Journal of Environmental Health Sciences (한국환경보건학회지)

Korean Society of Environmental Health (한국환경보건학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Ecological Risk Assessment of 4,4'-Methylenedianiline

4,4'-Methylenedianiline의 환경매체별 위해성평가

  • Hyun Soo Kim (Risk Assessment Division, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Daeyeop Lee (Risk Assessment Division, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Kyung Sook Woo (Risk Assessment Division, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Si-Eun Yoo (Risk Assessment Division, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Inhye Lee (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kyunghee Ji (Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, Yongin University) ;
  • Jungkwan Seo (Risk Assessment Division, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Hun-Je Jo (Risk Assessment Division, National Institute of Environmental Research)
  • 김현수 (국립환경과학원 위해성평가연구과) ;
  • 이대엽 (국립환경과학원 위해성평가연구과) ;
  • 우경숙 (국립환경과학원 위해성평가연구과) ;
  • 유시은 (국립환경과학원 위해성평가연구과) ;
  • 이인혜 (서울대학교 보건대학원 환경보건학과) ;
  • 지경희 (용인대학교 산업환경보건학과) ;
  • 서정관 (국립환경과학원 위해성평가연구과) ;
  • 조훈제 (국립환경과학원 위해성평가연구과)
  • Received : 2023.11.06
  • Accepted : 2023.11.22
  • Published : 2023.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: South Korea's Act on Registration and Evaluation, etc. of Chemicals (known as K-REACH) was established to protect public health and the environment from hazardous chemicals. 4,4'-Methylenedianiline (MDA), which is used as a major intermediate in industrial polymer production and as a vulcanizing agent in South Korea, is classified as a toxic substance under the K-REACH act. Although MDA poses potential ecological risks due to industrial emissions and hazards to aquatic ecosystems, no ecological risk assessment has been conducted. Objectives: The aim of this study is to assess the ecological risk of MDA by identifying the actual exposure status based on the K-REACH act. Methods: Various toxicity data were collected to establish predicted no effect concentrations (PNECs) for water, sediment, and soil. Using the SimpleBox Korea v2.0 model with domestic release statistical data and EU emission factors, predicted environmental concentrations (PECs) were derived for ten sites, each referring to an MDA-using company. Hazard quotient (HQ) was calculated by ratio of the PECs and PNECs to characterize the ecological risk posed by MDA. To validate the results of modeling-based assessment, concentration of MDA was measured using in-site freshwater samples (two to three samples per site). Results: PNECs for water, sediment, and soil were 0.000525 mg/L, 4.36 mg/kg dw, and 0.1 mg/kg dw, respectively. HQ for surface water and sediment at several company sites exceeded 1 due to modeling data showing markedly high PEC in each environmental compartment. However, in the results of validation using in-site surface water samples, MDA was not detected. Conclusions: Through an ecological risk assessment conducted in accordance with the K-REACH act, the risk level of MDA emitted into the environmental compartments in South Korea was found to be low.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 논문은 환경부의 재원으로 국립환경과학원의 지원을 받아 수행하였습니다(NIER-2022-01-01-006및NIER-2022-04-02-071).

References

  1. Wang Z, Walker GW, Muir DCG, Nagatani-Yoshida K. Toward a global understanding of chemical pollution: a first comprehensive analysis of national and regional chemical inventories. Environ Sci Technol. 2020; 54(5): 2575-2584. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06379
  2. European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic). Facts & figures 2023. The European Chemical Industry a vital part of Europe's future. Brussels: Cefic; 2023.
  3. National Institute of Chemical Safety. 2020 Chemical emissions survey. Sejong: Ministry of Environment; 2022.
  4. Sohn J, Lee C. The risk assessment of hazard chemicals in environment. J Korean Soc Environ Eng. 2007; 29(5): 477-488.
  5. Ministry of Environment. Act of Registration, Evaluation, Etc of Chemicals. Available: https://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%ED%99%94%ED%95%99%EB%AC%BC%EC%A7%88%EC%9D%98%EB%93%B1%EB%A1%9D%EB%B0%8F%ED%8F%89%EA%B0%80%EB%93%B1%EC%97%90%EA%B4%80%ED%95%9C%EB%B2%95%EB%A5%A0 [Accessed Nov 28, 2023].
  6. Hansen BG, Munn SJ, Pakalin S, Heidorn CJA, Allanou R, Scheer S, et al. European Union risk assessment report. 4,4'-Methylenedianiline: risk assessment. Final report. Luxembourg: European Communities; 2001 Nov. Report No.: EUR 19727 EN.
  7. Perez-Lopez M, Oropesa-Jimenez AL, Soler-Rodriguez F. Methylenedianiline and its dihydrochloride. In: Caplan MJ. editor. Reference Module in Biomedical Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2022. p.285-288.
  8. Bastian PG. Occupational hepatitis caused by methylenedianiline. Med J Aust. 1984; 141(8): 533-535. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1984.tb132915.x
  9. McGill DB, Motto JD. An industrial outbreak of toxic hepatitis due to methylenedianiline. N Engl J Med. 1974; 291(6): 278-282. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197408082910604
  10. Liss GM, Guirguis SS. Follow-up of a group of workers intoxicated with 4,4'-methylenedianiline. Am J Ind Med. 1994; 26(1): 117-124. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.4700260110
  11. Dunn GW, Guirguis SS. pp' - Methylene dianiline (MDA) as an occupational health problem a suggested time-weighted average exposure level and medical program. Arch Ind Hyg Toxicol. 1979; 30(Suppl 1): 639-645.
  12. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Centers for Disease Control. 4,4'-Methylenedianiline(MDA) (Revised). Available: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/86-115/default.html#print [Accessed Oct 6, 2023].
  13. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Methylenedianiline (4-4'-methylenedianiline; MDA). Available: https://www.osha.gov/chemicaldata/24 [Accessed Oct 6, 2023].
  14. Kim CN, Roh JH, Won JU, Kim TH, Yang JY et al. Risk assessment of hazardous chemicals (II). Daejeon: Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute; 2012 Nov. Report No.: 2012-연구원-918.
  15. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Screening Information Dataset (SIDS) Initial Assessment Profile (SIAP). Paris: OECD;
  16. National Institute of Technology and Evaluation. Japan CHEmicals Collaborative Knowledge database (J-CHECK). Available: https://www.nite.go.jp/chem/jcheck/top.action [Accessed Oct 3, 2023].
  17. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). eChemPortal guidance for new participants. Paris: OECD; 2023.
  18. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.10. Characterisation of dose [concentration]-response for environment. Helsinki: ECHA; 2008.
  19. Bayer. Untersuchungen zum okologischen Verhalten von Phenylbase MDA 70. Prufnummer 281 A/91. Leverkusen: Bayer; 1992.
  20. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC). Sufficiency of aquatic hazard data for environmental risk assessment in sediment and soil. Brussels: ECETOC; 2020 Apr. Technical Report No.: 134.
  21. Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan (MOE). Reproduction inhibition test of 4,4'-methylbenzeneamine on Selenastrum capricornutum. Tokyo: Mitsubishi Chemical Safety Institute; 2002. Report No.: A010459-1.
  22. Rufli H, Mueller K. Report on the test for acute toxicity of TK 10504 to Algae. OECD guideline No. 201. Basel: Ciba-Geigy; 1985.
  23. Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan (MOE). Acute immobilization test of 4,4'-methyelenedianiline on Daphnia manga. Tokyo: MOE; 2002. Report No.: A010459-2.
  24. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. Consideration of methods for ecological effect assessment. Tokyo: Chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute, Japan; 1993.
  25. Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan (MOE). Reproduction inhibition test of 4,4'-methyelenedianiline on Daphnia manga. Tokyo: MOE; 2002. Report No.: A010459-3.
  26. Fujiwara K. Studies on the effect of TDA and MDA on plankton-Daphnia. Manchester: International Isocyanate Institute; 1982. Report No.: 10118.
  27. Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan. Acute toxicity of 4,4'-methylbenzeneamine on Oryzias latipes. Tokyo: Mitsubishi Chemical Safety Institute; 2002.
  28. Rufli H, Mueller K. Report on the test for acute toxicity of TK 10504 to zebra fish. OECD guideline No. 203. Basel: Ciba-Geigy; 1985.
  29. Mueller N, Caspers N. Ecotoxicity of toluenediisocyanate (TDI), diphenylmethanediisocyanate (MDI), toluenediamine (TDA), diphenylmethanediamine (MDA). Leverkusen: Bayer; 1986. Report No.: 281 A/91.
  30. Bhuiyan MNH, Kang H, Choi J, Lim S, Kho Y, Choi K. Effects of 3,4-dichloroaniline (3,4-DCA) and 4,4'-methylenedianiline (4,4'- MDA) on sex hormone regulation and reproduction of adult zebrafish (Danio rerio). Chemosphere. 2021; 269: 128768.
  31. Munk R, Kirsch P. Golden orfe (Leuciscus idus L., golden variety): report on the study of the acute toxicity. Ludwigshafen: BASF; 1988. Report No.: 10F0621/875279.
  32. Rufli H, Mueller K. Report on the test for acute toxicity of TK 10504 to rainbow trout. OECD guideline No. 203. Basel: Ciba-Geigy; 1985.
  33. Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan (MOE). Sediment toxicity test of 4,4'-methylenedianiline to chironomid. Tokyo: MOE; 2011 Mon. Report No.: 2010-生態13.
  34. van der Hoeven N, Roza P, Henzen L. Determination of the effect of TDI, TDA, MDI, and MDA on the emergence and growth of the plant species Avena sativa and Lactuca sativa according to OECD guideline No. 208. Paris: OECD; 1992. Report No.: 11024.
  35. Van der Hoeven N, Roza P, Henzen L. Determination of the LC50 (14 days) of TDI, TDA, MDI and MDA to the earthworm Eisenia fetida according to OECD guideline no. 207. Manchester: International Isocyanate Institute; 1992.
  36. European Chemicals Bureau. Technical guidance document on risk assessment: in support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on risk assessment for new notified substances, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances, Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market. Part I-IV. Belgium: European Union; 2003.
  37. Dunn BJ. Guinea pig skin hypersensitization test, methylene dianiline. Morristown (NJ): Allied Chemical Corporation; 1978.
  38. Leong BK, Lund JE, Groehn JA, Coombs JK, Sabaitis CP, Weaver RJ, et al. Retinopathy from inhaling 4,4'-methylenedianiline aerosols. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1987; 9(4): 645-658. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-0590(87)90171-0
  39. Ciba-Geigy. 3 months toxicity study in rats (drinking water). Basel: Ciba-Geigy; 1982 Mon. GU Project No.: 791743.
  40. Lamb JC, Huff JE, Haseman JK, Murthy AS, Lilja H. Carcinogenesis studies of 4,4'-methylenedianiline dihydrochloride given in drinking water to F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1986; 18(3): 325-337. https://doi.org/10.1080/15287398609530874
  41. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). NIOSH manual of analytical methods. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 1994.
  42. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile for methylenedianiline. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1998.
  43. International Association of Cancer Registries (IARC). IARC monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans. Some chemicals used in plastics and elastomers. Vol. 39. Lyon: IARC; 1986.
  44. European Commission. Recommendation from the Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits for 4,4'-diaminodiphenylmethane [MDA]. Brussels: European Commission; 2012 Mar. Report No.: SCOEL/SUM/107.
  45. Cowen WF, Gastinger AM, Spanier CE, Buckel JR, Bailey RE. Sorption and microbial degradation of toluenediamines and methylenedianiline in soil under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Environ Sci Technol. 1998; 32(5): 598-603. https://doi.org/10.1021/es970203w
  46. Japan Chemical Industry Ecology-Toxicology & Information Center, Japan Tsusho Sangyosho, Chemicals Inspection & Testing Institute. Biodegradation and bioaccumulation data of existing chemicals based on the CSCL Japan. Tokyo: Japan Chemical Industry Ecology-Toxicology & Information Center; 1992.
  47. Arnot JA, Brown TN, Wania F, Breivik K, McLachlan MS. Prioritizing chemicals and data requirements for screening-level exposure and risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect. 2012; 120(11): 1565-1570. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1205355
  48. Vorosmarty CJ, McIntyre PB, Gessner MO, Dudgeon D, Prusevich A, Green P, et al. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature. 2010; 467(7315): 555-561. Erratum in: Nature. 2010; 468(7321): 334.