Cyclohexane

Monitoring data

Administrative data

Endpoint:

monitoring data

Type of information:

other: Regulatory review

Adequacy of study:

supporting study

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

other: Data are taken from a regulatory review document and therefore, although the original data have not been reviewed, the data are considered to be reliable.

Data source

Reference

Reference Type:

other:

Title:

European Risk Assessment Report for cyclohexane

Author:

European Chemical Bureau

Year:

2004

Bibliographic source:

European Chemical Bureau, EUR 21015 EN

Materials and methods

Principles of method if other than guideline:

We have not seen these individual studies, but the data were reviewed and compiled for the EU RAR (2004) and so, taken together, the data represents the range of concentrations measured in various situations.

GLP compliance:

not specified

Test material

Test material information

Constituent 1

Reference substance name:

Cyclohexane

EC Number:

203-806-2

EC Name:

Cyclohexane

Cas Number:

110-82-7

Molecular formula:

C6H12

IUPAC Name:

cyclohexane

Details on test material:

No data reported

Study design

Details on sampling:

No data reported

Results and discussion

Details on results:

Further evidence to support abiotic and biotic degradation is available from field monitoring studies where cyclohexane has been detected in surface water or effluents at very low concentrations indicating that it is easily biodegraded.

Any other information on results incl. tables

Table 3.11  from EU RAR (2004) Monitoring of cyclohexane in effluents or surface water
Location	Year	Results (µg/l)	Remarks	Reference
The Netherlands, river Rhine	1978	0.03-1	2 locations, n = ?	Morra et al. (1979)
Japan, surface water	1979	0.2	n = 27, no positive results, d.l.: 0.05-0.2 µg/l	Environment Agency (1996)
USA, 14 heavily industrialised river basins	1977	0-4	n = 204, 13 positive results, d.l.: 1 µg/l	US EPA (1977)
USA, Gulf of Mexico	1977	open sea:0-0.003	n = 6	Sauer (1981a)
		coastal sea: 0.003-0.02	n = 4
USA, Embarras river, crude oil production area	1975-1977	average: 0.6	n = 16, d.l.: 0.1 µg/l	Siefker and Catt (1980)
		maximum: 2.3
UK, Mersey estuary and its freshwater inputs	1987/88	freshwater: positive: 3/17	qualitative results only, no detection limit given	FWR (1990)
		suspended matter: 3/17
		estuary: positive: 9/23
		suspended matter: 16/23
USA, plume of a hydrocarbon venting system from an oil platform	1981	0.4	n = 1	Sauer (1981b)
USA, wastewater from am oil platform	1981	100	n = 1	Sauer (1981b)
USA, effluents from chemical manufacturing sites	1976-1978	3 positive results at concentrations 10 µg/l	n = 63	Perry et al. (1979)
Table 3.16  from EU RAR (2004) Monitoring of cyclohexane in the atmosphere
Location	Year	Results (µg/m^3)	Remarks	Reference
Oxfordshire, UK, 30 m from an infrequently used road	5/1986-3/1987	0.14-1.43	n = 127, 77 samples below d.l.	Jones (1988)
The Netherlands, in the vicinity of over 300 homes in Ede and Rotterdam	1981-1983	median: 0.4	n > 300	Lebret et al. (1986)
		max.: 2
Austria, region of Vienna	10/1986-2/1987	urban (street level): 6.21	n = 17 (average)	Lanzerstorfer and Puxbaum (1990)
		urban (elev. 52 m): 2.72	n = 12 (average)
		suburbs: 1.75	n = 16 (average)
		semi-rural: 0.68	n = 9   (average)
Norwegian Arctic	Jul-82	0.07 (d.l.)	n = 9	Hov et al. (1984)
	Mar-83	0.189	n = 10 (average)
USA, Houston, Texas	1973/1974	downtown Houston: 10-19	n = 2	US EPA (1979a)
		industrial area: 0-130.3	n = 14
USA, Texas, State Forest	1978	range: 0.3-3.2	n = 14	US EPA (1979b)
		average: 1.58
USA, Los Angeles	Sept./Nov. 1981	range: 24.4-108.2	n = 23	Grosjean and Fung (1984)
USA, urban, industrial & rural areas	1980	urban: 0-3.2	n = 6	Arnts and Meeks (1981)
		oil shale devel. area: 0.1-0.6	n = 5
		rural area: 0-1.2	n = 9
		refinery: 8.7; 14.4
		nat. gas facility: 31
USA, 7 cities		range: 0.35-108.2		Beals et al. (1986)
USA, 39 cities	1984-1986	range: 0.19-396.7	n > 800, sampling June - Sept. each year	Seila and Lonneman (1988)
		median: 2.13
		75-percentile: 4.7
USA, New Jersey, inside road tunnel	1972	average: 55.6	n = 2	Lonneman et al. (1986)
	1982	average: 44.2	n = 28
Australia, Sydney downwind of refinery complex and downwind of business district	1979/1980	average: 3.14	3 sites, n = 140	Nelson and Quigley (1982)
Japan, Tokyo, flight path to airport, altitude 350-600 m	1980	average: 0.35	n = 66	Uno et al. (1985)

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:

Further evidence to support abiotic and biotic degradation is available from field monitoring studies where cyclohexane has been detected in surface water or effluents at very low concentrations (EU RAR 2004) indicating that it is easily biodegraded.

Executive summary:

The results were taken from the EU RAR for cyclohexane (2004). Although the original sources have not been reviewed, the data are considered to be reliable as they are taken from a peer-reviewed regulatory document.