United Slates
Environmental Protection
Aqency
Off'ce of Water
Regulations and Standards.
Washington, DC 20460
Water
June, 1989
lethylene bis(2-chloroaniline'
*y *
-------
PREFACE
This document is one of a series of preliminary assessments dealing
with chemicals of potential concern in municipal sewage sludge. The
purpose of these documents is to: (a) summarize the available data for
the constituents of potential concern, (b) identify the key environ-
mental pathways for each constituent related to a reuse and disposal
option (based on hazard indices), and (c) evaluate the conditions under
which such a pollutant may pose a hazard. Each document provides a sci-
entific basis for making an initial determination of whether a pollu-
tant, at levels currently observed in sludges, poses a likely hazard to
human health or the environment when sludge is disposed of by any of
several methods. These methods include landspreading on food chain or
nonfood chain crops, distribution and marketing programs, landfilling,
incineration and ocean disposal.
These documents are intended to serve as a rapid screening tool to
narrow an initial list of pollutants to those of concern. If a signifi-
cant hazard is indicated by this preliminary analysis, a more detailed
assessment will be undertaken to better quantify the risk from this
chemical and to derive criteria if warranted. If a hazard is shown to
be unlikely, no further assessment will be conducted at this time; how-
ever, a reassessment will be conducted after initial regulations are
finalized. In no case, however, will criteria be derived solely on the
basis of information presented in this document.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE i
1. INTRODUCTION. 1-1
2. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FOR 4,4'-METHYLENE BIS
(2-CHLOROANILINE) IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE 2-1
Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing 2-1
Landfilling 2-2
Incineration - 2-2
Ocean Disposal 2-2
3. PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDICES FOR 4,4'-METHYLENE BIS
(2-CHLOROANILINE) IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE 3-1
Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing 3-1
Effect on soil concentration of 4,4'-Methylene Bis
(2-ChloroaniLine) (Index 1) ; . . . 3-1
Effect on soil biota and predators of soil biota
(Indices 2-3) 3-3
Effect on plants and plant tissue
concentration (Indices 4-6) 3-4
Effect on herbivorous animals (Indices 7-8) 3-7
Effect on humans (Indices 9-13) 3-10
Landf illing ' 3-16
Incineration 3-16
Ocean Disposal 3-16
4. PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR 4,4'-METHYLENE BIS
(2-CHLOROANILINE) IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE 4-1
Occurrence 4-1
Sludge 4-1
Soil - Unpolluted 4-1
Water - Unpolluted 4-2
Air 4-2
Food 4-3
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page
Human Effects 4-3
Ingestion 4-3
Inhalation 4-4
Plant Effects 4-5
Phytotoxicity 4-5
Uptake 4-5
Domestic Animal and Wildlife Effects 4-5
Toxicity 4-5
Uptake 4-5
Aquatic Life Effects • 4-5
Soil Biota Effects 4-5
Physicochemical Data for Estimating Fate and Transport 4-5
5 . REFERENCES ". 5-1
APPENDIX. PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR
4,4'-METHYLENE BIS (2-CHLOROANILINE) IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE
SLUDGE A-l
111
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
This preliminary data profile is one of a series of profiles
dealing with chemical pollutants potentially of concern in municipal
sewage . sludges. 4,4'-Methylene bis (2-chloroahiline) (MOCA)' was ini-
tially identified as being of potential concern when sludge is land-
spread (including distribution-and-marketing).* This profile is a com-
pilation of information that may be useful in determining whether MOCA
poses an actual hazard to human health or the environment when sludge is
disposed of by this method.
The focus of this document is the calculation of "preliminary
hazard indices" for selected potential exposure pathways, as shown in
Section 3. Each index illustrates the hazard that could result from
movement of a pollutant by a given pathway to cause a given effect
(e.g., sludge •* soil •* plant uptake •*• animal uptake •* human toxicity).
The values and assumptions employed in these calculations tend to repre-
sent a reasonable "worst case"; analysis of error or uncertainty has
been conducted to a limited degree. The resulting value in most cases
is indexed to unity; i.e., values >1 may indicate a potential hazard,
depending upon the assumptions of the calculation.
The data used for index calculation have been selected or estimated
based on information presented in the "preliminary data profile", Sec-
tion 4. Information in the profile is based on a compilation of the
recent literature. An attempt has been, made to fill out the profile
outline to the greatest extent possible. However, since this is a pre-
liminary analysis, the literature has not been exhaustively perused.
The "preliminary conclusions" drawn from each index in Section 3
are summarized in Section 2. The preliminary hazard indices will be
used as a screening tool to determine which pollutants and pathways may
pose a hazard. Where a potential hazard is indicated by interpretation
of these indices, further analysis will include a more detailed exami-
nation of potential risks as well as an examination of site-specific
factors. These more rigorous evaluations may change the preliminary
conclusions presented in Section 2, which are based on a reasonable
"worst case" analysis.
The preliminary hazard indices for selected exposure routes
pertinent to landspreading and distribution and marketing are included
in this profile. The calculation formulae for these indices are shown
in the Appendix. The indices are rounded to two significant figures.
* Listings were determined by a series of expert workshops convened
during March-May, 1984 by the Office of Water Regulations and
Standards (OWRS) to discuss landspreading, landfilling, incineration,
and ocean disposal, respectively, of municipal sewage sludge.
1-1
-------
SECTION 2
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FOR 4,4'-METHYLENE BIS (2-CHLOROANILINE)
IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
The following preliminary conclusions have been derived from the
calculation of "preliminary hazard indices", which represent conserva-
tive or "worst case" analyses of hazard. The indices and their basis
and interpretation are explained in Section 3. - Their calculation
formulae are shown in the Appendix.
I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING
A. Effect on Soil Concentration of 4,4-Methylene Bis
(2-Chloroani1ine)
Soil concentrations of MOCA are expected to increase slightly
with 5 to 50 mt/ha application rates of municipal sewage
sludge. Long term applications of sewage sludge are expected
to result in moderate increases of MOCA concentrations in the
amended soils (see Index 1).
B. Effect on Soil Biota or Predators of Soil Biota
Conclusions were not drawn about the effect of MOCA on soil
biota and predators because index values could not be calcu-
lated due to lack of immediately available data (see Indices 2
and 3).
C. Effect on Plants and Plant Tissue Concentration
Conclusions were not able"to be drawn concerning the effects
of MOCA on plants (see Index 4); however, the application of
municipal sewage sludge to soil is not expected to result in
increased concentrations of MOCA in plant tissue grown on the
amended soils (see Index 5). Phytotoxic levels were also not
able to be determined due to a lack of data (see Index 6).
D. Effect on Herbivorous Animals
The consumption of plant tissue grown on sludge-amended soils
by herbivorous animals is not expected to pose a toxic hazard
due to MOCA ingestion (see Index 7). Also, the consumption of
crops to which sludge-amended soil or sludge adheres is not
expected to pose a MOCA hazard to herbivorous animals (see
Index 8).
E. Effect on Humans
Conclusions could not be drawn about the potential effect of
MOCA on humans because index values could not be calculated
due to lack of immediately available data (see Indices 9 to
13).
2-1
-------
II. LANDPILLING
Based on che recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
III. INCINERATION
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
2-2
-------
SECTION 3
PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDICES FOR 4,4'-METHYLENE BIS
(2-CHLOROANILINE) IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING
A. Effect on Soil Concentration of 4,4'-Methylene Bis
(2-Chloroaniline)
1. Index of Soil Concentration (Index 1)
a. Explanation - Calculates concentrations in Ug/g DW
of pollutant in sludge-amended soil. Calculated for
sludges with typical (median, if available) and
worst (95 percentile, if available) pollutant
concentrations, respectively, for each • of four
applications. Loadings (as dry matter) are chosen
and explained as follows:
0 mt/ha No sludge applied. Shown for all indices
for purposes of comparison, to distin-
guish hazard posed by sludge from pre-
existing hazard posed by background
levels or other sources of the pollutant.
5 mt/ha Sustainable yearly agronomic application;
i.e., loading typical of agricultural
practice, supplying -^50 kg available
nitrogen per hectare.
50 mt/ha Higher single application as may be used
on public lands, reclaimed areas or home
gardens.
500 mt/ha Cumulative loading after 100 years of
application at 5 mt/ha/year.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes pollutant is
incorporated into the upper 15 cm of soil (i.e., the
plow layer), which has an approximate mass (dry
matter) of 2 x 10^ mt/ha and is then dissipated
through first order processes which can be expressed
as a soil half-life.
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Sludge concentration of pollutant (SC)
Typical 18.0 Ug/g DW
Worst 86.0 Ug/g DW
3-1
-------
Information on sludge concentrations of MOCA is
derived primarily from studies of Adrian,
Michigan where a MOCA manufacturing plant oper-
ated "(U.S. EPA, 1980; Parris et al., 1980). In
Adrian, MOCA concentrations in sludge are
reported to range between 0.006 Ug/g for
"return" sludge to 86.0 Ug/g for sludge from
dry beds at the wastewater treatment plant.
The value of 18.0 Ug/g (DW) applies to acti-
vated sludge. To be conservative, the two
highest values of known sludge concentrations
of MOCA, 18.0 Ug/g and 86.0 Ug/g, are used for
the typical and worst case sludge concentra-
tions, respectively. (See Section 4, p. 4-1.)
ii. Background concentration of pollutant in soil
(BS) = 2.9 Ug/g DW
Estimates of the ambient soil concentrations of
MOCA have been derived from soil analyses in
Adrian, Michigan (U.S. EPA, 1980). Soil levels
by roadways vary by distance from the MOCA man-
ufacturing plant, being 13 ppm (W/W) at 0.4
mile to 2.1 ppm at over 1 mile from the plant.
MOCA levels in garden soils are in the range of
0.08 to 2.9 ppm on the surface, but decline to
0.01 to 0.86 for subsurface garden soils. At
two Adrian wastewater treatment plant sites,
the soil concentrations of MOCA were 1.6 and
6.5 ppm. The value of 2.9 Ug/g DW was selected
as a conservative estimate of the range of
reported soil concentrations. (See Section 4,
pp. 4-1 and 4-2.)
iii. Soil half-life of pollutant (ti) = 5.3 years
The half-life of MOCA has been reported to
range between 3.69 hours to 12.96 hours for
photolysis. 12.96 hours for oxidation, and
1.07 x 10^ hours for volatilization (Versar,
1980). Based on these estimates, an average
half-life of 4.667 x 104 hours or 5.3 years has
been derived (Versar, 1980). Given the
scarcity of data on MOCA, this estimate is used
as a reasonable first approximation of the
chemical's half-life in soil. It should be
noted the underlying assumption of this
estimate is that all of the above processes are
involved in the decomposition of MOCA. (See
Section 4, p. 4-2.)
3-2
-------
d. Index 1 Values (mg/g DW)
Sludge Application Rate (mt/ha)
Sludge
Concentration
Typical
Worst
0
2.9
2.9
5
2^9
3.1
50
3.3
4.9
500
24
25
e. Value Interpretation - Value equals the expected
concentration in sludge-amended soil.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Soil concentrations of MOCA
are expected to increase slightly with 5 to 50 mt/ha
application rates of municipal sewage sludge. Long-
term applications of sewage sludge are expected to
result in moderate increases of MOCA concentrations
in the amended soils.
B. Effect on Soil Biota and Predators of Soil Biota
1. Index of Soil Biota Toxicity (Index 2)
a. Explanation - Compares pollutant concentrations in
sludge-amended soil with soil concentration shown to
be toxic for some soil organism.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes pollutant form in
sludge-amended soil is equally bioavailable and
toxic as form used in study where toxic effects were
demonstrated.
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in sludge-amended
soil (Index 1)
See Section 3, p. 3-3.
ii. Soil concentration toxic to soil biota (TB) -
Data not immediately available.
d. Index 2 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Value equals factor by which
expected soil concentration exceeds toxic concentra-
tion. Value > 1 indicates a toxic hazard may exist
for soil biota.
3-3
-------
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
2. Index of Soil Biota Predator Toxicity (Index 3)
a. Explanation - Compares pollutant concentrations
expected in tissues of organisms inhabiting sludge-
amended soil with food concentration shown to be
toxic to a predator on soil organisms.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes pollutant form
bioconcentrated by soil biota is equivalent in
toxicity to form used to demonstrate toxic effects
in predator. Effect level in predator may be
estimated from that in a different species.
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in sludge-amended
soil (Index 1)
See Section 3, p. 3-3.
ii. Uptake factor of pollutant in soil biota (UB) -
Data not immediately available.
iii. Feed concentration toxic to predator (TR)
Data not immediately available.
d. Index 3 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Values equals factor by which
expected concentration in soil biota exceeds that
which is toxic to predator. Value > 1 indicates a
toxic hazard may exist for predators of soil biota.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
C. Effect on Plants and Plant Tissue Concentration
1. Index of Phytotoxic Soil Concentration (Index 4)
a. Explanation - Compares pollutant concentrations in
sludge-amended soil with the lowest soil
concentration shown to be toxic for some plants.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes pollutant form in
sludge-amended soil is equally bioavailable and
toxic as form used in study where toxic effects were
demonstrated.
3-4
-------
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in sludge-amended
soil (Index 1)
See Section 3, p. 3-3.
ii. Soil concentration toxic to plants (TP) - Data
not immediately available.
d. Index 4 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Value equals factor by which
soil concentration exceeds phytotoxic concentration.
Value > 1 indicates a phytotoxic hazard may exist.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
Index of Plant Concentration Caused by Uptake (Index 5)
a. Explanation - Calculates expected tissue
concentrations, in Ug/g DW, in plants grown in
sludge-amended soil, using uptake data for the most
responsive plant species in the following
categories: (1) plants included in the U.S. human
diet; and (2) plants serving as animal feed. Plants
used vary according to availability of data.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes an uptake factor
that is constant over all soil concentrations. The
uptake factor chosen for the human diet is assumed
to be representative of all crops (except fruits) in
the human diet. The uptake factor chosen for the
animal diet is assumed to be representative of all
crops in the animal diet. See also Index 6 for
consideration of phytotoxicity.
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in sludge-amended
soil (Index 1)
See Section 3, p. 3-3. "
ii. Uptake factor of pollutant in plant tissue (UP)
Animal Diet:
Radishes 0 ug/g tissue DW (ug/g soil DW)"1
Human Diet:
Onion Tops and Bulbs
0 ug/g tissue DW (ug/g soil DW)"1
3-5
-------
In the only immediately available study of
plant tissue uptake of MOCA (U.S. EPA, 1980),
no MOCA residues could be found in onion tops
and bulbs, radishes, or zucchini squash, all of
which were grown in garden soil contaminated
with MOCA. (See Section 4, p. 4-3.)
d. Index 5 Values (ug/g DW)
Sludge Application Rate (mt/ha)
Sludge
Diet
Animal
Human
Concentration
Typical
Worst
Typical
Worst
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
500
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
e. Value Interpretation - Value equals the expected
concentration in tissues of plants grown in sludge-
amended soil. However, any value exceeding the
value of Index 6 for the same or a similar plant
species may be unrealistically high because it would
be precluded by phytotoxicity.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - The application of munici-
pal sewage sludge to soil is not expected to result
in increased concentrations of MOCA in plant tissue
grown on the amended soil.
3. Index of Plant Concentration Permitted by Phytotoxicity
(Index 6)
a. Explanation - The index value is the maximum tissue
concentration, in Ug/g DW, associated with
phytotoxicity in the same or similar plant species
used in Index 5. The purpose is to determine
whether the plant tissue concentrations determined
in Index 5 for high applications are realistic, or
whether such concentrations would be precluded by
phytotoxicity. The maximum concentration should be
the highest at which some plant growth still occurs
(and thus consumption of tissue by animals is
possible) but above which consumption by animals is
unlikely.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes that tissue
concentration will be a consistent indicator of
phytotoxicity.
3-6
-------
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Maximum plant tissue concentration associated
with phytotoxicity (PP) - Data not immediately
available.
d. Index 6 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Value equals the maximum
plant tissue concentration which is permitted by
phytotoxicity. Value is compared with values for
the same or similar plant species 'given by Index 5.
The lowest of the two indices indicates the maximal
increase that can occur at any given application
rate.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
D. Effect on Herbivorous Animals
1. Index of Animal Toxicity Resulting from Plant Consumption
(Index 7)
a. Explanation - Compares pollutant concentrations
expected in plant tissues grown in sludge-amended
soil with feed concentration shown to be toxic to
wild or domestic herbivorous animals. Does not con-
sider direct contamination of forage by- adhering
sludge.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes pollutant form
taken up by plants is equivalent in toxicity to form
used to demonstrate toxic effects in animal. Uptake
or toxicity in specific plants or animals may be
estimated from other species.
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in plant grown in
sludge-amended soil (Index 5)
The pollutant concentration values used are
those Index 5 values for an animal diet (see
Section 3, p. 3-6).
ii. Feed concentration toxic to herbivorous animal
(TA) = 125 Ug/g DW
Several studies have been conducted on the
toxicity and/or carcinogenicity associated with
the ingestion of MOCA. In a summary of this
research (U.S. EPA, 1981), the lowest dietary
3-7
-------
concentration associated with neoplasia (i.e.,
long neoplasms or lung adenocarcinomas) in rats
was a protein deficient diet containing 125 ppm
of MOCA. Total incidence of neoplasms are sig-
nificantly higher in rats on diets, either pro-
tein adequate or deficient, with MOCA
concentrations of 250 ppm. With the absence of
more pertinent data, the dietary concentration
of 125 ppm of MOCA in feed is used as a first
approximation of the toxic feed concentration
for herbivorous animals, although the validity
of such generalization has yet to be
established. (See Section 4, p. 4-5.)
Index 7 Values
Sludge Application Rate (mt/ha)
Sludge
Concentration 0 5 50 500
Typical
Worst
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
e. Value Interpretation - Value equals factor by which
expected plant tissue concentration exceeds that
which is toxic to animals. Value > 1 indicates a
toxic hazard may exist for herbivorous animals.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - The consumption of plant
tissue grown on sludge-amended, soils by herbivorous
animals is not expected to pose a toxic hazard due
to MOCA ingestion.
Index of Animal Toxicity Resulting from Sludge Ingestion
(Index 8)
a. Explanation - Calculates the amount of pollutant in
a grazing animal's diet resulting from sludge
adhesion to forage or from incidental ingestion of
siudge-amended soil and compares this with the
dietary toxic threshold concentration for a grazing
animal.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes that sludge is
applied over and adheres to growing forage, or that
sludge constitutes 5 percent of dry matter in the
grazing animal's diet, and that pollutant form in
sludge is equally bioavailable and toxic as form
used to demonstrate toxic effects. Where no sludge
is applied (i.e., 0 mt/ha), assumes diet is 5 per-
cent soil as a basis for comparison.
3-8
-------
Data Used and Rationale
i. Sludge concentration of pollutant (SC)
Typical 18.0 yg/g DW
Worst 86.0 yg/g DW
See Section 3, p. 3-1.
ii. Fraction of animal diet assumed to be soil (GS)
= 5%
Studies of sludge adhesion to growing forage
following applications of liquid or filter-cake
sludge show that when 3 to 6 mt/ha of sludge
solids is applied, clipped forage initially
consists of up to 30 percent sludge on a dry-
weight basis (Chaney and Lloyd, 1979; Boswell,
1975). However, this contamination diminishes
gradually with time and growth, and generally
is not detected in the following year's growth.
For example, where pastures amended at 16 and
32 mt/ha were grazed throughout a growing sea-
son (168 days), average sludge content of for-
age was only 2.14 and 4.75 percent,
respectively (Bertrand et al., 1981). It seems
reasonable to assume that animals may receive
long-term dietary exposure to 5 percent sludge
if maintained on a forage to which sludge is
regularly applied. This estimate of 5 percent
sludge is used regardless of application rate,
since the above studies did not show a clear
relationship between application rate and ini-
tial contamination, and since adhesion is not
cumulative yearly because of die-back.
Studies of grazing animals indicate that soil
ingestion, ordinarily <10 percent of dry weight
of diet, may reach as high as 20 percent for
cattle' and 30 percent for sheep during winter
months when forage is reduced (Thornton and
Abrams, 1983). If the soil were sludge-
amended, it is conceivable that up to 5 percent
sludge may be ingested in this manner as well.
Therefore, this value accounts for either of
these scenarios, whether forage is harvested or
grazed in the field.
iii. Peed concentration toxic to herbivorous animal
(TA) = 125 Ug/g DW
See Section 3, p. 3-7.
3-9
-------
d. Index 8 Values
Sludge Application Rate (rot/ha)
Sludge
Concentration 0 5 50 500
Typical
Worst
0.0
0.0
0.0072
0.034
0.0072
0.034
0.0072
0.034
e. Value Interpretation - Value equals factor by which
expected dietary concentration exceeds toxic concen-
tration. Value > 1 indicates a toxic hazard may
exist for grazing animals.
'f. Preliminary Conclusion - The consumption of crops to
which sludge-amended soil or sludge adheres is not
expected to pose a MOCA hazard to herbivorous
animals.
Effect on Humans
1. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Plant
Consumption (Index 9)
a. Explanation - Calculated dietary intake expected to
result from consumption of crops grown on sludge-
amended soil. Compares dietary intake with the
cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) of the pollutant.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes that all crops are
grown on sludge-amended soil and that all those con-
sidered to be affected take up the pollutant at the
same rate. Divides possible variations in dietary
intake into two categories: toddlers (18 months to
3 years) and individuals over 3 years old.
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in plant grown in
sludge-amended soil (Index 5)
The pollutant concentration values used are
those Index 5 values for a human diet (see
Section 3, p. 3-6).
ii. Daily human dietary intake of affected plant
tissue (DT)
Toddler 74.5 g/day
Adult 205 g/day
3-10
-------
The intake value for adults is based on daily
intake of crop foods (excluding fruit) by
vegetarians (Ryan et al., 1982); vegetarians
were chosen to represent the worst case. The
value for toddlers is based on the FDA Revised
Total Diet (Pennington, 1983) and food
groupings listed by the U.S. EPA (1984). Dry
weights for individual food groups were
estimated from composition data given by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1975).
These values were composited to estimate dry-
weight consumption of all non-fruit crops.
iii. Average daily human dietary intake of pollutant
(DI) - Data not immediately available.
iv. Cancer potency = 0.325 (mg/kg/day) ~*
A potency estimate of 0.325 (mg/kg/day)~^ was
employed by the U.S. EPA Office of Toxic Sub-
stances, as calculated from 70-year risk esti-
mates presented in Table 1 of U.S. EPA, 1983b.
(See Section 4, p. 4-3.)
v. Cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) = 0.215 Ug/day
The RSI is the pollutant intake value which
results in an increase in cancer risk of 10"^
(1 per 1,000,000). The RSI is calculated from
the cancer potency using the following formula:
RSI = 1Q~6 x 70 kg x 103 ug/mg
Cancer potency
d. Index 9 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Value > 1 indicates a poten-
tial increase in cancer risk of > 10~" (1 per
1,000,000). Comparison with the null index value at
0 mt/ha indicates the degree to which any hazard is
due to sludge application, as opposed to pre-
existing dietary sources.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
2. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Consumption of
Animal Products Derived from Animals Feeding on Plants
(Index 10)
a. Explanation - Calculates human dietary intake
expected to result from pollutant uptake by domestic
3-11
-------
animals given feed grown on sludge-amended soil
(crop or pasture land) but not directly contaminated
by adhering sludge. Compares expected intake with
RSI.
Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes that all animal
products are from animals receiving all their feed
from sludge-amended soil. Assumes that all animal
products consumed take up the pollutant at the
highest 'rate observed for muscle of any commonly
consumed species or at the rate observed for beef
liver or dairy products (whichever is higher).
Divides possible variations in dietary intake into
two categories: toddlers (18 months to 3 years) and
individuals over 3 years old.
Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in plant grown in
sludge—amended soil (Index 5)
The pollutant concentration values used are
those Index 5 values for an animal diet (see
Section 3, p. 3-6).
ii. Uptake factor of pollutant in animal tissue
(UA) - Data not immediately available.
iii. Daily human dietary intake of affected animal
tissue (DA)
Toddler 43.7 g/day
Adult 88.5 g/day
The fat intake values presented, which comprise
mea-t, fish, poultry, eggs and milk products,
are derived from- the FDA Revised Total Diet
(Pennington, 1983), food groupings listed by
the U.S. EPA (1984) and food composition data
given by USDA (1975). Adult intake of meats is
based on males 25 to 30 years of age and that
for milk products on males 14 to 16 years of
age, the age-sex groups with the highest daily
intake. Toddler intake of milk products is
actually based on infants, since infant milk
consumption is the highest among that age group
(Pennington, 1983).
iv. Average daily human dietary intake of pollutant
(DI) - Data not immediately available.
3-12
-------
v. Cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) =
0.215 Ug/day
See Section 3, p. 3-11.
d. Index 10 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Same as for Index 9.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
3. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Consumption of
Animal Products Derived from Animals Ingesting Soil
(Index 11)
a. Explanation - Calculates human dietary intake
expected to result from consumption of animal
products derived from grazing animals incidentally
ingesting sludge-amended soil. Compares expected
intake with RSI.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes that all animal
products are from animals grazing sludge-amended
soil, and that all animal products consumed take up
the pollutant at the highest rate observed for
muscle of any commonly consumed species or at the
rate observed for beef liver or dairy products
(whichever is higher). Divides possible variations
in dietary intake into two categories: toddlers
(18 months to 3 years) and individuals over 3 years
old.
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Animal tissue - Data not immediately available.
ii. Sludge concentration of pollutant (SC)
A
Typical 18.0 Ug/g DW
Worst 86.0 Ug/g DW
See Section 3, p. 3-1.
iii. Background concentration of pollutant in soil =
2.9 yg/g DW
See Section 3, p. 3-2.
iv. Fraction of animal diet assumed to be soil (GS)
= 5%
See Section 3, p. 3-9.
3-13
-------
v. Uptake factor of pollutant in animal tissue
(UA) - DaCa not immediately available.
vi. Daily human dietary intake of affected animal
tissue (DA)
Toddler 39.A g/day
Adult 82.4 g/day
The affected tissue intake value is assumed to
be from the fat component of meat only (beef,
pork, lamb, veal) and milk products
(Pennington, 1983). This is a slightly more
limited choice than for Index 10. Adult
intake of meats is based on males 25 to 30
years of age and the intake for milk products
on males 14 to 16 years of age, the age-sex
groups with the highest daily intake. Toddler
intake of milk products is actually based on
infants, since infant milk consumption is the
highest among that age group (Pennington,
1983).
vii. Average daily human dietary intake of
pollutant (DI) - Data not immediately
available.
viii. Cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) = 0.215 ug/day
See Section 3, p. 3-11.
d. Index 11 Values- - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Same as for Index 9.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was n'ot drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
Index of Human Cancer Risk from Soil Ingestion (Index 12)
a. Explanation - Calculates the amount of pollutant in
the diet of a child who ingests soil (pica child)
amended with sludge. Compares this amount with RSI.
b. Assumptions/Limitations - Assumes that the pica
child consumes an average of 5 g/day of sludge-
amended soil. If the RSI specific for a child is
not available, this index assumes the RSI for a 10
kg child is the same as that for a 70 kg adult. It
is thus assumed that uncertainty factors used in
deriving the RSI provide protection for the child,
taking into account the smaller body size and any
other differences in sensitivity.
3-14
-------
c. Data Used and Rationale
i. Concentration of pollutant in sludge-amended
soil (Index 1)
See Section 3, p. 3-3.
ii. Assumed amount of soil in human diet (DS)
Pica child 5 g/day
Adult 0.02 g/day
The value of 5 g/day for a pica child is a
worst-case estimate employed by U.S. EPA's
Exposure Assessment Group (U.S. EPA, 1983a).
The value of 0.02 g/day for an adult is an
estimate from U.S. EPA, 1,984.
iii. Average daily human dietary intake of pollutant
(DI) - Data not immediately available.
iv. Cancer risk-specific intake (RSI) = 0.215 ug/day
See Section 3, p. 3-11.
d. Index 12 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack, of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Same as for Index 9.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
5. Index of Aggregate Human Cancer Risk (Index 13)
a. Explanation - Calculates the aggregate amount of
pollutant in the human diet resulting from pathways
described in Indices 9 to 12. Compares this amount
with RSI.
*
b. Assumptions/Limitations - As described for Indices 9
to 12.
c. Data Used and Rationale - As described for Indices 9
to 12.
d. Index 13 Values - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
e. Value Interpretation - Same as for Index 9.
f. Preliminary Conclusion - Conclusion was not drawn
because index values could not be calculated.
3-15
-------
II. LANDFILLING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May,. 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
III. INCINERATION
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL
Based on" the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
3-16
-------
SECTION 4
PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR 4,4'-METHYLENE BIS(2-CHLOROANILINE)
IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. OCCURRENCE
MOCA is a commercially important curing agent for Rappaport and
polymer and epoxy-resin systems containing iso- Morales, 1978
cyanates. Production in 1972 estimated at 3.3 (p. 19)
million kg.
A. Sludge
1. Frequency of Detection
Data not immediately available.
2. Concentration
Sludge samples from Adrian, .MI U.S. EPA, 1980
(MOCA production plant nearby) in (p. 12)
1979 contained MOCA as follows:
Return sludge - 0.006 Ug/g
Digested sludge - 1.70 Ug/g
Sludge (DW) - 18.00 Ug/g
Sludge (DW) - 86.00 Ug/g
Activated sludge, Adrian, MI, Parris et al.,
18.0 Ug/g (DW) 1980 (p. 500)
B. Soil - Unpolluted
1. Frequency of Detection
Data not immediately available.
However, it is known that herbicide- Hsu and Bartna,
derived chloroaniline residues are 1974 (p. 444)
immobilized by physical adsorption to
both the organic and the inorganic
fraction of the soil as well as by
chemical binding to the soil organic
matter and that this binding greatly
increases their persistence in the
environment.
2. Concentration
In Adrian, MI, levels of MOCA in U.S. EPA, 1980
various soils in 1979 were as (p. 13)
follows:
4-1
-------
Adrian roads, surface soil -
<0.05-590 ug/g (WW)
Garden soil from homes near MOCA
plant -
0.08-2.90 ug/g (surface)
0.02-0.86 Ug/g (2-6 in. subsurface)
0.01-0.07 ug/g (6-10 in. subsurface)
Adrian roads, surface -
13 ug/g (WW) (near MOCA plant)
2.1 Ug/g (WW) (1 mile from MOCA plant)
Soil half-life = 5.3 years
Water - Unpolluted
1. Frequency of Detection
Data not immediately available.
2. Concentration
a. Freshwater
In Adrian, MI, levels of MOCA
in various waters in 1979 were
as follows:
Industrial Site -
deep well water
surface runoff
Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) -
effluent water
Raisin River Water (near STP
outfall)
b. Seawater
Data not immediately available.
c. Drinking water
Data not immediately available.
D. Air
1. Frequency of detection
Data not immediately available.
Versar, 1980
Parris et al.,
1980 (p. 500)
Ug/L
1.5
1.0
<0.5
4-2
-------
2. Concentration
In Adrian, MI, Levels of MOCA in
the air near the MOCA plant in 1979'
were A.57 Ug/m^ (method not cited)
E. Food
1. Total Average Intake
Data not immediately available.
2. Concentration
In Adrian, MI, thoroughly washed
samples of onion tops and bulbs,
zucchini, and radishes from contami-
nated gardens showed no evidence of
MOCA residues.
II. HUMAN EFFECTS
A. Ingestion
1. Carcinogenicity
Qualitative Assessment
a.
b.
Sufficient evidence in three
animal species; tumor induction
at several sites.
Potency
A potency estimate of 0.325
(mg/kg/day)"^ was employed by
the U.S. EPA Office of Toxic
Substances as calculated from
70-year risk estimate presented
in Table 1 of U.S. EPA, 1983b.
Effects
Malignant lung adenocarcinomas,
primary lung neoplasms, mammary
adenocarcinomas, hepatocellular
carcinomas and Zymbal gland car-
cinomas were found in rats.
2. Chronic Toxicity
Data not presented since carcinogenic
potency will be used to assess hazard.
U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. 14)
U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. 36)
U.S. EPA, 1983b
(p. 15)
U.S.EPA, 1983b
(p. 17)
U.S. EPA, 1983b
(p. 20)
4-3
-------
B.
3. Absorption FactOT
Data not immediately available.
4. Existing Regulations
"MOCA is an animal carcinogen and has
been banned in food and food-contact
surfaces by the FDA."
Inhalation
1.
Carcinogenicity
Qualitative assessment
a.
c.
Not tested for carcinogenicity by
inhalation route. Some indica-
tion of bladder cancer from occu-
pational exposure in humans.
Potency
Not derived for inhalation route.
However, the U.S. EPA Office of
Toxic Substances has employed the
oral potency value to estimate
risk, of human inhalation exposure,
assuming 100 percent absorption of
inhaled MOCA.
Effects
Not tested in animals by the
inhalation route. Possible
bladder cancer in humans.
2. Chronic Toxicity
Data not immediately available.
3. Absorption Factor
Assumed to be 100 percent.
4. Existing Regulations
Manufacture temporarily banned by State
of Michigan in 1979.
Parris et al.,
1980 (p. 497)
U.S. EPA, 1983b
(p. 11, 14)
U.S. EPA, 1983b
(p. 17)
U.S. EPA, 1983b
(p. 11, 14)
U.S. EPA, 1983b
(p. 17)
U.S. EPA, 1983b
(p. 3)
4-4
-------
III. PLANT EFFECTS
A. Phytotoxicity
Data not immediately available.
B. Uptake
In Adrian, MI, thoroughly washed samples of U.S. EPA, 1980
onion tops and bulbs, zucchini, and radishes (p. 36)
from contaminated gardens showed no evidence
of MOCA residues.
IV. DOMESTIC ANIMAL AND WILDLIFE EFFECTS
A. Toxicity
LD50: 750 Ug/kg (oral) - rats U.S. EPA, 1981
5000 Ug/kg (dermal) - rabbits (p. 8)
Lowest-observed-adverse-effect levels U.S. EPA, 1981
(LOAEL) for tumors (pp. 9-11)
Mice: 200 ppm (diet)
Rats: 500 ppm (diet)
Dogs: 8 to 15 pg/kg/day (oral)
Rats: 25.0 ppm (protein adequate diet)
125 ppm (protein inadequate diet)
B. Uptake
Data not immediately available.
V. AQUATIC LIFE EFFECTS
Data not immediately available.
VI. SOIL BIOTA EFFECTS
Data not immediately available.
VII. PHYSICOCHEMICAL DATA FOR ESTIMATING FATE AND TRANSPORT
Molecular wt: 267 Rappaport and
Density: 1.44 g/mL at 24°C Morales, 1978
Melting point: 100 to 109°C (p. 19-20)
Vapor pressure: 3.7 x 10~6 mm Hg at 20"C
5.1 x 10~6 mm Hg at 30°C
Soil half-life: 5.3 years Versar, 1980
4-5
-------
SECTION 5
REFERENCES
Bertrand, J. E., M. C. Lutrick, G. T. Edds and R. L. West. 1981. Metal
Residues in Tissues, Animal Performance and Carcass Quality with
Beef Steers Grazing Pensacola Bahigrass Pastures Treated with
Liquid Digested Sludge. J. Ani. Sci. 53:1.
Boswell, F. C. 1975. Municipal Sewage Sludge and Selected Element
Applications to Soil: Effect on Soil and Fescue. J. Environ.
Qual. 4(2):267-273.
Chaney, R. L., and C. A. Lloyd. 1979. Adherence of Spray-Applied Liquid
Digested Sewage Sludge to Tall Fescue. J. Environ. Qual. 8(3):407-
411.
Hsu, T., and R. Bartha. 1974. Interaction of Pesticide-Derived
Chloroaniline Residues with Soil Organic Matter. Soil Science
116(6):444-452.
Parris, G. E., G. W. Diachenko, R. C. Entz et al. 1980. Waterborne
Methylene Bis(2-Chloroaniline) and 2-Chloroaniline Contamination
Around Adrian, Michigan. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
24:497-503.
Pennington, J.A.T. 1983. Revision of the Total Diet Study Food Lists
and Diets. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 82:166-173.
Rappaport, S. M., and R. Morales. 1978. Air-Sampling and Analytical
Method for 4,4-Methylene Bis(2-Chloroaniline). Analytical Chem.
51(1): 19-23.
Ryan, J. A., H. R. Pahren, and J. B. Lucas. 1982. Controlling Cadmium
in the Human Food Chain: A Review and Rationale Based on Health
Effects. Environ. Res. 28:251-302.
Thornton, E., and P. Abrams. 1983. Soil Ingestion - A Major Pathway of
Heavy Metals into Livestock Grazing Contaminated Land. Sci. Total
Environ. 28:287-294.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1975. Composition of Foods.
Agricultural Handbook No. 8.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Potential Health Effects
from Persistent Organics in Wastewater and Sludges Used for Land
Application. EPA 600/1-80-025. U.S Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, OH.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1981. Chemical Hazard Informa-
tion Profile: 4,4* Methylene Bis(2-Chloroaniline). Draft Report.
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH. February 8.
5-1
-------
APPENDIX
PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR 4,4'-METHYLENE BIS
(2-CHLOROANILINE) IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING
A. Effect on Soil Concentration of 4,4'-Methylene Bis
(2-Chloroani 1 ine )
1. Index of Soil Concentration (Index 1)
a. Formula
(SC x AR) + (BS x MS)
- G!SS ~ AR -f MS
CSr = CSS [1 + 0.5
where:
CSS = Soil concentration of pollutant after a
single year's application of sludge
(Ug/g DW)
CSr = Soil concentration of pollutant after the
yearly application of sludge has been
repeated for n + 1 years (ug/g DW)
SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (ug/g DW)
AR = Sludge application rate (mt/ha)
MS = 2000 mt ha/DW = assumed mass of soil in
upper 15 cm
BS = Background concentration of pollutant in
soil (ug/g DW)
t^. = Soil half-life of pollutant (years)
n = 99 years
b. Sample calculation
CSS is calculated for AR = 0, 5, and 50 mt/ha only
•» ai7ft«flA ., / TMJ - (18 Ug/g DW x 5 mt/ha) + (2.9 ug/g DW x 2000 mt/ha)
2. 93765586 Ug/g DW - (J mj./ha QW + 200Q mt/ha ^
CSr is calculated for AR = 5 mt/ha applied for 100 years
23.9629350 ug/g DW = 2.93765586 ug/g DW [1 + 0.5(1/5'3) +
0.5(2/5'3) + ... + 0.5(99/5-3)]
A-l
-------
B. Effect on Soil Biota and Predators of Soil Biota
1. Index of Soil Biota Toxicity (Index 2)
a. Formula
1^
Index 2 = —
where:
I± = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant in
sludge-amended soil (pg/g DW)
TB = Soil concentration toxic to soil biota
(yg/g DW)
b. Sample calculation - Values .were not calculated due to
lack of data.
2. Index of Soil Biota Predator Toxicity (Index 3)
a. Formula
T , , *1 x UB
Index 3 = —~
where:
II = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant in
sludge-amended soil (ug/g DW)
UB = Uptake factor of pollutant in soil biota
(yg/g tissue DW [ug/g soil DW]"1)
TR = Feed concentration toxic to predator (ug/g
DW)
b. Sample calculation - Values were not calculated due to
lack, of data.
C. Effect on Plants and Plant Tissue Concentration
1. Index of Phytotoxic Soil Concentration (Index 4)
a. Formula
Index 4 = —
where:
II = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant in
sludge-amended soil (ug/g DW)
TP = Soil concentration toxic to plants (yg/g DW)
A-2
-------
b. Sample calculation - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
2. Index of Plant Concentration Caused by Uptake (Index 5)
a. Formula
Index 5 = Ii x UP
where:
1^ = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant in sludge-
amended soil (ug/g DW)
UP = Uptake factor of pollutant in plant tissue
(Ug/g tissue DW [ug/g soil DW]"1)
b. Sample Calculation
0 Ug/g DW = 2.9 Ug/g DW x 0 ug/g tissue DW (ug/g soil
DW)'1
3. Index of Plant Concentration Increment Permitted by
Phytotoxicity (Index 6)
a. Formula
Index 6 = PP
where:
PP = Maximum plant tissue concentration associ-
ated with phytotoxicity (ug/g DW)
b. Sample calculation - Values were not calculated due to
lack of data.
D. Effect on Herbivorous Animals
1. -Index of Animal Toxicity Resulting from Plant Consumption
(Index 7)
a. Formula
Index 7 =
where:
15 = Index 5 = Concentration of pollutant in
plant grown in sludge-amended soil (ug/g DW)
TA = Feed concentration toxic to herbivorous
animal (ug/g DW)
A-3
-------
b. Sample calculation
n - 0 Ug/g DW
" 125 Ug/g DW
2. Index of Animal Toxicity Resulting from Sludge Ingestion
(Index 8)
a. Formula
If AR = 0; Index 8=0
SC x GS
If AR £ 0; Index 8 =
TA
where:
AR = Sludge application rate (mt DW/ha) :
SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (yg/g DW)
GS = Fraction of animal diet assumed to be soil
TA = Feed concentration toxic to herbivorous
animal (ug/g DW)
b. Sample calculation
If AR = 0; Index 8=0
I£ a , „ 0.0072 . iB
E. Effect on Humans
1. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Plant Consumption
(Index 9)
a. Formula
(I5 x DT) + DI
Index 9 = - — -
where:
15 = Index 5 = Concentration of pollutant in
plant grown in sludge-amended soil (ug/g DW)
DT = Daily human dietary intake of affected plant
tissue (g/day DW)
DI = Average daily human dietary intake of
pollutant (ug/day)
RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (ug/day)
b. Sample calculation (toddler) - Values, were not
calculated due to lack of data.
A-4
-------
2. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Consumption of
Animal Products Derived from Animals Feeding on Plants
(Index 10)
a. Formula
(15 x UA x DA) + DI
Index 10 = _
where:
15 = Index 5 = Concentration of pollutant in
plant grown in sludge-amended soil (ug/g DW)
UA = Uptake factor of pollutant in animal tissue
(Ug/g tissue DW [ug/g feed DW]"1)
DA = Daily human dietary intake of affected
animal tissue (g/day DW) (milk products and
meat, poultry, eggs, fish)
DI = Average daily human dietary intake of
pollutant (ug/day)
RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (ug/day)
b. Sample calculation (toddler). - Values were not
calculated due to lack of data.
3. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Consumption of
Animal Products Derived from Animals Ingesting Soil (Index
11)
" a. Formula
_. AD . _ , .. (BS x GS x UA x DA) + DI
If AR = 0; Index 11 = —
KbJL
_, AD , n , , ., (SC x GS x UA x DA) + DI
If AR f 0; Index 11 =
where:
AR = Sludge application rate (mt DW/ha)
BS = Background concentration of pollutant in
soil (yg/g DW)
SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (ug/g DW)
GS = Fraction of animal diet assumed to be soil
UA = Uptake factor of pollutant in animal tissue
(Ug/g tissue DW [ug/g feed DW]"1)
DA = Daily human dietary intake of affected
animal tissue (g/day DW) (milk products and
meat only)
DI = Average daily human dietary intake of
pollutant (jag/day)
"RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (ug/day)
b. Sample calculation (toddler) - Values were not
calculated due to lack of data.
A-5
-------
4. Index of Human Cancer Risk. Resulting from Soil Ingestion
(Index 12)
a. Formula
(Ii x DS) + DI
RSI
where:
1^ = Index 1 = Concentration of pollutant in
sludge-amended soil (ug/g DW)
DS = Assumed amount of soil in human diet (g/day)
DI = Average daily human dietary intake of
pollutant (yg/day)
RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake (yg/day)
b. Sample calculation (toddler) - Values were not
calculated due to lack of data.
5. Index of Aggregate Human Cancer Risk (Index 13)
a. Formula
3DI
Index 13 = Ig + I10 + In + Ij.2 ~ ( RSI
where:
Ig = Index 9 = Index of human toxicity/cancer
risk resulting from plant consumption
(unitless)
= Index 10 = Index of human toxicity/cancer
risk resulting from consumption of animal
products derived from animals feeding on
plants (unitless)
= Index 11 = Index of human toxicity/cancer
risk resulting from consumption of animal
products derived from animals ingesting soil
(unitless)
= Index 12 = Index of human toxicity/cancer
risk resulting from soil ingestion
(unitless)
DI = Average daily human dietary intake of
pollutant (yg/day)
RSI = Cancer risk-specific intake ~(yg/day)
b. Sample calculation (toddler) - Values were not
calculated due to lack of data.
A-6
-------
II. LANDPILLING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
III. INCINERATION
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
A-7
------- |