(A) Chemical-Physical Properties - Michigan

CHEMICAL UPDATE WORKSHEET

Chemical Name: 1,4-Dichlorobenzene CAS #: 106-46-7 Revised By: RRD Toxicology Unit

Revision Date: September 16, 2015

(A) Chemical-Physical Properties Part 201 Value Updated Value Reference Source Comments

Molecular Weight (g/mol) 147 147.00 EPI EXP

Physical State at ambient temp Solid Solid MDEQ

Melting Point (˚C) --- 52.09 EPI EXP

Boiling Point (˚C) 174 174.00 EPI EXP

Solubility (ug/L) 73800 8.13E+04 EPI EXP

Vapor Pressure (mmHg at 25˚C) 1.064 1.74E+00 EPI EXP

HLC (atm-m³/mol at 25˚C) 2.43E-3 2.41E-03 EPI EXP

Log Kow (log P; octanol-water) 3.42 3.44 EPI EXP

Koc (organic carbon; L/Kg) 612 375.3 EPI EST

Ionizing Koc (L/kg) NR NA NA

Diffusivity in Air (Di; cm2/s) 0.069 5.50E-02 W9 EST

Diffusivity in Water (Dw; cm2/s) 7.9E-6 8.6797E-06 W9 EST

CHEMICAL UPDATE WORKSHEET 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)

2

Part 201 Value Updated Value Reference Source Comments Soil Water Partition Coefficient (Kd; inorganics) NR NR NA NA

Flash Point (˚C) 150 F 66 CRC EXP

Lower Explosivity Level (LEL; unit less) 0.025 0.025 NPG EXP

Critical Temperature (K) 6.85E+02 EPA2004 EXP

Enthalpy of Vaporization (cal/mol) 9.27E+03 EPA2004 EXP

Density (g/mL, g/cm3) 1.2475 PC EXP

EMSOFT Flux Residential 2 m (mg/day/cm2) 2.19E-05 2.57E-05 EMSOFT EST

EMSOFT Flux Residential 5 m (mg/day/cm2) 3.77E-05 5.42E-05 EMSOFT EST

EMSOFT Flux Nonresidential 2 m (mg/day/cm2) 2.99E-05 3.99E-05 EMSOFT EST

EMSOFT Flux Nonresidential 5 m (mg/day/cm2) 4.77E-05 8.03E-05 EMSOFT EST


3

(B) Toxicity Values/Benchmarks

Part 201 Value Updated Value Source*/Reference/Date

Comments/Notes/Issues

Reference Dose (RfD) (mg/kg/day) -- 7.0E-2 ATSDR, 2006

RfD details NA

Tier 2 Source: ATSDR: Basis: The IRIS RfD is based on a 2003 IRIS external draft document and newer studies. MDEQ (2011) RfD is based on an older study (Hollingsworth, 1956). ATSDR (7/2006), chronic oral MRL = 0.07 mg/kg-day. Critical Study(ies): 1) Naylor MW, Stout LD. 1996. One year study of p-dichlorobenzene administered orally via capsule to beagle dogs. Environmental Health Laboratory, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO. Study No. ML-94-210, March 25, 1996. MRID# 43988802. Unpublished. 2) USEPA. 1996b. Data Evaluation Record (DER) for p-dichlorobenzene – chronic oral toxicity in dogs (MRID# 439888-01 and -02) for Section 6 (a) (2) and reregistration need. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Method(s): Beagle dogs (5/sex/dose) were exposed to 0, 10, 50, or 75 mg/kg/day 1,4-DCB by capsule for 1 year. It is presumed that dosing was 5 days/week. The 75 mg/kg/day dose is a time-weighted average level reflecting dose decreases at the beginning of the study in response to unexpected severe toxicity. An initial high dose of 150 mg/kg/day was adjusted to 100 mg/kg/day for males during week 3, and a further decrease to 75 mg/kg/day was made for both sexes at the beginning of week 6. Both high-dose males and females were untreated during weeks 4 and 5 to allow for recovery. Critical effect: increased serum alkaline phosphatase; hepatic effects (increased liver weight, changes in liver enzymes, and histopathology) End point or Point of Departure (POD): BMDL1sd = 10 mg/kg-day; BMDL1sd ADJ = 7 mg/kg-day Uncertainty Factors: UF = 100 (10 each for intraspecies variability and interspecies extrapolation)

Complete


4



Source and date: ATSDR, 7/2006 Tier 1 and 2 Sources: IRIS: Per IRIS (1/01/1994), no value at this time. IRIS external draft (11/03/2003) calculates an RfD = 2.4E-3 mg/kg. Details are shown below:

Critical Study: Monsanto Company. (1996) M.W. Naylor and L.D. Stout. One Year Study of p-Dichlorobenzene Administered Orally Via Capsule to Beagle Dogs. MRID No. 439888-02. Available from USEPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460. Method(s): male and female beagle dogs were administered 1,4-DCB in gelatin capsules, 5 days/week, at initial dose levels of 0, 10, 50, or 150 mg/kg-day (adjusted doses; 0, 7, 36, 107 mg/kg-day) (Monsanto Company, 1996) for 1 year. The high dose was adjusted to 100 mg/kg-day (71 mg/kg-day) during the third week of exposure for males and further reduced to 75 mg/kg-day (54 mg/kg-day) for both sexes at the beginning of week 6. Both males and females at the highest dose level were untreated during the fourth and fifth weeks to allow for recovery, while the lower dose groups received 1,4-DCB continuously. Critical effect: increase in the absolute and relative liver weight End point or Point of Departure (POD): BMDL = 0.237 mg/kg-day Uncertainty Factors: UF = 100 (10 each for intraspecies variability and interspecies extrapolation) Source and date: IRIS, Last revision date - 1/01/1994; IRIS external review draft, 11/03/2003

EPA-OPP: No RfD available. No dietary exposure expected Per Memo: Ingredient:

para-Dichlorobenzene; Title HED chapter of the reregistration eligibility decision document (RED). Revised version. April 1, 2008 (table 3.5); Reregistration eligibility decision (RED) for para-dichlorobenzene. Revised December 2008.

PPRTV: No PPRTV record available at this time.


5



Tier 3 source: MDEQ: Per DEQ-CCD, RRD has no value at this time. WRD derived an RfD = 4.5E-2 mg/kg-day:

Critical Study: Hollingsworth, 1956 Method(s): Female rats dosed by gavage, 5 days/week for 27 weeks Critical effect: End point or Point of Departure (POD): NOAEL = 18.8 mg/kg Uncertainty Factors: UF = 300 Source and date: MDEQ-CCD/WRD, 12/29/2011

Oral Cancer Slope Factor (CSF) (mg/kg-day)-1)

1.3E-2 1.3E-2 IRIS, 2003/MDEQ,

2011

CSF details

NTP (1987): 2-year gavage study

in male mice, critical effect = hepatocellular adenoma and

adenocarcinoma combined.

Revised species scaling factor of

(BWh/BWa) to the 0.25 power used

for q* calculation. RD calculation

date: 1/12/2000

Tier 1 Source: IRIS: Basis: IRIS is a Tier 1 source. IRIS external review draft (11/03/2003) CSFHED = 1.3E-2 per mg/kg-day. MDEQ/WRD (2011) derived a similar CSF value (see below). IRIS: Per IRIS (1/01/1994), no value at this time; Per IRIS External Rreview Draft (11/03/2003), CSFHED = 1.3E-2 per mg/kg-day. Details are shown below: Critical Study: NTP (National Toxicology Program) (1987) Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (CAS No. 106-46-7) in F344/N Rats and B6C3F1 Mice (Gavage Studies). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NTP TR 319. NIH Publ. No. 87-2575. Method(s): F344 rats and B6C3F1 mice (50/sex/dose group); Female rats and both sexes of mice received 0, 300 and 600 mg/kg and male rats received 0, 150 and 300 mg/kg-day of 1,4-DCB in corn oil gavage for 2 years.

1) Dose response data: Tumor Type - hepatocellular adenomas or carcinomas; Test Species - male mice; Route – oral (gavage) 2) Extrapolation method: Linearized multistage extrapolation

Carcinogen Weight-of-Evidence (WOE) Class: likely to be carcinogenic in humans IRIS WOE Basis: increased tumor incidences in male rat kidneys and in the livers of male and female mice following oral exposure. The kidney tumors in rats are not relevant to humans because the mechanism is specific to male rats. The mechanistic bases of the mouse liver tumors are assessed to be relevant to

Complete


6



humans. Source and Date: IRIS, last revision date - 1/01/1994 and IRIS External Review Draft, 11/03/2003 EPA-OPP (2013): Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans below doses that do

not perturb normal liver homeostasis. Based on the IRIS evaluation draft document of May 2006, the slope factor linear approach was suggested. Source and Date: USEPA-OPP Per Memo: Ingredient: para-Dichlorobenzene; Title HED chapter of the reregistration eligibility decision document (RED). Revised version. April 1, 2008 (table 3.5); Reregistation eligibility decision (RED) for para-dichlorobenzene. Revised December 2008

Tier 2 Sources: PPRTV: No PPRTV record available at this time. MRL: NA; MRLs are for non-cancer effects only. MDEQ: Per DEQ-CCD/RRD, RfD = 1.3E-2. See Part 201 Value CSF details. WRD (2011) calculated a CSF = 0.0129 (mg/kg-day)-1 based on lliver carcinomas/adenomas in male mice following treatment by gavage, 5 days/week for 103 weeks (NTP, 1987):

Critical Study: NTP (National Toxicology Program) (1987) Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (CAS No. 106-46-7) in F344/N Rats and B6C3F1 Mice (Gavage Studies). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NTP TR 319. NIH Publ. No. 87-2575. Method(s): F344 rats and B6C3F1 mice (50/sex/dose group); Female rats and both sexes of mice received 0, 300 and 600 mg/kg and male rats received 0, 150 and 300 mg/kg-day of 1,4-DCB in corn oil gavage for 2 years. 1) Dose response data: Tumor Type - hepatocellular adenomas or carcinomas; Test Species – male mice; Route - oral (gavage) 2) Extrapolation method: linear Source and Date: MDEQ-CCD/WRD, 12/29/2011

Reference Concentration 8.0E+2 6.0E+1 ATSDR, 2006


7



(RfC) or Initial Threshold Screening Level (ITSL) (µg/m³)

RfC/ITSL details

ITSL based on USEPA's RfC of 800 ug/m3. The key study reported by Chlorobenzene Producers Assoc (1986) is based on a 2-generation Sprague-Dawley rat reproduction study. Key effect was increased liver weight, with NOAEL of 301 mg/m3 (50 ppm) and LOAEL of 902 mg/m3 (150 ppm). CCD/AQD date: 11/01/1996.

Tier 2 Source: ATSDR: Basis: This value is based on more current studies compared to the IRIS RfC basis. ATSDR (7/2006), chronic inhalation MRL = 0.01 ppm or 0.06 mg/m3: (Molecular weight = 147 g/mol). Critical Studies: 1) Aiso S, Takeuchi T, Arito H, et al. 2005b. Carcinogenicity and chronic toxicity in mice and rats exposed by inhalation to para-dichlorobenzene for two years. J Vet Med Sci 67(10):1019-1029. 2) Japan Bioassay Research Center. 1995. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of p-dichlorobenzene in 344/DuCrj rats and Crj:BDF1 mice. Two-year inhalation studies. Japan Industrial Safety and Health Association. Study carried under contract with the Ministry of Labour of Japan. Method(s): F344/DuCrj rats and Crj:BDF1 mice (50/sex/dose) were exposed to 1,4-DCB in target concentrations of 0, 20, 75, or 300 ppm for 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 104 weeks. Critical effect: increased incidences of nasal lesions in female rats End point or Point of Departure (POD): BMCL10 = 9.51 ppm; BMCLADJ = 1.7 ppm; BMCLHEC = 0.27 ppm (1.62 mg/m3; MW = 147 g/mol) Uncertainty Factors: UF = 30 (10 for intraspecies variability and 3 for interspecies extrapolation) Source and date: ATSDR, 7/2006 Tier 1 and 2 Sources: IRIS: Per IRIS (11/01/1996) RfC = 8.0E+2 µg/m³:

Critical Study: Chlorobenzene Producers Association. 1986. Parachlorobenzene: Two-generation Reproduction Study in Sprague-Dawley Rats. Study 86-81-90605. MRID No. 411088-1. Available from USEPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460.

Complete


8



Method(s): Sprague-Dawley rats (P1) (28/sex/group) were exposed to 1,4-dichlorobenzene (1,4-DCB) vapor at concentrations of 0, 50, 150, or 450 ppm (0, 301, 902, 2705 mg/m3) for 10 weeks, 6 hours/day, 7 days/week, then the rats were mated for 3 weeks. For exposure of the next generation, selected F1 weanlings were exposed to 1,4-DCB for 11 weeks then mated. Critical effect: Increased liver weights in P1 males End point or Point of Departure (POD): NOAEL = 301 mg/m3 (50 ppm); NOAEL(HEC) = 75 mg/m3 Uncertainty Factors: UF = 100 (10 for intraspecies variability and 3 each for interspecies extrapolation and use of a subchronic study. A full factor of 10 was not used for the latter because the LOAEL estimated from the chronic NTP (1987) oral study suggested limited progression of the hepatic lesions).

Source and date: IRIS, Last revision date – 11/01/1996 IRIS: Per IRIS External Review Draft (11/03/2003) RfC = 1.0E+3 µg/m³: USEPA-OPP:

Critical Study: Aiso, Shigetoshi; Tetsuya Takeuchi, Heihachiro Arito, Kasuke Nagano, Seigo Yamamoto, and Taijiro Matsushima. (2005b). Carcinogenicity and chronic toxicity in mice and rats exposed to para-dichlorobenzene for two years. J. Vet. Med. Sci., (2005). (67)10:1019-1029. Method(s): para-Dichlorobenzene (purity greater than 99.9%) was administered by inhalation to groups of 50 BDF1 mice of both sexes at a target

concentration of 20, 75, or 300 ppm for 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for two years.

Critical effect: Olfactory epithelium changes End point or Point of Departure (POD): NOAEL = 20 ppm = NOAELADJ = 19.8 ppm x 6h/24h x 5 days / 7 days = 3.54 ppm NOAELHEC = 0.56 ppm or 3.4 mg/m3 Uncertainty Factors: UF = 30 (10 for intraspecies variability, 3 for intraspecies variability) Source and date: USEPA-OPP Per Memo: Ingredient: para-Dichlorobenzene; Title HED chapter of the reregistration eligibility decision document (RED).


9



Revised version. April 1, 2008 (table 3.5); Reregistation eligibility decision (RED) for para-dichlorobenzene. Revised December 2008

PPRTV: No PPRTV record available at this time. Tier 3 source: MDEQ: Per DEQ-CCD, AQD adopted IRIS value.

Inhalation Unit Risk Factor (IURF) ((µg/m3)-1)

6.9E-6 4.8E-4 MDEQ, 2015

IURF details

Potency is based on NTP 1987

gavage study with 0, 300, or 600 mg/kg, where male mice had

increased incidence of liver

adenomas and carcinomas.

CCD/AQD date: 3/28/1988.

Tier 3 Source: MDEQ: Basis: The MDEQ (2015) value is based on a 2005 inhalation study. California (2009) derived a value based on NTP (1987) oral study. Several states adopted the CALEPA value. See details below. Tier 1 and 2 Sources: IRIS: Per IRIS (1/01/1994), no value at this time. Per IRIS external review draft (11/03/2003), no IURF value as “available inhalation carcinogenicity data for 1,4-dichlorobenzene are inadequate.” USEPA-OPP: “Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans below doses that do not perturb normal liver homeostasis. Based on the IRIS evaluation draft document of May 2006, the slope factor linear approach was suggested. “The recommended inhalation risk unit for para-dichlorobenzene is 4x10-3(mg/m3)-1, based on hepatocellular tumors in male and female mice….” Use of the linear approach would provide a worst case screening level analysis.” Source and Date: USEPA-OPP Per Memo: Ingredient: para-Dichlorobenzene; Title HED chapter of the reregistration eligibility decision document (RED). Revised version. April 1, 2008 (table 3.5); Reregistation eligibility decision (RED) for para-dichlorobenzene. Revised December 2008 PPRTV: No PPRTV record available at this time.

Complete


10



MRL: NA; MRLs are for non-cancer effects only. Tier 3: MDEQ-AQD

Basis: MDEQ IURF = 4.8E-4 (µg/m3)-1. Critical Study: Aiso, Shigetoshi; Tetsuya Takeuchi, Heihachiro Arito, Kasuke Nagano, Seigo Yamamoto, and Taijiro Matsushima. (2005b). Carcinogenicity and chronic toxicity in mice and rats exposed to para-dichlorobenzene for two years. J. Vet. Med. Sci., (2005). (67)10:1019-1029. Method(s): inhalation study with 0, 20, 75, or 300 ppm, where female mice had increased incidence of hepatoblastoma Source and Date: MDEQ-CCD/AQD, 1/13/2015

California DTSC/OEHHA: IURF= 1.1E-5 (µg/m3)-1.

Key study: NTP (National Toxicology Program) (1987) Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (CAS No. 106-46-7) in F344/N Rats and B6C3F1 Mice (Gavage Studies). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NTP TR 319. NIH Publ. No. 87-2575. Methods: F344 rats and B6C3F1 mice (50/sex/dose group); Female rats and both sexes of mice received 0, 300 and 600 mg/kg and male rats received 0, 150 and 300 mg/kg-day of 1,4-DCB in corn oil gavage for 2 years. The mice were exposed for 5 days/week, resulting in average daily doses of 0, 214, and 428 mg/kg/day 1,4-DCB. Mice of either sex exhibited a significant increase in hepatocellular carcinomas or adenomas. Potency calculation: The cancer potency for 1,4-DCB was calculated from the male mouse hepatocarcinoma and adenoma data. A linearized multistage procedure was used to estimate the cancer potency of 1,4-DCB from the NTP (1987) data in male B6C3F1 mice. The concentrations of 1,4-DCB given in the feed were 0, 214, or 428 mg/kg/day. The premature mortality of animals without tumors was subtracted from the sample groups. The 95% upper confidence bound on the dose-response slope was used to derive the oral cancer potency value of 0.04 [mg/kg-day]-1.


11



IURF: An airborne unit risk factor of 1.1E-5 (μg/m3)-1 was calculated from the oral potency value using the default parameters of 70 kg human body weight and 20 m3/day breathing rate. Source: OEHHA 2009. Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Factors.

Minnesota PCA: IURF= 1.1E-05 (µg/m3)-1 based on CALEPA 2009. New Jersey DEP: IURF= 1.1 E-05 (µg/m3)-1 based on CALEPA 2009. New York DEC: IURF= 0.011 per mg/kg/day based on CALEPA 2009 Other Tier 3: No value is available at this time from these Tier 3 sources/databases: HEAST, NTP ROC, health and environmental agencies of Massachusetts and Texas, WHO (IARC), WHO (IPCS/INCHEM), Canada, The Netherlands (RIVM), ECHA (REACH) and OECD HPV.

Mutagenic Mode of Action (MMOA)? (Y/N)

-- NO USEPA, 2015

MMOA Details -- NA

Not listed as a carcinogen with mutagenic MOA in the USEPA OSWER List.

Developmental or Reproductive Effector? (Y/N)

Yes No, the RfD or RfC/ITSL is not based on a reproductive-

developmental effect. However, the 1996 IRIS RfC value is based on a reproductive study.

MDEQ, 2015

Developmental or Reproductive Toxicity Details

NA

Recommends further evaluation for developmental and reproductive effects. IRIS (1996) RfC is based on a developmental effect: Critical Study: Chlorobenzene Producers Association. 1986. Parachlorobenzene: Two-generation Reproduction Study in Sprague-Dawley Rats. Study 86-81-90605. MRID No. 411088-1. Available from USEPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460. Critical effect: Increased liver weights in P1 males

State Drinking Water Standard 75 75 SDWA, 1976


12



(SDWS) (ug/L)

SDWS details NA MI Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 1976 PA 399

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) (ug/L)

-- NO SDWA, 1976 and USEPA SMCL List

SMCL details NA MI Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 1976 PA 399 and USEPA SMCL List

Is there an aesthetic value for drinking water? (Y/N)

NO Not evaluated. NA

Aesthetic value (ug/L) NA NA NA

Aesthetic Value details NA NA

Phytotoxicity Value? (Y/N) NO Not evaluated. NA

Phytotoxicity details NA NA

Others


13

(C) Chemical-specific Absorption Factors

Part 201 Value Update Source/Reference/Dates


Gastrointestinal absorption efficiency value (ABSgi)

--- 1.0

MDEQ, 2015/USEPA RAGS-E

ABSgi details RAGS E (EPA, 2004) Default Value

Skin absorption efficiency value (AEd)

--- 0.1 MDEQ, 2015

AEd details

Ingestion Absorption Efficiency (AEi)

1.0 MDEQ, 2015

AEi Details

Relative Source Contribution for Water (RSCW)

0.2 MDEQ, 2015

Relative Source Contribution for Soil (RSCS)

1.0 MDEQ, 2015

Relative Source Contribution for Air (RSCA)

1.0 MDEQ, 2015

Others


14

(D) Rule 57 Water Quality Values and GSI Criteria

Current GSI value (g/L) 17

Updated GSI value (g/L) 17

Rule 57 Drinking Water Value (g/L) 24

Rule 57 Value

(g/L) Verification Date

Human Non-cancer Values- Drinking water source (HNV-drink) 1,100 11/2011

Human Non-Cancer Values- Non-drinking water sources (HNV-Non-drink) 11,000 11/2011

Wildlife Value (WV) NA NA

Human Cancer Values for Drinking Water Source (HCV-drink) 24 11/2011

Human Cancer values for non-drinking water source (HCV-Non-drink) 240 11/2011

Final Chronic Value (FCV) 17 9/2011

Aquatic maximum value (AMV) 100 9/2011

Final Acute Value (FAV) 210 9/2011

Sources: 1. MDEQ Surface Water Assessment Section Rule 57 website 2. MDEQ Rule 57 table

http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3313_3686_3728-11383--,00.html

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wb-swas-rule57_210455_7.xls


15

(E) Target Detection Limits (TDL)

Value Source

Target Detection Limit – Soil (g/kg) 100 MDEQ, 2015

Target Detection Limit – Water (g/L) 1 MDEQ, 2015

Target Detection Limit – Air (ppbv) 6.20E-01 MDEQ, 2015

Target Detection Limit – Soil Gas (ppbv) 2.10E+01 MDEQ, 2015


16

CHEMICAL UPDATE WORKSHEET ABBREVIATIONS: CAS # - Chemical Abstract Service Number. Section (A) Chemical-Physical Properties Reference Source(s): CRC Chemical Rubber Company Handbook of Chemistry

and Physics, 95th edition, 2014-2015 EMSOFT USEPA Exposure Model for Soil-Organic Fate and

Transport (EMSOFT) (EPA, 2002) EPA2001 USEPA (2001) Fact Sheet, Correcting the Henry’s

Law Constant for Soil Temperature. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C.

EPA4 USEPA (2004) User’s Guide for Evaluating Subsurface Vapor Intrusion into Buildings. February 22, 2004.

EPI USEPA’s Estimation Programs Interface SUITE 4.1, Copyright 2000-2012

HSDB Hazardous Substances Data Bank MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality NPG National Institute for Occupational Safety and

Health Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards PC National Center for Biotechnology Information’s

PubChem database PP Syracuse Research Corporation’s PhysProp database SCDM USEPA’s Superfund Chemical Data Matrix SSG USEPA’s Soil Screening Guidance: Technical

Background Document, Second Edition, 1996 USEPA/EPA United States environmental protection agency’s

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment). July, 2004.

W9 USEPA’s User Guide for Water9 Software, Version 2.0.0, 2001

Basis/Comments: EST estimated EXP experimental EXT extrapolated NA not available or not applicable NR not relevant Section (B) Toxicity Values/Benchmarks Sources/References: ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry CALEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CAL DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control CAL OEHHA CAEPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard

Assessment CCD MDEQ Chemical Criteria Database ECHA European Chemicals Agency (REACH) OECD HPV Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development HPV Database HEAST USEPA’s Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables IRIS USEPA’s Integrated Risk Information System MADEP Massachusetts Department of Environmental

Protection MDEQ/DEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality DEQ-CCD/AQD MDEQ Air Quality Division DEQ-CCD/RRD MDEQ Remediation and Redevelopment Division DEQ-CCD/WRD MDEQ Water Resources Division MNDOH Minnesota Department of Health NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental

Protection


17

NYDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

OPP/OPPT USEPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs PPRTV USEPA’s Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values RIVM The Netherlands National Institute of Public Health

and the Environment TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA OSWER USEPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency

Response USEPA MCL USEPA Maximum Contaminant Level WHO World Health Organization WHO IPCS International Programme on Chemical Safety

(IPCS/INCHEM) WHO IARC International Agency for Research on Cancers NA Not Available. NR Not Relevant. Toxicity terms: BMC Benchmark concentration BMCL Lower bound confidence limit on the BMC BMD benchmark dose BMDL Lower bound confidence limit on the BMD CSF Cancer slope Factor CNS Central nervous system IURF or IUR Inhalation unit risk factor LOAEL Lowest observed adverse effect level LOEL Lowest observed effect level MRL Minimal risk level (ATSDR) NOAEL No observed adverse effect level NOEL No observed effect level RfC Reference concentration RfD Reference dose p-RfD Provisional RfD

aRfD Acute RfD UF Uncertainty factor WOE Weight of evidence Section (C) Chemical-specific Absorption Factors MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality USEPA RAGS-E United States Environmental Protection Agency’s

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment). July, 2004.

Section (D) Rule 57 Water Quality Values and GSI Criteria GSI Groundwater-surface water interface NA A value is not available or not applicable. ID Insufficient data to derive value NLS No literature search has been conducted

(A) Chemical-Physical Properties - Michigan

Documents

Transcript of (A) Chemical-Physical Properties - Michigan