 4.32 2.0 

Industrial application 1.08 0.51 2.79 1.3

Domestic application negligible <1 negligible <1

Use in metal 6.7 30.0 14.2

cutting/working fluids Use in oil-based fluids (large) 5.66 2.7 7.36a [13.1]b 3.5a [6.2]b

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 5.15 2.4 6.85a [11.9]b 3.2a [5.6]b

Use in emulsifiable fluids 0.51 0.24 2.21a [2.63]b 1.0a [1.2]b

Use in emulsifiable fluids – intermittent 

release 

46 21.7 47.6a [93.5]b 22.5a [44.1]b

Use in leather fat Formulation 1.78 0.84 3.49 1.6

liquors Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

15.3 7.2 17.0 8.0

Use – processing of wet blue 60.8 28.6 62.5 29.5 

Use in carbonless copy 

paper 

Paper recycling 3.02 1.4 4.76 2.2

Regional sources 0.088 0.042 91.6 43.2 

Compounding - O 

2.3 

1.7 

Compounding - O 

3.2

Formulation 14.1 

Note: a) Assuming a 5% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid. 

b) Assuming a 10% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid.

283 
Table E7 Estimated concentrations in fish and earthworms for secondary poisoning (PNEC = 0.5 mg/kg) 

Scenario Step Current situation using measured regional concentrations 

Fish Earthworms Fis

PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg) 

Production Site A 0.11 0.22 negligible <1 0.77 

Site B 0.15 0.30 negligible <1 0.81 Site C 0.19 0.38 <1 0.84 Site D 0.11 0.22 negligible <1 0.77 

Use in PVC – Compounding - O 0.13 0.26 1.7 3.4 0.79 plastisol coating Conversion – O 0.26 0.52 9.3 18.6 0.92 

Compounding/conversion - O 0.28 0.56 10.4 20.8 0.94 

Use in PVC – Compounding - O 0.19 0.38 4.8 9.6 0.84 extrusion/other Compounding - PO 0.52 1.04 24.1 48.2 1.18 

Compounding – C 0.14 0.28 2.5 5.0 0.80 Conversion – O 0.34 0.68 27.4 1.00 Conversion – PO 0.36 0.72 14.7 29.4 1.02 Conversion – C 0.32 0.64 12.6 25.2 0.98 Compounding/conversion – O 0.42 0.84 18.1 36.2 1.08 

Compounding/conversion - PO 1.54 38.3 76.6 1.43 

Compounding/conversion - C 0.36 0.72 14.6 29.2 1.01 

Use in plastics/rubber Compounding 0.15 0.30 2.7 5.4 0.81 

Conversion 0.24 7.8 15.6 Compounding/conversion 0.28 10.0 20.0 0.93 

negligible <1 negligible <1 negligible 

negligible

13.7

0.77 

0.48 0.90 0.56

Use in sealants Formulation and use 

Table E7 continued overleaf 

284 
Table E7 continued 

Scenario Step Current situation using measured regional concentrations 

Fish Earthworms Fis

PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg) PEC/PNEC PEC (mg/kg) 

Use in paints Formulation 0.23 0.46 7.6 15.2 0.89 

Industrial application 0.16 0.32 3.3 6.6 0.82 

Domestic application <1 negligible <1 negligible 

Use in metal Formulation 0.80 1.60 39.7 79.4 2.15 cutting/working fluids Use in oil-based fluids (large) 0.38 0.76 16.1 32.2 1.04a [1.32]b 

Use in oil-based fluids (small) 0.36 0.72 14.7 

29.4 1.02a [1.26]b 

Use in emulsifiable fluids 

0.13 0.26 1.7 3.4 0.79a [0.81]b 

Use in emulsifiable fluids – intermittent release 

0.52 1.04 129 258 1.18a [1.6]b 

Use in leather fat Formulation 0.19 0.38 5.2 10.4 0.85 liquors Use – complete processing of raw 

hides 

0.86 1.72 43.0 86.0 1.51 

Use – processing of wet blue 3.10 6.2 171 342 3.75 

Use in carbonless copy paper 

Paper recycling 0.23 0.46 8.8 17.6 0.89 

negligible

Note: a) Assuming a 5% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid. 

b) Assuming a 10% medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content in the base fluid. 

285 
R331_0208_env

References

RPA (1996). Risk-benefit analysis on the use of short chain length chlorinated paraffins in 

cutting fluids in the metal working industry. Produced for the Department of the

Environment. Risk and Policy Analysts Limited. 

RPA (1997). Risk-benefit analysis on the use of short-chain chlorinated paraffins in leather 

processing. Stage 1 Report for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the 

Regions. Risk and Policy Analysts Limited. 

286 
R331_0208_env

Appendix F Estimation of waste remaining in the environment and further 

consideration of diffusive emissions from articles 

Introduction

This Appendix considers an alternative approach to that given in the main risk assessment 

report to estimating the possible diffusive emissions of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

from products over their lifetimes. The basis of the approach taken here is that outlined in the 

November 1999 and May 2000 draft Risk Assessment Reports for di-(2-diethylhexyl) 

phthalate (DEHP), for which Sweden is the rapporteur country. The approach considers both 

losses of the substance itself over the products lifetime and also the production of any waste

containing the substance that may be released to the environment over the products’ lifecycle. 

DEHP is the major plasticiser used in PVC, and accounts for around 51% of the total 

phthalate plasticiser use. In some calculations in this Appendix it is assumed that the use 

pattern of PVC (and other polymers) containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is 

similar to that of PVC containing DEHP. This assumption is reasonable as medium-chain

chlorinated paraffins in PVC are mainly used as secondary plasticisers alongside the primary 

plasticisers (phthalates such as DEHP). 

Quantity of DEHP used in PVC (and other polymers) in the EU 

= 462,000 tonnes/year 

As DEHP accounts for around 51% of the phthalate plasticiser usage in PVC, the total 

amount of phthalate plasticised PVC produced in the EU can be estimated at approximately 

3×106

 tonnes/year. 

Estimated quantity of PVC containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced 

in EU = 0.36-0.54×106

 tonnes/year 

In order to use the data given in the DEHP report, the relative market share of PVC 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is needed. This can be estimated roughly as 

follows (the information on DEHP is taken from the May 2000 draft of the risk assessment 

for that substance): 

Typical DEHP content of PVC = 30% 

Estimated quantity of PVC containing DEHP produced in EU = 1.54×106

 tonnes/year 

Quantity of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in PVC (and other polymers) in 

EU = 53,973 tonnes/year 

Typical medium-chain chlorinated paraffin of PVC = 10-15% 

Therefore, based on the above calculations, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins could be 

present in around 12-18% of the total PVC (or other polymers) containing plasticisers 

(phthalates) produced in the EU. A figure of 18% of the total plasticiser use will be used in 

the following Sections as a worst case. 

In the draft DEHP risk assessment, the uses of flexible PVC were split between indoor and 

outdoor uses, with 78% of the flexible PVC used in indoor applications and 22% used in 

outdoor applications. This split will also be assumed to be applicable for PVC containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins here. 

287 
R331_0208_env

It should be noted that the actual amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in the 

various PVC applications considered are less well defined than is the case for DEHP. This 

therefore introduces further uncertainty into the emissions estimated. Information has been 

provided on the amounts of medium chain chlorinated paraffins used in certain applications, 

but the data set is incomplete (the actual final use of a large fraction of the total tonnage could 

not be determined in the survey, and the applicability to the EU as a whole is uncertain) and

so can only act as a guide. This information is discussed in the relevant Sections below and 

shows that in general the approach taken appears to be reasonable. 

Estimated emissions from volatilisation from PVC 

In Section 3.1.0.2.9 of the main risk assessment report, an emission figure to air for medium

chain chlorinated paraffins of 5×10-4 μg/m2

/s was determined for volatilisation from PVC 

over 21 days. Assuming this emission rate remains constant with time this emission figure is 

equivalent to 15.8 mg/m2

/year. This is used here to estimate releases to the environment

taking into account the surface area of products in a similar way as carried out for DEHP. 

Indoor applications

PVC flooring 

In the draft DEHP risk assessment the total annual production of PVC-flooring in the EU was

taken as 2.3×108

 m2/year, with a lifetime of 20 years. If it is assumed that medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins are present in 18% of the flooring, the amount of flooring containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced in the EU is 4.14×107

 m2/year, and the total 

amount present in the EU is 8.28×108

 m2 assuming a 20 year life-span. 

Using the emission factor of 15.8 mg/m2/year for on the total area of flooring estimated to

contain medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in the EU gives an estimated air emission 

of 13.1 tonnes/year from this source. 

A supplier of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has indicated that around 20% of the total 

supplied for PVC applications is used in flooring. Assuming this percentage is applicable to 

all suppliers, the total amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used PVC flooring can 

be estimated at around 10,700 tonnes/year. Assuming that PVC flooring has a density of 

1,300 kg/m3

 and a thickness of 2 mm (0.002 m) (taken from the draft DEHP report), and a 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content of 10-15%, the total annual surface area of 

PVC-flooring containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be estimated as

2.7-4.1×107 m2

/year, or a total surface area present in the EU of 5.4-8.2 m2 over a 20 year

lifetime. This is in good agreement with the figure estimated above and leads to an estimated 

air emission of 8.5-13.0 tonnes/year using the same emission factor as above. 

Further information has also been provided to indicate that around 50-60% of cushion vinyl 

flooring is coated with polyurethane in order to improve the wear resistance and stain

resistance of the product. This coating will obviously affect the potential for volatilisation of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from the product but no information is available on this. 

If it is assumed that 50% of the PVC flooring has this type of coating, and the coating reduces 

the emission rate by a factor of 10, then the estimated air emission for medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins would be of the order of 5.1-7.8 tonnes/year. 

288 
R331_0208_env

Vinyl wall covering 

In the draft DEHP risk assessment the total annual production of vinyl wall covering in the

EU was taken as 4×108

 m2/year, with a lifetime of 7 years. If it is assumed that medium-chain

chlorinated paraffins are present in 18% of the wall covering, the total amount of wall 

covering containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in the EU = 4×108

×7×0.18 

= 5.0×108

 m2. 

If it is assumed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are present in 18% of these products 

and that the emission rate is similar to that of the phthalates present, then an air emission of 

7.2 tonnes/year for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be estimated from this source. 

Using the emission factor of 15.8 mg/m2

/year for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, gives 

an estimated air emission of 7.9 tonnes/year from this source. 

A supplier of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins has indicated that around 11% of the total 

supplied for PVC applications is used in wall coverings. Assuming this percentage is 

applicable to all suppliers, the total amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin used in 

PVC wall coverings can be estimated at around 5,900 tonnes/year. Assuming that PVC wall

covering has density of 1,300 kg/m3

 (taken from the draft DEHP report), a thickness of 

0.5 mm (0.005 m; estimate) and a medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content of 10-15%, the 

total annual surface area of PVC-wall covering containing medium-chain chlorinated

paraffins can be estimated as 6.0-9.0×107

 m2/year or a total of 4.2-6.4×108 m2 over a 7 year

lifetime. This is in good agreement with the figure estimated above, and leads to an estimated 

air emission of 6.6-10.0 tonnes/year from this source using the same emission factor as 

above. 

Coated products, film and sheet 

In the draft DEHP risk assessment the relevant statistics for the production of coated 

products, film and sheet (e.g. upholstery, packaging, stationary products, luggage, clothing 

etc.) containing phthalate plasticisers could not be obtained. Instead the worst case 

assumption of 40 tonnes/year for total phthalate emissions from these products as determined 

by the European Council for Plasticisers and Intermediates (ECPI, 1996) was used as the 

basis of the release estimate. This estimate was based on a product lifetime of 7 years. 

Information provided from a supplier of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins indicates that 

around 6.6% of the total supplied for PVC applications is used in textiles and coated 

products. Assuming that this percentage is applicable to all suppliers, the total amount of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in this type of product can be estimated at around 

3,600 tonnes/year. It is not possible to relate this figure the information reported above for 

DEHP. As a rough approximation, assuming a density of PVC of 1,300 kg/m3

, an average 

thickness for this type of product of 1 mm (0.001m) and a 10-15% medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin content, the annual surface area for this type of product containing medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins produced each year can be estimated at 1.8-2.7×107 m2

/year. This 

should be considered a very crude estimate as the actual thickness of products in this group 

could be very variable. Assuming the products have a 7 year lifetime, the total surface area 

present in the EU is 1.3-1.9×108

 m2. Using the emission factor of 15.8 mg/m2/year for on the

total area estimated to contain medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in the EU gives an 

estimated air emission of tonnes/year from this source of 2-3 tonnes/year. This figure also 

289 
R331_0208_env

assumes that emissions only occurs from one side of the products. If emissions occur from 

both sides, then the surface area figures, hence release figures, would be doubled i.e. 

4-6 tonnes/year. This is of a similar order to the value obtained above based on the DEHP 

data. No distinction is made here in the amounts of these products used from indoor and 

outdoor applications, although it is likely that most are used in indoor applications. 

Cable 

If it is assumed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are present in 18% of these products 

and that the emission rate is similar to that of the phthalates present, then an air emission of 

9 tonnes/year for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be estimated from this source. 

In the draft DEHP risk assessment report the relevant statistics for the production of cable 

containing phthalate plasticisers could not be obtained. Instead the worst case assumption of 

50 tonnes/year for total phthalate emissions from these products as determined by the 

European Council for Plasticisers and Intermediates (ECPI, 1996) was used as the basis of 

the release estimate. 

Information provided from a supplier of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins indicates that 

around 17% of the total supplied for PVC applications is used in cable products. Assuming 

that this percentage is applicable to all suppliers, the total amount of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins used in this type of product can be estimated at around 

9,200 tonnes/year. It is not possible to relate this figure the information reported above for

DEHP. Assuming a density of PVC of 1,300 kg/m3

, and average thickness for this type of

product of 1.5 mm (0.0015m; taken from draft DEHP assessment) and a 10-15% 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content, the annual surface area for this type of product 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced each year can be estimated at

3.1-4.7×107 m2

/year. Assuming the products have a 30 year lifetime (from DEHP report), the 

total surface area present in the EU is 9.3-14.1×108

 m2. Cabling can be used in both indoor 

and outdoor applications. In the draft DEHP risk assessment, the overall split of PVC 

applications between indoor and outdoor was 78%:22%. The actual split for cabling is 

unknown and so this split will be assumed to apply here. This gives the total surface area of 

cabling present in indoor applications in the EU as 7.3-10.9×108

 m2. 

Using the emission factor of 15.8 mg/m2

/year for on the total area estimated to contain

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in the EU gives an estimated air emission from 

this source of 11.5-16.7 tonnes/year. This is of a similar order to the value obtained above

based on the DEHP data. Emissions from outdoor cabling applications are considered later. 

Hose and profile 

In the draft DEHP risk assessment report the relevant statistics for the production of hose and 

profile containing phthalate plasticisers could not be obtained. Instead it was assumed that, as

the surface to volume ratio and lifetime were similar to PVC-flooring, the overall releases of 

DEHP would be similar to flooring. The relative amounts of DEHP used in 

flooring:profile/hose (74,708 tonnes/year:55,911 tonnes/year or 1.34:1) was used to scale the 

estimated emissions from PVC flooring to give an estimate from this use. 

If it is assumed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are present in PVC-flooring and 

hoses/profile in a similar ratio to found for DEHP (i.e. 1.34:1) the releases to air from this

290 
R331_0208_env

application can be estimated using the above scaling factor from those estimated for 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin in PVC-flooring. Thus the estimated release to air of

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins is 13.1/1.34 = 9.8 tonnes/year. 

No information is available on the actual amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

used in these applications. 

Outdoor applications

The draft risk assessment report on DEHP provided estimated figures for the emitting surface 

areas for various outdoor PVC products produced each year containing DEHP. These are 

shown below, along with the estimated lifetimes of the product. These figures were estimated 

from the known DEHP yearly consumption in these applications and applying a “surface 

correction factor” to convert the consumption figures to an annual surface area produced 

figure. Since DEHP accounts of around 51% of the total phthalate plasticiser use in PVC, the

surface area of all flexible (phthalate plasticised) PVC produced each year in these 

applications will be around twice the values given. 

 coil coating 26,455,000 m2/year 10 year 

 hoses and profiles 1,587,300 m2/year 10 year 

 Annual emitting surface area Lifetime 

 (based on DEHP annual production) 

 car undercoating 3,703,700 m2

/year 12 year 

 roofing material 529,100 m2/year 20 year 

 fabric coating 22,222,200 m2/year 10 year 

cable and wires (above ground) 2,116,400 m2/year 30 year 

cable and wires (buried) 8,465,600 m2

/year 30 year 

 shoe soles 3,174,600 m2/year 5 year 

Assuming medium-chain chlorinated paraffins occur in around 18% of all plasticised PVC 

used in the above applications and using an emission rate of 15.8 mg/m2

/year, the following 

emission estimates can be obtained to air for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins over the

lifetime of the PVC products (emission = 2×annual surface area produced based on 

DEHP×lifetime×0.18×15.8 mg/year): 

Estimated medium-chain chlorinated paraffin emission 

 car undercoating {0.25 tonnes/year}a 

 roofing material 0.060 tonnes/year 

 coil coating 1.50 tonnes/year 

 fabric coating 1.26 tonnes/year 

cable and wires (above ground) 0.36 tonnes/year 

cable and wires (buried) (1.44 tonnes/year – emissions will be to 

soil compartment) 

 hoses and profiles 0.09 tonnes/year 

 shoe soles 0.09 

Note: a) Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are not thought to be used in car 

undercoating – calculation given only as an example. 

291 
R331_0208_env

Information on the actual amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in various 

PVC applications have been provided in a survey carried out by an EU supplier. The figures 

are uncertain as a) they are incomplete (the actual end-use of a large proportion of the total 

amount was not known and b) there is some uncertainty over the applicability of the figures 

to the EU as a whole. 

The information provided confirmed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were not used 

in car undercoating and no use in the production of roofing materials could be identified. 

For the other applications, the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in shoe soles was

estimated to be 0.6% of the total use in PVC. Assuming this percentage applies to the total 

amount supplied in the EU for PVC applications, the amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins used in production of shoe soles each year would be around 320 tonnes/year. 

Assuming that the density of PVC is 1,300 kg/m3

, the average thickness of shoe soles is

10 mm (0.01 m; taken from draft DEHP assessment) and the medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffin content is 10-15%, then the annual surface area of shoe soles containing 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced each year can be estimated as 164,000-246,000 

m2

/year. Assuming a life time of 5 years, and an emission factor of 15.8 mg/m2/year, the total 

air emission of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from shoe soles can be estimated as

0.013-0.019. This is slightly lower than, but of a similar order of magnitude to, the estimate 

made above. 

For coating applications, some figures for the actual amounts used have been provided been 

provided in the survey, but these have been considered in the indoor emissions earlier, as it 

was not possible to distinguish between indoor and outdoor applications. This lead to a 

similar order of magnitude estimate for the overall emissions as reported above. 

No information was provided in the survey on the amounts of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins used in hoses and profiles or coil coating in outdoor applications. 

For cable, information provided in the survey allowed an estimate of for the total area of PVC 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to be made as 9.3-14.1×108

 m2 to be made, 

with the area present in outdoor applications being around 2.0-3.1×108

 m2 (based on a 

30 year lifetime and 22% of the total being used outdoors; see Section 2.1). Using the 

emission factor for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins of 15.8 mg/m2

/year, and assuming 

that 80% of the cable is deep-buried and 20% is above ground, the total emission to air of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be estimated as 0.63-0.98 direct to air and

2.5-3.9 tonnes/year to soil. These values are similar to those estimated above based on the

DEHP data. 

Estimated emissions from leaching from PVC 

Indoor applications

In these estimates it is assumed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins have a similar 

potential for leaching from PVC as DEHP (see main Section 3.1.0.2.9 of main risk 

assessment report). 

292 
R331_0208_env

Washing clothing with PVC printing

It is not known if medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in this application. In the draft 

risk assessment report for DEHP a total EU release of DEHP from this application was 

estimated at 99 tonnes/year (range 18-180 tonnes/year), based on measurements of phthalate 

loss carried out in Denmark. If it is assumed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used 

in this application, then a release of 34.7 tonnes/year can be estimated based on the relative

amounts of PVC containing DEHP and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins estimated earlier 

(i.e. medium-chain chlorinated paraffins may be present in 18% of the total plasticised PVC 

or 35% of the PVC containing DEHP). There is a large uncertainty in this figure due to 

uncertainties in the release rate and the relative amounts of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins used in this application (if they are used at all). 

Washing PVC flooring 

An emission figure for DEHP of 5 μg/dm2 (=500 μg/m2) per cleaning event (10 day interval) 

was reported in the draft DEHP risk assessment, based on experimental data from Sweden.

The study was designed only to determine the leaching loss and did not include any loss due 

to abraded particulates.

In the draft DEHP risk assessment report the total annual production of PVC-flooring in the 

EU was taken as 2.3×108

 m2/year, with a lifetime of 20 years. If it is assumed that 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are present in 18% of the flooring, the total amount of 

flooring containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present in the EU = 2.3×108

×20×0.18 

= 8.28×108

 m2. A similar estimate of 5.4-8.2×108 m2 is obtained using information provided 

by a supplier on the likely amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in this 

application (see Section 1). Using the above emission figure and cleaning of the flooring once 

per week, the estimated emission of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin is 

14.0-21.5 tonnes/year. 

Further information has also been provided to indicate that around 50-60% of cushion vinyl 

flooring is coated with polyurethane in order to improve the wear resistance and stain

resistance of the product. This coating will obviously affect the potential for leaching of 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from the product but no information is available on this. 

If it is assumed that 50% of the PVC flooring has this type of coating, and the coating reduces 

the emission rate by a factor of 10, then the estimated leaching emission for medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins would be of the order of 8.4-12.9 tonnes/year. 

The draft DEHP risk assessment report also considered abrasion loss from PVC flooring. The 

assessment used data from standard tests from abrasion loss that indicated about 0.1-0.15 mm 

(average 0.125 mm) of the surface will be worn away over the lifetime of the flooring.

Assuming the flooring is typically 2 mm thick, this abrasion loss corresponds to a loss rate of 

around 6.25% over the lifetime of the PVC flooring or 0.31%/year. This loss was assumed to 

occur on all PVC flooring were walking occurred frequently and was estimated to be around 

50% of the total PVC area. 

Earlier, it was estimated that around 8.28×108

 m2 of PVC-flooring could contain 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins at around 10% by weight of the PVC could be present in 

the EU. Assuming an initial thickness of 0.002 m (2 mm) and a representative density of 

around 1,200-1,300 kg/m3 for plasticised PVC (from Draft risk assessment of DEHP), the 

293 
R331_0208_env

amount of PVC containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in flooring can be roughly 

estimated as 2.15×106

 tonnes at any one time (assuming a 20 year lifetime). If the abrasion

rate is 0.31%/year, and 50% of the available flooring is subject to abrasion, then the amount

of PVC abraded as particulates is 3,333 tonnes/year. The medium chain chlorinated paraffin 

could be present at up to 10% in these particulates, i.e. 333 tonnes/year of chlorinated 

paraffin. 

Information has been provided by a supplier of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to 

indicate that around 20% of the amount used in PVC applications is in flooring. This equates 

to around 10,700 tonnes/year of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in flooring, assuming 

that this percentage is applicable to the total amount supplied to the EU. Using the same

assumptions as above (a 20 year lifetime, abrasion rate of 0.31%/year and 50% of the

available flooring is subject to abrasion), then the amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins lost in particulates is around 332 tonnes/year. This is in very good agreement with 

the above figure. Again, it also needs to be taken into account that around 50-60% of cushion 

vinyl flooring is coated with polyurethane which will reduce the wear rate of the product, and 

hence emission of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. No information is available on this but 

if it is assumed that 50% of the PVC flooring has this type of coating, and the coating reduces 

the wear rate/emission factor by a factor of 10, then the estimated air emission for 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins would be of the order of 200 tonnes/year. 

These particulates are likely to end up in waste water (by washing) or landfill (by cleaning

methods not involving water). In the May 2000 draft of the DEHP risk assessment, it was 

assumed that 50% of these emissions would end up in waste water (around 

100-166 tonnes/year of medium chain chlorinated paraffins). 

Outdoor applications

The annual release of plasticiser from roofing materials have been estimated from studies

carried out by Pastruska et al., 1988 and Pastruska and Just, 1990). These gave overall loss 

figures (includes volatilisation, leaching and degradation) of phthalates from the roofing 

material of 0.15%/year for open air exposures and 0.35%/year for a surface covered with

gravel. In the draft risk assessment report for DEHP these figures were converted into surface 

area emission figures for DEHP of 1.98 g/m2

/year for uncovered surfaces and 4.62 g/m2/year

for gravel-covered surfaces. These figures were assumed to represent the leaching loss from

the PVC, and were expected to be distributed 50% to surface water and 50% to soil. 

Using a similar methodology as used for DEHP, the following surface area emission figures 

can be estimated for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins using the above data: 

 1 m2

 of roofing material (1.5 mm thickness) = 1.5×106 mm3 volume 

Density of PVC (unplasticised) = 1.406 mg/mm3

Density of DEHP = 0.985 mg/mm3

Density of MCCP = 1.3 mg/mm3

Overall density of plasticised PVC (10% MCCP and 35% DEHP) = 1.248 mg/mm3

Surface area emission factor for MCCP = 0.28 g/m2/year or 0.65 g/m2/year 

 1 m2

 of roofing material (1.5 mm thickness) = 1872 g 

Amount of MCCP present in 1 m2 roofing material = 10% = 187.2 g/m2 

Annual emission rate = 0.15%/year or 0.35% year 

294 
R331_0208_env

These calculations assume that the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are as equally

susceptible to removal (leaching) as DEHP. Processes other than leaching (e.g.

biodegradation) could have occurred in these experiments with phthalates, which may not be 

applicable to medium-chain chlorinated paraffins, resulting in an overestimate of the leaching

loss. 

Assuming medium-chain chlorinated paraffins occur in around 18% of all plasticised PVC 

used in the outdoor applications outlined in Section 2.2 and using an emission rate of 

0.65 g/m2

/year for gravel covered surface and 0.28 g/m2/year for open surfaces, the following

estimated leaching losses can be obtained for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins over the 

lifetime of the PVC products (emission = 2×annual surface area produced based on 

DEHP×lifetime×0.18×emission factor g/year): 

 roofing material 0.65 g/m2/year 2.5 tonnes/year 

 hoses and profiles 0.28 g/m2

/year 1.6 tonnes/year 

 Emission factor Estimated leaching loss 

 car undercoating {0.28 g/m2

/year 4.5 tonnes/year}a 

 coil coating 0.28 g/m2

/year 26.7 tonnes/year 

 fabric coating 0.28 g/m2

/year 22.4 tonnes/year 

cable and wires (above ground) 0.28 g/m2/year 6.4 tonnes/year 

cable and wires (buried) 0.65 g/m2/year (59.4 tonnes/year – 

 emissions will be to soil 

 compartment)

 shoe soles 0.65 g/m2/year 3.7 tonnes/year 

 

Note: a) Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are not thought to be used in car 

undercoating – calculation given only as an example. 

In addition, a figure of 47 tonnes/year of DEHP was estimated to be released to waste water 

during the washing of car underbodies in the draft risk assessment for DEHP. The “scaled” 

emission for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (taking into account the relative amounts

used in PVC applications) would be around 16 tonnes/year. However, it is thought that 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins do not have a significant use in car undercoating. 

Information on the actual amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins used in various 

PVC applications have been provided in a survey carried out by an EU supplier. The 

information provided confirmed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins were not used in car

undercoating and no use in the production of roofing materials could be identified. 

For the other applications, the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in shoe soles was

estimated to be 0.6% of the total use in PVC. Assuming this percentage applies to the total 

amount supplied in the EU for PVC applications, the amount of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins used in production of shoe soles each year would be around 320 tonnes/year. 

Assuming that the density of PVC is 1,300 kg/m3

, the average thickness of shoe soles is

10 mm (0.01 m) and the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin content is 10-15%, then the 

annual surface area of shoe soles containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced 

each year can be estimated as 164,000-246,000 m2

/year. Assuming a life time of 5 years, and

an emission factor of 0.65 g/m2/year, the total emission via leaching of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins from shoe soles can be estimated as 0.53–0.80 tonnes/year. This is

slightly lower than the estimate made above. 

295 
R331_0208_env

For fabric coating applications, some figures for the actual amounts used have been provided 

by Industry, but these have been considered in the indoor emissions earlier, as it was not 

possible to distinguish between indoor and outdoor applications. 

No information was provided in the Industry survey on the amounts of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins used in hoses and profiles or cable coating in outdoor applications. 

For cable, information provided by Industry allowed an estimate of the total area of PVC 

containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffin to be made as 9.3-14.1×108

 m2 to be made, 

with the area present in outdoor applications being around 2.0-3.1×108

 m2 (based on a 

30 year lifetime and 22% of the total being used outdoors; see Section 2.1). Using the 

emission factor for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins of 0.28 g/m2

/year for above ground 

cables and 0.65 g/m2

/year for buried cables, and assuming that 80% of the cable is 

deep-buried and 20% is above ground (taken from the draft DEHP assessment), the total 

emission via leaching of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins can be estimated as 

11.2-17.4 tonnes/year from above ground cables and 104-161 tonnes/year from below ground 

cables. These values are slightly higher than those estimated above based on the DEHP data. 

Emissions during waste disposal 

Car shredding

As well as PVC-coated underbodies (which are unlikely to contain medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins), cars may contain other PVC articles (e.g. cable or wiring) that may contain 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. The draft risk assessment report on DEHP includes an

emission scenario for this endpoint and this information has been used here to estimate the 

worst case emissions of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins during the process as follows: 

Amount of PVC per car = 16 kg 

Percentage of PVC that is plasticised = 35% 

Amount of plasticised PVC/car = 5.4 kg 

Amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin/car = 0.54 (assuming 10% content in 

PVC) 

Total number of cars processed in EU = 10,600,000 per year 

Total amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present = 5,724 tonnes/year 

Number of shredder sites in EU = 252 

Average amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins processed/site 

= 22.7 tonnes/year 

Number of days of operation = 300 

Emission factor to air = 0.05% 

Local release of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to air = 11.4 kg/year 

= 0.038 kg/day 

Total EU release of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins to air = 2.86 tonnes/year 

Incineration of municipal waste 

No information is available on levels of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in the exhaust 

gases from municipal waste incinerators and so it is not possible to estimate a release from

this source. The conditions present during municipal waste incineration would be expected to 

effectively destroy any medium-chain chlorinated paraffins present.

296 
R331_0208_env

Municipal landfill

No information is available on the amounts of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins subject to 

leaching from municipal landfills. In the draft Risk Assessment of DEHP it was estimated 

that around 15 tonnes/year of DEHP could be leached from landfills to waste water in the 

EU. If it is assumed that medium-chain chlorinated paraffins have a similar potential to leach 

as DEHP then the amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins leached could be estimated 

to be roughly around 2 tonnes/year, based on scaling the DEHP figure to the relative total 

volumes of DEHP (476,000 tonnes/year) and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

(65,256 tonnes/year) used in all applications in the EU. 

Waste remaining in the environment

Waste remaining in the environment can be considered to be particles of polymer product

(e.g. PVC, paint, sealant etc.) which contain the medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. These 

particles are primarily released to the urban/industrial soil compartment, but which may also 

end up in sediment or air. End-products with outdoor uses are most likely to be sources of 

this waste. The release can occur both over the lifetime of the product (due to weathering, 

wear etc.) and at disposal (particularly where articles are dismantled or subjected to other 

mechanical processes). 

In the draft DEHP risk assessment, waste remaining in the environment was identified to be 

produced from the following outdoor applications of PVC: 

 car undercoating 

 roofing material 

 coil coating

 fabric coating 

cables and wires 

hoses and profiles 

 shoe soles 

Further it was stated that 22% of the DEHP in PVC was used in these outdoor applications. 

The actual breakdown of the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins between these 

different sources is not known and so it will be assumed that around 22% of the 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffin is also used in PVC for outdoor applications. This 

assumption is probably reasonable since one of the major uses of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins in PVC appears to be for flooring (an indoor use). 

In addition, medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are also used in outdoor paints and building 

sealants which also need to be considered as possible sources of waste remaining in the 

environment. The use in leather fat liquors, carbonless copy paper and metal working/cutting 

fluids are not considered to contribute significantly to these types of release. Table F1

outlines the relevant tonnages for the applications considered. 

These emission factors used for these types of losses in the draft DEHP risk assessment were 

around 2-10% over the lifetime of the product, with the higher factor being applied to articles

subject to high wear rates (such as car underbodies and shoe soles), and 2% during disposal 

operations. The assumptions behind the derivation of these factors were not given in the 

report. These releases were thought to occur mainly to urban/industrial soil. A similar 

297 
R331_0208_env

approach is taken here as a worst case, using similar factors as used for DEHP. Only outdoor 

applications are considered to contribute significantly to the waste over the lifetime of the 

articles. 

 

This approach assumes the following: 

- the quantity of articles/products containing medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

disposed of each year is equal to the quantity of new articles/products containing

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins produced each year. 

- the emissions factors estimate the total release over the entire service life of the 

product/article (i.e. for high wear articles, 10% of the product is worn away as 

particles/dust over the lifetime of the product) 

In the calculations, the amount of medium-chain chlorinated paraffin lost by volatilisation 

and or leaching and during processing and formulation (as estimated earlier or in the main 

risk assessment report) is also taken into account to avoid double counting. 

For use in rubber/polymers (other than PVC), sealants/adhesives and paints, a particulate

emission factor of 2% over the technical lifetime of the product and 2% at disposal is used (in 

the May 2000 draft of the DEHP assessment a figure of 5% over the technical lifetime (and 

5% at disposal) was used for paints and sealants, and so these values are also considered). 

However, for PVC applications there may be some high wear products produced (e.g. shoe

soles) and so a higher particulate emission factor may be appropriate to some of these 

applications. Since the actual breakdown of the use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

between these various PVC end-uses is currently unknown, an emission factor of 6% over the 

lifetime of the technical product was used (average of the low and high wear factors), with 

2% emission at disposal. 

The emissions are likely to be mainly to soil. In the draft DEHP assessment it was assumed 

that 75% of the emission would be to industrial/urban soil and 0.1% to air, with the remainder

occurring to surface water (sediment). The same split of the emissions will be used here in 

the absence of any further information. 

There are many uncertainties inherent in these emission estimates. Further, since this “waste” 

is essentially polymeric particles (e.g. rubber, sealant, paint) containing the medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffin, it is not known if this is “available” in the environment and so would 

lead to actual exposure of organisms to medium-chain chlorinated paraffin. 

In addition to these particulate releases, an estimated 166 tonnes/year of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins may be emitted to waste water (and 166 tonnes/year to landfill/disposal) 

as particulates for PVC flooring as a result of wear and subsequent washing (see earlier). 

298 
R331_0208_env

Table F1 Estimation of waste remaining in the environment 

Uses considered for waste remaining in environment 

PVC Rubber/polymers

(other than PVC) 

Sealants/ 

adhesives 

Paints

Total quantity of MCCP used in 

applications 

51,827 tonnes/year 2,146 tonnes/year 2,360 tonnes/year 1,180 tonnes/year 

Quantity of MCCP emitted from other 

formulation and processing 

(accounted for elsewhere in 

assessment) 

216b tonnes/year 2.58b tonnes/year negligibleb 5.9b tonnes/year 

Percentage used in outdoor

applications (worst case 

assumptions) 

22% 100% 100% 100%

Quantity of MCCP present in outdoor 

applications 

11,354 tonnes/year 2,143 tonnes/year 2,360 tonnes/year 1,174 tonnes/year 

Volatilisation and leaching loss during 

product lifetime for outdoor 

applications (accounted for elsewhere 

in assessment) 

143a tonnes/year 1.07b tonnes/year 107.2b tonnes/year 45.4b tonnes/year

Quantity of MCCP remaining in 

outdoor applications after 

volatilisation and leaching losses 

11,211 tonnes/year 2,142 tonnes/year 2,253 tonnes/year 1,129 tonnes/year 

Percentage particulate emission over 

technical lifetime of product 

6% 2% 2-5% 2-5%

Amount of MCCP emitted as waste

remaining in the environment over

technical lifetime of product 

673 tonnes/year 42.8 tonnes/year 45.1-112.7 

tonnes/year 

22.6-56.4 

tonnes/year 

Amount of MCCP remaining in 

product at disposal 

10,538 tonnes/year 2,099 tonnes/year 2,140-2,208 

tonnes/year 

1,073-1,106 

tonnes/year 

Percentage particulate emission at 

disposal 

2% 2% 2-5% 2-5%

Amount of MCCP emitted as waste

remaining in the environment at 

disposal 

211 tonnes/year 42.0 tonnes/year 44.2-107.0 

tonnes/year 

22.1-53.6 

tonnes/year 

Total amount of MCCP as waste 

remaining in the environment 

884 tonnes/year 84.8 tonnes/year 89.3-219.7 

tonnes/year 

44.7-110 

tonnes/year 

urban soil 75% 75% 75% 75%

surface water 24.9% 24.9% 24.9% 24.9%

air 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

Total amount of MCCP as waste 

remaining in the environment to 

urban soil 

663 tonnes/year 63.6 tonnes/year 67.0-164.7 

tonnes/year 

33.5-82.5 

tonnes/year 

Total amount of MCCP as waste 

remaining in the environment to 

surface water 

220 tonnes/year 21.1 tonnes/year 22.2-54.7 

tonnes/year 

11.1-27.4 

tonnes/year 

Total amount of MCCP as waste 

remaining in the environment to air 

0.9 tonnes/year 0.085 tonnes/year 0.089-0.22 

tonnes/year 

0.045-0.11 

tonnes/year 

Distribution of 

emission 

Note: a) Figures taken from this Appendix. b) Figures taken from main assessment report. 

299 
R331_0208_env

Summary of emissions estimated 

 

Table F2 summarises the emissions estimated here for diffusive losses of medium-chain 

chlorinated paraffins during the lifetime of PVC (and other polymers) products and during 

disposal of articles. Table F3 summarises the emissions of medium-chain chlorinated 

paraffins as particulates (waste remaining in the environment) over the lifecycle of products. 

In order to generate these figures, a large number of “worst case” assumptions have had to be

made. This leads to a large uncertainty in the figures obtained, and the approach taken may 

grossly overestimate the actual releases. In particular, the information on leaching losses from 

products outdoors is based on a study where the overall loss (including leaching, degradation 

and particulate loss due to wear/weathering) of phthalate plasticiser from roofing material 

was determined. In the study, it was not possible to distinguish between these types of loss 

and so it has been assumed that all the loss was due to leaching. The applicability of this 

approach to estimating the leaching loss of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from products

outdoors is unknown. 

Table F 2 Summary of diffusive losses of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins from PVC (and other polymers) 

during product lifetimes and disposal 

Lifestage Emission of medium chain chlorinated paraffin (tonnes/year) 

Volatility losses to air Leaching loss to water and soil

flooring – indoor 5.1-13.1 8.4-21.5 Product b 

lifetime wall covering – indoor 6.6-10.0 

coated products, film and sheet – indoor 4.0-7.2 34.7a,b

cable – indoor 9-16.7 

hose and profile – indoor 9.8 

roofing material – outdoor {0.060}d {2.5}c,d 

coil coating – outdoor 1.50 26.7c 

fabric coating – outdoor 1.26 22.4c 

cable – outdoor 0.36-0.98 

(+1.44-3.9 to deep soil) 

6.44c-17.4c 

(+59.4-161 to deep soil) 

hoses and profile - outdoor 0.09 1.6c 

shoe soles 0.013-0.09 0.53c-3.7c 

Total from PVC over product lifetime 37.8-60.8 (to air)

 (+1.44-3.9 to deep soil) 

73.2-93.4 (to waste water) 

30.1-37.2 (to urban/industrial soil)

(+59.4-161 to deep soil) 

Waste car shredding 2.86 

disposal incineration

municipal landfill 2b 

Total from PVC at disposal 2.86 (to air) 2 (to waste water)

Note: a) Estimated for washing clothing with PVC printing – it is not known if medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are used in 

this application. 

b) Losses primarily to wastewater.

c) Losses to soil and water (assumed to be split 50:50 between surface water and industrial/urban soil). 

d) This was not identified as a use of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in an Industry survey. 

300 
R331_0208_env

Table F3 Summary of waste remaining in the environment during product lifetimes and disposal 

Lifestage Emission of medium chain chlorinated paraffin as particulates (tonnes/year) 

Air Surface water Waste water Soil 

PVC 0.7 168 100-166a Product 504 

lifetime Rubber/polymers (other than 

PVC) 

0.04 10.7 32.1

0.05-0.11 11.2-28.1 33.8-84.5

Paints 0.02-0.06 5.6-14.0 17.0-42.3 

PVC 0.2 52.5

Rubber/polymers (other than 

PVC) 

0.04 10.5

Sealants/adhesives 0.04-0.11 11.0-26.6 33.2-80.3

Paints 0.02-0.05 5.5-13.3 16.6-14.2

100-166 826-973 

 Sealants/adhesives 

Waste 158 

disposal 31.5 

Total 1.1-1.3 275-324 

Note: a) Emission to waste water from washing PVC-flooring. A further 100-166 tonnes/year estimated to end up in landfill. 

References

ECPI (1996). European Council for Plasticisers and Intermediates. Assessment of the release, 

occurrence and possible effects of plasticisers in the environment. Phthalate esters used in 

plasticised PVC. CEFIC, September 1996. (as quoted in the November 1999 draft of the ESR 

risk assessment report for DEHP). 

Pastruska G., Kerner-Gang W. and Just U. (1988). Langzeitverhalten von 

PVC-P-Dachbahnen. Kautschuk Gummi Kunststoffe, 41, 451-454. (as quoted in the

November 1999 draft of the ESR risk assessment report for DEHP). 

Pastruska G. and Just U. (1990). Weichmacherverlust aus langjährig freibewitternten 

PVC-P-Dachbahnen. Kautschuk Gummi Kunststoffe, 43, 1093-1094. (as quoted in the 

November 1999 draft of the ESR risk assessment report for DEHP). 

301 
R331_0208_env

Appendix G Volatility losses from PVC 

This Appendix considers further the available information on the volatility of medium chain 

chlorinated paraffins from PVC that is discussed in Section 3.1.0.2.1 of the main risk 

assessment report. Information on the volatility relative to DEHP is shown in Table G1 and 

G2. 

The data shows that the 45% wt. Cl product is around 3 times as volatile as DEHP from PVC 

and this figure is used in the main risk assessment report as a worst case for estimation of

local releases. 

The data for the 52% wt. Cl product shows that this is around 1.4 times as volatile as DEHP 

from PVC. The effect of this lower volatility on the estimated releases and subsequent PECs

is shown in Tables G3 to G5. 

Table G1Ageing loss from PVC (BS 2782 methods 465A and B)

For DEHP alone

Parts DEHP Parts MCCP % loss % DEHP loss/parts DEHP

56 0 0.55 0.0098

Parts DEHP Parts MCCP % loss Calculated 

contribution 

from DEHP

Residual from

MCCP

% MCCP

loss/parts 

MCCP

Relative loss 

MCCP/DEHP 

50 10 0.85 0.490 0.360 0.036 3.673

1.00 0.421 0.579 0.029 2.952

36 30 1.15 0.353 0.797 0.027 2.712

Average for C14-17, 45% wt. Cl 3.112 

For C14-17, 52% wt. Cl with DEHP

Calculated 

contribution 

from DEHP

Residual from

MCCP

% MCCP

loss/parts 

MCCP

Relative loss 

MCCP/DEHP 

51 10 0.60 0.500 0.100 0.010 1.022 

43 20 0.70 0.421 0.279 0.014 1.421

37 30 0.85 0.363 0.487 0.016 1.658

Average for C14-17, 52% wt. Cl 1.367 

For C14-17, 45% wt. Cl with DEHP

43 20

Parts DEHP Parts MCCP % loss 

302 
R331_0208_env

Table G2Weight loss on heating of plasticiser 

Plasticiser Weight loss after 4 

hours heating at 150oC 

(%) 

Weight loss after 4 

hours heating at 180oC 

Relative weight loss 

(MCCP/DEHP) at

150oC 

Relative weight loss 

(MCCP/DEHP) at

180oC 

DEHP 0.3 1.9 

C14-17, 45% wt. Cl 0.7 2.8 2.3 1.5

C14-17, 52% wt. Cl 0.5 1.4 1.7 0.7

C14-17, 58% wt. Cl 0.3 0.8 1.0 0.4

303 
Table G3Exposure estimates for C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance 

Use Tonnages (tonnes/year) Release factors for 

waste water (%) 

Release factors 

for air (%) 

Current release estimates for 

waste water

Revised release estimates for

52% Cl for waste water

Current rele

Total Local Regional Current 52% Cl Current 52% Cl Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Re

(k

Production 65 45 65 45PVC - compounding site- plastisol process 

74.4 0.010 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.025 0.025 0.000 

PVC - Processing site - plastisol process 

74.4 0.075 0.035 0.075 0.035 0.186 0.087 0.186 

PVC - Combined compounding/processing site - plastisol process 

74.4 0.085 0.045 0.075 0.035 0.211 0.112 0.186 

PVC - Compounding site- secondary plasticiser - open system 

112 0.025 0.017 0.015 0.007 0.093 0.056 

PVC - Compounding site- secondary plasticiser - partially open system 

599 0.025 0.017 0.015 0.007 0.499 0.339 0.300 

PVC - Compounding site- secondary plasticiser - closed system 

51 0.025 0.017 0.015 0.007 0.043 0.029 0.026 

PVC - Processing site - secondary plasticiser - open system 

112 0.075 0.035 0.075 0.035 0.280 0.131 0.280 

0.063

Table G3 continued overleaf 

304 
Table G3 continued 

Use Tonnages (tonnes/year) Release factors for 

waste water (%) 

Release factors 

for air (%) 

Current release estimates for 

waste water

Revised release estimates for

52% Cl for waste water

Current rele

Total Local Regional Current 52% Cl Current 52% Cl Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Re

(k

PVC - Processing site - secondary plasticiser - partially open system 

599 0.015 0.007 0.015 0.007 0.300 0.140 0.300 

PVC - Processing site - secondary plasticiser - closed system 

51 0.150 0.070 0.150 0.070 0.255 0.119 0.255 

PVC - Combined compounding/processing site - secondary plasticiser - open system 

112 0.100 0.052 0.090 0.042 0.373 0.194 0.336 

PVC - Combined compounding/processing site - secondary plasticiser - partially open system 

599 0.040 0.024 0.030 0.014 0.799 0.479 0.599 

PVC - Combined compounding/processing site - secondary plasticiser - closed system 

51 0.175 0.087 0.165 0.077 0.298 0.148 0.281 

PVC (general) - raw materialshandling 

51800 5180 0.010 0.010 0.000 0.000 518 4662 518 4662 

PVC (general) - compounding

36260 3626 0.015 0.007 0.015 0.007 351 3155 351 3155 

Table G3 continued overleaf

305 
Table G3 continued 

Use Tonnages (tonnes/year) Release factors for 

waste water (%) 

Release factors 

for air (%) 

Current release estimates for 

waste water

Revised release estimates for

52% Cl for waste water

Current rele

Total Local Regional Current 52% Cl Current 52% Cl Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Re

(k

PVC (general) - processing - open systems 

13468 1346.8 0.750 0.350 0.750 0.350 6510 58586 6510 58586 

PVC (general) - processing - partially open and closed systems 

38332 3833.2 0.150 0.070 0.150 0.070 3705 33349 3705 33349 

Total PVC 11083 99751 11083 99751 1Rubber/other plastics - compounding site

0.047 32.250 290.300 0.047 32.250 290.300 0.016 1

Rubber/other plastics - processing site

0.155 107.500 966.000 0.155 107.500 966.000 0.155 10

Rubber/other plastics - combined compounding/processing site

0.202 0.202 0.171 

Paints - formulation site

0.15 354 3186 0.15 354 3186 0.05 

Paints - industrial application 

0.059 118 1062 0.059 118 1062 

Paints - application by general public 

3.00

×10-7

3.00

×10-7

Metal cutting/working fluids - formulation 

0.83 1488 13875 0.83 1488 13875 

Table G3 continued overleaf 

306 
Table G3 continued 

Use Tonnages (tonnes/year) Release factors for 

waste water (%) 

Release factors 

for air (%) 

Current release estimates for 

waste water

Revised release estimates for

52% Cl for waste water

Current rele

Total Local Regional Current 52% Cl Current 52% Cl Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Re

(k

Metal cutting/working fluids - oil based - large site

0.33 38100 342900 0.33 38100 342900 

Metal cutting/working fluids - oil based - small site

0.3 0.3 

Metal cutting/working fluids - emulsion 

0.025 99200 892800 0.025 99200 892,800

Metal cutting/working fluids - emulsion - intermittent discharge 

25 25 

Leather fat liquors - formulation 

1.1 315 2829 1.1 315 2829 0.35 

Leather fat liquors - processing ofraw hides 

0.9 1050 9430 0.9 1050 9430

Leather fat liquors - processing ofwet blue 

3.6 3.6 

Carbonless copypaper - recycling 

14.8 3705 33345 14.8 3705 33345 

Table G3 continued overleaf 

307 
Table G3 continued 

Current release estimates for 

waste water

Use Tonnages (tonnes/year) Release factors for Current rele

waste water (%) 

Release factors 

for air (%) 

Revised release estimates for

52% Cl for waste water

Total Local Regional Current 52% Cl Current 52% Cl Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Regional

(kg/year) 

Continental 

(kg/year) 

Local

(kg/day)

Re

(k

Polymers - service life 

14790 133110 14790 133110 

All other uses 159,260 1,433,793 159,260 1,433,793 6Total from all sources 

170,408 1,533,590 170,408 1,533,590 1

via

wwtp 

119,286 1,073,513 via

wwtp 

119,286 1,073,513

direct 51,122 460,077 direct 51,122 460,077

308 
R331_0208_env

Table G4 Local PEC calculations for a C14-17, 52% Cl substance

Clocal(water) (ug/l) PEClocal(water) (ug/l) PEClocal(sediment) 

(mg/kg wet wt.) 

Use Size of

WWTP 

(m3/day) 

% to 

wwtp 

Dilution 

factor

current 

(45% Cl) 

52% Cl 52% Cl current 

(45% Cl) 

52% Cl 

Production 2000 7 10 0.170 0.170 0.558 0.558 7.143 7.143

PVC - compounding site 

- plastisol process 

2000 7 10 0.046 0.046 0.434 0.434 5.56 5.56

PVC - Processing site - 

plastisol process

2000 7 10 0.346 0.161 0.734 0.549 9.39 7.03

PVC - Combined 

compounding/ 

processing site -

plastisol process

2000 7 10 0.392 0.207 0.780 0.595 9.98 7.62

PVC - Compounding 

site - secondary 

plasticiser - open 

system 

2000 7 10 0.173 0.118 0.561 0.506 7.19 6.48

PVC - Compounding 

site - secondary 

plasticiser - partially 

open system 

2000 7 10 0.928 0.631 1.316 1.019 16.84 13.04

PVC - Compounding 

site - secondary 

plasticiser - closed 

system 

2000 7 10 0.079 0.054 0.467 0.442 5.98 5.65

PVC - Processing site - 

secondary plasticiser - 

open system 

2000 7 10 0.520 0.243 0.908 0.631 11.63 8.08

PVC - Processing site - 

secondary plasticiser - 

partially open system 

2000 7 10 0.557 0.260 0.945 0.648 12.09 8.29

PVC - Processing site - 

secondary plasticiser - 

closed system 

2000 7 10 0.474 0.221 0.862 0.609 11.03 7.80

PVC - Combined 

compounding/ 

processing site -

secondary plasticiser - 

open system 

2000 7 10 0.694 0.361 1.082 0.749 13.85 9.59

PVC - Combined 

compounding/ 

processing site -

secondary plasticiser - 

partially open system 

2000 7 10 1.484 0.891 1.872 1.279 23.97 16.37

PVC - Combined 

compounding/ 

processing site -

secondary plasticiser - 

closed system 

2000 7 10 0.553 0.275 0.941 0.663 12.04 8.49

current 

(45% Cl) 

Table G4 continued overleaf 

309 
R331_0208_env

Table G4 continued 

Clocal(water) (μg/l) PEClocal(water) (μg/l) PEClocal(sediment) (mg/kg 

wet wt.) 

Use Size of

WWTP 

(m3/day) 

% to 

wwtp 

Dilution 

factor

current 

(45% Cl) 

52% Cl current 

(45% Cl) 

52% Cl 52% Cl 

Rubber/other plastics - 

compounding site

2000 7 10 0.086 0.086 0.474 0.474 6.07 6.07

Rubber/other plastics - 

processing site 

2000 7 10 0.288 0.288 0.676 0.676 8.65 8.65

Rubber/other plastics - 

combined 

compounding/ 

processing site 

2000 7 10 0.375 0.375 0.763 0.763 9.77 9.77

Paints - formulation site 2000 7 10 0.279 0.279 0.667 0.667 8.54 8.54 

Paints - industrial

application 

2000 7 10 0.110 0.110 0.498 0.498 6.37 6.37

Paints - application by 

general public 

2000 7 10 0.000 0.000 0.388 0.388 4.97 4.97

Metal cutting/working 

fluids - formulation 

2000 7 10 1.543 1.543 1.931 1.931 24.71 24.71

Metal cutting/working 

fluids - oil based - large 

site 

2000 7 10 0.613 0.613 1.001 1.001 12.82 12.82

Metal cutting/working 

fluids - oil based - small 

site 

2000 7 10 0.558 0.558 0.946 0.946 12.10 12.10 

Metal cutting/working 

fluids - emulsion 

2000 7 10 0.046 0.046 0.434 0.434 5.56 5.56

Metal cutting/working 

fluids - emulsion -

intermittent discharge 

2000 7 10 46.462 46.462 46.850 46.850 599.72 599.72

Leather fat liquors - 

formulation 

2000 7 10 2.044 2.044 2.432 2.432 31.14 31.14 

Leather fat liquors - 

processing of raw hides 

2000 7 10 1.673 1.673 2.061 2.061 26.38 26.38

Leather fat liquors - 

processing of wet blue 

2000 7 10 6.691 6.691 7.079 7.079 90.61 90.61

Carbonless copy paper 

- recycling 

2000 7 10 27.505 27.505 27.893 27.893 357.06 357.06

current 

(45% Cl) 

310 
R331_0208_env

Table G5Predicted regional concentrations for a C14-17, 52% wt. Cl substance 

Substance Water (ug/l) Sediment (mg/kg) Agricultural soil

(mg/kg) 

Natural soil 

(mg/kg) 

Air (mg/m3) 

Current (45% wt. Cl) 0.388 8.79 50.4 1.1 3.35×10-6

52% wt. Cl 0.388 8.79 50.4 1.1 3.35×10-6

311 
R331_0208_env

Appendix H Effects of variability in physico-chemical properties and degradation rate 

on the environmental modelling of medium-chain chlorinated paraffins 

Physico-chemical properties 

Medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are complex mixtures. This presents some problems over

the values of physico-chemical properties to be chosen for the environmental modelling of 

these substances. In order to simplify the environmental modelling the main risk assessment 

report a set of physical chemical properties were chosen as being representative of the 

medium chain chlorinated paraffins as a group. However, for the majority of the

physico-chemical properties relevant for the environmental modelling, a range of values has 

been determined. This Appendix considers the effect of varying some of the key 

physico-chemical properties within the range measured on the predicted environmental 

concentration. In order to do this simply, the EUSES model was run several times using the 

release estimates for one local scenario (Use in rubber/plastics – conversion site; this is 

chosen as an example as it has releases to both air and waste water) and the total regional and 

continental releases as determined in the main report. This then allows the resulting

concentrations to be compared directly with those obtained in the main report. 

The physico-chemical properties for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are discussed in 

Chapter 1 of the main risk assessment report. The values used as input data used in the 

various example calculations are shown in Table H1. The values chosen reflect the range of 

values measured for medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. In all calculations, 93% removal in 

the waste water treatment plant due to adsorption onto sewage sludge was assumed.

Table H2 gives the resulting PECs from this approach. 

Table H3 outlines the PEC/PNEC ratios obtained for surface water, sediment, soil and

secondary poisoning, using the various physico-chemical properties (the PNECs for sediment 

and soil are based on the equilibrium partitioning approach). For the soil and sediment

endpoints, both the PEC and PNEC depend on the value for the organic carbon-water 

partition coefficient used. 

312 
Table H1 Input data for EUSES model for the various scenarios considered

Model input Value used in EUSES calculation

Main

assessment 

A B D E F G 

Molecular weight (g/mole) 488 488 405c 419d 468e 481 488 488 Water solubility (μg/l) 27 5 27 27 27 27 27 27 Vapour pressure (Pa) 2.7×10-4 2.7×10

2.7×10-4 5×10-5 c 2×10-5 d 2×10-6 e 9×10-7 f 2.7×10-4 

Henrys Law constanta

(Pa.m3.mole-1) 

4.88 26.4 0.75 0.31 0.035 0.016 4.88 4.88 

Log Kow 7 7 7 7 7 7 5.5 6 Kocb (l/kg) 5.89×105 5.89×105 5.89×105 5.89×105 5.89×105 5.89×105 3.59×104 9.13×10PNECwater (μg/l) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 PNECsediment (mg/kg wet 

wt.)g 

2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 0.16 0.40 

PNECsoil (mg/kg wet wt.)g 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 0.13 0.32 PNECsecondary poisoning

(mg/kg food) 

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Continental release 153,193 kg/year to air, 1,073,482 kg/year to waste water and 460,101 kg/year to surface water Regional release 17,027 kg/year to air, 119,286 kg/year to waste water and 51,122 kg/year to surface water Local release (Use in rubber/plastics – conversion site) 

0.155 kg/day to air and 0.155 kg/day to waste water over 300 days 

C 

Note a) Henrys law constant estimated from water solubility and vapour pressure (also depends on the molecular weight). 

b) Koc estimated by EUSES from log Kow.

c) Vapour pressure and molecular weight appropriate for C14, 51-53% wt. Cl congeners.

d) Vapour pressure and molecular weight appropriate for C15, 51-53% wt. Cl congeners.

e) Vapour pressure and molecular weight appropriate for C16, 51-53% wt. Cl congeners.f) Vapour pressure and molecular weight appropriate for C17, 51-53% wt. Cl congeners.

g) PNECs for sediment and soil calculated by the equilibrium partitioning method – dependent on Koc value. 

313 
Table H2 Resulting concentrations for the various scenarios considered 

Endpoint Value estimated in EUSES calculation 

Main

assessment 

A B C E F G 

Local concentrations (use in rubber/plastics – conversion site) 

0.68 0.93 0.93 1.23 

Sediment (mg/kg wet wt.) 8.7 6.1 11.2 11.6 11.9 12.0 0.96 2.Agricultural soil (30 days average)(mg/kg wet wt.) 

3.72 3.58 3.88 3.79 3.67 3.66 2.41 2.

Pore water (agricultural soil) (μg/l) 0.36 0.34 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.35 3.8 1.

4.3×10-5 4.3×10-5 4.3×10-5 4.3×10-5 4.3×10-5 4.3×10-5 4.3×

Fish (for secondary poisoning) (mg/kg wet wt.) 

0.55 0.33 0.76 0.80 0.83 0.83 1.01 0.

Earthworms (for secondary poisoning) (mg/kg wet wt.) 

152 92.2 175 178 178 178 30.0 59

Total daily human intake (mg/kg bw/day) 

0.137 0.127 0.138 0.132 0.126 0.125 0.053 0.0

Predicted regional concentrations 

Surface water (μg/l) 0.39 0.19 0.58 0.62 0.64 0.65 0.72 0.

8.80 4.27 13.2 14.6 14.6 0.97 2.

Agricultural soil (mg/kg wet wt.) 50.4 29.4 58.6 59.6 60.2 60.2 8.23 17Pore water (agricultural soil) (μg/l) 4.9 2.8 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.8 13 11

3.4×10-6 6.2×10-6 1.2×10-6 8.9×10-7 6.6×10-7 6.5×10-7 6.4×10-6 5.8×

Total daily human intake (mg/kg bw.day) 

1.71 1.0 1.99 2.02 2.04 2.04 0.173 0.

D 

Surface water (μg/l) 0.48 0.87 0.91 1.Air (during emission episode) (mg/m3) 

4.3×10-5

Sediment (mg/kg wet wt.) 14.0Air (mg/m3) 

314 
Table H3 Resulting PEC/PNEC ratios for the various scenarios considered 

Endpoint PEC/PNEC ratio 

Main

assessment 

A B C D E F G 

Local concentrations (use in rubber/plastics – conversion site) 

Surface water (μg/l) 3.4 2.4 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.7 6.2 5Sediment (mg/kg wet wt.) 33 23 43 45 46 46 60 5

17.7 17.0 18.5 18.0 17.5 17.4 185 

1.1 0.66 1.5 1.7 1.7 2.0 1

Earthworms (for secondary poisoning) (mg/kg wet wt.) 

304 184 350 356 356 356 60 11

Predicted regional concentrations 

Surface water (μg/l) 1.95 0.95 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.6 3Sediment (mg/kg wet wt.) 33.8 16.4 50.8 53.8 56.2 56.2 60.6 57Agricultural soil (mg/kg wet wt.) 240 140 279 283 287 287 640 5Agricultural soil (30 days average)(mg/kg wet wt.) 

9

Fish (for secondary poisoning) (mg/kg wet wt.) 

1.6

315 

R331_0208_env

As can be seen from Table H3, there is some variation in the results obtained. Lowering the 

water solubility (or increasing the Henrys law constant to values of around 25 Pa.m3.mole

-1) 

and increasing the log Kow value above 7-7.5 appeared to have the largest effects on the 

resulting PEC/PNEC ratio, leading to generally lower ratios for surface water, sediment and 

soil. 

Degradation rate 

The extremes of the PEC/PNEC ratios obtained vary by a factor of around 7 for surface water 

and sediment and by a factor of up to 60 for agricultural soil. However, for most scenarios

(e.g. B, C, D, E, F, G, H) the variation in PEC/PNEC ratio seen is much less than this, and

indicates that only the extremes of the values of the range of physico-chemical properties 

would result in a significant change to the PEC/PNEC ratios obtained. The values for 

physico-chemical properties used in the main assessment results in PEC/PNEC ratios that are 

generally in the middle to upper end of the range determined, and indicate that the results are 

reasonably representative for the majority of the components of the commercial mixtures. 

Since medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are not readily biodegradable, the appropriate 

default rate constants for degradation in surface water (6.93×10-7 day-1), soil (6.93×10-7 day-1) 

and sediment (6.93×10-8 day-1) were used in the EUSES modelling in the main report. These

correspond to degradation half-lives of the order of 2,740 years in soil and surface water, and 

27,400 years in bulk sediment. The regional concentrations estimated using these values were

generally higher than the available monitoring data indicated. One explanation for this would 

be if medium-chain chlorinated paraffins are less persistent in the environment than is

indicated by these default degradation halflives. Therefore the sensitivity of the calculations

to these degradation rates was investigated. In this analysis the physico-chemical properties 

and regional and continental releases were as in the main report and the EUSES model was 

run several times with different values for the degradation rate constants. The results are 

shown in Table H4. 

Table H4 Effects of varying the biodegradation half-life on predicted regional concentrations 

Biodegradation Half-life PECregional

Surface 

water, soil 

Bulk 

sediment 

Surface 

water, soil 

Bulk 

sediment 

Surface 

water 

Sediment Agricultural soil

6.93×10-7 6.93×10-8 2,740 years 27,400 years 0.39 μg/l 8.8 mg/kg wet wt. 50.4 mg/kg wet wt. 

6.93×10-6 6.93×10-7 274 years 2,740 years 0.27 μg/l 6.04 mg/kg wet wt. 10.6 mg/kg wet wt. 

6.93×10-5 6.93×10-6 27.4 years 274 years 0.24 μg/l 5.32 mg/kg wet wt. 1.19 mg/kg wet wt. 

6.93×10-4 6.93×10-5 2.74 years 27.4 years 0.21 μg/l 4.71 mg/kg wet wt. 0.12 mg/kg wet wt. 

1.90×10-4 1 year 10 years 0.19 μg/l 3.92 mg/kg wet wt. 0.044 mg/kg wet wt. 

6.93×10-3 6.93×10-3 100 days 2.74 years 0.13 μg/l 2.3 mg/kg wet wt. 0.012 mg/kg wet wt. 

0.0139 1.93×10-3 50 days 1.37 years 0.10 μg/l 1.45 mg/kg wet wt. 0.006 mg/kg wet wt. 

0.0231 2.31×10-3 30 days 300 days 0.08 μg/l 0.97 mg/kg wet wt. 0.004 mg/kg wet wt. 

0.1 μg/l 0.7 mg/kg wet wt. 0.088 mg/kg wet wt. 

1.90×10-3

Measured data 

317 
R331_0208_env

As can be seen from the data presented in Table H4, the regional soil concentration is

particularly sensitive to the value of the degradation rate chosen. A degradation half-life in

soil of around 2 years leads to predicted levels that are consistent with the measured data. 

318