EPA-820-N-16-004
SEPA	Fall 2016
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
FSTRAC
Newsletter
FEDERAL-STATE TOXICOLOGY RISK ANALYSIS COMMITTEE
What Is FSTRAC?
In 1985, Drs. Joseph Cotruvo, Edward Ohanian, and Penny Fenner-Crisp of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA's) Office of Science and Technology Health and Ecological Criteria Division,
started FSTRAC to build a better relationship with states and tribes to exchange research priorities and
results, policy concerns regarding water-related human health risk assessment, and technical information.
FSTRAC is made up of representatives from state and tribal health and environmental agencies and EPA
Headquarters and Regional personnel. As described on the EPA FSTRAC Web page (http://www2.epa.gov/
water-research/basic-information-fstrac), FSTRAC is an integral part of EPA's communication strategy with
states and tribes. FSTRAC fosters cooperation, consistency, and an understanding of EPA's and different
states' and tribe's goals and problems in human health risk assessment. It allows states, tribes and the federal
government to work together on issues related to the development and implementation of regulations and
criteria under the Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act.
Recent Webinars
FSTRAC holds several webinars each year to share
information through presentations and discussions
regarding human health risk analysis and the water
medium of exposure.
April 2016 FSTRAC Webinar
EPA held a FSTRAC Webinar in April 2016 during
which the following topics were discussed:
2016 Priorities for EPA's Health and Ecological Criteria
Division (presented by Ms. Colleen Flaherty, 0W/EPA):
Ms. Flaherty presented an overview of EPA Office
of Science and Technology, Health and Ecological
Criteria Division's priorities for 2016 in the areas of
human health and aquatic life criteria, and drinking
water health advisories.
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 3) Update
(presented by Ms. Melissa Simic, EPA/0W): Ms. Simic pro-
vided an overview of EPA's UCMR program which
collects national occurrence data for suspected drink-
ing water contaminants to support future regulatory
decisions. Ms. Simic presented a summary of UCMR
3 results, minimum reporting limits, and reference
concentrations. She also presented a table of proposed
UCMR 4 analytes; monitoring for UCMR 4 is tenta-
tively scheduled to start in 2018.
Arsenic Exposure in Maine Homes with POU Treatment
or Bottled Water Use (presented by Drs. Andrew Smith
and Thomas Simones, Maine Center for Disease Control &
Prevention): The Maine Center for Disease Control
& Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. CDC examined
arsenic exposure sources in Maine households that
have switched to bottled water or installed an arse-
nic treatment system at the kitchen sink to reduce
exposure from arsenic contaminated well water.
Occasional use of untreated water for drinking and
cooking accounted for the majority of the remaining
arsenic exposure for adults. For children, the majority
The purpose of this newsletter is to keep Federal-State Toxicology and Risk Analysis Committee (FSTRAC)
members up-to-date on current developments in toxicology, risk analysis, and water quality criteria and standards.
This newsletter also provides information on recent FSTRAC webinars and upcoming events. Please share this
newsletter with anyone you think might be interested in these topics. If you are interested in joining FSTRAC,
please contact the FSTRAC Chair, Dr. Shamima Akhter (Akhter.Shamima@epa.gov).

-------
2
of remaining arsenic exposure was unexplained
water-related exposure. Bathing in well water high
in arsenic was not a significant exposure source for
either children or adults. The study confirms the need
for private well owners to practice vigilance in avoid-
ing use of untreated water, especially if arsenic levels
are greater than 40 (ag/L, and especially if children are
present in the home.
The Impact of High Early Life Water Intake Rates and
Short-Term Effects for Deriving Health-Protective Drinking
Water Criteria (presented by Dr. Helen Goeden, Minnesota
Department of Health): To date, Minnesota Department
of Health has conducted multiple duration assess-
ments for 73 chemicals. As expected, reference doses
(RfDs) typically decreased as exposure duration
increased, however, the majority of the chronic RfDs
were less than four-fold lower than the short-term
RfDs. Intake rates during early life can be nearly sev-
en-fold higher than chronic water intake rates. As a
result, the short-term health-based guidance (HBG)
values were lower than the chronic-based HBG values
in nearly half of the assessments. The results demon-
strate the importance of evaluating shorter durations
to ensure protectiveness.
October 2016 FSTRAC Webinar
EPA held a FSTRAC Webinar in October 2016 during
which the following topics were discussed:
HECD Accomplishments and Workplan for FY 2017 (pre-
sented by Ms. Betsy Behl, OW/EPA): Ms. Behl presented
an overview of EPA Office of Science and Technology,
Health and Ecological Criteria Division's 2016 accom-
plishments and priorities for 2017 in the areas of
human health, nutrients, biocriteria, and aquatic life.
U.S. EPA's Current Approach to Developing Aquatic Life
Ambient Water Quality Criteria and Effort to Update EPA's
Methodology for Deriving Criteria (presented by Dr. Kathryn
Gallagher, OW/EPA): Dr. Gallagher described EPA's
current guidelines methods for developing aquatic
life criteria. The current guidelines methods have
led to the development of approximately 50 Aquatic
Life Criteria for toxic pollutants. Dr. Gallagher also
discussed EPA's plan for updating the guidelines
methods for developing aquatic life criteria using a
two-pronged approach, which includes developing
and implementing an expedited criteria development
method as well as a comprehensive criteria develop-
ment method.
U.S. EPA Office of Water's Communication and Other
Activities Related to Cyanotoxins (presented by Dr. Lesley
D'Anglada, OW/EPA): Dr. D'Anglada described EPA
Office of Water's efforts related to cyanotoxins in
drinking water and recreational water. Outreach
and communication activities include websites, fact
sheets and newsletters, webinars and workshops, and
partnerships and collaborations. Dr. D'Anglada also
discussed future activities at EPA's Office of Water for
cyanotoxins.
New Jersey Drinking Water Quality Institute (DWOI) Draft
Reports to Support an MCL Recommendation for PFOA
(presented by Dr. Gloria Post, New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection): Dr. Post provided an over-
view of the New Jersey DWQI's extensive evaluation
of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). The DWQI is a
legislatively-established advisory body charged with
recommending MCLs to NJDEP. In September 2016,
public review drafts of DWQI Subcommittee reports
recommending a Health-based MCL of 14 ng/L and
an analytical Practical Quantitation Level of 6 ng/L,
and concluding that treatment technologies can
remove PFOA to these levels, were posted for public
comment. These draft reports support an MCL recom-
mendation of 14 ng/L. They are posted at
http://www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/g_boards_
dwqi.html, and comments may be submitted to
watersupply@dep.nj.gov until November 21, 2016.
Setting Site-Specific Selenium Criteria in a Transboundary
Waterbody (Dr. Terri Mavencamp, Montana Department of
Environmental Quality): Dr. Terri Mavencamp presented
an overview of Montana DEQ's and British Columbia
Ministry of Environment's development of selenium
aquatic life criteria and objectives for Lake Koocanusa,
Montana and BC. Data from ongoing research proj-
ects will help inform a site-specific conceptual model
from which selenium criteria for Lake Koocanusa
will be determined. The third face-to-face meeting
of LKWG will take place this month (October) in
Cranbrook, BC.
FSTRAC Newsletter ~ Fall 2016

-------
3
Information from States Developing Guidance for Specific Chemicals
Criteria Values
Minnesota Department of Health
The Minnesota Department of Health has recently
completed reviews and generated health-based
guidance for the following chemicals: anatoxin-a; clo-
thianidin; 2,4-D; 17-alpha ethinylestradiol; mestranol;
and tetrahydrofuran. Additional information (e.g.,
values, calculations) can be found on MDH's web-
site at: http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/risk/
guidance/gw/table.html
The following chemicals are currently in review:
glyphosate and degradate AMPA; dinoseb; PFOA;
PFOS; and thiamethoxam.
New Jersey's Draft Drinking Water Quality
Institute (DWOI) Recommended Health-based
MCL for PFOA Posted for Public Comment
New Jersey's DWQI drafted a recommended Health-
based Maximum Contaminant Level (Health-based
MCL) for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA, C8) using
a risk assessment approach intended to protect for
chronic (lifetime) drinking water exposure. This
document, as well as a Report on the Development of
a Practical Quantitation Level for Perfluorooctanoic
Acid (PFOA) in Drinking Water, and Addendum to
Appendix C: Recommendation on Perfluorinated
Compound Treatment Options for Drinking Water,
are posted on the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection's New Jersey Drinking
Water Quality Institute website (http://www.nj.gov/
dep/watersupply/g_boards_dwqi.html). The following
PowerPoint presentations about the three documents
from the September 22 meeting of the DWQI are also
posted at this link:
•	Health Effects Subcommittee: Health-Based
PFOA MCL Recommendation
•	Testing Subcommittee
•	Treatment Subcommittee: Addendum to
"Recommendation of Perfluorinated Compound
Treatment Options for Drinking Water"
The DWQI is holding a 60-day public comment period
on the three documents from September 22, 2016 until
5 p.m. on November 21, 2016. All comments should be
submitted to watersupply@dep.nj.gov.
Risk Assessment
Drinking Water
EPA Office of Water Health Advisories for PFOA
and PFOS
In May 2016, the EPA Office of Science and
Technology, Health and Ecological Criteria Division
released Drinking Water Health Advisories of 70 ppt
for PFOA and PFOS and for the two chemicals com-
bined. The Health Advisories were derived from the
reference doses for PFOA and PFOS (0.00002 mg/kg/
day) calculated using modeled animal serum levels
to calculate equivalent external doses applicable to
humans. This approach accounted for pharmaco-
kinetic differences between the animal and human
responses to exposure to both chemicals. Lactating
women were selected as the most sensitive popu-
lation for the Health Advisory calculation because
of their high intake of drinking water compared
pregnant women and adults in the general popula-
tion. The Health Advisories apply to short and long
term exposures and are protective of systemic (e.g.
liver), immunological, developmental and cancer
effects based on the quantified studies. The animal
findings on adverse effects are supported by extensive
epidemiology data.
The OST Peer Reviewed Health Effects Support
Documents and Health Advisories for each chem-
ical are based on the latest peer-reviewed science
to provide drinking water system operators, and
state, tribal and local officials with information
on the health risks of these chemicals, so they
can take the appropriate actions to protect their
residents. For further information see: https://
www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/
drinking-water-health-advisories-pfoa-and-pfos.
FSTRAC Newsletter ~ Fall 2016

-------
4
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's
Reference Dose for Hexavalent Chromium
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
(TCEQ) has recently finalized a reference dose (RfD)
derived to be protective of both the potential carcino-
genic and non-carcinogenic effects of oral exposure to
hexavalent chromium (CrVI). The RfD is based on the
third peer-reviewed scientific article published by the
TCEQ on oral exposure to CrVI (Haney 2015), which
was recognized at this year's Society of Toxicology con-
ference along with another TCEQ CrVI paper as two of
the top ten best published papers in 2015 demonstrat-
ing an application of risk assessment (https://www.
toxicology.org/groups/ss/RASS/pastwinners.asp). The
open access Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
article is available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0273230015300957. The TCEQ
development support document (DSD) for the CrVI
RfD can be found on TCEQ's website at:
https://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/
implementation/tox/dsd/final/chr omium_ord.pdf
Clean Water
Mental Health and Toxicology Risk Assessment
The Health and Ecological Criteria Division (HECD)
in the Office of Science and Technology Office of
Water, EPA, is working to develop materials to provide
additional support to states and tribes and to protect
human health and welfare through the explicit consid-
eration of the mental health implications of exposure
to degraded water bodies.
The Clean Water Act (sections 101,103, and 104) and
the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR §131.2) call
for standards to "protect the public health or welfare".
However, when discussing human health and welfare
considerations for water quality standards, policy and
technical discussions are often limited to the exposure
effects on human "physical" or "bodily" health, and
do not explore other dimensions associated with the
protection of "public health and welfare". The proj-
ect seeks to provide information and resources that
describe the need to protect human access to a healthy
natural environment, and to protect aquatic resources
from degradation through the integration of mental
health considerations into risk analyses and water
quality standards development.
To explore the other dimensions of protecting human
health and welfare, HECD is: 1) identifying scien-
tifically defensible mental health impacts related to
waterbody and associated ecosystem degradation as
they pertain to nutrient pollution, and potentially
other stressors, 2) identifying projects and Clean
Water Act programs within the Office of Water where
mental health considerations are most relevant, and
3) developing educational tools to provide technical
support to EPA, states, territories, and tribes to inte-
grate mental health considerations into toxicology risk
analyses.
Natalie Spear (Knauss fellow to the Nutrient Criteria
program in HECD) is the project lead and point of
contact. Please contact her at spear.natalie@epa.gov
with any questions you may have.
Development of Recreational Water Quality
Criteria for Coliphage - 2016 Coliphage Experts
Workshop
EPA held a Coliphage Experts Workshop in March
2016 as part of EPA's ongoing efforts to build the
scientific basis for developing coliphage-based water
quality criteria. EPA convened a group of twelve
internationally recognized experts on the state of the
science of coliphage and their usefulness as a viral
indicator for the protection of public health in rec-
reational waters. Experts represented a spectrum of
perspectives from academia, federal agencies (EPA,
CDC, FDA), and the wastewater industry Agenda dis-
cussion topics included: the need for a viral indicator;
coliphage as a predictor of gastrointestinal illnesses;
how coliphage may be useful as an indicator of waste-
water treatment performance; male-specific versus
somatic coliphage; a systematic literature review of
viral densities; and future research. This fact sheet
outlines Workshop topics and overall findings. EPA
plans to publish a peer-reviewed meeting proceedings
report on the Workshop in early 2017.
https://www.epa.gov/wqc/development-recreational-
water- quality- criteria- coliphage- documents
Evaluation of Microbiological Risks Associated
with Direct Potable Reuse, Publication in
Microbial Risk Analysis
The U.S. EPA Office of Water conducted a
Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment (QMRA)
FSTRAC Newsletter ~ Fall 2016

-------
5
to evaluate the potential microbial risks associated
with various direct potable reuse (DPR) treatment
train combinations for recycled water. The assessment
methodology leveraged readily available peer-re-
viewed pathogen density and log removal data. The
results illustrate quantitative human health-based
advantages for DPR projects in which product water
is introduced into the raw water supply immediately
upstream of a conventional drinking water treatment
facility compared to those in which product water
is introduced directly into a potable water supply
distribution system. The results also indicate that a
single day can drive annual risks, highlighting the
need for robust and reliable on-line monitoring of
unit treatment processes within DPR facilities. The
QMRA methodology employed is adaptable to other
DPR treatment trains and could be iteratively refined
as additional data become available. This work will
be useful to federal and state regulators considering
DPR as source water, state and local decision makers
as they consider whether to permit a particular DPR
project, and design engineers as they consider which
unit treatment processes should be employed for par-
ticular projects. The U.S. EPA is currently planning
to create a Technical Guide highlighting some of the
findings of this work.
Western North American Mercury Synthesis
Through the compilation of existing datasets on mer-
cury pollution across western North America, a team
of scientists with support from EPA Region 10, the
U.S. Geological Survey John Wesley Powell Center for
Analysis & Synthesis, and the National Parks Service
used a landscape-scale approach to understand how
mercury cycling and bioaccumulation varies across
this region.
The results from this effort are summarized in 16
peer-reviewed scientific manuscripts that were pub-
lished in a special issue of the journal Science of the
Total Environment, titled: "Mercury in Western North
America—Spatiotemporal Patterns, Biogeochemistry,
Bioaccumulation, and Risks." Overall, the findings
show that mercury contamination is widespread, but
heterogeneous, across western North America. The
fate and transport of inorganic mercury across land-
scape gradients is heavily influenced by climate and
land cover factors such as plant productivity and pre-
cipitation. Trends of methylmercury in aquatic food
webs were found to be decoupled from concentrations
and sources of inorganic mercury. These results high-
light the importance of focusing on efforts to reduce
methylmercury production as opposed to focusing
simply on sources of inorganic mercury in order to
reduce food web exposure.
If you would like more information, please contact
Chris Eckley at eckley.chris@epa.gov.
High Natural Arsenic Levels Flowing from
Yellowstone National Park: Measured by Science
and Managed by Policy and Regulation
The geothermal waters from Yellowstone National
Park (YNP) are the main source of natural arsenic
loads to the Yellowstone and Madison Rivers, result-
ing in concentrations that exceed the Montana human
health standard extending from the YNP Boundary
to areas deep into the state. For example, water quality
samples taken from the Madison River near the West
Entrance to YNP average 300 (ag/L, more than 30 times
Montana's human health standard. Within the United
States, high natural concentration of arsenic in surface
water is unique to Montana due to the magnitude of the
geothermal activity and the resulting volumes of water
flowing northward from the park. While this ecological
condition is natural by any reasonable definition, the
social management of the issue is complicated by the
nature of arsenic. Arsenic is a carcinogen and public
is the main concern. Arsenic behaves conservatively in
aquatic systems in Montana with minimal geochemical
processes affecting the original Yellowstone National
Park arsenic loads. Under summer and fall base-
flow conditions, the arsenic load remains relatively
constant throughout the Yellowstone, Madison, and
Missouri reaches and dilution from tributaries is the
main process for concentration reduction as the rivers
flow through the state.
Montana is currently in the process of navigat-
ing through policy, rules, and regulations of this
natural carcinogen. The Montana Department of
Environmental Quality is conducting an investigation
to characterize the actual level of natural arsenic in
the Madison, Missouri, and Yellowstone Rivers. The
challenge lies in the development of an arsenic rule
FSTRAC Newsletter ~ Fall 2016

-------
6
that protects the health of Montana's citizens. The
science is actually the simplest part with the major
complexity being the development of suitable policy
and regulation. This is a first step towards adapting
state policy to a natural ecological condition and may
act as a template for other existing natural metal con-
ditions in Montana.
If you would like more information, please contact
Melissa Schaar at mschaar@mt.gov.
Setting Site-Specific Selenium Criteria in a
Transboundary Waterbody
Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MT
DEQ) and British Columbia Ministry of Environment
(BC MOE) are pursuing a site-specific selenium
standard for Lake Koocanusa. MT DEQ, BC MOE,
U.S. Geological Survey, Army Corps of Engineers,
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and Fish and
Wildlife Service are just several of the agencies work-
ing together to gather the necessary data to develop the
site-specific standard. Joe Skorupa, Theresa Presser,
Lana Miller, David Naftz, David Janz and Joe Beaman
compose the selenium technical subcommittee chaired
by MT DEQ and BC MOE, and Karen Jenni is devel-
oping the site-specific conceptual model. The model
will consider multiple endpoints, including birds and
fish, and will take into account downstream waters.
Additional details on this project are pro-
vided on Montana DEQ's website: http://
lakekoocanusaconservation.pbworks.com/w/
page/100633354/FrontPage
Drinking Water Contaminant Occurrence
Information
UCMR 4: The UCMR 4 proposal was published on
December 11, 2015 (https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/
fourth-unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule).
The public comment period ended February 9, 2016.
The draft UCMR 4 final is currently being reviewed by
OMB. The UCMR 4 final is expected to be published
late 2016/early 2017.
UCMR 3: The UCMR 3 quarterly Data Summary and
detailed sample results (based on data reported as of
July 1, 2016) were posted to the National Contaminant
Occurrence Database on August 31, 2016 (https://
www.epa.gov/dwucmr/occurrence-data-unregulated-
contaminant-monitoring-rule#3). UCMR 3 required
monitoring for 30 contaminants (28 chemicals and 2
viruses) during the monitoring period of January 2013
through December 2015. The small water system sam-
ple results are complete. A very limited number of large
water systems that had to repeat or reschedule their
sampling may still report results to EPA's data reporting
system (SDWARS 3) until it closes on December 31,
2016. The final dataset will be posted in early 2017.
Upcoming Events and Conferences
Upcoming FSTRAC Webinar
The Winter 2017 FSTRAC Webinar is tentatively
scheduled for January 2017. Additional details will be
provided to FSTRAC members in the coming weeks.
SETAC North America Annual Meeting
SETAC will be holding its 37th annual North America
meeting on November 6-10, 2016, in Orlando, Florida.
Additional information is provided on the SETAC
Website: http://orlando.setac.org/
SOT Annual Meeting
SOT will be holding its 56th annual meeting
on March 12-16, 2017, in Baltimore, Maryland.
Information about the March 2017 meeting and other
upcoming events is provided on the SOT website:
http://www.toxicology.org/
EPA IRIS Upcoming Events
EPA IRIS holds public meetings and workshops
on issues in risk assessment. IRIS will be holding
a SAB Review (Teleconference) Meeting for RDX
on November 17, 2016. Additional information is
provided on the EPA IRIS workshop website:
https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris2/events.cfm.
FSTRAC Newsletter ~ Fall 2016

-------