PB91-161539
Ambient Water Quality Criteria Document
Addendum for Antimony
 (U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH
May 89

-------
REPORT DOCUMENTATION. PAGE
• .niK reporting burden lor lhi» collrrtion ol inloimition '\«(c""*'»i • •.••«o» • «ou' ot< »«tpor»«. including thrum* lor n
»r< • •>• v««jq»"ifnt jnd ludgrl. 'tprfworli ftrdtKlion f roi
Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188
virwing mttruniont, wirching cutting dm tourcn.
rding thli burdtn mimttt V «ny other itp*ct ol thit
r mlormttion Operation* 
-------
                       GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS »O3 COMPLETING SF 298
         •M Documentation Page (RDP) is usea -r «• •••v.'«<>ng and cataloging reports.  It is important
         -•formation be consistent with the 'es; er r-e report, particularly the cover  and title page.
        :>os for filling in each block of the form {O..OA  t is important to stay within the lines to meet
       wanning requirements.
 I*   • •'  Agency Use Only (Leave blank).

 b .• • ?   Report Date. Full publication date
     •• "g day, month, and year, if available (e.g. 1
    *t.  Must cite at least the year.

 B 01 * 3  Type of Report and Dates Covered.
 •,vr /^nether report is interim, final, etc. If
 seo ioDie. enter inclusive report dates (e.g. 10
 .-8?- 30Jun88).

 Block 4.  Title and Subtitle. A title is taken from
 tr-e pan of the report that provides the most
 meaningful and complete information. When a
 reoon is prepared in more than one volume,
 repeat the primary title, add volume number, and
 include subtitle for the specific volume. On
 classified documents enter the title classification
 m parentheses.

 Blocks. Funding Numbers.  To include contract
 and grant numbers; may include program
 element number(s), project number(s), task
 number(s). and work unit number(s). Use the
 foil owing labels:
  C
  G
  PE
Contract
Grant
Program
Element
PR
TA
WU
Project
Task
Work Unit
Accession No.
Block 6. Author(s). Name(s) of person(s)
responsible for writing the report, performing
the research, or credited with the content of the
report If editor or compiler, this should follow
the name(s).

Block 7. Performing Organization  Name(s) and
Address(es). Self-explanatory.

Block 8.  Performing Organization Report
Number. Enter the unique alphanumeric report
number(s) assigned by the organization
performing the report.

Block 9. Sponsoring/Monitoring Agency Name(s)
and Address(es). Self-explanatory.

Block 10.  Sponsoring/Monitoring Agency
Report Number. (If known)

Block 11. Supplementary Notes. Enter
information not included elsewhere such as:
Prepared in cooperation with...; Trans, of...; To be
published in.... When a report is revised, include
a statement whether the new report supersedes
or supplements the older report.
                                          Block 12a. Distribution/Availability Statement.
                                          Denotes public availability or limitations. Cite any
                                          availability to the public. Enter additional
                                          limitations or special markings in all capitals (e.g.
                                          NOFORN, REL. ITAR).

                                            DOD  -  See DoDD 5230.24, "Distribution
                                                    Statements on Technical
                                                    Documents."
                                            DOE  •  See authorities.
                                            NASA -  See Handbook NHB 2200.2.
                                            NTIS  -  Leave blank.
 Block 12b. Distribution Code.

   DOD -  Leave blank.
   DOE  -  Enter DOE distribution categories
           from the Standard Distribution for
           Unclassified Scientific and Technical
           Reports.
   NASA-  Leave blank.
   NTIS  -  Leave blank.


 Block 13. Abstract. Include a brief (Maximum
200 words) factual summary of the most
significant information contained in the report.


Block 14. Subject Terms. Keywords or phrases
identifying major subjects in the report.


Block 15. Number of Pages. Enter the total
number of pages.


Block 16. Price Code. Enter appropriate price
code (NTIS  only).


Blocks 17.-19. Security Classifications. Self-
explanatory. Enter U.S. Security Classification in
accordance with  U.S. Security Regulations (i.e..
UNCLASSIFIED). If form contains classified
information, stamp classification on the top and
bottom of the page.


Block 20. Limitation of Abstract. This block must
be completed to assign a limitation to the
abstract. Enter either UL (unlimited) or SAR (same
as report). An entry in this block is necessary if
the abstract is to be limited. If blank, the abstract
is assumed to be unlimited.
                                                                      Standard Form 298 Back {Rev 2-89)

-------
                                                          FINAL DRAFT
               United Stitti                                    ECAO-C1N-617
               Environmental Protection
               Agency
oEPA       Research and
               Development
               AMBIENT WATER QUALITY CRITERIA DOCUMENT
               ADDENDUM FOR ANTIMONY
               Prepared for
               OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS
               AND STANDARDS
               Prepared by
               Environmental  Criteria and  Assessment Office
               Office  of  Health and  Environmental Assessment
               U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency
               Cincinnati, OH  45268
                           DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE



                                  NOTICE

           This document Is a preliminary draft.  It has not been formally released
        by the U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency and should  not at this stage be
        construed to represent Agency policy.  It Is being circulated for comments
        on Its technical*accuracy and policy Implications.

                            REPRODUCED BY
                            U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                                  NATIONAL TECHNICAL
                                  INFORMATION SERVICE
                                  SPRINGFIELD, VA 22161

-------
                                  DISCLAIMER

    This report 1s  an  external  draft for  review  purposes  only and does  not
constitute Agency  policy.  Mention  of   trade  names  or  commercial products
does not constitute endorsement  or recommendation  for  use.

-------
                                   PREFACE

    Under the 1977 Clean Water Act, Congress mandated  the  U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency to develop ambient water quality criteria  for  129  priority
pollutants.   These criteria were published In 1980.  Under  Section  304(a)(l)
of  the  Clean Water  Act as  amended  In  1987,  the U.S.  EPA  1s  mandated  to
re-evaluate   anc   update  these  criteria  every  five  years.   These  addenda
represent an updated  literature  search current as of  1988, plus additional
Information  from Agency files and  Program Office.**   The first draft  of  this
addendum was  prepared by  Syracuse Research Corporation  under contract  no.
68-C8-0004.
                                     111

-------
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                       Page
INTRODUCTION  	     1
REVIEW OF  NEW DATA	     4
    Toxlcologk/Carclnogenk Effects	     4
    BtpconcentraUon Factor (BCF)	     6
QUANTIFICATION OF EFFECTS	     7
EXISTING STANDARDS  AND CRITERIA	     9
REFERENCES	    10

-------
                            LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ADI                     Acceptable  dany  Intake
BCF                     file-concentration  factor
ECG                     Electrocardiogram
GOT                     Glutamlc  oxaloaceUc  transamlnase
GPT                     Glutamlc  pyruvlc  transamlnase
LOAEL                   Lowest-observed-adverse-effect  level
LOEL                    Lowest-observed-effect  level
NOAEL                   No-observed-adverse-effect  level
ppm                     Parts  per million
RfD                     Reference dose
RQ                      Reportable  quantity
SNARL                   Suggested no-adverse  response  level
TLV                     Threshold limit value
TWA                     Time-weighted  average

-------
                                 INTRODUCTION

    Under  Section  304(a)(l) of  the Clean Water  Act  of 1977  as  amended  In
1987,  the  U.S.  EPA  Is  required  to  publish  criteria  for  water   quality
accurately  reflecting  the latest scientific knowledge regarding the  effects
on health  and  welfare  that may occur from the presence of pollutants  In  any
body  of  water,  Including  groundwater.   In accordance  *Uh  the  1977 act,
Ambient Water  Quality  Criteria Documents  (AWQCDs) were developed In  1980  for
65 toxic pollutants  or classes of pollutants  listed  under Section 307(a)(l).
    These  addenda  are  Intended to serve as an update  of  the  original  AWQCDs.
The  addenda provide  the  Agency with  the latest  scientific assessments  of
potential  health  hazards  associated  with  these  pollutants  and  serve  as
guidelines  for modifying  the current (1980)  AWQCDs.
    The human  health criteria  In these addenda  are based on Agency  verified
risk  assessment values when  available.  These  values  consist of reference
doses  (RfD)  for  those  chemicals  believed  to be  systemic toxicants (I.e.,  do
not Induce  cancer) and cancer  risk  factors  for  those  thought likely  to cause
cancer  In  humans.    The  verification  process consists of  a  review and  con-
sensus of  risk assessment values provided by an  Agency workgroup  consisting
of  scientists   from  each of  the  major  Agency  offices.    Assessments  for
noncarclnogens are verified by the RfD workgroup and those for carcinogens
are verified by  the  Carcinogen Risk Assessment  Verification  Endeavor  (CRAVE)
workgroup.   If  such  values  are not  available, the  criteria  are based on  the
most  recent Agency  health  assessment.   In  the  absence of  any  appropriate
Agency  value,   RfD   values  or  cancer  risk  factors are derived  by  current
Agency methods  If  adequate new  data  are  available, and criteria  are recom-
mended based on the proposed RfD or  risk factor.
2079A                               -1-                              05/12/89

-------
    The  RfD  Is an  estimate  (with uncertainty  spanning  perhaps an  order  of
magnitude)  of  the  dally  exposure  to  the   human   population   (Including
sensitive  subgroups)  that Is  likely to  be  without an  appreciable risk  of
deleterious effects  during a  lifetime,   The  RfD  Is  derived  by  dividing  a
NOAEL  or  LOAEL for  subchronlc  or chronic exposure  by standard  uncertainty
factor(s) times an additional  uncertainty  factor:
                             RfD m NOAEL or LOAEL
                                     UF(s) x  UF
The  standard  uncertainty  factors  are applied  to reflect  the  various types  of
data  used to  estimate  RfOs.   An  uncertainty  factor of 10  Is  used  to account
for  variations  In human  sensitivity  when  extrapolating from valid  human
studies   Involving  long-term  exposure  of  average,   healthy  subjects.   An
additional 10-fold  factor  Is used for each of  the  following:   to  extrapolate
from  long-term animal   studies  to the  case  of humans,  to extrapolate  from
subchronlc animal  studies to  chronic  exposure,  and  to  extrapolate from  a
LOAEL  to  a NOAEL.   An  additional uncertainty  factor of >0-10  may  be applied
to  reflect  professional  assessment  of  the  uncertainties of  the  study  and
data  base not explicitly  addressed  by   the   standard  uncertainty  factors
(I.e.,  completeness  of the overall  data  base).   The  default value  for  the
additional uncertainty  factor  Is 1.
    In  assessing   the  carcinogenic potential  of   a  chemical,  the  U.S.  EPA
classifies the chemical  Into  one of the  following  groups according to  the
degree of evidence  In  ep1dem1olog1cal studies  and  animal  studies:   Group  A -
Human  Carcinogen;  Group B - Probable Human  Carcinogen [limited evidence  In
humans with or without sufficient evidence  1n animals (Group  Bl)  or  Inade-
quate  evidence In  humans  with  sufficient evidence  1n animals (Group  62)];
Group C  - Possible Human  Carcinogen  (limited  evidence of  carclnogenUHy  In
animals  In  the absence  of human data);  Group  D -  Not Classifiable  as  to

2079A                               -2-                              05/12/89

-------
Human  Carctnogentclty (Inadequate or  no evidence);  Group  E  -  Evl^nce  of
Noncarclnogenlclty  for  Humans,   Quantitative  carcinogenic  risk  assessments
are  performed  for chemicals  In Groups A  and  B,  and on a case-by-case  basis
for  chemicals  In Group  C.  Upper-bound cancer unit risks (slope  values)  are
estimated  through  the  use  of  mathematical  extrapolation   models.   Most
commonly  for  animal data,  the  linearized multistage  model  with a 95X  upper
confidence limit  Is used  to provide  a  low-dose  estimate  of  cancer  risk.   The
cancer  risk  Is  characterlred  as an upper-limit  estimate  (I.e..  the  true risk
to  humans,  while not Identifiable,  Is not  likely to exceed  the  upper-limit
estimate  and  In  fact may  be  lower).  Alternative risk models to  the multi-
stage  model,  such as  the  one-hit, Welbull,  Loglt  or  Problt  model,  are
available and  may be  used when the  evidence  Indicates that they  may be more
appropriate.   In the absence of  such  evidence,  the  Agency  recommends  the
linearized  multistage  model   to  provide  consistency  of  approach  and   an
upper-bound  on  the potential carcinogenic  risk.   In the  case where  human
data  are used  for  quantitative  risk  assessment,  an  upper-bound  estimate
rather  than  a  95X  upper-bound estimate   Is  used  when low-dose linearity 1s
assumed.
     In  the  development of this  Addendum to the  AWQCD  on antimony,  recent
Agency  assessments  have  been consulted.  A  computerized  literature  search
was  conducted  to cover  studies  published  more  recently  than  the  latest
Agency  assessment (I.e.,  published  In 1985  to 1988).  New key studies  have
been evaluated.
2079A                               -3-                              05/12/89

-------
                              REVIEW OF NEW DATA
Tox1coloQlc/Carc1noQ»n1g
    Female  normotenslve  (not  otherwise  specified)  albino  rats  (30/group)
were  administered antimony  trichloride  at 0,  0,1  or  1  mg/dl  (0,  1  or  10
ppm)  In drinking water  from  the  1st day  of  pregnancy  until  weaning of  the
pups   (22  days  after  delivery)   to evaluate  the  effect  of  antimony  on
development  of vascular  reactivity  1n  the pups  (Rossi  et al.,  1987).   The
pups  (10/dam)  received  antimony  trichloride  at  0,  1  or  10  ppm In  their
drinking  water  from weaning  to  day  60.  The  dams showed  a  dose-related
significant  (p<0.05) decrease 1n  body  weight  on  day 20,  but  not day  10 of
gestation.   There  were  no  significant   (p<0.05)  changes  In  maternal  or
offspring  systolic arterial blood  pressure, length of gestation  or number of
pups/Utter.   The pups  1n  the  high-dose group  had significantly  (p<0.05)
reduced  body  weight  from days 10-60,  but showed  no macroscopic  teratogenlc
effects.   Pre- and  postnatal  exposure  to   antimony   trichloride  did  not
slgnlflcanty  (p<0.05)  affect  pressor  response to  transient  carotid  artery
occlusion.   Pressor  response  of  60-day-old  pups   to  1-noradrenalln  and
l-1soprena!1ne  (hypertension-Inducing  drugs)  was  significantly  (p<0/05)
decreased   In   both  antimony   trichloride-treated   groups  compared   with
untreated controls,  and  response  to  acetylchollne (hypotension-Inducing) was
significantly (p<0.05) decreased  only In the  high-dose pups at  60 days.
    In  another  study,  male Wlstar rats were  divided among one  control  and
three  treated  groups (Hlraoka.  1986).    The  treated groups were fed  diets
containing 0.1X  (w/w) metal antimony,  l.OX  (w/w) antimony or  1.0%  antimony
trloxlde  for  12  weeks   (0,  0.1X, l.OX or l.OX  antimony).   The rats  were
evaluated at  0, 4 and  12  weeks  post-exposure for  body  weight  gain,  organ
weights, hematologUa-1 and  limited blood  biochemical endpolnts.   There were
no effects on  behavior,  general  appearance,  blood  hemoglobin  concentration,

2079A                               -4-                              09/20/88

-------
GOT  activities  or  A:G ratio.   Elevated  GPT  and  decreased  hematocrlt  and
total  blood  protein  were  observed  In  rats  fed  the  diet  containing  IX
metallic antimony  <4 weeks  after exposure.   Body weights  of rats fed  diets
containing  IX metallic  antimony and  IX antimony  trloxlde  were depressed
after 12 weeks of  exposure,  but  not after the 12-week recovery period.   The
abstract  stated   that  some  significant  changes  In  organ  weights   (not
specified)  were  observed  1n antimony  treated  rats,  however  the complete
paper was not available for  review.
    The  carclnogenlclty  of   antimony  was  recently  reviewed  by  U.S.  EPA
(1987a).  A  briefly  reported  retrospective ep1dem1olog1cal study  of antimony
process  workers   associated  lung  cancer  with  occupational  exposure  to
antimony  (Davles,  1973).   Schroeder et al.  (1970)  provided Long-Evans  rats
with  drinking  water  containing 5  ppm  antimony  (sae  next  section)  and
Kanlsawa  and Schroeder  (1969)   provided  CD-I  (male  and  female)  mice  with
drinking water containing  5  ppm antimony 1n  lifetime studies and  concluded
that neither  rats  nor  mice exhibited a  carcinogenic response.   In an  Inhala-
tion  study   (ASARCO,  Inc.,  1980; Watt,  1980,  1981,  1983),  a  statistically
significant  Increase  In  the  Incidence  of  lung tumors was  observed  In female
Sprague-Dawley rats  Intermittently  exposed  to antimony  from antimony  trl-
oxlde  at  4.2  mg/m3 but  not at 1.6  mg/m3.   The  data  were not  sufficient
for  quantitative  estimation  of  carcinogenic  potency,  but  antimony  was
assigned  to  EPA   Group  B2:   probable  human  carcinogen  (U.S.  EPA,  1987a).
Current  data  are   Inadequate  to  assess the  potential  carclnogenlclty  of
ingested antimony.
2079A                               -5-                              05/12/89

-------
Bloeoncentratlon Factor
    The  BCF  value  of  1 determined  In U,S,  EPA  (1980) was  reevaluated  1n
Stephan  (1983).   A new  BCF  of 0,5 was  derived,   Pertinent new  Information
regarding  the  BCF  value for  antimony  Is  currently undergoing Agency  review.
The BCF  value  of 0.5 {Stephan, 1983)  will be used until this evaluation  has
been completed.
 2079A                                -6-                              05/12/89

-------
                           QUANTIFICATION OF  EFFECTS

    The  1980  ambient  water  quality  criteria   (U.S.  EPA,  1980)  for  human
health  for  antimony were  based on  a  lifetime  study  1n which  groups  of at
least  50 male  and  50  female  Long-Evans  rats  were provided  drinking  water
containing   antimony  at   0  or   5  ppm  from  antimony  potassium  tartrate
(Schroeder  et  al.,  1970).   Endpolnts  monitored  Included mortality,  body
weights,  blood pressure,  serum  chemistries Including glucose,  urlnalysls and
tumor  Incidence.   Rats  that  died  during  the  study  were necropsled and gross
lesions  were examined  hlstopathologlcally.   Treated rats  of  both sexes had
significantly  decreased  survival  and  decreased  nonfastlng  serum glucose,
compared  with controls.   Treated  males  had  elevated  serum cholesterol  and
treated  females  had decreased  serum cholesterol.   The  5  ppm  antimony  level
was. designated a LOEL, but  was considered to  be  close to  the  NOAEL.   U.S.
EPA  (1980)  estimated  that the rats  weighed 0.3 kg, assumed a  drinking water
consumption  value of 0.025  I/day and  applied  an  uncertainty factor  rf 100
(10  for  Inter-  and 10  for   Intraspecles variation)  to derive  an ADI  for
antimony  of 4.17 yg/kg/day.  Assuming a  human  body weight of  70 kg,  dally
drinking  water consumption  of  2  I/day,  dally  fish and  shellfish consump-
tion of  0.0065 kg/day and a  BCF of 1, U.S. EPA  (1980) derived water criteria
of  145   yg/l  for  consumption   of  water and   fish and   shellfish  and  45
mg/l for  consumption of fish and shellfish alone.
    The  Schroeder et al.  (1970)   study  was  also used  as   the basis  for the
verified  RfD currently on  IRIS (U.S.  EPA.  1985a).  In the  RfD derivation.
the  5  ppm concentration  was equivalent to a dosage of  0.35 mg/kg/day  based
on an  estimation of drinking water  consumption.   Although Schroeder et al.
(1970)  did  not calculate  a dosage for  antimony, U.S.  EPA (1987a) noted that
^079A                               -7-                              05/12/89

-------
another report  from  this  laboratory (Kanlsawa and  Schroeder,  1969) provided
an estimate  of  drinking water consumption  by rats  In  parallel  studies from
which  the  dosage  of 0,35  mg/kg/day  can  be  estimated.   Application  of  an
uncertainty  factor  of  1000  (10  for  Interspecles  variation,  10  for  Intra-
specles variation  and 10 to  estimate  a NOAEL from a LOAEL)  resulted  In  an
RfD  of  0.00035  mg/kg/day, which  was  rounded to  0,0004  mg/kg/day.  Applying
the  assumptions discussed  above,  and  the  BCF   of 0.5  derived  In  Stephan
(1983),  new  ambient  water  quality  criteria of   14 yg/l for  consumption  of
water,  fish  and  shellfish  and  8.6  mg/l  for  consumption  of  fish  and
shellfish alone can be derived.
     A  more  recent  paper  by  Rossi  et  al.  (1987)  Identified  a  dose-related
reduction  In body  weight gain   In  dams exposed  to 1  and  10  ppm antimony
trichloride  In  drinking water throughout gestation.   In addition, high-dose
pups  had  reduced   body  weights  and  the  response  of   pups  to  hyper- and
hypotension-Inducing  drugs was  altered.  Because  food  and  water consumption
data were  not  provided,  U was  not  possible to   determine If  the  effects  on
body weight  reflect  toxlclty  of  the  chemical or reduced food  and/or  water
Intake.   Using  a  formula for estimating  drinking water consumption  (0.049
l/day)  for  rats   weighing   350  g  (U.S.  EPA,  1986),  dosages  of  antimony
trichloride  of  0.14 and  1.4  mg/kg/day  can be  estimated.   Corresponding
dosages  of  antimony  are  0.07  and  0.75 mg/kg/day.  These  data  suggest  an
effect  on  body  weights  at dosages  lower than that used  by  Schroeder et  al.
(1970)  In which  there were  no  effects on  body  weight In  a  much  longer
study.  It Is possible  that  antimony trichloride  Is more toxic  to rats than
antimony potassium  tartrate.   Additional studies  may  be warranted  In  order
to clarify this  effect level.
20l(9A                               -8-                              05/12/89

-------
                        EXISTING STANDARDS AND CRITERIA

    NAS  (1980)  determined  that  data  were   Insufficient  for  derivation  of
1-day,  7-day  or  chronic  SNARLS  for  antimony.   U.S.   EPA   (1987b)  listed
antimony as  a contaminant  In drinking water  required  to be regulated by the
1986  amendments  to the  Safe  Drinking Water Act; however, regulations are not
yet available.
    Arzamastsev  (1964)  determined the  taste threshold  for  either trlvalent
or pentavalent antimony at 0.6 mg/i.
    The  ACGIH (1987) TLV-THA recommendation, OSHA  (1985)  standard and NIOSH
(1978)   criteria  are all  set at  0.5 mg/m».   ACGIH  (1986) stated  that  the
TLV should protect against ECG  effects,  dermatitis.  Irritation of the mucous
membranes and pneumoconlosls.
    The  final  RQ for release Into the environment  1s  5000 pounds (U.S.  EPA,
1988).
207?A                               -9-                              09/20/88

-------
                                  REFERENCES

ACG1H  (American  Conference  of  Governmental  Industrial  Hyglenlsts).   1986.
Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values and  Biological  Exposure  Indices,
5th ed.  Cincinnati, OH.  p. 32-33.

ACGIH  (American  Conference  of  Governmental  Industrial  Hyglenlsts).   1987.
                                                       V
Threshold  Limit  Values  and  Biological  Exposure  Indices  for   1987-1988.
Cincinnati. OH.  p. 12.

Arzamastsev.  E.V.    1964.   Experimental  substantiation  of  the  permissible
concentrations  of   tr1- and  pentavalent  antimony  In  water  bodies.   Hyg.
Sanlt. (Transl. G1g. SanU.).  29: 16-21.  (Cited In NAS.  1980)

ASARCO,  Inc.   1980,  TSCA  8(e)  submission 8EHQ-0580-0342.   Blo/tox  data  on
antimony  trloxlde.   OTS,  U.S.  EPA.  Washington.  DC.   (Cited  In  U.S.  EPA,
1987a)

Davles,  T.A.L.   1973.   The  health  of  workers   engaged  In  antimony  oxide
manufacture --  A statement.  Dept.  Employment,  Employment  Hedlcal  Advisory
Serv., London.  2 p.  (CUed 1n  U.S.  EPA, 1987a)

Hlraoka,  N.   1986.   The  toxldty and  organ-distribution of  antimony  after
chronic  administration  to  rats.   J.  Kyoto   Prefect  Univ.  Ned.   95(8):
997-1017.  (Jap.)  (Taken from Blol.  Abstr. 86: 36186)
2079A                               -10-                             09/20/88

-------
Kanlsawa, H. and H.A,  Schroeder.   1969,   Life term studies on the effects of
trace  elements  on  spontaneous  tumors  In mice and  rats.  Cancer  Res.   29:
892-895.  (Cited In U.S. EPA, 19B7a)

HAS  (National  Academy  of  Sciences).   1980.   Drinking  Water  and  Health.
Vol. 3.  MAS, Washington, DC.  p. 77-80.

NIOSH   (National  Institute  for  Occupational  Safety  and  Health).   1978.
Criteria  for  a Recommended  Standard...Occupational  Exposure  to  Antimony.
DHEW Publ. No.  (NIOSH) 78-216.  (CHed 1n U.S. EPA, 1985b)

OSHA  (Occupational  Safety and  Health Administration).   1985.   Occupational
Standards Permissible Exposure Limits.  29 CFR 1910.1000.

Rossi,  F.,  R.  Acampora, C.  Vacca,  et  al.   1987.   Prenatal  and  postnatal
antimony  exposure   In  rats:  effect  on  vasomotor  reactivity  development  of
pups.  Teratogen. Carclnog.  Hutagen.  7: 491-496.

Schroeder, H.A.,  MUchner,  H. and  Nason, A.P.   1970.   Zirconium,  nlobllum,
antimony and lead In rats: Life-time studies.  J.  Nutr.  100:  59-69.

Stephan, C.E.  1983.  Memorandum to Randall J. Bruins.

U.S.  EPA.   1980.   Ambient   Water  Quality  Criteria Document  for  Antimony.
Prepared by the Office of Health and  Environmental  Assessment, Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH for  the Office of  Water Regu-
lations and Standards,.Washington DC.   EPA 440/5-80-020.   NTIS PB81-117319.
?079A                               -11-                             09/20/88

-------
U.S. EPA.   1985a.   Integrated  Risk  Information System (IRIS): Reference  Dose
(RfD)  for  Oral Exposure for Antimony,   Online,   (Revised; Verification  date
n .'06/85.)   Office  of  Health  and  Environmental  Assessment,  Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH,

U.S.  EPA.    1985b.   Health  and  Environmental  Effects  Profile  for  Antimony
Oxides.   Prepared  by   the  Office  of  Health  and Environmental  Assessment,
Environmental  Criteria  and Assessment Office, Cincinnati,  OH for  the Office
of  Solid Waste  and Emergency  Response, Washington,  DC.   EPA/600/X-85/271.
NTIS PB88-175039/AS.

U.S.  EPA.    1986.   Reference Values  for Risk  Assessment.  Prepared  by  the
Office  of   Health  and   Environmental  Assessment,  Environmental  Criteria  and
Assessment  Office,  Cincinnati,  OH for the Office of  Solid Waste,  Washington
DC.

U.S.  EPA.    1987a.   Health  Effects  Assessment for  Antimony and  Compounds.
Prepared by the  Office  of  Health  and Environmental  Assessment,  Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office,  Cincinnati, OH  for  the Office  of  Emergency
and    Remedial    Response,   Washington,   DC.    EPA/600/8-88/018.     NTIS
                                           t
PB88-179445/AS.

U.S. EPA.   1987b.   40   CFR  141  Drinking  water; Substitution  of  Contaminants
and  Priority  List  of  Additional  Substances  Which  May   Require  Regulation
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act.   Federal Register.   52(130):  25720-25734.
2079A                               -12-                             09/20/88

-------
U.S.  EPA.   1988.  Integrated Risk Information  System  (IRIS).   Chemical File
for  Antimony.   Online.   Office  of   Health  and  Environmental  Assessment,
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH.

Watt,  W.D.   1980.   Chronic  Inhalation  toxldty  of  antimony  trloxlde  and
validation  of the TLV.   Progress report  —  Summary of results.   TSCA 8(e)
submission.  8#HQ-0980-0342.   Study  submitted  by  ASARCO,   Inc.,  New  York.
Microfiche  No. OTS020486.  (Cited  In U.S. EPA, 1987a)

Watt.  W.O.   1981.   FYI  submission   TY-OTS-00081-0121  regarding  pathology
report  on  rat  Inhalation  study on   antimony  trloxlde.   OTS,  U.S.  EPA,
Washington, DC.  (Cited In U.S. EPA,  1987a)

Watt, W.D.  1983.  Chronic Inhalation  toxlclty  of  antimony  trloxlde:  Valida-
tion  of  the  threshold  limit  value.   Olss. Abstr.  Int.  B. 44(3):  739-740.
(Cited In U.S. EPA, 1987a)
2079A                               -13-                              09/20/88

-------