'  ALDICARB,  ALDICARB SULFOXIDE
                              AND ALDICARB SULFONE  -

                                      1995
                         .  V >
                         Drinking Water Health Advisory

                    Health  and Ecological Criteria Division
                        Office of Science and Technology
                                 Office of Water  •      '
                      ,U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
                              Washington, DC  '20460
 I.   INTRODUCTION                     .   '

 0   The Health Advisory (HA) Program,  sponsored by the Office of Water (OW),
 provides information on the health effects,  analytical methodology and
 treatment technology that would be useful in dealing with the contamination of '
 drinking water.  Health Advisories describe  nonregulatory concentrations of
 drinking water contaminants at which adverse health effects would not be
 anticipated to occur over specific exposure  durations. 'Health Advisories •
•contain a margin of safety to protect sensitive members of .the population.

     Health Advisories serve 'as informal technical guidance to assist Federal,
 State and local officials responsible for protecting public health when
 emergency spills or contamination situations occur.  They are not to be
 construed as^legally enforceable Federal standards. .The HAs are subject to
 change as new information becomes available.      •       -  .

     Health Advisories are developed for one-day, 'ten-day, longer-term
 (approximately 7 years, or 10%.of individual's lifetime) and lifetime
 exposures based on ,data describing noncarcinogenic endpoints of toxicity.
 Health, Advisories do nob quantitatively incorporate any" potential carcinogenic
 risk from such exposure.  For those substances that are known or probable
 Human ^carcinogens, according to the Agency classification scheme ('Group A or
 B)>• Lifetime HAs are not .recommended.   The chemical concentration values for
 Group A or B carcinogens are correlated with carcinogenic risk estimates-by
" employing a cancer potency (unit risk)  value together with assumptions for
 lifetime exposure and the consumption of drinking water.  The cancer unit >risk
 is  usually derived from the linear, multistage model with 95% upper.confidence
 limits.  • This provides a low-dose estimate of cancer risk to humans that is
 considered unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk in excess of the stated
 values.   Excess cancer risk estimates may also be calculated using the one-
 hit,  Weibull,  logit or probit'models.   There is no current understanding of  '
 the- biological mechanisms involved in cancer to suggest that any one of these
•models is able to predict risk more accurately than another.  Because each
 model is based on differing assumptions, the estimates that are derived can
 differ by several orders of magnitude.:           '.

-------
   This Health Advisory (HA) is based on the revision of the 1987 drinking
water HA document: for these contaminants.  The quantification of toxicological
effects in this HA is based on the available new information on these
chemicals up to 1994, including the November 1992 revised RfDs.

ii. GENERAL INFORMATION AND PROPERTIES

CAS Nos.    Aldicarb - 116-06-3
            Aldicarb sulf oxide - 1646-87-3                                 .
            Aldicarb sulf one - .1646-88-4

Structural Formulas
                            1             •-                                   '
       Aldicarb:

                                CH3   /   .0
                                                   I
                                CH3                H

         i           •             '                         -          .
             2-Methyl-2-(metnylthio)propiorialdenyde p-(methylcarbani6yi)oxinie

      Aldicarb Sulf oxide:
                            O  CH3             O  ,
                                GH3           -  ;   H                -

            2-Methyl-2- (methylsulf InyDpropionaldehyde O- (methylcarbamoyl)oxime

      Aldicarb Sulf one:
                                   .          '              • V

                            O   CH3           ,0
                            II          '     II
                       CH3-S-C-CH = N~O- C -N-CH3
                            II.                l                            ,
                            O   CH3                H

            2-methyl-2- (methyl sulf onyl) prop ionaldehyde 0- (methylcarbamoyl)oxinie

   Synonyms   -                  '

     •   Aldicarb:  Temik                                         '    .

     *   Aldicarb sulf oxide:  Temlk sulfide

     •   Aldicarb sulf one:   Aldoxicarb, Standak

   Uses               ;       _             .          '         •'•.-•

     •   Pesticide (insecticide,  nenatocide,  acaracide)

-------
                                                                         1995
Properties   (Registrant's unpublished data; FAO/WHO,  1980?  Knaak- et  al..  1966;
             Ruhr and Dorough,  1976; Lemley and  Zhong,  1983; Martin and
             Worthing,  1977)                            "
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight
Physical State
Boiling Point (°C)

Melting Point (°C)
Density
Vapor Pressure  (mm Hg>"
Specific Gravity
Water Solubility  (g/L)
Log Octanol/
  Water Part it ion
  Coefficient   •       ;
Taste Threshold (Water)
Odor Threshold  (Water)
Odor Threshold  (Air)
                             Aldicarb:
C7HI4O,N2S
190.. 3 "
White crystals
Decomposes
above 100 °C
100

0.05 (20°C)
1.195 (25°C).
0.6 (room temp.)
  Aldicarb
"  SuIfoxide  ,

 C7HMOjN2S
,206.06
.Crystalline
 108-110
 330
  Aldicarb
  Suifone

C7H,«04N2S   ,
222.1
Crystalline
132-133
10 (20°C)
Odorless to light   —
sulfur smell
Occurrence
    Hater
        Aldicarb will be released to the environment  from  its
        manufacture and use'as a systemic pesticide,  acaricide,
        nematocide (Howard, 1991; Budavari, 1989).
                                       and
        In' a data base that describes the extent of ground-rwater
        contamination by aldicarb in the U.S., al'dicarb was detected
        in- 19 of 25, States.  A.total of 12 States reported levels
        above 10 pg/L of which 10 had concentrations above 30 pg/L  and
        three had-concentrations'greater than 100 pg/L (Howard, 1991).

        In the U.S.  EPA's National Survey of Pesticides in Drinking -..
        Water. Wells (National.Pesticide Survey},, aldicarb was .not
        found in 566 community water system wells and 783 rural
        domestic drinking water wells,  with a minimum reporting limit'
        of 0.71 pg/L.   Based on the precision of the survey, U.S. EPA
        estimates that the maximum number of wells that may contain
        aldicarb-nationwide is 750 (0.8%)  community water supply wells
        and  83,100 (0.8%)  rural domestic wells based on a 95% upper-
        bound confidence level ((U-S.  EPA,  1990).              • •

-------
                                                                    1995
    Based on a review of the literature,  Cohen et al.  (1984) found
    that typical aldicarb levels detected in well water from 13
    States ranged from 1-50 /^g/L. ,

    According to Miller et al .  (1990),  the California Department
    of Food and Agriculture's well inventory data base reported
    that aldicarb was undetected in 520 samples (456 wells) from  <
    25 California counties.  Aldicarb' s degradation products,
    aldicarb -sulf oxide and aldicarb sulfone, were detected in 7
    wells, and >8 wells, respectively,  out of 67 wells sampled in 14
    counties.   Concentrations ranged from 0.18-1.02 pg/L for
    aldicarb sulfone and from 0.21-1.97 A*g/L for aldicarb
    sulf oxide.           .                               •

    Klaseus et. al. (1988) reported that in a cooperative survey
    between the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota
    Department of Agriculture,  aldicarb was found in 2 wells (5
    samples) from 100 private wells and was undetected in '400
    public wells sampled.  Detections ranged from 0.50-30:6 pg/L
    with a median of 9.0 /jg/L.   The detection limit was 0.5
    Jones and Beck (1984)  reportedly found aldicarb in 10 of 39.
    surface water samples  and  3  of 53 ground-water samples from
   'six, Florida citrus groves. .  Concentrations  ranged from 
-------
                                                                         1995
       ' Based on FDA  Total  Diet' Survey sampling results from the
        period April  1982 to  April  1985,., the  daily dietary intake of
        • aldicarb for  eight  di'f ferent  age-sex  groups were calculated to
        be as follows:   Infants  (6-11 months) "0.002. fjg/day,  toddlers
        (2 years)  0.006  /jg/day,  females (14-16  years)  0.009  /^g/day, '
       . males (14-16  years) 0.008 jjg/day, , females (25-30 years.)  0.008
        fig/day, males (25-30  years) 0;011  (jg/day, females (60-65
        years) 0^014  pg/day,  "and males (60-65 years)  0.018 pg/day
        (Gunderson, 1986)..       .          .
    •   No. data were  available  concerning  aldicarb 'levels in-air.      ' •
        However, -it is  anticipated  that .levels  in ambient air may  be
        negligible due  to, its low vapor .pressure.

Environmental Fate    ,
             *            i                         -             •
  • ,If released to soil,  aldicarb is 'expected to  be  degraded both
    biologically and  chemically,  being subject  to oxidation and
    hydrolysis.  It is  expected to  be mobile in soil 'and has been' found to
    be susceptible to leaching.   Vaporization from soils will vary with
    soil moisture, evaporating  more rapidly from  dry soils. (Howard,  i991).
    In a laboratory study by  (Bull  et al. ,' 1970 as cited in Howard,  1991),
    8.2% and 16. .7% of aldicarb  applied to  wet and dry s'and (25°C),
    respectively, was lost over a 24-hour  period.'

-  • The adsorption coefficient  (!(„.) for aldicarb  was measured in several
 ;  studies with values ranging from 8.2-37 (Howard,  1991).   Kenaga (1980)
    estimated a similar value of  32.  Based on  these K^  values,  aldicarb  ,
    should not adsorb significantly to soil.                , '

  • In soils where oxidation and  hydrolysis rates are slow compared to the
    leaching rates, aldiqarb will be leached into ground water.  - The
    susceptibility of aldicarb  to leaching is supported  by monitoring
    results whVich indicate the  presence of aldicarb  in the ground  waters  -
    of many States (Howard, 1991; Cohen et al... 1984).

  • The hydrolysis of aldicarb  in soil is  catalyzed  by both acids  and
    bases.  The rate  'of hydrolysis  was found to vary with pH in 'some     •
    experiments with  half-lives as  low as  0.4-3.2 days (at-25°C) for 'a pH
    range of 4.5-4.9  and  as' much  as 23 days (at 15°C) for a pH of 7.2.  'In
    another study, however, rates varied only slightly in the pH range of
    4-10 with half-lives  found  to be approximately 0.67  days {Howard,
         '                  "
  .• Aldicarb is oxidized, in soil  to trie .sulfoxide  and  sulfone  by chemical
    processes and is probably mediated biologically  in some cases.'  It has
    been reported that 8-20% of (the aldicarb  added to  soil  is  oxidized
    immediately to the sulfone, presumably by chemical oxidation,  followed
  .  by slower oxidation  rates.  The overall oxidation  halfrli'fe for

-------
                                                                       1995
   aldicarb  in soil varies  from  1.7-12 days  (pH  1-10), but remains  fairly
   constant  over the pH range of 4.4-10.  The  lowest oxidation  half-lives
   have been reported.for greenhouse soil, sandy loam, and Paimyrian soil,
   ranging from less than 1 day  to several days,  while in clay  loam and peaty
   sand half-lives of  about 1 .week were measured.  In surface soils,
   oxidation occurs more rapidly than in subsurface soils and fertilization
   may.result in-increased oxidation rates (Howard, 1991).

\»  Depending on the soil type, hydrolysis of aldicarb may 'occur at  a
   faster or slower rate than oxidation.  Results  from field studies have
   found aldicarb-half-lives ranging from several  days to several months.
   In fields previously treated with aldicarb, degradation rates were
   found to  be more rapid (Howard, 1991).                                '

•  In water, aldicarb  is not expected to adsorb •''significantly to bottom
   sediments or suspended particles based on its low K^ value.
   Experimental results indicate that it will  be subject to hydrolysis
  with rates varying with pH and temperature.   At pH 7.5 or lower  and
   temperatures of,15°c or  lower,  aldicarb  is relatively  stable  to
  hydrolysis.  The half-life .at pH 7.5 and 15°C  is 1,90O days and 3,240
   days at p!-J 5.5 and  15°C.  The  lowest  measured  hydrolysis half-life was
   131 days  at a pH of 4 and a temperature of  2O°C.  Based on an
  estimated Henry's Constant of 4.17xlO'9 atm-mj/mole, volatilization
   from water should not be an important fats  process.  The
  volatilization half-life for aldicarb in lake,and pond water was      N
  determined to be 5 days (Howard, 1991; Cohen  et al.. 1984).,

• Degradation of- aldicarb in ground water occurs  at a slow rate.   Under
  aerobic conditions,  it does not degrade unless  a relatively  high pH
  exists (pH 8.5).   In anaerobic studies,  reported half-lives 'in ground
  water were between 62-1,300 days at a pH range  of 7-7-8.3.
  Experimental results have shown that aldicarb sulfoxide" is reduced to
  aldicarb  in ground water under aerobic conditions and under  anaerobic
  conditions when glucose is added (Howard,  1991) .  No .studies  on
  biodegradatiori in natural waters were found.

• Aldicarb has been shown to photolyze when irradiated at,254  nanometers
   in acetonitrile.   No information was found, however, concerning
  photolysis of aldicarb in the environment (Howard, 1991).

•  In the atmosphere, aldicarb may be- partially  adsorbed onto
  particulates in air based on a relatively low vapor .pressure of  IxlO"4
  mm Hg.  Aldicarb, which is riot adsorbed onto  air particulates,'will  be
   susceptible to vapor phase reactions with hydroxyl radicals,  with an
  estimated .half^life of 0.24 days (Howard,  1991),

• Aldicarb  is not expected.to bioconcentrate  on aquatic organisms  based
   on reported bioconcentratiori factors (BCF)  of 42 and 4.  Kenaga  (1980)
   calculated the BCF to be 4 from the water solubility of aldicarb,
  while Garten and Trabalka (1983 as cited in Howard, 1991) measured a
   BCF 'of 42 in a microcosm study for a single species of fish.

-------
                                                                       .  1995
 III.   PHARMACOKINETICS      ••'-'.          ' '-,     ^     .  '.

 Aldicarb;     .                         .                  .             •.    '

 Absorption '                    ...            .                     '             N
                                                                                1
   • Aldicarb is readily and almost completely absorbed through the gut in a
     variety of mammalian and non-mammalian species (Knaak et al..  1966;
    >Andrawes et al... 1967; Dorough and Ivie, 1968; Dorough et al.. 1970; Hicks
     et al..  1972; Cambon et al.,  1979).        .     .

   • Dermal  absorption of aldicarb has been demonstrated in rabbits (Ruhr and
     Dorough, 1976; Martin and Worthing/  1977; West arid Carpenter,  1966) and
     rats, "(Gaines, 1969) and would be expected to occur in unprotected humans.
     in manufacturing and field application settings.   West and Carpenter
    "(1966)  have shown that dermal .absorption of  aldicarb by,, rabbits is
     facilitated by the use of oil or an  organic  solvent as the application
 ;.    vehicle.    •       .- ' .          •                    <•

 Distribution                   .-."•'•
      1 •                ' •         . ' "  . :                       •
   • Aldicarb was distributed widely in the tissues of Holstein cows when
     administered in feed at 0.6 or 1.2 ppm (Dorouqh et al.', 1970).-  Highest
     residues were found in the liver.-  When aldicarb was administered at
     O.12  ppm in this study, residues were  detected only in the liver.
     Aldicarb residues have also been found in cow's milk (Dorough and Ivie.,
    • 1968) .      •/'           -         '
       ' • • - .         .'•..'        i                   •     " .
   • In fats administered aldicarb orally,  -residues were found in -all 13 tissue
  ,   types analyzed.  Hepatic residue levels were similar to"those of many
     other tissues (Andrawes et al..  1967).   ,                     '.  -

   • Aldicarb (in a 1:T molar ratio of the  parent compound to the sulfone)
     administered orally to laying hens in  a single dose for 21 consecutive
     days  resulted in.patterns of distribution that were similar for both
^     exposure durations.  The liver and kidneys were the ,main target organs
     {Hicks  et al.. 1972).  Residues also were present in both the yolks and
•  •   whites  of the eggs laid by these hens.             '       '           .

 Metabolism   • •        .        .     ','.."

   • The metabolism of aldicarb involves  both hydrolysis of.the carbamate ester
     and oxidation of the sulfur to the 'sulfoxide, and sulfone derivatives.  All
     three of these compounds are active'cholinesterase (ChE)  inhibitors
     (Andrawes et al.-,  1967;. Bull et al.. 1967).

   • Metabolic end products of aldicarb detected  in both the milk and'urine of
    1 a  cow included the', sulfoxides and sulfones of .the parent,'compound. An
     oxime and a nitrile, as well as. a number of  unknown metabolites,, were also
     detected (Dorough and Ivie, 1968).-                 '  '

-------
                                                                        1995
Excretion                      .                                  '

  • Elimination of aldicarb and its metabolites occurs primarily via the
    "urine, as demonstrated in rats (Knaak et 'al., 1966), cows  (Dorough and
    Ivie, 1968) and chickens (Hicks et al... 1972).

  * Excretion of aldicarb as CO2  via  the  lungs has been demonstrated to be a
    minor route in rats (Knaak et al.. 1966).

  • Excretion of aldicarb is relatively rapid with reported 24-hour
    elimination values in rats and cows of approximately 80 to 90% of the
    administered dose {Knaak et'al..  1966; Dorough and Ivie, 1968).

ftldicarb Sulfoxide;

Absorption

  • Aldicarb sulfoxide is readily and almost completely absorbed through the
    gut in a variety of mammalian and non-mammalian species* (Knaak' et al..
    1966; Andrawes et al.. "1967;  Dorough and Ivie, 1968; Dorough et al.. 1970;
    Hicks et al.. 1972; Cambon et al., 1979).  Administration of. oral doses of
    radiolabeled aldicarb .sulfoxide to female rats resulted in 80-90%
    excretion of the jradiolabel in the urine and 2-5% excretion in the feces
   .within the first 24 hours (Andrawes et al., 1967).'
                                       '.                   -      i

  • Dermal absorption of aldicarb sulfoxide by laboratory animals is h£ghly
    dependent on the methodology  employed, particularly the application
    vehicle.  Studies by West and Carpenter (1966). have shown'that aldicarb
   •and its metabolites are absorbed  when' applied to the skin of' rabbits;•
    however, the rate'and extent  of absorption- vary, greatly.  Aldicarb
    sulfoxide which is considerably more water soluble than aldicarb, the -
    parent compound, is not well  absorbed'into the skin' from aqueous
    solutions.     • .    '                  ,          -
     r-
Distribution

  • Information regarding the distribution of aldicarb sulfoxide is limited to
    studies in which tissue levels of the aldicarb and its metabolites were
    measured following administration of the parent compound (Cambon et al..
    1979; Andrawes et al.. 1967;  Hicks et al.. 1972).  These studies have
    provided information on the general distribution pattern of radioactive
    label with no indication that any particular tissue or  group of tissues
    was selectively sequestering aldicarb,sulfoxide.
                                      ' 8

-------
                                                                         1995
Distribution   .,'.''                ;
     r       *        •
*     \                                  •                          ,
  • Information on  distribution patterns of aldicarb  sulfone  is  limited  to
    studies in which tissue levels .of  aldicarb  and  its metabolites were
    measured  following  administration  of the parent compound  (Cambon et  al..
  ;  1979; Andrawes  et al.. 1967; Hicks et al..  1972).  As  stated previously,
    these'studies have  provided information on  the  distribution  pattern  of the
    radioactive label .with no  indication that any particular  tissue  or group
    of tissues was  selectively sequestering'.aldicarb  sulfone.  As previously
    described, when aldicarb and/or aldicarb sulfone  was orally  administered
  .  to hens in either a single dose.or for  21 consecutive  days,  the  pattern of
    distribution was similar for either duration of exposure.  Liver and
    kidney were .found, to contain .the' highest level  of residues  (Hicks' et- al.,
    1972).                 .                   .    '

Metabolism                               -                   ..         '

  .• Incubation of aldicarb sulfone with•micrpsomes, with or without  NADPH,
    (reduced  nicotinamide adehine dinucleotide  phosphate), was found to
    partially destroy the sulfone derivative (Oonnithan and Gasida,  1967)..

Excretion             '    .    •    '
         '            V       •/      •  "          •''.''''-.'
                                       /            '        .                  i
  • Aldicarb'sulfone is eliminated primarily through  the urine.as demonstrated
    in rats (Knaak  et al.. 1966), cows  (Dorough and Ivie,-1968)  and  chickens
    (Hicks et al..  1972).
IV.  HEALTH EFFECTS                   '". . ..-.-,                          •

  i                           •*  '  '           "
Humans             ...                     .

ffldicarb; -. '       '            '   ' '          '••           . •    '.      •         '
                                       I
                                       V
    Short-term Exposure              •         •                           •     f
                          '  •'                '                '           I-
    •   In two related incidents in 1978 and  1979, ingestion of  cucumbers
        presumed to contain aldicarb at about 7 to 11 .ppm resulted  in
        complaints of,diarrhea, abdominal pain, vomiting,'nausea, excessive
        perspiration, .dyspnea, muscle  fasciculation, blurred vision,
    . ,   headaches, convulsions and/or  temporary loss of  limb function  in a
        total of fourteen residents of -a Nebraska town  (CDC, 1979;  Goes'
    x •   et al., 1980).  Symptoms occurred 15 minutes to  2.25 hours  after food
        consumption'and continued for  approximately 4 to 12 hours.
            '                *''                    '                         ,
    •   Goldman et al. (1990a,b) reviewed information available  on  four
        outbreaks of  food poisoning allegedly involving  aldicarb-cpntaminated
        cucumbers of  watermelon, in California between 1985 and 1988.   Dosage
        "estimates for 28 of over 1000  reported cases were derived from average
     ,   body weights  by age arid sex (from standard tables),- self reported
        symptoms and  estimated consumption, and analyzed aldicarb sulfoxide
        residues from watermelons.  .Estimates for 13 additional  cases  were
*     '              ,                   •           k       .
             '  *               v-   '                      '              *
               s  ..           '          10     '       -   -     ,     . '  •   '

-------
                                                                 1995
 provided by Hirsch et al. (1987) also based on estimates of body
 weights and consumption, and residues (in cucumbers) of total aldicarb
 believed to be primarily the -sulfoxide.  This total population  (N -
 41) had a median of 0.01 mg/kg  (for total aldicarb), a first quartile
 of 0.06 mg/kg and a third guartile of 0.029 mg/kg.  The dosage  range
 later calculated by Sette (1990) was 0.002-0.086 mg/kg for the  Goldman
 study.  The studies have some limitations since the description of the
 cases (self-reported) was limited in terms of onset, duration,  and
 severity and many of the symptoms (nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea) are
 nonspecific.  However, the cases analyzed .by Goldman (1990a,b)  were
 defined as. onset within 2 hours of ingestion which would be related to
 the expected peak of cholinesterase inhibition.  The analytical     ,,
 methodology to determine aldicarb sulfone residues was valid although
 the limit of. detection of 0.2 pptri (Goldman et al. 1990b) was somewhat
 higher than in other reports.   As a result, some mi'sclassif ication
 errors may have occurred.  The use of sex and age averages for  body
 weights and self-reported food consumption values are also subject to
 estimation errors (both underestimates and overestimates).
 Nevertheless the dosage estimates are regareded as reasonable general
 estimates of effects.  The LOAEL.is 0.01 mg/kg; for the most sensitive
 population the LOAEL' may be lower (O.002 mg/kg).

 Industrial' exposure by a man bagging aldicarb for 1 day resulted in
 nausea,  dizziness,  depression,* weakness, tightness of chest muscles,'
 and decreases in plasma and red blood cell ChE activity (Sexton,
 1966).  The symptoms lasted more than 6 hours, but the subject
 returned to work the following day without symptoms.

 A California farm worker was found dead from chest injuries about
 2 hours after he had begun loading aldicarb (formulated as Temik 15G)
 into a hopper.  A residue analysis .of his remains indicated that
 aldicarb,  aldicarb sulfoxide,and aldicarb sulfone were present  in
 samples of his blood, liver,  kidney and skin (hand,  abdomen and
 thigh).   The skin of the hand  had the highest concentration of
 aldicarb (0.492 ppm), while the kidney had the greatest concentrations
 of the sulfoxide and sulfone metabolites (0.261 and 0.422 ppm,
 respectively).  Little or none of the parent- compound was found in the
 blood, liver'or kidney (Lee and Ransdell, 1984).  The results of the
 toxicological analysis suggest that pesticide intoxication played at
 least a contributory role in his death.

 Union Carbide Corporation (1971) conducted a study using human
 volunteers (4 males/dosage level) who received aldicarb (99.2%  a.i.)
 in a single dose (administered in 100 mL of distilled water) at 0.025,
 0.05 or 0.10 mg/kg.   Each man's own blood ChE levels (based on  blood
 samples taken ,one hour prior to dosing)  served as the control for
 post-dosing ChE activity.  Blood ChE activity was'decreased in  every
 test subject at 1 and 2 hours post-exposure, with individual decreases
 ranging from 20 to 80% in the high-dosage group, 37 to 67% in the
 0.05 mg/kg group and 30 to 57% in the 0.025 mg/kg group.  There were
 •no clear dose-related trends in ChE inhibition.  Recovery was almost
. complete (75%) by 6 hours after dosing,  with more complete recovery

                 •  •          ' 11

-------
                                                                    I

                                                                 1995
 seen  in  the  lower  dose  groups.  All  subjects  that  received   0.10 mg/kg
 showed clinical  effects within  1 to  2 hours with the most common
 complaints being leg  weakness,  constriction of  the. pupils,  sweating,
 salivation,  slurred speech;  nausea,  and malaise.   One  subject  at
 0.05  mg/kg had a runny  nose .and another at 0.025 mg/kg had  a "panic
 attack." • The relationship of either of these observations  to  the
 aldicarb dosing  is not  clear.   A Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect -Level
 (LOAEL) of 0.025 mg/kg  can be identified  from this study for
 inhibition,of blood ChE.   •                          .
                   x'                 '         . •     '
 Rhone-poulenc (1992)  conducted  a double-blind placebo  controlled oral
 dosing study with  aldicarb (99.0% a.i.)including 38 men and 9  women.
 Subjects received  a light  breakfast  and single  doses of orange juice
 containing aldicarb to  be  consumed over a. period of 15-30 minutes.
 The doses of aldicarb were 0.01, 0.025, 0.050,  and 0.075 mg/kg body  ',
 weight in groups of 8 males  (only 4  males at  the highest dose) and
 0.025 and 0.050  mg/kg body weight in groups of  4 females; 16 control
 males and 6•control females .were included.  Subjects remained  seated
 or supine for the  first 4  hours after dosing.   Subjects were observed
 and signs and symptoms  (e.g., sweating) were  recorded  hourly for the
.first 6 hours and  at  24 hours.  Supine diastolic blood pressure, ECG
 and pulse rate,  pulmonary  functions  (PEV-1 and  PVC), saliva and urine
 output, and .pupil  diameter were measured  at pretest', hourly for 6
 hours and at 24  hours.  Red  blood cell and plasma  cholinesterase
 activities were  determined at pretest, 1, 2,  3, 4,  5/  and 6 hours.
 Hematology and clinical chemistry parameters  were  evaluated at
 screening, pretest, and at'24 hours.  Erythrocyte  and  plasma
 cholinesterase activities  were  depressed  at all dose levels with peak
 depressions  occurring at 1 hour and  the degree and duration of the '
 effect increased with increasing doses.   Inhibition of ChE  activities
 was greater  in females  than  in  males but  lasted longer in males.  At 1
 hour  post-dosing,  red blood  cell AChE was depressed 3.8%, 12%, 29%,
 and 38% compared to pretest  activity in males receiving 0.01,  0'.025,
 0.050, or 0.075  mg/kg and  were  depressed  20%  and 36%'in females'at
 0.025 or.0.050 mg/kg  aldicarb,  respectively.  One  hour after- dosing,
 mean  plasma  cholinesterase activity  was depressed  13%,  35%,  55%, and
 70% in males at  0.010,  0.025, 0.050, or 0.075: mg/kg and depressed 49%
 and '68% in females at 0.025  or  0.050 mg/kg, respectively.   One male in
 the 0.075 mg/kg  group who  had mistakenly  received  0.06 mg/kg developed
 diffuse and  profuse sweating that began at' about 2 hours and abated
 within "6' hours of  dosing;  no other males  in the O.O7S  mg/kg-group  >
 experienced  sweating.   Two other treated males, one given 0.05 mg/kg
 and,another  given  0.025 mg/kg,  experienced localized and mild  sweating
 with  onset at 2*'hours and  abatement  within 6  hours.  One male
 receiving O;075  mg/kg reported  that  he was light-headed Within an hour
 of dosing and 2  men in  the 0.01 mg/kg-group reported headaches within
 6 hours of dosing.  None of  the females developed  any  clinical signs
 or, symptoms  consistent  with  cholinesterase inhibition.  U.S. EPAN
 (1992d) .assessed the  sweating in the male receiving 0.06 mg/kg to be-
 definitely compound related  and the  mild  sweating  in other .males to be
 a possible effect  of  treatment.  A small decrease  in supine diastolic
 blood pressure,  'in general greater in the high-dose males .and  females

 .''•'                   ,     12-         .    -  ' '    •  • .

-------
r
1995
                     than in other groups,  was observed but, was -hot clearly related to
                     dosing.  Females at 0,05 mg/kg showed a higher saliva output than
                     controls which was marginally significant.' No consistent treatment-
                     related effects on EGG or pulse rate were seen and no effects on
                     clinical laboratory parameters or on lung function tests or pupil
                     diameters were observed in treated groups.  The NOAEL is considered to
                   '  be 0.01 mg/kg,! and the LOABL is 0.025 mg/kg aldicarb based .on sweating
                     observed in treated males.
                \                                                  '

                 Immunolooical Effects                                   .

                     Fiore et ai. (1986) and Mirkin et al. (1990) investigated the effects
                     of exposure to aldicarb in drinking water on.immunological parameters
                     in women living in the same country in Wisconsin.  Appropriate
                     controls had no detectable.levels of aldicarb in their drinking water.
                     Data in the first study and the followup study indicated
                     immunomodulatory effects on T- cell subsets, but no obvious adverse
                     effects^                         '       '              •   .

                 •   In, the'Piore et al. (1986) study, the approximate aldicarb dose in 23
                     exposed subjects, was O.O05 to 0.803 pg/kg/day.  [The mean adicarb
                     ingestion level as reanalyzed by Mirkin et al. (1990) was 0.087
                     pg/kg/day].  Several in vivo and in vitro immunological tests did not
                     reveal any differences between exposed and non-exposed groups (levels
                     of various immunoglobulins,  differential leukocyte counts, antibody
                     titers after immunization with tetanus booster in vitro
                     antigenic/mitogenic stimulation assays,  and lymphocyte proliferation
                     .assays).  An increase in the T-8 cell population was observed.

                 •   In the Mirkin et al. (1990)  followup, the aldicarb dose in 5 exposed
                     subjects was 0.001-0.066 pg/kg/day.  An increase in blood levels of
                     IgG but not IgA or IgM was seen and the total numbers of CD2+ and CDS*
                     lymphocytes (same as T-8 cells) was increased.  The CD 8-K population
                     of Ts cells was 90% higher than in nonexposed women and there was a  '
                     significant correlation between the level of aldicarb ingestion and
                   1  the elevated parameters.  The elevation of the T cell subset was not
                     accompanied by any clinical signs in either study.  Immunological
                     hazards' due-to aldicarb are not considered to have been demonstrated
                     in these studies (U.S. EPA,  1993)

             Aldicarb Sulfoxide;                                 .    ,        ,     .

               • Aldicarb sulfoxide has been identified as residues in watermelons and
                 cucumbers that were implicated in human food poisoning incidents  (Goldman
                 et al. (1990a,b).                 '
             Aldicarb Sulfone:

               • No information was located regarding human health effects resulting  from
                 direct exposure to aldicarb sulfone.          '       ' •
                         •
                                                   13

-------
                                                                        1995
Animals
Aldicarb;
    Short-term Exposure                                         •'.''.
                                         . ' "N   •
    ».  NAS (1977) stated that the acute toxicity of aldicarb is probably one
        of the greatest of any widely used pesticide.  ,

    •   Reported oral LD^ values for aldicarb administered to rats in corn or
        peanut oil. range from about 0.65 to 1 mg/kg  (Weiden et-'al..  1965-;
        Gaines, 1969).. Females appear to be. more sensitive than-males.  The
        oral LDM in mice is>0.3 to 0.5 mg/kg (Black et al.. 1973).  -

    •   Oral LDjg values .for aldicarb were higher when using a vehicle other
        than corn or peanut oil.  Weil (1973) reported an oral U>n".of
        7.07 mg/kg/day in rats' administered aldicarb as dry granules.
        carpenter.and Smyth .(1965) reported an LD^ of 6.2 mg/kg in rats,
        administered.aldicarb-in drinking water.

    •   The principal toxic effect of aldicarb in rats has 'been shown to be
    '  '  ChE inhibition (Weil.and Carpenter, 1963; Nycum and Carpenter,  1968;
        Weil, '1969) .  .     "•                                    .        .

    •   Feeding studies of. short duration (7 to 15 days) have demonstrated
        statistically significant decreases in ChE activity in rats  at
        aldicarb dosage levels of 1 mg/kg/day  (the approximate LDX in rats)
        (Nycum and Carpenter, 1970) and at 2.5 mg/kg/day.in chickens
        (Schlinke, 1970).  The latter dosage also resulted in some lethality
        in test animals.                     . .                •  »

    .•   Hazleton Laboratories (1987a) conducted a two-week, range-^f inding
        study, in which beagle dogs-  (one/sex/dosage group)'were administered
        "aldicarb (99.5% a.i.) in their diet at-. O. 0.1, 6.3, 1,, 3 or ,10  ppm
        (corresponding to dosage levels of approximately .0, 0.003, 0.008,
        0.029, 0.08M/0:114F, and'0.269M/0.294F)..  The only, effects reported
        were inhibition of plasma and erythrocyte ChE at. about, 3 ppm and
        above,* corresponding to a LOAEL of 0.08-0.114-mg/kg/day.  The  study
        design and data presentation are not sufficient to clearly identify a
        .No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level (NOAEL) for this study.

    •' '.  Hazleton' Laboratories (1991) conducted a 5-week study in dogs
        (6/sex/dosage group) that received aldicarb  (99.7% a.i.) in  their diet
        at 0, 0.35, 0.7, or 2.0 ppm (corresponding to dosage levels  of     >
        approximately 0.01, 0.02, or 0.57 mg/kg/day).  .Blood cholinesterase
        (ChE) activities were determined 2 hours after the 2-hour feeding
        period; brain-cholinesterase. activity, was analyzed.  No effect  on ChE
        activity was observed in dosed females.  In  1/6 males receiving 0.7
        ppm, a marginal inhibition of plasma ChE was observed when compared to
        the pretest value (inhibition was defined as greater than 20% •
        depression compared to the zeroTday value); no effect-on red blood

                      ' .  '            14 ..

-------
                                                                     1995
     cell '(RBC)  ChE  activity was  seen at 0.7 ppm.   In the  2 ppm group  of
     males,  a mean reduction of 30% in plasma ChE activity was observed at
     both 2  weeks  (6/6 dogs) and  5 weeks (4/6 dogs).  RBC  ChE activity was
     affected,in 1/6 dogs  at 2 weeks and 3/6 dogs at 5 weeks  (mean
     reduction 30%).  The  LOAEL for ChE inhibition  in males is 2 ppra  (0.057
     mg/kg/day)  and  the NOAEL is  0.7 ppm (0.02 mg/kg/day)1  Effects on gut
     motility were not considered related to dosing (U.S.  EPA, 1991b).'

Long-term Exposure                          •  '      -
 •                                        '            .
•    In a 1-year feeding study conducted by Hazleton Laboratories (1988),
     beagle  dogs (5/sex/dose) were administered aldicarb (99.7% a.i.)  in
     their diets at  0, 1,  2, 5, or 10 ppm (corresponding to^doses of
     approximately 0.028,  0.054,  0.132, and 0.231 mg/kg/day for males  and
     0.027,-  0.055,  0.132,  and 0;251 mg/kg/day in females).  Significant"
     decreases in plasma cholinesterase (ChE) activity were seen in males
     at all  treatment levels throughout the duration of the study..  In
     females, transitory decreases in plasma ChE activity  were seen at 2
     ppm and above.  Red blood cell ChE activity was transiently decreased
     in males (5 ppm) and  females (S ppm and 10 ppm), but  the activity was
     comparable  to controls at the 52-week test period.  Brain ChE activity
   • was decreased only in males at 10 ppm.   An increased  incidence of soft
     stool and mucoid stool in treated male dogs was reported.  However,
     considering the predose incidence rates and variations in groups, this
    was not considered evidence of a treatment related effect.   The data
    are flawed because of differences in reporting clinical signs,  failure
    to compare incidence for individual dogs at pretest with that, during
    dosing and inappropriate timing of observations to' detect cholinergic
    effects expected to occur within 2 hours of dosing (U.S.  EPA,  1992a).
    Dogs were checked for clinical signs only once daily.   Therefore, a
    NOAEL cannot be determined.   ,The,LOAEL  for effects ,on ChE activity was
    0.028 mg/kg/day.

•    Aldicarb administered for 2  years in the diets of rats or dogs at .
    dosage levels  up to 0.1 mg/kg/day resulted in no significant increases
    in adverse effects based on a variety of toxicologic end points (Weil
    and Carpenter,  1965,  1966a).   In another 2-year study, levels of  up to
    0.3 mg/kg/day resulted in no adverse effects in rats  '{Weil, 1975).'

Dermal/Ocular Effects .

•    Dermal LDW values (24-hour)  were 2.5 mg/kg for female rats, 3 .mg/kg
     for male rats (Gaines,. 1969)  and 5 mg/kg for rabbits  (Weiden et _al..
     1965).                        -

•    The results of dermal sensitization tests'in guinea pigs were also
     reported to be negative (Pozzani and Carpenter, 1968).  No other
     details are available.             •

•    Hazleton Laboratories  (1987a) conducted ophthalmologic examinations of
     beagle dogs-exposed to aldicarb (technical) in their  diet at dosage
     levels  of 0.003 to O.294 mg/kg/day.  No adverse effects were reported.

                                  15

-------
                                                                     1995
Immunoldaical.Effects                                            .

•   Olson et  al._  (1987)  conducted a series of  four experiments  to  '
    determine the effects of very low concentrations of aldicarb in  -.
    drinking  water on certain  immune parameters  in two outbred  strains  of
    mice.   In a 14-rday study,  Swiss-Webster mice (5/group)  received
    aldicarb  at 0, 10.,, 100 or  1,000 ppg  in drinking water  (corresponding
    to daily  dosages of  approximately 0,  0.0013,  0.013 and
    0.. 13 mg/kg/day).  On day 10, mice were challenged with  an injection of
    sheep*" erythrocytes (SRBCs),-In plaque-lorming cell  (PFC) assays  to
    determine the number of specific anti-SRBC antibody secreting  plasma
    cells,  an'inverse dose-response relationship was seen with  the most
    dramatic  and only statistically significant  decrease occurring in the .
  1  low .dosage, group (10 ppb).  The number of  PFCs per 106 spleen  .•
    lymphocytes was also decreased only  in the 10 ppb group.

•   In another experiment- in this series, CF-1 mice  (10/group)  were given
    drinking  water, with  aldicarb at ,0, 1, 10,  100 or 1;000  ppb
    (corresponding to approximately 0, 0.0002,'0.002, 0.02  and
    0.2 mg/kg/day) .for 44 days with SRBC challenge at 30 days  (Olson
    et.al.. 1987).  Significant decreases in the number, of  PFCs per spleen
    and per 10* spleen lymphocytes were seen only at-,the lowest level of
    exposure  (1 ppb).  Again,  an .inverse dose-response relationship was
    evident.  .Analysis of plasma hemolysin titers (antibodies produced  in
    response  to SRBCs) also showed an inverse  dose-response relationship
    with the  1 ppb group having the lowest,titer (62% of the control
  •• __value)    '     ,             '                  : •

•   Similar'results were reported for two additional 34-day experiments
   • using Swiss-Webster  and CF-1 mice  (each with 10 mice/dosage group)'  at
    the same  drinking water concentrations and estimated dosage levels  'as
    for the 44-day study described above (Olson  et al..  1987).  In
    addition, the study  using  CF-1 mice  also measured chemiluminescence
    ,(CHLM), which is considered to be a  correlate of phagocytic killing
    capability because it measures the respiratory hurst in the phagocytic
    cell when phagocytosis occurs.  CHLM measurements on peripheral blood
    .cells indicated nonsignificant reductions  of the CHLM  response, at the
    three -lower dosages  and a  16% enhancement  over the controls at the
    highest level (1,000 ppb).  The CHLM measurements  in the peritoneal
    exudate cells' (PECs) showed .a clear  and'Significant  inverse dose-
    response  with inhibition of'this parameter to 63% of the control  level
    at' 1 ppb  to 87% elevation  over the control level at-  1,000 ppb.
    Although  the  significance  of the inverse dose-response  relationship
    for any of these experiments is not  understood,  these  studies  provide
   • evidence  that immunomodulatory effects can occur, in  two strains of
    mice at extremely low level's of aldicarb in. drinking water  as  low as
    0.0013  mg/kg/day for '10 days for Swiss Webster mice  and as  low as
    0.0002  mg/kg/day for '30 days in Swiss Webster,and CF-1  mice.

•   Thomas  et al. (1990) did not'observe adverse effects on the immune
    systems of B6C3F, mice exposed to aldicarb in drinking water-at 0,  1',
    10 or 100 ppb- for ;34 days  (corresponding to  dosage .levels  of.-

'•'.'.•''    V      '         ' 16   -   '.           •'  '.'-•••

-------
                                                                    1995
    0>0.00032, 0.0031 and 0.033 mg/kg/day).  Following aldicarb exposure,
    no effects were observed "on the ability of splenic natural killer
    cells to lyse YAC-1 lymphoma cells and the ability of sensitized T-
    lymphocytes to lyse P815 (H-2d)  mastocytoma tumor cells.   No
    differences were seen in the percentages or absolute numbers of spleen
   1 lymphocyte subpopulations of T-cells, T-suppressor cells, T-helper
    cells or B-cells.  The NOAEL for these effects was 0.033 mg/kg/day.

Reproductive Effects        •    •

•   No reproductive effects have been demonstrated to result from the
    'administration of aldicarb to rats at levels up to 0.7 mg/kg/day in at
    3-generation study (Weil and Carpenter 1966c).  However, based on a
    decreased body weight of F2 pups in 'this  study,  a fetotoxic  LOAEL was
    identified as 0.7 mg/kg/day, and the NOAEL is 0.3 mg/kg/day.

•   A two generation reproduction study in rats was conducted at dietary
    levels that provided 0. 0.1. 0.4. 0.7-0.9, or 1.4-1.7 mg (aldicarb,
    (99.7% a.i.)/kg/day (Rhone-Poulenc,  1991).  Males and females
    (26/sex/group) were fed treated diets for 70 days prior to mating and
    continuously throughout the study.  P,j females were  bred twice;  the
    second mating was 2 weeks after weaning the Fla pups.  The F,
    generations were similarly mated to produce 2 litters.  Aldicarb had
    no apparent effect at-any mating based on precoital interval,
    pregnancy rate, gestational index and length, and there was a lack of
 ,. abnormalities in delivery.   Body weight gains were decreased during
    the growth phase for F0/males,at 1.4-1.7  mg/kg/day;  and  for  F0and  F,
    females, weight gains were decreased during growth,  gestation, and
    lactation at the two highest doses.   Plasma and erythrocyte
    cholinesterase activities were decreased 21%-30% in both males and
    females receiving 1.4-1.7 mg/kg/day.   The pup viability index at day 4
    was .decreased at the highest dose for both the first and second
   "litters in both'generation.  At 1.4-1.7 mg/kg/day, body weights were
    significantly lower than, controls during lactation in the Fu, F|k, and
    F2. Pups-  The parental systemic LOAEL was 0.-7-0.9 mg/kg/day based en
    decreased body weights and the NOAEL is 0.4 mg/kg/day.  The
    reproductive LOAEL is 1.4-1.7 mg/kg/day based on decreased pup wights
    and decreased pup viability-at day 4 of lactation; the NOAEL is 0.7-
    O.9 mg/kg/day;         '
                                            .'
Developmental Effects

•  -No developmental effects have been demonstrated to result from the
    administration of aldicarb' to rabbits (1RDC,  1983) or rats  (Weil and
    Carpenter 1964; Tyl and Neeper-Bradley, 1988).
                        j
•   IRDC (1983) evaluated the developmental effects of aldicarb  (99.5%
    a.i.) administered by.gavage to Dutch-Belted rabbits  (16/dosage group)
  "at 0, 0.1, .0.25 or 0.5 mg/kg/day on gestation days 7 through 27.  At
    the two higher dosage levels, body weight was decreased and pale  .. '
    kidneys and hydroceles on the oviducts were seen.  The numbers of
    implantations and viable fetuses per dam were reduced in all treatment
                                                 i                 -      /
                                  17

-------
                                                                1995
groups!  However, these decreases (only significant at the lowest
dose) were not considered-compound related and were due to ,the
unusually large number of corpora'lutea/dam and the.low rate of
preimplantation loss in the control group; historical data supported
this conclusion (U.S. EPA, 1992e).  No compound-re'lated effects' were
seen on mean fetal .body weight, sex ratio'or incidence of visceral or
skeletal malformations..  The LOAEL for this study is 0.1 mg/kg/day for
fetal.viability and implantation  loss.  The NOAEL for this study
(maternal toxicity) is 0.1 mg/kg/day.                        '      ,

Weil and Carpenter (1964) fed aldicarb (99.7% a.i.) to pregnant rats
either from gestation days 1-7, 5-15, or throughout'pregnancy and
weaning at dietary levels to provide an intake of 0, 0.04, 0.2, or
1 mg/kg/day.  No congenital malformations were reported for any group.
Maternal and fetal ,body weights were not affected .and there were no
effects on implantation, gestation, lactation, or pup viability.  The
NOASL for systemic and developmental.effects was equal to or greater
than/I mg/kg/day.          ,                                  .
                          s                      •

Tyl and Neeper-Bradley (1988) investigated the developmental toxicity
of ;aldicarb (99.5% a.i.} administered by gayage to  rats ,(25/dosage
group) at 0, 0.125, 0;25 or 0.5 mg/kg/day on gestation days 6 through
15.  Three dams in the high dosage group died on day 7 of gestation
and others in this group developed hypoactivity, tremors, urine
stains, audible respiration, lacrimation, nasal and ocular crusting
and loose feces.  Significant .reductions in body weight gain and •
decreased levels of food consumption were observed  at the two higher
dosage levels!  In the'.fetuseg, mean, body weight'was decreased at the
high dose.  .Increases in the incidence of ecchymosis (small
hemorrhages of the skin) of the trunk we're seen at  the mid and high
doses.' Also at the-"high'dose, there' was an increased'incidence of
lateral ventricle dilation with tissue depression and poor' '
ossification, of the sixth sternebra.  Although fetuses at the 0.125
mg/kg/day dose displayed some-ecchymosis. V.he incidence  (on a litter
basis) was within the range of laboratory historical.controls  (U.Si
EPA, 1991a).  The NOAEL for this  study is, therefore, 0.125 mg/kg/day,
and the LOAEjL, for effects on maternal weight gain and ecchymosis of
the fetus is 0.25 mg/kg/day. .   .  .       '           .          .    -

No adverse effects on milk;prdduction were observed in studies of
lactating .cows (Dorough and Iv.ie, 1968; Dorough et al. . .19701.

Statistically significant inhibition of ChE activity has-.been
demonstrated in the liver, brain  and blood of rat fetuses when their
mothers were administered aldicarb by gastric intubation on day 18 of
gestation (Cambon et al.. 1979).  These changes were seen at doses of
0,. 001 mg/kg and above' and were manifested within 5 minutes of the
administration of 0.1 mg/kg.  This study,. because of its design; does
not demonstrate any adverse developmental or- fetotoxic effects.  It *
does demonstrate that aldicarb rapidly crosses the placenta and the
data "reflect a potential effect on ChE activity in the fetus.
                                  '           .'
                              18                         '         -

-------
                                                                         1995
    Mutagenicitv                      .                        .  .

    »   Aldicarb has not been conclusively demonstrated to be mutagenic  in
        ~Ames assays or  in a dominant lethal mutageriicity test in rats.
         (Ercegovich and Hashed, 1973; Weil and Carpenter, 1974; Godek et al.,
        1980).                -    .                                            ,

    Care inoqen ic ity-

    •   Aldicarb does not significantly increase the incidence of tumors in
      ,.  mice or rats in feeding studies (Weil and Carpenter, 1965; NCI, ,1979).
        Bioassays with  aldicarb in.which rats and mice were fed either 2  or
        6 ppm in the diet for 103 weeks, revealed no treatment-related tumors
         (NCI, 1979).  It was concluded that under the conditions of the
        bioassay, technical grade  (99+%) aldicarb was not carcinogenic to F344
        rats or B6C3F,  mice of either sex.   A 2-year feeding study reported by
        Weil and Carpenter  {1965} also showed no statistically significant
      -' increase in tumors over controls when rats were administered  aldicarb
        in the diet at  concentrations equivalent to dosage levels of  0.005,
        0.025, 0.05 or  0.1 mg/kg/day.  However, the maximum tolerated dose
        (MTD) was not reached in these studies.  Weil (1975) similarly
        reported no adverse effects in rats fed aldicarb at 0.3 mg/kg/day, for
        2( years; however, data from this study are questionable because  the
        experimental protocol was not designed to assess the oncogenicity of
        this chemical.

    •'  In.a skin-painting study, Weil and Carpenter (1966b).found that
        aldicarb was noncarcinogenic in male C3H/H3J mice under the conditions
      , of the experiment.       .                       .                      '

    •   Intraperitoneally administered aldicarb did not exhibit transforming
        or tumorigenic  activity in a host-mediated assay using pregnant
      •  hamsters and nude (athymic) mice (Quarles et a1., 1979).'

Aldicarb Sulfoxide;
    Short-term 'Exposure •                  .    -     '

    •   Oral LD.JO values for aldicarb sulfoxide administered  in  corn oil  to
        male rats range from 0.45-1.1 mg/kg  (Weil and  Carpenter,  1970; Nycum
        and Carpenter, 1968; West and Carpenter, . 1966) .                   , •

    •   In rabbits, an acute dermal LD^ value of 20 mg/kg  was determined for
        aldicarb sulfoxide in aqueous solutions  (West  and  Carpenter,  1966).

    ••  'The principal toxic effect of aldicarb sulfoxide  (and the parent
        compound, .aldicarb) in rats is ChE inhibition  (Weil  and Carpenter,
        1963; Nycum and Carpenter, 1968;. Weii^ 1969).
        Nycum  and  Carpenter  (1970)  fed  rats  (5/sex/dosage group)  aldicarb
        sulfoxide  at. 0,  0.4  or" 0:8  mg/kg/day for  7  consecutive days.
        Evaluation criteria  included  plasma,  erythrocyte and brain ChE
                                                                %_   f

                                      -19                       '

-------
                                                                     1995
                                                 ,
     activity,  body weight changes,  relative liver and kidney weights and
   .  mortal-ity.  Male rats treated with 0.8 mg/kg/day had statistically
     significant decreases in erythrocyte ChE activity and in body weight.
     No effects were seen in females or , males that .received 0.4 mg/kg/day;
     this is identified as the NOAEL for this study.  The'LOAEL was
     0.8 mg/kg/day.            •                                          .

 •   A NOAEL of 0.12 rag/kg/day has been determined for a 1:1 mixture of
     aldicarb products (sulf one arid sulfoxide) ,  based on data reported by
    , Mirro et. al. (1982)  and DePass et al. (1985) who administered these
     compounds in the drinking water of young adult rats (10/sex/dosage
     group) for. 29 days at a total concentration of 0, 0.075, 0.3, 1.2,
     4.8, *or 19.2 ppm.  Based on water consumption, the dosage levels were
     approximately 0,  0;0074j 0.03,  0.12,  0.47 and 1.67 mg/kg/day for males
     and 0, 0.0098, 0.035, 0.14,  "0.54 and 1. 94, mg/kg/day for females.  Body
     weight and water consumption .were significantly reduced for males and
     females at the high .dose level (19.2 ppm).   Significant .decreases .in
     plasma and erythrocyte ChE activity were seen at 4.8 ppm in males and
     at 19.2 ppm in females.  Female rats at 19.2 ppm also displayed
     significant reductions in brain ChE activity.   •              ,   '

 Long-term Exposure

 •   Aldicarb sulfoxide was administered at levels to provide an 'intake of .
     O,  0.125,  0.25, 0.5  or 1.0 rag/kg/day in the diet_ to rats for 6 months
     (15/sex/dosage group) for 6 months' (Weil and Carpenter, 1968a) .  All
   ,  animals were evaluated for relative  ChE levels, liver and kidney
     weights and body weights.   Only ChE  activity was significantly,
     altered. ,  Plasma ChE activity was significantly inhibited in males and
     females that received 0.5' and 1.0 mg/kg/day and' in males that received
     0.125- and 0.25 mg/kg/day.   The inhibition of plasma ChE -activity at
     0.125 mg/kg/day -in males was noted at 3 months'but not' at .6 'months.
   .  Erythrocyte ChE activity was inhibited at doses of 0.25 mg/kg/day and
     above- following 'both 3 and- 6 months  of exposure in males and females.
     Brain ChE activity was significantly lower  in females fed. 1.0 and
     0.5 mg/kg aldicarb sulfoxide for 6 months.   A NOAEL of 0.125 mg/kg/day
     and a LOAEL '.of. 0. 25. mg/kg/day can be identified from this study based
     on brain ChE inhibition;              '            ...;'-

 •   In a second set of experiments' by 'Weil and Carpenter (1968a), used the
     same dosage • levels of aldicarb .sulfoxide as above for 3 months, groups
     of rats (15/sex/dosage group) were either sacrificed. immediately after
     the cessation of 'feeding or were placed on a control, diet for a 1-day
     recovery period.   Rapid recovery of  inhibited ChE activity was
     observed at all but  the highest do-sage level.  '
                               '                        ">      .      '
:'•   A' 3-month feeding study with' dogs that received aldicarb sulfoxide at
     dosage levels of 0,  0.0625,  0,125,  0.25 or 0. 5 mg/kg/day was also
     conducted by Weil and Carpenter (1968a).  None of the dogs died and no
     treatment-related effects were observed in body weight, organ weight,
                                   20 '

-------
                                                                    1995
    pathology or clinical chemistry. . The only effect observed was a
    slight decrease in plasma ChE activity at 0.5 mg/kg.  This decrease
    was'seen only after 1 month and not at 3 months of exposure.  A NOAEL
    of 0.25 mg/kg/day and ,a LOAEL of 0.5 mg/kg/day can be identified from
    this study.                                           .

•   In a 2-year study, Weil and Carpenter (1972) maintained rats
  •  (20/sex/dosage group) on diets containing aldicarb sulfoxide at 0.3 or
    0.6 mg/kg/day or a 1:1 mixture of sulfoxide and sulfone (0.6 and
    1.2 mg/kg/day). "A control group on a basal diet was also maintained
    under identical conditions.  Additional groups of'16 rats/sex/dosage
    group were maintained in parallel for serial sacrifice to determine'
    interim organ weights and histological effects.  The only treatment-
    related effect was reduced body weight and depression of plasma ChE
    activity in male rats at the. high dose of the sulfpxide-sulfone
    mixture.
         s   ' '

Dermal/Ocular Effects        •

•   No information has been located on dermal or ocular effects resulting
    fronT exposure to aldicarb sulfoxide.          .                       .

Reproductive Effects                                     .

•   No reproductive studies on aldicarb sulfoxide have been located in the
  -  available literature.  However, as with other effects, it is assumed
    that the reproductive effects of this compound would be similar to
    those of the parent compound.

Developmental Effects                  '                          -

•   No studies of the developmental effects of aldicarb sulfoxide have •
    been located in the available literature.  However, Wilkenson et al.• •
    (1983)  have- speculated that due to the increased polarity of this
    compound,  it would be less likely than aldicarb itself to cross the
    placenta.   Therefore, it would be conservative ,to assume that the
    NOAEL identified for the developmental effects of the parent compound,
    aldicarb,  would also be a NOAEL for al'dicarb sulfoxide.

Mutaaenicity
                        " X  .
•   No studies were located in the available literature,that assess -the
    mutagenic potential, of aldicarb sulfoxide in somatic cells or germinal
   -cells.   Evaluations of the parent compound {aldicarb) have indicated
    that it is nonmutagenic (Blevins et al.. 1977; Weil and Carpenter,
    1974; Dunkel and Simmon, 1980; Ercegovich andi Rashid, 1973).  As with
    other effects, it is assumed that the mutagenic potential of aldicarb
    sulfoxide would be similar to that of the parent compound.
                                  21

-------
                                                                         1995
    \Carcinoqenicitv      '                         ,

     •    Neither aldicarb nor its sulfoxide metabolite significantly increase
   .      the incidence of tumors in mice or rats in feeding studies' (Weil and
         Carpenter,  1965, 1972,*  NCI,  1979).   A 2-year feeding study reported by
         Weil-and Carpenter (1972)  did not result in a statistically
         significant increase in -tumors in the exposed group over the control
         group when rats were' fed aidicarb sulfoxide or a 1:1 mixture of  .
         aldicarb sulfoxide and  sulfone at concentrations equivalent to  '
         dosage levels of 0.3 and 0.6 or 0.6 and 1.2  mg/kg/day,  respectively.
         The most frequent types of tumors in both controls and  in treated rats
         were adenomas,of the pituitary and>triyroid;  however, the overall.
         incidence rate and type of tumor was,similar in all groups.  The
         existing data base is considered inadequate  to evaluate the potential
       .  for-human carcinogenicity by any of these compounds.

'Aldicarb Sulfone'      .                          •              •
     Short-term Exposure     .          '              • • ,
    i                                          .             • .             •    -

     •    Aldicarb sulfone is considerably less  toxic via  the oral route of
        ,. exposure in rats than  is aldicarb or aldicarb sulfoxide.  An oral  LDg,
         of  20-25 mg/kg has been reported for the sulfone'in male rats (Weil
       •  and Carpenter, 1970; Nycum and  Carpenter,  1968;" West and Carpenter,
         1966).   However,i in rabbits,  acute dermal LD^ values of 2O'mg/kg were
         determined for both, aldicarb  sulfoxide and aldicarb sulfone  in aqueous
         solutions (West and Carpenter,! 1966).   Weil et al.  (1974)  reported
         that the acute dermal, LDW for male rabbits was 194 mg/kg.

     •    The principal  toxic effect of aldicarb sulfone in rats has been shown
         to'be ChE inhibition (Weil and  Carpenter,  1963;  Nycum and Carpenter,
         1968;  Weil,  1969).     > '        '                      ,
                            i                '      •       i    i
                                                                        f
     •    Nycum and Carpenter (1970) fed  aldicarb sulfone  at 0, 0.4, 1.0, 2.5,
         5.0 or 20.0 mg/kg/day  for 7 consecutive days to  rats (5/sex/dosage  * '
         group).   Animals were  evaluated on the'following criteria:,  plasma,
         erythrocyte and brain  ChE activity,  body weight  changes, relative
         liver "and kidney weight and-'mortality.   No effects were observed in
         male rats fed  up to 2.5 mg/kg/day,  while at 5.0  mg/kg/day, there was a
         significant decrease; in plasma  and erythrocyte ChE "activity.  -In '  .
         females,  brain ChE activity'was significantly decreased at
         2.5, mg/kg/day  and above. - At  the1 highest dose (20 mg/kg/day), there
        •was a significant decrease in body weight and i'n" plasma,''erythrocyte
         and brain ChE  activity for-all  animals.   No effects .were observed  in
         those animals  given the lowest.dose.(0.4 mg/kg/day} (Nycum and
         Carpenter,  1970,).

     •  ,  As  described previously, a NOAEL of 0.12 mg/kg/day has been  determined
         for a mixture  of aldicarb oxidation products,  based on data  reported
        ,by  Mirro et al. (1982) and DePass et al. (1985).  who. administered
         aldicarb sulfone and sulfoxide  in-.a 1:1 ratio in the drinking-water of
         rats, for 29 days.                                           .
           ' /  ' '  •<                     .              •                -V
                                                                  •  •          \
           .   .'          • '            .22         •        .

-------
                                                                     1995
 Long-term Exposure

 •    In a series of experiments in rats, Weil  and Carpenter  (1968b)
    .administered  aldicarb sulfone (99.7% pure, 0.24  sulfoxide) at levels
     of 0, 0.2, 0.6,  1.8, 5.4 or 16.2 mg/kg/day in the diet  (15/sex/dosage
     group)  for 3  or  6 months.  After 3 months, groups were  sacrificed
     immediately after feeding diet for a 1-day recovery period.  All
     animals were  evaluated  for relative ChE levels,  liver and kidney
     weights and body weights.  A transient but significant ±>ody weight
     reduction was seen at the highest dose (16.2 mg/kg/day) but not at  the
     lower dose levels.  ChE  (plasma, erythrocyte and brain) activity was
     significantly inhibited in both sexes at,  doses of 1.8 mg/kg/day and
     above after both 3 and  6 months on, the diet.  In all cases, the
    •greatest inhibition of"ChE activity'was seen in  the plasma, followed
     by erythrocytes  and then brain.  In the recovery period, ChE activity
     returned to control levels in all groups,  except  those receiving the
     highest dosage level.  The NOAEL for brain ChE inhibition after 6
     months  of dietary exposure was 0.6 mg/kg/day.

 •    A 3-month feeding study with dogs that received  aldicarb sulfone
     <99."76% a.i., 0.24% sulfoxide) at levels  of 0, 0.2, O.6, 1.8 or
     5.4 mg/kg/day was also conducted by Weil  and carpenter.  (1968b).  Early
     in the  study  body weight was sl-ightly reduced at 5.4 mg/kg/day. ^No
     mortality was observed and no treatment-related  effects were observed
     in organ weight, pathology or clinical chemistry.  After three months,
     brain cholinesterase activity was reduced at doses above 0.2 mg/kg/day
     (0.6, 1.8, or 5.4 mg/kg/day).  Since animals were hot fed for up to 24
     hours prior to cholinesterase-determination's, the values do not
    .reflect peak  ChE activity depression which is known to occur within 2
     hours of dosing  and is then partially or  fully reversed.  Red blood
     cell ChE activity on the average was not  significantly different from
     controls in all  dosed groups.-  The LOAEL  for systemic toxicity is 5.4
     mg/kg/day based  on weight decrement and the NOAEL is 1.8 mg/kg/day.
     The NOAEL for depression of brain ChE activity is 0.2 mg/kg/day.

 »    Hazleton Laboratories (1987b) conducted a 1-year feeding study in
     beagle  dogs that were administered aldicarb sulfone (99% a.i.)in their
     diets at 0, 5, 25 or 100 ppm (corresponding to 'dosage levels of
     approximately 0, 0.11, 0.58-0.61 .and 2.21-2.30 mg/kg/day).  Brain
     cholinesterase (ChE)' activity at study .termination was  significantly
   .  depressed in  high-dose males (24%) and mid- and  high-dose females
     (19-23%) when compared,to controls.'  Red  blood cell cholinesterase
     activity was  also significantly depressed ,in high-dose  groups of both
     sexes (25-36%) and in mid-dose females (up to 22%).  Plasma
•   .  cholinesterase was inhibited 20-80% in dosed males and  40-72% in mid-
     and high-dose females.  At the lowest dose, no inhibition of plasma
     ChE was observed in females, but a marginal .decrease  (25%) was seen in
     males.  Decreased spleen weights were seen in mid- and  high-dose
     females and decreased thyroid/parathyroid weights in high-dose
     .females.  In  high-dose  males, livers had  slight  centrilobular venous
    .thickening and hyalinization and interlbbular fibrosis.  The LOAEL  for
                                   23

-------
                                                                     1995
     systemic toxicity based on  brain ChE  decrease is  25  ppm (O.58
     mg/kg/day),  and the  NOAEL is  5^ ppm (0.11  mg/kg/day).

 •    In a 2-year  study, Weil and Carpenter (1972)  maintained rats
     (20/sex/dbsage group)  on diets containing aldicarb sulfone (99.76% •
     a.i.  and 0.24% sulfoxide) at  0.6 or 1.2 mg/kg/day.  No treatment-
     related  effects were reported at either dosage level.

 Dermal/Ocular"Effects            *          :          • "  '          •

 •  ,  Hazleton Laboratories (1987b) found no treatment-related ophthalmic,
     abnormalities in dogs that .received aldicarb  sulfone in their diet at...
     levels corresponding'to 0.11  to 2.30  mg/kg/day for 1 year.

 »    Myers et al.  the 9.6 mg/kg/day-dose.  No developmental
     effects :or anomalies were seen in  pups.  Wilkenson et al. (1983)  noted
     that because of the  increased polarity of aldicarb sulfone. as compared.
t    to the parent compound, this  chemical would be less  likely to cross
     the placenta.  Therefore, it  would be conservative to assume that the
     NOAEL identified for the developmental effects of the- parent compound,
     aldicarb,  would -also be a NOAEL' for aldicarb  sulfone.

 Mutaoenicity                                    •-
          •,                          /
 •    Aldicarb sulfone was not mutageiiic in Salmonella'tvphimurium strains
     TA98,  TA100,  TA1535,  TA1537 or TA1538 with or-without 59 at Uevels'
     between  50 and 10', 000">g/plate (Godek et  al..  1980). .Aldicarb sulfone
                                ' '24

-------
                                                                         1995
        was  not  clastogenic  nor did  it cause chromosome  aberrations  in
        cultured CHO cells activated with  rat  liver  homogenate  and tested at -
        sulfone  levels of SO,  250, or 500  //g/mL  (Pharmacon,  1984).
        Evaluations of  the  parent compound, aldicarb, have  indicated that it
        is nonmutagenic {Blevins et._al._, 1977; Weil  and  Carpenter, 1974;
        Dunkel and Simmon, 1980; Ercegovich and  Rashid,  1973).. As with other
        effects, it is assumed that  the mutagenic potential  of  aldicarb
        sulfone  would be similar to  that of the  parent compound.' .

    Carcinoaenicity

    •   Neither  aldicarb nor its sulfone metabolite  have been demonstrated to
        significantly increase the incidence of  tumors in mice  or rats in
        feeding  studies (Weil  and Carpenter, 1965, 1972;  NCI, 1979).   A 2-year
        feeding  study reported by Weil and Carpenter (1972)  did not  result in
        a statistically significant  increase in  tumors over  controls when rats
        were fed aldicarb'sulfonate  dosage levels equivalent to 0.3,  0.6  or
        •2.4 mg/kg/day.  The  most frequent  types  of tumors in both control and
        treated  rats were adenomas of the  pituitary  and  thyroid.  However,  the
        overall  incidence rate and type of tumor was  similar in all  groups.
        The overall data base  is considered inadequate to evaluate the
        potential for human  carcinogenicity from aldicarb-sulfone.
V.  QUANTIFICATION OF TOXICOLOGICAL EFFECTS

   Health Advisories (HAs) are generally determined for one-day, ten-day,
longer-term (up to 7 years) and lifetime exposures if adequate data are
available that identify a sensitive noncarcinogenic end point of.toxicity. The
HAs for noncarcinogenic toxicants are derived using the following formula:
              u, _  (NpAEL or LOAEL)   (BW)
                      (UF)  (	L/day)
mg/L  {or	pg/L)
where:
        NOAEL = No-Observed-Adverse-Effect.Level  (thei exposure dose  in rag/kg
                bw/day).

        LOAEL - Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level  (the  exposure dose in
                mg/kg bw/day).    '                '              •     •

           BW = assumed body weight of protected  individual  (10-kg for child
                or 70-kg  for adult).

        UP(s) = uncertainty factors, based upon quality  and  nature of data
                (10, 100,  1,000,  or 10,000)  in accordance  with NAS/EPA
                guidelines;                                                '

       _'L/day = assumed water consumption  (1 L/day  for child or 2 L/day for
                adult) .                    ••'*_•

-------
                                                                          1995
     The available data suggest that the .appearance of chollnergic symptoms  •
  indicative of ChE inhibition is 'the most sensitive indicator of the effects of
  exposure to al'dicarb and its metabolites.  Because these' effects are rapidly
  reversible, the, same NOAEL or LOAEL can be used as the basis for the
  derivation'of acceptable levels of exposure over virtually any duration.  In
  addition, the Health Advisories values calculated in this document' are
•  appropriate for use in circumstances in which the sulfoxide and/or' sulfone may
  be the, substance(s) present in a drinking water sample.1  By establishing
  Health Advisories based upon data, from valid studies with the most potent of
  the three substances, there is greater assurance that the guidance is
  protective of human health.  This approach has been employed because it may
  not be possible to specifically characterize the residue present using some   ''
  analytical techniques.       •              '• ,         ,  • ,        .   .     "     ,
 •  •.        ..              '     .               "             >,
     The studies upon which the Health Advisories values and Reference Dose
 ^(RfD) for aldicarb are based are the acute experimental human study by Rhone-
  Poulenc (1992), a similar study in humans by Haines„(Union Carbide, 1971) and
  analysis of data from human food poisoning incidences by-Goldman et al.
  (1990a,b) and.Hirsch et al. (1987).  The human studies are supported by the 1-
  year study by Hazleton Laboratories (1988) in beagle dogs.

  Aldicarb;               ,                      .        , .          ,

     In the human study by Rhone-Poulenc (1992), groups of male subjects
  received a single oral dose of 0, 0.01", 6.025,. O^OSO, or 0.075 mg/kg aldicarb
  over a period of 15-3O minutes and females received 0, 0.025, or O.O50 mg/kg
  similarly.' -A number of biological' parameters known 'to be affected by
  cholinesterase inhibitors were monitored before dosing,  hourly for 6 Hours,
  and'at 24 hours.-  The major endpoints that were considered treatment related-
  were effects on plasma and erythrocyte cholinesterase activity at all' dose
  levels in both sexes, sweating (profuse in one high-dose male receiving
  0.06 mg/kg),  light-headedness, headaches, salivation, and a slight decrease in
  supine diastplic blood pressure.  No important clinical signs or symptoms
  consistent with cholinesterase inhibition developed in- females.  One female at'
  0.05 mg/kg (highest dose tested) had a higher 'saliva,output than controls that
  was marginally significant.  Sweating in the male that received 0.06 mg/kg
.  developed at about 2 hours and abated 'by 6 hours; localized mild sweating was
  experienced in one male.receiving 0.05 mg/kg and in one male receiving
  0.025 mg/kg.   Sweating was not observed in 3 other, males in the high-dose
  group that received 0.075 mg/kg, but one male in this group reported 'light—
  headedness one hour after dosing.  No consistent effects were seen on supine
  or standing diastolic blood pressure; and there were no effects on EGG, pulse
  rate, pupil diameter, or lung function test.  RBC acetylcholinesterase
•  activity was depressed 12-38% in'males at doses between 0.025^0.075 mg/kg and
  depressed 20% and 36% in females at doses of 0.025 or 0.050 mg/kg.  Plasma
•  cholinesterase activity was depressed in a dose-related manner in dosed males
  (13-70%) and depressed 49% and 68% in females, at 25 or 50 pg/kg.
  Cholinesterase activities reached peak depression at 1 hour and were'reversed
  by 6 hours.  The NOAEL was considered to be 0.01 mg/kg and the NOAEL
  0.025 mg/kg'based on sweating in treated males.               '      '•

  '   In the Haines study (union Carbide, 1971)., male volunteers (4/dosage level)

                                  •  , "   '26

-------
                                                                          1995
  received aldicarb as a single dose of 0.025,  0,05  or 0.10 mg/kg dissolved in
  100 mL of distilled water.   Each man's own  blood ChiE levels (based on blood
 • samples taken 1 hour prior  to dosing) served  as  the control for post-dosing
  ChE activity.  Blood ChE activity was decreased  in every test subject at 1 and
  2  hours post-exposure, with decreases ranging from 20 to 80% at 0.1 mg/kg, 37
  to 67% at 0.05 mg/kg and 30 to 57% at 0.025 mg/kg.  . There were no clear dose-
  related trends in ChE inhibition.   Recovery was  almost complete (75%) by
  6  hours after dosing,, with  more complete recovery  in the lower dose groups.
  All four subjects that received 0.10 mg/kg  showed  clinical effects with the
  most common complaints being leg weakness,  constriction of the pupils and
  sweating.  One subject in each of the two lower  dosage groups had clinical
  symptoms {a runny nose and  anxiety)  that were not  clearly related to aldicarb
  administration.  The method of analysis of  ChE, activity in blood was
  considered valid and appropriate.   Based on significant inhibition of whole
-  blood ChE observed at all dose levels, the  LOAEL for ,this study is 0.025 mg/kg
  (the lowest dose tested).   The range of ChE inhibition at this dose was 30 to
  57%.•  A NOAEL was not established for this  study.

     In the-Goldman et al,.  (1990a,b)  studies, information was. reviewed on four
  outbreaks of food poisoning involving aldicarb or  aldicarb sulfoxide- •
  contaminated watermelons in California between 1985 and 1988.  .An additional
  study Hirsch et al.,  1977)  reported food poisonings from aldicarb contaminated
  cucumbers.   Dosages were estimated for.28 persons  (Goldman et al., 1990a,b)
  and 13 additional persons {Hirsch et al., 1977)  who reported nausea,  vomiting
  and diarrhea (nonspecific symptoms of ChE inhibition).   The median dosage for
 .41 persons was 0.01 mg/kg (total aldicarb). .The range of dosages were later
  recalculated by Sette (1990)  as 0.002-0.086 mg/kg.   Limitations in these
  studies include the use of  hypothetical rather than actual weights to1 estimate
  dosage levels, self-classification'of symptoms,  and the use of - analytical
  methodology with a limit of detection of 0.2  ppm to measure aldicarb sulfoxide
  (a higher limit than that used in other studies).   Despite the limitations
  discussed above,  this study is viewed as presenting valid evidence of clinical
  effects-at aldicarb levels  as, low as 0'. 002  mg/kg in a sensitive human
  population.   The symptoms reported by individuals  exposed to fruits and
  vegetables with detectable  aldicarb residues  were  consistent: with the syndrome
  expected in cases of ChE inhibition.   The analytical technique was a valid
  method for estimating aldicarb residues in  fresh produce and estimates of  -
  cucumber and watermelon consumption were plausible and displayed limited
  variability.  There was also a reasonable correlation of dosage estimates with
  ChE inhibition symptoms.  These dosage estimates are,  accordingly, regarded as
  acceptable approximations of aldicarb potency.

     The critical study for\ deriving a reference dose (RfD) and Health
  Advisories is the Rhone-Pouleric 1992,study.  Although longer-term studies are
  not available in human volunteers,  both animal and human data support the
  finding that neurobehavioral changes are short lived, and there is no
  accumulation of effects over time.-.  Using cholinesterase inhibition as a
  biomarker of potential neurotoxic or behavioral  effects in animal studies,
  there is a comparable degree of cholinesterase ^inhibition at the same- doses in
  acute, subchronic, and chronic studies and  no neurotoxic signs are seen at
  dose levels below those causing cholinesterase 'inhibition.  Therefore, the^
                                        27

-------
/
                                                                         '       1995


      .  effects of an acute, human study are equivalent to those that'would be observed,
        after repeated human exposure.  The peak of cholinesterase inhibition in human
     '   studies occurs within 2 hours of dosing and inhibition- is reversed by 6 hours.
     '   The observed effects, of aldicarb "in animal studies are similarly rapidly
      - reversed.  The reversal is supported by pharmacokinetic studies demonstrating
        rapid absorption, metabolism, and excretion of aldicarb'.                    >

           In the. study"by Haines, blood cholinesterase activity inhibition was
       - observed within 1-2 hours and- almost completely recovered by 6 hours in groups
        of 4 males administered 0.025, 0.05, or 0.1 mg/kg of aldicarb as a single oral'
        dose. . The highest dose elicited clinical signs in air four .subjects,
        predominantly sweating and leg weakness, while-most subjects at the^two lower
        doses had no signs or symptoms.  This study helps define a dose (0.1 mg/kg)  •
        that is clearly associated with adverse effects in humans;  The study by'  ,
        Goldman et al. (1990) oh alleged aldicarb poisoning identified a median effect
        dose of 0.01 mg/kg.  The-range of doses causing clinical effects
        (0.002-0.086 mg/kg) may reflect individual variation with the 0.002 mg/kg dose
        applicable to the most sensitive population.  However,, the estimated dose for
        this population was much.less precise than the two controlled populations in
     •'  the RhSne-Poulenc and Haines  studies; the symptoms were non-specific for ChE;
       ^and blood cholinesterase levels were not measured., Both the Haines study and
       ,the Goldman 'study add weight  of evidence to the Rhdne-Poulenc study.

           Based on'the fact that the acute and chronic symptoms of, ChE inhibition are •
        the same, -the One-day and Ten-day HAs for aldicarb can be calculated from the  ,
        Rhone-Poulenc (1992) study with a NOAEL of O.01 mg/kg/day.  Therefore, the
        Lifetime HA of 7 pg/L will be used as the One-rday HA for aldicarb.

        Aldicarb Sulfoxide; ..              ,                               •   •          ,

           The One-day HA- for a 10—kg child exposed to aldicarb. sulfoxide  is the ^sarne
        value as the One-day HA for aldicarb, 7 /jg/L.

        Aldicarb .Sulfone;   .                                        '."'-.

           Due to the data gaps in the toxicity profile of aldicarb-sulfone and due  to
        the absence of acute human data on the sulfone, the one-day  HA  for ,a  10-kg
        .child exposed to  aldicarb, 7  pg/L,- will also" be used  for the sulfone.

     •  . Ten-day Health Advisory.. ,

        Aldicarb;  -                '   '        -

           The Lifetime HA for the 10-kg child will be used as  the'Ten-day HA  (7  pg'/L)
        for aldicarb.  •

        Aldicarb Sulfoxide and Aldicarb Sulfone;  '  .  .

           The Ten-day HA for.a 10-kg child exposed to aldicarb sulfoxide -or  aldicarb
        sulfone is the same  value as  the Ten-day  HA  for aldicarb,  7  £ig/L.   ^   ,'-'
                                               28

-------
                                                                         1995
 Longer-term Health Advisory     .                                       ,

 Aldicarb;                             '              .          "            .

    Since ,the chronic and acute effects  of  aldicarb  are  the  same,  the Longer-
 term HA values for a 10-kg child and a  70-kg  adult  are  the  same as the
 Lifetime HA of 7  fjg/L as calculated below:
                                                           i
 Aldicarb Sulfoxide;   .                          .            ••'-..

    The Longer-term HA values  for aldicarb  sulfoxide for the 10-kg child and
 the 70-kg  adult are the same  as the Lifetime  HA value of  7  pg/L for aldicarb .
 sulfoxide.   '                                                                  .

 Aldicarb Sulfone;      ,

    The Longer-term HA values  for aldicarb  sulfone for the 10-kg child and the
 70-kg adult are the same as the Lifetime HA value of 7  Aig/L for aldicarb
 sulfone.                                          •                        .

 Lifetime Health Advisory
                   •-,                      •
    The Lifetime HA represents that  portion of an individual's total  exposure
 that is attributed to drinking water arid is considered  protective of
 noncarcinogenic adverse 'health effects  over a lifetime  exposure.   The Lifetime
 HA  is derived  in a three-step'process,  step 1 determines the Reference Dose
 (RfD),  formerly called  the  Acceptable Daily Intake  (ADI).   The  RfD is an
.estimate of a  daily  exposure  to the human population that is likely  to be
 without appreciable  risk of deleterious effects over .a  lifetime,  and is
 derived from the NOAEL  (or  LOAEL),  identified from  a chronic (or  subchronic)
 study,  divided by  an uncertainty factor(s).  From the RfD,  a .Drinking Water
 Equivalent  Level.(OWEL)  can be determined  (Step 2).  A  DWEL is  a  medium--
•specific (i.e. , drinking  water)  lifetime exposure level, assuming 100%
 exposure from, that medium,  at which adverse, noncarcinogenic health  effects
 would  not be expected to  occur.  The DWEL is -derived from the multiplication
 of the RfD  by  the  assumed body- weight of an adult and divided by  the assumed
 daily  water consumption of  an adult.  The Lifetime  HA is determined in Step 3 ,
 by  factoring in other sources of exposure, the relative source  contribution
 (RSC).   The RSC'from drinking water is  based on actual  exposure data or,  if
 data are not available,  a value of  20%  is assumed.   If  the  contaminant is
 classified  as  a known,  probable or  possible carcinogen, according to the .
 Agency's classification scheme of carcinogenic potential  {U.S.  EPA,  1986),
.then caution must  be exercised in making a decision on  how  to deal with
 possible lifetime, exposure to this  substance.  For  human  (A) or probable  human
 (B)  carcinogens,.a Lifetime HA is not recommended.   For possible human
 carcinogens (C),  an additional 10-fold  safety factor is used to calculate the
 Lifetime HA.,  The  risk manager must balance this assessment of  carcinogenic
 potential  and  the  quality of  the data against the likelihood of occurrence and
 significance of health effects related -to  noncarcinogenic end points of
 toxicity.   To  assist the risk manager in this process,  drinking water
 concentrations associated with estimated excess lifetime  cancer risks over the
                                       29

-------
                                                                            1995
   range of 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 1,000>000 for the 70-kg.adult drinking ,2 L of
   water/day are provided in the Evaluation ofCarcinogenic Potential section.

   Aldicarb      . .     •  •       '                  ,              '           -.
 :         '      t        -.  •          i       i    ''.            t
      The Lifetime Health Advisory and RfD are,based on the acute human study by
   Rh6ne-Poulenc (1992) and as discussed above supported by the study of acute
   human exposure by Haines (Onion Carbide Corporation, 1971) and analysis of
   data for: human food poisonings (Golman et al., 1990a,b; Hirsch et al., 1987).
-  - xhe effects of aldicarb are readily reversible in humans and animals.  A  large
   .data base in animals shows that a comparable inhibition of cholinesterase is
   found at the same doses in acute, subchronic,  and chronic studies and that
   inhibition and recovery of cholinesterase activity parallels, the clinical
   neurotoxic/neurobehavioral signs.  Therefore,, it is concluded that the same
...  NOAELs or LOAELs for neurotoxic-signs can be-used as the basis for-the
   calculation of acceptable levels of exposure over .virtually any duration  of
   exposure.  The RfD for Aldicarb has been verified by the Agency in October,
   1992 and peer reviewed by'the SAP/SAB Committee in November, 1992 (U.S. EPA,
   1992b).     '••-••        j   >-
                                    •        •;i-'
      Using a NOAEL of 0.01 mg/kg/day, the Lifetime HA is derived as follows:

  'Step 1:   Determination of the Reference Dose (RfD)

                •-.'    RfD =  (0-01 ing/kg/day) = 0-001 mg/kg/day
   where:
    0.01 mg/kg/day =
                     NOAEL,  based  on sweating (a cholinergic sign)  in human
                     volunteers  (Rh6ne-Poulenc,  1992).'
                 10
                     uncertainty  factor  (UF),  chosen in accordance with NAS/EPA
                     guidelines for  use  of  human data to account for variation in
                     sensitivity  among persons in the population.

   Step 2:   Determination of the  Drinking Water Equivalent Level  (DWEL)

       ' -  DWEL = s< 0.001 mg/kg/day) (70kg) = „  Q35 mg/^  (roun
-------
                                                                        1995
         2 L/day
                  assumed daily water consumption of an adult.
Step 3:  Determination of-the Lifetime HA
     ,  Lifetime HA =  (0.035 mg/L)  (20%) - 0.007 mg/L "(rounded to 7 pgr/L)
where:
      0.035 mg/L =
             20%
                  DWEL
                  assumed contribution of drinking water to total exposure to
                  aldicarb and its metabolites.
Aldicarb Sulfoxide;                               •

   The Lifetime HA for aldicarb suIfoxide is the same as the .Lifetime HA  for
aldicarb, 7 fjg/1,.         '[ •

Aldicarb Sulfone:        •        •        ."•''•

   The Lifetime HA for aldicarb sulfone is the same as the Lifetime HA  for
aldicarb, 7 .pg/L.  However, this value is based on data from the one year dog
feeding- study by Hagleton  (1987b) and further supported by the data base  and
the human study (Rhone-Poulenc, 1992) for aldicarb.

   In the Hazleton Laboratories (1987b) 1-yeair dietary study of aldicarb
sulfone in dogs, a NOAEL of 0.11 mg/kg/day was identified for cholinesterase
inhibition.  At higher levels"  (0.58 mg/kg/day and above), levels of plasma,
erythrocyte and. brain cholinesterase activity were inhibited.  Although human
data were not available on aldicarb sulfone, and although data gaps were  noted
for reproductive and developmental.effects, and there was the lack of an
adequate rat chronic study, the available information on the parent compound
is sufficient to support the data base.for this metabolite.  Therefore, the
dog study was selected for calculation of the Lifetime HA.  Aldicarb sulfoxide
has also been demonstrated to be rapidly degraded and eliminated in animal
studies (Andrawes et al..  1967).  Therefore, the same NOAEL or LOAEL can  be
used as the basis for the  calculation of acceptable levels of exposure  ove'r
virtually any duration.  The RfD for aldicarb sulfone has been verified by the
Agency in September, 1992  and peer reviewed by the SAP/SAB Committee in
November, 1992 {U.S. EPA,  1992c).     .   ,

Step 1:  'Determination of  the Reference Dose  (RfD) -

                    RfD =   (0.11 mg/kg/day)  - 0"-001 mg/kg/day .  ".
                                      •31

-------
                                                                        1995
where:

0.11 mg/kg/day
             10O '
                  NOAEL,  baaed on Brain ChE activity inhibition in dogs
                  (Hazleton Laboratories,  1987b). .        .     .
                                                      _
                  uncertainty factor (UF), chosen in accordance with" NAS/EPA
                  guidelines to account for interspecies . and intraspeci.es
                  differences when a NOAEL from an animal study is used.
Step 2:  Determination of the Drinking Water Equivalent Level  (DWEL)

       •DWEL = (0-001 ^/kg/day)' (70 kg) „ 0,Q35 mg/L  (rounded to 35 ,,g/L)
                      (2 L/day)             '                     .
where:   .

 0.001 mg/kg/day =


     v  "'  70 kg
                  RfD  .
                  assumed body weight of an adult.          '     .

        '2 L/day =                         .        '
                  assumed daily water consumption of an adult.
                                   -                              i
Step 3:  Determination of the Lifetime HA   ;

        Lifetime HA = (0.035 mg/L)  (20%) =0.007 mg/L  (rounded to 7 (ig/L)
where:
     .O.035 mg/L =
             20%
                  DWEL
                  assumed contribution of drinking water, to total exposure to
                  aldicarb and its metabolites. ' "
Health advisory Values for Mixture of the Aldicarbs   -                        .
    i    •                           •                           ,
   Because the mechanism of neurotoxicity^ .of.aldicarb,  aldicarb sulfoxide and
aldicarb sulfone is the same, the presence of these contaminants in mixture is
additive.  Therefore, the HA values for the .mixture is  also- 0.007•mg/1.
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Potential

Aldicarb:        '            '             ./''-.
                          • )                 -     -                        -
 ' ***  Although^ aldicarb was honcarcinogenic under all  conditions tested,  the

               '•'        •      -       32        .,',.'

-------
                                                                         1995
       MTD  was  not  reached  in  the  chronic  feeding  studies  in rats  (Weil  and
       Carpenter, 1965;  NCI, 1979}  or mice (NCI, 1979).  •

    •   The  International Agency  for Research  on Cancer  (IARC)  has  not
       classified aldicarb  in  terms of  its carcinogenic potential.

   •  •  Applying the criteria described  in  EPA'.s guidelines for assessment  of
       carcinogenic risk (U.S. EPA,  1986),  aldicarb may be classified  in
 - ,     Group D: not classified.   This  category is for agents  with inadequate
       animal evidence of carcinogenicity.

 Aldicarb Sulfoxide andAldicarb Sulfbne:

   •    The  carcinogenic  potential  for both aldicarb sulfoxide  and  aldicarb
       sulfone  has  not been assessed.  •

   •    Applying the criteria described  in  EPA's guidelines for assessment  of
       carcinogenic risk (U.S. EPA,  1986),  both aldicarb sulfoxide  and aldicarb
       sulfone  may  be classified in Group  D:  not classified.   This category, is
       for  agents with inadequate,  animal evidence of carcinogenicity.
             .f'                                       i

•VI.  OTHER CRITERIA, GUIDANCE AND -STANDARDS

 Aldicarb:                                                          ' ,

   •    The  FAO/WHO  proposed ADIs for total  aldicarb residues of 0-
       0.001  mg/kg/day in 1979 and  0-0.005  mg/kg/day in 1982 (FAO/WHO, 1979,
       1982).          :
             •  '              s
   •    An MCLG  of 0.001  mg/L was established  for aldicarb  by EPA's  Office  of
       Water  on July 1,  1991.  Based on practical quantitation .limits  (PLQs),-
       an MCL of 0.003 mg/L has been set (U.S. EPA; 1991).  'in response  to the
       registrant's  appeal  of the MCL, this..regulation was  stayed  in May 1992  '
       until  additional  new data were evaluated.

   •    Tolerances for aldicarb residues in agricultural commodities ranging
       from 0.002 to 1 ppm  have'been set by USDA (USDA, 1990).
                                                            •v
 Aldicarb Sulfoxide and  Aldicarb Sulfone;
             '             i         '
   •    An MCLG  of 0.001  mg/L was established  for aldicarb  sulfoxide by EPA's   J
       Office of Water on July 1,  1991.  Based on PLQs, an MCL of  0.004  mg/L
       has  been set.  An MCLG  of 0.002 mg/L was established for aldicarb
       sulfone  by EPA's  Office of  Water on July 1, 1991.   This level has also1
       been established  as  the MCL (U.S. EPA, 1991c).  In  response to  the
       registrant's appeal  of  these MCLs,  this 'regulation  was'stayed in  May
       1992 until additional new data were evaluated.
                                       33

-------
                                                                        1995
VI.  ANALYTICAL METHODS      -,             .

Aldicarb;         ...'•'

  •   Analysis of aldicarb and its metabolites, the sulfoxide and sulfone, is  .
      by a high performance liquid chromatographic procedure used for,' the.  .
      determination of N-methyl carbamoyloximes arid N-methylcarbamates in
      drinking water (U.S. EPA, 1984). .In this method, the water sample is
      filtered and a'400 //L aliquot is injected into a reverse phase HPLC
      column.  Separation of compounds is achieved using gradient elution
      chromatography.  - After elutibn from the HPLC column, the compounds are
      hydrolyzed with sodium hydroxide.  The methylamine formed during1
      hydrolysis is reacted with o-phthalaldehyde (OPA) to form a fluorescent
      derivative which is detected using a fluorescence,detector (detection
      limit = 1.3 ^g/L for aldicarb).                          •  •

  •   Krause (1985a,b). reported a liquid chromatographic (LC) multiresidue
      method for determining residues of carbamate insecticides, including
      aldicarb, its sulfoxide and'its sulfone.  In this method, methanol and a
      mechan'ical ultrasonic homogenizer are used,to extract carbamates.  Water
      soluble and nonpolar material are separated by liquid-liquid
      partitioning.  Estimated limits of quantitation are O.'Ol ppm.
            v                                                                 /
Aldicarb Sulfoxide;

  •   The'analytical methodologies described above for aldicarb and its •
      metabolites are the only known methodologies appropriate for aldicarb
      sulfoxide.                 .                 "•    •

Aldicarb Sulf one;'             "'.''''

  •   The analytical methodologies .described above for aldicarb and its.
      metabolites are the only known methodologies appropriate .for aldicarb
      sulfone.
Will.  TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Aldicarb;
      Techniques which have been used to remove•aldicarb from water are carbon
      adsorption and filtration.  Since aldicarb is converted to aldicarb
      sulfoxide and sulfone, all three compounds must be considered when
      evaluating the efficiency of any decontamination technique.

      Granular activated carbon. (GAC) was used in two studies',of aldicarb
      removal- from contaminated water (Union Carbide/ 1979; ESE, 1984).  Both
      studies utilized home water treatment units rather than large-scale
      water treatment systems.  Union Carbide tested the Hytest Model HP-1
      water softener in which'the ion exchange ion was replaced .with 38.5 Ib
      Filtrasorb 400 (Calgon GAC).  The .unit was operated at a flow rate of
      3 gal/miri.  Water spiked with 200 ppb or 1,000 ppb of a mixture of

                  •"•.'."'.•   /   / 34    • '    ' •  .          .'''/.

-------
                                                                        1995
      aldicarb, aldicarb sulfoxide and aldicarb sulfone in a 10:45:45 ratio
      was treated.  Under these conditions, the total aldicarb residue level
      was reduced by 99% to 1 ppb for the treatment of 13,500 gallons of water
      with 200 ppb of residues and 41,500 gallons with' 1,000 ppb total  •
      residues.  No breakthrough of aldicarb occurred.'  When the study was
      terminated, the carbon had adsorbed 9 rag aldicarb residue.per gram.
      This value can be compared with an equilibrium loading value of 21 mg
      per gram of carbon at 16°c determined using 200 ppb aldicarb residues.
      In the second study, ESE (1984) did a field study in Suffolk County, NY.
      Nineteen units using type CW 12 x 40 mesh carbon were tested.  After
      38' months of use, breakthrough of aldicarb occurred to levels over
      7 jug/L in eight units tested.  The range of usage values can be
      •attributed to- the fact that the natural well samples contained a variety
      of adsorbable substances in addition to aldicarb..

  •   Chlorination also appears to offer the potential for aldicarb removal
      (Union Carbide, 1979).  The company reported that 1.0 ppm free chlorine
      caused a shift in the ratio of aldicarb,' its sulfoxide and its sulfone
      so that all residues were converted to the sulfoxide within 5 minutes of•
      chlorine.exposure.  Normal conversion of aldicarb to aldicarb sulfone
      did not appear to be affected.  on standing, the sulfoxide and sulfone
      decomposed.  The. decomposition products were not identified.

  •   Aeration or air stripping which is commonly used to remove synthetic
      organic chemicals is not considered to be a good technique for the
      removal of aldicarb (ESE, 1984).  This is because aldicarb -has a low
      Henry's Law Constant (2.32 x 10'4 atm) .

Aldicarb Sulfoxide:

  •   Treatment technologies described above for aldicarb and its metabolites
      are the only technologies known.to be appropriate for aldicarb  -
      sulfoxide.         . .

Aldicarb Sulfone;                           .

  • '  Treatment technologies described above for aldicarb and its metabolites
      are the only technologies known to be appropriate for aldicarb sulfone.
                                     , 35

-------

                                                                       ,  1995
 XI.   REFERENCES             ,        .                       .

 Andrawes,  N\.R., H.W.  Dorough and D.Al  Lindquist.   1967.   Degradation and
 elimination of Teroik , in rats .   J.  Ecoh.  Entomol.  60(4) :'979-987..
      "      '                                               '• e
•Black,  A.L.,  Y..C. ,Chiu, M.A.H.  Fahmy and R.R. Fukuto.  1973.   Selective
 toxicity of N-sulfenylated derivatives of insect icidal  methylcarbamate esters.
 J. Agric.  Food Chem.  21:747-751.              ,•                            .
                 /             '                                 -
iBlevins,  D.,  W. Lijinsky and j'.D.  Regan.  1977.   Nitrosated methylcarbamate
 insecticides:  Effect on the ONA of human cells.   Mutat. Res.' 44:1-7. '
Budavari; S.
biologicals.
               1989.   Merck Index. -  An encyclopedia of chemicals, drugs, and
               llth Edition.   Rahway,  N.J.:  -Merck and Co. , Inc. p. 38.
 Bull,  D.L., ' R.A.  Stokes,  J . R . • Cbppedge and R.L.  Ridgway.  1970.  Further
 studies  of the fate of aldicarb in soil.   J.  Econ.  Entomol.  63:1283-1289.
 Bull,  D.L.,  D.A.  Lindquist  and J.R.  Coppedge.   1967.   Metabolism of 2-methyl-
 2-(methylthio)propionaldehyde o-(roethyl -carbamoyl-)  oxime (.Temik, UC-21149) in
 insects.   J. Agric.  Food Chem. 15(4):61O-616;,                   '
               p  /         x                          >                .
 Cambon, C.,  C. Declume and  R:  Derache.   1979.   Effect of the insecticidal
 carbamate derivatives (carbofuran,  priraicarb,  aldicarb)  on the activity of •
 acetylchol'inesterase in tissues from pregnant  rats  and fetuses.  Toxicol.
 Appl.  Pharmacol.  49:203-208. .    ••'
 Carpenter,  C.P.  and H.F.  Smyth.
 acute  toxicity studies  on'remik.
 Pesticide Petition No.' 9F0798.
                                 1965.  Recapitulation of pharmacodynamic and
                                  Mellon Institute-Report No. 28-78.  EPA
 CDC.   1979.   Centers  for Disease Control.   Epidemiologic notes and reports:
 Suspected carbamate intoxications — Nebraska.   Morbid.  Mortal. Week Rep.
 28:133-134.  '    '     •               -                      '               '    '^
                              \ '             •         •    •      '  •
                                              \
 Close,  J. , K^ -Slade and K.  Markussen.   1982:x :Report of; 1981 Organic chemical
 Surveillance Survey of  Community Water Systems  in-New  York State.   New York
 State  Department of Health,  Bureau of-Public'Water Supply Protection. .August.
                         \            "                              .
 Cohen,  S.Z.,  S'.M.  Creeger,  R.F.  Carsel and C.G. Enfield.-  1984. 'Potential
 Pesticide Contamination of  Groundwater From Agricultural Uses.  ACS Symposium
 Series,  Vol.  259.   U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency,'Washington,. D.C.  pp.
 297-325.                . . '    .      " .-  •       .

 Conroy,  W.J,  and C.P. Carpenter.   1977.   UC 21865—Technical and 75% WP: .  '
 Sensitization potential in  guinea pigs as determined by intradermal injection.
 Project Report 40-12.   (Unpublished study received August 4, 1977 under
 1016-79;  prepared by Carnegie-Mellon University, Institute of Research,
 Chemical  Hygiene Fellowship,  submitted by(Union Carbide Corporation,
 Arlington, VA.   CDL:231509-Y.         ,                       .  .
                                       36

-------
                                                                         1995
DePass, L.R., E.V. Weaver and B.J. Mirro.   1985.  Aldicarb sulfoxide/aldicarb
sulfone mixture in drinking water of rats:  Effects on growth and  acetyl-
cholinesterase activity.  J. Toxicol'. Environ. Health 16:163-172.

Dorough, H.W., R.B. Davis and G.W. Ivie.  1970.  Fate of Temik-rcarbon-14 in
lactating cows during a  14-day feeding period.• J. Agric. Pood Chem.
18(1):135-143.                      .        '.

Dorough, H.W. and G.W. Ivie.  1968.  Temik-S35 metabolism in a lactating cow.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 16(3):460-464.                                          .

Dunkel, V.C.  and V.(F. Simon.  1980.  Mutagenic activity of chemicals
previously tested for carcinogenicity in the NCI Bioassay Program.  IARC Sci.
Publ. 27:283-302.                           .'

Ercegovich, C.D. and. K.A- Rashid.  1973.  Mutagenesis induced.in mutant
strains of Salmonella typhimurium by pesticides.  Abstracts of Papers.'
Am. Chem. Soc. ?p. 43.

ESB.  1984.   Environmental Science and Engineering.  Review of treatability
data for removal of twenty-five synthetic- organic chemicals from drinking
water.  Prepared for U.S. EPA Office of Drinking Water.

FAO/WHO.  1979, 1980 and 1982.  FAO/World Health Organization.  Citations not
available.                             .                •

Fiore, M.C.,  H.*A. Anderson, R. Hong, R. Golubjatnikov, J.E. Seiser,  ,
D. Nordstrom, L. Hanrahah and D. Belluck.   1986.  Chronic exposure to
aldicarb-contaminated groundwater and human immune function.  Environ. Res.
41:633-645.                           - .     .                  -

Gaines, T.B..  1969-.  .The acute toxicity of.  pesticides.  Toxicol. Appl.
Pharmacol. 14:515-534.

Garten, C.T.  and J.R. trabalka..- .1983-  Environ. Sci. Technol. 17:590-595.
Cited in Howard, 1991.

Godek, E.G.,  M.C. Dolak, R.W. Naismith and  R.J. Matthews.  1980.  Ames
Salmonella/Microsome Plate Test.  Unpublished, report by Pharmakbn
Laboratories.; Submitted, to Union Carbide on June 20, 1980.
                 i                                   '                     (
Goes, E.H., E.P. Savage, G. Gibbons, M. Aaronson, S.A. Ford and H.W- Wheeler.
1980.  Suspected foodborne carbamate pesticide intoxications  associated with
ingestion of  hydroponic  cucumbers.  Am. J.  EpidemiolJ' 111:254-259.

Goldman, L.R., M. Seller and R.J. Jackson.  1990a.  Aldicarb  food  poisonings
in California, 1985-1988:  Toxicity estimates for humans.  Arch. Environ.
Health 45(3) : 141-147.     /                ,'               ;

Goldman, L.R., D.F. Smith, R.R.-Neutra et al.  1990b.  Pesticide food
poisonings from contaminated watermelons in California, 1985.  Arch. Environ.
Health,45(4):229-236.                               .           '      .

   -                                  37

-------
                                                                         1995
 Gunderson, E.L.  1986.  Food and Drug Administration, Div. of Contaminants
 Chemistry Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, • Washington, D.C.
 Memorandum to Dr. Paul S. Price, Office of Drinking .Water, U.S. Environmental
 Protection Agency," Washington, D.C.  November 6.

 Hazleton Laboratories. • 1991.  Subchronic toxicity study in dogs with aldicarb
 technical.  Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company.  Unpublished Report.          , ,
 Hazleton Laboratories.  1988.
 dogs with aldicarb technical.
One-year chronic oral toxicity study in beagle
Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company.  Unpublished report.
 Hazleton Laboratories.  1987a. .Two-week dose range-finding oral toxicity
 study in beagle dogs with aldicarb technical.' Union Carbide Agricultural
 Products Company.  Unpublished report.

 Hazleton Laboratories.  1987b.  One-year feeding study in dogs with aldicarb
 sulfone technical. .Union Carbide Agricultural Products Company.  Unpublished
'report.                .                '             -   •

•Hicks,  B.W.,  H.W. Dorough and H.M. Mehendale".  1972.  Metabolism of aldicarb
 pesticide in" laying %hens.  J. Agric.  Food Chem.  20(1):151-156.'

 Hirsch, G.'H.,  B.T. Mori, G.B- Morgan,  P.R.' Bennett and B.C. We 11 lams.  1987'.
 Reported illnesses caused by aldicarb contaminated cucumbers.  Food Additives
•and Contaminants 5(2):155-160..                      •            "'

 Howard, P.H.   1991.  Handbook of Environmental Fates and  Exposure Data for
 Organic Chemicals.  Volume III:,  Pesticides.   Chelsea,  Michigan:  Lewis
 Publishers,   pp. 76-84.       -                 '                 •

 IRDC. *  1983.   International Research  and Development Corporation.  Teratology
 study in rabbits. -Union Carbide Corporation.  Unpublished report.
  '                   '      *                 •
 Jones,  R.L.,  R.C. Beck.  1984.'  Monitorin.g ,aldicarb residues in;florida soil'
 and water.  Environ.  Toxicol:.Chero. 3{1):9-20.       ,            .  '- .
                    • »          .•'•.,
 Kenaga, E.E.   1980.  Predicted bioconcentration factors and soil sorption
 coefficients  of pesticides and other.chemicals.   Ecotox.  Env. safety 4:26-38.

 Klaseus,  T.G.,  G.C. Buzicky and E.G.  Schneider.   1988.   Pesticides and
 Groundwater:   Surveys of Selected Minnesota Wells.  Prepared for the
 Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources by the Minnesota Department of
 Health  and Minnesota Department of Agriculture:   February.,     '

 Knaak,  J.B.,  M.j. Tallant and L.J. Sullivan.   1966.  The  metabolism of
 2-methyl-2-(methylthi6)propionaldehyde O-(methyl carbamoyl) oxime in the rat.
 J.  Agric. Food Chem. '14(6):573-578.       '               ;         ' -

 Krause; R.T.  ^1985a.   Liquid chromatographic  determination of N-methyl-
 carbamate insecticides and,metabolites in crops.  .1. 'Collaborative study.
J.  Assoc. Off.  Anal.  Chem. 68(4):726-733.     \        ~               •        ,

                          '.-.,-   38                     "        .-.'•.'

-------
                                                                         1995
 Krause,  R.T.   1985b.   Liquid chromatographic determination of.N-methyl-  .
 carbamate insecticides and metabolites in,crops;   II.   Analytical
 characteristics and' residue findings.   J.  Assoc.  Off.  Anal. Chem.
 68(4):734-741.                                      .

 Krill,  R.M.  and W.C.  Sonzogni.   1986.   Chemical contamination of Wisconsin's
 groundwater.   Bur. Water Supply,  Wisconsin Dep. -Nat.  Resoure.,  Madison, WI.
 J. Am.  Water Works Assoc. 78(-9) 1.70-75.

 Kuhr,  R.J.  and H.W. Dorough.  1976.'  Carbamate insecticides:  Chemistry,
 biochemistry,  and toxicology.'  Cleveland,  OK:
 103-112,  187-190, 211-213,  219-220.
CRC Press, Inc., pp. 2-6,
 Lee,  M.H.  and J.F.  Ransdell.   1984.   A farmworker death due to pesticide
 toxicity:  . A, case report.   J.  Toxicol.  Environ.  Health 14:239-246.

 Lemley,  A.T.  and W.Z.  Zhong.  -1983.   Kinetics of aqueous base and acid
•hydrolysis of aldicarb,  aldicarb suIfoxide and aldicarb sulfone.  'J..Environ,
 Sci.  Health 818:189-206.
 Martin,  H.  and C.R.  Worthing,  eds.   1977.   Pesticide manual.
 Protection  Council,  Worcestershire,  England,  p.  6.
               British Crop
 Miller,  C.,'M.  Pepple,  J.'Troiano,  D.  Weaver and W.  Kimaru.   1990,  Sampling
 for  Pesticide Residues  in California Well Water.v 1990 Update.   Well Inventory
 Data Base.   California  Department of Food and Agriculture,. Sacramento,
 California.   December 1.                                                ,

 Mirro,  E.J.~,  L.R.  DePass  and F.R. Frank.  . 1982.   Aldicarb sulfone:  Aldicarb
 sulfoxide twenty-nine-day water inclusion study  in rats.   Carnegie-Mellon
 Institute Report  No., 45-18.

 Mirkin,  I.R., H.'A. Anderson, L. Hanrahan, P.. Hong, R.  Golubjatnikov and
 D. Belluck.   1990.  Changes  in T-lymphocyte distribution  associated with
 ingestion of aldicarb-contaminated drinking water:  A follow-up study.
 Environ.  Res. 51:35-50.                     '                 ,

 Myers,  R.C.,  C.S.  Weil, N.I. Condra, et al.  ,1975.  Temik Sulfone-75%^WP
 (UC  21865-75%).   Range  finding toxicity studies:  Special report 38-87.
 (Unpublished study received  January^ 18, 1977- under 1016-EX-37;  prepared by
 Carnegie-Mellon University,  Carnegie-Mellon Institute of  Research, Chemical
 Hygiene Fellowship, submitted by Union Carbide Corporation,  Arlington, VA.
 CDL:228975-B -       '

 NAS.  1977.   National Academy of Sciences.  Drinking water and health.
 Vol. 1.   Washington, DC:   National Academy Press, pp.19-63.
                                                                 i
 NCI.  1979.   National Cancer Institute.  Bioassay of aldicarb for possible
 carcinogenicity.   NCI-CG-rTR-136.,  U.S. Department of Health, Education and
 Welfare,  U.S. Public Health  Service," National Institutes  of Health.-
                                       39

-------
                                                                          1995
  Nycurri,  J.S.  and C.  Carpenter.   1970..  Summary with respect to Guideline  '  ,
  PR70-15.   Mellon Institute Report No. 31-48.  EPA Pesticide Petition
  NO.  9F0798.       :  '                .         '

  Nycutn,  J.S.  and C.  Carpenter-.   1968.   Toxicity studies on Temik and related  .
  carbamates.j  Mellon Institute.  'Unpublished Report No. 31-48..

  Olson,  L.J., B.J. Erickson,  R.D.  Hinsdill,  J.A.  Wyman, W.P. Porter,
  L.K.  Benriing,' R.C.  Bidgood and  E.V. Nordheim.  1987.  Aldicarb
  immunomodulat'ion in mice:   An  inverse dose-response..to, parts per billion
  levels' in drinking  water.'  Arch.  Environ.  Contam. Toxicpl. 16':433-439.
\                    '
  Oonriithan, E-S. and J;E.  Casida.   1967'.  Oxidation of methyl-r and dimethyl
  carbamate insecticide chemicals by microsomal enzymes and anticholinesterase
  activity  of the metabolites.  J.  Agric. Food Chem. 16:29-44.

  Pozzani,  U.C. and C.P.  Carpenter. .1968.  Sensitizing-potential in guinea pigs
  as determined by a  modified Lansteiner test.  Mellon Institute Report No..
  31-143.   EPA Pesticide Petition No. 9F0798.              '.
                       . ' .                       '    -                       s '
                                                           s
  Quarles,  J.M.,  M.W.  Sega,  C.K.  Schenley and W. Lijinsky.  1979.-       •
  Transformation of hamster fetal cells, by nitre-sated pesticides .in a
  transplacental assay.   Cancer Res.  39:4525-4533.
                 !     '                  '       •
  Rhone-Poulenc.   1991.  'Two-generation reproduction study in rats, with
  aidicarb.   Hazleton Report No.  656-157 by  J.K. Lemen. (MRID No. 421484)
  Available-from EPA,  write to F.OI, EPA Washington, DC 20460.

  Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company.   1992.   A safety and tolerability .stu'dy of aidicarb
  at various dose levels in healthy male and female volunteers.  Inveresk
:  Clinical  Research Report  No.. 7786 {MRID No." 423730-01).  Available from EPA,
  write to  FOI, EPA Washington, DC'20460.    '  '  • ••         •'     .            '

  Schlinke,  J.c.   1970.   Toxicologic effects of five'soil, nematocides .in
 ^chickens.   J. Am. Vet.  Med. Assoc.  31:119-121.            '
  Sette, W..F.   1990.   Aidicarb 'food poisonings in' California - 1985-1988:.
  Toxicity  estimates  for humans.   Data evaluation report.   Sponsored by
  Environmental Epidemiology and  Toxicology Section,  California -Department of
  Health Services,  Emeryville, CA.
 Se'xton, W.F.
 Section C.
1966.  Report ,pn aidicarb.'  EPA Pesticide Petition No. 9F0798,
 Thomas,  P., H.  Ratajczak,  D.  Demetral,  K.  Hagen and R.  Baron.  1990.  Aidicarb
 immunotoxicity:   Functional  analysis of cell-mediated immunity and
 quantitation of lymphocyte subpopulations.   Fundam. Ap'pl.  Toxicol. 15:221-230.

 Tyl, R.W.  and T.L.  Neeper-Bradley.   1988_.  .Developmental toxicity evaluation
 of aidicarb administered  by.  gavage  to CD '(Sprague-Dawley)  rats.,  Rhone-Poulenc
 Ag Company. 'Unpublished  Study No.  551; conducted by Bushy'Run Research
 Center,  Export,  PA. •             •                 -'.,'.•.
                                        40

-------
                                                                         1995
Union Carbide Corporation.   1971.' R. Haines, J.B. Dernehl and  J.R.  Block
supervising physicians.   Ingestion &f aldicarb by. .human volunteers:-  A
controlled study of the effects of aldicarb on man.  ALD-03-77-2215. MR ID  No.  >
00101911. HED Doc. No. 010450. Available  from EPA.

Union Carbide.Corporation.   1979.  Union  Carbide Agricultural Products.
Company.  Temik   aldicarb'pesticide.  Removal of residues from water.     -.
Research and   Development Department.                                '
        .                     /
U.S.D.A.  1990.  U.S. Department  of Agriculture.  Code of Federal Regulations
40CFR 180.269.  p."328.                                           .        ,  ,

U.S. EPA.  1992a.  Aldicarb:  Addendum to Hazleton Laboratories 1-year chronic
oral toxicity study in dogs  with  aldicarb technical.  A memorandum from
William"Sette, Ph.D. to Seppehr Haddad.    •          .          '             .   -,

U.S. EPA.  1992b.  Aldicarb  and aldicarb  sulfone 1992 RfD verification
document.                     .                              .

U.S. EPA.  1992c.  Aldicarb  sulfone 1992.  RfD verification document.

U.S. EPA.  1992d.  Review of the  19.92 Rhone-Poulenc human study.  ICR Project
No. 003237', Reviewer William Sette.  A memorandum to the ad hoc Joint,
OPPT/OW/OR Review Group, September 4, 1992.                  >

U.S. EPA.  1992e.  RfD/Peer  review report of Aldicarb.  A memorandum from
George Ghali, Ph.D. to Dennis Edwards.  September 15, 1992. .
                     \.           •               -
U.S. EPA-  1992f.  SAP/SAB Peer review report of aldicarb and aldicarb sulfone  '
RfD.  November 1992;

U.S. EPA.  1991a.  Aldicarb rat developmental toxicity study:   Analysis of
historical control incidence of ecchymosis:  Re-evaluation.  A  memorandum  from
William Burnum to William Sette, Ph.D.  October 3,  1991.

U.S. EPA.  1991b.'  Review of the final report.on a 5-week dog study on dietary
treatment with aldicarb.  A memorandum from Henry Spencer,' Ph.D. to William
Sette,  Ph.D.   HED Project. No 01838/2038.             '                   '       •

U.S. EPA. ^ 1991c. .U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Fed.   Reg.
56(126):30266-30281.  July 1.

U.S. EPA.  1990.'  National Pesticide Survey:- Summary of Results of EPA's
National Survey of Pesticides in .Drinking Water Wells.  PB91-126795.  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water and Office of  Pesticides  and
Toxic Substances.  •           "     •   .                '

U.S. EPA.  1986.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Guidelines  for>
carcinogen risk assessment.  Fed. Reg. 5i{185):33992-34003.  September 24.   .  '
                                      41

-------
                                                                         1995
 U.S.  EPA.   1984. '  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Method 531.
 Measurement of  N-rmethyl carbamoyloximes and N-methylcafbamates in drinking
 water by direct aqueous injection HPLC with post column  derivatization;
 Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati,  OH.
                                            V      I
 U.S.  PDA.   1990.  .Food  and Drug Administration Pesticide.Program:  Residues in
 Food  -' 1989.  U.S.  Fo.od and Drug Administration, • Div.  of Contaminants Chem.,,
 Washington,  D.C.   j'.  Assoc. Off Chem. 73(5) :127A-146A.

 Weideh,  M.H.J.,  H.H.  MorefieId and L.K.'Payne.  1965.  O-(Methyl carbamoyl)
 oximes:   A new  class  of carbamate insecticides-acaricides.   J. Econ.  Entomol.
 58:154-155.

'Weil,  C.S.   1975.   Mellon Institute Report No. 35-72,  Section C.  EPA
.Pesticide Petition No.  3F1414.
  -^                       '                  • '                     '
 Weil,  C.S.   1973.   Aldicarb,  seven-day inclusion in diet of dogs.  Carnegie-
 Mellon. Institute of Research,  Unpublished Report No.  36-33.

 Weil,  C.S.   1969.   Purified and technical Temik.  Results of feeding in the .
 diets of rats for  one week.  Mellon Institute, Unpublished  Report No. 32-11.'

 Weil,  C.S.  and  C.P. Carpenter.   1974.,  Aldicarb.  Inclusion in the diet of
 rats  for three  generations and a dominant lethal mutagenesis test.  Carnegie- •
 Mellon Institute of,Research.   Unpublished Report No.  37-9O.
     * ^         .    '  -     ! '
 Weil,  C.Si  and  C.P. Carpenter.   1972.  Aldicarb (A),  aldicarb sulfoxide (ASO),
 aldicarb sulfone (ASO,)  and a 1:1 mixture ASO:ASO2.   Two-year feeding in the
 diets of rats.   Mellon  Institute Report No. 35-82.,  EPA  Pesticide Program No.
 9F0798. ' '    '      '     •             • '  ~ ••       '         '•'-."

 Weil,  C.S.  and  C.P. Carpenter.   1970.  Temik and other materials.
 Miscellaneous single  dose peroral and parenteral LD^, assays and some joint
 action studies;  Mellon Institute Report No.  33-7.-  Amendment to EPA Pesticide
 Petition No. 9F0798.>             _  .                           .

 Weil,  C.S.  and  C.P. Carpenter.   1968a.  Temik sulfoxide:  Results of feeding
 in  the diet of  rats for 6 months and dogs for .3 months.   Mellon Institute
 Report No.  31-141.  EPA Pesticide .Petition No. 9F(0798.
        • -      ,                     - '    •           (       '    «
 Weil,  C.S.  and  C.P. Carpenter.   1968b. <  Ternik sulfone.   Results 'of feeding in
 the diet of. rats for  6  months and dogs for 3 months.   Mellon Institute Report
 No. 31-142.  EPA Pesticide Petition No.  9F0798.       .   '/   '

 Weil,  C.S.  and  C.'P. Carpenter.   1966a\  Two-year feeding of- Compound 21149 in
 the diet of dogs.   Mellon Institute.  Unpublished Report No. 29-^5.

 Weil,  C.S.  and  C.P. Carpenter.- 1966b.  Skin painting study in mice.  No
 citation reference available.    "                    .       •   "
                                       42

-------
                                                                         1995
 Weil,  C.S.  and C'.P.  Carpenter.   1966c.   Results of a developmental toxicity
 study  in rats:   Mellon Institute Report No.  37-90.  (MRID No.•0044736).

 Weil,  C.S.  and C.P.  Carpenter.  .1965.   Two-year feeding of Compound 21149 in
 the  diet of-rats.  Mellon Institute.. Unpublished Report No.  28-123.
                          .  \         '
 Weil,  'C.S.  and C.P.  Carpenter.   1964.   Results of a three-generation
 reproduction study on rats fed  Compound 21149 in their diet.   Mellon Institute
 Report No.  27-158.  EPA Pesticide Petition No. 9F0798.
                                          ''
 Weil,  C.S.  and C.P.  Carpenter.   1963.   Results of three months of inclusion of
 Compound 21149 in  the diet of rats.   Mellon Institute.  Unpublished Report
 No.  26-47.              •"'._,        '                      •   ,   -
        '-~     '              ~\
 Weil,  C.S.,  N.I. Condra,  D.L. Geary  Jr.,  et al.  1974.  UC 21865-Technical and
 75%  WP (1974):.  Some range finding toxicity studies:  Special  report 37-49.
 (Unpublished study received Jan.  18,  1977 under 1016-EX-37; prepared by
 Carnegie Mellon University, Division of Sponsored Research, Chemical Hygiene
 Fellowship,  submitted by Union  Carbide  Corporation, Arlington,  VA;
 CDL:2281S2-C.                                           .              .
               ',•                    '
 West and C.P.  Carpenter.   1966.   Temik  joint action with .selected organic
 phosphate and  carbamate pesticides.   Mellon Institute Report No.- 29-98.   EPA
 Pesticide Petition No.  9F0798.

 Wilkenson;,  C.F., G.C.  Bajgish,  A.T.  Lemley,  et al.  1983.  A toxicological
 evaluation  of  aldicarb and its  metabolites in relation to the  potential  human
 health impact  of aldicarb in Long Island groundwater.   Report  1.   Prepared by
 the  Institute  for  Comparative" and Environmental Toxicology, Cornell
 University,  Ithaca,  NY..                         ,

-Woodside, M.D.,  C.S.  Weil, J'.R.  Bernard,  et  al.  1977.  A'ldicarb sulfone:
 Inclusion in the.diet of  rats for three generations:  .Dominant  lethal
 mutagenesis  and  teratology studies:   Project Report 40-1.  Unpublished-study
 received January 25,  1978 under 1016-79;  prepared by Carnegie-Mellon
 university,  Institute of  Research, Chemical  Hygiene Fellowship,  submitted'by
 Union  Carbide  Corporation, Arlington, VA.   CDL:096728-O.
                                       43

-------