'FINAL PATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE BASELINE …PATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE BASELINE RISK...

U.S. EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-S7-03-04

FinalPATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT

FOR THEBASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT

FORANNISTON PCB SITE OPERABLE UNIT 3

ANNISTON, ALABAMA

October 2006

TASK ORDER NO. 0023

Prepared for:U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 4ATLANTA, GEORGIA

Prepared by:CDM Federal Programs Corporation

3715 Northside Parkway, Building 300, Suite 400Atlanta, Georgia 30327

IU.S. EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-S7-03-04I

III• October 2006

I

I Prepared for:T T C1 T71LTT 7T¥1 ^^T^TH Jfm^TT1 A T "OTi f\rTT>

I

finalPATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT

FOR THEBASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT

FORANNISTON PCB SITE OPERABLE UNIT 3

ANNISTON, ALABAMA

TASK ORDER NO. 0023

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION 4

• Prepared By: V^/7 /** Date: /*//'Tony IsoMa

• Project Manager

/9• Approved By: V V \-U/k^J/ l/Mi/( Date: /£>// '

i s~\ Gary P. demons, Ph.D. ' '

1 -d*\) IT \ Region 4 Program Manager

iIIiII

IIIIIIIIiiiiiiiiiii

ContentsFigures iiiTables iiiAcronyms and Abbreviations iv

Section 1 Introduction 1-11.1 Overview of the PAR 1-11.2 PAR Contents 1-2

Section 2 Site Background and Setting 2-12.1 Site Location and Description 2-12.2 Site History 2-12.3 Land Use 2-3

Section 3 Human Exposure Pathways 3-13.1 Identification of Exposure Pathways 3-13.2 Characterization of Potentially Exposed Populations 3-2

3.2.1 Cur rent/Future Receptors 3-23.2.2 Future Receptors 3-3

3.3 Summary of Exposure Pathways 3-3

Section 4 Exposure Assessment 4-14.1. Data Evaluation and Selection of Chemicals of Potential Concern 4-14.2 Exposure Pathway Variables 4-3

4.2.1 Operations Area Site Worker Exposure Assumptions 4-44.2.2 Construction Worker Exposure Assumptions 4-44.2.3 Trespasser Exposure Assumptions 4-54.2.4 O&M Worker Exposure Assumptions 4-64.2.5 Residential Exposure Assumptions 4-6

Section 5 Toxicity Assessment 5-15.1 Health Effects Criteria for Non-carcinogens 5-15.2 Health Effects Criteria for Potential Carcinogens 5-25.3 Toxicological Assessment 5-4

Section 6 References 6-1

AppendicesAppendix A Remedial Investigation SamplesAppendix B RAGS D Standard Tables

COMAnnlston PAR.wpd

IIiIiiiiitiIiiiiiii

Figures2-12-23-1

Tables

3-14-14-25-15-25-35-4

COMAnnlslon PAR.wpd

Site Location MapSite MapConceptual Site Model

2-42-53-5

Selection of Exposure PathwaysSummary of COPCs for the PARPhysical/chemical Properties for COPCsNon-cancer Toxicity Data - Oral/DermalNon-cancer Toxicity Data - Inhalation ...Cancer Toxicity Data - Oral/DermalCancer Toxicity Data - Inhalation

.3-6

.4-94-10.5-5.5-6.5-7.5-8

III1IiIIiiiiiiiiii

Acronyms and AbbreviationsADEMbgsCDMCOPCCSCSFEPAHEASTHHRAIRISLm/sMCCMSMSDmg/kgNCEANOAELOSHAOUPAHPARPCBPEFPNCBPNPPQLPRGPSQAQCRAGSRCRARfCRfDRFIRIRMESwarmTALTCLUCL

Alabama Department of Environmental Managementbelow ground surfaceCDM Federal Programs Corporationchemical of potential concernconfirmatory samplingcancer slope factorU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyHealth Effects Assessment Summary Tableshuman health risk assessmentIntegrated Risk Information Systemlitermeter per secondMonsanto Chemical Companymatrix spikematrix spike duplicatemilligram per kilogramNational Center for Environmental Assessmentno-observed-adverse-effect-levelOccupational Health and Safety Agencyoperable unitpolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbonPathway Analysis Reportpolychlorinated biphenylparticulate emission factorpara-nitrochlorobenzene4-nitrophenolpractical quantitation limitPreliminary Remediation Goalpentasulfidequality assurancequality controlRisk Assessment Guidance for SuperfundResource Conservation and Recovery Actreference concentrationreference doseRCRA Facility Investigationremedial investigationreasonable maximum exposureSwarm Chemical CompanyTarget Analyte ListTarget Compound Listupper confidence limit

CDMAnniston PAR.wpd

IIIIIIIIiiifiiiIiii

Section 1IntroductionCOM Federal Programs Corporation (COM) was tasked by the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) to perform a baseline risk assessment for the AnnistonPolychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Site (herein after referred to as "the Site"), throughTask Order No. 023. This Pathways Analysis Report (PAR) was developed tocharacterize the exposure setting and receptor characteristics for Operable Unit(OU) 3.

This PAR identifies present and future-use potential exposure pathways by whichpopulations may be exposed. These exposure pathways and receptors will befinalized in the draft human health risk assessment (HHRA) report. Exposurepathways were identified based on consideration of the sources and locations ofcontaminants, the likely environmental fate of the contaminants, and the location andactivities of the potentially exposed populations. The PAR identifies exposure pointsand routes of exposure for each exposure pathway, as well as assumptions regardingreceptor characteristics and behavior (e.g., body weight, ingestion rate, exposurefrequency). The PAR also identifies chemicals of potential concern (COPCs) for eachmedium and toxicity values.

Note that while state or federal Occupational Safety and Health Organizations(OSHA) are typically responsible for risks to workers at a site, these agencies areprimarily concerned with air exposures. OSHA does not have a validated method forassessing risk resulting from dermal exposure for PCBs. Thus the HHRA is a usefultool to estimate risk based on soil as the primary medium of exposure and providesan adjunct method of assessing total risk.

1.1 Overview of the PARIn preparation of this PAR, CDM reviewed the available information pertaining to theSite. Exposure variables that will be used for the calculation of daily intakes andcarcinogenic and non-carcinogenic toxicity values for preliminarily identified COPCsand the sources of these values are presented in subsequent sections. The exposurepathways and receptors, exposure variables, and toxicity values are presented intabular form in accordance with the standard tables of Risk Assessment Guidance forSuperfund (RAGS) Part D (EPA 2001).

The PAR is developed in accordance with EPA guidance set forth in the followingdocuments:

• Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part A(EPA 1989)

CDM 11Armlsloti PAR wpd

I

I

I

Section 1Introduction

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part D(EPA 2001)

III

• Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part E,ft Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment. Final (EPA 2004a)

• Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. (EPA• 2002a)

— • Exposure Factors Handbook, Volumes I, II, and III (EPA 1997a)

• Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default ExposureM Factors (EPA 1991)

• ProUCL User's Guide (EPA 2004b)

• • Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) (on-line database of toxicity information)(EPA 2006)

• • Human Health Toxicity Values in Superfund Risk Assessments (EPA 2003)

• • Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables FY-1997 Annual (HEAST) (EPA 1997b)

National Center for Environmental Assessment (EPA agency, additional toxicityinformation not found in IRIS or HEAST and updates for the HEAST values.)

• 1.2 PAR ContentsThis PAR is composed of six sections, as follows:

• • Section 1, Introduction

• • Section 2, Site Background and Setting—Briefly describes the site background

• Section 3, Human Exposure Pathways — Identifies receptors and presents• potential exposure pathways

• Section 4, Exposure Assessment—Presents the approach for the exposure• assessment, including exposure variables

_ • Section 5, Toxicity Assessment—Contains the toxicity assessment for the• preliminarily identified COPCs

COM 12Annlsion PAR.wpd

II

Section 1Introduction

• Section 6, References — Contains the report references

| Tables and figures are presented at the end of each section. In addition, Appendix Aprovides a list of the samples included in the risk assessment and figures showing the

I locations of those samples. Appendix B includes the RAGS Part D Standard Tables 1,2, 4, 5 and 6.

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

iIiI COM 13

_ Anntston PAR.wpd

II

IIIiiIiiiiiii

Section 2Site Background and Setting

2.1 Site Location and Description

•

The Anniston PCB Site (the "Site") is located in Calhoun County in the north-centralpart of Alabama (Figure 2-1). The Site consists of the entire geographic area inAnniston and its environs where PCBs have come to be located. EPA believes that the

I vast majority of the PCBs in the Anniston area were released from the operations of™ the former Monsanto Company's Anniston PCB manufacturing plant. Today the

former PCB plant property is owned by Solutia, Inc., (Solutia). Solutia currently• produces para-nitrophenol and polyphenyl compounds at the Anniston plant.

To better manage the cleanup and study of PCBs in the Anniston area, sitemanagement activities have been divided into four Operable Units (OUs): OU-1,Anniston residential properties; OU-2, Anniston non-residential properties: OU-3, theformer Monsanto PCB plant and landfills; and OU-4, Choccolocco Creek and its floodplains. This document concerns OU-3, the former Monsanto PCB plant and landfills.

The Site has been evaluated extensively since 1980. Environmental work has includeda combination of investigative and remedial efforts conducted pursuant to a varietyof environmental permits. The environmental response efforts under the ResourceConservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) included the general areas of the Solutiamanufacturing plant, which were termed the "On-Site" area, and areas downstreamof the Solutia manufacturing plant, termed the "Off-Site" area. The "On-Site area isgeographically similar to the OU-3 area, which includes the manufacturing plant andthe two landfills. The borders of OU-3 depicted in Figure 2-2, are the railway to thenorth, the South Landfill to the south. Clydesdale Avenue to the east, and FirstAvenue to the west. Groundwater impacts that originate within the manufacturingplant and have migrated beyond the physical boundaries of OU-3 described aboveare also included in OU-3.

2.2 Site HistoryA thorough discussion of the manufacturing history at this site was included in theRCRA Facility Investigation/Confirmatory Sampling (RFI/CS) Work Plan for theAnniston, Alabama, Facility (Colder 1997). As reported therein, manufacturingoperations began in 1917 with the production of ferro-manganese, ferro-silicon, ferro-phosphorous compounds, and phosphoric acid (added later) by the SouthernManganese Corporation. In 1927, the production of organic chemicals began with theintroduction of biphenyl, which remains a major product today. In 1930, SouthernManganese Corporation became Swann Chemical Company (Swann); in May 1935,Monsanto Chemical Company purchased Swann. Monsanto created Solutia, thepresent owner, as a spin-off in 1997.

COM 2-1Anniston PAR.wpd

IIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii


A variety of organic and inorganic chemicals, including PCBs, parathion, phosphoruspentasulfide, and 4-nitrophenol (PNP), have been produced during the plant'soperational history. The plant currently manufactures polyphenyl compounds(utilized in a variety of heat transfer fluid, plasticizer, and lubricant applications).These compounds have been produced for many years using the same raw materialsand intermediates, even though there have been several expansions and processmodifications. A summary description of the various manufacturing and associatedsupport processes is provided below.

• Polyphenyl Production (1927 to present) — Polyphenyls are manufactured frombenzene and cumene (isopropyl benzene) in a continuous pyrolysis unit. Thecrude product is separated into various polyphenyl products including Santotar*.

• 4-Nitrophenol Production (1965 to 2004) — 4-Nitrophenol was manufactured bythe hydrolysis of para-nitrochlorobenzene (PNCB). PNCB and sodium hydroxideare reacted and acidified with sulfuric acid before the product is filtered anddried.

• Therminol® Production (1983 to Present) — Therminol® is produced frompolyethylbenzene. Distillation residues (Therminol® ends) are managed in atotally enclosed treatment facility. The ends are blended with Santotar® andburned as a non-hazardous back-up fuel in the plant's boiler.

• Parathion and Methyl Parathion Production (1957 to 1986) - Parathion (or Niran®)and methyl parathion were produced on a seasonal basis. These materials wereproduced by reacting ethanol or methanol with phosphorus pentasulfide to form"thio acid." The thio acid was stripped, chlorinated and then distilled to producean intermediate. The intermediate was either sold or reacted with acetone,4-nitrophenol, and soda ash to produce crude parathion. Wet acetone from theoperation was recovered in a solvent recovery system. The residue from thedistillation of the chlorinated thio acid was recycled to a crystallizer. The filtratewas returned to the parathion process, and sulfur waste was returned to theproduction process or landfilled.

• Phosphorus Pentasulfide Production (1967 to 1988) — Phosphorus pentasulfidewas produced by reacting elemental sulfur and phosphorus. The resultingphosphorus pentasulfide was drummed for sale or used in the parathion process.

• PCB Production (late 1929 to 1971) — PCBs were produced by reacting chlorineand biphenyl. Chlorine was produced between 1952 and 1969 solely for thispurpose.

COM 2-2

Innlston PAR.wpd

IIIIIIiiIIiiiiiiiii


2.3 Land UseThe following was obtained from the Solutia Inc., and Pharmacia Corporation'sPreliminary Site Characterization Summary Report on Operable Unit 3 (Solutia 2005):Land uses reflects the urbanized nature of the area surrounding the chemicalmanufacturing plant and includes heavy industry, manufacturing, residences, andlight commercial. The manufacturing plant itself is largely occupied by buildings,parking lots, other areas actively used for industrial purposes, and impervioussurfaces. Impervious surfaces (buildings, roads, parking lots, and concrete or asphaltsurfaces) make up approximately 12% of the total area of OU-3. Other types ofengineered covers, such as gravel or engineered landfill covers, occupy much of theremaining area (55% of the total area). As such, only 33% of the OU-3 area can beconsidered undeveloped. The property on which the manufacturing plant is located(including the landfills) is encumbered by a legal deed restriction. The deedrestriction ensures that there will be no future residential development or any use ofgroundwater for industrial, potable, or irrigation purposes.

COM 2-3

Annlston PAR.wpd

Solatia Facility Location

Site Characterization Summary

liiliiiil Military Reservation

Property Line

I I Alabama Power

HI Solutia Inc.-• V On-site boundary

- \' Pipeline

Powerline/V Railroad - Active

/'•/ Railroad - Abandoned

/\/ Major Road.• • ,• Minor Road

/\f River

Hi Lakes/'-./ Intermittent Stream

A/ Perennial Stream

Colder Associates (On Site Base Map)United States Geological Survey (USG5)1:100,000 Scale Digital Line Graph (DLG)data (1981).

ColderAssociates

OU-3 Area


Solutia Inc., Anniston, Alabama

A/ Major Roads/'./ Minor Roads

/\/ Drainage BasinRailroads

/V Property LineI | Buadings

I I Paved

SOURCEColder Associates (on-site base map)USGS 1:2400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

ColderAssociates

SCALE

200 400 600 Feet

II

IIIIIIIIIIIIII

Section 3Human Exposure PathwaysPotential human exposure pathways for the site are defined based on current and

_ potential future land uses of the site. Each potential pathway is then evaluated• considering site-specific conditions to determine if the pathway could be present at

the site. The area demography and land-use characteristics are taken into

•

consideration when the pathways are developed. If a pathway potentially could becomplete between the source of contamination and a human receptor, it is retainedfor further evaluation.

3.1 Identification of Exposure PathwaysAs defined in the Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Part A (EPA 1989), anexposure pathway is composed of the following elements:

• A source and mechanism of chemical release to the environment

• An environmental transport medium (e.g., groundwater) for the releasedchemical and/or mechanism of transfer of the chemical from one medium toanother

• A point of potential contact by humans with the contaminated medium

• A route of exposure (i.e., ingestion, inhalation, or dermal contact)

In this risk assessment, pathways are identified for the No Action alternative,assuming no site remediation occurs. This assessment also assumes that no additionalrestrictions to site access or use exist. The goal of this discussion is to establishwhether it is feasible for individuals to engage in activities resulting in exposure tosite-related contaminants.

Contamination in OU-3 is linked to releases associated with past manufacturing andwaste disposal processes. Contaminants in soil may have migrated through thesurface to affect area groundwater. Refer to Figure 3-1 for the conceptual site model.

There are three general routes through which individuals could potentially beexposed to chemical contamination: ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact. Thefollowing sections describe the possible sources, receptors, and exposure pathwaysconsidering both current and potential future land use. An identified pathway doesnot imply that exposures are actually occurring, only that the potential exists for thepathway to be complete.

COM 31Annlslon PAR.wpd

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiII

Section 3Human Exposure Pathways

3.2 Characterization of Potentially Exposed PopulationsThe following was obtained from the Solatia Inc., and Pharmacia Corporation'sPreliminary Site Characterization Summary Report on Operable Unit 3 (Solutia 2005):Area residents obtain water from the local water utility. The water utility obtains itswater from Coldwater Spring which is located approximately 5 miles southwest(upgradient) of the manufacturing plant. Coldwater Spring is the primary watersource for the cities of Anniston, Fort McClellan, Anniston Ordinance Depot, andother municipalities and communities within Calhoun County.

Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) completed a watersupply well survey for the area as part of its preliminary assessment of an unrelatedfacility in the vicinity of the Solutia plant (ADEM 2000). The ADEM report stated thatonly one active water supply well is located within four miles of the site. The well islocated on the Union Foundry property, approximately one mile from the plant. Aspart of the supplemental RFI, Solutia identified two wells within a one-mile radiusfrom the plant; however, the wells were not in use and were not in good enoughcondition to be used. During the remedial investigation (RI), 11 parcels occupied bycommercial enterprises were found to have wells.

3.2.1 Current/Future ReceptorsOperations Area Site WorkersSite workers may come into contact with contaminants in surface soil throughincidental ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of fugitive dust. Workers will beexamined using default parameters recommended by EPA (1989,1991,1997a, 2002a,2004a) as described in Section 4.

Construction WorkersConstruction workers could be exposed to subsurface soils through incidentalingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of fugitive dust. They will be examinedusing default parameters recommended by EPA (1989,1991,1997a, 2002a) asdescribed in Section 4.

TrespassersTrespassers who cross the fence at the site may be exposed to contaminants in surfacesoil via incidental ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of windblown soil (i.e.,fugitive dust). Trespassers will be examined using default parameters recommendedby EPA (1989,1997a, 2001b, 2004a) as described in Section 4.

Operations and Maintenance (O&M) WorkersO&M workers are responsible for the routine inspection of the West End Landfill andthe South Landfill. Semi-annual groundwater monitoring, occasional cap repair,

COM 3-2

Anniston PAR.wpd

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII


periodic inspection and mowing are typical activities. O&M workers will beevaluated using a combination of default exposure assumptions for body weight andexposure duration and professional judgment.

3.2.2 Future ReceptorsOn-site ResidentsFor this risk assessment, exposure to adults and young children (0 to 6 years) will beexamined as the most conservative potential exposure pathways. They will beexamined as a future use scenario using default parameters recommended by EPA(1989,1991,1997a, 2001b, 2001c, 2002a, 2004a) as described in Section 4. Future on-siteresidents may come into contact with contaminants in surface soil via dermal contact,incidental ingestion, and inhalation of fugitive dust.

Although development of groundwater resources at the Site is unlikely and the deedfor the Site restricts future residential development, it is EPA Region 4's policy toevaluate future consumption of groundwater for residential purposes if thegroundwater is considered to be potable. Thus, the risk assessment will evaluate ascenario where wells are installed in the future that draw from die contaminated partof the aquifer. In such an eventuality, future residents [lifetime residents and youngchildren (0-6 years old)] may come into contact with contaminants in on-sitegroundwater through ingestion, dermal contact and by inhalation of VOCs fromgroundwater during washing, bathing, showering, laundering, and cooking. Futureresidents will be examined using default parameters recommended by EPA (1989,1991,1997a, 2002a, 2002b, 2004a) as described in Section 4.

3.3 Summary of Exposure PathwaysThe following exposure pathways were considered to be complete and will beevaluated as part of the assessment of exposure to contaminants at the Site. Asummary of these exposure pathways is also presented in Table 3-1.

Curren1/Future• Operations Area Site Worker (Adult)

— incidental ingestion of surface soil— dermal contact with surface soil— inhalation of fugitive dust released from surface soil

• Construction Worker (Adult)— incidental ingestion of subsurface soil— dermal contact with subsurface soil— inhalation of fugitive dust released from subsurface soil

COM 3-3

Annlslon PAR.wpd

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII


• Trespasser (Adolescent)— incidental ingestion of surface soil— dermal contact with surface soil— inhalation of fugitive dust released from surface soil

• O&M Worker (Adult)— incidental ingestion of surface soil— dermal contact with surface soil— inhalation of fugitive dust released from surface soil

Future Use• On-site Resident [Lifetime Resident and Young Child (0-6 years old)]

— incidental ingestion of surface soil— dermal contact with surface soil— inhalation of fugitive dust released from surface soil— ingestion of groundwater obtained from private well— dermal contact with groundwater obtained from private well during

showering and bathing— inhalation of volatile chemicals released from groundwater obtained from

private well

COM 3-4

Annlston PAR.wpd

PrimarySource

i i

ReleasesLinked to

Manufacturingand WasteDisposal

«

»

Primary ReleaseMechanism

1

Wind Erosion/Resuspension

Human

Transport

Infiltration/Leaching

SecondarySecondary Release

Source Mechanism

i i r

Air M

*

'

Surface Soil(0-6 inches)

Si

I '

bsurt;Soil

ice

1Groundwater 1 *

1

DustGeneration

Excavation 1

Pumping forDomestic

1 lea

Pathways(Media)

'-, Air

(Particulates)

— » Surface Soil

SubsurfaceSoil

DrinkingWater

ExposureRoute

^

f

r*

L

Inhalation [•

i lngestion k1

Dermal Contact [-

Ingestion k

Dermal Contact k

Ingestion k

Dermal Contact k

1 Inhalation IVolatiles 1

Potential Receptors

CurrentResident

-

-

FutureResident

•

•

•

-

-

•

Site Visitor/Trespasser

•

•

•

-

-

-

•-

•-

Commercial/IndustrialWorker

•

•

Operations &Maintenance

WorkerConstruction

Worker

• 1 *

•

•

-

-

-

-

-

•

-

-

-

-

-

•

•

•

•

-

-

-

LEGEND

>• = Pathways, current, historical and future

% = Pathways for quantitative evaluation

— = Incomplete pathways

COMAnnislon CSM10/18/2006

Figure 3-1Site Conceptual Exposure Model

Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3Anniston, Alabama

TABLE 3-1

SELECTION OF EXPOSURE PATHWAYS

Anniston PCS Site, Operable Unit 3

Scenario

Timeframe

Current / Future

Future

Medium

Surface Soil

Subsurface Soil

Groundwater

Surface Soil

Exposure

Medium

Surface Soil

Air

Surface Soil

Air

Subsurface Soil

Air

Groundwater

Air

Surface Soil

Exposure

Point

OU-3Area

OU-3Area

OU-SArea

OU-3Area

OU-3Area

OLMArea

Tap

Vapors in Bath

OU-3Area

Receptor

Population

Workers: OperationsArea and O&M Staff


Trespassers

Trespassers

Construction Worker

Construction Worker

Resident

Resident

Resident

Receptor

Age

Adult

Adult

Adolescent

Adolescent

Adult

Adult

Child to Adult

Child

(0-6 yrs)

Child to Adult

Child

(0-6 yrs)

Child to Adult

Child

(0-6 yrs)

Exposure

Route

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Dermal

Ingestion

On-Slte/

Cm-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

Type of

Analysis

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Rationale (or Selection or Exclusion

of Exposure Pathway

Workers may have exposed skin surfaces come into contact with soil

Workers may incidentally ingest soil

Workers may inhale fugitive dust

Trespassers may have exposed skin surfaces come into contact with soil

Trespassers may incidentally ingest soil

Trespassers may inhale fugitive dust


Workers may incidentally Ingest soil

Workers may inhale volatiles/particulates

Groundwater is potable. It may be developed for drinking water use in the future.

Groundwater is potable. It may be developed for drinking water use In the future.





Residents may have exposed skin surfaces come Into contact with soil

Residents may incidentally Ingest soil

Residents may have exposed skin surfaces come into contact with soil

Residents may incidentally ingest soil

Text tables; 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 2

TABLE 3-1



Scenario

Timeframe

Future

Medium

Surface Soil

Exposure

Medium

Air

Exposure

Point

OU-3Area

Receptor

Population

Resident

Receptor

Age

Child to Adult

Child

OWyre)

Exposure

Route

Inhalation

Inhalation

On-Site/

Off-Site

On-Site

On-Site

Type of

Analysis

Quant

Quant

Rationale tor Selection or Exclusion

of Exposure Pathway

Residents may inhale fugitive dust


Quant = Quantitative risk analysis performed.

Text tables: 10/19/2006 Page 2 of 2

II

IIIIIIIiiiiiiiIi

Section 4Exposure AssessmentThis section discusses the selection of chemicals of potential concern (COPCs),exposure factors, and the basis for their selection.

4.1 Data Evaluation and Selection of Chemicals ofPotential ConcernConsultants to Solatia conducted field investigations at the site that are evaluated inthis PAR. The investigations included collection and analysis of samples from thesurface soil, subsurface soil, and groundwater. Details of the investigations andsample analyses are summarized below. Appendix A provides tables summarizingthe samples collected from each medium, analysis conducted, and figures showingthe sample locations.

Surface SoilSurface soil samples from thirty-six locations have been collected during the RFI(Colder 2002), the supplemental RFI (Colder 2003), and the RI. Sample locationsshown in Figure A-l. Surface soil samples were collected from varying depthintervals ranging from 0 to 3 inches below ground surface (bgs) to 0 to 2 feet. Allsurface soil samples were analyzed for PCBs. In addition to PCBs, two samples wereanalyzed for the COPC list extant at the time of the investigation (arsenic, barium,beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, vanadium,methyl parathion, parathion, tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate, 1,2-dichlorobenzene,1,4-dichlorobenzene, 2,4,5-trichlorophenol, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 2,4-dichlorophenol,4-nitrophenol, o,o,o-triethylphosphorothioate, pentachlorophenol,1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, chlorobenzene, isopropylbenzene, and methlyene chloride).In addition to PCBs, three samples were analyzed for furans, dioxins, PCB congeners,Target Analyte List (TAL) metals, Target Compound List (TCL) volatile organics,semi-volatile organics, pesticides, and cyanide. In addition to PCBs, two sampleswere analyzed for mercury. Duplicate samples collected for quality assurance/qualitycontrol (QA/QC) purposes are not included in the risk assessment data set.

Subsurface SoilThirty-four subsurface soil samples have been collected during the RFI, thesupplemental RFI, and the RI. Sample locations shown in Figure A-l. At twolocations, SSR-20 and SSR-22, the samples were analyzed for total petroleumhydrocarbons only. For this reason, the results are not included in this evaluation.Subsurface soil samples were collected from varying depth intervals ranging from0.25 to 0.5 feet bgs to 19 to 21 feet bgs. (The deepest interval will not be evaluated inthis assessment as an excavation scenario generally does not consider depths greaterthat 12 feet). Twenty subsurface soil samples were analyzed for the COPC list extant

COM 4-1Annlston PAR.wpd

1IIIIIIIiiiiiI

JL.\

I

I

I

Section 4Exposure Assessment

at the time of the investigation (arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium,cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, vanadium, methyl parathion, parathion,tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate, 1,2-dichlorobenzene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene,2,4,5-trichlorophenol, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 2,4-dichlorophenol, 4-nitrophenol,o,o,o-rriethylphosphorothioate, pentachlorophenol, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane,chlorobenzene, isopropylbenzene, and methlyene chloride). Fourteen samples wereanalyzed for PCBs only.

GroundwaterThe groundwater data set consists of the results from 38 monitoring wells. Allsamples were analyzed for PCBs. Additional analyses were performed on a subset ofthese wells. The latest results from each well were used to select COPCs. However, inkeeping with Region 4 policy, only those wells in the highly concentrated area of theplume, defined as MW-07, MW-09A, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-20A, MW-21A,and T-4, were used to assess risk. Therefore, not all groundwater COPCs arerepresented in the risk calculations. The list of the groundwater samples used in therisk assessment is provided in Table A-2. Duplicate samples collected for QA/QCpurposes are not used in the risk assessment data set. The well locations are shown inFigure A-2.

Quality ControlAs part of the sampling programs, field duplicates, matrix spike/matrix spikeduplicates (MS/MSDs), and trip and rinsate blanks were submitted for analysis.These samples provide important information on analytical variability and error, theoverall performance of the field sampling effort, and the uncertainty surrounding theanalytical results. Field duplicate/split samples provide an indication of analyticalvariability and error. Rinsate blanks are indicators of equipment cleanliness and theeffectiveness of equipment decontamination procedures. Trip blanks are used toassess whether cross contamination of samples has occurred during containershipment and storage. Rejected data are not used in any analysis, however qualifieddata are incorporated into the data analysis and the uncertainty around the use of thisdata will be discussed in the risk assessment uncertainty section.

As discussed in the QA sections of the RFI, supplemental RFI, and RI reports (Colder2002, 2003, 2005) the data used in this assessment are considered usable as reportedwith the data validation qualifiers added. All chemical analyses were performedusing specified methods with proper holding times.

Selection of Chemicals of Potential ConcernStandard Tables 2.1 through 2.7 in Appendix B summarize the analytical data (rangeof detected concentrations, the detection frequency, the range of detection limits, andthe basis for selecting or excluding the chemical from the list of COPCs) for each

COM 4-2

Annlslon PAR.wpd

IIIIIX—

iiiiiIIiiIiii


medium, and identify COPCs for the risk assessment. The tables include only thosechemicals that were detected at least once. The COPCs are summarized in Table 4-1.

Maximum detected concentrations were compared to risk-based screening levels toidentify COPCs for each medium. The screening levels are based on the EPA Region 9Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for residential soil and tap water (EPA 2004c),using a target cancer risk of 10"6 (one in one million) and a target hazard quotient of0.1. Chemicals were considered COPCs if the maximum detected concentrationexceeds its respective screening level.

Risk-based screening levels were not available for the following chemicals: calcium,lead, magnesium, potassium, and sodium. The nutrients calcium, magnesium,potassium, and sodium were not selected as COPCs because the potential toxicities ofthese minerals are significantly lower than other inorganics detected at the site andmore data are available with respect to identifying dietary intake rather than toxicity.

4.2 Exposure Pathway VariablesExposure assumptions were primarily taken from EPA documents (EPA 1989,1991,1992,1997a, 2002a, 2004a) and EPA Region 4's approach. EPA's standard defaultassumptions (EPA 1991) were used, where available. Otherwise values from the mostrecent guidance available were used unless EPA Region 4 has a known preference fora specific value. RME exposure parameters that will be used in the risk assessmentare provided in RAGS Part D Tables B-4.1.RME, B-4.2.RME, and B-4.3RME.

The Solutia RCRA Facility Investigation/ Confirmatory Sampling (RFI/CS) report(Solutia October 2002) proposes modified exposure parameters for:• exposed skin surface area• dermal absorption factor• soil adherence factor• intestinal absorption factor• soil ingestion rate• exposure frequency

EPA believes that these values are well defended and documented, and should beconsidered in the risk assessment. Solutia's modified exposure parameters may befound in Table B-4.4. Once risks are calculated, a range of risk will be presented withthe parameter values found in Tables B-4.1.RME, B-4.2.RME, and B-4.3RMErepresenting the upper bound and the modified values, found in Table B-4.4, used torepresent a lower bound. Title

COM 43

Annlslon PAR.wpd

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIEitii


4.2.1 Operations Area Site Worker Exposure AssumptionsIn the current/future use scenario, operations area site workers are assumed to beexposed to soil while outdoors at work via incidental ingestion, dermal contact, andinhalation of fugitive dust. While future commercial/industrial use of the site couldinclude both indoor and outdoor workers, soil exposures are conservativelyestimated assuming the worker is a full time employee who spends most of theworkday conducting maintenance activities outdoors. The activities for this receptor(e.g., moderate digging, landscaping) would involve on-site exposures to surfacesoils. The soil exposure factors are given in RAGS Part D Table B-4.1.RME and arebased primarily on recommendations from EPA's draft Soil Screening LevelGuidance for nonresidential exposures (EPA 2001).

The soil incidental ingestion rate of site workers is assumed to be 100 milligrams!(mg)/day (EPA 1997a, 2002a). For dermal contact with soil, the adult worker wasassumed to wear a short-sleeved shirt, long pants, and shoes; therefore, the exposedskin surface is limited to the head, hands, and forearms. The exposed skin surfacearea for workers is 3,300 cm2, the average of the 50th percentile for males and femalesgreater than 18 years of age (EPA 1997a, 2002a, 2004a). A dermal adherence factor of0.2 mg/cm2 was assumed (EPA 2002a). Dermal absorption factors of 1.0% fororganics and 0.1% for inorganics will be used in determining the uptake associatedwith dermal exposure to contaminated soils.

Inhalation of fugitive dusts generated by wind erosion may occur. An inhalation rateof 20 cubic meters (m3)/day was assumed (EPA 1997a, 2002a). A particulate emissionfactor (PEF) of 1.36 * 109 m3/kilogram (kg) was assumed (EPA 1995, 2002a), relatingthe concentration of a contaminant in soil to the concentration of dust particles in theair. This value assumes a vegetative cover of 50 percent and a mean annual windspeed of 4.69 meters per second (m/s).

Site workers are assumed to be exposed for 250 days per year (EPA 1991). Theexposure duration for site workers is 25 years, based on the 95th percentile value forjob tenure for men in the manufacturing sector (EPA 1991,1997a, 2002a). A lifeexpectancy of 70 years (EPA 1989) was used as the averaging time for exposure tocarcinogenic contaminants. The averaging time for non-carcinogenic effects is equalto the exposure duration, or 25 years for site workers. A body weight of 70 kg wasused (EPA 1991).

4.2.2 Construction Worker Exposure AssumptionsIn the current/future use scenario, construction workers are assumed to be exposedto soil over the duration of a single construction project (typically a year or less). Ifmultiple non-concurrent construction projects are anticipated, it is assumed thatdifferent workers will be employed for each project. The activities for this receptor

COM 4-4

Anntston PAR.wpd

IIIIIIIIIt


typically involve substantial exposures to surface soils and subsurface soils viaincidental ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of fugitive dust. The soilexposure factors are given in RAGS Part D Table B-4.1. RME.

The soil incidental ingestion rate of construction workers is assumed to be 330mg/day (EPA 2002a). This value is based on the 95th percentile value for adult soilintake rates (EPA 2002a). For dermal contact with soil, the adult construction workerwas assumed to wear a short-sleeved shirt, long pants, and shoes; therefore, theexposed skin surface is limited to the head, hands, and forearms. The exposed skinsurface area for workers is 3,300 cm2, the average of the 50th percentile for males andfemales greater than 18 years of age (EPA 1997a, 2002a). A dermal adherence factor of0.3 mg/cm2 was assumed (EPA 2002a), corresponding to the 95th percentile value thathas been measured for construction workers. Dermal absorption factors of 1.0% fororganics and 0.1% for inorganics will be used in determining the uptake associatedwith dermal exposure to contaminated soils.

Inhalation of fugitive dusts generated by wind erosion may occur. An inhalation rateof 20 m3/day was assumed for workers (EPA 1997a, 2002a). A PEF of1.36 x 109 m3/kg was assumed (EPA 1995, 2002a), relating the concentration of acontaminant in soil to the concentration of dust particles in the air.

Construction workers are assumed to be exposed for five months (100 workdays) peryear. The exposure duration for construction workers is one year.

I A life expectancy of 70 years (EPA 1989) was used for all receptor groups as theaveraging time for exposure to carcinogenic contaminants. The averaging time for

f non-carcinogenic effects is equal to the exposure duration, or one year forconstruction workers (EPA 1989). A body weight of 70 kg was used for construction

^ workers (EPA 2002a).

I 4.2.3 Trespasser Exposure Assumptions

I The trespasser is assumed to be a 7 to 16 year old. While adults could also trespass atthe site, adolescent trespassers are expected to have a greater intake of sitecontaminants because of their lower body weight and because they have more time

V available to visit the site more frequently.

In the current/future use scenario, adolescent trespassers (ages 7 to 16 years old) are• assumed to cross the fence and be exposed to onsite soil via ingestion, dermal contact,

and inhalation of fugitive dust. Trespassers are assumed to be exposed for 1 day per^ week or about 50 days per year.

• COM 45

^^ Annislon PAR.wpd

IIIIf

IIitIiiitiiii


The soil incidental ingestion rate of trespassers is assumed to be 100 mg/day (EPA1991, 2001b). For dermal contact with soil, the adolescent trespasser was assumed towear a short-sleeved shirt, shorts, and shoes; therefore, the exposed skin surface islimited to the head, hands, forearms, and lower legs. The exposed skin surface areafor the adult resident is 5,700 cm2, the average of the 50th percentile for males andfemales greater than 18 years of age (EPA 2001b). For dermal contact with soil, theexposed skin surface area (SA) for adolescent trespassers was conservatively assumedto be the same as an adult, or 5,700 cm2. A dermal adherence factor of 0.2 mg/cm2

was assumed (EPA 1995). The chemical-specific dermal absorption fractions forCOPCs are presented in Table 4-2. The Solutia-proposed dermal absorption fractionfor PCBs will be used as an alternative to represent lower-bound risk.

Inhalation of fugitive dusts generated by wind erosion may occur. An inhalation rateof 20 m3/day was assumed for trespassers (EPA 1997a, 2001b). A default particulateemission factor (PEF) of 1.36 * 109 m3/kg was assumed (EPA 1995, 2001b), relatingthe concentration of a contaminant in soil to the concentration of dust particles in theair. This value assumes a vegetative cover of 50 percent and a mean annual windspeed of 4.69 m/s.

4.2.4 O&M Worker Exposure AssumptionsThe exposure parameters for the O&M worker are the same as for the operations areaworker with the following exception: the exposure frequency is assumed to be onceper month, or 12 days per year.

4.2.5 Residential Exposure AssumptionsIn the future use scenario, residents are exposed to groundwater via ingestion, dermalcontact, and inhalation during showering. In this future land-use scenario, the sitegroundwater is assumed to be the sole source of water supply for the exposedpopulation.

Residents are assumed to be exposed for 350 days per year (EPA 1991). The total RMEexposure duration for residents is assumed to be 30 years (EPA 1991): 24 years as anadult and 6 years as a young child. A life expectancy of 70 years (EPA 1989) was usedfor all receptor groups as the averaging time for exposure to carcinogeniccontaminants. The averaging time for non-carcinogenic effects is equal to theexposure duration, or 6 years for children. A body weight of 70 kg was used for alladult residents and 15 kg from children (0 to 6 years) under both scenarios (EPA1991).

As a measure of conservatism and to avoid redundancy, an effort was made toidentify the most sensitive receptor to calculate non-cancer hazards and excess cancerrisk levels. In the case of non-carcinogens, a child resident is the most sensitive

COM 46

Annlslon PAR.wpd

IIIII

Ii1IIIIiiiiit


receptor, owing to its lower body mass relative to the amount of chemical intake. The95th percentile of the drinking water intake rate for children ages 1-10 years is 1 liter(L)/day (EPA 1991,2002b). Therefore, the RME water ingestion rate for childresidents is assumed to be 1 L/day.

For carcinogens, a resident from child through adult (child/adult), is the mostsensitive receptor because the excess cancer risk for the child (exposure duration ofsix years) is assumed to be additive to that of an adult (exposure duration of24 years). For this reason, no calculations of excess cancer risk will be included forchild residents and no calculations of non-cancer hazards will be included forchild/adult residents. An intake factor that accounts for changing body mass andconsumption over 30 years was used to assess risk for a lifetime resident. The methodis described in EPA's Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance:Standard Default Exposure Factors (EPA 1991). The resulting groundwater ingestionfactor is 1.09 L-yr/kg-d.

Inhalation and dermal exposure of residents to groundwater may occur throughshowering and other household activities. The Region 4 policy is to assume that theexposure via these two routes is equivalent to what is received via in the ingestionpathway. Thus, the dose is simply doubled, and the inhalation toxicity factorsappropriately applied.

A similar approach was followed to examine future residents' exposure to soil viaingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of fugitive dust if the site is developed forresidential use. That is, the child receptor will be used to evaluate non-cancer hazardsand intake factors that account for changing body mass and consumption over30 years will be used to assess risk for a lifetime resident.

The intake factor for soil will be based on a soil incidental ingestion rate of adult andchild residents of 100 mg/day and 200 mg/day, respectively (EPA 1991). Theresulting soil ingestion factor is 114 mg-yr/kg-day

For dermal contact with soil, the intake factor is based on an adult resident who isassumed to wear a short-sleeved shirt, shorts, and shoes; therefore, the exposed skinsurface is limited to the head, hands, forearms, and lower legs. The exposed skinsurface area for the adult resident is 5,700 cm2, the average of the 50th percentile formales and females greater than 18 years of age (EPA 2001 b). The child resident wasassumed to wear a short-sleeved shirt and shorts (no shoes); therefore, the exposedskin surface area is limited to head, hands, forearms, lower legs, and feet. The skinsurface exposure area for the child resident is 2,800 cm2, the average of the 50thpercentile for males and females less than 6 years old (EPA 2001b). A dermaladherence factor of 0.07 mg/cm2 was assumed for adults (EPA 2001b). The adultdermal adherence factor is based on the 50th percentile weighted adherence factormeasured for gardeners, the activity determined to represent a high-end contact (EPA

COM 4-7

Annlston PAR.wpd

IIIII1IiiIiiiiiiIit


2001 b). A dermal adherence factor of 0.2 mg/cm2 was assumed for the child (EPA2001b). The child dermal adherence factor is based on the 95th percentile weightedadherence factor for children playing at a daycare center (EPA 2001b). The resultingsoil dermal factor is 361 mg-yr/kg-d. The chemical-specific dermal absorptionfractions for COPCs are presented in Table 4-2.

Inhalation of fugitive dusts generated by wind erosion may occur. An inhalation rateof 20 m3/day was assumed for adult residents (EPA 1991). An inhalation rate of10 m3/day was assumed for child residents (EPA 2004c). A PEF of 1.36 x 1Q9 m3/kgwas assumed (EPA 1995, 2001b), relating the concentration of a contaminant in soil tothe concentration of dust particles in the air. This value assumes a vegetative cover of50 percent and a mean annual wind speed of 4.69 m/s. The resulting inhalation factoris 10.9 m3-yr/kg-day.

COM 4-8

Anniston PAR.wpd

IIfIIIIiIIiiiiiiiii

Table 4-1Summary of COPCs for the Draft Human Health Risk Assessment

Annlston PCS SiteOperable Unit 3

1336-38-3

298-00-0

3689-24-5 '

56-38-2

SB-B9-9

60-57-1

1024-57-3

NA

1 00-02-7

128-68-1

56-55-3

50-32-8

205-99-2

207-08-9

218-01-9

53-70-3

193-39-5

87-86-5

88-06-2

92-52-4

106-4B-7

108-90-7

120-82-1

124-48-1

127-18-4

156-59-2

56-23-5

37-66-3

71-43-2

75-27-4

79-01-6

79-34-5

7429-90-5

7440-36-0

7440-38-2

7440-39-3

7440-41-7

7440-43-9

7440-47-3

7440-48-4

7439-89-8

7439-92-1

7439-96-5

7439-97-6

7440-02-0

7440-62-2

7440-66-6

PCBs, Total

Methyl parathlon

Sulfotepp

Parathion

gamma-BHC

Dieldrin

Heptachlor apoxlde

Dloxin TEQ

4-Nitrophgnol

O,O,O-Trieuiylph05phorolhioate

Bonzo(a)anthracena

Benzo(a)pyrana

Benzo(b}fluoranlhene

Benzo(k)fliioranthene

Chiysane

Dibenz{a,h)anthracene

lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd}pyrene

Pentachlorophenol

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

1.1'-Biphenyl

1 ,4-Dicrilorober\zene

Chlorobenzene

1 ,2.4-Trichlorobanzena

Oibromochloromethana

Tetrachloroethytene

cis-1,2-Dlchloroelhene

Carbon tetrachlorlde

Chloroform

Banzana

Bromodichloromethana

Trtchloroathylena

1 .1 ,2.2-Tatrachloraethana

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsanlc

Barium

9aryllium

Cadmium

Chromium

Cobalt

Iron

Lead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

Vanadium

Zinc

Surface SoilFacility

.. • .Y. : '

YY

YYYYYYY

YYY

Y

YYYY

Y

Surface SoilSouth Landfill

'•••• Y- ! i -•

SubsurfaceSoil - Facility

"'"• /-AY' .,:..-;

YY

Y

YYYY

Ambient Air -Facility

; .-.̂ " '„ Y :i •

Ambient Air -South Landfill

: .=,': Y : -"

Ambient Air-West Landfill

•.i :.:••*:: <:f-'-:

Groundwater

(•'.' ;•• ' . ; y.- - - V;

.-. '• : '.'. Y.- • -'.".".:•

' • ' • . . ' "••( -"Y"-'".-' "!

:.!:'•••:: r lY, . - ' - ..;!••••' •?-;••;••. 1:;Y':-::.'.:-,1.. I'ii.V'-'Y.':... - '.

:.'"-'--:I.':Y,-.:! '••• ; '• - ' • : • , - . ; - -Y -,';-•; • • •

--'•l.':-.C'Y'.:-;.:"-' • : - " ;

:Y : • ' ; " • ; •

'-•:;.' :'.': Y- - . : • • ; • -

.1 ' • ..' -!y : - - • - • :

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

YY

Y

YYYY

.•'.'.Y..:''.:yi:..:-, :' .,''

= Chemical wai delected in media and designated a chemical of potential concern

Page 1of1

IIII1IIiiii1iiiiiii

TABLE 4-2

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL PROPERTIES FOR COPC

Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3

Chemical

of

Potential

Concern

PCBs, Total

Methyl parathion

Sulfotepp3aralhion

gamma-BHC

Dieldrin

Heptachlor epoxide

Dioxin TEQ

1,1'-Biphenyl

2-Methylnaphthalene

Anthracene

4-Nitrophenol

0.0,0-Triethylphosphorothioate

Benzo(a)anthracene

3enzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(b)fluoranlhene

3enzo(Q,h,i)perylene

Benzo(k)fluoranlhene

bis(2-Elhylhexyl)phthalate

Carbazole

Chrysene

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

Dibenzofuren

Di-n-butylphthelate:luoranthene

Fluorene

ndeno(1 ,2.3-cd)pyrene

Naphthalene

Phenanlhrene

Pyrene

Acetone

Carbon disultide

Pentachlorophenol


1.r-Biphenyl

1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene

Chlorobenzene

1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

Dibromochloromethane

retrachloroethylene

cis-1,2-DicWoroelhene

Carbon tetrachloride

Chloroform

Benzene

Bromodichloromethane

frichloroethylene

1 .1 ,2,2-TetrachloroBthane

Aluminum

AntimonyArsenic

Permeability

Coefficient (1)

(cm/hr)

(water)

7.5E-01

1.3E-02

NA

1.3E-02

1.1E-02

1.2E-02

86E-03

8.1E-01

NA

4.7E-02

NA

4.8E-02

NA

4.7E-01

7.0E-01

7.0E-01

NA

NA

NA

NA

4.7E-01

1.5E+00

NA

2.4E-02

2.2E-01

NA

1.0E+00

4.7E-02

1.4E-01

NA

NA

1.7E-02

3.9E-01

3.5E-02

NA

4.2E-02

2.8E-02

6.6E-02

NA

3.3E-02

NA

1.6E-02

6.8E-03

6.0E-04

4.6E-03

1.2E-02

6.8E-03

1.0E-03

1.0E-03VOE-03

Dermal

Absorption

Fraction (1)

(soil)

1.4E-01

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

3.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.0E-01

NA

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-Q1

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.0E-01

1.0E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.0E-01

1.0E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

1.3E-01

NA

NA

1.0E-01

1.0E-01

1.0E-01

1.0E-01

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

3.0E-02


I1iiIiiiiiiiiiiiiii

Section 5Toxicity AssessmentHealth criteria used in this risk assessment will be primarily derived frominformation provided in EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).Toxicological information presented in IRIS represents a consensus opinion of EPAhealth scientists and has undergone peer review (both internal and external). If noinformation is provided in IRIS for a given chemical, toxicity values may be drawnfrom EPA's Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST), or provided byEPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA). In addition, valuesfrom HEAST were updated, as appropriate, based on discussions with NCEA.

5.1 Health Effects Criteria for Non-carcinogensFor chemicals that exhibit non-carcinogenic (e.g., systemic) effects, organisms haverepair and detoxification capabilities that must be exceeded by some criticalconcentration (threshold) before the health effect is manifested. This threshold viewholds that a range of exposures from just above zero to some finite value can betolerated by the organism without an appreciable hazard of adverse effects.

Health criteria for chemicals exhibiting non-carcinogenic effects for use in riskassessment are generally EPA-derived reference doses (RfDs) and referenceconcentrations (RfCs). The RfD or RfC is an estimate of average daily exposure to anindividual (including sensitive individuals) that is likely to be without appreciablerisk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. The RfD is expressed in units of mgchemical per kg body weight per day (mg/kg-day), while the RfC is expressed inunits of mg chemical per cubic meter of air (mg/m3). RfDs and RfCs are usuallyderived either from human studies involving work-place exposures or from animalstudies, and are adjusted using uncertainty factors to ensure that they are unlikely tounderestimate the potential for adverse non-carcinogenic effects to occur. Theuncertainty factors reflect scientific judgment regarding the various types of dataused to estimate the RfD/RfC and generally consist of multiples of factors rangingfrom 1 to 10. For example, a factor of 10 may be introduced to account for possibledifferences in response between humans and animals in prolonged exposure studies.Other factors may be used to account for variation in susceptibility amongindividuals in the human population, use of data from a study with less-than-lifetimeexposure, and/or use of data from a study that did not identify a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL).

RfDs and RfCs provide benchmarks against estimated doses (i.e., those projectedfrom human exposures to various environmental conditions) might be compared.Doses that are significantly higher than the RfD/RfC may indicate an increased

COM 51Annlston PAR.wpd

IIiiIiiiitiiiiiiiii

Section 5Toxicity Assessment

potential of hazard from the exposure, while doses that are less than the RfD/RfC arenot likely to be associated with adverse health effects. It should be notedthat an exceedance of the RfD/RfC does not predict a specific disease, just anincreased potential hazard for non-cancer health effects.

5.2 Health Effects Criteria for Potential CarcinogensFor chemicals that exhibit carcinogenic effects, EPA as well as other scientificauthorities recognize that one or more molecular events can evoke changes in a singlecell or a small number of cells that can lead to malignancy. This non-threshold theoryof carcinogenesis purports that any level of exposure to a carcinogen can result insome finite possibility of causing cancer. Generally, regulatory agencies assume thenon-threshold hypothesis for carcinogens in the absence of information concerningthe mechanisms of carcinogenic action for the chemical. The cancer slope factor (CSF)[in units of (mg/kg body weight-day)"1] is a number which, when multiplied by thelifetime average daily dose of a potential carcinogen (in mg/kg body weight-day),yields the upper-bound lifetime excess cancer risk associated with exposure at thatdose. CSFs are developed for a specific route of exposure, either oral or inhalation.Upper-bound is a term used by EPA to reflect the conservative nature of the CSFs:risks estimated using slope factors are considered unlikely to underestimate actualrisks and may overestimate risks for a given exposure. Excess lifetime cancer risks aregenerally expressed in scientific notation and are probabilities. An excess lifetimecancer risk of 1E-6 (one in one million), for example, represents the incrementalprobability that an individual will develop cancer as a result of exposure to acarcinogenic chemical over a 70-year lifetime under specified exposure conditions.

In practice, CSF estimates are derived from the results of human epidemiologystudies or chronic animal bioassays. The animal studies are conducted for a range ofdoses, including a high dose, in order to detect possible adverse effects. Since humansare expected to be exposed at lower doses than those used in animal studies, the dataare adjusted via mathematical models. The data from animal studies are typicallyfitted to the linearized multistage model to obtain a dose-response curve. EPAevaluates a range of possible models based on the available data before conductingthe extrapolation. The most appropriate model to reflect the data is selected based onan analysis of the data set.

The 95 percent upper confidence limit slope of the dose-response curve, subject tovarious adjustments and an inter-species scaling factor is applied to derive the healthprotective CSF estimate for humans. Dose-response data from humanepidemiological studies are fitted to dose-time-response curves. These modelsprovide rough, but reasonable, estimates of the upper limits on lifetime risk. CSFestimates based on human epidemiological data are also derived using health

COM 5-2

Armislon PAR.wpd

IIiiiiiiiaiiiiiiiii


protective assumptions and, as such, they too are considered unlikely tounderestimate risks.

Therefore, while the actual risks associated with exposures to potential carcinogensare unlikely to be higher than the risks calculated using a slope factor estimate, theycould be considerably lower.

In addition, there are varying degrees of confidence in the weight of evidence forcarcinogenicity of a given chemical. EPA (1989) has proposed a system forcharacterizing the overall weight of evidence based on the availability of animal,human, and other supportive data. The weight-of-evidence classification is anattempt to determine the likelihood that an agent is a human carcinogen and thusqualitatively affects the estimation of potential health risks.

Three major factors are considered in characterizing the overall weight of evidencefor human carcinogenicity: (1) the availability and quality of evidence from humanstudies, (2) the availability and quality of evidence from animal studies, and (3) othersupportive information which is assessed to determine whether the overall weight ofevidence should be modified. Under EPA's 1986 risk assessment guidelines (EPA1986), classification of the overall weight of evidence has the following fivecategories:

• Group A — Human Carcinogen: There is at least sufficient evidence fromhuman epidemiological studies to support a causal association between anagent and cancer.

• Group B — Probable Human Carcinogen: There is at least limited evidencefrom epidemiological studies of carcinogenicity in humans (Group Bl) or that,in the absence of adequate data in humans, there is sufficient evidence ofcarcinogenicity in animals (Group B2).

• Group C—Possible Human Carcinogen: There is inadequate evidence ofcarcinogenicity in humans.

• Group D — Not Classified: There is inadequate data or no existing data for thechemical.

• Group E — No Evidence of Carcinogenicity in Humans: There is no evidencefor carcinogenicity in at least two adequate animal tests in different species orin both epidemiological and animal studies.

COM 5-3

Annlslon PAR.wpd

IIIIIIIilIIiIiIIIIi


According to EPA's newest guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment (EPA 2005),EPA is changing the classification of carcinogens from the letter categories listedabove to narrative descriptions of the available scientific information. There are fiverecommended standard hazard descriptors: "carcinogenic to humans," "likely to becarcinogenic to humans," suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential," "inadequateinformation to assess carcinogenic potential," and "not likely to be carcinogenic tohumans." The Weight of Evidence classification will be based on evaluation of thedata and in context of weight of evidence narratives, no one-to-one correspondencebetween the former groupings for carcinogens exists. For example, a B2 classificationmay change to "There is suggestive evidence for carcinogenicity based on animalstudies, but not sufficient for assessment of human carcinogenic potential."

5.3 Toxicological AssessmentTables 5-1 through 5-4 summarize the chronic RfDs, RfCs, and CSFs used to estimatenon-carcinogenic effects and cancer risks for the COPCs. These criteria are the mostcurrent data, obtained from the May 2006 on-line version of IRIS, and current NCEArecommendations.

The use of surrogate toxicity values can be seen noted in Tables 5-1 through 5-4.Regarding dioxin-like PCB congeners, a qualitative assessment of "excess" risk willbe made as described in the streamlined risk evaluation in support of residentialcleanup (EPA 2002c). Note that the congener data is not included in the summarytables in Appendix B. Chromium VI toxicity values have been applied to totalchromium. Chromium VI is an A carcinogen by the inhalation route, but a Dcarcinogen by the oral route. Mercuric chloride toxicity values have been applied tomercury.

The RfD for Aroclor-1254 was used as a surrogate for total PCBs. The CSF for totalPCBs is the upper-bound CSF intended for Aroclors having high risk and persistence.The oral CSFs for the carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) arederived using the relative potency approach (EPA 1993, Provisional Guidance forQuantitative Assessment of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, EPA/600/R-93/089).

COM 54

Annlston PAR.wpd

TABLE 5-1NON-CANCER TOXICITY DATA - ORAL/DERMAL


K

(5

(6)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern (1)

PCBs, Total

Sulfotepp

Parathion

gamma-BHC

Dioxin TEQ

4-NitrophenolO,O,O-Triethylphosphorothioate

Benzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyreneBenzo(b)fluoranthene

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

Chrysene

Dibenz(a.h)anthracene

lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene


Chlorobenzene1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

cis-1 ,2-Oichloroethene

Frichloroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

Cobalt

IronLead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Chronic/

Subchronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

MA

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

NA

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

OralRfD

Value

2.0E-05

Pending

6.0E-03

3.0E-04

NA

Pending

Pending

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1.0E-04

2.0E-02

1.0E-02

1.0E-02

3.0E-04

1.0E+00

4.0E-04

3.0E-O4

2.0E-01

1.0E-03

3.0E-03

2.0E-02

3.0E-01

NA

1.4E-01

3.0E-04

2.0E-02

7.0E-03

3.0E-01

Units

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-daymg/kg-day

Oral Absorption

Efficiency for Dermal (2)

100%

100%

100%

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

15%

95%

7%

3%

3%

100%

100%

NA

4%

100%

4%

3%

100%

Absorbed RfD for Dermal (2)

Value

2.0E-05

6.0E-03

3.0E-04

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1.0E-04

2.0E-02

1.0E-02

1.0E-023.0E-04

1.0E+00

6.0E-05

2.9E-04

1.4E-02

2.5E-05

7.5E-05

2.0E-02

3.0E-01

NA

5.6E-03

3.0E-04

8.0E-04

1.8E-04

3.0E-01

Units

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-daymg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg/day

mg/kg-day

NA

mg/kg/day

mg/kg/day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg/day

mg/kg-day

Primary

Target

Organ(s)

Eye/Skin/Nails

Liver and kidney

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Liver

Adrenals

NOAEL

Ltver/Wdney/Fetus

Gl Tract/CNS

Whole Body/Blood

Skin

Nerves

Kidney

NA

Polycythemia

Gl Tract/Liver

NA

CNS

Autoimmune effects

Whole Body

Lungs

Deer. ESOD activity

Combined

Uncertainty/Modifying

Factors

300

1000 -

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1000

1000

3000

3000

100

1000

3

300

10

900

10

1

NA

1

1000

300

100

3

RfD: Target Organ(s)

Source(s)

IRIS

HEAST

IRIS

HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS / HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

HEAST

IRIS

Date(s) (3)

(MM/DD/YYYY)

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/2006

1997

05724/2006

05/24/2006

05^4/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

11/10/2003

10/25/2004

05/01/2002

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

0504/2006

05/24/2006

05C4/2006

07/24/2001

05/01/2002

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/2006

NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment

IRIS - Integrated Risk Information System

HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables; July 1997

RfD = Reference dose

ESOD = Erythrocyte superoxids dismutase

NOAEL - No observed adverse effect level

(1) Toxictiy values shown include COPCs in surface soil, subsurface soil, and groundwater COPCs found in latest results from MW-07, MW-09A, MW-14, MW-15. MW-16. MW-20A, MW-21A. and T-4.

(2) The dermal RfD was assumed to equal the oral RfD, unless an adjustment factor was found in Exhibit 4.1 of RAGS-E (EPA 2001 b).

(3) IRIS values were confirmed against the EPA's online database. May 2006.

(4) The RfD for total PCBs based on Arodor 1254

(5) The RfD for hexavalent chromium has been applied to total chromium.

(6) The RfD .for mercuric chloride has been applied to mercury

Text tables; 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/19/2006

TABLE 5-2

NON-CANCER TOXICITY DATA - INHALATION


(4)

(5)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern (1)

PCBs, Total

Sulfotepp

Parathion

gamma-BHC

Dioxin TEQ

4-Nitrophenol

O.O.O-Triethylphosphorothioate

Benzo(a)anthracene

3enzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(b)f!uoranthene


Chrysene




Chlorobenzene


cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene

Trichloroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

CobaltIron

Lead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Chronic/

Subchronic

NA

Pending

Chronic

Chronic

NA

Pending

Pending

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

Inhalation RfC

Value

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

MA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

5.0E-03

4.0E-05

NA

NA

2.0E-O4

1.0E-04

NA

NA

NA

5.0E-05

3.0E-04

9.00E-05

NANA

Units

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/m3

mg/m3

NA

NA

mg/m3

mg/m3

NA

NA.

NA

mg/m3

mg/m3

mg/m3

NA

NA

Extrapolated RfD (2)

Value

NA

6.0E-03

3.0E-04

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1.0E-04

1.7E-02

1.0E-03

1.0E-02

1.0E-02

1.4E-03

1.1E-05

NA

NA

5.7E-05

2.9E-05

NA

NA

NA

1.4E-05

8.6E-OS

26E-05

NA

NA

Units

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/Kg-day

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

Primary

Target

Organ(s)

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

CNS

Lungs

NA

NA

NA

Lungs

NA

NA

NA

CNS

CNS

NA

NA

NA

Combined

Uncertainty/

Modifying Factors

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

10001000NA

NA

.NA

300

NA

NA

NA

100030

NA

NA

NA

RfC

Target Organ(s)

Source(s)

IRIS / HEAST

Route

Route

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

Route

NCEA

NCEA

Route

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS / HEAST

IRIS

NCEA

IRIS

NCEA

HEAST

IRIS / HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS/HEAST

IRIS

Date(s)(3)

(MM/DD/YYYY)

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/200S

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

10/25/2004

1/22/2003

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

3/10/2003

1/22/2003

7/24/2001

1997

1/22/2003

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

1/220003

5/24/2006


IRIS = Integrated Risk Information System


RfC = Reference concentration


Route = Route-to-route extrapolation from Region 9 PRG tables, http://www.epa.gov/region09/waste/sfund/prg/index.htm

(1) Toxictiy values shown include COPCs in surface soil, subsurface soil, and groundwater COPCs found in latest results from MW-07, MW-09A, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-20A, MW-21A, and T-4.

(2) Inhalation RfDs were calculated from Inhalation RfCs assuming a 70 kg individual has an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day.(USEPA Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Part A; December 1989).

(3) IRIS values were confirmed against the EPA's online database, May 2006

(4) The RfC information for hexavalent chromium has been applied to total chromium

(5) The RfC for elemental mercury has been applied to mercury

Text tables; 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/19/2006

TABLE 5-3CANCER TOXICITY DATA - ORAL/DERMAL


(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern

PCBs, Total

Sulfotepp

Parathion

gamma-BHC

Dioxin TEQ

4-Nftrophenol

0,O,O-TriethylphosphorothioateBenzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo<b)fluoranthene

3enzo(K)fluoranthene

Chrysene


lndeno(1.2,3-cd)pyrene


Chlorobenzene

1 ,2,4-Trichtorobenzene


rrichloroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

3arium

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

Cobalt

ron

Lead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Oral Cancer Slope Factor

Value

2.0E+00

Pending

NA

1.3E+00

1.5E+05

Pending

Pending

7.3E-01

7.3E+00

7.3E-01

7.3E-02

7.3E-03

7.3E+00

7.3E-01

1.1E-02

NA

NA

NA

4.0E-01

NA

NA

1.5E+00

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Units

(mg/kg-dayM

NA

(mg/kg/day)-1

(mg/Kg/day)-1

(mg/kg-dayM

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-<lay)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day}-1

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day>-1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Oral Absorption

Efficiency for Dermal (1 )

100%

NA

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

NA

NA

NA

100%

NA

NA

95%

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Absorbed Cancer Slope Factor

for Dermal (1)

Value

2.0E+OO

NA

1.3E+OO

1.5E+05

7.3E-01

7.3E+00

7.3E-01

7.3E-02

7.3E-03

7.3E+00

7.3E-01

1.1E-02

NA

NA

NA

4.0E-01

NA

NA

1.6E+00

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Units

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

(mg/kg/day)-1

(mg/kg/day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day>-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Weight of Evidence/

Cancer Guideline

Description

B2

C

NA

NA

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

D

D

D

81

D

D

A

D

D

D

D

NA

B2

D

C

NA

NA

D

Oral CSF

Source(s)

IRIS

IRIS

HEAST

HEAST

NCEA

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS /HEAST

IRIS/ HEASTIRIS

Date(s)(2)

05/24/2006

5/31/2006

1997

1997

05/01/2001

05/24/2006

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/2006

11/10/2003

10/25/2004

1/22/2003

1/22/2003

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

07/24/2001

1997

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006



CSF = Cancer slope factor

(1) The dermal CSF was assumed to equal the oral CSF, unless an adjustment factor was found in Exhibit 4.1of RAGS-E (EPA 2001 b).


(3) The Oral Cancer Slope Factors for PAHs derived using the relative potency approach (USEPA. 1993.Provisional Guidance for Quantitative Assessment of Polycydic Aromatic Hydrocarbons; EPA/600/R-93/089).

EPA Weight of Evidence;

A - Human Carcinogen

B1 - Probable human carcinogen - indicates that limited human data are available.

B2 - Probable human carcinogen - indicates sufficient evidence in animals

and inadequate or no evidence in humans.

C - Possible human carcinogen

D - Not classifiable as human carcinogen

E - Evidence of noncarcinogenidty


TABLE 5-4CANCER TOXICITY DATA - INHALATION


0)(3)

(3)

(3)(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern

PCBs. TotalSutfotepp

Parathion

jamma-BHC

Dioxin TEQ

4-NitrophenolO,O,O-Triethylphosphorothioate

Benzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyreneBenzo(b)fluoranthene

Benzo(k)fluofanthene

ChryseneDibenz(a,n)anthracene



Chlorobenzene



rrichloroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

ArsenicBarium

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

Cobalt

IronLeadManganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Unit Risk

Value

1.0E-04

PendingMA

MA

NA

Pending

Pending

NA

8.9E-04

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

3.1E-06

NA

NA

NA

1.1E-04

NA

NA

4.3E-03NA

1.8E-03

1.2E-02NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Units

(ug/m3>-1

NA

NA

NA

NA(ug/m3)-1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

(ug/m3)-1

NA

NA

NA

(U8/m3)-1NA

NA

(ug/mSMNA

(ug/m3)-1

(ug/m3)-1NANANANA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Inhalation Cancer Slope Factor (1)

Value

3.5E-01

NA

1.3E+00

1.5E+05

3.1E-01

3.1E+00

3.1E-01

3.1E-023.1E-03

3.1E+00

3.1E-01

1.1E-02NA

NA

NA

4.0E-01

NA

NA

1.5E+01NA

6.3E+004.2E+01

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Units

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

(mg/kg/day)-1

(mg/kg/day}-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/Kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1. (mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/Vg-day)-!

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

(mg/kg-<lay)-1NA

(mg/kcj-<lay)-1(mg/kg-day)-1

MA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Weight of Evidence/

Cancer Guideline

Description

B2

NA

NA

NA

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

D

D

D

B1

D

B1

A

D

B1

A

D

D

B2

D

C

D

D

D

Unit Risk: Inhalation CSF

Source(s)

IRIS

HEAST

Route

HEAST

IRIS

NCEANCEA

NCEA

NCEANCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRISNCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRISIRIS

IRIS

IRISNCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRISIRIS

Date(s) (2)

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/20061/22/2003

1/24/2003

1/24/2003

1/24/2003

1/24/2003

1/24/2003

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/200611/10/2003

10/25/2004

1/22/2003

1/22/2003

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/200610/25/2004

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/200605/24/2006



HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables: July 1997

Route = Route-lo-route extrapolation from Region 9 PRG tables, http://www.epa.gov/region09/waste/sfund/prg/index.htm

(1) Inhalation CSFs were calculated from unit risks assuming a 70 kg individual has an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day.


(3) The Inhalation Cancer Slope Factors for PAHs derived using the relative potency approach in EPA's 1993Provisional Guidance for Quantitative RiskAssessment of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons; EPA/600/R-93/089.

(4) The cancer slope factor for hexavalent chromium have been applied to total chromium.

EPA Weight of Evidence:







E - Evidence of noncarcinogenicity


I

II

M

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Section 6ReferencesAlabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM). 2000. Preliminary

Assessment, MCT Anniston, Inc., Anniston, Alabama. Montgomery, Alabama.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1986. Guidelines for Carcinogen RiskAssessment. Federal Register. Vol. 51, No. 185. September 24.

EPA. 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Human Health Evaluation ManualPart A. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emergency andRemedial Response, Washington DC. EPA/ 540/1-89/002. OSWER Directive9285.701A. NTIS PB90-155581.

EPA. 1991. Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default^ Exposure Factors. EPA. March 25, 1991.

EPA. 1992. Final Guidance On Data Usability In Risk Assessment (Part A). Office Of SolidWaste And Emergency Response Directive 9285.7-09A.

EPA. 1993. Provisional Guidance for Quantitative Assessment of Poll/cyclic Aromatic• Hydrocarbons; EPA/ 600/ R-93/ 089.

EPA. 1995. Guideline for Predictive Baseline Emissions Estimation for Superfund Sites.ASF-21. EPA-451/R-96-001. November.

EPA. 1997a. Exposure Factors Handbook, Volumes I, II, and III. Office of Research andDevelopment. EPA/600/P-95/002Fa, -002Fb, and 002Fc.

EPA. 1997b. Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables. FY1997 Update. Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response. EPA-540-R-97-036. July.

EPA. 2001. Risk Assessment Guidance For Superfund: Volume I: Human Health EvaluationManual (Part D, Standardized Planning, Reporting, and Review of Superfund RiskAssessments). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. Publication 9285.7-47. December.

EPA. 2002a. Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for SuperfundSites. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. OSWER 9355.4-24.December.

EPA. 2002b. Child Specific Exposure Factors Handbook. NCEA-W; EPA/600/P-00/002B.

COM 6-1

Anniston PAR.wpd

. Section 6Phase III Remedial Investigation

IEPA. 2002c. Streamlined Risk Evaluation for Residential Areas, Anniston PCB Site, Region

• 4 Office of Technical Services, October.

EPA. 2003. EPA Memorandum on Human Health Toxicity Values in Superfund Risk• Assessments. Michael B. Cook. December 5, 2003.

EPA. 2004a. Risk Assessment Guidance For Superfund: Volume I: Human Health• Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment)" Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. OSWER 9285.7-02EP.

EPA/540/R/99/005. July.

EPA. 2004b. ProUCL Version 3.0 User's Guide. April.

|[ EPA. 2004c. Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals. Last updated November 2000.http://www.epa.gov/region09/waste/sfund/prg/index.htm.

I EPA. 2005. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. Final. NCEA. F-0644A. March 25,2005.

™ EPA. 2006. Integrated Risk Information System (on-line database of toxicity measures).^ http://www.epa.gov/iris. May.

Colder Associates, Inc. 1997. RCRA Facility Investigation/Confirmatory Sampling• (RFI/CS) Work Plan.

Colder Associates, Inc. 2002. RFI/CS Report for the Solutia Inc., Anniston, Alabama• Facility, October 2002.

Colder Associates, Inc. 2003. Supplemental RFI/CS Report for the Solutia Inc., Anniston,• Alabama Facility, May 2003.

Colder Associates, Inc. 2005. Preliminary Site Characterization Summary Report on• Operable Unit 3, Solutia Inc. Facility, Anniston, Alabama, EPA ID No. AID 004

019 048, December 2005.

I Solutia. 2002. RCRA Facility Investigation/Confirmatory Sampling Report for the Anniston,Alabama Facility. October.

| Solutia. 2005. Preliminary Site Characterization Summary Report on Operable Unit 3.

I

I COM 62

Anniston PAR.wpd

Appendix A

Remedial Investigation Samples

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIlii

Table A-1Soil Sample Information

Annlston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3

Sample CodeSurface Soil SamAOC-A-6ASLGM-3ASLGM-3BSLGM-3CSLGM-3DSSR-1SSR-2SSRI-01-06SSRI-02-06SSRI-03-06

Location

Depth, interval(ft bgs)

use in KisKAssessment?

piesProduct storape tank j 0-0.5 i YesSouth Landfill cap j 0-0.25 j YesSouthLandliii cap [ CM3.25 I YesSouth Landfill cap | 0-0.25 j YesSouth Landfill cap ! 0-0.25 1 YesOperations area 1 0-2 ! YesFormer parathion production area j 0-2 i YesOperations areaOperations areaOperations area

SSRI-04-06 i Operations areaSSRI-05-06 | Operations areaSSRI-06-06 [Operations areaSSRI-07-06 i Operations areaSSRI-OB-06 [Operations areaSSRI-09-06SSRI-10-06SSRI-11-06SSRI-12-06SSRI-13-06SSRI-14-06SSRI-15-06SSRI-16-06SWMU-12-24A

0-0.5 Yes0-0.5 ! Yes0-6.5 i Yes0-0.5 ! Yes0-0.50-0.50-0.50-0.5

YesYesYesYes

Operations area j 0-0.5 i YesOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaWest End Landfill capWest End Landfill capPhosphoric acid basin

SWMU-12-24B [phosphoric acid basinSWMU-12-24C fphosphoric acid basin

0-0.5 Yes0-0.5 Yes0-0.5 i Yes0-0.5 Yes0-0.5 | Yes0-0.5 Yes6-6.5 1 Yes0-2 ! Yes

[ £2 i Yes0-2 I Yes

SWMU-12-24D ! Phosphoric acid basin * O-2 ] YesSWMU-12-24E i Phosphoric acid basinSWMU-i2-24FSWMU-12-24GSWMU-12-24HSWMU-i2-24lSWMU-17-6ASWMU-25-6ASWMU-31-6ASWMU-42-6A

Phosphoric acid basinPhosphoric acid basinPhosphoric acid basinPhosphoric acid basinScrap yard oil satellite accumulation areaBoiler feed tankSteam cleaning padWaste drum satellite accumulation area

0-2 j Yes1 0-2 1 Yes

0-2 Yes0-2 1 Yes

[ 0-2 Yes0-0.5 j Yes0-0.5 j Yes6-6.5 ] Yes0-0.5 Yes

Subsurface Soil SamplesSSR-3SSR-4SSR-5SSR-6SSR-7SSR-8SSR-9SSR-10SSR-i'lSSR-12SSR-1 3SSR-14SSR-1 5SSR-1 6SSR-17SSR-1 8SSR-1 9SSR-20SSR-21SSR-22SSRi-oi-36SSRi-02-36

Phosphoric acid basinPhosphoric acid basinPhosphoric add basinPhosphate landfillPhosphate landfillSanotar PitSanotar PitFormer parathion production areaFormer parathion production area

0.5-2.5 Yes6-10 j Yes

2.5-4.5 i Yes0.67-2 ]

2-3

i'-3 1

0.58-2.5819-21$-10

YesYesYesYesNoYes

Former PCB production area [ 6-8 i YesFormer PCB production areaUnderground product storape tanksPhosphoric acid basinFormer parathion production areaFormer holding tanks, aeration basins, and clarifiersWaste drum satellite accumulation areaFormer phosphorus pentasulfide production areaScrap yard oil satellite accumulation areaOld boiler scrap yardSteam cleaning padOperations area

6-810-126-10

0.83-3

YesYesYesYes

1.25-3.5 I Yes0.25-6.50.67-3

0.254.50.33-2.50.33-0.5

3-4

YesYesYesYesYesYes

Operations area j 3-4 Yes

AppA 1 of 2

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Table A-1Soil Sample Information

Annlston PCS Site, Operable Unit 3

Sample CodeSSRI-03-36SSRI-04-36SSRI-05-36SSRI-06-36SSRI-07-36SSRI-08-36SSRI-09-36SSRI-10-36SSRI-11-36SSRI-12-36SSRi-13-36SSRI-14-36

LocationOperations areaOperations area'Operations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations areaOperations area

Depth interval(ft bgs)

3-43-4£iM3-43-43-43-43-43-43-43-4

use in KISKAssessment?

YesYesY e s ' • •

YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes ...Yes

ft bgs = feet below ground surface

AppA 2 of 2

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Table A-2Groundwater Sample Information


Sample CodeMonitoring WellOWR-5DMW-11AMW-12AMW-13AMW-15MW-16MW-20AMW-9AMW-14OW-21AMW-7T-4WEL-01WEL-02WEL-03OWR-10OWR-7DOW-8/8AOW-15OW-16/16AOWR-11OWR-12OWR-13 .. .OW-07T-1T-3OWR-1SOW-9OW-10OWR-1DOWR-2DOWR-4DOWR-5DOWR-6DOWR-7DOWR-14DOWR-15D

Location

WMA 1/SWMU 1WMA 1/SWMU 1WMA 1/SWMU 1WMA 1/SWMU 1WMA II and OLBSIWMA II and OLBSIWMA II and OLBSIWMA II and OLBSIWMA II and OLBSIOW-21AAreaOW-21AAreaOW-21A AreaWest End LandfillWest End LandfillWest End LandfillWest End LandfillWest End LandfillOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterOperations Area Interior and Northeast PerimeterDeep residuumDeep residuumDeep residuumDeep residuumDeep residuumDeep residuumDeep residuumDeep residuum

COPC Selection?

YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes

Risk Calc?

NoNo

NoNoYesYesYesYesYes

YesYesYesNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNo

AppA 1 of 1

Soil Sample Locations


Solulia Inc., Anniston. Alabama

3 RFI/CS Subsurface soil sample

O RFI/CS Surface (or near surface)soil sample

• Supplemental RFI/CSSoil Sample

Supplemental RFI/CSComposite Soil Sample

0 OU-3 Rl Soil Sample Location

Major Roads

Minor Roads

/\/ Drainage Basin

/\/ Property Line

A/ OU-3 Area

I I Paved

I I Buildings

CD Landfill Area

SOURCEGotder Associates (ort-sila base map}USGS 1:2400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION

Gokku-Associates

Monitoring Well Locations


Solutia Inc.. Anniston. Alabama

LEGEND

,-'V OrvSite Boundary/V Major Roads/V Minor Roads/V Drainage BasinA/A/ OU-3 Area

I 1 Buddingsr I Alabama PowerHS1 Solutia Inc.I I Paved Surface

A Recovery Well

© Deep Residuum Monitoring/Observation Well

O Shallow Residuum Monitoring/Observation Well

O Piezometer

NOTES

ZONE

Alabama East 101

SOURCEColder Associates (on-sils base map)USGS 1:2400 Quad Maps

MAP PROJECTION DATUM

LOCATION MAP

11

AJC"

,'GolderAssociates

PRODUCED BY: PROJECT/FILE No:

December 2005 A-2

Appendix B

RAGS D Standard Tables

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

List of Standard Tables Included in Appendix BAnniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3

TABLES1 Selection of Exposure Pathways2 Occurrence, Distribution and Selection of Chemicals of Potential Concern

2.1 Surface Soil - Operations Area2.2 Surface Soil - South Landfill2.3 Subsurface Soil - Operations Area2.4 Ambient Air - Operations Area2.5 Ambient Air - South Landfill2.6 Ambient Air - West Landfill2.7 Groundwater - Site-wide

4 Values and Equations Used for Intake Calculations4.1 RME Soil4.2 RME Soil4.3 RME Groundwater4.4 RME Soil

5 Non-Cancer Toxiclty Data5.1 Non-Cancer Toxicity Data — Oral/Dermal5.2 Non-Cancer Toxicity Data - Inhalation

6 Cancer Toxicity Data6.1 Cancer Toxicity Data - Oral/Dermal6.2 Cancer Toxicity Data - Inhalation

Pagel of 1

TABLE B-1


Anniston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3

Scenario

Timeframe

Current / Future

Future

Medium

Surface Soil

Subsurface Soil

Groundwater

Surface Soil

Exposure

Medium

Surface Soil

Air

Surface Soil

Air

Subsurface Soil

Air

Groundwater

Air

Surface Soil

Exposure

Point

OU -3 Area

OU-3Area

OlMArea

OU-3Area

OU-3Area

OU-3Area

Tap

Vapors in Bath

011-3 Area

Receptor

Population

Workers: OperationsArea and O&M staff


Trespassers

Trespassers

Construction Worker

Construction Worker

Resident

Resident

Resident

Receptor

Age

Adult

Adult

Adolescent

Adolescent

Adult

Adult

Child to Adult

Child

(0-6 yrs)

Child to Adult

Child

(0-6 yrs)

Child to Adult

Child

(0-6 yrs)

Exposure

Route

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Dermal

Ingestion

Inhalation

Inhalation

Dermal

Ingestion

Dermal

Ingestion

On-Site/

Off-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Site

On-Sits

On-Site

On-Site

Type of

Analysis

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

Rationale for Selection or Exclusion

of Exposure Pathway

Workers may have exposed skin surfaces come into contact with soil


Workers may inhale fugitive dust


Trespassers may incidentally ingest soil

Trespassers may inhale fugitive dust



Workers may inhale volatiles/particulates











App B RAGSD_RME Anniston: 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 2

TABLE B-1



Scenario

Timeframe

Future

Medium

Surface Soil

Exposure

Medium

Air

Exposure

Point

OU-SArea

Receptor

Population

Resident

Receptor

Age

Child to Adult

Child

(0-6 yrs)

Exposure

Route

Inhalation

Inhalation

On-Site/

Off-Site

On-Site

On-Site

Type of

Analysis

Quant

Quant

Rationale for Selection or Exclusion

of Exposure Pathway



Quant = Quantitative risk anarysis performed.

App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Page 2 of 2

TABLE B-2.1OCCURRENCE. DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN

Anniston PCS Site. Operable Unit 3: Operations Area Surface Soil

Scenario Timeframe:

Medium:

Exposure Medium:

Current/Future

Surface Son

Surface Son

Exposure

Point

Operations

Area

CAS

Number

1336-36-3

1024-57-3

MA

92-52-4

91-57-6

120-12-7

56-55-3

50-32-8

205-99-2

191-24-2

207-08-9

117-81-7

86-74-8

218-01-9

53-70-3

132-84-9

84-74-2

206-4*0

88-73-7

193-39-5

91-20-3

85-01-8

129-00-0

87-64-1

75-15-0

7429-90-5

7440-36-0

7440-38-2

7440-39-3

7440-41-7

7440-43-9

7440-70-2

7440-47-3

7440-48-4

7440-50-8

7439-89-6

7439-92-1

7439-95-4

7439-96-5

7439-97-6

7440-02-0

9/7/7440

7782-49-2

7440-22-4

Chemical

PCBs, Total (G)

rtoptachlor epoxide

Dloxin TEQ

1.1'-Biphenyl

2-Methytnaphthalene

Anthracene

Benzo(&)anthracene

3enzo(a)pyrerw

Benzo{b)fluoranthene

Benzo(g,h,Qpery1ene

Benzofkjfluonnthene

bis(2-Ethylhexy1)phthalate

Carbazole

Chrysen*

Oib«nz(a,h)anthncene

Dibenzofuran

DHl-butylpmhalate

Fluoranthene

Ruorene

lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

Naphthalene

Phenanthrene

Pyrene

Acetone

Carbon disulfide

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Banum

Ben/Ilium

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

Potassium

Selenium

Silver

Minimum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)

143

380

0.256

45

32

120

46

24 '

50

40

88

57

62

290

41

31

49

42

28

59

37

74

340

25

2.3

11,000

8.7

3.8

18

0.47

0.52

24.000

13

2

13

19,000

8.7

850

70

0.091

15

1,000

4.5

12

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

d)

1,082.000

380

0.256

140

32

120

830

1.900

2,100

2,100

1,500

200

62

1.900

620

31

49

940

28

1.300

37

470

1,200

35

2.3

19,000

8.7

390

230

1

4.7

59,000

23

11

280

26,000

4.700

34,000

830

2.6

33

1,800

4.5

12

Units

US/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

us/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mo/kg

Location

of Maximum

Concentration

SSRI-11

SSRH1

SWMU-42

SSRI-04

SSRH1

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-07

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-07

SSRI-11

SSRI-O7

SSRMI

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-04

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSR-02

SSRI-11

SSRI-04

SSRI-11

SSRI-07

SSRM1

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

SSRI-04

SSRI-07

SSRI-07

SSRI-04

SSRI-04

SSRI-11

SSRI-11

Detection

Frequency

29 / 32

1 / 3

1 / 1

3 / 3

1 / 3

1 / 3

3 / 3

3 / 3

3 / 3

3 / 3

2 / 3

3 / 3

1 / 3

3 / 3

2 / 3

1 / 3

1 / 3

3 / 3

1 / 3

2 / 3

1 / 3

3 / 3

3 / 3

2 / 3

1 / 3

3 / 3

1 / 3

5 / 5

5 / 5

4 / 5

3 / 5

3 / 3

5 / 5

5 / 5

3 / 3

3 / 3

5 / 5

3 / 3

5 / 5

6 / 7

4 / 5

3 / 3

1 / 3

1 1 3

Range of

Detection

Limits

37 - 88,000

31 - 300

NA - MA

NA - NA

390 - 420

410 - 410

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

410 - 410

NA - NA

390 - 410

NA - NA

410 - 410

410 - 410

410 - 420

NA - NA

410 - 420

410 - 410

390 - 410

NA - NA

NA - NA

49 - 49

4.9 - 8.3

NA - NA

2.3 - 2.4

NA - NA

NA - NA

0.55 - 0.55

0.55 • 0.55

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

0.033 - 0.21

4.4 - 18

NA - NA

2.8 - 3

1.1 - 1.2

Concentration

Used for

Screening

P)

1.1E+08

3.8E+02

2.6E-01

1.4E+02

3.2E+01

1.2E+02

8.3E+02

1.9E+03

2.1E+03

2.1E+03

1.5E*03

2.0E+02

6.2E+O1

1.9E+03

6.2E»02

3.1E+01

4.9E+01

9.4E*02

2.8E+O1

1.3E+03

3.7E+01

4.7E+02

1.2E*03

3.5E+01

2.3E+00

1.9E+O4

8.7E+00

3.9E+02

2.3E+02

1.0E+00

4.7E+OO

5.9E-KJ4 .

2.3E+01

1.1E+01

2.8E+02

2.6E+04

4.7E+03

3.4E-I-04

8.3E+02

2.6E-I-00

3.3E+01

1.8E+03

4.5E+00

1.2E+Q1

Background

Value

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

. NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Screening

Toxicity Value

<n<Jca)

(3)

2.2E»02 ca

5.3E»01 ca

3.9E-03 ca

3.0E+O5 nc

5.6E+03 nc

2.2E+06 nc

6.2E»02 a

6.2E+01 ca

6.2E+O2 CO

2.3E*05 nc

6.2E+03 ca

3.5E+04 ca

2.4E+04 ca

6.2E«04 ca

6.2E+01 ca

1.5E+04 nc

6.1E+05 m

2.3E+05 ne

2.7E+OS ro

6.2E+02 ca

5.6E+03 m

2.3E+05 ne

2.3E+05 n<

1.4E*06 nc

3.6E+04 nc

7.6E+03 m

3.1E+00 ne

3.9E-01 ca

5.4E+02 nc

1.5E»01 ne

3.7E+00 ru

NA

3.0E+01 nc

9.0E+02 n(

3.1E+02 nc

2.3E+03 nc

4.0E+01

NA

1.8E+02 nt

2.3E-OO nc

1.6E+02 nc

NA

3.9E+01 nc

3.9E+01 m

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Value

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Source

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

COPC

Rag

(Y/N)

YES

YES

YES

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

YES

NO

NO

YES

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

NO

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

NO

YES

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

Rationale for

Selection or

Deletion

(6)

ASL

ASL

ASL

BSL

BSL

BSL

ASL

ASL

ASL

BSL

Class

BSL

BSL

Class

ASL

BSL

BSL

BSL

BSL

ASL

BSL

BSL

BSL

BSL

BSL

ASL

ASL

ASL

BSL

BSL

ASL

Nut

BSL

BSL

BSL

ASL

ASL

Nut

ASL

ASL

BSL

Nut

BSL

BSL

App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/1B/2006 Page 1 of 2 10/16/2006


Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3: Operations Area Surface Soil

Scenario Timeframe: Current/Future

Medium: Surface Son

Exposure Medium: Surface Soil

Exposure

Point

Surface Soil

CAS

Number

7440-23-5

7440-82-2

7440-66-657-12-5

Chemical

Sodium

Vanadium

ZincCyanide

Minimum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)

150

23

250.65

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)

400

39

6100.65

Units

mg/kg

mg/kg

ma/kgmg/kg

Location

of Msxifnurn

Concentration

SSRM1

SSR-02

SSRI-11SSRI-11

Detection

Frequency

3 / 3

5 / 5

3 / 3

1 / 3

Range of

Detection

Limits

NA - MA

NA - NA

NA - NA0.58 - 0.6

Concentration

Used for

Screening

(2)

4.0E-H32

3.9E+01

6.1E+026.5E-01

Background

Value

NA

NA

NANA

Screening

Toxidty Value

(nc/ca)

(3)

NA

7.8E+00 nc

2.3E+03 nc1.2E+02 nc

Potent! si

ARAR/TBC

Value

NA

NA

NANA

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Source

NA

NA

NA

NA

COPC

Flag

(Y/N)

NO

YES

NO

NO

Rationale for

Selection or

Deletion

(6)

Nut

ASL

BSL

BSL

(1) Samples AOC-A, SSR-O1. SSR-02, SSRI-01. SSRI-02, SSRI-03, SSRI-O4, SSRHJ4, SSRI-05.SSRI-06. SSRI-O7. SSRI-07. SSRI-08. SSRI-09, SSRI-10, SSRI-11. SSRI-11, SSRH2, SSRI-13. SSRI-14.SWMU-12-24A, SWMU-12-24B, SWMU-12-24C, SWMU-12-24D. SWMU-12-24E, SWVU-12-24F. SVWIU-12-24G. SWMU-12-24H, SWMU-12-241, SWMU-17, SWMU-25, SWMU-31, SWMU-45.

(2) Maximum detected concentration used for screening, units adjusted to ug/kg for organics and mg/kg for inorganics.

(3) Screened against EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for residential soil adjusted to cancer benchmark = 1E-6 and HQ -0.1. The more conservative value of the combined cancer and combined hazard values (after adjustment) was used.Units adjusted to ug/kgfor organics and mg/kg for inorganics, http://www.epa.gov/region09/waste/sfund/prg/indexhtm

(5) Rationale Codes:

Selection Reason: ASL = Above Screening Level

Class = Member of a class of chemicals that is a COPC

BSL = Below Screening Level

Deletion Reason: NUT = Essential Nutrient

Toxicity value surrogates:Screening toxicity value for pyrene applied to benzo(g,h,Qperylene and phenanthreneScreening toxicity value for chromium VI applied to total chromium.

(8) Total PCBs calculated using one-half the practical quantitation limit for non-detected Arodors when at least one Arodor detected

Definitions: NA = Not Available

nc = Screening Toxdty Value is based on noncancer effects

ca = Screening Toxicity Value is based on cancer effects

COPC = Chemical of Potential Concern

ARAR/TBC = Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement/To Be Considered

TEQ = Toxic equivalents


TABLE B-2.2OCCURRENCE, DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN

Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3: South Landfill Surface Soil

Scenario Timeframe:

Medium:

Exposure Medium:

Current/Future

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Exposure

Point

South Landfil

CAS

Number

1336-38-3

Chemical

PCBs, Total (6)

Minimum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)226

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)348

Units

ug/kg

Location

of Maximum

Concentration

SSRM1

Detection

Frequency

3 / 4

Range of

Detection

Limits

37 - 88,000

Concentration

Used for

Screening

(2)

3.5E-KJ2

Background

Value

MA

SoeeransToxicity Value

(nc/ca)

(3)

2.2E+02 as

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Value

NA

PotenM

ARAR/TBC

Source

NA

COPC

Flag

(Y/N)

YES

Rationale for

Selection or

Deletion

(6J

ASL

(1) Samples SLGM-3A. SLGM-3B, SLGM-3C, SLGM-3D

(2) Maximum detected concentration used for screening, units adjusted to ug/kg for organics and mg/kg for inorganics.

(3) Screened against EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for residential soil adjusted to cancer benchmark = 1E-6 and HQ =0.1. The more conservative value of the combined cancer and combined hazard values (after adjustment) was used.Units adjusted to ug/kgfor organics and mg/kg for inorganics. http://www.epa.gov/region09/waste/sfunaypr9/indexhtrn

(5) Rationale Code:


(8) Total PCBs calculated using one-half the practical quan&tation limit for non-detected Aroclors when at least one Arodor detected


nc = Screening Toxcity Value is based on noncancer effects




App B RAGSD_RME Anniston: 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006


Anniston PCS Site, Operable Unit 3: Operations Area Subsurface Soil

Scenario Timeframe:

Medium:

Exposure Medium:

Current/Future

Subsurface Soil

Subsurface Soil

Exposure

Point

Operations

Area

CAS

Number

1336-38-3

298-OO-0

56-38-2

108-9O-7

75-09-2

7440-38-2

7440-39-3

7440-41-7

7440-43-9

7440-47-3

7440-48-4

7439-92-1

7439-96-5

7439-97-6

7440-O2-07440-82-2

Chemical

PCBs, Total (6)

Methyl parathion

Parathion

Chlorobenzene

Methylene chloride (Dichlororm

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Cadmium

Chromium

Cobalt

Lead

Manganese

Mercury

NickelVanadium

Minimum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)

157

49

58

8.8

33

3.1

22

0.62

0.73

7.4

2.2

15

88

0.032

5.79.7

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)

12,745,000

100

56

17

33

33

780

1

0.92

110

74

250

12.000

3.3

2,40093

Units

us/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

ug/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kgmg/kg

Location

of Maximum

Concentration

SSR-18

SSR-18

SSR-21

SSR-12

SSR-11

SSR-18

SSR-09

SSR-13

SSR-09

SSR-13

SSR-17

SSR-14

SSR-09

SSR-15

SSR-07SSR-19

Detection

Frequency

26 / 31

2 / 17

1 / 17

2 / 17

1 / 17

16 / 17

17 / 17

6 / 17

2 / 17

16 / 17

17 / 17

17 / 17

17 / 17

17 / 17

17 / 1717 / 17

Range of

Detection

Limits

39 - 930.000

18 - 49

37 - 56

4.2 - 7.1

4.2 - 33

12 - 12

NA - NA

0.49 - 6

0.49 - 6

12 - 12

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NA

NA - NANA - NA

Co ncc ntrati on

Used for

Screening

(2)

1.3E+07

1.0E+02

5.6E+01

1.7E+01

3.3E+01

3.3E+01

7.8E+02

1.0E+00

9.2E-01

1.1E*02

7.4E+01

2.5E+02

1.2E+04

3.3E+00

2.4E+039.3E+01

Background

Value

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Screening

Toxicity Value

(nc/ca)

(3)

2.2E+02 ca

1.5E+03 nc

3.7E*04 nc

1.5E+04 nc

9.1E+03 ca

3.9E-01 ca

5.4E*02 nc

1.5E+01 nc

3.7E+00 nc

3.0E+01 nc

9.0E+02 nc

4.0E+02

1.8E+02 nc

2.3E+OO nc

1.6E*02 nc7.8E+00 nc

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Value

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA •

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Source

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

COPC

Flag

(Y/N)

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

NO

NO

YES

NO

NO

YES

YES

YES

YES

Rationale for

Selection or

Deletion

(6)

ASL

BSL

BSL

BSL

BSL

ASL

ASL

BSL

BSL

ASL

BSL

BSL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

(1)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(6)

Samples SSR-03. SSR-04, SSR-05, SSR-O8, SSR-07. SSR-08. SSR-09, SSR-11. SSR-12, SSR-13, SSR-14, SSR-15. SSR-16. SSR-17. SSR-18, SSR-19. SSR-21, SSRI-01. SSRI-02. SSRI-03, SSRI-O4, SSRI-05, SSRI-08, SSRI-07. SSRI-08. SSRI-09. SSRI-10. SSRI-11, SSRI-12.SSRI-13, SSRI-14.

Maximum detected concentration used for screening, units adjusted to ug/kg for organics and mg/kg 'or inorganics.

Screened against EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for residential soil adjusted to cancer benchmark = 1E-6 and HQ =0.1. The more conservative value of the combined cancer and combined hazard values (after adjustment) was used.Units adju

Rationale Codes:


Class - Member of a class of chemicals that is a COPC



Toxicity value surrogates:Screening toxicity value for chromium VI epplied to total chromium.

Total PCBs calculated using one-half the practical quantilation limit for non-detected Aroclors when at least one Aroclor detected


nc - Screening Toxctty Value is based on noncancer effects



ARAR/TBC - Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement/To Be Considered

TEQ = Toxic equivalents



Anniston PCS Sits. Operable Unit 3: Operations Area Ambient Air

Scenario Timeframe:

Medium:

Exposure Medium:

Current/Future

Air

Air

Exposure

Point

Operations Area

CAS

Number

133B-36-3

Chemical

PCBs, Total (5)

Minimum

Conce ntration

(Qualifier)

(1)0.8

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)85.9

Units

ng/Kg

Location

of Maximum

Concentration

6-Near East

Detection

Frequency

24 / 24

Range of

Detection

Limits

NA - NA

Concentration

Used for

Screening

(2)

8.6E+01

Background

Value

NA

Screening

Toxicity Value

(nc/ca)

(3)3.4E+00 ca

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Value

NA

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Source

NA

COPC

Flag

(Y/N)

YES

Rationale for

Selection or

Deletion(5)

ASL

(1)(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Samples collected from April 15, 2003 through March 24, 2004

Maximum detected concentration used for screening.Screened against EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs)forairfor cancer benchmark = 1E-6

Rationale Code:


Total PCBs calculated using zero for non-detected homologs


nc = Screening Toxctry Value a based on noncancer effects




App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/1B/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006

en m cm; —I ?i •


Anniston PC8 Site. Operable Unit 3: South Landfill Ambient Air

Scenario Timeframa: Current/Future

Medium: Air

Exposure Medium: Air

Exposure

Point

South Landfil

CAS

Number

1336-36-3

Chemical

PCBs. Total (5)

Minimum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)0.1

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

d)10.2

Units

ng/kg

Location

of Maximum

Concentration

2-South

Detection

Frequency

16 / 24

Range of

Detection

Limits

NA • NA

Concentration

Used for

Screening

(2)

1.0E+01

Background

Value

NA

Screening

Toxidty Value

(nc/ca)

(3)

3.4E+00 ca

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Value

NA

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Source

NA

COPC

Flag

(Y7N)

YES

Rationale tor

Selection or

Deletion

W

ASL

(1) Samples collected from April 15. 2003 through March 24. 20O4

(2) Maximum detected concentration used for screening.(3) Screened against EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for air for cancer benchmark =

(4) Rationale Code:


(5) Total PCBs calculated using zero for non-detected homologs

1E-6



ca - Screening Toxicrty Value is based on cancer effects


ARAR/TBC « Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate RequjrememTTo Be Considered



Anniston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3: Site-Wide Groundwater

Scenario Timeframe: Future

Medium: Groundwater

Exposure Medium: Greundwater

Exposure

Point

Tap

CAS

Number

1336-36-3

298-OO-O

3689-24-5

56-38-2

58-89-9

60-57-1

100-02-7

126-68-1

50-32-8

205-99-2

207-08-9

53-70-3

193-39-5

87-86-5

88-06-2

92-52-4

106-46-7

108-90-7

120-62-1

124-48-1

127-16-4

156-59-2

56-23-5

67-66-3

71-43-2

75-27-4

79-01-6

79-34-5

7440-39-3

7440-41-7

7440-48-4

7439-96-5

7439-97-6

7440-02-0

7440-62-27440-66-6

CtwmtcaJ

PCB>, Total (6)

Methyl parathion

Sutfotepp

Parathion

gamma-BHC

Dleldrin

4-NItrophenol

O,O,O-Triethylphosphorothioate

Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(b)fluoranthene



lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

Pentachlorophenol


1,1'-6lphenyl

1,4-Olchlorobenzene

Chlorabenzene

1 ,2,4-Trfchloro benzene

Dibromochloromethane

Tetrachloroethylene

cls-1,2-Dichloroethene

Carbon tetrachlorlde

Chloroform

Benzene

Bromodichloromethane

Trichloroethylene

1 ,1 ,2,2-Tetracnloroethane

Barium

Beryllium

Cobalt

Manganese

Mercury .

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Minimum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

d)

2.6

1.4

59

0.25

0.1

0.075

24

3

2.5

2.1

2.8

2.4

0.73

1.4

9.4

170

2.6

2.5

0.8

0.8

3.1

9.1

2.5

27

0.8

2.0

3.4

0.7

13

0.2

1.9

21.0

0.14

2.7

2.09.9

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)

8.050

1.4

59

11,000

0.56

0.075

16.000

340

2.5

2.1

2.6

2.4

1.9

11

9

170

21

29

1,200

0.8

3.1

9.1

2.5

27

0.8

2.0

10

0.7

930

7.1

300

12,000

23

85

182,200

Unit!

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/Lug/L

Location

of Maximum

Concentration

OW-21A

OW-16A

OW-21A

OW-21A

OW-08A

OW-O8A

OW-21A

OW-21A

OW-08A

OW-OBA

OW-08A

OW-08A

OW-OBA

MW-20A

MW-20A

OW-16A

OWR-11

OWR-11

OW-16A

OW-16A

OW-18A

T-4

OW-10

OW-10

OW-16A

OW-10

OW-10

OW-08A

OW-10

OWR-11

OWR-11

OWR-12

OW-10

OWR-11

OWR-14DOW-10

Detection

Frequency

12 / 34

1 / 21

1 / 28

6 / 32

3 / 9

1 / 9

4 / 31

5 / 31

1 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

2 / 9

2 / 28

1 / 28

1 / 9

4 / 27

5 / 27

3 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

1 / 9

2 / 9

1 / 20

20 / 22

9 / 22

14 / 30

21 / 22

11 / 32

11 / 22

5 / 227 / 9

Range of

Detection

Limits

0.47 - 260

0.5 • 0.5

0.47 - 0.53

0.25 - 51

0.047 - 0.56

0.075 - 0.47

47 - 8000

3.4 - 1000

9.4 - 10

9.4 - 10

9.4 - 10

9.4 - 10

9.4 - 10

0.94 - 5000

9.4 - 1100

9.4 - 170

1 - 1100

1 - 29

1 - 11

1 - 1

1 - 1

1 - 9.1

1 • 1

1 - 1

0.77 - 1

1 - 2

1 - 10 .

1 - 2 0

0.01 - 0.18

0.00019 - 0.04

0.0076 - 0.014

0.033 - 0.66

0.00014 - 0.0013

0.004 - 0.4

. 0.004 - 0.10.02 - 0.81

Concentration

Used for

Screening

(2)

8.1E+03

1.4E+00

5.9E+01

1.1E+04

5.6E-01

7.5E-02

1.6E+O4

3.4E+02

2.5E+00

2.1E+00

2.6E+00

2.4E+00

1.96*00

1.16*01

9.4E+00

1.7E*02

2.1E*01

2.9E*01

1.2E+03

7.7E-01

3.1E+00

9.1E+00

2.5E*00

2.7E+01

7.7E-01

2.0E+00

1.0E+01

6.7E-01

9.3E+02

7.1E+00

3.0E+02

1.2E+04

2.3E+01

8.5E*01

1.8E+012.2E+03

Background

Value

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Screening

Toxidty Value

(nc/ca)

(3)

3.4E-02 ca

9.1E-01 nc

2.2E+01 nc

5.2E-02 ca

4.2E-03 ca

9.2E-03 ca

9.2E-02 ca

9.2E-01 ca

9.2E-03 ca

9.2E-02 ca

5.8E-01 ca

3.6E-01 nc

3.0E+01 nc

5.0E-01 ca

1.1E+01 nc

7.2E-01 nc

1.3E-01 ca

1.0E-01 ca

6.1E+00 nc

1.7E-01 ca

1.7E-01 ca

3.5E-01 ca

1.8E-01 ca

2.BE-O2 ca

5.5E-02 ca

2.6E+02 nc

7.3E+00 nc

7.3E+01 nc

8.8E+01 nc

1.1E*00 nc

7.3E*01 nc

3.6E*00 nc1.1E+03 nc

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Value

0.5

NA

NA

NA

0.2

NA

NA

NA

0.2

NA

NA

NA

NA

1

NA

NA

75

100

70

100

5

70

5

100

5

100

5

NA

2,000

4

NA

NA

2

NA

NANA

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Source

MCL

NA

NA

NA

MCL

NA

NA

NA

MCL

NA

NA

NA

NA

MCL

NA

NA

MCL

MCL

MCL

MCL'

MCL

MCL

MCL

MCL'

MCL

MCL'

MCL

NA

MCL

MCL

NA

NA

MCL

NA

NA

NA

COPC

Flag

(Y/N)

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

Rationale (or

Selection or

Deletion

(6)

ASL

ASL

NOSL

ASL

ASL

ASL

NOSL

NOSL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

>MCL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

ASL

(1)

(2)

(3)

Latest results from MW-07, MW-09A. MW-11A. MW-12A, MW-14. MW-15. MW-16. MW-20A, OW-07, OW-08A, OW-O9, OW-10. OW-16A. OW-21A, OWR-01D. OWR-01S, OWR-02D. OWR-04D, OWR-05D, OWR-06D. OWR-07D. OWR-10, OWR-11, OWR-12. OWR-13, OWR-14D. OWR-15D. T-1, T-3. T-4, WEL-01, WEL-02. WEL-03

Maximum detected concentration used for screening

Screened against EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for residential tap water adjusted to cancer benchmark = 1E-6 and HO =0.1. The more conservative value of the combined cancer and combined hazard values (after adjustment) was used.Units are ug/L





ARAR/TBC - Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement/To Be Considered

MCL = Maximum contaminant level

App B RAGSD.RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Pagel of 2


Annlston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3: Site-Wide Groundwater

irio Timeframe:

llMedlum:

I Exposure Medium:

Future

Groundwater

Groundwater

Exposure

Point

CAS

Number

Chemical Minimum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

(1)

Maximum

Concentration

(Qualifier)

d)

Units Location

of Maximum

Concentration

Detection

Frequency

Range of

Detection

Limits

Concentration

Used for

Screening

(2)

Background

Value

Screening

Toxicity Value

(nc/ca)

(3)

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Value

Potential

ARAR/TBC

Source

COPC

Flag

(Y7N)

Rationale for

Selection or

Deletion

(6)

(5) Rationale Codes:

Toxicity value surrogates:


>MCL = Present at greater than Maximum Contaminant Level

NO SL = No screening level



MCL' = Total trihalomethanes

TT = Treatment technique action level

(6)

Screening toxicity value for pyrene applied to benzo(g.h,i)peryleneScreening toxicity value for chromium VI applied to total chromium.

Total PCBs calculated using one-half the practical quantitation limit for non-detected Arodors when at least one Arodor detected

App B RAGSD.RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Page 2 of 2 10/18/2006

TABLE B-4.1.RME

VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS



Medium: Soil

Exposure Medium: Soil

ExposureRouts

IngesSon

ReceptorPopulation

She Worker

Trespasser /Visitor

O&M Worker

ConstructionWorker

ReceptorAfla

Adult

Adolescent

Adult

Adult

Exposure Point

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Subsurface Soil

ParameterCode

CS

CF

IR-S

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

IR-S

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

IR-S

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

IR-S

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

Parameter Definition

Chemical Concentration in Soil

Convention Factor

Ingestion Rate of Soil

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight

Averaging Time (Cancer)

Averaging Time (Noncancer)


Conversion Factor


Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight



RMEValue

See Tables B-3.1, B-2, B-3.3

1E-06

100

250

25

70

25,550

9,125

See Tables B-3.1.B-2, B-3.3

1E-06

100

SO

10

45

25,550

3,650

See Tables B-3.1, B-2. B-3.3

1E-06

100

12

25

70

25,550

9.125


1E-06

330

100

1

70

25.550

365

Units

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

days/year

years

kg

days

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

days/year

years

kg

days

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

days/year

years

kgdays

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

days/year

years

kg

days

days

RMERationale/Reference

See Tables B-3.1. B-2, B-3.3

-

EPA 2002

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1991. 1997, 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


-

professional judgment


EPA 1995

EPA 1995

EPA 19S9

EPA 1989


-

EPA 2002


EPA 1991. 1997. 2002

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989

See Tables B-3.1. B-2. B-3.3

-

EPA 2002



EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989

Intake Equation/Model Name

Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =

CS x CF x IR-S x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT




CS x CF x IR-S x EF x ED x 1/BW x 1/AT



App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 1 of 3 10/18/2006

TABLE B-4.1.RME




Medium: Soil


ExposureRoute

Derma]

ReceptorPopulation

Site Worker

Trespasser /Visitor

O&M Worker

ConstructionWorker

ReceptorAge

Adult

Adolescent

Adult

Adult

Exposure Point

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Subsurface Soil

ParameterCode

CS

CF

SA

AF

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

SA

AF

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

SA

AF

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

SA

AF

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N



Conversion Factor

Skin Surface Area Available for Contact

Adherence Factor

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Adherence Factor

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Adherence Factor

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Adherence Factor

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight



RMEValue

See Tables B-3. 1,8-2. B-3.3

1E-OB

3.300

0.2

See Table 4-1

250

25

70

25.550

9.125

See Tables B-3. 1.B-2. B-3.3

1E-08

5.700

0.2

See Table 4-1

50

10

45

25,550

3.650

See Tables B-3. 1.B-2. B-3.3

1E-08

3.300

0.2

See Table 4-1

12

25

70

25,550

9.125

See Tables B-3.1.B-2. B-3.3

1E-06

3.300

0.3

See Table 4-1

100

1

70

25.550

385

Units

mg/kg

kg/mg

cm1

mg/cm2

unttiess

days/year

years

'• kgdays

days

mg/kg

Kg/mg

cm1

mg/cm'

unitless

days/year

years

kg

days

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

cm2

mg/cm2

unitless

days/year

years

kg

days

days

mg/Xg

kg/mg

cm2

mg/cm2

unitless

days/year

years

kg

days

days


See Tables B-3.1.B-2. B-3.3

-

EPA1997, 2002.2004(1)

EPA 2002

See Table 4-1

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989

See Tables B-3. 1.B-2, B-3.3

-



EPA 1995


EPA 1995

EPA 1995

EPA 1969

EPA 1989


-

EPA1997. 2002,2004(1)

EPA 2002

See Table 4-1


EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989

See Tables B-3.1. B-2, B-3 3

-

EPA 1997. 2002 (1)

EPA 2002

See Table 4-1



EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989



CS x CF x SA x AF x ABS x EF x ED x

1/BWxl/AT


CSxCFxSAxAFxABSxEFxEDx

1/BWxl/AT



1/BW x 1/AT



1/8WX1/AT


TABLE B-4.1.RME




Medium: Son


ExposureRoute

Inhalation

Of fugitive

dust

ReceptorPopulation

Site Worker

Trespasser/Visitor

O&M Worker

ConstructionWorker

ReceptorAfle

Adult

Adolescent

Adult

Adult

Exposure Point

Air

Air

Air

Air

ParameterCode

CS

IR-A

£f

ED

PEF

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

IR-A

EF

ED

PEF

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

IR-A

EF

ED

PEF

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

IR-A

EF

ED

PEF

BW

AT-C

AT-N



Inhalation Rate of Air

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Paniculate Emission Factor

Body Weight

Averaging Tone (Cancer)




Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration


Body Weight


Averaging Tune (Noncancer)

Chemical Concentration in Son


Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration


Body Weight





Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration


Body Weight



RMEValue


20

250

25

1.36E+09

70

25,550

9,125


17

50

10

1.36E+09

45

25,550

3,650


20

12

25

1.36E+09

70

25,550

9,125


20

100

1

1.36E+09

70

25,550365

Units

mg/kg

m'/day

days/year

years

m'/kg

kg

days

days

mg/kg

m'/day

days/year

years

m'/kg

kg

days

days

mg/kg

m'/day

days/year

years

m3/kg

kg

days

days

mg/kg

m'/day

days/year

years

m'/kg

kg

days

days



EPA 1997, 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991

EPA 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1969

EPA 1989


EPA 1997


EPA 1995

EPA 2002

EPA 1995

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


EPA 1997. 2002


EPA 1991

EPA 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1969

EPA 1989


EPA 1997, 2002



EPA 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989



CS x IR-A x EFx ED x 1/PEF x

1/BWx1/AT

Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/Kg-day) =

CS x IR-A x EFx ED x 1/PEF x

1/BWx1/AT


CS x IR-A x EF x ED x 1/PEF x

1/BWxl/AT


CS x IR-A x EF x ED X 1/PEF x

1/BWx1/AT

RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure.

(1) Based on 50th percentile values for men and women (EPA 1997) for the following body pans, head, hands, and forearms.

Sources:

EPA 1989: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part A. OERR. EPA/540/1-89/002.

EPA 1991: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance. Standard Default Exposure Factors Interim Final. OSWER Directive 9285.6-03.

EPA 1992: Dermal Exposure Assessment Principles and Applications. Interim Report. ORD. EPA/600/8-91/011B.

EPA 1995."Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Region 4 Bulletins. Human Health Risk Assessment" November.

EPA 1997: Exposure Factors Handbook. Vol. 1: General Factors. ORD. EPA/600/P-95/002Fa.

EPA 2002: Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. OSWER 9355.4-24.

EPA 2004: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment Final. EPA/540/R/99/005.


TABLE B-4.2.RME


Annislon PCS Site, Operable Unit 3

Scenario Timeframe-. Future

Medium: Soil


Exposure

Route

Ingestion

Dermal

Receptor

Population

Resident

Resident

Resident

Receptor

Age

Child to Adult(LifetimeResident)

Child

(0-6 yrs)


Exposure Poin

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Parameter

Code

CS

IFs

BWc

BWa

IRc

IRa

EDc

EDtot

CF

Fl

EF

AT-C

CS

CF

IR-S

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

DF

BWc

BWa

SAc

SAa

EDc

EDtot

AFc

AFa

EF

ABS

CF

AT-C



ingestion factor (soil)

Body weight, child

Body weight, adult

Ingestion rate, child

ingestion rate, adult

Exposure duration, child

Exposure duration, total

Conversion factor

Fraction ingested from source

Exposure frequency


Chemical Concentration In Soil

Conversion factor


Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Dermal factor

Body weight, child

Body weight, adult

Surface area, child

Surface area, adult



Adherence factor (child)

Adherence factor (adult)

Exposure frequency

Absorption factor

Conversion factor

Averaging time (cancer)

RMEValue

See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3

114

15

70

200

100

6

30

0.000001

1

350

25.550


1E-06

200

350

6

15

25.550

2,190


361

15

70

2.600

5,700

6

30

0.2

0.07

350

Chem. Spec.

0.000001

25,550

Units

mg/kg

mg-yr/kg-day

kg

kg

mg/day

mg/day

years

years

kg/mg

unitless

days/year

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

days/year

years

kgdays

days

mg/kg

mg-yr/kg-d

kg

kgcm2

cm2/day

years

years

mg/cm2

mg/cm2

days/year

unitless

kg/mg

days

RME

Rationale/

Reference


EPA 1 991 b

EPA 1995

EPA 1995

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1991a

EPA 1991 a

-

Judgment

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1989


-

EPA 1991a

EPA1991a

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


EPA 19916

EPA 1995

EPA 1995

EPA 2004(1)

EPA 1997

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1995

EPA 1995

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1995

-

EPA 19893


IFs = (EDc x IRc / BWc) + (EDtot - EDc) X (IRa/BWa)

Chronic daily intake = CS x IFs x CF x Fl x EF x 1/AT


CS x CF x IR-S x EF x ED x 1/BW x 1/AT

DF = (EDc x SAc x AFc / BWc) +

(EDtot - EDc) x (SAa x AFa/BWa)

Chronic daily intake = CS x DF x CF x ABS x EF x 1/AT

App B_Tab4s Anniston Pagel of 3 10/18/2006

TABLE B-4.2.RME



Scenario Tcmeframe; Future

Medium: Soil

((Exposure Medium: Soil

ExposureRoute

Dermal

Inhalation

of fugitive

dust

ReceptorPopulation

Resident

Resident

Resident

ReceptorAge

Child

(0-6 yrs)


Child

(0-6 yrs)

Exposure Poin

Surface Soil

Air

Air

ParameterCode

CS

CF

SA

AF

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CA

IFa

BWc

BWa

IRc

IRa

EDc

EDtot

CF

EF

AT-C

CA

IR-A

EF

ED

CF

BW

AT-C

AT-N



Conversion factor


Adherence Factor

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight



Chemical Concentration in Air

Inhalation factor (air)

Body weight, child

Body weight, adult

Inhalation rate, child

Inhalation rate, adult



Conversion factor

Exposure frequency

Averaging time (cancer)

Chemical Concentration in Air


Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Conversion factor

Body Weight



RMEValue


0.000001

2,800

0.2

See Table 4-1

350

6

15

25.550

2.190


10.9

15

70

10

20

6

30

0.000001

350

25.550


10

350

6

0.000001

15

25,550

2,190

Units

mg/kg

kg/mg

cm2

mg/cm2

unities:

days/year

years

kg

days

days

ng/m3

m3-yr/kg-day

kg

kg

m'/day

m'/day

years

years

mg/ng

days/year

days

mg/kg

m3/day

days/year

years

mg/ng

kg

days

days



-

EPA 2004(1)

EPA 2004

See Table 4-1

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


EPA 1 991 b

EPA 1995

EPA 1995

EPA 1997

EPA 1997

EPA1991a

EPA1991a

-

EPA 1991 a

EPA1989a


EPA 1997

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1991 a

-

EPA 1991 a

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


Chronic Dairy Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =

CS x CF x SA x AF x ABS x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT

IFa = (EDc x IRc / BWc) + (EDtot - EDc) x (IRa/BWa)

Chronic daily intake = CA x IFa x EF x CF x 1/AT


CA x IR-A x EF x ED x CF x 1/BW x 1/AT


(1) Based on the 50th percentile values for males and females (<1 to <6 years old) for the following body parts: head, hands, forearms, lower legs and feet.

Sources:

EPA 1989: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part A. OERR. EPA/540/1 -89/002.

EPA 1991 a: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance, Standard Default Exposure Factors. Interim Final. OSWER Directive 9285.6-03.

EPA 1991b. Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part B: Development of Risk-Based Preliminary Remediation Goals," OSWER Directive 9285.7-01B, December 13.


TABLE B-4.2.RME



Erio Timeframe: Future

m: Soil

ure Medium: Soil

ExposureRoute

ReceptorPopulation

ReceptorAge

Exposure Poin

«r

ParameterCode

Parameter Definition RMEValue

Units RMERationale/Reference


EPA 1995.'Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Region 4 Bulletins. Human Health Risk Assessment" November.

EPA 1997: Exposure Factors Handbook. Vol. 1: General Factors. ORD. EPA/600/P-9S/002Fa.


EPA 2004: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment Final. EPA/540/R/99/005.


TABLE B-4.3.RMEVALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS


Scenario Timeframe: Future

Medium: Groundwater

Exposure Medium: Groundwater

ExposureRoute

Ingestion

Dermal andInhalation atShowemead

ReceptorPopulation

Resident

Resident

ReceptorAge


Child

(Wiyrs)


Child

(Wyrs)

Exposure Point

Tap Water

Tap Water

Tap Water

Tap Water

ParameterCode

CW

CF

IFw

EF

AT-C

CW

CF

IRw

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CW

CF

IFw

EF

AT-C

CW

CF

IRw

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N


Chemical Concentration tn Water

Conversion Factor

Ingestion Factor

Exposure Frequency


Chemical Concentration in Water

Conversion Factor

Ingestion Rate of Water

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor

Ingestion Factor

Exposure Frequency



Conversion Factor

Ingestion Rate of Water

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight



RMEValue

See Table B-3.4

0.001

1.09

350

25.550

See Table B-3.4

0.001

1

350

6

15

25.550

2.190

See Table B-3.4

0.001

1.09

350

25,550

See Table B-3.4

0.001

1

350

6

15

25,550

2.190

Units

ug/L

mg/ug

L-yr/kg-d

daysfyear

days

ug/L

mg/ug

L/day

days/year

years

kgdays

days

ug/L

mg/ug

L-yr/kg-d

daysfyear

days

ug/L

mgAjg

L/day

days/year

years

kg

days

days


See Table B-3.4

EPA 1991

EPA 1991

EPA 1989

See Table B-3.4

-

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991

EPA 1991

EPA 1991

EPA 1989

EPA 1989

See Table B-3.4

EPA 1991 a and b

EPA 1991

EPA 1989

See Table B-3.4

-

EPA 1991 a and b. 2002

EPA 19913

EPA 1991 a

EPA 19913

EPA 19913

EPA 19913



CWx IFw x CF x EF x 1/AT

Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) -

CWx CF1 X IRw x EF X ED x 1/BW x 1/AT


CW x IFw xCFxEFx 1/AT


CWx CF1 x IRw X EF X ED X 1/BWx I/AT


Sources:EPA 1989: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual. Part A. OERR. EPA/540/1-89/002.

EPA 1991 a: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual. Supplemental Guidance. Standard Default Exposure Factors. Interim Final. OSWER Directive 9285.6-03.

EPA 1991b: Guidance on Estimating Exposure to VOCs During Showering, Office ol Research and Development. July 10,1991.

EPA 2002: Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook. NCEA-W; EPA/600/P-00-002B.


TABLE B-4ARME

MODIFIED VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS



Medium: Soil


ExposureRoute

Ingestion

ReceptorPopulation

Site Worker

Trespasser/Visitor

O4M Worker

ReceptorAge

Adult

Adolescent

Adult

Exposure Point

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

ParameterCode

CS

CF

IR-S

IAF

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

IR-S

IAF

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

IR-S

IAF

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N



Conversion Factor


Intestinal Absorption Factor for PCBs and As

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor



Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor



Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight



ModifiedValue

See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5 '.

1E-06

50

0.3

250

25

70

25,550

9,125

See Tables B-3.1 - B-3-5

1E-06

100

0.3

60

10

45

25,550

3,650

See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5

1E-06

50

0.3

50

25

70

25.550

9.125

Units

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

unitless

days/year

years

Kg

days

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

unitless

days/year

years

kg

days

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

unitless

days/year

years

kg

days

days

Modified ValuesRationale/Reference

Sea Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5

-

RFI/CS Report; EPA 1991

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report; EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991, 1997, 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


-

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report


EPA 1995

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


-

RFI/CS Report EPA 1991

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report

EPA 1991, 1997.2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


Chronic Dally Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =

CS x CF x IR-S x IAF x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT


CS X CF X IR-S x IAF x EF x ED X 1/BW X 1/AT

Chronic Dally Intake (CDI) (mg/Xg-day) =



TABLE B-4.4.RME

MODIRED VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS



Medium: Soil


ExposureRoute

Ingestion

Dermal

ReceptorPopulation

ConstructionWorker

Site Worker

Trespasser/Visitor

ReceptorAge

Adult

Adult

Adolescent

Exposure Point

Subsurface Soil

Surface Soil

Surface Soil

ParameterCode

CS

CF

IR-S

IAF

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

SA

AF

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

SA

AF

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N



Conversion Factor



Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Adherence Factor

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Adherence Factor

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight



ModifiedValue

See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5

1E-06

•480

0.3

120

1

70

25,550

365


1E-06

2.290

0.2

See Table 4-2

250

25

70

25,550

9,125


1E-06

5,300

0.04

See Table 4-2

60

10

45

25.550

3,650

Units

mg/kg

kg/mg

mg/day

unffless

days/year

years

kgdays

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

cnfmg/crr?

witless

days/year

years

kg

days

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

cm2

mg/cm7

unitless

days/year

years

kg

days

days



-

RFI/CS Report EPA^991

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


-



See Table 4-1

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989

See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5_



EPA 1995

RFI/CS Report

EPA 1995

EPA 1995

EPA 1989

EPA 1989





CS x CF x SA x AF X ABS x EF X ED x

1/BWX1/AT


CSxCFxSAxAFxABSxEFxEDx

1/BWxl/AT


TABLE B-4.4.RME


Amiston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3

Scenario Timetrame: Cuirent/Future

Medium: Soil


ExposureRoute

Dermal

Inhalation

of fugitive

dust

ReceptorPopulation

O&M Worker

ConstructionWorker

Site Worker

ReceptorAge

Adult

Adult

Adult

Exposure Point

Surrace Soil

Subsurface Soil

Air

ParameterCode

CS

CF

SA

SA«

AF«

SA»

AFM

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

CF

SA

SA*,

AFM

SA™

AFM

ABS

EF

ED

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

IR-A

EF

ED

. PEF

BW

AT-C

AT-N


Chemical Concentration In SoD

Conversion Factor


Exposed Surface Area - Adult Head

Adherence Factor (head)

Exposed Surface Area - Adult Hands

Adherence Factor (hands)

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight




Conversion Factor


Exposed Surface Area - Adult Head

Adherence Factor (head)

Exposed Surface Area - Adult Hands

Adherence Factor (hands)

Absorption Factor

Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration

Body Weight





Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration


Body Weight



ModifiedValue


1E-06

2,290

1,300

0.004

990

0.046

See Table 4-2

50

25

70

25,550

9.125


1E-06

2,290

1,300

0.029

990

0.24

See Table 4-2

120

1

70

25,550

365


20

250

25

1.36E+09

70

25,550

9.125

Units

mg/kg.

kg/mg

cm1

cm2

mg/cnr'

cm1

mglcnf

uniUess

days/year

years

kgdays

days

mg/kg

kg/mg

cm*

crrf

mg/cnf

cm2

mg/cnf

unltless

daystyear

years

kgdays

days

mg/kg

rrrVday

days/year

years

nr'/yg

kg

days •

days

Modified ValuesRationale/R&ferencB


-






See Table 4-1

RFI/CS Report

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989

See Tables B-3.1 - B-3-5_






See Table 4-1

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA .1909


EPA 1997, 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1991

EPA 2002

EPA 1991, 2002

EPA 1889

EPA 1989


Chronic Daily Intake (GDI) (mg/kg-day) =

CS x CF x (SAhd x AFhd * SA« x AF.J x ABS x EF x ED x

1/BWxl/AT


CS x CF x (SAhd x AFhd * SA« x AF ,̂) x ABS x EF x ED x

1/BWxl/AT


CS xlR,AxEFxEDx1/PEFx

1/BWxl/AT


TABLE B-4.4.RME




Medium: Soil


ExposureRoute

Inhalation

ol fugitive

dust

ReceptorPopulation

Trespasser/Visitor

O&M Worker

ConstructionWorker

ReceptorAge

Adolescent

Adult

Adult

Exposure Point

Air

Air

Air

ParameterCode

CSIR-A

EF

ED

PEF

BW

AT-CAT-N

CS

IR-A

EF

ED

PEF

BW

AT-C

AT-N

CS

IR-A

EF

ED

PEF

BW

AT-C

AT-N




Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration


Body Weight





Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration


Body Weight





Exposure Frequency

Exposure Duration


Body Weight

Averaging Time (Cancer)Averaging Time (Noncancer)

ModifiedValue

See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-S

17

60

10

1.36E+09

45

25,550

3.650


20

50

25

1.36E+09

70

25.550

9.125


20

120

1

1.36E+09

70

25,550365

Units

mg/kg

rrf/day

days/year

years

nrrVkg

K9days

days

mg/kg

rrf/day

days/year

years

rrr'/Xg

kgdays

days

mg/kgnrVday

days/year

years

rrrVkg

kg

daysdays



EPA 1997

RFI/CS Report

EPA 1995

EPA 2002

EPA 1995

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


EPA 1997. 2002

RFI/CS Report

EPA 1991

EPA 2002

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989

EPA 1989


EPA 1997. 2002

RFI/CS Report

RFI/CS Report

EPA 2002

EPA 1991. 2002

EPA 1989EPA 1989



CS xlR^kxEFxEDx1/PEFx

1/BWx1/AT


CS xlR-AxEFxEDx1/PEFx

1/BWxl/AT


CS xlR^AxEFxEDx1/PEFx

1/BWxl/AT

Sources:

EPA 1989: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Part A. OERR. EPA/540/1 -89/002.

EPA 1991: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance, Standard Default Exposure Factors. Interim Final. OSWER Directive 9285.6-03.

EPA 1992: Dermal Exposure Assessment Principles and Applications. Interim Report. ORD. EPA/600/8-91/D11B.

EPA 1995."Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Region 4 Bulletins. Human Health Risk Assessment' November.

EPA 1997: Exposure Factors Handbook. Vol. 1: General Factors. ORD. EPA«00/P-95/002Fa.

EPA 2001: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance, Dermal Risk Assessment Interim Guidance. EPA/540/R/99/005.


EPA 2004: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual. Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment Final. EPA/540/R/99/005.

RFI/CS Report RFI/CS Reportfor the Anniston Alabama Facility. October 2002.


TABLE B-5.1NON-CANCER TOXICITY DATA - ORAL/DERMAL

Amiston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3

(4

(5.

(6)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern (1)

PCBs, Total

Sutfotepp

Paralhion

gamma-BHC

Dioxin TEQ

*-Nitrophenol

0,O,O-Triethytphosphorothioate

Benzo(8)anthrBcene

Benzo(a)pyrerie



Chrysene




Chlorobenzene



rrichloroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

Cobalt

IronLead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Chronic/

Subchronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

ChronicHA

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

ChronicNA

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

OralRfD

Value

2.0E-05

Pending

6.0E-03

3.0E-04

NA

Pending

Pending

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA1.0E-04

2.0E-02

1.0E-02

1.0E-02

3.0E-041.0E+00

4.0E-04

3.0E-04

2.0E-01

1.0E-03

3.0E-03

2.0E-02

3.0E-01

NA

1.4E-01

3.0E-04

2.0E-02

7.0E-03

3.0E-01

Units

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-daymg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-daymg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day.

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NAmg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

Oral Absorption


100%

100%

100%

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

15%

95%

7%

3%

3%

100%

100%

NA

4%

100%

4%

3%100%

Absorbed RfD for Dermal (2)

Value

2.0E-05

6.0E-03

3.0E-04

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1.0E-04

2.0E-02

1.0E-02

1.0E-02

3.0E-04

1.0E-KJO

6.0E-OS

2.9E-04

1.4E-02

2.5E-05

7.5E-05

2.0E-02

3.0E-01

NA

5.6E-O33.0E-04

8.0E-04

1.8E-04

3.0E-01

Units

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg/day

mg/kg-day

NA

mg/kg/day

mg/kg/day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg/day

mg/kg-day

Primary

Target

Organ(s)

Eye/Skin/Nails

Liver and kidney

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

MA

NA

Liver

Adrenals

NOAEL

L'wetfKidneyfFetus

Gl Tract/CNS

Whole Body/Blood

Skin

Nerves

Kidney

NA

Porycythemia

Gl Tract/Liver

NA

CNS

Autoimmune effects

Whole Body

Lungs

Deer. ESOD activity

Combined

Uncertainty/Modifying

Factors

300

1000

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1000

1000

3000

3000

100

1000

3300

10

900

10

1

NA

1

1000

300

100

3

RfD: Target Organ(s)

Souroa(s)

IRIS

HEAST

IRIS

HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS / HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

HEAST

IRIS

Date(s)(3)

(MM/DD/YYYY)

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/2006

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

11/10/2003

10/2512004

05/01/2002

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

07/24/2001

05/0 1/2002

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/2006





ESOD = Erythrocyte superoxide dismutase

NOAEL - No observed adverse effect level

(1) Toxictiy values shown include COPCs in surface soil, subsurface soil, and groundwater COPCs found in latest results from MW-07. MW-09A, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-20A, MW-21A, and T-4.

(2) The dermal RfD was assumed to equal the oral RfD, unless en adjustment factor was found in Exhibit 4.1 of RAGS-E (EPA 2001b).

(3) IRIS values were confirmed against the EPA's online database. May 2006.

(4) The RfD for total PCBs based on Arodor 1254

(5) The RfD for hexavalent chromium has been applied to total chromium.

(6) The RfD for mercuric chloride has been applied to mercury

App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006

TABLE B-5.2

NON-CANCER TOXICITY DATA - INHALATION


w

(5)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern (1)

PCBs, Total

SuKotepp

Parathion

jamma-BHC

DtoxinTEQ4-Nrtrophenol

O.O.O-TriethylphosphorothioateBenzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(b)nuoranthene

Benzo(k)fluoranUiene

ChryseneDibenz(a,h)anthracene

lndeno(1.2,3-cd)pyrene

2,4,6-Triehlorophenol

Chlorobenzene

1 .2.4-Trichlorobenzene


rrichloroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

Cobalt

Iron

Lead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Chronic/

Subchronic

NA

Pending

Chronic

Chronic

NA

Pending

Pending

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

NA

Chronic

Chronic

Chronic

NA

NA

Inhalation RfC

Value

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

5.0E-03

4.0E-05

NA

NA

2.0E-04

1.0E-04

NA

NA

NA

5.0E-05

3.0E-04

9.00E-05

NA

NA

Units

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/m3

mg/m3

NA

NA

mg/m3

mg/m3

NA

NA

NA

mg/m3

mg/m3

mg/m3

NANA

Extrapolated RfD (2)

Value

NA

6.0E-03

3.0E-04

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1.0E-04

1.7E-02

1.0E-03

1.0E-02

1.0E-02

1.4E-03

1.1E-05

NA

NA

S.7E-05

2.9E-05

NA

NA

NA

1.4E-05

8.6E-OS

2.6E-05

NA

NA

Units

NA

mg/kg-day

m'g/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NA

NA

NA

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

mg/kg-day

NANA

Primary

Target

Organ(s)

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

CNS

Lungs

NA

NA

NA

Lungs

NA

NA

NA

CNS

CNS

NA

NA

NA

Combined

Uncertainty/

Modifying Factors

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1000

1000

NA

NA

NA

300

NA

NA

NA

1000

30

NA

NANA

RfC

Target Organ(s)

Source(s)

IRIS / HEAST

Route

Route

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

Route

NCEA

NCEA

Route

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS / HEAST

IRIS

NCEA

IRIS

NCEA

HEAST

IRIS / HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS/HEAST

IRIS

Date(s) (3)

(MM/DD/YYYY)

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/20065/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

10/25/2004

1/22/2003

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

3/10/2003

1/22/2003

7/24/2001

1997

1/22/2003

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

5/24/2006

1/22/2003

5/24/2006




RfC = Reference concentration



(1) Toxictiy values shown include COPCs in surface soil, subsurface soil, and groundwater COPCs found in latest results from MW-07, MW-09A, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-20A, MW-21A, and T-4.

(2) Inhalation RfDs were calculated from Inhalation RfCs assuming a 70 kg individual has an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day.(USEPA Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Part A; December 1989).

(3) IRIS values were confirmed against the EPA's online database. May 2006

(4) The RfC information for hexavalent chromium has been applied to total chromium

(5) The RfC for elemental mercury has been applied to mercury

App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006

TABLE B-6-1CANCER TOXICITY DATA - ORAL/DERMAL


(3)

(3)

(3)(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern

PCBs, Total

Sulfotepp

Parathion

gamma-BHC

DioxinTEQ

4-Nitrophenol

O.O.O-Triethytphosphorcrthioate

Benzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(b)fluorBnthene


Chrysene

Dibenz(a,h)anthraccne


2,4,6-Trichtoropheno!

Chlorobenzene



Trichloroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

Cobalt

Iron

Lead

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Oral Cancer Slope Factor

Value

2.0E+00

Pending

MA

1.3E+00

1.5E-KI5

Pending

Pending

7.3E-01

7.3E+00

7.3E-01

7.3E-02

7.3E-03

7.3E-KX3

7.3E-01

1.1E-02MA

NA

MA

4.0E-01

NA

HA

1.5E+00

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Units

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

(mg/kg/day)-l

(mg/kg/day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(m|}/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Oral Absorption


100%

NA

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

NA

NA

NA

100%

NA

NA

95%

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Absorbed Cancer Slope Factor

for Dermal (1)

Value

2.0E+00

NA

1.3E+00

1.5E+05

7.3E-01

7.3E-KX)

7.3E-01

7.3E-02

7.3E-03

7.3E+00

7.3E-01

1.1E-02NA

NA

NA

4.0E-01

NA

NA

1.6E+00

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Units

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

(mg/kg/day)-1

(mg/kg/day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/k9-day)-1

(mg/kg-day}-1

NA

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NANA

Weight of Evidence/

Cancer Guideline

Description

B2

C

NA

NA

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

D

D

D

B1

D

D

A

D

D

D

D

NA

B2

D

C

NA

NA

D

Oral CSF

Source(s)

IRIS

IRIS

HEAST

HEAST

NCEA

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

HEAST

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS /HEAST

IRIS/ HEAST

IRIS

Date(s)(2)

05/24/2006

5/31/2006

1997

1997

OS/01/2001

05/24/2006

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

01/24/2003

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/200611/1 MOOS

10/25/2004

1/22/2003

1/22/2003

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

07/24/2001

1997

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/200605/24/2006



CSF - Cancer slope factor

(1) The dermal CSF was assumed to equal the oral CSF, unless an adjustment factor was found in Exhibit 4.1ofRAGS-E(EPA2001b).


(3) The Oral Cancer Slope Factors for PAHs derived using the relative potency approach (USEPA. 1993.Provisional Guidance for Quantitative Assessment of Potycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons; EPA/600/R-93/089).



B1 - Probable human carcinogen - tndtcales that limited human data are available.







TABLE B-6-2CANCER TOXlCtTY DATA - INHALATION


(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

Chemical

of Potential

Concern

PCBs, Total

Sulfotepp

Psrathion

gamma-BHC

Dtoxin TEQ

4-Nrtrophenol

O,O,0-Triethytphosphorothioate

Benzo(a)anthraceneBenzo(a)pyrene


Benzo(k)fluorantheneChryseneDibenz(a,h)anthracen8

lndeno(1 .2.3-cd)pyrene


Chlorobenzene



rrichtoroethylene

Aluminum

Antimony

ArsenicBanum

Cadmium (food)

Chromium

CobaltIron

LeadManganese

Mercury

Nickel

VanadiumZinc

Unit Risk

Value

1.0E-04

Pending

NA

NA

NA

Pending

Pending

NA

8.9E-04

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

3.1E-06NA

NA

NA

1.1E-04

NA

NA

4.3E-03NA

1.8E-03

1.2E-02NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Units

(ug/m3)-1

NA

NA

NA

NA

(ug/m3)-1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

(ug/m3)-1

NA

NA

NA

(ug/m3)-1

NA

NA

(pg/mSMNA

(ug/m3}-1

(ug/m3)-1NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Inhalation Cancer Slope Factor (1 )

Value

3.5E-01

NA

1.3E+00

1.SE+OS

3.1E-013.1E+00

3.1E-01

3.1E-02

3.1E-03

3.1E+00

3.1E-01

1.1E-02

NA

NA

NA

4.0E-01

NA

NA

1.5E+01NA

6.3E-K10

4.2E+01NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Units

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

(mg/kg/day)-1

(ma/kg/dayM

(mg/kg-dayM

(mg/kg-day)-!(mg/kg-day)-1


(mg/kg-day)-1


NA

NA

NA

(mg/kg-day)-1

NA

NA

(mg/kg-dayHNA

(mg/kg-day)-1

(mg/kg-day)-1NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

weight of Evidence/

Cancer Guideline

Description

B2

NA

NA

NA

B2B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

B2

D

D

D

B1

D

B1

A

0

B1

A

D

D

82

D

C

D

D

0

Unit Risk: Inhalation CSF

Source(s)

IRIS

HEAST

RouteHEAST

IRISNCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEANCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

NCEA

IRISIRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRISNCEA

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRIS

IRISIRIS

Date(s)(2)

05/24/2006

1997

05/24/20061997

05/24/20061/22/2003

1/24/20031/24/2003

1/24/2003

1/24/2003

1/24/2003

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

11/10/2003

10/25/20041/22/2003

1/22/2003

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/200605/24/2006

05/24/2006

10/25/200405/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/2006

05/24/200605/24/2006



HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables: July 1997


(1) Inhalation CSFs were calculated from unit risks assuming a 70 Kg individual has an inhalation rate of 20 m3/day.

(2) IRIS values were confirmed against the EPA's online database. May 2006

(3) The Inhalation Cancer Slope Factors for PAHs derived using the relative potency approach in EPA's 1993Provisional Guidance for Quantitative RiskAssessment of Polycydic Aromatic Hydrocarbons; EPA/EOO/R-93/089.

(4) The cancer slope factor for hexavatent chromium have been applied to total chromium.










'FINAL PATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE BASELINE …PATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE BASELINE RISK...

Documents

Transcript of 'FINAL PATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE BASELINE …PATHWAYS ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE BASELINE RISK...