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
Section 2Site Background and Setting
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
Section 2Site Background and Setting
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
Site Characterization Summary
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
Section 3Human Exposure Pathways
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
Section 3Human Exposure Pathways
• 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
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
Trespassers may have exposed skin surfaces come into contact with soil
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.
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.
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
SELECTION OF EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
Anniston PCS Site, Operable Unit 3
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
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
Section 4Exposure Assessment
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
Section 4Exposure Assessment
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
Section 4Exposure Assessment
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
Section 4Exposure Assessment
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
Section 4Exposure Assessment
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
Section 4Exposure Assessment
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
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
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
Text tables; 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 1
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
Section 5Toxicity Assessment
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
Section 5Toxicity Assessment
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
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
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
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
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
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
(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
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
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
NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment
IRIS = Integrated Risk Information System
HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables; July 1997
RfC = Reference concentration
RfD = Reference dose
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
Anniston PCS Site, Operable Unit 3
(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
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
lndeno(1.2,3-cd)pyrene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichtorobenzene
cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
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
NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment
HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables; July 1997
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).
(2) IRIS values were confirmed against the EPA's online database, May 2006
(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
Text tables; 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 1
TABLE 5-4CANCER TOXICITY DATA - INHALATION
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
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
lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
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
NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment
IRIS = Integrated Risk Information System
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.
(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 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:
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 noncarcinogenicity
Text tables; 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 1
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
Annlston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
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
Site Characterization Summary
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
Site Characterization Summary
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
SELECTION OF EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
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
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 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
Trespassers may have exposed skin surfaces come into contact with soil
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.
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.
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
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston: 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 2
TABLE B-1
SELECTION OF EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
Anniston PCS Site, Operable Unit 3
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
Residents may inhale fugitive dust
Residents may inhale fugitive dust
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
TABLE B-2.1OCCURRENCE. DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
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
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2008 Page 2 of 2
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:
Selection Reason: ASL = Above Screening Level
(8) Total PCBs calculated using one-half the practical quan&tation limit for non-detected Aroclors when at least one Arodor detected
Definitions: NA = Not Available
nc = Screening Toxcity 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
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston: 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006
TABLE B-2.3OCCURRENCE, DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
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:
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 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
Definitions: NA = Not Available
nc - Screening Toxctty 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
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2008 Page 1 of 1
TABLE B-2.4OCCURRENCE. DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
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:
Selection Reason: ASL = Above Screening Level
Total PCBs calculated using zero for non-detected homologs
Definitions: NA = Not Available
nc = Screening Toxctry Value a 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
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/1B/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006
en m cm; —I ?i •
TABLE B-2.5OCCURRENCE. DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
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:
Selection Reason: ASL = Above Screening Level
(5) Total PCBs calculated using zero for non-detected homologs
1E-6
Definitions: NA = Not Available
nc = Screening Toxcity Value is based on noncancer effects
ca - Screening Toxicrty Value is based on cancer effects
COPC = Chemical of Potential Concern
ARAR/TBC « Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate RequjrememTTo Be Considered
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2008 Page 1 of 1
TABLE B-2.7OCCURRENCE, DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
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
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Pentachlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
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
Definitions: NA = Not Available
nc = Screening Toxcity 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
MCL = Maximum contaminant level
App B RAGSD.RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Pagel of 2
TABLE B-2.7OCCURRENCE, DISTRIBUTION AND SELECTION OF CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
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:
Selection Reason: ASL = Above Screening Level
>MCL = Present at greater than Maximum Contaminant Level
NO SL = No screening level
Deletion Reason: NUT = Essential Nutrient
BSL = Below 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
Anniston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe: Current/Future
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)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
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
See Tables B-3.1, B-2, B-3.3
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
See Tables B-3.1. B-2, B-3.3
-
professional judgment
professional judgment
EPA 1995
EPA 1995
EPA 19S9
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1. B-2, B-3.3
-
EPA 2002
professional judgment
EPA 1991. 1997. 2002
EPA 1991. 2002
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1. B-2. B-3.3
-
EPA 2002
professional judgment
professional judgment
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
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x IR-S x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x IR-S x EF x ED x 1/BW x 1/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x IR-S x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 1 of 3 10/18/2006
TABLE B-4.1.RME
VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Anniston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe: Current/Future
Medium: Soil
Exposure 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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Adherence Factor
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Adherence Factor
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Adherence Factor
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Adherence Factor
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
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
RMERationale/Reference
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
-
professional judgment
professional judgment
EPA 1995
professional judgment
EPA 1995
EPA 1995
EPA 1969
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1. B-2. B-3.3
-
EPA1997. 2002,2004(1)
EPA 2002
See Table 4-1
professional judgment
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
professional judgment
professional judgment
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
Intake Equation/Model Name
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x SA x AF x ABS x EF x ED x
1/BWxl/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CSxCFxSAxAFxABSxEFxEDx
1/BWxl/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x SA x AF x ABS x EF x ED x
1/BW x 1/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x SA x AF x ABS x EF x ED x
1/8WX1/AT
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 2 of 3 10/13/2008
TABLE B-4.1.RME
VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Anniston PCS Site, Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe: Current/Future
Medium: Son
Exposure Medium: Soil
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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
Body Weight
Averaging Tone (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Tune (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Son
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
RMEValue
See Tables B-3.1, B-2, B-3.3
20
250
25
1.36E+09
70
25,550
9,125
See Tables B-3.1, B-2. B-3.3
17
50
10
1.36E+09
45
25,550
3,650
See Tables B-3.1, B-2. B-3.3
20
12
25
1.36E+09
70
25,550
9,125
See Tables B-3.1, B-2, B-3.3
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
RMERationale/Reference
See Tables B-3.1. B-2, B-3.3
EPA 1997, 2002
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1991
EPA 2002
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1969
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1. B-2. B-3.3
EPA 1997
professional judgment
EPA 1995
EPA 2002
EPA 1995
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1. B-2. B-3.3
EPA 1997. 2002
professional judgment
EPA 1991
EPA 2002
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1969
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1. B-2, B-3.3
EPA 1997, 2002
professional judgment
professional judgment
EPA 2002
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
Intake Equation/Model Name
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
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
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x IR-A x EF x ED x 1/PEF x
1/BWxl/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
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.
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 3 of 3 10/18/2006
TABLE B-4.2.RME
VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Annislon PCS Site, Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe-. Future
Medium: Soil
Exposure Medium: Soil
Exposure
Route
Ingestion
Dermal
Receptor
Population
Resident
Resident
Resident
Receptor
Age
Child to Adult(LifetimeResident)
Child
(0-6 yrs)
Child to Adult(LifetimeResident)
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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration in Soil
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
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Chemical Concentration In Soil
Conversion factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Dermal factor
Body weight, child
Body weight, adult
Surface area, child
Surface area, adult
Exposure duration, child
Exposure duration, total
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
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
1E-06
200
350
6
15
25.550
2,190
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
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
See Tables B-3.1, B-2, B-3.3
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
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
-
EPA 1991a
EPA1991a
EPA 1991 a
EPA 1991 a
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1, B-2, B-3.3
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
Intake Equation/Model Name
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
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
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
VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Annlston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
Scenario Tcmeframe; Future
Medium: Soil
((Exposure Medium: Soil
ExposureRoute
Dermal
Inhalation
of fugitive
dust
ReceptorPopulation
Resident
Resident
Resident
ReceptorAge
Child
(0-6 yrs)
Child to Adult(LifetimeResident)
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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Adherence Factor
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Air
Inhalation factor (air)
Body weight, child
Body weight, adult
Inhalation rate, child
Inhalation rate, adult
Exposure duration, child
Exposure duration, total
Conversion factor
Exposure frequency
Averaging time (cancer)
Chemical Concentration in Air
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Conversion factor
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
RMEValue
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
0.000001
2,800
0.2
See Table 4-1
350
6
15
25.550
2.190
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
10.9
15
70
10
20
6
30
0.000001
350
25.550
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
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
RMERationale/Reference
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
-
EPA 2004(1)
EPA 2004
See Table 4-1
EPA 1991 a
EPA 1991 a
EPA 1991 a
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1, B-2, B-3.3
EPA 1 991 b
EPA 1995
EPA 1995
EPA 1997
EPA 1997
EPA1991a
EPA1991a
-
EPA 1991 a
EPA1989a
See Tables B-3.1 & B-3.3
EPA 1997
EPA 1991 a
EPA 1991 a
-
EPA 1991 a
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
Intake Equation/Model Name
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
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CA x IR-A x EF x ED x CF x 1/BW x 1/AT
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure.
(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.
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 2 of 3 10/18/2006
TABLE B-4.2.RME
VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Anniston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3
Erio Timeframe: Future
m: Soil
ure Medium: Soil
ExposureRoute
ReceptorPopulation
ReceptorAge
Exposure Poin
«r
ParameterCode
Parameter Definition RMEValue
Units RMERationale/Reference
Intake Equation/Model Name
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 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.
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 3 of 3 10/18/2006
TABLE B-4.3.RMEVALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe: Future
Medium: Groundwater
Exposure Medium: Groundwater
ExposureRoute
Ingestion
Dermal andInhalation atShowemead
ReceptorPopulation
Resident
Resident
ReceptorAge
Child to Adult(LifetimeResident)
Child
(Wiyrs)
Child to Adult(LifetimeResident)
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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration tn Water
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Factor
Exposure Frequency
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Chemical Concentration in Water
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Water
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Water
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Factor
Exposure Frequency
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Chemical Concentration in Water
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Water
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
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
RMERationale/Reference
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
Intake Equation/Model Name
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
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
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CW x IFw xCFxEFx 1/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CWx CF1 x IRw X EF X ED X 1/BWx I/AT
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure.
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.
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006
TABLE B-4ARME
MODIFIED VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Annlston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe: Current/Future
Medium: Soil
Exposure 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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Intestinal Absorption Factor for PCBs and As
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Intestinal Absorption Factor for PCBs and As
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Intestinal Absorption Factor for PCBs and As
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
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
See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5
-
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report; EPA 1995
EPA 1995
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5
-
RFI/CS Report EPA 1991
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report
EPA 1991, 1997.2002
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
Intake Equation/Model Name
Chronic Dally Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x IR-S x IAF x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
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) =
CS x CF x IR-S x IAF x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 1 of 4 10/19/2006
TABLE B-4.4.RME
MODIRED VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe: Current/Future
Medium: Soil
Exposure 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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration In Soil
Conversion Factor
Ingestion Rate of Soil
Intestinal Absorption Factor for PCBs and As
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Adherence Factor
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration In Soil
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Adherence Factor
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
ModifiedValue
See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5
1E-06
•480
0.3
120
1
70
25,550
365
See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5
1E-06
2.290
0.2
See Table 4-2
250
25
70
25,550
9,125
See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5
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
Modified ValuesRationale/Reference
See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5
-
RFI/CS Report EPA^991
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report
EPA 1991. 2002
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5
-
RFI/CS Report; EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
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_
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
EPA 1995
RFI/CS Report
EPA 1995
EPA 1995
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
Intake Equation/Model Name
Chronic Dally Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x IR-S x IAF x EF x ED x 1/BWx 1/AT
Chronic Dally Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x SA x AF X ABS x EF X ED x
1/BWX1/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CSxCFxSAxAFxABSxEFxEDx
1/BWxl/AT
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 2 of 4 10/18/2006
TABLE B-4.4.RME
MODIFIED VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Amiston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timetrame: Cuirent/Future
Medium: Soil
Exposure 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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration In SoD
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Exposed Surface Area - Adult Head
Adherence Factor (head)
Exposed Surface Area - Adult Hands
Adherence Factor (hands)
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Conversion Factor
Skin Surface Area Available for Contact
Exposed Surface Area - Adult Head
Adherence Factor (head)
Exposed Surface Area - Adult Hands
Adherence Factor (hands)
Absorption Factor
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
ModifiedValue
See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5
1E-06
2,290
1,300
0.004
990
0.046
See Table 4-2
50
25
70
25,550
9.125
See Tables B-3.1-B-3-5
1E-06
2,290
1,300
0.029
990
0.24
See Table 4-2
120
1
70
25,550
365
See Tables B-3.1 - B-3-5
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 Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5
-
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report; EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
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_
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
RFI/CS Report EPA 2001
See Table 4-1
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report
EPA 1991. 2002
EPA 1989
EPA .1909
See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5
EPA 1997, 2002
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1991
EPA 2002
EPA 1991, 2002
EPA 1889
EPA 1989
Intake Equation/Model Name
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
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS x CF x (SAhd x AFhd * SA« x AF ,̂) x ABS x EF x ED x
1/BWxl/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS xlR,AxEFxEDx1/PEFx
1/BWxl/AT
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 3 of 4 10/19/2008
TABLE B-4.4.RME
MODIFIED VALUES USED FOR DAILY INTAKE CALCULATIONS
Anniston PCB Site. Operable Unit 3
Scenario Timeframe: Current/Future
Medium: Soil
Exposure 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
Parameter Definition
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
Body Weight
Averaging Time (Cancer)
Averaging Time (Noncancer)
Chemical Concentration in Soil
Inhalation Rate of Air
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Paniculate Emission Factor
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
See Tables B-3.1 - B-3-5
20
50
25
1.36E+09
70
25.550
9.125
See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5
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
Modified ValuesRationale/Reference
See Tables B-3.1 -B-3-5
EPA 1997
RFI/CS Report
EPA 1995
EPA 2002
EPA 1995
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1 - B-3-5
EPA 1997. 2002
RFI/CS Report
EPA 1991
EPA 2002
EPA 1991. 2002
EPA 1989
EPA 1989
See Tables B-3.1 - B-3-5
EPA 1997. 2002
RFI/CS Report
RFI/CS Report
EPA 2002
EPA 1991. 2002
EPA 1989EPA 1989
Intake Equation/Model Name
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS xlR^kxEFxEDx1/PEFx
1/BWx1/AT
Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
CS xlR-AxEFxEDx1/PEFx
1/BWxl/AT
Chronic Dally Intake (CDI) (mg/kg-day) =
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 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.
RFI/CS Report RFI/CS Reportfor the Anniston Alabama Facility. October 2002.
App B_Tab4s Anniston Page 4 of 4 10/19/2006
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
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
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
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-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
NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment
IRIS = Integrated Risk Information System
HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables; July 1997
RfD = Reference dose
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
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
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
cis-1 ,2-Oichloroethene
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
NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment
IRIS = Integrated Risk Information System
HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables; July 1997
RfC = Reference concentration
RfD = Reference dose
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
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 10/18/2006
TABLE B-6-1CANCER TOXICITY DATA - ORAL/DERMAL
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
(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
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthraccne
lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene
2,4,6-Trichtoropheno!
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
cis-1 ,2-Oichloroethene
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
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
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
NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment
HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables; July 1997
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).
(2) IRIS values were confirmed against the EPA's online database, May 2006
(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).
EPA Weight of Evidence:
A - Human Carcinogen
B1 - Probable human carcinogen - tndtcales 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 noncarcinogenicity
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1
TABLE B-6-2CANCER TOXlCtTY DATA - INHALATION
Anniston PCB Site, Operable Unit 3
(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(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluorantheneChryseneDibenz(a,h)anthracen8
lndeno(1 .2.3-cd)pyrene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
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(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-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
NCEA - National Center for Environmental Assessment
IRIS = Integrated Risk Information System
HEAST = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables: July 1997
Route = Route-to-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.
(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.
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 noncarcinogenicity
App B RAGSD_RME Anniston; 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1