Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

US-EPA

Reference methods for criteria (19) and hazardous (20) poUutants estabHshed by the US EPA include sulfur dioxide [7446-09-5] by the West-Gaeke method carbon monoxide [630-08-0] by nondispersive infrared analysis ozone [10028-15-6] and nitrogen dioxide [10102-44-0] by chemiluminescence (qv) and hydrocarbons by gas chromatography coupled with flame-ionization detection. Gas chromatography coupled with a suitable detector can also be used to measure ambient concentrations of vinyl chloride monomer [75-01-4], halogenated hydrocarbons and aromatics, and polyacrylonitrile [25014-41-9] (21-22) (see Chromatography Trace and residue analysis). [Pg.384]

D. B. Turner, Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates, US EPA, OAP, Pub. AP26, Research Triangle Park, N.C., revised 1970, U.S. Department Printing Office Stock No. 5503-0015. [Pg.414]

Effective Stack Height Plume Rise, US EPA Air Pollution Training Institute Pub. SP.406, with Chapts. D, E, and G by G. A. Briggs and Chapt. H by D. [Pg.414]

Method 1613 of US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) was used for the PCDD detection in the objects of environment (water, soil etc.). PCDD detection was done with the help of Polaris Q gas chromatograph/ mass spectrometer on mass-spectrum of electronic impact in the MS-MS mode. Division of isomer PCDD was carried out on a capillary column from the sintered quartz DB-5 MS (60 m x 0,25 mm, thickness of tape 0,25 p.m). The same device was used for detection of fungicides formulations active ingredients in soil. [Pg.189]

We direct attention to procedures for estimating the air quality impact of stationary sources based on an approach developed by the US EPA. [Pg.297]

EPA, 19.98a. US. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Stationary Source Control Techniques Document for Fine Particulate Matter, "EPA-452IR-97-001, Research Triangle Park, NC., October. [Pg.489]

The US EPA explored UV light for small scale water treatment plants and found it compared unfavorably with chlorine due to 1) higher costs, 2) lower reliability, and 3) lack of a residual disinfectant. [Pg.41]

The Inorganic Chemicals Industry Commercial Explosives , US EPA Rept EPA i00/2-74-009b... [Pg.801]

Marmorek, D.R. Thornton, K.W. Baker, J.P. Bernard, D.P. Jones, M.L. Reuber,B. Acidic Episodes in Surface Waters The State of ence. Final Rept., US/EPA, Corvallis, OR, 1987. [Pg.62]

Wolcoff, N., and Bruetsch, R. Size Specific Total Particulate Emission Factors for Nobile Sources. US EPA Publication EPA-460/3-85-00, Ann Arbor, Nichlgan, 1985. [Pg.183]

Environment Protection Agency (EPA) (1980). Ambient Water Quality for Mercury. US EPA, Criteria and Standards division (EPA-600/479-049). [Pg.345]

US EPA (1974) Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of Nine Beverage Container Alternatives. US EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) Report No. EPA/530/SW-91c. [Pg.268]

US EPA Water Disinfection By-Products with Carcinogenicity Estimates. [Pg.282]

Below we describe three examples of frameworks that use the Best in Class approach including another US EPA DfE Program called the Formulator Program, the CleanCredients database and SC Johnson s GreenList . [Pg.296]

Safer Detergent Stewardship Initiative (SDSI). An example of a program that focuses on eliminating chemicals of concern is the US EPA DfE Program s SDSL... [Pg.300]

Evaluating chemicals is challenging because decision makers are often faced with both a lack of information and with lack of consensus on what constitutes green . Both of these deficiencies are addressed through the US EPA DfE Partnerships and the Green Screen for Safer Chemicals. [Pg.302]

Section 307 of the CWA defines a fist of 126 priority pollutants for which the US EPA must establish ambient water-quality criteria and effluent limitations. [Pg.307]

EFDB has been developed in support of US EPA. It is comprised of DATALOG and BIOLOG, which contain environmental fate, microbial toxicity and biodegradation data. [Pg.315]

US EPA (2007) Fact Sheet L Multimedia Strategy for Priority Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) Chemicals. [Online - accessed 1 May 2007] Available from URL http //www.epa.gov/ pbt/pubs/fact.htm... [Pg.319]

A method for determining the LOD and LOQ for water samples was proposed by the US EPA. This method has also been discussed by Roy-Keith Smith in his book titled Handbook of Environmental Analysis .The method has also been proposed by the US EPA in their guidelines for Assigning Values to Non-detected/Non-quantitied Pesticide Residues in Human Health Pood Exposure Assessments . ... [Pg.68]

MQL. This method has been described previously by the US EPA and by Smith ... [Pg.71]

The US EPA recommends that if the calculated values of LQQ (MQL) are significantly different from the estimated values, then steps 1-7 above should be repeated with the new estimates of the LQD/LQQ and the MDL and MQL should be recalculated. This should be done till the calculated values of LQD and LQQ are in the range of the estimated values (LLMV = 2-5 times the MDL). [Pg.72]

US EPA, Assigning Values to Non-detected/Non-quantified Pesticide Residues in Human Health Food Exposure Assessments, Guidance Document Office of Pesticide Programs, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (March 23,2000). Also available on the World Wide Web http //www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac3b012.pdf. [Pg.75]

US EPA, Title 40 of the US Code of Federal Regulations, Part 136, Appendix B, OfiSce of the Federal Register National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC (July 1, 1993). [Pg.76]

J. Corley, B. Glazier, and G. MdUer, Clopyralid Magnitude of the Residue on Canola (Rapeseed), unpublished lR-4 Submission to the US EPA, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, North Bmnswick, NJ (2001). [Pg.76]

Once the determinative or confirmatory method has been developed to take full advantage of the chemical properties of the analyte molecule, a study is necessary to prove that the method is valid. Criteria for method validation are outlined in guidelines from the US FDA, US EPA, and EU. A summary of the differences in regulatory requirements for method validation is provided in Table 3. The parameters addressed by all of the regulatory guidelines include accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, and practicability. [Pg.319]


See other pages where US-EPA is mentioned: [Pg.414]    [Pg.5]    [Pg.287]    [Pg.71]    [Pg.86]    [Pg.623]    [Pg.362]    [Pg.57]    [Pg.337]    [Pg.21]    [Pg.278]    [Pg.284]    [Pg.284]    [Pg.284]    [Pg.297]    [Pg.298]    [Pg.302]    [Pg.359]    [Pg.68]    [Pg.69]    [Pg.75]    [Pg.76]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.284 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.9 , Pg.10 , Pg.11 , Pg.75 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.831 ]




SEARCH



EPA

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection

EPA (US Environmental Protection

EPA . See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Methods US EPA

PCP (The U.S. EPA Data)

Proposed U.S. EPA FGDW Methodology

U. S. EPA Method

U.S. EPA 33/50 list

U.S. EPA ICP-MS Standard Operating Procedure for FGDW Samples

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA

US EPA Warm Program

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

US-EPA General Approach

US-EPA Guidance for Exposure Assessment

US-EPA Guidelines for Exposure Assessment

US-EPA Risk Assessment Guidelines

US-EPA Test Guidelines

US-EPA approach

United States Environmental Protection Agency US EPA)

© 2024 chempedia.info