TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR
 

HEXACHLOROETHANE
 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
 

Public Health Service
 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
 

September 1997 
HEXACHLOROETHANE ii 

DISCLAIMER 

The use of company or product name(s) is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE iii 

UPDATE STATEMENT 

Toxicological profiles are revised and republished as necessary, but no less than once every three years. 

For information regarding the update status of previously released profiles, contact ATSDR at: 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
 

Division of Toxicology/Toxicology Information Branch
 

1600 Clifton Road NE, E-29
 

Atlanta, Georgia 30333
 


*Legislative Background vi 

The toxicological profiles are developed in response to the Super-fund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 (Public Law 99-499) which amended the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Super-fund). Section 

211 of SARA also amended Title 10 of the U. S. Code, creating the Defense Environmental 

Restoration Program. Section 2704(a) of Title 10 of the U. S. Code directs the Secretary of Defense 

to notify the Secretary of Health and Human Services of not less than 25 of the most commonly found 

unregulated hazardous substances at defense facilities. Section 2704(b) of Title 10 of the U. S. Code 

directs the Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to 

prepare a toxicological profile for each substance on the list provided by the Secretary of Defense 

under subsection (b). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE vii 

CONTRIBUTORS 

CHEMICAL MANAGER(S)/AUTHOR(S): 

Cassandra Smith-Simon, M.S.
 

ATSDR, Division of Toxicology, Atlanta, GA
 

Joyce M. Donohue, Ph.D.
 

Life Systems, Inc., Arlington, VA
 

Carol Eisenmann, Ph.D.
 

Sciences International, Inc., Alexandria, VA
 

THE PROFILE HAS UNDERGONE THE FOLLOWING ATSDR INTERNAL REVIEWS: 

1. Green Border Review. Green Border review assures the consistency with ATSDR policy. 

2. Health Effects Review. The Health Effects Review Committee examines the health effects 

chapter of each profile for consistency and accuracy in interpreting health effects and classifying 

end points. 

3. Minimal Risk Level Review. The Minimal Risk Level Workgroup considers issues relevant to 

substance-specific minimal risk levels (MRLs), reviews the health effects database of each profile, 

and makes recommendations for derivation of MRLs. 

HEXACHLOROETHANE ix 

PEER REVIEW
 

A peer review panel was assembled for Hexachloroethane. The panel consisted of the following members: 

1. Mr. Bruce Jacobs, General Physics Corporation, Edgewood, MD 

2 . Mr. Lyman Skory, Private Consultant, Midland, Michigan 

3 . Dr. Peter Van Voris, Senior Program Manager, Richland, Washington 

These experts collectively have knowledge of hexachloroethane’s physical and chemical properties, 

toxicokinetics, key health end points, mechanisms of action, human and animal exposure, and 

quantification of risk to humans. All reviewers were selected in conformity with the conditions for peer 

review specified in Section 104(1)(13) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

and Liability Act, as amended. 

Scientists from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) have reviewed the peer 

reviewers’ comments and determined which comments will be included in the profile. A listing of the peer 

reviewers’ comments not incorporated in the profile, with a brief explanation of the rationale for their 

exclusion, exists as part of the administrative record for this compound. A list of databases reviewed and a 

list of unpublished documents cited are also included in the administrative record. 

The citation of the peer review panel should not be understood to imply its approval of the profile’s final 

content. The responsibility for the content of this profile lies with the ATSDR. 









HEXACHLOROETHANE 1 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

This statement was prepared to give you information about hexachloroethane and to emphasize 

the human health effects that may result from exposure to it. The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) has identified 1,416 hazardous waste sites as the most serious in the nation. 

These sites make up the National Priorities List (NPL) and are the sites targeted for long-term 

federal clean-up activities. Hexachloroethane has been found in at least 45 of the sites on the 

NPL. However, the number of NPL sites evaluated for hexachloroethane is not known. As EPA 

evaluates more sites, the number of sites at which hexachloroethane is found may increase. This 

information is important because exposure to hexachloroethane may cause harmful health effects 

and because these sites are potential or actual sources of human exposure to hexachloroethane. 

When a substance is released from a large area, such as an industrial plant, or from a container, 

such as a drum or bottle, it enters the environment. This release does not always lead to 

exposure. You can be exposed to a substance only when you come in contact with it. You may 

be exposed by breathing, eating, or drinking substances containing it or by touching it. 

If you are exposed to a substance such as hexachloroethane, many factors will determine whether 

harmful health effects will occur and what the type and severity of those health effects will be. 

These factors include the dose (how much), the duration (how long), the route or pathway by 

which you are exposed (breathing, eating, drinking, or skin contact), the other chemicals to 

which you are exposed, and your individual characteristics such as age, sex, nutritional status, 

family traits, lifestyle, and state of health. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 2 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

1 .1	 WHAT IS HEXACHLOROETHANE? 

Hexachloroethane is a colorless solid that gradually evaporates when it is exposed to air. This 

compound is also called perchloroethane, carbon hexachloride, and HCE. It is sold under the 

trade names Avlothane, Distokal, Distopan, and Distopin. In the United States, about half of the 

hexachloroethane is used by the military for smoke-producing devices. It is also sold as 

degassing pellets that are used to remove the air bubbles in melted aluminum. Hexachloroethane 

may be present as an ingredient in some fungicides, insecticides, lubricants, plastics, and 

cellulose. At one time, hexachloroethane was prescribed for deworming animals. 

Hexachloroethane does not occur naturally in the environment. It is made by adding chlorine to 

tetrachloroethylene. Hexachloroethane is no longer made in the United States, but it is formed as 

a by-product in the production of some chemicals. For example, it is a by-product in the high 

temperature synthesis of tetrachloroethylene from carbon tetrachloride. Some hexachloroethane 

can be formed by incinerators when materials containing chlorinated hydrocarbons are burned. 

Hexachloroethane itself does not easily catch fire. Some hexachloroethane can also be formed 

when chlorine reacts with carbon compounds in drinking water. 

Hexachloroethane vapors smell like camphor. You can begin to smell hexachloroethane in air 

when there are 150 parts present in a billion parts of air (ppb). You can smell it in water at 

10 ppb. Neither a description of the taste nor the amount of hexachloroethane that gives a taste 

to water were found. 

For more information on the properties and uses of hexachloroethane, see Chapters 3,4, and 5. 

1.2	 WHAT HAPPENS TO HEXACHLOROETHANE WHEN IT ENTERS THE

 ENVIRONMENT? 

Hexachloroethane is released to the air during military operations and training exercises when 

smoke-producing devices containing it are used. In a smoke pot or grenade, most of it is used up 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 3 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

by the smoke-producing reaction. Only small amounts (5% or less) remain after the smoke has 

formed. However, these small amounts can collect in the atmosphere and in the soil. At one 

military training site, about 14,700 pounds of hexachloroethane were released to the air over a 

2-year period. 

Hexachloroethane also enters the environment as part of the waste from companies that make or 

use it. Vapors can be released to the air during production, use, or transport. Solid wastes 

containing it are buried in landfills or burned. In landfills, it can dissolve in underground water 

because it does not bind strongly to soil. Once dissolved, it can reach rivers, lakes, streams, or 

well water. 

Hexachloroethane in the air does not break down to other compounds. It gradually escapes into 

the upper atmosphere. Some hexachloroethane that is in lakes or streams and surface soils will 

evaporate into the air. Some will be broken down by microscopic organisms. Microbes can 

break down hexachloroethane more easily without oxygen than with oxygen. That is why 

hexachloroethane will break down more quickly when it is buried in the soil or trapped in 

underground water than when it is near the surface. In one study, it took only 4 days for 99% of 

the hexachloroethane in soil to break down when oxygen was not present. It took 4 weeks when 

oxygen was present. 

Hexachloroethane does not appear to collect in plants or animals used for food. It has a slight 

tendency to build up in fish, but the fish break it down quickly, so the amount found in fish from 

polluted waters is very low. Rainbow trout from Lake Ontario had only 0.03 parts 

hexachloroethane per trillion (ppt) parts of fish. 

More information on what happens to hexachloroethane in the environment is in Chapters 4 

and 5. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 4 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

1.3 HOW MIGHT I BE EXPOSED TO HEXACHLOROETHANE? 

You can be exposed to hexachloroethane from the air. Background levels in air range from 5 to 

7 ppt. Larger amounts may be found near military installations where smoke pots and grenades 

that contain hexachloroethane are used during training. When a smoke pot or grenade is used, 

the heat will cause other chemicals to be formed, including tetrachloroethylene, carbon 

tetrachloride, phosgene, and hexachlorobenzene. These chemicals can also be toxic. Higher than 

average amounts can occur near aluminum smelters that use hexachloroethane as a degassing 

agent. Incinerators that burn industrial wastes containing chlorine can release hexachloroethane 

to the air. 

If you live near a hazardous waste site, you might be exposed to hexachloroethane by breathing 

or by drinking contaminated water. Private wells within one mile of a hazardous waste site 

contained 4.6 ppb hexachloroethane. Children who play in soil near a waste site that contains 

hexachloroethane could be exposed if they put soil or soiled fingers into their mouths. 

You are not likely to be exposed to hexachloroethane from your food. However, you might be 

exposed if you use insecticides, fungicides, or plastics that contain this chemical. You may also 

be exposed to small amounts of this chemical from your drinking water if chlorine is used to kill 

germs. Hexachloroethane has occasionally been reported in drinking water at concentrations of 

0.03-4.3 ppb in some locations in the United States. 

If you work in an industry that uses hexachloroethane, such as aluminum smelting, or a chemical 

plant, you could be exposed by breathing it or touching it. About 8,500 people in the United 

States are exposed to hexachloroethane at work. 

People who work with smoke-producing devices that contain hexachloroethane are exposed to it 

in the smoke. They can contact it through smoke particles on plants and in the soil. 

More information on how you can be exposed to hexachloroethane is in Chapter 5. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 5 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

1.4 HOW CAN HEXACHLOROETHANE ENTER AND LEAVE MY BODY? 

Hexachloroethane can enter your body through your lungs if you breathe its vapors. Of the 

amount that enters your lungs, only a small fraction of the hexachloroethane will enter your 

bloodstream and ultimately your body tissues. It can enter your body if you eat or drink 

something contaminated with it. Based on studies in animals, about half of the hexachloroethane 

you eat will get into your bloodstream. Very little will enter your body if you get it on your skin. 

The hexachloroethane that enters your bloodstream will go to your liver where it is turned into 

other compounds. Some of these compounds are harmful and will affect your health in almost 

the same way hexachloroethane does. If you are exposed to carbon tetrachloride, your liver can 

make hexachloroethane from it. 

When hexachloroethane gets into your body, some is temporarily stored in your body fat. Most 

of it leaves your body in 1 or 2 days in the air you breathe out, in your urine, and in your feces. 

More information on how hexachloroethane enters and leaves your body is in Chapter 2. 

1.5 HOW CAN HEXACHLOROETHANE AFFECT MY HEALTH? 

Mild skin irritation has been reported by workers at a munitions factory who were exposed to 

low levels of hexachloroethane. The workers were wearing protective clothing that greatly 

reduced exposure. No other information is available concerning health effects in people exposed 

to hexachloroethane. However, results of animal studies can be used to show how it can affect 

your health. Based on the animal data, hexachloroethane in the air can irritate your nose and 

lungs and cause some buildup of mucus in your nose, much like an allergy. It can also irritate 

your eyes and make them tear. 

If you are in an area that has a lot of hexachloroethane vapor, your facial muscles may twitch or 

you may have difficulty moving. These effects have been observed in animals during exposure 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 6 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

at levels far greater than those found in industrial use of hexachloroethane or those which would 

be expected in areas near a hazardous waste site. 

Hexachloroethane is not a highly toxic substance. If you are exposed to a large amount for a 

long time, some of your liver cells could be destroyed and fat could build up in your liver. There 

is also a slight chance that your kidneys could be damaged. 

No results from animal studies suggest that hexachloroethane would make it hard for you to 

become pregnant or that it would hurt your baby while you are pregnant. However, animal 

studies that have looked at the effects of hexachloroethane during pregnancy are limited. 

Liver tumors developed in mice that were orally exposed to hexachloroethane for their whole 

lifetime. Tumors of this kind are common in mice. Hexachloroethane will not necessarily have 

the same effect on people. Male rats that were exposed to hexachloroethane for their lifetime 

developed kidney tumors. This type of tumor is not found in people, so it is unlikely that 

exposure to hexachloroethane would cause you to develop cancer of the kidney. The Department 

of Health and Human Services has determined that hexachloroethane may reasonably be 

anticipated to be a carcinogen (can cause cancer). The International Agency for Research on 

Cancer (IARC) has determined that hexachloroethane is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity 

in people. EPA has determined that hexachloroethane is a possible human carcinogen. 

More information on the health effects from hexachloroethane exposure is in Chapter 2. 

1.6	 IS THERE A MEDICAL TEST TO DETERMINE WHETHER I HAVE BEEN 

EXPOSED TO HEXACHLOROETHANE? 

Samples of your blood, urine, or feces can be tested to see if you were exposed to 

hexachloroethane. The tests are not routinely available at most doctors’ offices, but your doctor 

can collect blood, urine, or fecal samples and send them to a special laboratory for testing. These 

tests are useful only if you were exposed 24-48 hours before you saw the doctor. Your body 

changes hexachloroethane into the same compounds that it makes from other chemicals like 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 7 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

tetrachloroethylene or pentachloroethane. Your body can also make hexachloroethane from 

carbon tetrachloride. Therefore, if a laboratory finds hexachloroethane in your body blood or 

excretions, your doctor will ask you if you were exposed to carbon tetrachloride. More 

information on medical tests that can be used to determine if you have been exposed to 

hexachloroethane is in Chapters 2 and 6. 

1.7 WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS HAS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MADE TO 

PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH? 

The federal government is concerned about the amount of hexachloroethane that you are exposed 

to in the environment. The government has established standards and guidelines to prevent you 

from being overexposed. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set a 

limit of 1 part per million (ppm) for the hexachloroethane in workplace air over an &hour 

workday. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) considers 

hexachloroethane as a potential occupational carcinogen (can cause cancer) and recommends 

1 ppm in air as a tolerance value. 

The EPA recommends that children not drink water with more than 5 ppm hexachloroethane for 

more than 10 days or more than 100 ppb for any longer than 7 years. Adults should not drink 

water with more than 450 ppb any longer than 7 years. EPA suggests that water consumed over 

a lifetime contain no more than 1 ppb hexachloroethane. 

Industrial releases of more than 100 pounds of hexachloroethane into the environment must be 

reported to EPA. 

More information on government regulations for hexachloroethane is in Chapter 7. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 8 

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT 

1.8 WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION? 

If you have any more questions or concerns, please contact your community or state health or 

environmental quality department or 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 

Division of Toxicology 

1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop E-29 

Atlanta, Georgia 30333 

(404) 639-6000 

This agency can also provide you with information on the location of occupational and 

environmental health clinics. These clinics specialize in the recognition, evaluation, and 

treatment of illness resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 9 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.1 INTRODUCTION 

The primary purpose of this chapter is to provide public health officials, physicians, toxicologists, and 

other interested individuals and groups with an overall perspective on the toxicology of hexachloroethane. 

It contains descriptions and evaluations of toxicological studies and epidemiological investigations and 

provides conclusions, where possible, on the relevance of toxicity and toxicokinetic data to public health. 

A glossary and list of acronyms, abbreviations, and symbols can be found at the end of this profile. 

2.2 DISCUSSION OF HEALTH EFFECTS BY ROUTE OF EXPOSURE 

To help public health professionals and others address the needs of persons living or working near 

hazardous waste sites, the information in this section is organized first by route of exposure - inhalation, 

oral, and dermal; and then by health effect - death, systemic, immunological, neurological, reproductive, 

developmental, genotoxic, and carcinogenic effects. These data are discussed in terms of three exposure 

periods - acute (14 days or less), intermediate (15-364 days), and chronic (365 days or more). 

Levels of significant exposure for each route and duration are presented in tables and illustrated in figures. 

The points in the figures showing no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) or lowest-observedadverseeffect levels (LOAELs) reflect the actual doses (levels of exposure) used in the studies. LOAELs 

have been classified into “less serious” or “serious” effects. “Serious” effects are those that evoke failure 

in a biological system and can lead to morbidity or mortality (e.g., acute respiratory distress or death). 

“Less serious” effects are those that are not expected to cause significant dysfunction or death, or those 

whose significance to the organism is not entirely clear. ATSDR acknowledges that a considerable 

amount of judgment may be required in establishing whether an end point should be classified as a 

NOAEL, “less serious” LOAEL, or “serious” LOAEL, and that in some cases, there will be insufficient 

data to decide whether the effect is indicative of significant dysfunction. However, the Agency has 

established guidelines and policies that are used to classify these end points. ATSDR believes that there is 

sufficient merit in this approach to warrant an attempt at distinguishing between “less serious” and 

“serious” effects. The distinction between “less serious” effects and “serious” effects is considered to be 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 10 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

important because it helps the users of the profiles to identify levels of exposure at which major health 

effects start to appear. LOAELs or NOAELs should also help in determining whether or not the effects 

vary with dose and/or duration, and place into perspective the possible significance of these effects to 

human health. 

The significance of the exposure levels shown in the Levels of Significant Exposure (LSE) tables and 

figures may differ depending on the user’s perspective. Public health officials and others concerned with 

appropriate actions to take at hazardous waste sites may want information on levels of exposure associated 

with more subtle effects in humans or animals or exposure levels below which no adverse effects have 

been observed. Estimates of levels posing minimal risk to humans (Minimal Risk Levels or MRLs) may 

be of interest to health professionals and citizens alike. 

Levels of exposure associated with carcinogenic effects (Cancer Effect Levels, CELs) of hexachloroethane 

are indicated in Table 2-2 and Figure 2-2. Because cancer effects could occur at lower exposure levels, 

Figure 2-2 also shows a range for the upper bound of estimated excess risks, ranging from a risk of 1 in 

10,000 to 1 in 10,000,000 (10m-4 to 10-7), as developed by EPA. 

Estimates of exposure levels posing minimal risk to humans (Minimal Risk Levels or MRLs) have been 

made for hexachloroethane. An MRL is defined as an estimate of daily human exposure to a substance 

that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of adverse effects (noncarcinogenic) over a specified 

duration of exposure. MRLs are derived when reliable and sufficient data exist to identify the target 

organ(s) of effect or the most sensitive health effect(s) for a specific duration within a given route of 

exposure. MRLs are based on noncancerous health effects only and do not consider carcinogenic effects. 

MRLs can be derived for acute, intermediate, and chronic duration exposures for inhalation and oral 

routes. Appropriate methodology does not exist to develop MRLs for dermal exposure. 

Although methods have been established to derive these levels (Barnes and Dourson 1988; EPA 1990e), 

uncertainties areassociated with these techniques. Furthermore, ATSDR acknowledges additional 

uncertainties inherent in the application of the procedures to derive less than lifetime MRLs. As an 

example, acute inhalation MRLs may not be protective for health effects that are delayed in development 

or are acquired following repeated acute insults, such as hypersensitivity reactions, asthma, or chronic 

bronchitis. As these kinds of health effects data become available and methods to assess levels of 

significant human exposure improve, these MRLs will be revised. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 11 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

A User’s Guide has been provided at the end of this profile (see Appendix A). This guide should aid in the 

interpretation of the tables and figures for Levels of Significant Exposure and the MRLs. 

2.2.1 Inhalation Exposure 

Hexachloroethane is a solid that sublimes at ambient air temperatures. At 20°C the saturated vapor 

concentration is 670-700 ppm (Weeks et al. 1979); thus, there is a limitation on the vapor concentration 

that can be used in studies using the inhalation route of exposure. In circumstances where the saturation 

threshold is exceeded, microcrystalline hexachloroethane forms in the atmosphere and is inhaled by the 

exposed animals along with the volatilized hexachloroethane. 

2.2.1 .l Death 

No studies were located regarding death in humans after inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane. 

Rats were exposed to vapor concentrations of either 260 or 5,900 ppm hexachloroethane for 8 hours 

(Weeks et al. 1979). The 5,900 ppm vapor concentration was generated at 50°C and crystallized as it 

entered the exposure chamber. At the higher concentration the exposed animals showed signs of distress 

(staggering gait) during exposure, and 2 of 6 were dead at the end of 8 hours. No animals died at the 

lower exposure concentration. 

Following 6 weeks of inhalation exposure to 15-260 ppm, no deaths in quail were reported; however, 2 of 

50 rats, 4 of 10 guinea pigs, and 1 of 4 dogs died at the 260 ppm concentration (Weeks et al. 1979). Based 

on clinical signs, the dogs seemed to be particularly sensitive to hexachloroethane exposure. The animals 

developed tremors and ataxia and closed their eyes. The one dog that died experienced convulsions before 

death. The rats and guinea pigs that succumbed to exposure died during weeks 4 or 5 and, thus, appear to 

be less sensitive. The quail were the most resistant to death following hexachloroethane exposure. 

All identified LOAEL values for lethality in each species and duration category are recorded in Table 2- 1 

and plotted in Figure 2- 1. These values indicate that hexachloroethane is lethal to animals exposed 

intermittently to 260 ppm for 6 weeks; however, no deaths occurred in animals acutely exposed for 

8 hours to the same concentration. Concentrations of 48 ppm and lower were not lethal in rats, guinea 

pigs, dogs, or quail. 







HEXACHLOROETHANE 19 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.2.1.2 Systemic Effects 

The highest NOAEL values and all LOAEL values from each reliable study for systemic effects in each 

species and duration category are recorded in Table 2- 1 and plotted in Figure 2-l. 

Respiratory Effects. Pulmonary function tests (vital capacity, forced expiratory volume at 1 second) 

were in the normal range in 11 workers occupationally exposed to hexachloroethane at 0.5-2.1 ppm while 

wearing protective equipment including compressed-air-fed visors or full-facepiece masks with 

combination filters (Selden et al. 1994). The testing was completed 5 weeks after production at a smoke 

munitions plant resumed following a 5-week break. Plasma hexachloroethane levels were 0.08 ± 

0.14 μg/L before production resumed and 7.3 ±6.04 μg/L 5 weeks later indicating that despite protective 

equipment, low-level exposure occurred (Selden et al 1993). Mild skin and mucous membrane irritation 

were reported in the exposed group, suggesting that exposure may have been through either the inhalation 

or dermal routes of exposure. 

Acute exposure of rats to 5,900 ppm hexachloroethane for 8 hours caused interstitial pulmonary 

pneumonitis (Weeks et al. 1979). At this exposure concentration there were hexachloroethane particles 

present in the exposure chamber that were inhaled and probably contributed to the lung irritation. 

Changes in lung histopathology were noted when the animals were sacrificed after a 14-day recovery 

period. There were no changes in relative lung weights or tissue histopathology in animals that were 

exposed to 260 ppm for the same time period. When pregnant female rats were exposed to 0, 15,48, or 

260 ppm hexachloroethane on gestation days 6-16, 85% of the animals in the 48-ppm dose group 

displayed nasal exudate, and all animals in the 260-ppm dose group were affected. There was an endemic 

mycoplasma infection in the colony of rats used in the Weeks et al. (1979) study. Therefore, it is not clear 

if the increase in nasal exudate observed at 48 ppm in the teratology study, but not at 48 ppm in the 

6-week study (discussed below), was truly related to exposure. 

In rats exposed to 260 ppm hexachloroethane for 6 weeks, there was a significant decrease in oxygen 

consumption as compared to the controls (Weeks et al. 1979). Oxygen consumption was determined by 

measuring carbon dioxide exhaled by rats placed in a water-sealed chamber for 15 minutes. The authors 

hypothesized that the decrease in oxygen consumption could have been a normal response to inhalation of 

a respiratory tract irritant. There were no significant changes in lung weights, but there was an increase in 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 20 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

mycoplasma lesions of the nasal turbinates, trachea, and lungs; lymphoid hyperplasia of the trachea; and 

pneumonitis of the bronchi when the animals were sacrificed after the 6-week exposure period. These 

changes were not seen in the animals exposed to 15 or 48 ppm or in rats exposed to 260 ppm and 

sacrificed after a 12-week recovery period. The authors hypothesized that the respiratory tract lesions 

were the result of hexachloroethane potentiation of an endemic mycoplasma infection rather than systemic 

effects from inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane. The infection could be the result of lowered host 

resistance due to either compromised immune defenses or a weakened mucosal barrier along the 

respiratory epithelium. 

In older rats (12-14 weeks), there was a significant increase in relative lung weights as compared to 

controls following 6 weeks of exposure to 260 ppm hexachloroethane. Oxygen consumption was not 

measured in these animals, and it is not clear if the tissues were examined histologically (Weeks et al. 

1979). 

In dogs, there were no significant changes in pulmonary function with exposure to 15-260 ppm 

hexachloroethane for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). Intrapleural pressure, transpulmonary pressure, air 

flow, and tidal volume were measured to obtain scores for compliance and resistance. When the animals 

were sacrificed at either 6 weeks or after a 12-week recovery period, there were no histopathological 

changes observed in the lungs. There were also no apparent effects on the respiratory system in guinea 

pigs from exposure to 15-260 ppm hexachloroethane. Exposure of quail to 260 ppm was associated with 

increased mucus in the nasal turbinates in 2 of the 10 animals, but this increased mucus did not appear to 

be associated with a respiratory infection. These changes were considered to be the direct effect of 

hexachloroethane on the epithelium of the nasal cavity and are discussed in Section 2.2.3.2. 

Exposure to hexachloroethane vapors can cause irritation to the respiratory system. Acute exposure to 

260 ppm hexachloroethane had no apparent effect on the lungs and air passages in rats, but acute exposure 

to a concentration where particulate hexachloroethane was present in the atmosphere caused lung irritation 

(Weeks et al. 1979). .On the other hand, intermediate-duration exposure to 260 ppm hexachloroethane 

appeared to cause some irritation of the respiratory epithelium, which may have increased susceptibility to 

respiratory infection. When exposure ceased, the animals recovered, so there were no histopathological 

indications of tissue damage after a 12week recovery period. Lesions of the nasal passages, trachea, and 

bronchi; increased mycoplasma infections; mucus in the nasal cavities; and decreased oxygen 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 21 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

consumption were indicators of respiratory tract irritation from repeated episodes of hexachloroethane 

exposure. 

Cardiovascular Effects. No studies were located regarding cardiovascular effects in humans after 

inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no histopathological changes in the heart for rats, guinea pigs, dogs, or quail that were exposed 

to concentrations of 0, 260, or 5,900 ppm hexachloroethane for 8 hours or to 0, 1548, or 260 ppm 

hexachloroethane 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Gastrointestinal Effects. No studies were located regarding gastrointestinal effects in humans after 

inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no histopathological changes in the stomach, small intestines, or large intestines for rats, 

guinea pigs, dogs, or quail that were exposed to concentrations of 0,260, or 5,900 ppm hexachloroethane 

for 8 hours or to 0, 15,48, or 260 ppm hexachloroethane 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks (Weeks 

et al. 1979). 

Hematological Effects. Routine blood parameters (hemoglobin, erythrocyte, leukocyte and 

thrombocyte levels) measured in 11 hexachloroethane workers did not differ from those of the controls 

(Selden et al. 1994). Plasma hexachloroethane levels in these workers, who wore protective equipment, 

were 7.3 ± 6.04 μgL at the time of the hematological analysis and 0.08± 0.14 μg/L before production 

resumed (Selden et al. 1993). Mild skin and mucous membrane irritation were reported in the exposed 

group, suggesting that exposure may have been through either the inhalation or dermal routes of exposure. 

There were no effects on the red blood cell counts of dogs exposed to 0, 15,48, or 260 ppm 

hexachloroethane for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). Although other hematological parameters were 

apparently determined, the red cell count was the only parameter that was specified. Accordingly, it is not 

possible to speculate whether inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane has any effect on other 

hematological parameters. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 22 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Musculoskeletal Effects. No studies were located regarding musculoskeletal effects in humans after 

inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no treatment-related gross or histopathological lesions of the skeletal muscle or bone in rats, 

guinea pigs, dogs, or quail exposed to 0, 15,48, or 260 ppm hexachloroethane 6 hours/day, 5 days/week 

for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Hepatic Effects. Liver function tests (serum bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, 

alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase) completed in 11 hexachloroethane workers were 

within the normal range (Selden et al. 1994). Plasma hexachloroethane levels in these workers, who wore 

protective equipment, were 7.3 ±6.04 μg/L at the time of the tests (Selden et al. 1993). Mild skin and 

mucous membrane irritation were reported in the exposed group, suggesting that exposure may have been 

through either the inhalation or dermal routes of exposure. 

A single 8-hour exposure of rats to 260 ppm hexachloroethane had no effect on relative liver weight or 

tissue histopathology (Weeks et al. 1979). A single S-hour exposure to 5,900 ppm did not cause 

histopathological changes. Organ weights were not determined for the higher exposure concentration. 

The relative liver weight was significantly increased (p value not given) in guinea pigs and rats, but not 

dogs or quail, that were exposed to 260 ppm 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Since the increase in liver weight was not accompanied by any histological abnormalities, it is classified as 

a NOAEL rather than a LOAEL in Table 2-l and Figure 2-l. There were no changes in liver weights or 

histopathology in any species exposed to concentrations of 15 or 48 ppm for 6 weeks. 

Renal Effects. Renal function tests (serum creatinine and urate, urinary hemoglobin, protein and 

glucose) completed in 11 hexachloroethane workers were within the normal range (Selden et al. 1994). 

Plasma hexachloroethane levels in these workers, who wore protective equipment, were 7.3 ± 6.04 μg/L at 

the time of the tests (Selden et al. 1993). Mild skin and mucous membrane irritation were reported in the 

exposed group, suggesting that exposure may have been through either the inhalation or dermal routes of 

exposure. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 23 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

A single exposure of rats to 260 ppm hexachloroethane had no effect on relative kidney weight or tissue 

histopathology (Weeks et al. 1979). A single exposure to 5,900 ppm did not cause histopathological 

changes. Organ weights were not determined for the higher exposure concentration. 

The relative kidney weight was significantly increased (p value not stated) in male rats, but not female 

rats, guinea pigs, dogs, or quail, that were exposed to 260 ppm 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks 

(Weeks et al. 1979). Since the increase in kidney weight was not accompanied by any histological 

abnormalities, it is classified as a NOAEL rather than a LOAEL in Table 2-1 and Figure 2-l. There were 

no changes in kidney weights or histopathology in any species exposed to 15 or 48 ppm hexachloroethane 

for 6 weeks. 

Endocrine Effects. No studies were located regarding endocrine effects in humans after inhalation 

exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no histopathological changes in the pancreas or adrenal glands of rats exposed to 

concentrations of 0,260, or 5,900 ppm hexachloroethane for 8 hours, or in the pancreas or adrenal glands 

of rats, guinea pigs, dogs, or quail exposed to 0, 15,48, or 260 ppm hexachloroethane 6 hours/day, 

5 days/week for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Dermal Effects. Hexachloroethane exposed workers reported a slightly higher prevalence of dry skin 

and dry mucous membranes as well as itching and other skin problems than the unexposed controls 

(Selden et al. 1994). Clinical examinations of the 11 exposed workers did not reveal signs of abnormal 

dermatological or mucous membrane status. Plasma hexachloroethane levels in these workers, who wore 

protective equipment, were 7.3 ± 6.04 μg/L at the time of the examinations (Selden et al. 1993). The 

investigators indicate that the dermal effects may also have been a result of a local trauma effect of the 

protective equipment. 

Ocular Effects; No studies were located regarding ocular effects in humans after inhalatioin exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Dogs that were exposed to 260 ppm hexachloroethane for 6 hours per day, 5 days per week, kept their 

eyes closed during each exposure (Weeks et al. 1979). Since this effect occurred throughout the 6-week 

study, it can be regarded as an acute effect that was most likely the result of vapor contact with the eye. In 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 24 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

rats, a red exudate appeared about the eyes starting at week 4. This may have been a systemic effect. 

There were no reported effects on the eyes of guinea pigs or quail during 6 weeks of exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Body Weight Effects. Rats exposed to a concentration of 5,900 ppm hexachloroethane for 8 hours had 

a decreased weight gain over the 14-day, postexposure observation period when compared to controls 

(Weeks et al. 1979). There were no differences in the weight gain for animals exposed to 260 ppm under 

the same conditions. 

Guinea pigs and male rats had decreased weight gains starting at week 2 or 3 of an intermittent 6-week 

exposure to 260 ppm hexachloroethane, but there were no effects on dogs or quail (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Intermittent exposure to 15 or 48 ppm hexachloroethane for 6 weeks had no effect on weight gain in rats, 

dogs, guinea pigs, or quail. 

2.2.1.3 Immunological and Lymphoreticular Effects 

No studies were located regarding immunological or lymphoreticular effects in humans after inhalation 

exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no treatment-related gross or histopathological lesions of the thymus and spleen and no 

changes in spleen weight in rats that were exposed to 260 or 5,900 ppm hexachloroethane for 8 hours, nor 

were there any effects on thymus and spleen histopathology in rats, guinea pigs, dogs, and quail that were 

exposed to 260 ppm 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). The relative spleen 

weight was significantly higher (p value not stated) than that for the controls in young male rats but was 

not affected in older male rats or any of the other species evaluated. No effects were seen in the 15 and 

48 ppm dose groups. 

There was an increased incidence of a mycoplasma respiratory tract infection in rats exposed to 260 ppm 

hexachloroethane for 6 weeks but not in rats exposed to lower doses or in other species. This could 

indicate compromised immune function or a weakened mucosal barrier along the respiratory epitbelium. 

There were no studies identified that evaluated a wide range of immunological parameters. Therefore, 

there are no reliable LOAELs or NOAELs for this end point. Increases in spleen weights are not classified 

as LOAELs since they were not accompanied by histopathological changes. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 25 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.2.1.4 Neurological Effects 

No studies were located regarding neurological effects in humans after inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Acute 8-hour exposures to 5,900 ppm, but not 260 ppm, resulted in a staggering gait in one of six rats 

(Weeks et al. 1979). Tremors were also noted in pregnant rats exposed 6 hours per day to 260 ppm 

starting on the 6th day of an 1 l-day exposure period but not in animals exposed to 15 or 48 ppm (Weeks 

et al. 1979). Based on the NOAEL for neurological effects, an acute inhalation MRL of 6 ppm was 

calculated, as described in the footnote in Table 2-l. 

When male rats were exposed to concentrations of 0, 15,48, or 260 ppm hexachloroethane 6 hours/day, 

5 days/week for 6 weeks, foot shock avoidance behavior and spontaneous motor activity were not 

different from controls when measured at 1 day, 3 weeks, or 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). However, a 

group of male and female rats exposed to 260 ppm experienced tremors beginning at 4 weeks and 

persisting for the remainder of the 6-week exposure period. Recovery was evident during the 12 week 

post-exposure period (Weeks et al. 1978). Tremors were not observed in rats exposed at 48 ppm. Based 

on the intermediate-duration NOAEL of 48 ppm for neurological effects, an intermediate inhalation MRL 

of 6 ppm was calculated, as described in the footnote in Table 2-l. 

Dogs were apparently quite sensitive to neurological effects during hexachloroethane exposure (Weeks 

et al. 1979). The animals displayed tremors, ataxia, head bobbing, and fasciculation of the facial muscles 

with a 260 ppm exposure. Symptoms disappeared in the interval between exposures but returned 

intermittently over the 6-week exposure period. There were no differences in serum cholinesterase 

activity between control and exposed animals. Apparently, the levels of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine 

were not affected by hexachloroethane. There were no neurological responses in guinea pigs or quail with 

a 260-ppm exposure; and none of the species evaluated showed any overt neurological responses with an 

intermittent 6-week exposure at 15 or 48 ppm. 

The highest NOAEL values and all LOAEL values from each reliable study for neurological effects in 

each species and duration category are recorded in Table 2- 1 and plotted in Figure 2-l. Acute exposures 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 26 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

to hexachloroethane appear to cause neurological impairment during exposure of rats and dogs, but 

symptoms do not persist during the intervals between exposures or after exposure ceases. 

2.2.1.5 Reproductive Effects 

No studies were located regarding reproductive effects in humans after inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Hexachloroethane was maternally toxic at concentrations of 48 and 260 ppm in rats exposed 6 hours/day 

on gestation days 6-16, based on significantly decreased (p value not stated) maternal body weight gain, 

but it was not embryotoxic or fetotoxic (Weeks et al. 1979). There were no treatment-related gross or 

histopathological lesions of the testes in rats, dogs, guinea pigs, and quail that were exposed to 

concentrations of hexachloroethane up to 260 ppm 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks. However, 

relative testes weights were increased in rats when compared to the controls. No other reproductive organs 

were evaluated (Weeks et al. 1979). The highest NOAEL from each reliable study for reproductive effects 

in each species and duration category is recorded in Table 2-l and plotted in Figure 2-l. 

2.2.1.6 Developmental Effects 

No studies were located regarding developmental effects in humans after inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

In animals, hexachloroethane did not cause skeletal or soft tissue abnormalities in offspring of rats that 

were exposed to vapors of hexachloroethane (1.5-260 ppm) 6 hours/day during gestation days 6-16 

(Weeks et al. 1979). The highest NOAEL value from this study for developmental effects in rats is 

recorded in Table 2-l and plotted in Figure 2-l. 

2.2.1.7 Genotoxic Effects 

No studies were located regarding genotoxic effects in humans or animals after inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Genotoxicity studies are discussed in Section 2.5. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 27 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.2.1.8 Cancer 

One case study was identified where a man who had been occupationally exposed to hexachloroethane 

was treated for a liver tumor (Selden et al. 1989). Exposure had occurred over a period of 6 years as a 

result of the presence of hexachloroethane in a degassing agent used during aluminum smelting. 

However, the hexachloroethane reacted at the 700°C use-temperature, releasing a gas that was 96% 

hexachlorobenzene with small amounts of other chlorinated compounds. Because there was occupational 

exposure to a mixture of chlorinated compounds rather than just hexachloroethane, it is highly unlikely 

that the tumor was the result of hexachloroethane exposure alone. Occupational exposure to mineral oil 

mists for 20 years was also part of the subject’s employment history. 

No studies were located regarding cancer incidence in animals after inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. EPA has derived an inhalation unit risk (cancer slope factor) of 1.4x10-’ (mg/kg/day)-1 

for hexachloroethane (IRIS 1995). This inhalation unit risk was calculated using data from oral studies 

(see Section 2.2.2.8) and Figure 2-2. 

2.2.2 Oral Exposure 

2.2.2.1 Death 

No studies were located regarding death in humans after oral exposure to hexachloroethane. 

When hexachloroethane was administered to rats by gavage with corn oil as the solvent, the LD50 value 

was 5,160 mg/kg for males and 4,460 mg/kg for females (Weeks et al. 1979). Kinkead and Wolfe (1992) 

reported an LD50 value of 4,489 mg/kg for both male and female rats treated with hexachloroethane in 

corn oil. When hexachloroethane was dissolved in aqueous methyl cellulose solution, the LD50 was 

7,690 mg/kg for male and 7,080 mg/kg for female rats (Weeks et al. 1979). The lower LD50 for the corn 

oil solvent indicates that the absorption from this hydrophobic medium is greater than that from a 

hydrophilic medium such as methyl cellulose solution. The LD50 of 4,970 mg/kg for male guinea pigs 

given hexachloroethane in corn oil is similar to that for rats (Weeks et al. 1979). According to the 

classification system of Hodge and Sterner (1949), these LD50 values indicate that hexachloroethane is 

slightly toxic by acute oral exposure. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 28 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

With repeated administration of hexachloroethane, a dose of 750 mg/kg/day in corn oil was lethal to 1 of 5 

male rats and 2 of 5 females within 15 days (NTP 1989). The earliest death occurred in a male rat 

on day 5. All animals died between day 2 and day 8 with doses of 1,500 and 3,000 mg/kg/day. 

With 6-week hexachloroethane exposures, there were some deaths among rats given a dose of 

1,000 mg/kg/day in corn oil, and all animals died with a dose of 1,780 mg/kg/day (NTP 1977). The 

number of animals that died at the 1,000 mg/kg/day dose level was not specified and the time of death was 

not given for any of the doses. There were no deaths in animals given doses of 562 mg/kg/day or lower. 

Mice were more resistant to hexachloroethane exposure than rats because all of the mice survived doses of 

1,000 mg/kg/day in corn oil for 6 weeks (NTP 1977). Some male mice died with a 1,780 mg/kg/day dose, 

but the exact number was not specified. 

With a 13-week exposure duration, doses of 750 mg/kg/day in corn oil were lethal to some male and 

female rats (NTP 1989). The earliest death occurred among the males at 7 weeks. Between 7 weeks and 

13 weeks (the end of the exposure period), 5 of 10 males died; during week 13, 2 of 10 females died. 

Chronic (2-year) exposure of male rats to 20 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane and female rats to 

160 mg/kg/day had no effect on survival (NTP 1989), but the longevity of rats exposed to doses of 212 

and 423 mg/kg/day for 66 weeks was decreased as compared to controls (NTP 1977; Weisburger 1977). 

The hexachloroethane was given by gavage in corn oil for both studies. 

Doses of 750 mg/kg/day and greater can be lethal with both acute- and intermediate-duration exposures, 

and a chronic intake of 212 mg/kg/day or greater can shorten the lifespan of rats. There were no apparent 

effects on lifespan with chronic administration of a 160 mg/kg/day dose in female rats or a dose of 

20 mg/kg/day in male rats. 

All identified LOAEL values for lethality in each species and duration category are recorded in Table 2-2 

and plotted in Figure 2-2. 

2.2.2.2 Systemic Effects 

The highest NOAEL values and all LOAEL values from each reliable study for systemic effects in each 

species and duration category are recorded in Table 2-2 and plotted in Figure 2-2. 










HEXACHLOROETHANE 39 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

Respiratory Effects. No studies were located regarding respiratory effects in humans after oral 

exposure to hexachloroethane. 

Pregnant female rats were given 100 or 500 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in corn oil by gavage for 11 days 

(gestation days 6-16) (Weeks et al. 1979). In the high dose group, 75% of the animals showed an 

increased incidence of upper respiratory tract irritation compared to only 10% of the controls. Subclinical 

pneumonitis was evident in 20% of the animals in the high dose group as was increased mucous in the 

nasal turbinates. There were no effects on the respiratory tract for the animals exposed to 100 mg/kg/day 

when compared to the controls. 

No changes in lung histopathology or in lung weights were observed in rabbits exposed by gavage to 

0, 100,320, or 1,000 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in methyl cellulose solution for 12 days (Weeks et al. 

1979). 

When rats were exposed to 750 mg/kg/day or less hexachloroethane in corn oil by gavage for 13 weeks, 

there were no effects on the histopathology of the nasal cavity, nasal turbinates, larynx, trachea, bronchi, 

or lungs (NTP 1989). There were also no changes in the trachea or lungs of rats when hexachloroethane 

was fed in the diet at a dose of 62 mg/kg/day for 16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 1985). Doses of 20 mg/kg/day 

for males and 160 mg/kg/day for females had no effects on the nasal cavity, nasal turbinates, larynx, 

trachea, bronchi, or lungs when given to rats by gavage in corn oil over their lifetimes (NTP 1989). It 

appears that hexachloroethane can cause irritation of the respiratory passages in rats even when given 

orally. The presence of mycoplasma in the animal colony may have contributed to the appearance of 

lesions and, thus, the lesions may be the result of a synergistic interaction between the microorganism and 

the hexachloroethane. Based on the data from inhalation exposures as well as the findings of upper 

respiratory tract infections in pregnant rats that were orally exposed to hexachloroethane (Weeks et al. 

1979), it appears that hexachloroethane may weaken resistance to bacterial infections. 

Cardiovascular Effects. No studies were located regarding cardiovascular effects in humans after oral 

exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no histopathological changes in the hearts of rabbits that were exposed by gavage to doses of 

0, 100,320, or 1,000 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in methyl cellulose solution for 12 days (Weeks et al. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 40 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

1979). This was also true for rats that were exposed to doses of up to 62 mg/kg/day in the diet for 

16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 198.5) or rats exposed to doses of up to 750 mg/kg/day by gavage in corn oil for 

13 weeks (NTP 1989). There were significant increases in heart weight for male rats receiving doses of 

188-750 mg/kg/day and female rats receiving 750 mg/kg/day for 13 weeks (NTP 1989). Since these 

changes were not accompanied by any histopathological lesions, they are regarded in Table 2-2 and 

Figure 2-2 as NOAEL values rather than LOAELs. The heart does not appear to be a target organ when 

hexachloroethane is administered orally. 

Gastrointestinal Effects. No studies were located regarding gastrointestinal effects in humans after 

oral exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no histopathological changes in the stomach, small intestines, or large intestines of rabbits 

exposed by gavage to 1,000 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in methyl cellulose solution for 12 days (Weeks 

et al. 1979). No effects were noted in rats that were exposed by gavage to concentrations of up to 

750 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in corn oil or 62 mg/kg/day in feed for 13 or 16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 

1985; NTP 1989). Lifetime doses of up to 20 mg/kg/day for male and 160 mg/kg/day for female rats were 

without effect on the histopathology of the stomach or intestines (NTP 1989). Hexachloroethane appears 

to have no effects on the gastrointestinal system when administered orally. 

Hematological Effects. No studies were located regarding hematological effects in humans after oral 

exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no significant changes in red cell counts, hemoglobin concentration, or white cell counts in 

rats fed doses of 0, 1, 15, or 62 mg/kg/day in the diet for 16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 1985). 

Musculoskeletal Effects. No studies were located regarding musculoskeletal effects in humans after 

oral exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There were no treatment-related gross or histopathological lesions of the skeletal muscle or bone in rabbits 

exposed by gavage to l00-1,000 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in water for 12 days (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Histopathological changes were not observed in the skeletal muscle of rats exposed to hexachloroethane in 

drinking water at 62 mg/kg/day for 16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 1985). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 41 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

Hepatic Effects. No studies were located regarding hepatic effects in humans after oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

The liver appeared to be a target organ for hexachloroethane following oral administration. When one 

dose of 500 mg/kg was administered in an olive oil aqueous emulsion to male sheep, the levels of 

glutamate dehydrogenase, sorbitol dehydrogenase, ornithine carbamyl transferase, and aspartate 

aminotransferase in serum increased in the 2-day period after compound administration and then 

normalized (Fowler 1969b). Hexachloroethane had no effect on bromsulphthalein uptake from the blood by 

liver cells, but the transfer of this dye to bile was reduced in sheep exposed to doses of 500-l,000 

mg/kg/day. 

On the other hand, in rats, a single dose of 6,156 mg/kg hexachloroethane in mineral oil had no effects on 

a different set of biochemical indicators of liver function (microsomal protein, oxidative demethylase, 

NADP-NT reductase, glucose-6-phosphatase, or lipid conjugated diene concentration) when measured 

2 hours after compound administration (Reynolds 1972). Each of these parameters is an indicator of 

microsomal function. The authors postulated that the observed lack of effects could have been the result 

of slow uptake of hexachloroethane by the liver in a 2-hour period. Gastrointestinal absorption of 

hexachloroethane in mineral oil is probably minimal because, unlike olive oil, mineral oil cannot be 

digested. Dissolved lipophilic materials could be excreted in the feces soon after administration because 

mineral oil can act as a laxative. Thus, the author’s hypothesis that minimal hexachloroethane would reach 

the liver in 2 hours is reasonable. 

In rabbits, relative liver weights were increased by a dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in methyl 

cellulose solution when given by gavage for 12 days (Weeks et al. 1979). Doses of 320 and 

1,000 mg/kg/day were associated with hepatic necrosis, fatty degeneration, hemosiderin-laden 

macrophages, eosinophilic change, hemorrhage, and coagulation necrosis. The occurrence and severity of 

each effect at each dose was not presented in the published report of this study. There were also 

nonsignificant increases in the serum levels of alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, and 

bilirubin with the 1,000 mg/kg/day dose. No effects were seen with a dose of 100 mg/kg/day. As 

described in the footnote of Table 2-2, this NOAEL was used to calculate an MRL of 1 mg/kg/day for 

acute oral exposures. 

Liver weights were increased with doses of 15-497 mg/kg/day in rats and exposure durations of 

7-16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 1985; Milman et al. 1988; NTP 1989; Story et al. 1986). The lowest LOAEL 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 42 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

was 15 mg/kg/day from a 16-week study where the hexachloroethane was fed in the diet (Gorzinski et al.
 

1985). At this LOAEL, hepatocytes were visibly enlarged in 6 of 10 males. At a 62 mg/kg/day dose,
 

8 males had enlarged hepatocytes and liver weights were increased 10%. No hepatic effects were noted in
 

rats fed 1 mg/kg/day in this study. Based on this value, an intermediate oral MRL of 0.01 mg/kg/day was
 

calculated as described in the footnote in Table 2-2. In a different study, hepatic necrosis in the
 

centrilobular area was seen in 40% of the female rats with a dose of 188 mg/kg/day and in both sexes at
 

doses of 375 mg/kg/day and greater when hexachloroethane was given by gavage in corn oil for 13 weeks
 

(NTP 1989). With the 750 mg/kg/day dose, 40% of the males and 80% of the females were affected.
 

No effects were seen on liver histopathology in male rats given up to 20 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane for
 

their 2-year lifetime or females given up to 160 mg/kg/day (NTP 1989).
 

The liver is sensitive to hexachloroethane following both acute and longer term exposure scenarios.
 

Evidence of effects on the liver include increased weight and centrilobular necrosis in rats and rabbits and
 

increased serum levels of liver enzymes in sheep. There can also be fatty degeneration of the tissues and
 

hemorrhage when damage is severe.
 

Renal Effects. No studies were located regarding renal effects in humans after oral exposure to
 

hexachloroethane.
 

Male New Zealand rabbits displayed nephrosis of the convoluted tubules and nephrocalcinosis when given
 

doses of 320 and 1,000 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in methyl cellulose solution for 12 days (Weeks et al.
 

1979). Kidney weights were increased significantly for the 1,000 mg/kg/day dose. There were no
 

observed effects on the kidney with a dose of 100 mg/kg/day.
 

In male rats, hyaline droplets could be seen in tubular epithelial cells after 12 gavage doses of
 

187-750 mg/kg/day in corn oil over a 16-day period (NTP 1989). No adverse histopathologic effects
 

were seen in the kidneys of females. Hyaline droplet formation, tubular regeneration, and tubular casts
 

were present with doses of 47-750 mg/kg/day when the hexachloroethane was administered in corn oil by
 

gavage for 13 weeks (NTP 1989). Renal tubular necrosis and papillary necrosis were present in five males
 

that died during weeks 7-12 when given 750 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane. The kidneys of the
 

five survivors were not examined. Kidney weights were increased significantly in males at doses of
 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 43 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

94 mg/kg/day or greater and in females at 375 and 750 mg/kg/day. Hemorrhagic necrosis of the urinary 

bladder was present in the males from the highest dose group. 

When hexachloroethane was given in the diet for 16 weeks, male rats showed a dose-related increase in 

tubular hypertrophy, dilation, atrophy, peritubular fibrosis, and tubular degeneration (Gorzinski et al. 

1985). These signs of nephropathy were present in all of the males at the 62 mg/kg/day dose and 70% of 

the males at the 15 mg/kg/day dose. Kidney weights were significantly increased for the 62 mg/kg/day 

dose group. Renal effects were also present in female rats, but they were less severe than the effects seen 

in males and occurred at higher doses. A dose of 62 mg/kg/day in the diet for 16 weeks was associated 

with atrophy and degeneration of the tubules in 60% of the females (Gorzinski et al. 1985). 

Chronic exposure of both rats and mice resulted in tubular nephropathy in both males and females. In rats, 

lesions were present in 45-66% of the males when they were sacrificed at 110 weeks after receiving 212 

and 423 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane for 66 weeks of a 78-week exposure period (NTP 1977; Weisburger 

1977). The renal lesions were characterized by hyperchromic regenerative epithelium, necrosis, interstitial 

nephritis, fibrosis, focal pyelonephritis, tubular ectasis, and hyaline casts. Lesions were also present in 

females but had a lower incidence (18% and 59%) for the two dose groups. Two-year exposures of male 

rats to much lower doses (10 and 20 mg/kg/day) resulted in similar effects on the kidneys (NTP 1989). 

Minimal to mild nephropathy was present in females for doses of 80 and 160 mg/kg/day. Over 90% of the 

male and female mice exposed to 590 and 1,179 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane for 78 weeks displayed 

tubular nephropathy when sacrificed at 90 weeks (NTP 1977; Weisburger 1977). Regenerative tubular 

epithelium was visible and degeneration of the tubular epithelium occurred at the junction of the cortex 

and the medulla. Hyaline casts were present in the tubules, and fibrosis, calcium deposition, and 

inflammatory cells were noted in the kidney tissues. 

Male rats are sensitive to renal tubular nephropathy after exposure to hexachloroethane. The lesions 

observed are characteristic of hyaline droplet nephropathy. They are most likely the result of 

hexachloroethane or one of its metabolites binding to the excretory protein α2μ-globulin, altering its 

kidney transport, and leading to the formation of hyaline droplets. This protein is synthesized by male rats 

and accounts for 26% of their urinary protein excretion (Olson et al. 1990). It is not excreted in female 

rats except in minimal quantities. Since some effects are also seen in kidneys of female rats and in male 

and female mice that do not synthesize α2μ-globulin hexachloroethane must also have milder adverse 

effects on the kidney through a different mechanism. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 44 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Endocrine Effects. No studies were located regarding endocrine effects in humans after oral exposure 

to hexachloroethane. 

Histopathological changes were not observed in the pancreas or adrenal glands of pregnant rats treated by 

gavage with hexachloroethane in corn oil for 11 days at doses up to 500 mg/kg/day, or in the pancreas of 

male rabbits treated for 12 days at doses up to 1,000 mg/kg/day (Weeks et al. 1979). Following 16 weeks 

of dietary treatment, hexachloroethane did not result in histopathologic changes in the pancreas, adrenal 

glands, thyroid, or parathyroid glands of rats treated at doses up to 62 mg/kg/day (Gorzinski et al. 1985). 

An increased incidence of pheochromocytomas in the adrenal gland was observed in male rats treated by 

gavage with hexachloroethane in corn oil at 10 and 20 mg/kg/day 5 days/week for 2 years (NTP 1989). 

This effect is discussed further in Section 2.2.2.8, Cancer. 

Dermal Effects. No studies were located regarding dermal effects in humans after oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Histopathological changes in the skin were not observed in pregnant rats given hexachloroethane in corn 

oil by gavage for 11 days at doses up to 500 mg/kg/day (Weeks et al. 1979). Treatment of rats with doses 

of hexachloroethane in the diet for 13 weeks at 62 mg/kg/day (Gorzinski et al. 1985), by gavage for 

13 weeks at 750 mg/kg/day, and by gavage for 2 years at 20 mg/kg/day for males and 160 mg/kg/day for 

females (NTP 1989) did not result in histopathologic changes in the skin. 

Ocular Effects. No studies were located regarding ocular effects in humans after oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

An oral dose of 750 mg/kg/day of hexachloroethane for 12 of 16 days resulted in lacrimation in rats 

during exposure,-but this effect was not mentioned for this dose in the discussion of the results following 

13-weeks of treatment (NTP 1989). There were no histopathological effects of hexachloroethane on the 

eyes of rats at doses up to 750 mg/kg/day for 13 weeks or for lifetime administration of doses of 10 or 

20 mg/kg/day to male rats and 80 or 160 mg/kg/day to females rats (NTP 1989). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 45 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

Body Weight Effects. Rabbit weight gain was reduced by doses of 320 and 1,000 mg/kg/day 

hexachloroethane in methyl cellulose solution given by gavage for 12 days (Weeks et al. 1979). Body 

weight gain was also reduced in rats exposed by gavage to 750 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in corn oil for 

12 of 16 days, but not in males receiving doses of 375 mg/kg/day and lower (NTP 1989). Females in the 

375 mg/kg/day dose groups gained only 67 ± 7% of the weight gained by the controls, and the females in 

the 750 mg/kg/day dose group lost 25± 2% of their initial body weight. 

With exposures of 6 to 16 weeks, doses of 562 mg/kg/day and greater were associated with decreased 

weight gain in rats (NTP 1977, 1989). No effects on weight were seen with doses of 375 mg/kg/day and 

lower (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 1989). Mice were more resistant to effects on weight gain with a 

NOAEL of 1,000 mg/kg/day and an LOAEL of 1,760 mg/kg/day for a 6-week exposure (NTP 1977). 

With chronic exposures, the doses that had no effect on weight gain in rats were 160 mg/kg/day or lower 

(NTP 1989). A dose of 212 mg/kg/day was associated with a 30% reduction of weight gain in males 

(NTP 1977). Chronic exposure of mice to doses as high as 1,179 mgfkg/day had no apparent effect on 

weight gain (NTP 1977). 

2.2.2.3 Immunological and Lymphoreticular Effects 

No studies were located regarding immunological or lymphoreticular effects in humans after oral exposure 

to hexachloroethane. 

There were no treatment-related gross or histopathological lesions of the thymus, spleen, or lymph nodes 

in animals that were exposed to hexachloroethane over any duration (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 

1989; Weeks et al. 1979). For acute exposures, doses of 1,000 mg/kg/day or less were given to rabbits for 

12 days (Weeks et al. 1979). In the intermediate-duration exposure category, doses of 750 mg/kg/day or 

less were tested in rats (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1989) while for chronic exposures, doses of 

20 mg/kg/day or-less were given to male rats and 160 mg/kg/day or less were given to female rats (NTP 

1989). No studies were identified that evaluated a wide range of immunological parameters; therefore, 

there is no reliable LOAEL or NOAEL for this end point. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 46 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.2.2.4 Neurological Effects 

No studies were located regarding neurological effects in humans after oral exposure to hexachloroethane. 

Acute exposure of sheep to 500 mg/kg hexachloroethane resulted in tremors of the facial muscles 

immediately after the exposure (Fowler 1969b). In sheep that were suffering from liver fluke infections, 

the neurotoxicity of hexachloroethane was even more pronounced. A dose of 170 mg/kg given for 

treatment of the fluke infection rendered 2 of 15 sheep immobile and unable to stand on the day after 

treatment, and a dose of 338 mg/kg affected 6 of 15 animals. Tremors of the facial muscles, neck, and 

forelimbs were apparent. The animals that were able to stand had a staggering gait, and when they fell, 

they were unable to return to their feet (Southcott 1951). Treatment with calcium borogluconate relieved 

most of the neuromuscular symptoms although the twitches of the facial muscles persisted. 

Tremors were also noted in pregnant rats exposed to 500 mg/kg/day for 11 days during gestation (Weeks 

et al. 1979). Decreased motor activity was observed in pregnant rats treated with oral doses of 

167 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane on gestation days 7-17 (Shimizu et al. 1992). No effects were observed 

at 56 mg/kg/day. Male and nonpregnant female rats exposed to 750 mg/kg/day for 12 of 16 days suffered 

from ataxia and prostration (NTP 1989). When exposures were carried out for 13 weeks, a dose of 

94 mg/kg/day was associated with postgavage hyperactivity and doses of 375 and 750 mg/kg/day were 

associated with convulsions (NTP 1989). There were no effects noted on brain histopathology for doses 

of 750 mg/kg/day or less in rats given hexachloroethane by gavage in corn oil for 13 weeks, but brain 

weights were increased significantly in both sexes at this dose (NTP 1989). 

Chronic exposure of male rats to doses of 20 mg/kg/day or less and of female rats to doses of 

160 mg/kg/day or less had no effect on the histopathology of the brain or spinal cord (NTP 1989). 

Hyperactivity was reported in females, but it was not clear if one or both dose groups were affected. 

There has been no comprehensive evaluation of neurological function in animals after oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. The data are limited primarily to clinical signs immediately after exposure and to 

histopathological evaluations of the brain tissues, which showed no effects. The highest NOAEL values 

and all LOAEL values from each reliable study for neurological effects in each species and duration 

category are recorded in Table 2-2 and Figure 2-2. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 47 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.2.2.5 Reproductive Effects 

No studies were located regarding reproductive effects in humans after oral exposure to hexachloroethane. 

In rats, fertility was adversely affected in dams that were administered 500 mg/kg/day (highest dose tested) 

as evidenced by a reduction in gestation indices and the number of live fetuses per dam. Similar effects 

were not seen in concurrent vehicle controls. Also, fetal resorption rates were higher at this dose than in 

the control group (Weeks et al. 1979). Maternal body weight gain was also suppressed. It should be noted 

that quantitative data were not provided for evaluation. No effects on the number of corpora lutea, the 

number of implants, or the number of live fetuses were observed in rats treated with hexachloroethane by 

gavage at 500 mg/kg/day on gestation days 7-17 (Shimizu et al. 1992). The number of late gestation 

resorptions was increased at 500 but not 167 mg/kg/day. The 500-mg/kg/day dose also resulted in 

maternal body weight gains that were about 35% less than those of the controls. The highest NOAEL 

values and all LOAEL values from each reliable study for reproductive effects in each species and 

duration category are recorded in Table 2-2 and plotted in Figure 2-2. 

2.2.2.6 Developmental Effects 

No studies were located regarding developmental effects in humans after oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

A slowing of fetal development was observed in offspring of rats that were exposed to a dose of 

500 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane during gestation days 6-16; however, no effects were seen at doses of 

100 mg/kg/day or less (Weeks et al. 1979). Hexachloroethane was not teratogenic under the conditions of 

this study. It should be noted that the authors did not provide quantitative data for evaluation. These 

results have been confirmed in a study by Shimizu et al. (1992) in which decreased fetal body weights and 

delayed ossification were observed in the offspring of rats treated with hexachloroethane at 500 mg/kg/day 

on gestation days 7-17. This dose also resulted in maternal body weight gains that were ab-dut 35% less 

than those of the controls. An increase in fetal anomalies was not observed, with no significant fetal 

effects at 167 mg/kg/day. The highest NOAEL values and all LOAEL values from each reliable study in 

each species and duration category are recorded in Table 2-2 and plotted in Figure 2-2. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 48 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.2.2.7 Genotoxic Effects 

No studies were located regarding genotoxic effects in humans or animals after oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Genotoxicity studies are discussed in Section 2.5 

2.2.2.8 Cancer 

No studies were located regarding cancer in humans after oral exposure to hexachloroethane. 

There have been three bioassays of hexachloroethane; two were conducted using rats as the test species 

and one used mice. In the first rat bioassay, there were no statistically significant increases in tumors that 

could be attributed to compound administration (NTP 1977; Weisburger 1977). Time weighted average 

doses of 212 or 423 mg/kg/day were given in corn oil by gavage 5 days per week for 66 of 78 weeks. The 

animals were not exposed to hexachloroethane for 32 weeks before they were sacrificed at 110 weeks. 

The total number of tumors for the exposed animals was 22/49 for the males in the low-dose group and 

12/50 for the high-dose group, compared to a value of 13120 for the controls (Weisburger 1977). In the 

females, the number of tumors for the controls was 22/20; for the low-dose group, 50/50; and for the 

highdose group, 27/49. When evaluated by tumor type there were no statistically significant patterns 

apparent.Tumors seen in control and treated animals were thyroid adenomas and carcinomas; pituitary 

adenomas; adrenal tumors; mammary fibromas, fibroadenomas, and carcinomas; and kidney tumors. 

A significant and dose-related increase in adenomas and adenocarcinomas of the kidney was observed in 

male rats given doses of 0, 10, or 20 mg/kg/day for 2 years (NTP 1989). The combined incidence of 

adenomas and adenocarcinomas was l/50 for the vehicle controls, 2/50 for the low-dose group, and 7/50 

for the high-dose group. These tumors are considered to be unique to male rats and are not-indicative of 

tumorigenic potential in other species because they were associated with hyaline droplet nephropathy. 

There was no increase in renal adenomas and carcinomas for the female rats, even though they were given 

doses of 80 and 160 mg/kg/day. In this study, there was also an increased incidence of pheochromatomas 

in the adrenal glands of male rats when compared to the controls. In the vehicle controls, tumor incidence 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 49 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

was 30% (15/50), in the low-dose group it was 62% (28/45), and in the high-dose group it was 43% 

(21/49). 

In mice, there was an increase in hepatocellular carcinomas when the animals were sacrificed at 90 weeks 

after being exposed to doses of 590 and 1,179 mg/kg/day for 78 weeks (NTP 1977; Weisburger 1977). 

The total number of tumors for the exposed animals was 4/20 for the male controls, 17150 for the males in 

the low-dose group, and 37/49 for the males in the high-dose group. In females, the number of tumors 

was 9/20 for the controls, 40/50 for the low-dose group, and 30/49 for the high-dose group. When 

evaluated by tumor type, there was a dose-related trend of 3/20, 15/50, and 29/49 for liver hepatocellular 

carcinomas in males but not in females, where the corresponding values were 2/20,20/50, and 15/49. 

Other tumors seen in control and experimental animals included lung adenomas and carcinomas and 

histolytic lymphomas. 

An investigation of the incidence of gamma glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT+) lesions in the liver indicates 

that hexachloroethane is a promoter of carcinogenicity rather than an initiator. These lesions are markers 

for preneoplastic cellular changes. When male rats were given a single dose of 497 mg/kg 

hexachloroethane followed by treatment with a known promotor (phenobarbital) for 7 weeks, there was no 

increase in number of liver GGT+ foci (Milman et al. 1988). However, when a single dose of a known 

initiator (dimethylnitrosamine) was followed by 7 weeks of dosing with 497 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane, 

the number of GGT+ foci was four times the number seen with a single dose of dimethylnitrosamine in the 

absence of hexachloroethane treatment. 

All CELs from each reliable study are included in Table 2-2 and plotted in Figure 2-2. EPA has derived 

an oral slope factor of 1.4x10-2 (mg/kg/day)-1 for hexachloroethane based on hepatocellular carcinomas in 

male mice (IRIS 1995). Doses that correspond to excess cancer risks of 10-4 to 10-7 are shown in 

Figure 2-2. 

2.2.3 Dermal Exposure 

2.2.3.1 Death 

No studies were located regarding death in humans after dermal exposure to hexachloroethane. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 50 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

In rabbits, a dermal LD50 of greater than 32,000 mg/kg for a 24-hour exposure to a water paste of 

hexachloroethane was reported. Ataxia, tremors, and convulsions were noted in those animals that died 

from exposure (Weeks et al. 1979). The LD50 value is reported in Table 2-3. 

2.2.3.2 Systemic Effects 

No studies were located regarding cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, or musculoskeletal effects after dermal 

exposure to hexachloroethane. The highest NOAEL values and all reliable LOAEL values in each species 

and duration category are recorded in Table 2-3. 

Respiratory Effects. Pulmonary function tests (vital capacity, forced expiratory volume at 1 second) 

were in the normal range in 11 workers occupationally exposed to hexachloroethane at 0.5-2.1 ppm for 

5 weeks while wearing protective equipment including respiratory protection (Selden et al. 1994). Plasma 

hexachloroethane levels were 7.3 ± 6.04 yg/L at the time of testing indicating that despite protective 

equipment, low-level exposure occurred (Selden et al. 1993). Mild skin and mucous membrane irritation 

were reported in the exposed group, suggesting that exposure may have been through either the inhalation 

or dermal routes of exposure. 

No studies were located regarding respiratory effects in animals after dermal exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Hematological Effects. Routine blood parameters (hemoglobin, erythrocyte, leukocyte and 

thrombocyte levels) measured in 11 hexachloroethane workers that wore protective clothing did not differ 

from those of the controls (Selden et al. 1994). Mild skin and mucous membrane irritation were reported 

in the exposed group, suggesting that exposure may have been through either the inhalation or dermal 

routes of exposure. 

No studies were located regarding hematological effects in animals after dermal exposure to. 

hexachloroethane. 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 52 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Hepatic Effects. Liver function tests (serum bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase,
 

alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase) completed in 11 hexachloroethane workers who
 

wore protective clothing were within the normal range (Selden et al. 1994). Mild skin and mucous
 

membrane irritation were reported in the exposed group, suggesting that exposure may have been through
 

either the inhalation or dermal routes of exposure.
 

No studies were located regarding hepatic effects in animals after dermal exposure to hexachloroethane.
 

Renal Effects. Renal function tests (serum creatinine and urate, urinary hemoglobin, protein and
 

glucose) completed in 11 hexachloroethane workers who wore protective clothing were within the normal
 

range (Selden et al. 1994). Mild skin and mucous membrane irritation were reported in the exposed
 

group, suggesting that exposure may have been through either the inhalation or dermal routes of exposure.
 

No studies were located regarding renal effects in animals after dermal exposure to hexachloroethane.
 

Dermal Effects. Hexachloroethane-exposed workers reported a slightly higher prevalence of dry skin
 

and dry mucous membranes as well as itching and other skin problems than the unexposed controls
 

(Selden et al. 1994). Clinical examinations of the 11 exposed workers did not reveal signs of abnormal
 

dermatological status. Plasma hexachloroethane levels in these workers, who wore protective equipment,
 

were 7.3 ± 6.04 μg/L at the time of the examinations (Selden et al. 1993). The investigators indicate that
 

the dermal effects may also have been a result of a local trauma effect of the protective equipment.
 

Hexachloroethane had no effects on intact or abraded skin of rabbits when 500 mg was applied to shaved
 

skin as the pure solid (Weeks et al. 1979). There was only a slight redness at the application site when it
 

was applied as a water paste. All redness disappeared after 72 hours. The NOAEL for dermal effects in
 

rabbits (132 mg/kg) is reported in Table 2-3.
 

Ocular Effects. No studies were located regarding ocular effects in humans after dermal exposure to
 

hexachloroethane.
 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 53 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Contact with crystalline hexachloroethane (100 mg caused swelling, iritis, cornea1 opacity, and discharge 

when placed in rabbit eyes overnight. All signs of ocular irritation were reversed 72 hours later (Weeks 

et al. 1979). This LOAEL for ocular effects in rabbits is reported in Table 2-3. 

Contact with hexachloroethane vapors at a concentration of 260 ppm was apparently irritating to the eyes 

of dogs because the animals kept their eyes closed during all exposure periods (Weeks et al. 1979). In 

rats, a red exudate was observed about the eyes after 4 weeks of exposure to hexachloroethane vapors, and 

in rabbits, after a single dermal exposure to a water paste of hexachloroethane (Weeks et al. 1979). The 

red exudate did not appear until after 4 weeks of exposure to hexachloroethane vapor and, thus, may be a 

systemic effect rather than the effect of direct contact of the eye with hexachloroethane. 

2.2.3.3 Immunological and Lymphoreticular Effects 

No studies were located regarding immunological or lymphoreticular effects in humans following dermal 

exposure to hexachloroethane. 

Hexachloroethane did not act as a sensitizer in guinea pigs when a challenge dose was given 2 weeks after 

the end of a 3-week sensitization period (Weeks et al. 1979). Accordingly, it did not stimulate antibody 

formation during sensitization. The NOAEL for dermal sensitization is reported in Table 2-3. 

2.2.3.4 Neurological Effects 

No studies were located regarding neurological effects in humans following dermal exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

Rats that died after dermal exposure to unspecified doses of hexachloroethane during an LD50 test protocol 

displayed ataxia, tremors, and convulsions before death (Weeks et al. 1979). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 54 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

No studies were located regarding the following health effects in humans or animals after dermal exposure 

to hexachloroethane: 

2.2.3.5 Reproductive Effects 

2.2.3.6 Developmental Effects 

2.2.3.7 Genotoxic Effects 

Genotoxicity studies are discussed in Section 2.5. 

2.2.3.8 Cancer 

No studies were located regarding cancer in humans or animals after dermal exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

2 . 3 TOXICOKINETICS 

Hexachloroethane has been found in the plasma of workers wearing protective clothing and respiratory 

protection suggesting that hexachloroethane can be absorbed following inhalation and/or dermal exposure. 

Based on the minimal effects seen on target tissues (liver and kidney) in animal studies, absorption from 

the lungs seems to be limited. Dermal absorption was also estimated to be low based on calculated dermal 

penetration rates. 

Data on absorption across the gastrointestinal tract indicate that hexachloroethane is absorbed, but the 

percentage of a dose that is absorbed varies. Absorption estimates based on excretory products in rabbits 

suggest that a moderate portion of a 500 mg/kg dose (perhaps 40-50%) is absorbed. Data on excretory 

products from rats and mice indicate that a much larger portion (62-88%) of this same dose is absorbed. 

Hexachloroethane distributes preferentially to the adipose tissue. Relatively high concentrations are also 

found in male rat kidneys. Moderate concentrations of hexachloroethane are found in the liver, female 

kidney, and blood and small amounts in muscle, lungs, and brain. If the hexachloroethane is generated 

endogenously from carbon tetrachloride, the concentration in the rat liver exceeds that in the kidneys. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 55 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Hexachloroethane is metabolized by the mixed function oxidase system by way of a two-step reduction 

reaction involving cytochrome P-450 and either reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate 

(NADPH) or cytochrome b, as an electron donor. The first step of the reduction reaction results in the 

formation of the pentachloroethyl free radical. In the second step, tetrachloroethene is formed as the 

primary metabolite. Two chloride ions are released. Pentachloroethane is a minor metabolic product that 

is generated from the pentachloroethyl free radical. 

The primary metabolites of hexachloroethane are eventually oxidized to form trichloroethanol and 

trichloroacetic acid. These ultimate metabolites are excreted along with unchanged hexachloroethane, 

tetrachloroethene, and pentachloroethane. A small amount of the absorbed hexachloroethane is oxidized 

completely to carbon dioxide. Hexachloroethane and its metabolites are removed from the body in 

exhaled air, urine, and bile. In rats and mice, 60-70% of the radiolabeled hexachloroethane was in 

exhaled air and was present as volatiles other than carbon dioxide. 

2.3.1 Absorption 

2.3.1.I Inhalation Exposure 

No information was located regarding absorption in either humans or animals after inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

The minor effects of hexachloroethane on organs other than the lungs in animal studies indicates that 

absorption does occur, but is probably minimal. Given the lipophilic nature of hexachloroethane, 

absorption across the lung epithelium is possible. 

2.3.1.2 Oral Exposure 

No studies were located regarding absorption in humans following oral exposure to hexachloroethane. 

When sheep were administered a dose of 500 mg/kg hexachloroethane dissolved in olive oil and 

emulsified in water, absorption was slow based on the appearance of hexachloroethane in the venous 

blood (Fowler 1969b). The maximum concentration in blood was observed 24 hours after compound 

administration in one sheep. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 56 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Based on the amount of label found in rabbit urine and exhaled air, 19-29% of a 500 mg/kg dose was 

absorbed (Jondorf et al. 1957). Since some hexachloroethane would be excreted in bile and found in fecal 

matter, the actual amount absorbed was larger than 30%, perhaps 40-50%. 

Data from studies in rats and mice using 14C-radiolabeled hexachloroethane suggest that much higher 

proportions of a 500 mg/kg/day dose of hexachloroethane were absorbed (Mitoma et al. 1985). Rats 

exhaled 65% of the radiolabel in expired air and 6% in the excreta. This indicates that more than 65-70% 

of the hexachloroethane was absorbed. Comparable data from mice given 999 mg/kg/day indicate that 

more than 72-88% of the dose was absorbed. The radiolabel in expired air was 72% of the dose in mice 

and there was 16% of the label in the excreta (Mitoma et al. 1985). 

Hexachloroethane is apparently absorbed to a greater extent when administered in corn oil than when 

administered in an aqueous medium, based on the fact that the LD50 values for hexachloroethane dissolved 

in methyl cellulose solution are higher than those for a corn oil solvent in both male and female rats 

(Weeks et al. 1979). The ratio of LD50 values suggests that about one-third less material is absorbed from 

an aqueous medium. 

2.3.1.3 Dermal Exposure 

Despite wearing protective equipment that included disposable overalls and compressed-air-fed visors or 

full-facepiece masks with filters for dusts and vapors, hexachloroethane was detected in the plasma of 

exposed workers (Selden et al. 1993). After 5 weeks of exposure, plasma levels of hexachloroethane in 

12 workers were 7.3 k 6 μg/L. Mild dermal irritation was also noted. If the skin irritation was a response 

to hexachloroethane rather than trauma from the protective clothing, the irritation suggests that the 

principal exposure route may have been dermal. Absorption of a saturated hexachloroethane solution 

across human skin was estimated to be 0.0230 mg/cm2

/hour based on the physical properties of 

hexachloroethane (Fiserova-Bergerova et al. 1990). 

No information was located regarding absorption of hexachloroethane in animals after dermal exposure. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 57 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.3.2 Distribution 

2.3.2.1 Inhalation Exposure 

No information was located regarding distribution in humans or animals following inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

2.3.2.2 Oral Exposure 

No information was located regarding distribution in humans following oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

After oral exposure of rats to hexachloroethane for 8-16 weeks, the largest concentration of 

hexachloroethane was found in the adipose tissues (Gorzinski et al. 1985; Nolan and Karbowski 1978). 

The kidneys of male rats, but not females, also contained high concentrations of hexachloroethane. When 

rats were given doses of 3,30, or 100 mg/kg/day for 110-l11 days, the concentration in the male kidney 

was four times larger than that in the female kidney at the lowest dose and 48 times larger at the highest 

dose (Nolan and Karbowski 1978). These proportions are very much like the relationship found with 

doses of 1, 15, or 62 mg/kg/day given to rats where the male kidney contained four times as much label as 

the female kidney at the low dose and 45 times as much as the female kidney at the high dose (Gorzinski 

et al. 1985). 

Hexachloroethane is also found in the liver and blood after oral exposure to hexachloroethane, although 

the levels found in these tissues are much lower than those found in adipose tissue and male rat kidney 

(Gorzinski et al. 1985; Nolan and Karbowski 1978). With a dose of 1 mg/kg/day, adipose tissue samples 

from male rats contained 3.15 μg/g; the kidneys contained 1.36 μg/g; the liver, 0.29 μg/g; and the blood, 

0.08 ug/g after 16 weeks of exposure (Gorzinski et al. 1985). In the female rat, the adipose tissue 

contained 2.59 μg/g; the kidneys, 0.39 μg/g; the liver, 0.26 μg/g; and the blood, 0.07 μg/g. As the doses 

were increased, the concentrations in the tissues also increased. 

There is a relatively rapid turnover of hexachloroethane in the tissues. In studies where doses of 62 or 

100 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane were fed in the diet for about 8 weeks, the level in the tissue decayed 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 58 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

with a half-life of 2.3-2.7 days following first order kinetics (Gorzinski et al. 1985; Nolan and Karbowski 

1978). 

In sheep fed hexachloroethane in olive oil emulsified in water, the hexachloroethane was found primarily 

in the liver, kidneys, and adipose tissue 8 hours after exposure; much smaller amounts were found in brain 

and muscle 8 hours after exposure. The maximum concentration of hexachloroethane in blood occurred 

24 hours after dosing (Fowler 1969b). 

2.3.2.3 Dermal Exposure 

No information was located regarding distribution in humans or animals after dermal exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

2.3.2.4 Other Routes of Exposure 

The tissue distribution of intraperitoneal 14C hexachloroethane in male rats differed from that in male mice 

based on the concentrations that were bound to DNA, RNA, and protein (Lattanzi et al. 1988). In both 

species the highest concentrations of label were found in the kidney, followed by the liver, lungs, and 

stomach in descending order. The amount of bound label in the mice, however, was about twice that in 

the rat for both kidney and liver. The higher concentration of label in mouse liver may help to explain 

why hepatocellular cancer has been seen in mice but not in rats. 

Hexachloroethane can be generated endogenously from exposure to carbon tetrachloride. Hexachloroethane 

is formed in the liver through the union of two trichloromethyl free radicals. The tissue distribution 

of endogenously generated hexachloroethane differed from that of exogenous hexachloroethane. After 

oral administration of 1 mL/kg carbon tetrachloride to rabbits, adipose tissue contained the highest 

concentration of hexachloroethane (4.1 ±1.2, 16.5 ±1.6, and 6.8± 2.4 ng/g) at 6,24, and 48 hours 

(Fowler 1969a). This was similar to the distribution found after oral and intraperitoneal exposure to 

hexachloroethane (Gorzinski et al. 1985; Lattanzi et al. 1988; Nolan and Karbowski 1978). However, the 

amount in the liver was about twice that in the kidney at both 6 and 24 hours. At 6 hours, the liver 

contained 1.6 ±0.5 ng/g and the kidney 0.7 ±0.2 ng/g, while at 24 hours the liver contained 4.2 ± 1.8 ng/g 

and the kidney contained 2.2± 1.1 ng/g (Fowler 1969a). Only small amounts were found in the muscle. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 59 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.3.3 Metabolism 

Most of the information on the metabolism of hexachloroethane has been collected by in vitro techniques 

using rat liver slices or rat liver microsomes. Figure 2-3 summarizes the results of these studies. The 

identification of tetrachloroethene and pentachloroethane as the initial metabolites of hexachloroethane 

metabolism in vitro agrees with in vivo data from sheep that were orally exposed to doses of 

500-l ,000 mg/kg hexachloroethane (Fowler 1969b). 

The initial steps of hexachloroethane metabolism take place in liver microsomes under anaerobic 

conditions (Nastainczyk et al. 1982a, 1982b; Salmon et al. 1981, 1985; Town and Leibman 1984). 

Cytosolic enzymes are minimally involved with hexachloroethane metabolism (Town and Leibman 1984). 

Hexachloroethane is dechlorinated in a two-step reduction reaction. In the first step, cytochrome P-450 

contributes one electron to hexachloroethane, leading to the loss of a chloride ion and the formation of a 

pentachloroethyl free radical. In the second step, a second electron is contributed by either NADPH or 

cytochrome b5 and a second chloride is lost, producing tetrachloroethene (Nastainczyk et al. 1982a). A 

smaller amount of the pentachloroethyl free radical becomes pentachloroethane by abstraction of a 

hydrogen atom from a hydrogen donor. 

In studies using liver microsomes, approximately 99.5% of the hexachloroethane was converted to 

tetrachloroethene at physiological pHs (Nastainczyk et al. 1982b). When the reaction occurred at higher 

pHs (8.4-8.8), the ratio of pentachloroethane to tetrachloroethene was increased. The specific cytochrome 

P-450 involved in this series of reactions was stimulated by phenobarbital and not by 

3-methylchloanthrene (Nastainczyk et al. 1982a; Salmon et al. 1985; Thompson et al. 1984; Town and 

Leibman 1984). 

Both tetrachloroethene and pentachloroethane undergo subsequent hepatic metabolism. Pentachloroethane 

is reductively dechlorinated by microsomes to yield trichloroethene. (Reductive dechlorination was 

favored when there were three chlorines on one carbon and at least one chlorine on the vicinal carbon 

[Thompson et al. 1984], a characteristic shared by hexachloroethane and pentachloroethane). 

Trichloroethene and tetrachloroethene were then oxidized by hepatic enzymes to form trichloroethanol and 

trichloroacetic acid as terminal reaction products. Apparently additional dechlorination reactions can 

occur since labeled dichloroethanol, dichloroacetic acid, monochloroacetic acid, and oxalic acid have been 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 61 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

found in the urine of animals given an oral dose of labeled hexachloroethane (Jondorf et al. 1957; Mitoma 

et al. 1985). Some hexachloroethane (about 2%) was completely dechlorinated and metabolized to carbon 

dioxide in rats and mice (Mitoma et al. 1985). 

2.3.4 Excretion 

2.3.4.1 Inhalation Exposure 

No data were located regarding excretion in humans or animals after inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

2.3.4.2 Oral Exposure 

Orally ingested hexachloroethane is exhaled and excreted in urine and fecal matter. The portion of the 

hexachloroethane found in fecal matter is the result of excretion in bile. The results of studies that 

measured the amount of residual hexachloroethane in excreta can be misleading, since much of the 

absorbed hexachloroethane is metabolized to other compounds. Measurement of 14C label after exposure 

to labeled compound presents a more complete picture of ultimate hexachloroethane fate and excretion 

than measurement of hexachloroethane. 

In rats and mice, 65-70% of an oral dose of radiolabeled hexachloroethane (500 mg/kg/day for rats and 

999 mg/kg/day for mice) was present in exhaled air (Mitoma et al. 1985). Only about 2% of this amount 

was exhaled as carbon dioxide. The remainder was present as other volatile compounds. In rabbits, a 

much smaller portion of the label was found in exhaled air (14-24%) after oral administration of 

500 mg/kg hexachloroethane. The amount of labeled carbon dioxide was not determined (Jondorf et al. 

1957). 

Relatively little hexachloroethane, pentachloroethane, and tetrachloroethene was found in the urine of 

sheep after oral administration of 500 mg/kg hexachloroethane (Fowler 1969b), and relatively little label 

(5%) was found in the urine of rabbits given 500 mg/kg (Jondorf et al. 1957). The major urinary 

metabolites were trichloroethanol and trichloroacetic acid in rats, rabbits, and mice (Jondorf et al. 1957; 

Mitoma et al. 1985). In rabbits, smaller amounts of dichloroethanol, dichloroacetic acid, 

monochloroacetic acid, and oxalic acid were also present (Jondorf et al. 1957). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 62 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

In sheep, 80% of the hexachloroethane, tetrachloroethene, and pentachloroethane fecal excretions were 

excreted within 24 hours (Fowler 1969b). Some of this was unabsorbed hexachloroethane and the 

remainder was material that had been absorbed and was excreted with the bile. Hexachloroethane was 

present in bile within 15 minutes of dosing and the concentration in bile was 8-10 times greater than that 

in blood at that time. Traces of hexachloroethane, tetrachloroethene, and pentachloroethane were present 

in the 48-72 hour fecal collections. 

2.3.4.3 Dermal Exposure 

No studies were located regarding excretion by humans or animals after dermal exposure to 

hexachloroethane. 

2.4 Mechanisms of Action 

The kidney and liver are the primary target organs for hexachloroethane based on the results of toxicity 

testing and supported by toxicokinetic information from tissue distribution and binding studies (Lattanzi et 

al. 1988). Male rats were more susceptible to kidney damage than female rats (NTP 1989), and the 

kidneys of male rats contained 4-45% more hexachloroethane radiolabel than the kidneys of female rats 

(Gorzinski et al. 1985). However, there were some effects on kidneys of both sexes. 

The mechanism of toxicity leading to tubular nephropathy and renal tumorigenesis in male rats is related 

to the synthesis and excretion of the protein α2μ-globulin. This protein is synthesized in the liver and 

secreted into the blood. It is filtered through the glomeruli of the kidneys and partially reabsorbed through 

the proximal tubules where it is partially hydrolyzed (Swenberg 1993). The remainder is excreted, 

comprising 26% of the urinary protein (NTP 1989; Olson et al. 1990). Other species of laboratory 

animals, female rats, and humans produce minimal amounts of an α2μ-globulin-type protein. In the 

presence of hexachloroethane and other nonpolar hydrocarbons or their metabolites, α2μ-globulin 

accumulates in hyaline droplets in the tubular epithelium. The accumulation of hyaline droplets damages 

the epithelial cells, leading to exfoliation and the appearance of hyaline casts in the urine. Regenerative 

repair of the epithelium leads to hyperplasia and increases the risk for tumors when mutated cells divide 

before DNA repair can occur. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 63 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Although binding of hexachloroethane to α2μ-globulin can explain kidney damage in male rats, it does not 

explain the less severe kidney changes in female rats (NTP 1989). Thus, other mechanisms must be 

involved in the nephrotoxicity of hexachloroethane. When DNA, RNA, and protein were isolated from 

kidney cells of male rats, it was found that hexachloroethane was bound more strongly to RNA and 

protein than to DNA (Lattanzi et al. 1988). The highest concentrations were found bound to RNA. 

Epigenetic interference with protein synthesis and cell function could lead to the kidney nephropathy seen 

in female rats and contribute to the damage in male rats. However, no studies were identified that would 

support this hypothetical mechanism. 

Liver necrosis is another concern following hexachloroethane exposure. Hexachloroethane is metabolized 

in the centrilobular area of the liver by way of the microsomal mixed function oxidase system. The 

relatively nonpolar pentachloroethyl free radical is an intermediate in this pathway. The reaction of the 

free radical with unsaturated lipids in the cellular or organelle membranes could contribute to hepatocyte 

damage and necrosis. 

Conjugated dienes and malondialdehyde serve as a markers for free radical-induced lipid peroxidation. 

There was a uniform increase in malondialdehyde in eight assays of rat liver microsomes that were 

incubated with hexachloroethane (Town and Leibman 1984). Conjugated dienes were increased in some, 

but not all, of the samples. No changes were seen in the concentration of conjugated dienes in the hepatic 

endoplasmic reticulum of male rats, 2 hours after hexachloroethane exposure (Reynolds 1972). The 

authors hypothesized that the poor solubility of hexachloroethane in body fluid and the use of a mineral oil 

solvent limited the concentration of hexachloroethane in the liver at 2 hours and, thus, the lack of its 

effects on conjugated dienes could not be used to eliminate the possibility of free radical cellular damage 

at a later point in time. Although limited, the data provide some support for a free radical mechanism for 

the hepatic toxicity of hexachloroethane. 

Clinical signs of neurotoxicity (tremors and ataxia) have been observed in sheep, dogs, and rats during or 

immediately after both oral and inhalation exposure. Sometimes tremors developed early irrthe treatment 

regime and other times the tremors became apparent only after repeated exposures. Fluke-infected sheep 

experienced tremors of the facial muscles, neck, and forelimbs and were unable to stand after treatment 

with hexachloroethane. They were successfully treated with calcium borogluconate. This suggests that the 

neurological action of hexachloroethane may be the result of interference with the availability of calcium 

within excitable cells. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 64 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.5 RELEVANCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH 

Hexachloroethane is a solid crystalline material that has entered the environment as a result of its use in 

military pyrotechnics and as a component of smoke-producing devices used for screening or signaling 

purposes. It is an intermediate in the production of fluorocarbons, cleaning agents, and refrigerants and 

was once used in veterinary medicine to control liver flukes in sheep. It can be found at military disposal 

sites and at hazardous waste sites. In addition, hexachloroethane can be formed during incineration of 

chlorinated organic compounds and during chlorination of drinking water. Accordingly, there is some risk 

that humans can be exposed to this material. 

Respiratory, hematological, liver, and renal effects were not observed in 11 hexachloroethane-exposed 

workers. The identification of hexachloroethane in the plasma of these workers confirmed exposure, 

although the workers were wearing protective equipment. Mild dermal irritation was noted that may have 

been from exposure or a result of a local trauma effect of the protective equipment. 

Animal studies identify the kidney and liver as the primary target organs for hexachloroethane. Renal 

problems were most severe in male rats and were associated with α2μ-globulinlhyaline droplet 

nephropathy. Minimal to mild lesions were also seen in female rat kidneys and in male and female mice, 

indicating that some mechanism, in addition to hyaline droplet formation, is involved in renal toxicity. 

The liver responds to hexachloroethane exposure with increases in liver weight, increases in serum levels 

of liver enzymes, centrilobular necrosis, fatty degeneration, hemosiderin-laden macrophages, and 

hemorrhage. Effects on the liver and kidneys were mild with inhalation exposure and more pronounced 

with oral exposure. No data were available for effects on the liver and kidneys by the dermal exposure 

route. 

Hexachloroethane vapors and ingested hexachloroethane act as irritants on the lining of the lung, nasal 

cavity, trachea, and other tissues of the respiratory tract. Pulmonary irritation was associate&with an 

increased incidence of mycoplasma infection in rats. Hexachloroethane exposure can also irritate the eyes. 

The irritation of the eye and respiratory tract are reversible once exposure has ceased. 

Both oral and inhalation exposures to high concentrations of hexachloroethane were associated with 

hyperactivity, ataxia, convulsions, and/or prostration in rats, sheep, and dogs. The mechanism for these 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 65 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

neurological effects is not clear since there were no apparent histopathological lesions in the brains of the 

affected animals. Neurological effects were only noted with the high-dose exposures. 

There has been no comprehensive evaluation of the reproductive and developmental effects of 

hexachloroethane. Limited data indicate that it is maternally toxic and retards fetal development. It does 

not appear to be a teratogen. 

Minimal Risk Levels for Hexachloroethane 

Inhalation MRLs 

•	 An MRL of 6 ppm has been derived for acute inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane. This 

MRL is based on a study in pregnant female rats exposed to concentrations of 0, 15,48, or 

260 ppm hexachloroethane for 6 hours/day on gestation days 6-16 (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Tremors were observed in the 260-ppm dose group during exposure starting on day 12 and 

persisting through day 16. Excess mucus was present in the nasal turbinates of all of the dams in 

the 260-ppm dose group and 85% of the dams in the 48-ppm dose group. This effect was not 

observed at 48 ppm in the 6-week study, and the endemic mycoplasma infection that was present 

in the colony of rats used in the Weeks et al. (1979) study may have contributed to this effect. 

Based on the NOAEL of 48 ppm for neurological effects observed in the teratology study by 

Weeks et al. (1979), an acute inhalation MRL was calculated by adjusting to a Human 

Equivalent Concentration (HEC) of 181 ppm using reference ventilation rates (rat, 0.22 m3/day; 

human, 20 m3/day) and body weights (rat, 0.204 kg; human, 70 kg) from EPA (1988a) and by 

dividing by an uncertainty factor of 30. A factor of 3 was used to extrapolate from animals to 

humans, and a factor of 10 was used to account for human variability. 

•	 An MRL of 6 ppm has been derived for intermediate-duration inhalation exposure to 

hexachloroethane. This MRL is based on the 6-week study in rats by Weeks et aG(1979) in 

which tremors were observed at 260 ppm but not at 48 ppm. Based on the NOAEL of 48 ppm 

for neurological effects observed in the 6-week study (Weeks et al. 1979), an intermediate 

inhalation MRL was calculated by adjusting the NOAEL to an HEC of 174 ppm using reference 

ventilation rates (rat, 0.245 m3

/day; human, 20 m3/day) and body weights (rat, 0.236 kg; human, 

70 kg) from EPA (1988a) and by dividing by an uncertainty factor of 30. A factor of 3 was used 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 66 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

to extrapolate from animals to humans, and a factor of 10 was used to account for human
 

variability.
 

A chronic MRL for inhalation exposure has not been derived because no data were located on the effects 

of long-term exposures in humans or animals. 

Oral MRLs 

•	 An MRL of 1 mg/kg/day has been derived for acute oral exposure to hexachloroethane. This 

MRL was derived from a NOAEL of 100 mg/kg/day in a study where groups of five male New 

Zealand rabbits were given doses of 0, 100,320, and 1,000 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane 

dissolved in methyl cellulose solution by gavage for 12 days (Weeks et al. 1979). Dosedependant liver degeneration and necrosis were noted at dose levels of 320 and 

1,000 mg/kg/day. Effects were characterized as fatty degeneration, coagulation necrosis, 

hemorrhage, ballooning degeneration, eosinophilic change, hemosiderin-laden macrophages and 

giant cells. Comparable effects were not seen in the l00-mg/kg/day dose group. Liver weights 

increased at the highest dose tested; however, quantitative data were not provided. The NOAEL 

of 100 mg/kg/day was divided by an uncertainty factor of 100, 10 each for interspecies and 

intraspecies variability. 

•	 Toxic tubular nephrosis and minimal nephrocalcinosis of the convoluted tubules were seen at 

dose levels of 320 and 1,000 mg/kg/day, however comparable effects were not seen at the lowest 

dose tested. Kidney weights increased significantly (p<0.05) at the highest dose tested. For the 

most part, serum clinical parameters (blood urea nitrogen, protein bilirubin, aspartate aminotransferase, 

alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, and sodium) were not affected 

significantly. Levels of potassium and glucose were decreased significantly at dose levels of 

320 mg/kg/day or greater. Body weights were reduced significantly (p<0.05) at exposure levels 

of 320 and 1,000 mg/kg/day. Quantitative data were not provided for any of the eTfects noted in 

this study, although the degree of significance and the dose-related nature of the effects were 

included in the discussion of the results. 

•	 An MRL of 0.01 mg/kg/day has been derived for intermediate oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane. The MRL was derived from a NOAEL of 1 mg/kg/day in a study where 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 67 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

groups of 10 male and 10 female rats were given hexachloroethane at 1, 15, or 65 mgikg/day in the 

diet for 16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 1985). All rats survived the 16-week exposure period and there 

were no clinical signs of compound toxicity. Organ weights were not significantly different than 

those of the controls except for absolute and relative liver weights and kidney weights of males 

treated at the highest dose. Swelling of the hepatocytes was present in males at the two highest 

doses. At the 15-mg/kg dose, swollen hepatocytes were noted in 6 of 10 males, and 8 of 10 males 

were affected at the 62-mg/kg/day dose. Swollen hepatocytes were seen in four control males and 

in three males from the lowest dose group. Hepatocyte size was not affected in females, but 

absolute and relative liver weights were increased in the highest dose group. The male rats 

exhibited renal tubular atrophy, hypertrophy, dilation, and degeneration for both the 15- and 62-

mg/kg/day doses. Atrophy and tubular degeneration was also present in 6 of 10 females at the 62-

mg/kg/day dose and 2 of 10 females at the 15 mg/kg/day dose. The 15 mg/kg/day dose was 

identified as the LOAEL in this study with the 1 -mg/kg/day dose as the NOAEL. This NOAEL was 

used with an uncertainty factor of 100 (10 each for interspecies and intraspecies variability) to 

derive the MRL. 

Insufficient information was available to derive a chronic-duration oral exposure MRL for 

hexachloroethane. 

Death. No studies were located regarding lethality in humans after exposure to hexachloroethane. LD50 

values for animals range fi-om 4,460 to 5,160 mg/kg when hexachloroethane is administered by gavage in 

corn oil and from 7,080 to 7,690 mg/kg when administered in an aqueous methyl cellulose solution 

(Weeks et al. 1979). The higher LD50 value for the aqueous solution indicates that absorption from this 

medium is lower than from a digestible food oil. When exposures occurred by the inhalation route, 1 of 6 

rats died during an 8-hour exposure to 5,900 ppm (Weeks et al. 1979). At this concentration, the 

inhalation chamber contained crystalline hexachloroethane as well as hexachloroethane vapors. The 

dermal LD50 was greater than 32,000 mg/kg when hexachloroethane was applied to shaved rabbit skin for 

24 hours (Weeks et al. 1979). This suggests poor dermal absorption of hexachloroethane and agrees with 

a calculated low dermal absorption rate of 0.023 mg/cm2

/hr based on physical properties (FiserovaBergerova et al. 1990). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 68 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

There were some deaths among dogs, rats, and guinea pigs with exposure to 260 ppm in air for 6 weeks 

(Weeks et al. 1979). Following oral exposure, death occurred in rats at doses of 750 mg/kg/day (NTP 

1989) and in mice at doses of 1,780 mg/kg/day (NTP 1977). Lower doses were nonlethal. 

Chronic oral exposure to 212 mg/kg/day shortened the life expectancy of male and female rats (NTP 

1977), but doses of 20 mg/kg/day in males and 160 mg/kg/day in females did not (NTP 1989). Although 

mice were exposed to oral doses of 590 and 1,170 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane for 78 weeks, poor 

survival among male controls made it difficult to evaluate the effects of hexachloroethane. Survival for 

the high-dose females was slightly less than that for vehicle controls, but the differences were not 

significant (NTP 1977). 

LD50 values and the lowest lethal doses for acute- and intermediate-duration exposures classify 

hexachloroethane as slightly toxic (Hodge and Sterner 1949). It is unlikely that exposures to 

hexachloroethane at levels found at hazardous waste sites would cause death in humans. 

Systemic Effects 

There are no data for cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, endocrine, or ocular effects in 

humans following exposure to hexachloroethane by any route. Data are available for inhalation and oral 

exposures in several animal species. The only available dermal exposure data apply to dermal and ocular 

effects. 

Respiratory Effects. Pulmonary function tests were not affected in workers exposed to hexachloroethane 

for 5 weeks while wearing protective equipment (Selden et al. 1994). Acute exposure of rats to 5,900 ppm 

hexachloroethane (a combination of gaseous and microcrystalline material) resulted in interstitial 

pulmonary pneumonitis (Weeks et al. 1979). These pulmonary lesions were seen after a 14-day recovery 

period. The entrapment of solid hexachloroethane particles in the lungs could have contributed to the 

symptoms observed. 

Excess mucus in the nasal turbinates, irritation of the epithelium, and increased incidence of a mycoplasma 

respiratory infection were seen in rats with inhalation exposure to 260 ppm for 6 weeks and in pregnant 

rats with inhalation exposure to 48 ppm for 11 days. Pulmonary irritation was also present in pregnant rats 

treated with an oral dose of 500 mg/kg/day for 11 days (Weeks et al. 1979). Effects on the respiratory 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 69 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

epithelium were not apparent in the tissue of the lungs, nasal cavity, nasal turbinates, larynx, trachea, or 

bronchi based on histopathological examination (NTP 1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). Exposure to 

hexachloroethane, especially in its vaporous state, may weaken the effectiveness of respiratory tract mucus 

as an antimicrobial barrier and, thus, increase the incidence of pulmonary infections in exposed animals. 

Alternatively, it may weaken disease resistance by some other mechanism. Humans exposed to 

hexachloroethane vapors in the environment could experience an increased risk of respiratory tract 

infections. 

Cardiovascular Effects. There were no histopathological effects on the heart after inhalation or oral 

exposure at any concentration tested (15-5,900 ppm for the inhalation route and l-750 mg/kg/day for the 

oral route) and with acute, intermediate, or chronic exposure durations (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 

1989; Weeks et al. 1979). The risk that humans will experience adverse effects on the cardiovascular 

system as the result of exposure to hexachloroethane through the environment seems to be relatively low. 

Gastrointestinal Effects. There were no histopathological effects on the stomach, small intestines, or 

large intestines with inhalation or oral exposure to hexachloroethane at any concentration tested 

(15-5,900 ppm for the inhalation route and l-750 mg/kg/day for the oral route) and with acute, 

intermediate, or chronic exposure durations (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). 

The risk that humans will experience adverse effects on the gastrointestinal system as the result of 

exposure to hexachloroethane in the environment seems to be relatively low. 

Hematological Effects. Routine blood parameters (hemoglobin, erythrocyte, leukocyte and thrombocyte 

levels) measured in 11 hexachloroethane-exposed workers who wore protective clothing did not differ 

from those of the controls (Selden et al. 1994). Hexachloroethane plasma levels in these workers were 

7.3 ± 6 μg/L (Selden et al. 1993). 

The effects of acute exposures to hexachloroethane on hematological parameters were not evaluated in 

animals. Inhalation doses of 260 ppm for 6 weeks had no effect on erythrocyte counts in dogs (Weeks 

et al. 1979) and oral exposures of up to 62 mg/kg/day for 16 weeks had no effect on red cell counts, 

hemoglobin concentrations, or white cell counts in rats (Gorzinski et al. 1985). These results suggest that 

hexachloroethane does not affect hematological parameters, but there are relatively few data upon which 

to base this conclusion. On the basis of the existing data, the occurrence of hexachloroethane at hazardous 

waste sites should not pose a significant hematological risk for humans. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 70 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Musculoskeletal Effects. Neither inhalation nor oral exposures to hexachloroethane were associated with 

histopathological changes in skeletal muscle or bone in rats following acute-, intermediate-, or chronic 

duration exposures with inhalation exposure concentrations of 15-5,900 ppm or oral exposure doses of l750 mg/kg/day (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). More comprehensive data 

pertaining to the musculoskeletal system were not identified. Based on the data available, there appears to 

be no risk for musculoskeletal effects for those who live or work near a hazardous waste site. 

Hepatic Effects. Liver function tests (serum bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, alanine aminotransferase, 

aspartate aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase) were not affected in 11 hexachloroethaneexposed 

workers who wore protective clothing (Selden et al. 1993). 

Animal studies indicate that hepatic tissues are moderately vulnerable to exposure to hexachloroethane 

especially when exposure occurs by the oral route. With acute- and intermediate-duration inhalation 

exposures, the only effects noted were an increase in liver weight in rats and guinea pigs, but not dogs or 

quail, after 6 weeks of exposure to 260 ppm (Weeks et al. 1979). There were no observable 

histopathological changes in the tissues that accompanied the organ weight change and no 

histopathological changes with acute exposure to an even higher hexachloroethane concentration 

(5,900 ppm). 

When exposures occurred by the oral route, increased liver weights, increases in serum liver enzyme 

levels, centrilobular necrosis, fatty degeneration, hemosiderin-laden macrophages, and hemorrhage were 

noted in animals following acute- and intermediate-duration exposures (Fowler 1969b; Gorzinski et al. 

1985; NTP 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). The lowest LOAEL for these effects was a dietary dose of 

15 mg/kg/day for 16 weeks which was associated with enlargement of the hepatocytes in males (Gorzinski 

et al. 1985). However, there were no observable adverse effects on tissue histopathology in male rats 

given 20 mg/kg/day for 2 years or in females given 160 mg/kg/day for the same period of time (NTP 

1989). Organ weights were not determined for the chronic exposures. These data suggest that there is a 

potential for individuals who might be exposed to hexachloroethane from a contaminated diYnking water 

supply to experience hepatic effects. The risk from other exposure routes (inhalation or dermal) due to 

contaminated hazardous waste sites is probably minimal. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 71 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Renal Effects. No effects on renal function tests (serum creatinine and urate, urinary hemoglobin, protein 

and glucose) were noted in 11 hexachloroethane-exposed workers who wore protective clothing (Selden et 

al. 1994). 

Acute exposure to concentrations of 260-5900 ppm hexachloroethane had minimal effects on the kidney. 

There was an increase in kidney weights in male rats exposed to 260 ppm hexachloroethane for 6 weeks 

but no discernable effects on tissue histopathology (Weeks et al. 1979). This same exposure concentration 

had no effect on female rats or on male or female dogs, guinea pigs, or quail under parallel exposure 

conditions. 

Acute-, intermediate-, and chronic-duration oral exposures of male rats to doses of 10 mg/kg/day or 

greater were associated with renal tubular nephropathy (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 1989; Weeks 

et al. 1979). Affected animals displayed tubular necrosis, hyaline droplets in tubular epithelial cells, 

regenerative tubular epithelium, interstitial nephritis, and fibrosis. The severity of the renal lesions varied 

with the dose and the duration of exposure. 

Hexachloroethane is a member of a family of compounds that bind to the male rat excretory protein 

α2μ-globulin and form hyaline droplets in the tubular epithelium leading to necrosis and repair hyperplasia 

(Borghoff 1993; Olson et al. 1990). The hexachloroethane metabolites tetrachloroethene and 

pentachloroethane are also members of this family of compounds (Borghoff 1993; Swenberg 1993). 

Female rats and laboratory animals from other species synthesize only minimal quantities of this protein 

and, thus, have a lower risk for renal effects. In male rats, α2μ-globulin accounts for 26% of the urinary 

protein, and chemicals that bind with it have a strong tendency to accumulate in the kidney causing 

cellular damage. 

Mild to moderate nephropathy in female rats exposed to 80 or 160 mg/kg/day for 2 years, a high incidence 

of nephropathy in mice exposed to 590 or 1,179 mg/kg/day for 78 weeks, and nephrosis in rabbits exposed 

to 320 or 1,000 mg/kg/day for 12 days, indicate that hexachloroethane has an effect on the kidney that is 

independent of α2μ-globulin (NTP 1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). Thus, the public health risk for renal 

effects should be considered when evaluating the possible effects of human exposure to hexachloroethane 

at hazardous waste sites. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 72 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Endocrine Effects. Histological changes have not been observed in the pancreas or adrenal glands of rats, 

guinea pigs, dogs, or quail following inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane at concentrations up to 

260 ppm for 6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). Intermediate-duration oral treatment of rats with 

hexachloroethane at doses up to 62 mg/kg/day also did not result in histological changes in the pancreas, 

adrenal glands, thyroid, or parathyroid glands (Gorzinski et al. 1985). Chronic gavage treatment of male 

rats with hexachloroethane at 10 or 20 mg/kg/day did result in an increased incidence of 

pheochromocytomas in the adrenal gland (NTP 1989). The relevance of this effect to humans is not clear. 

Dermal Effects. Hexachloroethane-exposed workers reported a slightly higher prevalence of dry skin and 

dry mucous membranes as well as itching and other skin problems than the unexposed controls (Selden et 

al. 1994). Clinical examinations of the 11 exposed workers did not reveal signs of abnormal 

dermatological status. The investigators indicate that the dermal effects may also have been a result of a 

local trauma effect of the protective equipment. 

There was no evidence that crystalline hexachloroethane affected the skin of animals with either inhalation 

or oral exposures of acute, intermediate, or chronic durations (Fowler 1969b; Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 

1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). When a water paste was placed on the shaved skin of rabbits for 

24 hours, there was only a slight redness as the result of contact (Weeks et al. 1979). 

The concentrations of hexachloroethane that might be found at hazardous waste sites are unlikely to act as 

skin irritants in humans. 

Ocular Effects. Inhalation and oral exposure of animals to hexachloroethane caused lacrimation and 

reddening of the eyes after oral exposure (NTP 1977, 1989), or closing of the eyes as an avoidance 

mechanism during inhalation exposure (Weeks et al. 1979). Overnight, direct contact of the eyes with 

crystalline hexachloroethane resulted in cornea1 opacity and iritis in rabbits, but recovery was complete 

3 days later (Weeks et al. 1979). Direct eye contact with hexachloroethane at hazardous waste sites may 

result in an eye irritation. 

Body Weight Effects. Decreased weight gains occurred in rats in response to both acute inhalation 

exposure to a high concentration of hexachloroethane (5,900 ppm) and intermediate-duration exposures to 

a lower concentration (260 ppm) (Weeks et al. 1979). Oral exposures were also associated with decreased 

weight gains with doses of 320 mg/kg/day or greater for 12 days in rabbits (Weeks et al. 1979) and with 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 73 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

562 mg/kg/day or greater for 6-16 weeks in rats (NTP 1977, 1989). Female rats exposed to 

750 mg/kg/day for 16 days actually lost 25% of their initial body weight (NTP 1989). Decreased weight 

gain occurred in mice at doses of 1,760 mg/kg/day (NTP 1977). In light of these findings, the 

concentrations of hexachloroethane found at hazardous waste sites are unlikely to be of great enough 

magnitude to have an effect on body weight in humans. 

Immunological and Lymphoreticular Effects. No studies were located regarding immunological 

effects in humans after exposure to hexachloroethane. In addition, there were no data from comprehensive 

studies of immune response in animals for exposure by any route and for any duration. When the tissue 

histopathology of the spleen, thymus, and, in one case, lymph nodes were evaluated, no abnormalities 

were noted (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). After 6-week inhalation exposures to 

260 ppm hexachloroethane, the relative spleen weight was increased in young, but not in older, male rats. 

Data on dermal sensitization in guinea pigs indicate that exposure to low levels of hexachloroethane does 

not elicit antibody formation leading to an allergic dermatological response (Weeks et al. 1979). 

An increased incidence in mycoplasma infections in rats exposed to 260 ppm hexachloroethane for 

6 weeks suggests that hexachloroethane might weaken resistance to infection (Weeks et al. 1979). This 

could be the result of either a change in the quantity or consistency of the respiratory tract mucus or a 

systemic weakening of the immune system. The data are inadequate to formulate any hypothesis 

regarding the mechanism for diminished host resistance or to postulate whether hexachloroethane in the 

environment might lower the resistance of humans to respiratory infections. 

Neurological Effects. No studies were located regarding neurological effects in humans after exposure 

to hexachloroethane. Inhalation, oral, and dermal exposure of animals to moderate or high doses 

(260 ppm, 5,900 ppm, 375 mg/kg/day, 750 mg/kg/day) resulted in hyperactivity, tremors, fasciculation of 

the facial muscles, ataxia, convulsions, and/or prostration (Fowler 1969b; NTP 1977, 1989; Southcott 

1951; Weeks et al. 1979). Reduced motor activity has also been observed following oral exposure of 

pregnant rats (167 mg/kg/day) (Shimizu et al. 1992). Inhalation exposure of rats to 260 ppm for 6 weeks 

did not have any effect on spontaneous motor activity or shock avoidance behavior (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Ataxia, tremors, and prostration in sheep given hexachloroethane (170 or 338 mg/kg) for a liver fluke 

infection were successfully ameliorated with calcium as calcium borogluconate. This suggests that the 

neurological action of hexachloroethane may be the result of interference with the availability of calcium 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 74 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

within excitable cells. This mechanism would explain the transient nature of the hexachloroethane 

neurotoxicity and is compatible with the low affinity that hexachloroethane shows for brain tissue (Fowler 

1969b). 

There were no effects at any of the doses tested on the histopathology of the brain for any duration or 

route of exposure (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). This observation is 

consistent with tissue distribution studies which indicate that hexachloroethane has no particular affinity 

for the brain tissues (Fowler 1969b). 

Based on the available data, the concentrations of hexachloroethane at hazardous waste sites are unlikely 

to reach levels that would elicit a neurological response in humans. However, there have not been any 

comprehensive studies of brain or nerve function after exposure to hexachloroethane. 

Reproductive Effects. No studies of reproductive effects in humans were located. In animals, 

hexachloroethane adversely affected fertility following oral exposure, but no effects were reported 

following inhalation exposure (Weeks et al. 1979). The absence of quantitative data on reproductive 

parameters, as well as evaluation of parameters that are pertinent to the assessment of reproductive risk, 

precludes any meaningful determination of the potential for hexachloroethane to cause adverse effects on 

human reproduction. 

Developmental Effects. No studies were located regarding the developmental effects of 

hexachloroethane in humans. Fetal body weights were reduced, late-gestation resorptions were increased, 

and the degree of ossification was reduced in offspring from pregnant rats treated orally with 

hexachloroethane at 500 mg/kg/day on gestation days 7-17 (Shimizu et al. 1992) or gestation days 6-16 

(Weeks et al. 1979). The 500-mg/kg/day dose also caused a significant decrease in maternal body 

weights. No effect on the number of fetuses with anomalies was observed, and no fetal or maternal effects 

were observed at lower doses. These studies suggest that in the absence of maternal effects, 

developmental effects in humans are unlikely. 

Genotoxic Effects. No studies were located regarding the genotoxic effects of hexachloroethane in 

humans after inhalation, oral, or dermal exposure. In vitro studies of hexachloroethane using microbial, 

fungal, and rodent cell assays are summarized in Table 2-4. Tests of prokaryotic cell systems failed to 

detect gene mutation (Haworth et al. 1983; Roldan-Arjona et al. 1991; Simmon and Kauhanen 1978; 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 76 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

Weeks et al. 1979) or DNA damage (Nakamura et al. 1987) following hexachloroethane treatment. 

Similar results were reported for eukaryotic cells. Hexachloroethane did not cause gene mutation in cells 

harvested from the stationary growth phase (Bronzetti et al. 1989) or DNA damage in yeast 

(Succharomyces cerevisiue) (Simmon and Kauhanen 1978), chromosomal aberrations in fungi 

(Aspergillus nidulans) (Crebelli et al. 1988), chromosomal aberrations in Chinese hamster ovary cells 

(Galloway et al. 1987), or cell transformations in mouse cells (Tu et al. 1985). Hexachloroethane did 

cause sister chromatid exchanges in Chinese hamster ovary cells in the presence of activation; however, 

the overall importance of this response is reduced since these effects occurred at doses that were cytotoxic 

(e.g., induced cell cycle delay) (Galloway et al. 1987). Similarly, hexachloroethane induced a significant 

(p<0.01) increase of gene conversion in S. cerevisiae cells harvested from the logarithmic growth phase. 

Similar effects were not seen in stationary growth phase cells, both with and without metabolic activation 

(Bronzetti et al. 1989). Because cells of this sort contain a high level of cytochrome P-450, it is plausible 

that the positive responses were due to metabolites rather than the parent compound. 

Cancer. Only one report was located regarding an association between hexachloroethane and cancer in 

humans (Selden et al. 1989). In this study a liver tumor was found in an adult male who had used a 

product containing hexachloroethane at work for 6 years. However, under the conditions of use, the 

hexachloroethane reacted to form hexachlorobenzene and other chlorinated compounds which were as 

likely, or more likely, to have contributed to the tumorigenesis as the hexachloroethane. 

Lifetime exposure of rats to hexachloroethane resulted in renal carcinomas and adenomas in Fischer-344 

male rats (NTP 1989). The incidence of adenomas was l/50 for the controls, 2/50 for animals at a dose of 

10 mg/kg/day, and 4/50 for animals at a dose of 20 mg/kg/day. In the animals from the high-dose group, 

there were also 3/50 renal carcinomas. The number of tumors (carcinomas and adenomas) was 

significantly greater in exposed rats than in both controls and historical controls using the Fisher Exact 

Test (NTP 1989). No tumors were seen in the female rats. 

In an earlier study, there were renal tubular cell adenomas in 5/50 Osborne-Mendel rats receiving doses of 

212 mg/kg/day but no tumors in 49 animals receiving 423 mg/kg/day or in 20 vehicle control rats 

(Weisburger 1977). Despite the lack of tumors, there was a high incidence of nephropathy (18-66%) in 

exposed male and female rats. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 77 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

The male rat kidney is susceptible to the induction of tumors because of α2μ-globulin excretion (Borghoff 

1993; Olson et al. 1990). This protein is not made by female rats, other laboratory species, or humans in 

significant quantities, but large amounts are synthesized and excreted by male rats. EPA (1991a) has 

concluded that renal tumors in male rats that are associated with α2μ-globulin should not be used in 

assessing the potential for any chemical to cause renal tumors in humans. Compounds that bind to 

α2μ-globulin lead to the formation of hyaline droplets in the kidney causing cell damage and regenerative 

hyperplasia (Borghoff 1993; Olson et al. 1990). 

A statistically significant increase in hepatocellular carcinomas was seen in male and female mice that 

were dosed with 590 and 1,179 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane in corn oil by gavage for 78 continuous 

weeks (Weisburger 1977). The incidence of tumors in the exposed mice was greater than that in 

controls on the basis of both the Fisher Exact test and the Cochran-Armitage test. There were no hepatic 

tumors in male or female rats with chronic exposure to doses of 10423 mg/kg/day (NTP 1977, 1989; 

Weisburger 1977). 

Hexachloroethane may function as a promoter rather than an inducer of hepatic tumors. When male rats 

were given a single dose of 497 mg/kg hexachloroethane followed by daily treatment with a known 

promotor (phenobarbital) for 7 weeks, there was no increase in the number of GGT+ foci in the liver 

(Milman et al. 1988). GGT+ foci are markers for precarcinogenic cell changes. When a single dose of a 

known initiator dimethylnitrosamine was followed by 7 weeks of dosing with 497 mg/kg/day 

hexachloroethane, the number of GGT+ foci was four times the number seen with a single dose of 

dimethylnitrosamine in the absence of hexachloroethane treatment. The fact that hexachloroethane does 

not appear to be mutagenic in short-term tests of genetic toxicity and that it has a low tendency to bind to 

DNA (Lattanzi et al. 1988) is consistent with classifying it as a promotor rather than a direct acting 

carcinogen. 

NTP determined that there was clear evidence of carcinogenicity in male rats based on the increased 

incidence of renal neoplasms and no evidence of carcinogenic activity in female rats (NTP 1989). The 

EPA classified hexachloroethane as a possible human carcinogen (Group C). The slope factor calculated 

by EPA is 1.4 x 10-2 (mg/kg/day)-1 for both the oral and inhalation routes of exposure (IRIS 1995). IARC 

has determined that hexachloroethane is not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity (Group 3). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 78 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.6 BIOMARKERS OF EXPOSURE AND EFFECT 

Biomarkers are broadly defined as indicators signaling events in biologic systems or samples. They have 

been classified as markers of exposure, markers of effect, and markers of susceptibility (NAS/NRC 1989). 

Due to a nascent understanding of the use and interpretation of biomarkers, implementation of biomarkers 

as tools of exposure in the general population is very limited. A biomarker of exposure is a xenobiotic 

substance or its metabolite(s), or the product of an interaction between a xenobiotic agent and some target 

molecule(s) or cell(s) that is measured within a compartment of an organism (NAS/NCR 1989). The 

preferred biomarkers of exposure are generally the substance itself or substance-specific metabolites in 

readily obtainable body fluid(s) or excreta. However, several factors can confound the use and 

interpretation of biomarkers of exposure. The body burden of a substance may be the result of exposures 

from more than one source. The substance being measured may be a metabolite of another xenobiotic 

substance (e.g., high urinary levels of phenol can result from exposure to several different aromatic 

compounds). Depending on the properties of the substance (e.g., biologic half-life) and environmental 

conditions (e.g., duration and route of exposure), the substance and all of its metabolites may have left the 

body by the time samples can be taken. It may be difficult to identify individuals exposed to hazardous 

substances that are commonly found in body tissues and fluids (e.g., essential mineral nutrients such as 

copper, zinc, and selenium). Biomarkers of exposure to hexachloroethane are discussed in Section 2.6.1. 

Biomarkers of effect are defined as any measurable biochemical, physiologic, or other alteration within an 

organism that, depending on magnitude, can be recognized as an established or potential health 

impairment or disease (NAS/NRC 1989). This definition encompasses biochemical or cellular signals of 

tissue dysfunction (e.g., increased liver enzyme activity or pathologic changes in female genital epithelial 

cells), as well as physiologic signs of dysfunction such as increased blood pressure or decreased lung 

capacity. Note that these markers are not often substance specific. They also may not be directly adverse, 

but can indicate potential health impairment (e.g., DNA adducts). Biomarkers of effects caused by 

hexachloroethane are discussed in Section 2.6.2. 

A biomarker of susceptibility is an indicator of an inherent or acquired limitation of an organism’s ability 

to respond to the challenge of exposure to a specific xenobiotic substance. It can be an intrinsic genetic or 

other characteristic or a preexisting disease that results in an increase in absorbed dose, a decrease in the 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 79 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

biologically effective dose, or a target tissue response. If biomarkers of susceptibility exist, they are 

discussed in Section 2.8, “Populations That Are Unusually Susceptible.” 

2.6.1 Biomarkers Used to Identify or Quantify Exposure to Hexachloroethane 

Based on results from animal studies, urinary and fecal excretion of hexachloroethane can be used to 

identify recent exposures (Fowler 1969b; Jondorf et al. 1957). Recent exposure to hexachloroethane can 

also be determined by measuring the amount of hexachloroethane in the blood, but this would be a more 

invasive procedure than analyzing urine or fecal matter (Fowler 1969b). The concentrations of 

hexachloroethane in fecal matter were higher than those in urine in sheep for the 24-hour period following 

exposure (Fowler 1969b). Thus, fecal matter might be better for analysis than urine. 

Both hexachloroethane and its lipophilic metabolites can distribute to body fat. Only hexachloroethane 

can be used to confirm compound exposure by way of a fat biopsy, since some of its metabolites are also 

produced from other chlorinated hydrocarbons or are present as contaminants in the environment. Based 

on one worker occupationally exposed to hexachloroethane, Selden et al. (1993) estimated that the plasma 

half-life in humans was several days, but less than one week. A clearance half-life in rats of 2.5 days was 

reported for hexachloroethane absorbed from the diet (Gorzinski et al. 1985). Therefore, similar to 

measurement of hexachloroethane in blood, urine, and feces, hexachloroethane in body fat is 

representative of current exposures rather than exposures that occurred weeks or months before testing. 

2.6.2 Biomarkers Used to Characterize Effects Caused by Hexachloroethane 

No information was located regarding adverse health effects of hexachloroethane in humans; therefore, no 

judgment can be made concerning possible biomarkers of exposure in humans. 

Animal data suggest that renal and liver effects may occur in humans exposed to high doses of 

hexachloroethane. Kidney and liver effects are not specific to hexachloroethane. Lesions ofthe kidney 

(nephropathy, linear mineralization, and hyperplasia) were reported at 10 mg/kg/day or greater in male rats 

(NTP 1989). Urinalysis also revealed granular and cellular casts in rats exposed to hexachloroethane 

(47 mg/kg/day or greater) for 13 weeks (NTP 1989). Because other compounds cause similar effects and 

because some of these effects are unique to male rats, they are not valuable as biomarkers for human 

hexachloroethane exposure. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 80 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

The liver is also a target of hexachloroethane toxicity, but the effects are not as severe as for the kidneys. 

For the most part, effects in rats were confined to swelling of hepatocytes which occurred at dose levels of 

15 mg/kg/day or greater following oral exposure (Gorzinski et al. 1985). Certain biochemical parameters 

that are commonly associated with chemically-induced liver damage were assessed in rabbits exposed to 

hexachloroethane by gavage for 12 days (Weeks et al. 1979) and in sheep given a single dose of 

500 mg/kg (Fowler 1969b). There were no statistically significant alterations in serum enzymes (alanine 

amino transferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase) or bilirubin in rabbits, but serum 

values were increased as compared to controls (Weeks et al. 1979). Plasma sorbitol dehydrogenase, 

glutamate dehydrogenase, and omithine carbamoyl transferase concentrations increased in sheep (Fowler 

1969b). Because these effects can also be caused by other chemicals, they cannot be considered specific 

biomarkers for hexachloroethane. 

2.7 INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER SUBSTANCES 

Hexachloroethane is commonly used by the military for pyrotechnics and smoke screens. 

Hexachloroethane-containing, smoke-producing devices combine hexachloroethaue with zinc oxide 

(Gordon et al. 1991). Small quantities of other materials such as calcium silicide can also be present. 

Hexachloroethane is generally about 44-47% of the reaction mixture. When a smoke pot or grenade is 

ignited, hexachloroethane reacts with zinc oxide to produce zinc chloride. Only small amounts (0.3-5%) 

of hexachloroethane remain. Other products of the reaction are tetrachloroethylene, carbon tetrachloride, 

phosgene, and hexachlorobenzene (Gordon et al. 1991). The environmental residues from smoke 

generation vary with the configuration of the device and its position when it ignites (upright or prone) 

(Schaeffer et al. 1988). 

A number of studies of the toxicity of zinc oxide/hexachloroethane smoke have been conducted (Brown 

et al. 1990; Karlsson et al. 1986; Mans et al. 1983). These studies demonstrate that smoke exposure 

results in pulmonary inflammation and irritation. When male Porton Wistar rats were exposed to 

hexachloroethane/zinc oxide smoke for 60 minutes, the lungs showed pulmonary edema, alveolitis, and 

areas of macrophage infiltration 3 days later. At 14 days, there was interstitial fibrosis and macrophage 

infiltration. At 28 days, increased fibrosis and macrophage infiltration were noted. However, these same 

symptoms occurred when the animals inhaled zinc chloride; there was no apparent synergism between the 

zinc chloride and residual hexachloroethane (Brown et al. 1990; Richard et al. 1989). This is consistent 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 81 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

with the fact that smoke contains little hexachloroethane and the observation that acute exposure to 

260 ppm hexachloroethane had no effects on the lungs of rats (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Environmental agents that influence microsomal reactions will influence hexachloroethane toxicity. The 

production of tetrachloroethene as a metabolite is increased by agents like phenobarbital that induce 

certain cytochrome P-450 isozymes (Nastainczyk et al. 1982a; Thompson et al. 1984). Exposure to food 

material or other xenobiotics that influence the availability of mixed function oxidase enzymes and/or 

cofactors will change the reaction rate and end products of hexachloroethane metabolism and thus 

influence its toxicity. 

No other studies of interactions of hexachloroethane with other chemicals were identified in the published 

literature. However, the primary metabolites of hexachloroethane (tetrachloroethene and 

pentachloroethane) are themselves toxic and would be expected to exacerbate hexachloroethane toxicity if 

they were present in a mixture with hexachloroethane. Concurrent carbon tetrachloride exposure would 

also be expected to exacerbate hexachloroethane toxicity. Both hexachloroethane and carbon tetrachloride 

are processed by microsomes to generate free radicals, and carbon tetrachloride also forms endogenous 

hexachloroethane in the liver (Fowler 1969a). 

2.8 POPULATIONS THAT ARE UNUSUALLY SUSCEPTIBLE 

A susceptible population will exhibit a different or enhanced response to hexachloroethane than will most 

persons exposed to the same level of hexachloroethane in the environment. Reasons include genetic 

make-up, developmental stage, age, health and nutritional status (including dietary habits that may 

increase susceptibility, such as inconsistent diets or nutritional deficiencies), and substance exposure 

history (including smoking). These parameters may result in decreased function of the detoxification and 

excretory processes (mainly hepatic, renal, and respiratory) or the pre-existing compromised function of 

target organs (including effects or clearance rates and any resulting end-product metabolites). For these 

reasons we expeet the elderly with declining organ function and the youngest of the population with 

immature and developing organs will generally be more vulnerable to toxic substances than healthy adults. 

Populations who are at greater risk due to their unusually high exposure are discussed in Section 5.6, 

“Populations With Potentially High Exposure.” 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 82 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

No studies were located regarding populations that are unusually susceptible to hexachloroethane toxicity. 

Because the kidney and liver are the primary target tissues, individuals with compromised liver or kidney 

function would have an increased risk from exposure. Susceptibility to pulmonary infections could be 

increased by exposure to hexachloroetbane vapors and, thus, individuals that suffer from chronic 

respiratory problems could also have an increased risk from hexachloroethane exposure. 

The risk to overweight individuals consuming a high fat diet is likely to be greater than that for lean 

individuals. Excess deposits of body fat increase physiological exposure durations due to the affinity of 

the adipose tissue for hexachloroethane. Hexachloroethane collects in the adipose deposits during 

exposure and is released slowly to circulatory fluids after the exposure has ceased. Individuals consuming 

a high fat diet are likely to absorb increased quantities of hexachloroethane when exposure occurs through 

the oral route; absorption from a lipid matrix is favored over absorption from an aqueous medium. 

2.9 METHODS FOR REDUCING TOXIC EFFECTS 

This section describes clinical practice and research concerning methods for reducing toxic effects of 

exposure to hexachloroethane. However, because some of the treatments discussed may be experimental 

and unproven, this section should not be used as a guide for treatment of exposures to hexachloroethane. 

When specific exposures have occurred, poison control centers and medical toxicologists should be 

consulted for medical advice. 

2.9.1 Reducing Peak Absorption Following Exposure 

Humans can be exposed to hexachloroethane by inhalation, ingestion, or skin contact. There are no 

specific treatments for hexachloroethane overexposure. However, treatments available for halogenated 

hydrocarbons may be useful. 

When individuals have been exposed to vapors of hexachloroethane, they should be moved-to fresh air. 

Additional treatment with oxygen may be beneficial. 

If hexachloroethane has been ingested, treatments designed to minimize absorption of halogenated 

hydrocarbons are appropriate. If the victim is alert, can swallow, and appears to have a good gag reflex, 

water (l-2 glasses) may be administered after ingestion of small amounts of hexachloroethane (Bronstein 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 83 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

and Currance 1988; Stutz and Ulin 1992). Because many hydrocarbons may cause spontaneous vomiting, 

induced emesis is not recommended since it may result in aspiration of gastric contents. If large amounts 

of hexachloroethane have been ingested, gastric lavage may be useful if performed soon after exposure. 

Activated charcoal can be administered to bind hexachloroethane in the gastrointestinal tract and minimize 

absorption. Activated charcoal can be combined with cathartics to speed fecal excretion. Because 

hexachloroethane is lipid soluble, the administration of a fat-based substance or whole milk are not 

recommended as they may cause increased absorption. 

In order to minimize absorption through the skin, all contaminated clothing should be removed and the 

skin should be washed with mild soap and water (Bronstein and Currance 1988; Stutz and Ulin 1992). In 

cases where the compound has been splashed into the eyes, irrigation with large amounts of water for 

15-30 minutes has been recommended. 

2.9.2 Reducing Body Burden 

Hexachloroethane that is absorbed appears rapidly in the systemic circulation. It is distributed widely 

throughout the body, with the highest concentration in fat and kidney and the lowest in the muscle (Fowler 

1969b; Gorzinski et al. 1985). There are no specific treatments available for reducing the body burden if 

hexachloroethane is absorbed. Because hexachloroethane causes renal injury, hemodialysis may be useful 

to reduce the plasma levels of hexachloroethane should renal failure occur in exposed persons. 

2.9.3 Interfering with the Mechanism of Action for Toxic Effects 

No information is available on the adverse health effects of hexachloroethane in humans. Animal studies 

revealed that hexachloroethane primarily causes liver and kidney toxicity. Effects on the nervous system 

and lungs have also been reported. The mechanism by which these effects are mediated is not well 

characterized. Reductive metabolism by cytochrome P-450 and production of a free radical intermediate 

have been suggested.as factors in hexachloroethane-induced hepatotoxicity (Nastainczyk et-al. 1982a; 

Thompson et al. 1984; Town and Leibman 1984). Accordingly, one possible approach may be to reduce 

free radical injury. To that end, oral administration of N-acetylcysteine can be used as a means of 

reducing free radical injury. Also, oral administration of vitamin E and vitamin C may be of value since 

they are free radical scavengers. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 84 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

The mechanism of renal toxicity is not clear. Because the spectrum of kidney lesions observed in male 

rats (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1989) resembled those for α2μ-globulin nephropathy, 

hexachloroethaneinduced kidney lesions may, in part, be due to hexachloroethane binding to this protein. 

On the other hand, renal toxicity was observed in female rats and did not present the same sequence of 

lesions. This suggests the effects in males may not be totally due to α2μ-globulin. Specific methods to 

minimize renal toxicity, based on mechanism of action, cannot be proposed at this time. 

2.10 ADEQUACY OF THE DATABASE 

Section 104(I)(5) of CERCLA, as amended, directs the Administrator of ATSDR (in consultation with the 

Administrator of EPA and agencies and programs of the Public Health Service) to assess whether adequate 

information on the health effects of hexachloroethane is available. Where adequate information is not 

available, ATSDR, in conjunction with the National Toxicology Program (NTP), is required to assure the 

initiation of a program of research designed to determine the health effects (and techniques for developing 

methods to determine such health effects) of hexachloroethane. 

The following categories of possible data needs have been identified by a joint team of scientists from 

ATSDR, NTP, and EPA. They are defined as substance-specific informational needs that if met would 

reduce the uncertainties of human health assessment. This definition should not be interpreted to mean 

that all data needs discussed in this section must be filled. In the future, the identified data needs will be 

evaluated and prioritized, and a substance-specific research agenda will be proposed. 

2.10.1 Existing Information on Health Effects of Hexachloroethane 

The existing data on health effects of inhalation, oral, and dermal exposure of humans and animals to 

hexachloroethane are summarized in Figure 2-4. The purpose of this figure is to illustrate the existing 

information concerning the health effects of hexachloroethane. Each dot in the figure indicates that one or 

more studies provide information associated with that particular effect. The dot does not ne?cessarily imply 

anything about the quality of the study or studies, nor should missing information in this figure be 

interpreted as a “data need.” A data need, as defined in ATSDR’s Decision Guide for Identifying 

Substance-Specific Data Needs Related to Toxicological Profiles (ATSDR 1989), is substance-specific 

information necessary to conduct comprehensive public health assessments. Generally, ATSDR defines a 

data gap more broadly as any substance-specific information missing from the scientific literature. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 85 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

As indicated by Figure 2-4, data available on the health effects of hexachloroethane in humans is 

extremely sparse. A study (Selden et al. 1994) of 11 workers who wore protective equipment while being 

exposed to hexachloroethane for 5 weeks showed no respiratory, hematological, liver or kidney effects at 

plasma levels of 7.3 ±6 μg/L (Selden et al. 1993). Because of skin irritation, the investigators suggest that 

the principal exposure route may have been dermal, although the dermal effects may also have been a 

result of trauma from the protective equipment. Because of the protective equipment it is not possible to 

determine exposure levels. There is one case study of a liver tumor in an individual who had used a 

hexachloroethane-containing degassing agent in his work for a period of 6 years (Selden et al 1989). 

However, during use the hexachloroethane reacted to form hexachlorobenzene and small amounts of other 

chlorinated compounds. Exposure to hexachloroethane was minimal compared to exposure to the reaction 

products. 

There are more data available concerning the effects of hexachloroethane in animals, particularly for 

exposure by the inhalation and oral routes. These studies identify the liver and kidney as target organs for 

hexachloroethane. There have been no studies of chronic exposure by the inhalation route. Although 

there are some data on neurological and immunological effects, there have been no well-designed, 

comprehensive studies of these systems. This is also true for reproductive and developmental effects. The 

data are limited and there has been no comprehensive multigeneration study of reproductive processes and 

only two studies of developmental effects. 

In vivo testing for mutagenic potential has also not been conducted. The carcinogenic potential for 

hexachloroethane has only been evaluated for the oral route. 

Data for the dermal route are limited to an LD50 study and data on dermal/ocular effects. A theoretical 

estimation of dermal transport of hexachloroethane indicated that absorption is low. 

2.10.2 Identification of Data Needs 

Acute-Duration Exposure. No studies were located on the effects of hexachloroethane in humans 

after acute exposure by any route. Acute inhalation exposure in animals caused respiratory effects, 

staggered gait, and reduced body weight gain, but these effects occurred at a concentration that was lethal 

(Weeks et al. 1979). There were no histological changes or changes in organ weights in the liver and 

kidneys after inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane (Weeks et al. 1979). Reproductive and 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 87 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

developmental effects were not observed in rats exposed to hexachloroethane on gestation days 6-16 

(Weeks et al. 1979). Tremors were observed at the high concentration in pregnant rats, and an acute 

inhalation MRL of 6 ppm was calculated based on the NOAEL for neurological effects observed in the 

developmental study (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Acute oral exposure of animals was associated with tubular nephrosis and nephrocalcinosis in the kidneys 

(Weeks et al. 1979), hepatocellular degeneration, coagulation necrosis, hemorrhage in the liver (Weeks et 

al. 1979), and elevated liver enzymes in the serum (Fowler 1969b). An MRL of 1 mg/kg was derived for 

acute oral exposures based on a NOAEL for the absence of liver damage in rabbits (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Reduced body weight gain and neurological effects (tremor, decreased motor activity) have also been 

observed following acute oral exposure to hexachloroethane (Shimizu et al. 1992; Weeks et al. 1979). 

Increased fetal resorptions, decreases in fetal body weight, and an increase in skeletal anomalies have also 

been observed in rats treated orally with hexachloroethane during organogenesis (Shimizu et al. 1992; 

Weeks et al. 1979). As the dose following inhalation exposure is limited by the amount of 

hexachloroethane vapor that can be formed at standard temperatures (Weeks et al. 1979), oral studies may 

be more useful. Additional oral exposure studies to delineate the threshold for acute liver effects and to 

help clarify the indices that are predictive of liver damage would be especially useful. Studies of kidney 

effects in female rats and other laboratory animals using the oral route would also be helpful to 

differentiate between lesions associated with α2μglobulin and those produced by other mechanisms. 

Hexachloroethane caused reversible cornea1 injury in rabbits following ocular contact, but contact with the 

skin for 24 hours resulted in no dermal effects (Weeks et al. 1979). The physical properties of 

hexachloroethane suggest that absorption across human skin would be limited (Fiserova-Bergerova et al. 

1990). Therefore, unless dermal absorption studies indicate that this prediction is incorrect, there is no 

need for additional studies of acute dermal toxicity. 

Intermediate-Duration Exposure. A study (Selden et al. 1994) of 11 workers who wore protective 

equipment while-being exposed to hexachloroethane for 5 weeks showed no respiratory, hematological, 

liver, or kidney effects at plasma levels of 7.3 f 6 ug/L (Selden et al. 1993). Because mild dermal effects 

were noted, the principal exposure route may have been dermal. The dermal effects may also have been a 

result of trauma from the protective equipment. Because of the protective equipment, it is not possible to 

determine exposure levels. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 88 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Inhalation of 260 ppm hexachloroethane, but not 48 ppm, was associated with an increased incidence of a 

respiratory tract mycoplasma infection that was endemic in the rat colony (Weeks et al. 1979). Ocular 

irritation, reduced body weight gain, and tremors were also noted in rats at 260 ppm. Reduced body 

weight gain in guinea pigs and ocular irritation and tremors in dogs were noted at 260 ppm, but not 

48 ppm (Weeks et al. 1979). Based on the 48 ppm concentration for the lack of neurological effects in rats 

(Weeks et al. 1979), an intermediate inhalation MRL of 6 ppm was calculated. 

Following intermediate oral exposure to hexachloroethane, decreased body weight gain has been observed 

in rats and mice (NTP 1977) and kidney effects, including increased kidney weight, tubular atrophy and 

hypertrophy, and hyaline droplet formation (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1989), and post-treatment 

hyperactivity and convulsions have been observed in rats (NTP 1989). Following intermediate exposure, 

liver enlargement has also been observed in rats treated with hexachloroethane (Gorzinski et al. 1985; 

Milman et al. 1988; Story et al. 1986). Enlargement of hepatocytes in male rats following oral exposures to 

15 mg/kg/day hexachloroethane, but not 1 mg/kg/day (Gorzinski et al. 1985), was used as the basis of an 

MRL of 0.01 mg/kg/day for intermediate-duration oral exposures. Because there is potential for persons 

living near hazardous waste sites to be exposed to hexachloroethane through contaminated drinking water, 

additional studies of liver damage in male and female rats and kidney damage in female rats by the oral 

route would be useful. Hexachloroethane appears to be less bioavailable in an aqueous medium than in a 

lipid medium (Weeks et al. 1979). 

In an intermediate-duration study, dermal treatment of rats did not result in skin sensitization (Weeks et al. 

1979). Additional intermediate-duration dermal studies were not available. The physical properties of 

hexachloroethane suggest that absorption across human skin would be limited (Fiserova-Bergerova et al. 

1990). Therefore, unless dermal absorption studies indicate that this prediction is incorrect, there is no 

need for additional studies of intermediate dermal toxicity. 

Chronic-Duration Exposure and Cancer. No studies were located in humans following chronicduration 

exposure to.hexachloroethane for any exposure route. No chronic animal studies were conducted 

using the inhalation route of exposure. In oral studies with rats, the kidney was identified as a primary 

target organ in males and females (NTP 1989). The kidney damage in male rats was the result of hyaline 

droplet nephropathy and, accordingly, was not suitable as the basis for an oral MRL. In contrast to acuteand 

intermediate-duration oral exposure, liver toxicity was not evident in rats following chronic oral 

exposure. There were no studies of chronic dermal exposure to hexachloroethane. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 89 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

Studies using the inhalation route might be useful to determine the potential human health risk in
 

populations that may be occupationally exposed to hexachloroethane vapors for long periods. Additional
 

chronic oral studies may be useful to help further clarify the dose-response relationships and better
 

characterize thresholds. Studies by the dermal route would not be useful until the rate and extent of
 

absorption have been better characterized.
 

The carcinogenic potential of hexachloroethane has not been evaluated following chronic inhalation or
 

dermal exposure. Hexachloroethane increased the incidence of renal tumors in male rats (NTP 1989)
 

following chronic oral exposure. However, these tumors were associated with renal hyaline droplets and,
 

thus, are unique to male rats. Although kidney damage was present in female rats after lifetime exposures
 

to 80 and 160 ppm hexachloroethane, there was no increase in renal tumors. Liver lesions and liver
 

tumors were found in mice following long-term oral exposure (NTP 1977).
 

A bioassay in mice (oral route) using current good laboratory practices may be useful in order to clarify
 

whether or not hexachloroethane is a hepatic carcinogen. The suspected hepatic carcinogenicity of the
 

hexachloroethane metabolites pentachloroethane and tetrachloroethene strengthens the justification for
 

additional investigations of the carcinogenic potential of hexachloroethane. Studies of the mechanism of
 

hexachloroethane carcinogenicity would also be useful to determine if effects observed in mice are
 

applicable to humans. To further characterize risk to persons occupationally exposed to hexachloroethane,
 

inhalation studies of the carcinogenic potential of hexachloroethane may be useful. The concentrations
 

used in the inhalation studies would be limited to about 670-700 ppm, the saturated vapor concentration at
 

20°C (Weeks et al. 1979). The physical properties of hexachloroethane suggest that absorption across
 

human skin would be limited (Fiserova-Bergerova et al. 1990). Therefore, unless dermal absorption
 

studies indicate that this prediction is incorrect, there is no need for carcinogenic studies following dermal
 

exposure.
 

Genotoxicity. Hexachloroethane did not exhibit mutagenic activity in vitro in prokaryotic cells
 

(Haworth et al. 1983: Nakamura et al. 1987; Roldan-Arjona et al. 1991; Simmon and Kauhanen 1978;
 

Weeks et al. 1979) or in eukaryotic cells (Galloway et al. 1987; Tu et al. 1985). In vivo data from animals,
 

such as the results of a micronucleus assay, would be of value.
 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 90 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

The mutagenic potential of hexachloroethane has not been evaluated in humans. Because 

hexachloroethane has been detected at hazardous waste sites, it would be useful to evaluate the potential 

for hexachloroethane to induce mutagenic effects in human cells (e.g., peripheral lymphocytes). 

Reproductive Toxicity. The effects of hexachloroethane on human reproduction have not been 

evaluated for any route of exposure. Data were available from animal studies using the inhalation and oral 

routes of exposure, but there were no data from studies using the dermal route. Following inhalation 

exposure to 260 ppm hexachloroethane, signs of maternal toxicity (decreased weight gain and clinical 

signs of neurotoxicity) were noted, but there was no evidence of embryotoxicity or fetotoxicity (Weeks 

et al. 1979). Reduced fertility, as characterized by reduced gestation indices and the number of live 

fetuses, occurred in pregnant rats following oral exposure during gestation (Weeks et al. 1979). Increased 

late-stage fetal resorptions were observed in rats treated orally with hexachloroethane at doses that resulted 

in maternal body weight gain 35% less than the controls (Shimizu et al. 1992). A comprehensive 

onegeneration study focusing on a broad range of predictive parameters regarding reproductive success 

would be useful. Because inhalation exposure is limited by the properties of hexachloroethane, higher 

doses could be achieved using oral exposure. If an oral study is negative for reproductive effects at high 

doses, an inhalation study may not be necessary. 

Developmental Toxicity. No studies on developmental effects in humans using any route of exposure 

were located. Rats were exposed to hexachloroethane during gestation using both the oral and inhalation 

routes and there were no soft tissue or skeletal effects in the pups (Weeks et al. 1979). Decreased fetal 

body weights and delayed ossification were observed in offspring of rats treated orally with 

hexachloroethane at doses that resulted in maternal body weight gain 35% less than the controls (Shimizu 

et al. 1992). Malformations were not observed in either control or hexachloroethane-treated fetuses. 

Confirmation of a lack of developmental effects in a second species following oral exposure would be 

useful. The inclusion of a developmental component to the suggested one-generation study would also 

provide useful data. As inhalation and dermal exposure are limited because of the physical properties of 

hexachloroethane that prevent exposure to high concentrations of vapor and that limit dermal absorption, 

studies by these routes of exposure may not be necessary. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 91 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Immunotoxicity. No studies are available for any exposure route on the potential for hexachloroethane 

to cause immunotoxic effects in humans. Data in animals are limited to studies that evaluated lymphoid 

organs (e.g., spleen and thymus) as part of a comprehensive histopathological examination following oral 

and inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane (Gorzinski et al. 1985; Weeks et al. 1979). Adverse effects 

were not reported for these organs. 

Effects on immune function have not been evaluated in animals following any route of exposure. There 

was an increased frequency of pulmonary tract infections in animals following inhalation and oral 

exposures (Weeks et al. 1979). Responses of this sort may be due, in part, to compromised immune 

functions. Studies in animals, using a battery of in vitro and short-term in vivo studies of immunotoxicity 

following inhalation and oral exposure, may enhance our overall understanding of the effects of 

hexachloroethane on disease resistance. 

Neurotoxicity. No information is available on neurotoxic effects of hexachloroethane in humans 

following any route of exposure. Acute inhalation exposure in rats caused staggering gait after exposure 

to high concentrations (5,900 ppm) (Weeks et al. 1979). The usefulness of this data is limited since this 

concentration was lethal. Tremors have been reported at 260 ppm but not 48 ppm following inhalation 

exposure of rats in a developmental study and in a study of 6-weeks duration (Weeks et al. 1979). The 

lack of tremors at 48 ppm in the developmental study serves as the basis for the acute inhalation MRL, and 

the lack of tremors at 48 ppm in the 6-week study serves as the basis for the intermediate inhalation MRL. 

One study that evaluated spontaneous motor activity and avoidance behavior in rats during 6 weeks of 

exposure to 260 ppm hexachloroethane vapors did not reveal adverse effects of hexachloroethane on these 

neurobehavioral functions (Weeks et al. 1979). 

Acute oral doses (500 mg/kg) given to healthy sheep caused tremors of the facial muscles (Fowler 1969b); 

several liver-fluke-infected sheep experienced prostration with even lower doses (170 or 338 mg/kg) 

(Southcott 1951). Treatment of sheep with calcium relieved the clinical signs of neurotoxicity, suggesting 

that cellular availability of calcium ion may be related to the neuromuscular symptoms noted (Southcott 

1951). Therefore, mechanistic studies of neuromuscular impulse transmission and cognitive function in 

animals would be useful. These neurological studies should examine the effects of different concentrations 

of hexachloroethane in several species. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 92 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

Postgavage hyperactivity was noted in rats with an oral dose of 375 mg/kg/day (NTP 1989) and tremors 

occurred following a dose of 500 mg/kg/day (Weeks et al. 1979). Other available animal data are limited 

to the findings of histological examination of the brain and other nervous tissue following inhalation, oral, 

and dermal exposures (Gorzenski et al. 1985; NTP 1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). No lesions were 

reported. 

Epidemiological and Human Dosimetry Studies. No epidemiological studies of hexachloroethane 

exposure were identified. Epidemiological studies including endpoints such as immunotoxicity, 

neurotoxicity, liver enzymes, and kidney function in individuals who handle hexachloroethane in the 

production of military pyrotechnics and smoke-producing devices would be useful. Epidemiological 

studies of exposure to the hexachloroethane-generated smoke might be of little value because most of the 

hexachloroethane is consumed in the smoke-generating reaction. Epidemiological studies will be of 

greatest value when mixtures of other chlorinated hydrocarbons are not present with hexachloroethane in 

the occupational environment because there are similarities in metabolism and possible synergistic 

demands on microsomal enzymes. 

Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect 

Exposure. Hexachloroethane has been measured in the plasma of occupationally exposed humans (Selden 

et al. 1993). Because these workers were wearing protective equipment, it is not possible to relate 

exposure concentrations to plasma levels of hexachloroethane. Based on animal data, exposure to 

hexachloroethane can be determined by analyzing blood, urine, and fecal matter for the presence of 

hexachloroethane within 24 hours of exposure (Fowler 1969b). After 24 hours, most of the 

hexachloroethane has been metabolized to compounds that are not unique to hexachloroethane 

metabolism. Additional studies of biomarkers of exposure in animals are not needed at this time. 

Effect. No data on biomarkers of effect in humans were identified. In animals, kidney and liver effects 

have been reported (Fowler 1969b; Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 1989; Weeks et al. 1979). Hyaline casts 

were present in urine but they can be caused by other chemicals as well as hexachloroethane (Borghoff 

1993). Biochemical tests (e.g., blood urea nitrogen) to detect renal damage were negative (Weeks et al. 

1979). However, the usual battery of urinary tests (i.e., glucose, protein, enzymes, creatinine, electrolytes, 

and urine output) has not been applied. Additional studies that monitor these indices would be useful and 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 93 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

could demonstrate whether or not hexachloroethane has an effect on glomerular filtration and/or tubular 

resorption. 

In rabbits, biochemical indices commonly used to assess liver damage (e.g., aspartate aminotransferase, 

alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, bilirubin, and protein) were elevated but within normal 

ranges (Weeks et al. 1979). On the other hand, plasma enzyme concentrations (sorbitol dehydrogenase, 

glutamate dehydrogenase, and ornithine carbamoyl transferase) increased in sheep (Fowler 1969b). 

Because people living near hazardous waste sites are likely to be exposed for long periods, it may be 

useful to evaluate these parameters in hexachloroethane-exposed animals to determine if there is consistent 

elevation of these biomarkers of liver damage with chronic exposure. 

Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion. There are no mechanistic or quantitative 

studies of hexachloroethane absorption from the lungs or across the gastrointestinal tract or skin. 

However, absorption does occur following oral exposure based on the appearances of hexachloroethane 

and its metabolites in blood, urine, and exhaled air (Fowler 1969b; Gorzinski et al. 1985; Jondorf et al. 

1957; Mitoma et al. 1985; Nolan and Karbowski 1978). The observation of toxic effects following 

inhalation exposure and dermal exposure (Weeks et al. 1979) indicates that hexachloroethane is absorbed 

through the respiratory tract. Quantitative studies that examine the absorption of hexachloroethane 

following inhalation and dermal exposure would be useful. 

Oral kinetic studies in rats indicate that hexachloroethane distributes preferentially to the adipose tissue 

(Gorzinski et al. 1985; Nolan and Karbowski 1978). Relatively high concentrations are also found in male 

rat kidneys (Nolan and Karbowski 1978). Moderate concentrations of hexachloroethane are found in the 

liver, kidneys of female rats, and blood, and small amounts in muscle, lungs, and brain (Gorzinski et al. 

1985). 

The metabolism of hexachloroethane is relatively well defined and involves dehalogenation followed by 

oxidation (Fowler 1969b; Gorzinski et al. 1985; Jondorf et al. 1957; Nastainczyk et al. 1982a, 1982b; 

Nolan and Karbowski 1978; Salmon et al. 1981; Thompson et al. 1984; Town and Leibman 1984). 

Urinary by-products such as trichloroacetic acid and trichloroethanol are consistent with metabolism 

(Jondorf et al. 1975; Mitoma et al. 1985) and do not require additional evaluation at this time. A small 

portion of the exhaled radioactive label from hexachloroethane is exhaled as carbon dioxide (Mitoma et al. 

1985). A more thorough investigation of the other hexachloroethane metabolites removed from the body 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 94 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS
 

in exhaled air would be useful, along with quantification of biliary excretion and identification of the 

biliary metabolites. 

Comparative Toxicokinetics. There are differences in the effects of hexachloroethane on different 

species and between sexes. Male rats are particularly susceptible to kidney damage following 

hexachloroethane exposure because of the binding of hexachloroethane to α2μ-globulin (NTP 1989). 

However, nephrotoxicity is also seen in female rats and in mice and rabbits (Gorzinski et al. 1985; NTP 

1977, 1989; Weeks et al. 1979) and should be examined in greater detail to identify the mechanisms for 

the lesions observed. Additional information on hepatic lesions in species other than the rat and mouse 

would be useful in evaluating the risk to humans for both noncarcinogenic and carcinogenic effects from 

hexachloroethane exposure. 

An increased risk of respiratory infections was seen in rats exposed to 260 ppm hexachloroethane for 

6 weeks (Weeks et al. 1979). A similar occurrence was not noted in dogs or guinea pigs. Additional 

information on the susceptibility of species other than the rat to similar infections would be useful in 

determining the significance of this observation to human health. Comparative studies of the infection 

incidence should await elucidation of the mechanism for this effect. 

Dogs were more susceptible to neurotoxicity from hexachloroethane vapors than rats, and both species 

were more sensitive than guinea pigs and quail (Weeks et al. 1979). Pregnant rats were more sensitive to 

tremors than nonpregnant rats (Weeks et al. 1979). Once the mechanism of neurotoxicity has been 

determined, the advisability of examining differences in species response can be evaluated. 

Methods for Reducing Toxic Effects. There are no compound-specific methods for reducing the 

toxic effects of hexachloroethane. The mitigation procedures suggested (Bronstein and Currance 1988; 

Stutz and Ulin 1992) are applicable to exposure to volatile chlorinated hydrocarbons as a class and are not 

specific for hexachloroethane. 

Neither the mechanism of absorption nor the mechanism of distribution for hexachloroethane has been 

established. There are indications that free radical reactions may be responsible for some of the toxic 

effects of hexachloroethane in the liver (Town and Leibman 1984), but the data are not conclusive. When 

additional data on absorption, distribution and mechanism are available, compound-specific studies on 

methods for mitigation of toxic effects can be designed. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 95 

2. HEALTH EFFECTS 

2.10.3 On-going Studies 

No on-going studies of the toxicity of hexachloroethane were identified. 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 97 

3. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL INFORMATION 

3.1 CHEMICAL IDENTITY 

Table 3-l lists common synonyms, trade names, and other pertinent identification information for 

hexachloroethane. 

3.2 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

Table 3-2 lists important physical and chemical properties of hexachloroethane. 



HEXACHLOROETHANE 101 

4. PRODUCTION, IMPORT, USE, AND DISPOSAL 

4.1 PRODUCTION 

Hexachloroethane is usually produced commercially by the chlorination of tetrachloroethylene in the 

presence of ferric chloride at l00-140°C. It may also be obtained as a co-product in the production of 

tetrachloroethylene by pyrolysis of carbon tetrachloride at 800-900°C or by passing a mixture of ethylene 

and chlorine over charcoal at 300-350°C. Small amounts of high purity hexachloroethane may be 

prepared by the action of chlorine on barium carbide (Dacre et al. 1979; Gordon et al. 1991; IARC 1979; 

Santodonato et al. 1985). 

Hexachloroethane is not currently produced for commercial distribution in the United States. It is a 

by-product in the industrial chlorination of saturated and unsaturated C, hydrocarbons by several U.S. 

companies, including Dow Chemical, PPG Industries, and Occidental Petroleum Corporation. The 

product may be used captively in-house or recycled in feedstock to produce tetrachloroethylene or carbon 

tetrachloride. Estimates of current production volumes were not located (Gordon et al. 1991; Santodonato 

et al. 1985; TRI93 1995). 

Hexachloroethane was produced in the United States for commercial distribution from 1921 to 1967. 

Hummel Chemical Company, Inc., South Plainfield, New Jersey, and the Nease Chemical Company 

(location not provided) produced hexachloroethane at one time. In the 1970s there were’14 producers and 

distributors of hexachloroethane in the United States. The producers reported that the product was not 

distributed; it was used in-house or recycled. The distributors were importers of hexachloroethane (see 

Section 4.2). Estimated production volume of hexachloroethane in 1977 was about 2-20 million pounds 

(Gordon et al. 1991; HSDB 1995; IARC 1979; Kitchens et al. 1978; Santodonato et al. 1985; SRI 1977). 

Table 4-l lists information on U.S. companies that reported the manufacture and processingof 

hexachloroethane in 1993 (TRI93 1995). The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data should be used with 

caution since only certain types of facilities are required to report. This is not an exhaustive list. 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 103 

4. PRODUCTION, IMPORT, USE, AND DISPOSAL 

4.2 IMPORT/EXPORT 

Quantities of hexachloroethane imported into the United States increased from the 1970s to the 1980s. 

Imports were about 1.6 million pounds (730,000 kg) in 1976 (mainly from France and the United 

Kingdom), more than 2 million pounds in 1977, approximately 2.5 million pounds (1,124,000 kg) in 

1985, and approximately 4.5 million pounds in 1986. In 1978, all hexachloroethane distributed 

commercially in the United States was imported by Rhodia, Inc., Monmouth, New Jersey. Current 

information on importers and import quantities was not located (ACGIH 1991; Gordon et al. 1991; HSDB 

1995; IARC 1979; Kitchens et al. 1978; Santodonato et al. 1985). 

No data were located on export quantities, but exports are not expected, since hexachloroethane is not 

produced for commercial distribution. 

4.3 USE 

Prior to 1979, 50% of the hexachloroethane distributed was used by the military for hexachloroethane 

smoke pots and grenades, 30-40% for the manufacture of degassing pellets to force air bubbles out of 

molten ore in aluminum foundries, and 10-20% as an anthelminthic to control sheep flukes. It has also 

been used as a moth repellent, a plasticizer for cellulose esters in place of camphor, a polymer additive, a 

component of fungicidal and insecticidal formulations, in the formulation of extreme pressure lubricants, 

and in the manufacture of fire extinguishing fluids. Currently, large amounts of hexachloroethane are still 

used by the military for hexachloroethane smoke and pyrotechnic devices. Hexachloroethane is probably 

not used any longer as an anthelminthic, since approval of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for 

this use of hexachloroethane was withdrawn in 1971 (ACGIH 1991; HSDB 1995; IARC 1979; Kitchens 

et al. 1978; Santodonato et al. 1985). 

Pine Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas was reported to be the major facility manufacturing smoke and 

pyrotechnic devices containing hexachloroethane for the military (Gordon et al. 1991). It was estimated 

that between 1966 and 1977 this facility used an average of 192,802 pounds of hexachloroethane annually 

(Kitchens et al. 1978). Data on quantities of hexachloroethane currently consumed for military and 

civilian uses were not located. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 104 

4. PRODUCTION, IMPORT, USE, AND DISPOSAL 

4.4 DISPOSAL 

Hexachloroethane and waste containing hexachloroethane are classified as hazardous wastes by EPA. 

Generators of waste containing this contaminant must conform to EPA regulations for treatment, storage, 

and disposal (see Chapter 7). Rotary kiln or fluidized bed incineration methods are acceptable disposal 

methods for these wastes. Underground injection may also be used (HSDB 1995). 

According to the TRI, approximately 92,755 pounds of hexachloroethane were transferred to landfills 

and/or treatment/disposal facilities by industrial manufacturers or processors in 1993 (see Section 5.2) 

(TRI93 1995). No hexachloroethane was discharged to publicly owned treatment works (POTW), but 

1,081 pounds were disposed of by underground injection. These data do not include disposal of 

hexachloroethane-containing wastes by the military. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 105 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE 

5.1 OVERVIEW 

Hexachloroethane is an industrial chemical which is not known to occur naturally. It is not produced for 

commercial distribution in the United States, but is imported for use in military smoke and pyrotechnic 

devices and as an intermediate in the organic chemicals industry. It is released to the environment from 

these uses, primarily to the atmosphere. 

Hexachloroethane is relatively persistent in the environment. It volatilizes readily from water to the 

atmosphere, with a half-life of less than one day in some waters. Hexachloroethane may also leach 

through soil to groundwater. Neither hydrolysis nor photolysis are expected to be important removal 

processes, but hexachloroethane may be reduced in aquatic systems in the presence of specific agents. 

Bioconcentration in fish has been reported, but biomagnification through the food chain is unlikely. 

Biodegradation may contribute to hexachloroethane removal from ambient waters, but there is conflicting 

evidence regarding the significance of this fate process for hexachloroethane. 

Hexachloroethane has been detected at low (ng/m3

) levels in the atmosphere and occasionally in drinking 

water systems. It is rarely detected in surface waters or biota, and has not been reported in ambient soil, 

sediments, or commercial food products. 

Hexachloroethane has been identified in at least 45 of the 1,416 hazardous waste sites that have been 

proposed for inclusion on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL) (HazDat 1995). However, the number 

of sites evaluated for hexachloroethane is not known. The frequency of these sites within the United 

States can be seen in Figure 5-l. 

5.2 RELEASES TO THE ENVIRONMENT 

Hexachloroethane is not known to occur naturally (IARC 1979). Most of the hexachloroethane entering 

environmental media is from releases during manufacture and use of the compound in smoke-producing 

and pyrotechnic devices and as an intermediate in the production of several other products (Gordon et al. 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 107 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE 

1991). Treatment and disposal of hexachloroethane-containing wastes also contributes to the 

environmental concentrations of this chemical. 

Recent data reported to the TRI indicate that environmental releases of hexachloroethane from 

manufacture and industrial processing total about 51,088 pounds (TRI93 1995). However, these data do 

not include releases from the manufacture and use of military smoke and pyrotechnic devices, since 

federal facilities are not required to report releases to the TRI. 

5.2.1 Air 

The major sources of hexachloroethane releases to air are from its production and use in the organic 

chemical industry. As shown in Table 5-1, an estimated total of 49,716 pounds of hexachloroethane, 

amounting to about 97% of the total industrial environmental release, was discharged to the air from 

manufacturing and processing facilities in the United States in 1993 (TRI93 1995). The TRI data should 

be used with caution since only certain types of facilities are required to report. This is not an exhaustive 

list. 

Releases may also occur from the use of this chemical in smoke and pyrotechnic devices. 

Hexachloroethane content of the smoke devices is about 44.5-46% of the total solid material. The smoke 

device burns, producing smoke which is mainly zinc chloride, but contains some hexachloroethane. It was 

estimated that about 0.3-5% of the mass of the reagents in the device is released to air as hexachloroethane 

in the smoke, assuming a 70% burn efficiency (Katz et al. 1980; Novak et al. 1987). On this basis, it was 

estimated that during 1982-1984, a maximum of about 6,683 kg (14,700 pounds) of hexachloroethane 

was released to the atmosphere at Fort Irwin, California, a major military training facility (Novak et al. 

1987). Hexachloroethane in smoke (aerosol) was measured in a wind tunnel at concentrations ranging 

from 0.64-1.26 mg/m3

 (average 0.89 mg/m3) (Cataldo et al. 1989). 

Hexachloroethane may also be released to air during combustion and incineration of chlorinated wastes, 

from hazardous waste sites, and in small amounts during chlorination of sewage effluent prior to discharge 

and chlorination of raw water during drinking water treatment (Gordon et al. 1991; Howard 1989). 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 109 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE 

5.2.2 Water 

Releases of hexachloroethane to water may occur during production, processing, and disposal of the 

chemical. In the past, reported concentrations of hexachloroethane in manufacturing effluents and waste 

waters from industrial and POTW facilities ranged from 0.9 to 1,405.6 μg/L (Gordon et al. 1991). It is 

estimated that prior to 1979, about 117,000 gallons (443,000 liters) of waste water per day were released 

from the Pine Bluff Arsenal (Gordon et al. 1991). The average hexachloroethane concentration in the 

waste water was 168 mg/L, resulting in the release of about 165 pounds of hexachloroethane per day. 

Following installation of pollution abatement devices at the arsenal in 1979, hexachloroethane was not 

detected in several samples of waste water from the facility. 

Hexachloroethane was detectable in 2.0% of 1,253 effluent samples reported in the storage and retrieval 

(STORET) database maintained by EPA from 1980 to 1982 (Staples et al. 1985). The median 

concentration for all samples, including nondetects, was <10 μg/L. 

As shown in Table 5-1, an estimated total of 291 pounds of hexachloroethane, amounting to about 0.6% of 

the total industrial environmental release, was discharged to surface water from manufacturing and 

processing facilities in the United States in 1993 (TRI93 1995). An additional 1,081 pounds (2% of the 

total) was discharged to underground injection. The TRI data should be used with caution since only 

certain types of facilities are required to report. This is not an exhaustive list. 

5.2.3 Soil 

Hexachloroethane may be released to soil by industrial sources and from hazardous waste sites at which 

this chemical has been detected. It may be also be released to soil from the use of hexachloroethane 

smoke and pyrotechnic devices via deposition of airborne particulates (see Section 5.3.1) (Cataldo et al. 

1989) or ejection of partially reacted compounds from the canister by the force of combustion (Schaeffer 

et al. 1988). Average hexachloroethane concentrations in deposited residues from several smoke pots, 

using different bum configurations, ranged from 1,900 to 54,700 mg/kg (Schaeffer et al. 1988). The 

authors estimated that the soil load of hexachloroethane from a single upright canister (smoke pot) could 

reach 6,054 mg hexachloroethane per kg soil in a semicircular area with a 5 m radius downwind of the 

burn. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 110 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE
 

As shown in Table 5-1, no hexachloroethane was discharged to land from manufacturing and processing 

facilities in the United States in 1993 (TRI93 1995). The TRI data should be used with caution since only 

certain types of facilities are required to report. This is not an exhaustive list. 

5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE 

5.3.1 Transport and Partitioning 

Hexachloroethane released to water or soil may volatilize into air or adsorb onto soil and sediments. 

Volatilization appears to be the major removal mechanism for hexachloroethane in surface waters 

(Howard 1989). The volatilization rate from aquatic systems depends on specific conditions, including 

adsorption to sediments, temperature, agitation, and air flow rate. Volatilization is expected to be rapid 

from turbulent shallow water, with a half-life of about 70 hours in a 2 m deep water body (Spanggord 

et al. 1985). A volatilization half-life of 15 hours for hexachloroethane in a model river 1 m deep, flowing 

1 m/set with a wind speed of 3 m/sec was calculated (Howard 1989). Measured half-lives of 40.7 and 

45 minutes for hexachloroethane volatilization from dilute solutions at 25°C in a beaker 6.5 cm deep, 

stirred at 200 rpm, were reported (Dilling 1977; Dilling et al. 1975). Removal of 90% of the 

hexachloroethane required more than 120 minutes (Dilling et al. 1975). The relationship of these 

laboratory data to volatilization rates from natural waters is not clear (Callahan et al. 1979). 

Atmospheric transport of hexachloroethane may occur, based on the stability of the compound in air 

(Class and Ballschmitter 1986; Singh et al. 1979). Hexachloroethane is expected to diffuse slowly into the 

stratosphere, with a half-life of about 30 years (Howard 1989). Deposition of hexachloroethane from air 

to water, plants, and soil has been reported (Cataldo et al. 1989). 

Based on calculated soil adsorption factors (log KOC of 2.24, 2.98, and 4.3), hexachloroethane is expected 

to have medium to low mobility in soil (Howard 1989). Thus, leaching to groundwater could occur. 

Results of studies with low organic carbon (0.02%) soil material indicate that sorption to aquifer materials 

retards hexachloroethane migration in groundwater (Curtis et al. 1986). In aquatic environments, 

moderate to slight adsorption to suspended solids and partitioning to sediments is likely (Howard 1989). 

Bioconcentration of hexachloroethane is expected to occur to a moderate degree. A measured 

bioconcentration factor (BCF) of 139 was reported in bluegills (EPA 1980a). After adjustment of the BCF 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 111 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE
 

for lipid content, the weighted average BCF calculated for the edible portion of freshwater and estuarine 

aquatic organisms was 86.9. However, hexachloroethane is rapidly metabolized in bluegill, with an 

estimated half-life of <l day (Howard 1989). The measured BCFs in rainbow trout were 510 and 1,200 at 

low (0.32 ng/L) and high (7.1 ng/L) exposure levels, respectively (Oliver and Niimi 1983). A BCF of 245 

was calculated for hexachloroethane, based on the octanol water partition coefficient (Kow) and the molar 

solubility in octanol (Banerjee and Baughman 1991). Since hexachloroethane is rarely detected in 

ambient waters (see Section 5.4.2) and appears to be rapidly metabolized, significant bioaccumulation or 

biomagnification in the food chain is not expected. 

5.3.2 Transformation and Degradation 

5.3.2.1 Air 

Hexachloroethane is quite stable in air. It is not expected to react with hydroxyl radicals or ozone in the 

atmosphere or to photodegrade in the troposphere (Callahan et al. 1979; Howard 1989). Degradation by 

photolysis may occur in the stratosphere. 

5.3.2.2 Water 

Hexachloroethane is also relatively resistant to degradation in the aquatic environment. No hydrolysis of 

hexachloroethane in water was observed after 11 days at 85°C at 3 pH levels (3,7, and 11) (Ellington 

et al. 1987). However, hexachloroethane may be reduced in aquatic systems in the presence of sulfide and 

ferrous ions (Kriegman-King and Reinhard 1991). The transformation rate of hexachloroethane to 

tetrachloroethylene under simulated groundwater conditions at 50°C was evaluated without ferrous or 

sulfide ions, with minerals (biotite and vermiculite) providing ferrous ions, and with minerals and sulfide 

ions. Reported half-lives for hexachloroethane were 365 days for hexachloroethane alone, 57-190 days 

with minerals present, and 0.45-0.65 days in the presence of both minerals and sulfide. 

Photolysis of hexachloroethane in water has been reported, but degradation to carbon dioxide occurred at a 

temperature of 90-95°C (Knoevenagel and Himmelreich 1976). The relevance of these results to ambient 

conditions are uncertain. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 112 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE
 

Biodegradation may be an important removal process in ambient waters, but there is conflicting evidence 

regarding the significance of this fate process for hexachloroethane. In the presence of a mixed bacterial 

culture, hexachloroethane had no effect on the growth rate of the culture, was recovered quantitatively 

after incubation with the culture for 8 days, and hexachloroethane could not be used as a sole source of 

carbon after incubation for more than 6 weeks (Mrsny et al. 1978). The authors concluded that 

hexachloroethane was apparently not toxic to or metabolized by bacteria, and used hexachloroethane as an 

internal standard to monitor the bacterial degradation of crude oil. Results reported in another 

biodegradation screening study indicated that <30% degradation of hexachloroethane occurred after a 

2-week incubation period in activated sludge under aerobic conditions (Howard 1989). However, other 

studies indicate that considerable biodegradation of hexachloroethane may occur. In a 7-day 

staticscreening- flask test at 25°C under aerobic conditions, 100% loss of hexachloroethane was reported, 

with no loss attributable to volatilization (Tabak et al. 1981). Other studies reported significant losses (38% 

loss in sterile control) resulting from volatilization under aerobic conditions (Spanggord et al. 1985). 

Under anaerobic conditions, loss of 90% of hexachloroethane was reported from pond water in 18 days, 

while no loss from sterile pond water was observed (Spanggord et al. 1985). 

A half-life of about 40 days was reported for hexachloroethane in an unconfined sand aquifer (Criddle 

et al. 1986). Laboratory studies with wastewater microflora cultures and aquifer material provided 

evidence for microbial reduction of hexachloroethane to tetrachloroethylene under aerobic conditions in 

this aquifer system (Criddle et al. 1986). In anaerobic groundwater, hexachloroethane reduction to 

pentachloroethane and tetrachloroethylene was found to occur only when the water was not poisoned with 

mercury chloride (Roberts et al. 1994). Pentachloroethane reduction to tetrachloroethylene occurred at a 

similar rate in both poisoned and unpoisoned water. From these results, Roberts et al. (1994) suggested 

that the reduction of hexachloroethane to tetrachloroethylene occurred via pentachloroethane. The first 

step, the production of pentachloroethane, was microbially mediated, while the production of 

tetrachloroethylene from pentachloroethane was an abiotic process. 

5.3.2.3 Sedimentand Soil 

Hexachloroethane may biodegrade in soil, but abiotic degradation processes are not expected to be 

significant. Hexachloroethane is biotransformed in soil under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions, but 

proceeds more rapidly in anaerobic soils (Spanggord et al. 1985). Loss of 99% of hexachloroethane was 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 113 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE 

reported after 4 days of incubation anaerobically and after 4 weeks under aerobic conditions. 

Volatilization contributed to aerobic losses. 

5.4 LEVELS MONITORED OR ESTIMATED IN THE ENVIRONMENT 

5.4.1 Air 

Since hexachloroethane is quite stable in air (see Section 5.3.2.1), it may tend to accumulate in the 

atmosphere. Based on limited data, typical background concentrations in the northern hemisphere were 

reported to range from 5 to 7 ppt (48-68 ng/m3

) (Singh et al. 1979). Data reported on the National 

Ambient Volatile Organic Compounds Database indicate that hexachloroethane was detected at an average 

concentration of 0.001 ppb (9.7 ng/m3

) in ambient air in the United States, based on 69 measurements 

(Shah and Heyerdahl 1988). The detected concentrations were in remote and rural areas (average 3.2 ppt 

(31 ng/m3

)), rather than in urban and industrial locations (Howard 1989; Shah and Heyerdahl 1988). 

Hexachloroethane was detected in the atmosphere in Portland, Oregon at concentrations ranging from 

2.8 to 4.1 ng/m3

 (Ligocki et al. 1985) and in air over the Atlantic Ocean at an average concentration of 

0.5 ppt (4.8 ng/m3

) in the northern hemisphere and 0.34 ppt (3.3 ng/m3) in the southern hemisphere (Class 

and Ballschmiter 1986). 

5.4.2 Water 

Hexachloroethane is rarely detected in ambient water. Data reported in the STORET database indicate 

that the chemical was detectable in only 1 of 882 (0.1%) ambient water samples (Staples et al. 1985). The 

median concentration for all samples was <l0 μg/L. Hexachloroethane was detected in Lake Ontario 

water, but not in Lake Erie (International Joint Commission 1983). The concentration of 

hexachloroethane in Lake Ontario was reported at 0.02 ng/L (Oliver and Niimi 1983). It was also 

identified in leachate from a hazardous waste site in Niagara Falls, New York (Hauser and Bromberg 

1982). Hexachloroethane was not detected in 86 samples of urban runoff from 15 cities analyzed for the 

National Urban Runoff Program (Cole et al. 1984). 

Hexachloroethane has occasionally been reported in drinking water in the United States. 

Hexachloroethane was detected in drinking water from Cincinnati, Ohio and three water supplies in the 

New Orleans area at concentrations ranging from 0.03 to 4.3 μg/L (Keith et al. 1976); in the municipal 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 114 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE
 

water supply in Evansville, Indiana (Kleopfer and Fairless 1972); and in 4 of 16 samples of Philadelphia 

drinking water (Suffet et al. 1980). It was also reported in 19 of 31 samples from private wells within 

1 mile of a toxic waste dump in Hardeman County, Tennessee, at a median concentration of 0.26 μg/L 

(Clark et al. 1982). 

5.4.3 Sediment and Soil 

Data regarding hexachloroethane concentrations in soil or sediments are sparse. Hexachloroethane was 

not detectable in any of 356 sediment analyses reported in the STORET database (Staples et al. 1985). 

The median detection limit was 500 μkg. 

5.4.4 Other Environmental Media 

Hexachloroethane has not generally been reported in foods. Hexachloroethane was not detected in 

116 fish samples reported in the STORET database (Staples et al. 1985), nor was it detected in 28 fish 

samples from 14 Lake Michigan tributaries (Camanzo et al. 1987). However, hexachloroethane was 

detected in 10 of 10 Lake Ontario rainbow trout at an average concentration of 0.03 ng/g (Oliver and 

Niimi 1983). No information was located regarding hexachloroethane in other foods. 

5.5 GENERAL POPULATION AND OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE 

Exposure of the general population to hexachloroethane is expected to be low. Analysis of blood from 

13 individuals, using a method with a detection limit of 0.028 ppb, did not identify hexachloroethane in 

any sample (Ashley et al. 1992). The chemical has not been frequently detected in any environmental 

medium. Ambient air is the most likely source of hexachloroethane for exposed individuals in the general 

population (Howard 1989). Due to the stability of hexachloroethane (see Section 5.3.2.1), it may remain 

in the atmosphere for extended periods. 

Workers in industrial facilities manufacturing or using hexachloroethane as an intermediate in the 

manufacture of other products may be exposed to the chemical by inhalation or dermal absorption. In 

addition, military or civilian personnel working with smoke or pyrotechnic devices may be exposed. 

Based on information collected for the National Occupational Exposure Survey, the National Institute for 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 115 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE 

Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) estimates that 8,515 workers were potentially exposed to 

hexachloroethane (NOES 1991). 

5.6 POPULATIONS WITH POTENTIALLY HIGH EXPOSURES 

Residents or workers near hazardous waste sites containing hexachloroetbane wastes or military training 

areas using smoke or pyrotechnic devices containing hexachloroethane may be exposed to higher than 

ambient levels. 

5.7 ADEQUACY OF THE DATABASE 

Section 104(i)(5) of CERCLA, as amended, directs the Administrator of ATSDR (in consultation with the 

Administrator of EPA and agencies and programs of the Public Health Service) to assess whether adequate 

information on the health effects of hexachloroethane is available. Where adequate information is not 

available, ATSDR, in conjunction with the NTP, is required to assure the initiation of a program of 

research designed to determine the health effects (and techniques for developing methods to determine 

such health effects) of hexachloroethane. 

The following categories of possible data needs have been identified by a joint team of scientists from 

ATSDR, NTP, and EPA. They are defined as substance-specific informational needs that if met would 

reduce the uncertainties of human health assessment. This definition should not be interpreted to mean 

that all data needs discussed in this section must be filled. In the future, the identified data needs will be 

evaluated and prioritized, and a substance-specific research agenda will be proposed. 

5.7.1 Identification of Data Needs 

Physical and Chemical Properties. The physical and chemical properties of hexachloroethane are 

sufficiently wellcharacterized to allow estimation of its environmental fate (see Table 3-2) (EPA 1991a; 

Spanggord et al. 1985; Verschueren 1983; Weast 1986). On this basis, it does not appear that further 

research in this area is required at this time. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 116 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE 

Production, Import/Export, Use, Release, and Disposal. Hexachloroethane is not manufactured 

for commercial distribution in the United States (Gordon et al. 1991; IARC 1979; Santodonato et al. 

1985). However, current production as a by-product and import information are not available. Current 

uses of this chemical and the amounts consumed by each use, including military uses, were not located. 

This information would be helpful in assessing potential exposure to workers and the general population. 

The amount of the chemical disposed of by industrial facilities was reported to EPA (TRI93 1995), but 

information on quantities of hexachloroethane-containing wastes disposed of by military facilities was not 

located. Rotary kiln or fluidized bed incineration are acceptable methods for disposal of waste containing 

hexachloroethane (HSDB 1995). 

According to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986,42 U.S.C. Section 

11023, industries are required to submit substance release and off-site transfer information to the EPA. 

The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), which contains this information for 1993, became available in 1995. 

This database is updated yearly and should provide a list of industrial production facilities and emissions. 

Environmental Fate. The environmental fate of hexachloroethane has been characterized (Gordon 

et al. 1991; Howard 1989; Spanggord et al. 1985). The chemical is relatively unreactive and degrades 

slowly in environmental media. In groundwater the half-life of hexachloroethane may range from 

365 days to less than a day when minerals and sulfide are present (Kriegman-King and Reinhard 1991). 

Because hexachloroethane appears to remain in the atmosphere for long periods (half-life not available) 

and may migrate to groundwater (Callahan et al. 1979; Curtis et al. 1986; Howard 1989), additional 

studies of adsorption and intermediate partitioning might be useful to assess the potential for emission and 

transport of this chemical from hazardous waste sites. 

Bioavailability from Environmental Media. No data are available on the absorption of 

hexachloroethane following inhalation or dermal contact. However, systemic toxicity (though minimal) 

was observed and suggests that some absorption can occur by these routes (Weeks et al. 1979). Data from 

animal studies that used gavage in oil for exposure to hexachloroethane indicate that the compound can 

also be absorbed following oral exposure (Fowler 1969b; Mitoma et al. 1985). No data were located 

regarding the absorption of hexachloroethane from air, water, soil, or plant material. Hexachloroethane 

exists in the air almost entirely as a vapor and there are no known processes that would impair its 

bioavailability from this medium. Since there is some adsorption of hexachloroethane to suspended solids 

and sediments in water, bioavailability from water may be limited (Howard 1989). On the other hand, 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 117 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE
 

hexachloroethane is not expected to adsorb to soil significantly (Howard 1989). Additional studies would 

be useful to determine the extent of bioavailability of hexachloroethane from contaminated air and 

drinking water near hazardous waste sites. 

Food Chain Bioaccumulation. Hexachloroethane in water may bioconcentrate in aquatic organisms 

to a moderate degree (Howard 1989), with a BCF of 139 reported in bluegills (EPA 1980a). Due to its 

rapid metabolism (Howard 1989) and the low incidence of hexachloroethane in ambient waters (Staples et 

al. 1985), food chain bioaccumulation is unlikely. Additional research in this area does not appear to be 

necessary at this time. 

Exposure Levels in Environmental Media. Hexachloroethane has been detected in smoke 

generated from smoke-producing devices during military training exercises (Katz et al. 1980; Novak et al. 

1987). In the Northern hemisphere and the United States, hexachloroethane has been detected in air at 

concentrations in the parts per trillion (Howard 1989; Ligocki et al. 1985; Shah and Heyerdahl l988; 

Singh et al. 1979). In water, concentrations in the parts per billion are occasionally detected (Cole et al. 

1984; International Joint Commission 1983; Staples et al. 1985). Hexachloroethane was not found in any 

of 356 sediment samples (Staples et al. 1985). Additional information regarding hexachloroethane in soil 

or sediments was not available. Since this chemical is not prevalent in the environment, monitoring of 

ambient environmental media does not appear to be required at this time. However, monitoring of 

workplace air, and environmental media at hazardous waste sites and military training areas at which 

hexachloroethane has been detected would help to determine potential sources of exposure. 

Reliable monitoring data for the levels of hexachloroethane in contaminated media at hazardous waste 

sites are needed so that the information obtained on levels of hexachloroethane in the environment can be 

used in combination with the known body burden of hexachloroethane to assess the potential risk of 

adverse health effects in populations living in the vicinity of hazardous waste sites. 

Exposure Levels in Humans. Hexachloroethane has not been detected in human tissuesas a result of 

exposure to this chemical from environmental media. Biological monitoring data were not located for 

populations surrounding hazardous waste sites. Hexachloroethane has been detected in the plasma of 

workers at concentrations of 7.3 ± 6 μg/L, despite the use of protective equipment including disposable 

overalls and compressed-air-fed visors or full-facepiece masks with filters (Selden et al. 1994). Because of 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 118 

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE
 

protective equipment, exposure concentrations could not be related to plasma levels of hexachloroethane. 

This information is necessary for assessing the need to conduct health studies on these populations. 

Exposure Registries. No exposure registries for hexachloroethane were located. This substance is not 

currently one of the compounds for which a subregistry has been established in the National Exposure 

Registry. The substance will be considered in the future when chemical selection is made for subregistries 

to be established. The information that is amassed in the National Exposure Registry facilitates the 

epidemiological research needed to assess adverse health outcomes that may be related to exposure to this 

substance. 

5.7.2 On-going Studies 

No on-going studies regarding human exposure were located. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 119 

6. ANALYTICAL METHODS
 

The purpose of this chapter is to describe the analytical methods that are available for detecting, and/or 

measuring, and/or monitoring hexachloroethane, its metabolites, and other biomarkers of exposure and 

effect to hexachloroethane. The intent is not to provide an exhaustive list of analytical methods. Rather, 

the intention is to identify well-established methods that are used as the standard methods of analysis. 

Many of the analytical methods used for environmental samples are the methods approved by federal 

agencies and organizations such as EPA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 

(NIOSH). Other methods presented in this chapter are those that are approved by groups such as the 

Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) and the American Public Health Association 

(APHA). Additionally, analytical methods are included that modify previously used methods to obtain 

lower detection limits, and/or to improve accuracy and precision. 

6.1 BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS 

Analytical methods are available for measuring hexachloroethane in blood, urine, feces, liver, kidney, and 

adipose tissues, and breath (Ashley et al. 1992; Fowler 1969a; Nolan and Karbowski 1978; Pellizzari et al. 

1985a, 1985b). Gas chromatography (GC) is the usual method for detecting and measuring 

hexachloroethane in biological materials (Pellizzari et al. 1985a, 1985b). The chromatograph separates 

complex mixtures of organics and allows individual compounds to be identified and quantified by a 

detector. An electron capture detector (ECD) is often used to identify hexachloroethane (Fowler 1969b; 

Nolan and Karbowski 1978). A mass spectrometer (MS) coupled to the GC column provides unequivocal 

identification. 

Blood samples for analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including hexachloroethane should be 

collected into containers from which VOC contamination has been reduced (Ashley et al. 1992). 

Potassium oxalate/sodium fluoride is the recommended anti-coagulant. Blood samples should be placed 

on ice or refrigerated shortly after collection, and Ashley et al. (1992) recommend that analysis for VOCs 

be completed within 14 days. 

Hexachloroethane can be detected in tissues at levels as low as 0.001 μg/g (Nolan and Karbowski 1978) 

and recoveries range from 50 to 130%. Prior to analysis, hexachloroethane must be separated from the 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 120 

6. ANALYTICAL METHODS
 

biological sample matrix and prepared for introduction into the analytical instrument. Separation may be 

effected by purging with an inert gas (helium), and trapping on an adsorbent cartridge (Tenax GC®, 

followed by thermal desorption directly to the GC column (Pellizzari et al. 1985a, 1985b). Alternatively, 

hexachloroethane may be extracted from the matrix with hexane (Fowler 1969b; Nolan and Karbowski 

1978). Details of selected analytical methods for hexachloroethane in biological samples are summarized 

in Table 6-l. 

6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES 

Determination of hexachloroethane in air, water, soil, wastes, and food is usually by GC analysis (APHA 

1992; EPA 1982, 1990a, 1990b, 1990c; NIOSH 1994; Yurawecz and Puma 1986). Several representative 

methods for quantifying hexachloroethane in each of these media are summarized in Table 6-2. NIOSH 

(1994) has developed an approved method for analysis of hexachloroethane in air and EPA has developed 

approved methods for analysis of hexachloroethane in drinking water (EPA 1989, 1991c), 

water/wastewater (EPA 1982, 1990c), and soil/sediment/waste (EPA 1990a, 1990b) samples. The APHA 

(1992) method is equivalent to an EPA approved method. 

Separation of hexachloroethane from environmental samples is usually by extraction with an organic 

solvent such as methylene chloride or acetonitrile (EPA 1982,1990a, 1990b, 1990c; Yurawecz and Puma 

1986). A supercritical fluid extraction protocol has been developed for extraction of organics from soils 

and sediments (Lopez-Avila et al. 1991), which may be applicable to hexachloroethane. Air samples are 

drawn through a solid sorbent material and desorbed with carbon disulfide (NIOSH 1994). Cleanup 

procedures, with Florisil, for example, may be required for some environmental matrices (Yurawecz and 

Puma 1986). In addition, co-eluting compounds may be eliminated from extracts of drinking water by 

high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) prior to GC/MS analysis, thus improving the quality of 

analytical results (Thruston 1978). 

The electron capture detector (ECD) is most frequently used to identify hexachloroethane. A flame 

ionization detector (FID) may also be used (NIOSH 1994). When unequivocal identification is required, 

an MS coupled to the GC column may be employed. 




HEXACHLOROETHANE 125 

6. ANALYTICAL METHODS 

6.3 ADEQUACY OF THE DATABASE 

Section 104(I)(5) of CERCLA, as amended, directs the Administrator of ATSDR (in consultation with the 

Administrator of EPA and agencies and programs of the Public Health Service) to assess whether adequate 

information on the health effects of hexachloroethane is available. Where adequate information is not 

available, ATSDR, in conjunction with the NTP, is required to assure the initiation of a program of 

research designed to determine the health effects (and techniques for developing methods to determine 

such health effects) of hexachloroethane. 

The following categories of possible data needs have been identified by a joint team of scientists from 

ATSDR, NTP, and EPA. They are defined as substance-specific informational needs that if met would 

reduce the uncertainties of human health assessment. This definition should not be interpreted to mean 

that all data needs discussed in this section must be filled. In the future, the identified data needs will be 

evaluated and prioritized, and a substance-specific research agenda will be proposed. 

6.3.1 Identification of Data Needs 

Methods for Determining Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect The presence of 

hexachloroethane in exhaled air, blood, and tissues can be determined using GC/MS (Ashley et al. 1992; 

Pellizzari et al. 1985a, 1985b). Separation by GC with electron capture detection and liquid 

chromatography have also been used to identify hexachloroethane in blood, tissues, urine, and/or fecal 

matter (Fowler 1969b; Gorzinski et al. 1985; Jondorf et al. 1957; Mitoma et al. 1985; Nolan and 

Karbowski 1978). These methods are sufficiently sensitive and selective to measure low levels of 

hexachloroethane and levels that may result in adverse effects. Since the metabolites of hexachloroethane 

are themselves xenobiotic compounds or are the metabolites of other xenobiotics, the parent compound 

serves as the only true biomarker of exposure. Endogenous production of hexachloroethane following 

carbon tetrachloride exposure necessitates the need for an exposure history even when hexachloroethane is 

detected in body tissues or fluids (Fowler 1969a). Additional studies correlating levels of 

hexachloroethane in various biological media with environmental exposures would be useful. 

No data were located regarding methods that identify biomarkers of hexachloroethane’s toxic effects. 

Although hexachloroethane-induced hepatic damage can cause increases in serum levels of liver enzymes, 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 126 

6. ANALYTICAL METHODS
 

these enzyme changes are not specific to hexachloroethane exposure (Fowler 1969b; Weeks et al. 1979). 

In male rats, exposure to hexachloroethane is associated with the presence of granular and cellular casts in 

the urine (NTP et al. 1989). These effects are related to the formation of hyaline droplets in the male rat 

kidney. The formation of hyaline droplets is unique in male rats and is not indicative of the toxic effect of 

hexachloroethane. Therefore, they are not useful as biomarkers of effect. There is a need to identify 

compound-specific biomarkers for the effects of hexachloroethane exposure at this time. 

Methods for Determining Parent Compounds and Degradation Products in Environmental 

Media. Analytical methods are available to detect and quantify hexachloroethane in air, water, soil, 

wastes, and food (APHA 1992; EPA 1982,1990a, 1990b, 1990c; NIOSH 1994; Yurawecz and Puma 

1986). Air is the medium of most concern for human exposure to this chemical. Exposure may also occur 

from water, especially in the vicinity of hazardous waste sites or industrial sources. The existing analytical 

methods can provide determinations for hexachloroethane at levels sufficiently low to meet regulatory 

requirements and evaluate health effects (EPA 1982, 1990a, 1990b, 1990c; NIOSH 1994). 

Methods are also available to measure degradation products of hexachloroethane in environmental 

samples, but these products (e.g., tetrachloroethylene) are released to the environment from many other 

sources and are therefore not useful determinants of the environmental impact of this chemical. 

6.3.2 On-going Studies 

The Environmental Health Laboratory Sciences Division of the National Center for Environmental Health, 

Centers for Disease Control, is developing methods for the analysis of hexachloroethane and other volatile 

organic compounds in blood. These methods use purge and trap methodology, high resolution gas 

chromatography, and magnetic sector mass spectrometry which gives detection limits in the low parts per 

trillion (ppt) range. 

On-going studies to i,mprove analytical methods for hexachloroethane and related compounds include the 

EPA “Master Analytical Scheme” being developed for organic compounds in water (Michael et al. 1988) 

and the research in supercritical fluid extraction (Lopez-Avila et al. 1991; Wieboldt et al. 1988). Research 

continues on improving extraction, concentration, and elution techniques, and detection devices 

(Eichelberger et al. 1983,1990; Ho et al. 1993; Pankow and Rosen 1988; Valkenburg and Munslow 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 127 

6. ANALYTICAL METHODS 

1989). These improvements are designed to overcome problems with sample preparation and increase 

sensitivity and reliability of the analyses. 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 129 

7. REGULATIONS AND ADVISORIES
 

Because of its potential to cause adverse health effects in exposed people, numerous regulations, and 

advisories have been established for hexachloroethane by various international, national, and state 

agencies. Major regulations and advisories pertaining to hexachloroethane are summarized in Table 7-l. 

ATSDR has calculated an MRL of 6 ppm for acute inhalation exposure to hexachloroethane based on a 

NOAEL of 48 ppm from a study in pregnant rats. The critical effect was tremors, which occurred during 

an 11 -day exposure period at a LOAEL of 260 ppm (Weeks et al. 1979). The intermediate inhalation 

MRL of 6 ppm was also calculated from a NOAEL of 48 ppm observed in a 6-week study in which 

tremors were observed in rats exposed intermittently at 260 ppm (Weeks et al. 1979). 

An MRL of 1 mg/kg/day has been calculated for acute oral exposure to hexachloroethane based on a 

NOAEL of 100 mg/kg/day from a study in male rabbits (Weeks et al. 1979). Hepatic necrosis and 

degeneration were observed in the treated animals at doses of 320 and 1,000 mg/kg/day. 

An intermediate-duration MRL of 0.01 mg/kg/day has been calculated for oral exposure to 

hexachloroethane in the diet based on a NOAEL of 1 mg/kg/day from a study in male and female rats 

(Gorzinski et al. 1985). Enlargement of the hepatocytes was seen in male rats at doses of 15 and 

62 mg/kg/day. Relative liver weights were increased in males and females at the 62 mg/kg/day dose. 

EPA has derived a chronic oral RfD of 0.001 mg/kg/day for hexachloroethane (IRIS 1995). This value is 

based on a NOAEL of 1 mg/kg/day for atrophy and degeneration of the renal tubules in rats exposed for 

16 weeks (Gorzinski et al. 1985). The NOAEL was divided by an uncertainty factor of 1,000 to account 

for interspecies extrapolation, human variability, and the use of a subchronic study. EPA places medium 

confidence in this RfD (IRIS 1995). 



____________________ 

HEXACHLOROETHANE 133 

8. REFERENCES
 

Abrams EF, Derkics D, Fong CV, et al. 1975. Identification of organic compounds in effluents from 

industrial sources. Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service PB-241 641. 

*ACGIH. 1991. Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices. 6th ed. 

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, OH. 

*ACGIH. 1993. Threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical agents and biological 

exposure indices for 1992 to 1993. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, 

Cincinnati, OH. 

*Amoore JE, Hautala E. 1983. Odor as an aid to chemical safety: odor thresholds compared with 

threshold limit values and volatilites for 214 industrial chemicals in air and water dilution. J Appl Toxicol 

3:272-290. 

*APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18th ed. Washington, 

DC: American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment 

Federation, 6-77-6-89. 

Archer WL. 1979 Other chloroethanes. In: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of chemical technology. 3rd Ed. 

In: John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 5:722-742. 

Ardran GM. 1964. Phosgene poisoning. Br Med J February 8:375. 

Ashby J, Tennant RW. 1990. Definitive relationships among chemical structure, carcinogenicity and 

mutagenicity for 301 chemicals tested by the U.S. NTP. Mutat Res 257:229-306. 

*Ashley DL, Bonin MA, Cardinali FL. 1992. Determining volatile organic compounds in human blood 

from a large sample population by using purge and trap gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Anal 

Chem 64:1021-1029. 

*ATSDR. 1989. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Part V. Federal Register 

54:37619-37633. 

Bakale G, McCreary RD. 1990. Response of the ke test to NCI/NTP-screened chemicals. I. Nongenotoxic 

carcinogens and genotoxic noncarcinogens. Carcinogenesis 11: 181l- 1818. 

Baker RWR. 1977. GEL filtration of phthalate esters. In: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, 

Amsterdam. 

*Banerjee S, Baughman GL. 1991. Bioconcentration factors and lipid solubility. Environ Sci Technol 

25:536-539. 

*Cited in text 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 134 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Barnes DG, Dourson M. 1988. Reference dose (RfD): Description and use in health risk assessments. 

Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 8:47l-486. 

Barrett JC, Huff J. 1991. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of chemically induced renal carcinogenesis. 

Renal Failure 13:21l-225. 

Bartlet AL. 1976. Actions of carbon tetrachloride, hexachloroethane and the products of their metabolism 

in sheep onfusciola hepatica. Br J Pharmacol58:395-400. 

Baxter RM. 1989. Reductive dehalogenation of environmental contaminants: a critical review. Water 

Pollution Reseach Journal 24:299-322. 

Bonse G, Henschler D. 1976. Chemical reactivity, biotransformation, and toxicity of polychlorinated 

aliphatic compounds. CRC Critical Reviews in Toxicology 395-409. 

*Borghoff SJ. 1993. y2u-Globulin-mediated male rat nephropathy and kidney cancer: relevance to human 

risk assessment. Chemical Industry Institute of Technology (CIIT) Activities l-8. 

*Bronstein AC, Currance PL. 1988. Emergency care for hazardous materials exposure. St. Louis, MO: 

The C.V. Mosby Company. 10: 143-144. 

*Bronzetti G, Morichetti E, Del Carratore R, et al. 1989. Tetrachloroethane, pentachloroethane, and 

hexachloroethane: genetic and biochemical studies. Teratogenesis Carcinog Mutagen 9:349-357. 

*Brown RF, Marrs TC, Rice P, et al. 1990. The histopathology of rat lung following exposure to zinc 

oxidekexachloroethane smoke or instillation with zinc chloride followed by treatment with 70% oxygen. 

Environ Health Perspect 85:81-87. 

*Budavari S, O’Neil MJ, Smith A, et al., eds. 1989. The Merck index: An encyclopedia of chemicals, 

drugs, and biologicals. 1 lth ed. Rahway, NJ: Merck and Co., Inc., 740. 

*Callahan MA, Slimak MW, Gael NW, et al. 1979. Water-related environmental fate of 129 priority 

pollutants. Vol. II. Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Planning and 

Standards, Washington, DC, by Versar Incorporated, Springfield VA. NTIS No. PB80-204381. 

*Camanzo J, Rice CP, Jude DJ, et al. 1987. Organic priority pollutants in nearshore fish from 14 Lake 

Michigan tributaries and embayments, 1983. J Great Lakes Res 13(3):296-309. 

*Cataldo DA, Ligotke MW, Bolton H, et al. 1989. Evaluate and characterize mechanisms controlling 

transport, fate and effects of army smokes in the aerosol wind tunnel. Pacific Northwest Laboratory 

ADA - 215 415 . 

Chopra NM. 1972. Breakdown of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides in tobacco smokes: A short review. 

In: Tahori AS, ed. Fate of pesticides in environment. Vol VI. 245-261. 

*Clark CS, Meyer CR, Gartside PS, et al. 1982. An environmental health survey of drinking water 

contamination by leachate from a pesticide waste dump in Hardeman County, Tennessee. Arch Environ 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 135 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Class TH, Ballschmiter K. 1986. Chemistry of organic traces in air VI: distribution of chlorinated C1 – C4 

hydrocarbons in air over the northern and southern Atlantic ocean. Chemosphere 15:413-427. 

Clode SA, Riley RA, Blowers SD, et al. 1991. Studies on the mutagenicity of a zinc 

oxide-hexachloroethane smoke. Human & Experimental Toxicology 10:49-57. 

*Cole RH, Frederick RE, Healy RP, et al. 1984. Preliminary findings of the priority pollutant monitoring 

project of the nationwide urban runoff program. J Water Pollut Control Fed 56(7)898-908. 

*Crebelli R, Benigni R, Franekic J, et al. 1988. Induction of chromosome malsegregation by halogenated 

organic solvents in Aspergillue nidulans: unspecific or specific mechanism? Mutat Res 201:401-411. 

*Griddle CS, McCarty PL, Elliott MC, et al. 1986. Reduction of hexachloroethane to tetrachloroethylene 

in groundwater. Ada, OK: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. 

PB86-201324. 

*Curtis GP, Roberts PV, Reinhard M. 1986. A natural gradient experiment on solute transport in a sand 

aquifer 4. sorption of organic solutes and its influence on mobility. Water Resources Research 

22:2059-2067. 

*Dacre JC, Burrows WD, Wade CWR, et al. 1979. Problem definition studies on potential environmental 

pollutants v. physical, chemical toxicological, and biological properties of seven substances used in 

pyrotechnic compositions. U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command Technical Report 

7704. 

Davidson KA, Hovatter PS, Ross RH. 1988. Water quality criteria for hexachloroethane. Draft report, 

Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ORNL-6469. 

DeMarini DM, Inmon JP, Simmons JE, et al. 1987. Mutagenicity in salmonella of hazardous wastes and 

urine from rats fed these wastes. Mutat Res 189:205-216. 

*Dilling WL. 1977. Interphase transfer processes. II. Evaporation rates of chloro methanes, ethanes, 

ethylenes, propanes, and propylenes from dilute aqueous solutions. Comparisons with theoretical 

predictions. Environ Sci Technol 11:405-409. 

*Dilling WL, Tefertiller NB, Kallos GJ. 1975. Evaporation rates and reactivities of methylene chloride, 

chloroform, 1,l ,1 -trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, and other chlorinated compounds 

in dilute aqueous solutions. Environ Sci Technol 9:833-838. 

Dowd RW. 1990. Review of studies concerning effects of well casing materials on trace measurements of 

organic compounds. In: Friedman D, ed. Waste Testing and Quality Assurance: Second V’olume. 31-42. 

Eaton JC, Young JY. 1989. Medical criteria for respiratory protection in smoke: the effectiveness of the 

military protective mask. Frederick MD: U.S. Army Biomedical Research & Development Laboratory, 

AD-A204-303. 

*Eichelberger JW, Bellar TA, Donnelly JP, et al. 1990. Determination of volatile organics in drinking 

water with USEPA method 524.2 and the ion trap detector. J Chromatogr Sci 28:460-467. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 136 

8. REFERENCES 

*Eichelberger JW, Kerns EH, Olynyk P, et al. 1983. Precision and accuracy in the determination of 

organics in water by fused silica capillary column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and packed
 

column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 55:1471-1479.
 

Ellenhorn MJ, Barceloux DG. 1988. Medical toxicology: Diagnosis and treatment of human poisoning.
 

New York, NY: Elsevier, 1391.
 

*Ellington JJ, Stancil FE, Payne WD, et al. 1987. Measurement of hydrolysis rate constants for evaluation
 

of hazardous waste land disposal: Volume 2. Data on 54 chemicals. Athens, GA: U.S. Environmental
 

Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory. EPA/600/S3-87/019.
 

*EPA. 1980a. Ambient water quality criteria for chlorinated ethanes. Washington, DC: U.S.
 

Environmental Protection Agency, Criteria and Standards Division. EPA-440/5-80-029.
 

*EPA. 1980b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Federal Register 45:33132-33133.
 

*EPA. 1982. Chlorinated hydrocarbons - method 612. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Environmental Protection
 

Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory l-7.
 

EPA. 1986a. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry for semivolatile organics: capillary column
 

technique. Method 8270. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency l-32.
 

EPA. 1986b. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry for semivolatile organics: packed column technique.
 

Method 8250. In: Test methods for evaluating solid waste. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental
 

Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, l-30.
 

EPA. 1987a. Health effects assessment for hexachloroethane. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Environmental
 

Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development EPA/600/8-88/043.
 

*EPA. 1987b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part II. Federal Register 52:25942-25953.
 

*EPA. 1988a. Recommendations for and documentation of biological values for use in risk assessment.
 

Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of
 

Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH.
 

*EPA. 1988b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part II. Federal Register 53:4500-4507
 

EPA. 1988c. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part V. Federal Register 53:38642-38654.
 

*EPA. 1989. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part V. Federal Register 54:33418-33419, 33459.
 

*EPA. 1990a. Chlorinated hydrocarbons by gas chromatography: capillary column technique. Method
 

8 121. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, l-21.
 

*EPA. 1990b. Chlorinated hydrocarbons by gas chromatography. Method 8120A. Washington, DC: U.S.
 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1 - 16.
 

*EPA. 1990c. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Method 1625, Revision B. Semivolatile organic
 

compounds by isotope dilution GC/MS. Code of Federal Regulations, 40:516-536. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 137 

8. REFERENCES
 

*EPA. 1990d. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part II. Federal Register 55:22520-22537, 22593, 

22712. 

*EPA. 1990e. Interim methods for development of inhalation reference doses. Research Triangle Park, 

NC. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/8-90/066A. 

*EPA. 1991a. Alph2μ-globulin: association with chemically induced renal toxicity and neoplasia in the 

male rat. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum. 

EPA/625/3-91/019F. 

*EPA. 1991b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part II. Federal Register 55:3864-3870,3890, 

3910. 

*EPA. 1991~. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part III. Federal Register 56:7134-7135,7234. 

*EPA. 1992. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part II. Federal Register 57:62608-62619, 

62690-62693. 

*EPA. 1995. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Identification and listing of hazardous waste. 

CFR 40:261.24. 

Erickson MD, Harris III BSH, Pellizzari ED, et al. Acquisition and chemical analysis of mother’s milk for 

selected toxic substances. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides 

and Toxic Substances, EPA 560/13-80-029. 

*Fiserova-Bergerova V, Pierce JT, Droz PO. 1990. Dermal absorption potential of industrial chemicals: 

criteria for skin notation. Am J Ind Med 17:617-635. 

Fishbein L. 1979. Potential halogenated industrial carcinogenic and mutagenic chemicals II. Halogenated 

saturated hydrocarbons. Sci Total Environ 11: 163-195. 

*Fowler JS. 1969a. Carbon tetrachloride metabolism in the rabbit. Br J Pharmacol 37:733-737. 

*Fowler JS. 1969b. Some hepatotoxic action of hexachloroethane and its metabolites in sheep. Br J 

Pharmacol 35:530-542. 

Fowler JS. 1970. Chlorinated hydrocarbon toxicity in the fowl and duck. J Comp Pathol 80:465-471. 

*FSTRAC. 1990. Summary of state and federal drinking water standards and guidelines. Washington, 

DC: Federal-State Toxicology and Regulatory Alliance Committee, Chemical Communication 

Subcommittee. Report 7, p. 17. 

*Galloway SM, Armstrong MJ, Reuben C, et al. 1987. Chromosome aberrations and sister chromatid 

exchanges in Chinese hamster ovary cells: evaluations of 108 chemicals. Environ Mol Mutagen l0:l-175. 

*Gordon L, Hartley WR, Roberts WC. 1991. Health advisory on hexachloroethane. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 138 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Gorzinski SJ, Nolan RJ, McCollister SB, et al. 1985. Subchronic oral toxicity, tissue distribution and 

clearance of hexachloroethane in the rat. Drug Chem Toxicol 8:155-169. 

Gorzinski SJ, Wade CE, McCollister SB, et al. 1980. Hexachloroethane: results of a 16-week toxicity 

study in the diet of CDF Fischer 344 rats. Midland, MI: Dow Chemical, Health and Environmental 

Sciences. 

Grant WM. 1974. Hexachloroethane. In: Toxicology of the eye. 2nd Ed. Drugs, Chemicals, Plants, 

Venoms. Springfield, IL: Thomas CC, publisher. 

urbelash AT. 1969. Effect of hexachloroethane on the protein and amino acid composition of the blood 

in cattle milk. Veterinariia 5 l-52. 

Hanson D. 1993. OSHA won’t appeal toxics exposure ruling. Chemical and Engineering News 5. 

*Hauser TR, Bromberg SM. 1982. EPA’s monitoring program at Love Canal 1980. Environmental 

Monitoring and Assessment 2:249-271. 

*Haworth S, Lawlor T, Mortelmans, et al. 1983. Salmonella mutagenicity test results for 250 chemicals. 

Environ Mutagen Suppl 1:3- 142. 

*HazDat. 1995. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), Atlanta, GA. March 9, 

1993. 

Helmes CT, Atkinson DL, Jaffer J, et al. 1982. Evaluation and classification of the potential 

carcinogenicity of organic air pollutants. J Environ Sci Health A17:321-389. 

Henry MC, Barkley JJ, Rowlett CD. 1981. Mammalian toxicologic evaluation of hexachloroethane smoke 

mixture and red phosphorus. Frederick, MD: U.S. Army Medical Bioengineering Research and 

Development Laboratory. Final Report. ADA109583. 

*Ho JS, Tang PH, Eichelberger JW, et al. 1993. Determination of organic compounds in water by liquid 

solid extraction followed by supercritical fluid elution and capillary column gas chromatography/mass 

spectrometry. Denver, CO: American Chemical Society, 313-315. 

*Hodge HC, Sterner JH. 1949. Tabulation of toxicity classes. American Industrial Hygiene Association 

Quarterly 10:93-96. 

Houk VS, DeMarini DM. 1988. Use of the microscreen phage-induction assay to assess the genotoxicity of 

14 hazardous industrial wastes. Environ Mol Mutagen 11:13-29. 

*Howard PH, 1989. Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data for Organic Chermcals. Vol. I. 

Large Production and Priority Pollutants. In: Lewis Publishers, New York, NY. 

Howard PH, Boethling RS, Jarvis WF, et al. eds. 1991. Handbook of Environmental Degradation Rates. 

In: Lewis Publishers, New York, NY. 

*HSDB. 1995. Hazardous substances data bank. National Library of Medicine, National Toxicology 

Information Program, Bethesda, MD. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 139 

8. REFERENCES
 

*IARC. 1979. IARC monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans: some 

halogenated hydrocarbons. Vol. 20. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France, October, 

1979. 

*IARC. 1987. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans. Suppl 7. 

Overall evaluations of carcinogenicity: Updating of IARC monographs volumes l-42. World Health 

Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France, 29-33,64. 

*International Joint Commission. 1983. An inventory of chemical substances identified in the Great Lakes 

Ecosystem. Vol. 1 Summary. December, 1983. 

*IRIS. 1995. Integrated Risk Information System. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, 

DC. 

*Jondorf WR, Parke DV, Williams RT. 1957. The metabolism of [14C]hexachloroethane. In: Proceedings 

of the Biochemical Society. 14P-15P. 

Kaiser JP, Bollag JM. 1990. Microbial activity in the terrestrial subsurface. Experientia 46:797-806. 

Kallqvist T, Carlberg GE, Kringstad A. 1989. Ecotoxicological characterization of industrial wastewater ­

sulfite pulp mill with bleaching. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety l8:321-336. 

*Karlsson N, Cassel G, Fangmark I, et al. 1986. A comparative study of the acute inhalation toxicity of 

smoke from TiO2-hexachloroethane and Zn-hexachloroethane pyrotechnic mixtures. Arch Toxicol 

59:160-166. 

Karlsson N, Fangmark I, Haggqvist I, et al. 1991. Mutagenicity testing of condensates of smoke from 

titanium dioxidekexachloroethane and zinc/hexachloroethane pyrotechnic mixtures. Mutat Res 260:39-46. 

*Katz S, Snelson A, Farlow R, et al. 1980. Physical and chemical characterization of fog oil smoke and 

hexachloroethane smoke. Chicago, IL: IIT Research Institute. 

Keith LH. 1976. Identification of organic compounds in unbleached treated kraft paper mill wastewaters. 

Environ Sci Technol 10:555-564. 

*Keith LH, Garrison AW, Allen FR, et al. 1976. Identification of organic compounds in drinking water 

from thirteen U.S. cities. In: Identification and analysis of organic pollutants in water. Keith, LW ed. Ann 

Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc. 

Kenaga EE. 1983. Predictability of chronic toxicity from acute toxicity of chemicals in fish and aquatic 

invertebrates. Environ Toxicol Chem 1:347-358. 

*Kinkead ER, Wolfe RE. 1992. Single oral toxicity of various organic compounds. J Am Co11 Toxicol 

11(6):713. 

*Kitchens JF, Harward WE, Lauter DM, et al. 1978. Preliminary problem definition study of 48 

munitions-related chemicals. Vol. III. Pyrotechnic Related Chemicals. Alexandria, VA: Atlantic Research 

Corporation. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 140 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Kleopfer RD, Fairless BJ. 1972. Characterization of organic components in a municipal water supply. 

Environ Sci Technol 12:1036-1037. 

*Knoevenagel K, Himmelreich R. 1976. Degradation of compounds containing carbon atoms by 

photooxidation in the presence of water. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 4:324-333. 

Knoietzko H. 1984. Chlorinated ethanes: sources, distribution, environmental impact, and health effects. 

401-448. 

Kraybill HF. 1983. Assessment of human exposure and health risk to environmental contaminants in the 

atmosphere and water with special reference to cancer. J Environ Sci Health 2: 175-232. 

*Kriegman-King MR, Reinhard M. 1991. Reduction of hexachloroethane and carbon tetrachloride at 

surfaces of biotite, vermiculite, pyrite, marcasite. In: Organic substances and sediments in water, volume 2. 

Lewis Publishers, Inc. 349-364. 

Kroneid R. 1985. Recovery and reproducibility in determination of volatile halocarbons in water and 

blood. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 34:486-496. 

*Lattanzi G, Colacci A, Grilli S, et al. 1988. Binding of hexachloroethane to biological macromolecules 

from rat and mouse organs. J Toxicol Environ Health 24:403-411. 

Ligocki MP, Pankow JF. 1985. Assessment of adsorption/solvent extraction with polyurethane foam and 

adsorption/thermal desorption with Tenax-GC for the collection and analysis of ambient organic vapors. 

Anal Chem 57:1138-1144. 

*Ligocki MP, Leuenberger C, Pankow JF. 1985. Trace organic compounds in rain-II. gas scavenging of 

neutral organic compounds. Atmos Environ 19:1609-1617. 

Loew CH, Rebagliati M, Poulsen M. 1984. Metabolism and relative carcinogenic potency of chloroethanes: 

a quantum chemical structure-activity study. Cancer Biochem Biophys 7:109-132. 

Lopez-Avila V, Baldin E, Benedict0 J, et al. 1990. Application of open-tubular columns to SW-846 GC 

methods. Las Vegas, NV: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems 

Laboratory. EPA/600/S4-90/021. 

*Lopez-Avila V, Dodhiwala NS, Beckert WF. 1991. Method for the supercritical fluid extraction of 

soils/sediments. Las Vegas, NV: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring 

Systems Laboratory. EPA/600/S4-90/026. 

*Mabey WR, Smith JH, Pod011 RT, et al. 1982. Aquatic fate process data for organic priority pollutants. 

Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, 

DC, by SRI International, Menlo Park, CA. EPA 440/4-81-014. 

Mackay D, Leinonen PJ. 1975. Rate of evaporation of low-solubility contaminants from water bodies to 

atmosphere. Environ Sci Technol 9: 1178-l 180. 

*Marrs TC, Clifford WE, Colgrave HF. 1983. Pathological changes produced by exposure of rabbits and 

rats to smokes from mixtures of hexachloroethane and zinc oxide. Toxicol Lett 19:247-252. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 141 

8. REFERENCES 

Marrs TC, Colgrave I-IF, Edginton JA, et al. 1988. The repeated dose toxicity of a zinc 

oxide/hexachloroethane smoke. Arch Toxicol 62: 123-132. 

McManus KP. 1982. Health hazard evaluation; Timber Lake Manufacturing, Alton, Hampshire. 

Cincinnati, OH: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, PB84-148402. 

Mennear JH, Haseman JK, Sullivan DJ, et al. 1982. Studies on the carcinogenicity of pentachloroethane in 

rats and mice. Fund Appl Toxicol 2:82-87. 

Mersch-Sundermann V, Muller G, Hofmeister A. 1989. Examination of mutagenicity of organic 

microcontaminations of the environment. IV. Communication: the mutagenicity of halogenated aliphatic 

hydrocarbons with SOS-Chromotest. Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed 266-271. 

*Michael LC, Pellizzari ED, Wiseman RW. 1988. Development and evaluation of a procedure for 

determining volatile organics in water. Environ Sci Technol22:565-570. 

Mico BA, Pohl LR. 1983. Reductive oxygenation of carbon tetrachloride: trichloromethylperoxyl radical 

as a possible intermediate in the conversion of carbon tetrachloride to electrophilic chlorine. Arch Biochem 

Biophys 225:596-609. 

Miller CT, Comalander DR. 1988. Groundwater quality. In: Fate and Effects of Pollutants. J Water 

Pollut Control Fed 60:961-978. 

*Milman HA, Story DL, Riccio ES, et al. 1988. Rat liver foci and in vitro assays to detect initiating and 

promoting effects of chlorinated ethanes and ethylenes. Ann N Y Acad Sci 521-530. 

*Mitoma C, Steeger T, Jackson SE, et al. 1985. Metabolic disposition study of chlorinated hydrocarbons in 

rats and mice. Drug Chem Toxicol 8:183-194. 

*Mrsny RJ, Barles RW, Chin D, et al. 1978. Use of an internal standard in monitoring the bacterial 

degradation of crude oil. Appl Environ Microbial 36:776-779. 

Munz C, Roberts PV. 1987. Air-water phase equilibria of volatile organic solutes. Research and 

Technology 62-69. 

Mussalo-Rauhamaa H, Pyysalo H, Moilanen R. 1984. Influence of diet and other factors on the levels of 

organochlorine compounds in human adipose tissue in Finland. J Toxicol Environ Health 13:689-704. 

*Nakamura S, Oda Y, Shimada T, et al. 1987. SOS-inducing activity of chemical carcinogens and 

mutagens in Salmonella typhimurium TA1535/pSK1002: examination with 151 chemicals. Mutat Res 

192:239-246. 

*NAS/NRC. 1989. Biologic markers in reproductive toxicology. Washington, DC: National Academy of 

Sciences, National Research Council, National Academy Press. 

*Nastainczyk W, Ahr H, Uhich V, et al. 1982a. The mechanism of the reductive dehalogenation of 

polyhalogenated compounds by microsomal cytochrome P450. 799-808. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 142 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Nastainczyk W, Ahr HJ, Ullrich V. 1982b. The reductive metabolism of halogenated alkanes by liver 

microsomal cytochrome P450. Biochem Pharmacol31:391-396. 

*NATICH. 1995. National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse: NATICH database report on state, 

local and EPA air toxics activities. Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, by Radian Corporation, Austin, TX. 

EPA-450/3-91-018. 

NIOSH. 1978. Current Intelligence Bulletin 27, chloroethanes review of toxicity. Cincinnati, OH: 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. PB85-119196. 

*NIOSH. 1990. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. NIOSH pocket guide to chemical 

hazards. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services, 122-123. 

*NIOSH. 1994. Hydrocarbons, halogenated - method 1033. In: NIOSH manual of analytical methods. 

4th ed. Vol. 2. Cincinnati, OH: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease 

Control. 

*NOES. 1991. National occupational exposure survey. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH. 

*Nolan RJ, Karbowski RJ. 1978. Hexachloroethane: tissue clearance and distribution in Fischer 344 rats. 

Midland, MI: Dow Chemical Company. 

*Novak EW, Lave LB, Strukel JJ, et al. 1987. A revised health risk assessment for the use of 

hexachloroethane smoke on an Army training area. Champaign, IL: U.S. Army Construction, USA-CERL 

TR N-87126. 

*NTP. 1977. National Toxicology Program. Bioassay of hexachloroethane for possible carcinogenicity. 

Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. NIC-CG-TR-68. 

*NTP. 1989. National Toxicology Program. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of hexachloroethane 

(CAS No. 67-72-l) in F344/N rats (gavage studies). Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. NTP TR 361. NIH Publication No. 89-2816. 

*NTP. 1994. Seventh annual report on carcinogens. Summary 1994. U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services, iv-viii, 226-229. 

*Oliver BG, Niimi AJ. 1983. Bioconcentration of chlorobenzenes from water by rainbow trout: 

correlations with partition coefficients and environmental residues. Environ Sci Technol 17:287-291. 

*Olson MJ, Johnson JT, Reidy CA. 1990. A comparison of male rat and human urinary proteins: 

implications for human resistance to hyaline droplet nephropathy. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 102:524-536. 

OSHA. 1989. Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Part III. Federal Register 54:2332, 2939. 

OSHA. 1992. Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Part II. Federal Register 57:26002,26547, 

26564,26581,26595. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 143 

8. REFERENCES 

*OSHA. 1993. Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Part V. Federal Register 5835338 

35340, 35345. 

Otson R, Williams DT. 1982. Headspace chromatographic determination of water pollutants. Anal Chem 

54:942-946. 

*Pankow JF, Rosen ME. 1988. Determination of volatile compounds in water by purging directly to a 

capillary column with whole column cryotrapping. Environ Sci Technol 22:398-405. 

Pankow JR, Isabelle LM, Kristensen TJ. 1982. Tenax-GC cartridge for interfacing capillary column gas 

chromatography with adsorption/thermal desorption for determination of trace organics. Anal Chem 

54:1815-1819. 

*Pellizzari ED, Sheldon LS, Bursey JT. 1985a. Method 25. GC/MS determination of volatile halocarbons 

in blood and tissue. In: Environmental Carcinogens selected methods of analysis. Fishbein L, O’Neill IK, 

eds. Lyon, France. International Agency for Research on Cancer, 7:435-444. 

*Pellizzari ED, Zweidinger RA, Sheldon LS. 1985b. Method 24. GC/MS determination of volatile 

halocarbons in breath samples. In: Environmental Carcinogens selected methods of analysis. Fishbein L, 

O’Neill IK, eds. Lyon, France. International Agency for Research on Cancer, 7:413-441. 

*Public Law 101-549. 1990. Clean air act amendments of 1990. Environmental Reporter 71:2022-2023. 

*Reynolds ES. 1972. Comparison of early injury to liver endoplasmic reticulum by halomethanes, 

hexachloroethane, benzene, toluene, bromobenzene, ethionine, thioacetamide and dimethylnitrosamine. 

Biochem Pharmacol 21:2555-2561. 

*Richard RJ, Atkins J, Marrs TC, et al. 1989. The biochemical and pathological changes produced by the 

intratracheal instillation of certain components of zinc-hexachloroethane smoke. Toxicology 54:79-88. 

*Roberts AL, Gschwend PM. 1994. Interaction of abiotic and microbial processes in hexachloroethane 

reduction in groundwater. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 16:157-174. 

*Roldan-Arjona T, Garcia-Pedrajas MD, Luque-Romero FL, et al. 1991. An association between 

mutagenicity in rodents for 16 halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Mutagenesis 6:199-205. 

*Salmon AG, Jones RB, Mackrodt WC. 1981. Microsomal dechlorination of chloroethanes: 

structurereactivity relationships. Xenobiotica 11:723-734. 

*Salmon AG, Nash JA, Walkin CM, et al. 1985. Dechlorination of halocarbons by microsomes and 

vesicular reconstituted cytochrome P-450 systems under reductive conditions. Br J Ind Med 42:305-311. 

*Santodonato J, Bosch S, Meylan W, et al. 1985. Monograph on human exposure to chemicals in the 

workplace: hexachloroethane. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse Research Corporation, Center for Chemical Hazard 

Assessment. PB86-149317. 

Schaeffer DJ, Lower WR, Kapila S, et al. 1986. Preliminary study of effects of military obscurant smokes 

on flora and fauna during field and laboratory exposures. Frederick, MD: U.S. Army Medical 

Bioengineering Research and Development Command. USA-CERL Technical Report N-86/22. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 144 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Schaeffer FJ, Kapila S, Meadows JE, et al. 1988. Chemical characterization of residues from military HC 

smokepots. Journal of Hazardous Materials 17:315-328. 

*Selden A, Jacobson G, Berg P, et al. 1989. Hepatocellular carcinoma and exposure to hexachlorobenzene: 

a case report. Br J Ind Med 46:138-140. 

*Selden A, Kvamlof A, Bodin L, et al. 1994. Health effects of low level occupational exposure to 

hexachloroethane. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology 3(10):73-79. 

*Selden A, Nygren M, Kvamlof A, et al. 1993. Biological monitoring of hexachloroethane. Int Ach 

Occup Environ Health 65:Sll l-S114. 

*Shah JJ, Heyerdahl EK. 1988. National ambient volatile organic compounds (VOCs) data base update. 

Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. 

Shah JJ, Singh HB. 1988. Distribution of volatile organic chemicals in outdoor and indoor air. Environ 

Sci Technol22:1381-1388. 

*Shimizu M, Noda T, Yamano T, et al. 1992. Safety evaluation of chemicals for use in household products 

(XVII). A teratological study on hexachloroethane in rats. Osaka City Institute of Public Health and 

Environmental Sciences 54:70-75. (Japanese) [translation in progress] 

*Simmon VF, Kauhanen K. 1978. In vitro microbiological mutagenicity assays of hexachloroethane. 

Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Environmental Research Center, Water 

Supply Research Laboratory. 

*Singh HB, Salas LJ, Shigeishi H, et al. 1979. Atmospheric distributions, sources, and sinks of selected 

halocarbons, hydrocarbons, SF6 and N2O. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Research and Development. 

*Southcott WH. 195 1. The toxicity and anthelmintic efficiency of hexachloroethane in sheep. The 

Australian Veterinary Journal 18-21. 

*Spanggord RJ, Chou TW, Mill T, et al. 1985. Environmental fate of nitroguanidine, diethyleneglycol 

dinitrate, and hexachloroethane smoke. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. 

*SRI. 1977. Profiles on occupational hazards for criteria document priorities. Menlo Park, CA: Stanford 

Research Institute, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. PB-274 073. 

*Staples CA, Werner AF, Hoogheem TJ. 1985. Assessment of priority pollutant concentrations in the 

United States using STORET database. Environ Toxicol Chem 4:131-142. -. 

*Story DL, Meierhenry EF, Tyson CA, et al. 1986. Differences in rat liver enzyme-altered foci produced 

by chlorinated aliphatics and phenobarbital. Toxicol Ind Health 2:351-362. 

Strong L, Wall R. 1990. The chemical control of livestock parasites: problems and alternatives. 

Parasitology Today 6:291-296. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 145 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Stutz DR, Ulin S. 1992. Hazardous materials injuries: A handbook for pre-hospital care. Third edition. 

Beltsville, MD: Bradford Communications Corporation, 286-287. 

*Suffet IH, Brenner L, Cairo PR. 1980. GC/MS identification of trace organics in Philadelphia drinking 

waters during a 2-year period. Water Res 14:853-867. 

*Swenberg JA. 1993. ∝2μ-globuin mediated male rat kidney carcinogens. In: Coping with nongenotoxic 

carcinogens: mode of action, detection, and risk assessment. New Orleans, LA: Society of Toxicology. 

*Tabak HH, Quave SA, Mashni CI, et al. 1981. Biodegradability studies with organic priority pollutant 

compounds. J Water Pollut Control Fed 53:1503-1518. 

Tennant RW, Elwell MR, Spalding JW, et al. 1991. Evidence that toxic injury is not always associated 

with induction of chemical carcinogenesis. Mol Carcinog 4:420-440. 

*Thompson JA, Ho B, Mastovich SL. 1984. Reductive metabolism of 1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane and 

related chloroethanes by rat liver microsomes. Chem Biol Interactions 5 1:321-333. 

*Thruston AD. 1978. High pressure liquid chromatography techniques for the isolation and identification 

of organics in drinking water extracts. J Chromatogr Sci 16:254-259. 

Thruston RV, Gilfoil TA, Meyn EL, et al. 1985. Comparative toxicity of ten organic chemicals to ten 

common aquatic species. Water Res 19: 1145-l 155. 

*Town C, Leibman KC. 1984. The in vitro dechlorination of some polychlorinated ethanes. Drug Metab 

Disp 12:4-8. 

Tracer Jitco, Inc. 1981. Environmental and health aspects of hexachloroethane, a comprehensive 

bibliography of published literature 1930-l 981. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances. PB81-249674. 

*TRI93. 1995. Toxic Chemical Release Inventory. National Library of Medicine, National Toxicology 

Information Program, Bethesda, MD. 

*Tu AS, Murray TA, Hatch KM, et al. 1985. In vitro transformation of BALB/c-3T3 cells by chlorinated 

ethanes and ethylenes. Cancer Lett 28:85-92. 

*Valkenburg CA, Munslow WD. 1989. Evaluation of modifications to extraction procedures used in 

analysis of environmental samples from Superfund sites. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 72:602-608. 

Van Dyke RA. 1977.. Dechlorination mechanisms of chlorinated olefins. Environ Health Perspect 

21:121-124. 

Van Dyke RA, Wineman CG. 1971. Enzymatic dechlorination. Dechlorination of chloroethanes and 

propanes in vitro. Biochem Pharmacol20:463-470. 

Van Rossum P, Webb RG. 1978. Isolation of organic water pollutants by XAD resins and carbon. J 

Chromatogr 150:381-392. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 146 

8. REFERENCES
 

*Verschueren K. 1983. Handbook of environmental data on organic chemicals. 2nd ed. New York: Van 

Nostrand Reinhold Company. 

Walker JD. 1987. Effects of chemicals on microorganisms. J Water Pollut Control Fed 59:614-625. 

*Weast RC, ed. 1986. CRC handbook of chemistry and physics. 67th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. 

*Weeks MH, Angerhofer RA, Bishop R, et al. 1979. The toxicity of hexachloroethane in laboratory 

animals. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 40:187-199. 

*Weisburger EK. 1977. Carcinogenicity studies on halogenated hydrocarbons. Environ Health Perspect 

21:7-16. 

*Wiebolt RC, Adams GE, Later DW. 1988. Sensitivity improvement in infrared detection for supercritical 

fluid chromatography. Anal Chem 60:2422-2427. 

*Yaws C, Yang HC, Pan X. 1991. Henry’s law constants for 362 organic compounds in water. Chemical 

Engineering 179-185. 

Young JY, Smart DA, Allen JT, et al. 1989. Field exposure of chemical school students and cadre to fog 

oil and hexachloroethane (HC) smokes. Frederick, MD: U.S. Army Biomedical Research & Development 

Laboratory. AD-A225008 

*Yurawecz MP, Puma BJ. 1986. Gas chromatographic determination of electron capture sensitive volatile 

industrial chemical residues in foods, using AOAC pesticide multiresidue extraction and cleanup 

procedures. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 6980-86. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 147 

9. GLOSSARY 

Acute Exposure -- Exposure to a chemical for a duration of 14 days or less, as specified in the
 

Toxicological Profiles.
 

Adsorption Coefficient (KOC) -- The ratio of the amount of a chemical adsorbed per unit weight of organic
 

carbon in the soil or sediment to the concentration of the chemical in solution at equilibrium.
 

Adsorption Ratio (Kd) -- The amount of a chemical adsorbed by a sediment or soil (i.e., the solid phase)
 

divided by the amount of chemical in the solution phase, which is in equilibrium with the solid phase, at a
 

fixed solid/solution ratio. It is generally expressed in micrograms of chemical sorbed per gram of soil or
 

sediment.
 

Bioconcentration Factor (BCF) -- The quotient of the concentration of a chemical in aquatic organisms at
 

a specific time or during a discrete time period of exposure divided by the concentration in the surrounding
 

water at the same time or during the same period.
 

Cancer Effect Level (CEL) -- The lowest dose of chemical in a study, or group of studies, that produces
 

significant increases in the incidence of cancer (or tumors) between the exposed population and its
 

appropriate control.
 

Carcinogen -- A chemical capable of inducing cancer.
 

Ceiling Value -- A concentration of a substance that should not be exceeded, even instantaneously.
 

Chronic Exposure -- Exposure to a chemical for 365 days or more, as specified in the Toxicological
 

Profiles.
 

Developmental Toxicity -- The occurrence of adverse effects on the developing organism that may result
 

from exposure to a chemical prior to conception (either parent), during prenatal development, or postnatally
 

to the time of sexual maturation. Adverse developmental effects may be detected at any point in the life
 

span of the organism.
 

Embryotoxicity and Fetotoxicity -- Any toxic effect on the conceptus as a result of prenatal exposure to a
 

chemical; the distinguishing feature between the two terms is the stage of development during which the
 

insult occurred. The terms, as used here, include malformations and variations, altered growth, and in utero
 

death.
 

EPA Health Advisory -- An estimate of acceptable drinking water levels for a chemical substance based
 

on
 

health effects information. A health advisory is not a legally enforceable federal standard, but serves as -.
 

technical guidance to assist federal, state, and local officials.
 

Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) -- The maximum environmental concentration of a
 

contaminant from which one could escape within 30 min without any escape-impairing symptoms or
 

irreversible health effects.
 

Intermediate Exposure -- Exposure to a chemical for a duration of 15-364 days, as specified in the
 

Toxicological Profiles.
 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 148 

9. GLOSSARY
 

Immunologic Toxicity -- The occurrence of adverse effects on the immune system that may result from 

exposure to environmental agents such as chemicals. 

In Vitro -- Isolated from the living organism and artificially maintained, as in a test tube. 

In Viva -- Occurring within the living organism. 

Lethal Concentration (LO) (LCLO) -- The lowest concentration of a chemical in air which has been 

reported to have caused death in humans or animals. 

Lethal Concentration(50) (LC50) -- A calculated concentration of a chemical in air to which exposure for a 

specific length of time is expected to cause death in 50% of a defined experimental animal population. 

Lethal Dose(LO) (LDLO) -- The lowest dose of a chemical introduced by a route other than inhalation that is 

expected to have caused death in humans or animals. 

Lethal Dose(50) (LD50) -- The dose of a chemical which has been calculated to cause death in 50% of a 

defined experimental animal population. 

Lethal Time(50) (LT50) -- A calculated period of time within which a specific concentration of a chemical is 

expected to cause death in 50% of a defined experimental animal population. 

Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level (LOAEL) -- The lowest dose of chemical in a study, or group of 

studies, that produces statistically or biologically significant increases in frequency or severity of adverse 

effects between the exposed population and its appropriate control. 

Malformations -- Permanent structural changes that may adversely affect survival, development, or 

function. 

Minimal Risk Level -- An estimate of daily human exposure to a dose of a chemical that is likely to be 

without an appreciable risk of adverse noncancerous effects over a specified duration of exposure. 

Mutagen -- A substance that causes mutations. A mutation is a change in the genetic material in a body 

cell. Mutations can lead to birth defects, miscarriages, or cancer. 

Neurotoxicity -- The occurrence of adverse effects on the nervous system following exposure to chemical. 

No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level (NOAEL) -- The dose of chemical at which there were no 

statistically or biologically significant increases in frequency or severity of adverse effects seen between 

the exposed population and its appropriate control. Effects may be produced at this dose, but they are not 

considered to be adverse. 

Octanol-Water Partition Coefficient (KOW) -- The equilibrium ratio of the concentrations of a chemical 

in n-octanol and water, in dilute solution. 

Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) -- An allowable exposure level in workplace air averaged over an 8­

hour shift. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE 149 

9. GLOSSARY
 

q1* -- The upper-bound estimate of the low-dose slope of the dose-response curve as determined by the 

multistage procedure. The q1* can be used to calculate an estimate of carcinogenic potency, the incremental 

excess cancer risk per unit of exposure (usually μg/L for water, mg/kg/day for food, and μg/m3

 for air). 

Reference Dose (RID) -- An estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude) of the 

daily exposure of the human population to a potential hazard that is likely to be without risk of deleterious 

effects during a lifetime. The RfD is operationally derived from the NOAEL (from animal and human 

studies) by a consistent application of uncertainty factors that reflect various types of data used to estimate 

RfDs and an additional modifying factor, which is based on a professional judgment of the entire database 

on the chemical. The RfDs are not applicable to nonthreshold effects such as cancer. 

Reportable Quantity (RQ) -- The quantity of a hazardous substance that is considered reportable under 

CERCLA. Reportable quantities are (1) 1 pound or greater or (2) for selected substances, an amount 

established by regulation either under CERCLA or under Sect. 3 11 of the Clean Water Act. Quantities are 

measured over a 24-hour period. 

Reproductive Toxicity -- The occurrence of adverse effects on the reproductive system that may result 

from exposure to a chemical. The toxicity may be directed to the reproductive organs and/or the related 

endocrine system. The manifestation of such toxicity may be noted as alterations in sexual behavior, 

fertility, pregnancy outcomes, or modifications in other functions that are dependent on the integrity of this 

system. 

Short-Term Exposure Limit (STEL) -- The maximum concentration to which workers can be exposed 

for up to 15 min continually. No more than four excursions are allowed per day, and there must be at least 

60 min between exposure periods. The daily TLV-TWA may not be exceeded. 

Target Organ Toxicity -- This term covers a broad range of adverse effects on target organs or 

physiological systems (e.g., renal, cardiovascular) extending from those arising through a single limited 

exposure to those assumed over a lifetime of exposure to a chemical. 

Teratogen -- A chemical that causes structural defects that affect the development of an organism. 

Threshold Limit Value (TLV) -- A concentration of a substance to which most workers can be exposed 

without adverse effect. The TLV may be expressed as a TWA, as a STEL, or as a CL. 

Time-Weighted Average (TWA) -- An allowable exposure concentration averaged over a normal 8-hour 

workday or 40-hour workweek. 

Toxic Dose (TD50) -- A calculated dose of a chemical, introduced by a route other than inhalation, which is 

expected to cause a specific toxic effect in 50% of a defined experimental animal population. 

Uncertainty Factor (UF) -- A factor used in operationally deriving the RfD from experimental data. UFs 

are intended to account for (1) the variation in sensitivity among the members of the human fiopulation, (2) 

the uncertainty in extrapolating animal data to the case of human, (3) the uncertainty in extrapolating from 

data obtained in a study that is of less than lifetime exposure, and (4) the uncertainty in using LOAEL data 

rather than NOAEL data. Usually each of these factors is set equal to 10. 

HEXACHLOROETHANE A-l 

APPENDIX A 

ATSDR MINIMAL RISK LEVEL 

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) [42 U.S.C. 

9601 et seq.], as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) [Pub. L. 

99-4991, requires that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) develop jointly 

with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in order of priority, a list of hazardous substances 

most commonly found at facilities on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL); prepare toxicological 

profiles for each substance included on the priority list of hazardous substances; and assure the initiation of 

a research program to fill identified data needs associated with the substances. 

The toxicological profiles include an examination, summary, and interpretation of available toxicological 

information and epidemiologic evaluations of a hazardous substance. During the development of 

toxicological profiles, Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) are derived when reliable and sufficient data exist to 

identify the target organ(s) of effect or the most sensitive health effect(s) for a specific duration for a given 

route of exposure. An MRL is an estimate of the daily human exposure to a hazardous substance that is 

likely to be without appreciable risk of adverse noncancer health effects over a specified duration of 

exposure. MRLs are based on noncancer health effects only and are not based on a consideration of cancer 

effects. These substance-specific estimates, which are intended to serve as screening levels, are used by 

ATSDR health assessors to identify contaminants and potential health effects that may be of concern at 

hazardous waste sites. It is important to note that MRLs are not intended to define clean-up or action levels. 

MRLs are derived for hazardous substances using the no-observed-adverse-effect level/uncertainty factor 

approach. They are below levels that might cause adverse health effects in the people most sensitive to such 

chemical-induced effects. MRLs are derived for acute (1-14 days), intermediate (15-364 days), and 

chronic (365 days and longer) durations and for the oral and inhalation routes of exposure. Currently, 

MRLs for the dermal route of exposure are not derived because ATSDR has not yet identified a method 

suitable for this route of exposure. MRLs are generally based on the most sensitive chemical-induced end 

point considered to be of relevance to humans. Serious health effects (such as irreparable damage to the 

liver or kidneys, or birth defects) are not used as a basis for establishing MRLs. Exposure to a level above 

the MRL does not mean that adverse health effects will occur. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE A-2 

APPENDIX A
 

MRLs are intended only to serve as a screening tool to help public health professionals decide where to 

look more closely. They may also be viewed as a mechanism to identify those hazardous waste sites that 

are not expected to cause adverse health effects. Most MRLs contain a degree of uncertainty because of the 

lack of precise toxicological information on the people who might be most sensitive (e.g., infants, elderly, 

nutritionally or immunologically compromised) to the effects of hazardous substances. ATSDR uses a 

conservative (i.e., protective) approach to address this uncertainty consistent with the public health 

principle of prevention. Although human data are preferred, MRLs often must be based on animal studies 

because relevant human studies are lacking. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, ATSDR assumes 

that humans are more sensitive to the effects of hazardous substance than animals and that certain persons 

may be particularly sensitive. Thus, the resulting MRL may be as much as a hundredfold below levels that 

have been shown to be nontoxic in laboratory animals. 

Proposed MRLs undergo a rigorous review process: Health Effects/MRL Workgroup reviews within the 

Division of Toxicology, expert panel peer reviews, and agencywide MRL Workgroup reviews, with 

participation from other federal agencies and comments from the public. They are subject to change as new 

information becomes available concomitant with updating the toxicological profiles. Thus, MRLs in the 

most recent toxicological profiles supersede previously published levels. For additional information 

regarding MRLs, please contact the Division of Toxicology, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 

Registry, 1600 Clifton Road, Mailstop E-29, Atlanta, Georgia 30333. 








HEXACHLOROETHANE B-1 

APPENDIX B 

USER’S GUIDE 

Chapter 1 

Public Health Statement 

This chapter of the profile is a health effects summary written in non-technical language. Its intended 

audience is the general public especially people living in the vicinity of a hazardous waste site or chemical 

release. If the Public Health Statement were removed from the rest of the document, it would still 

communicate to the lay public essential information about the chemical. 

The major headings in the Public Health Statement are useful to find specific topics of concern. The topics 

are written in a question and answer format. The answer to each question includes a sentence that will 

direct the reader to chapters in the profile that will provide more information on the given topic. 

Chapter 2 

Tables and Figures for Levels of Significant Exposure (LSE) 

Tables (2-1,2-2, and 2-3) and figures (2-l and 2-2) are used to summarize health effects and illustrate 

graphically levels of exposure associated with those effects. These levels cover health effects observed at 

increasing dose concentrations and durations, differences in response by species, minimal risk levels 

(MRLs) to humans for noncancer end points, and EPA’s estimated range associated with an upper- bound 

individual lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 10,000,000. Use the LSE tables and figures for a quick 

review of the health effects and to locate data for a specific exposure scenario. The LSE tables and figures 

should always be used in conjunction with the text. All entries in these tables and figures represent studies 

that provide reliable, quantitative estimates of No-Observed-Adverse- Effect Levels (NOAELs), 

Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect Levels (LOAELs), or Cancer Effect Levels (CELs). 

The legends presented below demonstrate the application of these tables and figures. Representative 

examples of LSE Table 2-l and Figure 2-l are shown. The numbers in the left column of the legends 

correspond to the numbers in the example table and figure. 

LEGEND 

See LSE Table 2-1 

1)	 Route of Exposure One of the first considerations when reviewing the toxicity of a substance using 

these tables-and figures should be the relevant and appropriate route of exposure. When sufficient 

data exists, three LSE tables and two LSE figures are presented in the document. The three LSE 

tables present data on the three principal routes of exposure, i.e., inhalation, oral, and dermal (LSE 

Table 2-1,2-2, and 2-3, respectively). LSE figures are limited to the inhalation (LSE Figure 2-l) and 

oral (LSE Figure 2-2) routes. Not all substances will have data on each route of exposure and will not 

therefore have all five of the tables and figures. 

2)	 Exposure Period Three exposure periods - acute (less than 15 days), intermediate (15-364 days), and 

chronic (365 days or more) are presented within each relevant route of exposure. In this example, an 

inhalation study of intermediate exposure duration is reported. For quick reference to health effects 
HEXACHLOROETHANE B-2 

APPENDIX B 

occurring from a known length of exposure, locate the applicable exposure period within the LSE 

table and figure. 

3)	 Health Effect The major categories of health effects included in LSE tables and figures are death, 

systemic, immunological, neurological, developmental, reproductive, and cancer. NOAELs and 

LOAELs can be reported in the tables and tigures for all effects but cancer. Systemic effects are 

further defined in the “System” column of the LSE table (see key number 18). 

4)	 Key to Figure Each key number in the LSE table links study information to one or more data points 

using the same key number in the corresponding LSE figure. In this example, the study represented 

by key number 18 has been used to derive a NOAEL and a Less Serious LOAEL (also see the 2 “18r” 

data points in Figure 2-l). 

5)	 Species The test species, whether animal or human, are identified in this column. Section 2.5, 

“Relevance to Public Health,” covers the relevance of animal data to human toxicity and Section 2.3, 

“Toxicokinetics,” contains any available information on comparative toxicokinetics. Although 

NOAELs and LOAELs are species specific, the levels are extrapolated to equivalent human doses to 

derive an MRL. 

6)	 Exposure Frequency/Duration The duration of the study and the weekly and daily exposure regimen 

are provided in this column. This permits comparison of NOAELs and LOAELs from different 

studies. In this case (key number 18), rats were exposed to 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane via inhalation for 

6 hours per day, 5 days per week, for 3 weeks. For a more complete review of the dosing regimen 

refer to the appropriate sections of the text or the original reference paper, i.e., Nitschke et al. 1981. 

7)	 System This column further defines the systemic effects. These systems include: respiratory, 

cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, hematological, musculoskeletal, hepatic, renal, and dermal/ocular. 

“Other” refers to any systemic effect (e.g., a decrease in body weight) not covered in these systems. In 

the example of key number 18, 1 systemic effect (respiratory) was investigated. 

8)	 NOAEL A No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level (NOAEL) is the highest exposure level at which no 

harmful effects were seen in the organ system studied. Key number 18 reports a NOAEL of 3 ppm 

for the respiratory system which was used to derive an intermediate exposure, inhalation MRL of 

0.005 ppm (see footnote “b”). 

9)	 LOAEL A Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level (LOAEL) is the lowest dose used in the study 

that caused a harmful health effect. LOAELs have been classified into “Less Serious” and “Serious” 

effects. These distinctions help readers identify the levels of exposure at which adverse health effects 

first appear and the gradation of effects with increasing dose. A brief description of the specific 

endpoint used to quantify the adverse effect accompanies the LOAEL. The respiratory effect reported 

in key number 18 (hyperplasia) is a Less serious LOAEL of 10 ppm. MRLs are not derived from 

Serious LOAELs. 

10) Reference The complete reference citation is given in chapter 8 of the profile. 

11) CEL A Cancer Effect Level (CEL) is the lowest exposure level associated with the onset of 

carcinogenesis in experimental or epidemiologic studies. CELs are always considered serious effects. 

The LSE tables and figures do not contain NOAELs for cancer, but the text may report doses not 

causing measurable cancer increases. 
HEXACHLOROETHANE B-3 

APPENDIX B
 

12) Footnotes Explanations of abbreviations or reference notes for data in the LSE tables are found in the 

footnotes. Footnote “b” indicates the NOAEL of 3 ppm in key number 18 was used to derive an MRL 

of 0.005 ppm. 

LEGEND 

See Figure 2-l 

LSE figures graphically illustrate the data presented in the corresponding LSE tables. Figures help the 

reader quickly compare health effects according to exposure concentrations for particular exposure periods. 

13) Exposure Period The same exposure periods appear as in the LSE table. In this example, health 

effects observed within the intermediate and chronic exposure periods are illustrated. 

14) Health Effect These are the categories of health effects for which reliable quantitative data exists. 

The same health effects appear in the LSE table. 

15) Levels of Exposure concentrations or doses for each health effect in the LSE tables are graphically 

displayed in the LSE figures. Exposure concentration or dose is measured on the log scale “y” axis. 

Inhalation exposure is reported in mg/m’ or ppm and oral exposure is reported in mg/kg/day. 

16) NOAEL In this example, 18r NOAEL is the critical endpoint for which an intermediate inhalation 

exposure MRL is based. As you can see from the LSE figure key, the open-circle symbol indicates to 

a NOAEL for the test species-rat. The key number 18 corresponds to the entry in the LSE table. The 

dashed descending arrow indicates the extrapolation from the exposure level of 3 ppm (see entry 18 in 

the Table) to the MRL of 0.005 ppm (see footnote “b” in the LSE table). 

17) CEL Key number 38r is 1 of 3 studies for which Cancer Effect Levels were derived. The diamond 

symbol refers to a Cancer Effect Level for the test species-mouse. The number 38 corresponds to the 

entry in the LSE table. 

18) Estimated Upper-Bound Human Cancer Risk Levels This is the range associated with the 

upper-bound for lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 10,000,000. These risk levels are derived 

from the EPA’s Human Health Assessment Group’s upper-bound estimates of the slope of the cancer 

dose response curve at low dose levels (q1*). 

19) Key to LSE Figure The Key explains the abbreviations and symbols used in the figure. 


HEXACHLOROETHANE B - 6
 

APPENDIX B 

Chapter 2 (Section 2.5) 

Relevance to Public Health 

The Relevance to Public Health section provides a health effects summary based on evaluations of existing 

toxicologic, epidemiologic, and toxicokinetic information. This summary is designed to present 

interpretive, weight-of-evidence discussions for human health end points by addressing the following 

questions. 

1.	 What effects are known to occur in humans? 

2 . What effects observed in animals are likely to be of concern to humans? 

3 . What exposure conditions are likely to be of concern to humans, especially around hazardous

 waste sites? 

The section covers end points in the same order they appear within the Discussion of Health Effects by 

Route of Exposure section, by route (inhalation, oral, dermal) and within route by effect. Human data are 

presented first, then animal data. Both are organized by duration (acute, intermediate, chronic). In vitro 

data and data from parenteral routes (intramuscular, intravenous, subcutaneous, etc.) are also considered in 

this section. If data are located in the scientific literature, a table of genotoxicity information is included. 

The carcinogenic potential of the profiled substance is qualitatively evaluated, when appropriate, using 

existing toxicokinetic, genotoxic, and carcinogenic data. ATSDR does not currently assess cancer potency 

or perform cancer risk assessments. Minimal risk levels (MRLs) for noncancer end points (if derived) and 

the end points from which they were derived are indicated and discussed. 

Limitations to existing scientific literature that prevent a satisfactory evaluation of the relevance to public 

health are identified in the Data Needs section. 

Interpretation of Minimal Risk Levels 

Where sufficient toxicologic information is available, we have derived minimal risk levels (MRLs) for 

inhalation and oral routes of entry at each duration of exposure (acute, intermediate, and chronic). These 

MRLs are not meant to support regulatory action; but to acquaint health professionals with exposure levels 

at which adverse health effects are not expected to occur in humans. They should help physicians and 

public health officials determine the safety of a community living near a chemical emission, given the 

concentration of a contaminant in air or the estimated daily dose in water. MRLs are based largely on 

toxicological studies in animals and on reports of human occupational exposure. 

MRL users should be .familiar with the toxicologic information on which the number is based. Chapter 2.5, 

“Relevance to Public Health,” contains basic information known about the substance. Other sections such 

as 2.7, “Interactions with Other Substances,” and 2.8, “Populations that are Unusually Susceptible” provide 

important supplemental information. 

MRL users should also understand the MRL derivation methodology. MRLs are derived using a modified 

version of the risk assessment methodology the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides (Barnes 

and Dourson 1988) to determine reference doses for lifetime exposure (RfDs). 
HEXACHLOROETHANE B - 7
 

APPENDIX B
 

To derive an MRL, ATSDR generally selects the most sensitive endpoint which, in its best judgement, 

represents the most sensitive human health effect for a given exposure route and duration. ATSDR cannot 

make this judgement or derive an MRL unless information (quantitative or qualitative) is available for all 

potential systemic, neurological, and developmental effects. If this information and reliable quantitative 

data on the chosen endpoint are available, ATSDR derives an MRL using the most sensitive species (when 

information from multiple species is available) with the highest NOAEL that does not exceed any adverse 

effect levels. When a NOAEL is not available, a lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) can be 

used to derive an MRL, and an uncertainty factor (UF) of 10 must be employed. Additional uncertainty 

factors of 10 must be used both for human variability to protect sensitive subpopulations (people who are 

most susceptible to the health effects caused by the substance) and for interspecies variability 

(extrapolation from animals to humans). In deriving an MRL, these individual uncertainty factors are 

multiplied together. The product is then divided into the inhalation concentration or oral dosage selected 

from the study. Uncertainty factors used in developing a substance-specific MRL are provided in the 

footnotes of the LSE Tables.