Office of Water Office Science and Technology EPA 820 -D- 14 -0 33 May 20 14



# Draft Update of Human Health Ambient Water Quality Criteria:

Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

Cl

C l C l C H 2 

### O C l



### Cl

C lEPA 820 -D- 14

- 033 May 2014



# Update of Human Health Ambient Water Quality Criteria:

Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

D raft

O ffice of Science and Technology Office of Water U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC 20460Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

Table of Contents

Introduction : Plan and Scope of Update Problem Formulation Criteri a Formulas - Analysis Plan Exposure Factors Body Weight Drinking Water Intake Fish Consumption Rate Bio accumulation Factor Hazard Identification and Dose Response: Cancer Slope Factor Criteria Derivation - Analysis Criteria Characterization Chemical Name / Syn onyms References

Introduction: Plan and Scope of Update

Human health ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) are numeric values for pollutant concentrations in ambient waters that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) consider s to be protective of human health. EPA periodically revises water quality criteria to ensure that they reflect the latest scientific knowledge

. The current revisions of the criteria for dieldrin * , contained in this document, incorporate updated i nformation regarding body weight, drinking water i ntake, fish consumption rate, and bioaccumulation. Updated body weight and drinking water intake data are identified in EPA’s ‘Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition’ (USEPA, 2011). The bioaccumulation fac tor data is updated using EPA’s Estimation Program Interface (EPI) Suite modeling program (USEPA, 2012a). The overall fish consumption rate and trophic level breakdowns are updated using EPA’s ‘Estimated Fish Consumption Rates for the U.S. Population and Selected Subpopulations (NHANES 2003

- 2010)’ (USEPA, 2014)

. Unless otherwise specified, all sources of information used in this update are from peer reviewed

sources.

Note that the term "water quality criteria" can carry one of two possible meanings, depend ing on the section of the Clean Water Act ( CWA) associated with the particular criteria at issue. “Water quality criteria” may refer to national water quality criteria recommendations issued under CWA § 304. “Water quality criteria” may also refer to water quality criteria components of water quality standards adopted by states, territories, or authorized tribes under CWA § 303.

National ambient water quality criteria recommendations for human health are issued by the EPA under CWA § 304. They are based on the latest scientific information on the relationship between the effects of a constituent concentration and human health. Protective

* This compound is not currently registered as a pesticide by EPA.

1Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

assumptions are made regarding the potential human exposure intakes. These criteria do not reflect consideration of non

- human health endpoints or economic impacts. Nor do they reflect the technological feasibility of meeting the chemical concentrations in ambient water. National ambient water quality criteria recommendations for human health are not aut omatically incorporated into water quality standards adopted by states, territories, or authorized tribes. Rather, they provide scientific information to states, territories and authorized tribes to assist them in adopting ambient water quality criteria for human health in water quality standards that meet CWA requirements. National ambient water quality criteria recommendations for human health are not regulations themselves and they do not impose legally binding requirements on EPA, states, territories, a uthorized tribes, or the public. States, territories, and authorized tribes have the discretion to adopt, where appropriate, other scientifically defensible water quality criteria that differ from EPA’s national ambient recommended criteria for human healt h.

Amb ient water quality criteria components of water quality standards are generally adopted by the states, territories, and authorized tribes themselves, under § 303(c)(2). (In certain circumstances EPA also may promulgate this type of criterion itself, pursuant to §303(c)(4)). State ambient water quality criteria for human health represent a quality of water that sufficiently protects human health to support a designated use of the state, territory, or authorized tribe. Such criteria may be expressed in terms of constituent concentrations, levels, or narrative statements. Once ambient water quality criteria for human health are adopted by a state, territory, or authorized tribe into their water quality standards, they provide a basis for controlling discharges or releases of pollutants, for developing permit limits, assessing waters, and developing total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for waters that do not meet the water quality standard. Ambient water quality criteria for human health have a regulatory impa ct once they have been adopted into water quality standards by the state, territory, or authorized tribe under § 303(c)(2) (or alternatively issued by EPA pursuant to § 303(c)(4)).

T he water quality criteria at issue in this document are national ambient water quality criteria recommendations for human health issued under CWA § 304. Unless expressly indicated otherwise, all references to “criteria,” “water quality criteria,” “ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) recommendations,” or similar variants there of, are references to national ambient water quality criteria recommendations for human health.

P roblem Formulation

P roblem formulation provides a strategic framework for water quality criteria development by focusing on the most relevant endpoints and i ncreasing the transparency of the effects assessment process

. The structure of this criteria document is consistent with U.S. EPA’s ‘ Framework for Human Health Risk Assessment to I nform Decision Making ’ ( USEPA, 2012 b ).

I n the development of AWQC, EPA currently follows the deterministic assessment methodology outlined in EPA’s ‘ Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for

2Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

the Protection of Human Health (2000) ’ (USEPA
, 2000) , hereafter known as the 2000 Meth odology. For the development of criteria for carcinogens that express a non

- threshold, linear dose response, the 2000 Methodology takes into consideration exposure factors (body weight, drinking water intake, fish consumption, and bioaccumulation), the inc reased cancer risk due to exposure to the pollutant, and a 10 -6 ( or 1 in 1,000,000 ) risk level for the general population

. The 10 -6 risk level utilized in the derivation of the AWQC represents the water concentration that would be expected to increase an i ndividual’s lifetime cancer risk from exposure to the particular pollutant by no more than one chance in one million, regardless of the additional lifetime cancer risk due to exposure, if any, to that particular substance from other sources. States and authorized t ribes may consider adjusting exposure assumptions and related model inputs according to guidance in the 2000 Methodology, to assure that subpopulations are adequately protected if data are available

.

Criteri a Formulas - Analysis Plan

The following formulas are used to develop EPA’s CWA Section 304(a) human health ambient water quality criteria. EPA develops criteria for ambient waters typically considering
two routes of exposure

. The first formula can be used to derive a human health c riterion that assumes exposure through both the consumption of water and the consumption of aquatic organisms. The second formula can be used to derive a criterion that assumes exposure through the consumption of aquatic organisms, but not water. The use o f one criterion over the other depends on the designated use of the water bodies in question (i.e. drinking water source and/or fishable waters)

.
EPA recommends inclusion of the drinking water exposure pathway for ambient surface
waters where drinking wa ter is a designated use for the following reasons: (1) Drinking water is a designated use for surface waters under the CWA
, and therefore, criteria are needed to assure that this designated use can be protected and maintained. (2) Although rare, there are some public water supplies that provide drinking water from surface water sources without treatment. (3) Even among the majority of water supplies that do treat surface waters, existing treatments may not necessarily be effective for reducing levels of particular contaminants. (4) In consideration of the Agency’s goals of pollution prevention, ambient waters should not be contaminated to a level where the burden of achieving health objectives is shifted away from those responsible for pollutant discharges and placed on downstream users to bear the costs of upgraded or supplemental water treatment (USEPA, 2000).

EPA recommends the organism only criterion in those cases where the designated uses of a water body include only supporting fishable uses under Section 101(a) of the CWA , and thus, fish or shellfish for human consumption, but not as a drinking water supply source (e.g.,

non

- potable estuarine waters) (USEPA, 2000).

3Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

The formulas for deriving the criteria values are as follows (USEPA, 2000):

For consumption of water and organisms:

AWQC (μg/L) = [10 † / CSF (kg·d /mg)] × BW (kg) × 1000 (μg/mg) ‡ DI (L/d) + ∑ (FCR i (kg/d) × BAF i (L/kg)) 4 i=2 -6 (E q. 1)

Fo r consumption of organisms only:

AWQC (μg/L) = [10 -6 † / CS F (k g·d/mg)] × B W (k g) × 1 000 (μ g/mg) ‡ ∑ (F CR i (kg/d) × BAF i (L/kg))

4 i=2 (Eq. 2)

W here: AW QC = ambient water quality criteria (at the 10 -6 risk level) CSF = cancer slope factor BW = body weight DI = drinking water intake ∑ 4 i=2 = summation of values for aquatic trophic levels (TL) where the letter “i” stands for the
t rophic levels to be considered, starting with TL 2 and proceeding to TL 4 FCR i = fish consumption rate for aquatic trophic levels 2, 3, and 4 BAF i = bioaccumulation factor for aquatic trophic levels 2, 3, and 4

The following sections identify each of the components of the formulas for the human health ambient water quality criteria and provide reference sources, previously used values when available, and the values to be used in the updated criteria.

E xposure Factors:

B ody Weight

T he updated recommende d body weight (BW) is 80 kg which represents the mean weight for adults 21 years of age and older. This recommendation is found in EPA’s ‘ Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition’ in Chapter 8. It was based on data derived from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999

− 2006 (USEPA, 2011 ). This body weight replac es the recommended standard weight for adults of 70 kg that was described in the 2000 Methodology which was approximated from the mean body weight of adults from the Nati onal Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III database (1988

- 1994) and a 1989 study by the National Cancer Institute (USEPA, 2000)

.

† 10 -6 or 1 in 1,000,000 risk level for the general population
‡ 1000 μg/mg is used to convert the units of mass into micrograms from milligrams.

4Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

Drinking Water Intake

The updated drinking water intake (DI) is 3 L/day, rounded from 3.091 L/day for

consum er

- only estimates of direct and indirect water ingestion based on NHANES 2003

- 2006 data for all sources of water at the 90 th percentile for adults (≥21 years o f age) (USEPA, 2011 ). Direct water is defined as water ingested directly as a beverage (from all sources) ; indirect water is defined as water added in the preparation of food or beverages, not including indirect consumption of bottled water. This recommended value is found in EPA’s ‘ Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition’ in Table 3

- 36. It replac es the drinking water intake standard of 2 L/day described in the 2000 Methodology which represented the 86 th percentile for adults 20 years and older in the US Department of Agriculture’s 1994

- 96 Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) analysis or the 88 th percentile of adults in the National Cancer Institute study of the 1977

- 78 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (USEPA, 2000)

.
Fish Consumption Rate

The updated fish consumption rate (FCR) for the general adult population is 22 grams/day (0.022 kg/day) (USEPA, 2014: see Table 9a ). It represents the 90 th percentile per capita consumption rate of freshwater and estuarine fish for the U.S. adult populatio n 21 years of age and older based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) conducted from 2003

- 2010. It replaces the FCR default of 17.5 grams/day, which represented an estimate of t he 90th percentile per capita consumption rate of freshwater and estuarine fish for the U.S. adult population based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) 1994

- 96 data (USEPA, 2002a).

As recommended in the 2000 Methodology, this update to the criteria distinguishes a trophic level (TL) breakdown of the fish consumption rate to provide a better representation of dietary exposure to fish at multiple trophic levels. An organism’s trophic p osition in the aquatic food web can have an important effect on the magnitude of bioaccumulation of certain chemicals. The trophic levels are numbered 2, 3, and 4 and account for different categories of fish and shellfish species based on their position in the aquatic food web. TL2 accounts for benthic filter feeders, TL3 accounts for forage fish, and TL4 accounts for predatory fish.

In order to derive the trophic level breakdown of the 22 grams/day freshwater and estuarine FCR, the trophic level specific freshwater and estuarine FCR data sets for adults 21 years of age and older were identified (USEPA, 2014: see Tables 16a, 17a, and 18a ). In each trophic level specific data set, the ratio of that trophic level’s 90 th percentile FCR compared to the summati on of all three trophic level specific 90 th percentile FCRs was applied to the 22 grams/day FCR used in this update. The trophic level ratios were calculated as follows: TL ratio = 90 th percentile FCR for the TL divided by the sum of the 90 th percentile FC Rs for all TLs. TL2 = 7.6/21.3 = 0.3568 (35.68%), TL3 = 8.6/21.3 = 0.4038 (40.38%), and TL4 = 5.1/21.3 = 0.2394 (23.94%). Applying these ratios to the updated FCR of 22 grams/day result in trophic level breakdowns of TL2 = 8 grams/day (0.00 8 kg/day); TL3 = 9 grams/day (0.00 9 kg/day); and TL4 = 5

5Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

grams/day (0.00 5 kg/day). These resulting trophic level FCRs are well within the confidence intervals for each of the trophic level specific distributions’ 90 th percentiles and add to the total of 22 grams/day (USEPA, 2014).

Bioaccumulation Factor

Several attributes of the bioaccumulation process are important to understand when deriving national BAFs for use in setting national 304(a) criteria. First, the term “bioaccumulation” refers to the uptake and retention of a chemical by an aquatic organism from all surrounding media (e.g., water, food, sediment). The term “bioconcentration” refers to the uptake and retention of a chemical by an aquatic organism from water only. For some chemicals (particularly those that are highly persistent and hydrophobic), the magnitude of bioaccumulation by aquatic organisms can be substantially greater than the magnitude of bioconcentration. Thus, an assessment of bioconcentration alone may underestimate the extent of accumulation in aquatic biota for these chemicals. Accordingly, EPA’s guidelines presented in the 2000 Methodology emphasize the measurement or estimation of chemical bioaccumulation by aquatic organisms (USEPA, 2000)

.
The bioaccumulation factors (BAF) have been estimated using EPA’s Estimation Program Interface (EPI) Suite (USEPA, 2012a). The BCFBAFTM program within EPI Suite estimates fish bioaccumulation factors using octanol

- water partition coefficients (K OW ) and b iotransformation data from a model designed by Arnot and Gobas (2003)

. The model includes mechanistic processes for bioaccumulation such as chemical uptake from the water at the gill surface and from the diet, chemical elimination at the gill surface, feca l egestion, growth dilution and metabolic biotransformation. Other processes included in the calculations are bioavailability in the water column (only the freely dissolved fraction can bioconcentrate) and absorption efficiencies at the gill and in the gas trointestinal tract. The model requires the octanol

- water partition coefficient (K OW ) of the chemical and the normalized whole

- body metabolic biotransformation rate constant as input parameters to predict BAF values. Model predictions may be highly uncerta in for chemicals that have estimated log K OW values > 9. The model is not recommended at this time for chemicals that appreciably ionize, for pigments and dyes, or for perfluorinated substances (USEPA, 2012a).

For dieldrin , BAFs have been estimated using the EPI Suite model (USEPA, 2012a) as described above for trophic levels 2, 3, and 4. The estimated lower (TL2), mid (TL3), and upper (TL4) trophic level BAFs for dieldrin (log K OW = 5.20 ) are 17,280 L/kg, 20,740 L/kg, and 30,820 L/kg wet

- weight, respecti vely. These estimated BAFs replace the bioconcentration factor (BCF) of 4,670 L/kg used in the 2002 criteria derivations, which was calculated from two studies which measured steady

- state bioconcentration and represented all trophic levels (USEPA, 1980).

6Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

Hazard Identification and Dose Response: Cancer Slope Factor

Dieldrin is characterized as a class B2 probable human carcinogen following the 1986 EPA Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (USEPA, 1986a; USEPA, 1986b; USEPA, 1993).

The cancer slope factor (CSF) is an upper bound, approximating a 95% confidence limit, on the increased cancer risk from a lifetime oral exposure to an agent. The CSF for dieldrin is 1.6 × 10 1 per mg/kg·day (16 per mg/kg·day) (USEPA, 1993).

The principle studies by Davis (1965), Walker et al. (1972), Thorpe and Walker (1973), National Cancer Institute (NCI, 1978a,b), Tennekes et al. (1981), and Meierhenry et al. (1983) chosen to calculate the cancer slope factor for dieldrin were based on development of liver carcinomas in mice orally exposed to dieldrin (USEPA, 1993).

Criteria D erivation - Analysis

T able 1 summarizes model inputs used to derive the 2014 updated human health ambient water quality criteria for dieldrin

. Criteria calculations a re presented below. These updated dieldrin criteria recommendations are based on the 2000 Methodology and updated exposure assumptions as described above (Exposure Factors).

Table 1. Summary of input parameters for 2014 human health ambient water quality criteria for dieldrin

Component Value Source Input Characterization

CSF 16 per mg/ kg·day USEPA, 1993 an upper bound, approximating a 95% confidence limit, on the increased cancer risk from a lifetime exposure to an agent by ingestion

BW 80 kg USEPA, 2011 mean weight for adults (≥21 years of age)

DI 3 L/day USEPA, 2011 90 th percentile for adults (≥21 years of age)

FCR TL2 0.00 8 kg/day USEPA
, 2014 90 th percentile consumption rate for the U.S. adult population (≥21 years of age) TL3 0.00 9 kg/day
TL4 0.00 5 kg/day

BAF TL2 17,280 L/kg USEPA, 2012a EPI Suite K OW model estimated steady

- state BAF values for non

- ionic organic chemicals in 3 general trophic levels of fish in temperate environments (10°C) TL3 20,740 L/kg

TL4 30,820 L/kg

For consumption of water and organisms:

AWQC (μg /L) = [10 -6 / CSF (kg·d/mg)] × BW (kg) × 1000 (μg/mg) DI (L/d) + ∑ (FCR i (kg/d) × BAF i (L/kg)) 4 i=2

7Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

= 10 -6 / 16 kg·d/mg × 80 kg × 1000 μg/mg

3 L/ d + (( 0.00 8 kg/d × 17,280 L/kg) + ( 0.00 9 kg/d × 20,740 L/kg) + ( 0.00 5 kg/d × 30,820 L/kg))

= 0.0000 10 4 μg /L (rounded to 0.00001 0 μg/L because of significant figures
, see 2000 Methodology )

For consumption of organisms only:

AWQC (μg/L) = [10 -6 / CSF (kg·d/mg)] × BW (kg) × 1000 (μg/mg) ∑ (FCR i (kg/d) × BAF i (L/kg))

4 i=2

= 10 -6 / 16 kg·d/mg × 80 kg × 1000 μg/mg

( 0.00 8 kg/d × 17,280 L/kg) + ( 0.00 9 kg/d × 20,740 L/kg) + ( 0.00 5 kg/d × 30,820 L/kg)

= 0.00001 04 μg /L (rounded to 0.00001 0 μg/L because of significant figures , see 2000 Methodology )

The updated magnitude of the human health ambient wa ter quality criteria for dieldrin at the 10 -6 risk level are 0.00001 0 μg/L (water and organism) and 0.00001 0 μg/L (organism only) (Table 2). These updated criteria replace the previous ly published values (USEPA, 2002b ).

Table 2. Summary of EPA’s preciously recommended (2002 ) and updated ( 2014 ) human health ambient water quality criteria for dieldrin 2002 Human Health AWQC 2014 Human Health AWQC Water and Organism 0.000052 μg/L 0.00001 0 μg/L (1. 0 ×10 - 5 μg/L) Organism Only 0.000054 μg/L 0.00001 0 μg/L (1. 0 ×10 - 5 μg/L)

These AWQC are meant to be protective of human health for the general adult population from an increased cancer risk due to exposure to dieldrin at a 10 -6 or 1 in 1,000,000 risk level. The 10 -6 risk level associated with the AWQC represents the concentration that would be expected to increase an individual’s lifetime cancer risk from exposure to the particular pollutant by no more than one chance in one mil lion, regardless of the additional lifetime cancer risk due to exposure, if any, to that particular substance from other sources.

Criteria Characterization

The updated 2014 human health AWQC for dieldrin take into account current data on health effects and exposure input parameters, consistent with the 2000 Methodology. The updated 2014 human health AWQC for dieldrin are about five times lower than EPA’s previously recommended 2002 criteria; i.e. the water

- and

- organism crit erion decreased from 0.000052 to 0.00001 0 μg/L and the organism

- only criterion decreased from 0.000054 to 0.00001 0 μg/L (Table 2). The following paragraphs describe the individual influence of each of the revised model inputs and exposure assumptions on th e overall change in value

.

8Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

Body Weight

EPA’s updated AWQC assume a higher body weight compared to the previously recommended 2002 criteria, reflecting a recent rise in average adult body weight among the U.S. population. The updated body weight assumption of 80 kg based on recent survey data from the 1999

− 2006 NHANES data is 10 kg greater than the previous recommendation of 70 kg. Assuming all other input parameters remain constant, a higher average body weight in the AWQC ca lculations (Eq. 1 and 2 above) results in higher AWQC. That is, as body weight increases, the level of a contaminant in water at or below which n egative health effects are not anticipated from a lifetime of exposure also increases

.

D rinking Water Intake

The updated drinking water intake assumption is 3 L/da y, which is higher than the previously recommended rate of 2 L/day. Assuming all other input parameters remain constant, a higher drinking water intake assumption in the AWQC calculations (Eq. 1 and 2 above) results in lower AWQC. That is, as drinking water intake increases, and thus overall exposure increases, the level of a contaminant in water at or below which negative health effects are not anticipated from a lifetime of exposure decreases

.

Fish Consumption Rate

The updated fish consumption rate is 2 2 g/day, divided into trophic level rates of 8 g/day, 9 g/day, and 5 g/day for trophic levels 2, 3, and 4, respectively, which is higher than the previously recommended rate of 17.5 g/day. Assuming all other input parameters remain constant, a higher fish consumption rate assumption in the AWQC calculations (Eq. 1 and 2 ab ove) results in lower AWQC. That is, as fish consumption increase, and thus overall exposure increases, the level of a contaminant in water at or below which negative health effects are not anticipated from a lifetime of exposure decreases.

Bioaccumulatio n Factor

The updated AWQC rely on EPI Suite model

- estimated BAFs rather than the previously recommended BCF of 4,670 L/kg . The lower (TL2), mid (TL3), and upper (TL4) trophic level BAFs assumed in the updated criteria equations (Eq. 1 and 2 above) are 17, 280, 20,740, and 30,820 L/kg wet

- weight, respectively. Assuming all other input parameters remain constant, t he higher ratios of fish tissue concentrations to water concentrations of dieldrin by aquatic organism s result in lower AWQC. That is, as bioaccumulation or bioconcentration of a contaminant in fish and shellfish increases , and thus overall exposure increases , the level of a contaminant in water at or below which negative health effects are not anticipated from a lifetime of exposure decreases . The u tilization of a bioaccumulation factor rather than a bioconcentration factor better represents the amount of a contaminant accumulating in an organism because it accounts not only for the organism’s exposure to the pollutant in the water column, but also from the food chain and surrounding environment as well as biotransformation of the pollutant

9Dieldrin 60

- 57 -1

in the organism due to metabolic processes. The utilization of the three trophic levels of fish and shellfish consumed, as opposed to representing all trophic levels of fish and shellfish consumed by a single value, allows for better exposure representation, especially when pollutants bioaccumulate in significantly different amounts for organisms in different trophic levels at different positions in the food chain.

Additional routes of exposure to a particular pollutant besides exposure from water intake and fish consumption are possible and may be considered when setting criteria for a

s tate or t ribe. Possible additional routes include, but are not limited to, dermal exposure, inhalation exposure, marine fish and shellfish consumption (when not included in t he fish consumption rate), and non

- fish dietary exposures (fruits, vegetables, grains, meats or poultry). If scientific evidence exists which indicate that o ne or more of these routes pose a significant risk of exposure, s tate s and authorized t ribe s are en couraged to ensure that subpopulations are adequately protected

.
States, territories, and authorized tribes have the flexibility to develop criteria, on a site

specific basis, that provide additional protection appropriate for highly exposed populations. EPA is aware that exposure patterns in general, and fish consumption in particular, vary substantially. EPA understands that highly exposed populations may be widely distributed geographically throughout a given state, territory, or authorized tribal area. EPA recommends that priority be given to identifying and adequately protecting the most highly exposed populations. Thus, if a state, territory, or authorized tribe determines that a highly exposed population is at greater risk and would not be adequately protected by criteria based on the general population, and by the national 304(a) criteria in particular, the state, territory, or authorized tribe may adopt more stringent criteria using alternative exposure assumptions (USEPA, 2000). Subpopulations that may be considered include, but are not limited to, recreational fishers, subsistence fishers, women of childbearing age, and children. When scientific data exist showing one of these subpopulations is at risk of greater exposure to the pollutant or are bi ologically more sensitive, then the relevant inputs should be considered in setting criteria. This could entail raising the fish consumption rate to a level more reflective of the subpopulation based on collected data or adjusting the body weight and drink ing water intake.

C hemical Name / Synonyms

• Dieldrin (CAS Number 60

- 57

- 1)

• Alvit

• Compound 497

• Dieldrex

• Dieldrin

• Dieldrine

• Dieldrite

10Dieldrin 60

- 57

- 1

• 1,4:5,8

- dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10

- hexachloro

- 6,7

- epoxy

- 1,4,4a,5,6,7,8,8a

octahydro, endo,exo

-

• ENT 16,225

• HEOD

• Hexachloroepoxyoctahydro

- endo,exo

- dimethanonaphthalene

• 3,4,5,6,9,9

- hexachloro

- 1a,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,7a

- octahydro

- 2,7:3,6

- dimethanonaphth(2,3

- b)oxirene

• Illoxol

• NA 2761

• NCI

- C00124

• Octalox

• Panoram D

- 31

• Quintox

• RCRA waste number P037

References

Davis, K.J. 1965. Pathology report on mice fed aldrin, dieldrin, heptachlor or heptachlor epoxide for two years. Internal FDA memorandum to Dr. A.J. Lehman. July 19.

Meierhenry, E.F., B.H. Reuber, M.E. Gershwin, L.S. Hsieh and S.W. French. 1983. Deildrin

induced mallory bodies in hepatic tumors of mice of different strains. Hepatology. 3: 90

- 95. NCI (National Cancer Institute). 1978a. Bioassays of aldrin and dieldrin for possible carcinogenicity. DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 78

- 821. National Cancer Institut e Carcinogenesis Technical Report Series, No. 21. NCI

- CG

- TR

- 21.

NCI (National Cancer Institute). 1978b. Bioassays of aldrin and dieldrin for possible carcinogenicity. DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 78

- 822. National Cancer Institute Carcinogenesis Technical R eport Series, No. 22. NCI

- CG

- TR

- 22.

Tennekes, H.A., A.S. Wright, K.M. Dix and J.H. Koeman. 1981. Effects of dieldrin, diet, and bedding on enzyme function and tumor incidence in livers of male CF

- 1 mice. Cancer Res. 41: 3615

- 3620.

Thorpe, E. and A.I.T. Walker. 1973. The toxicology of dieldrin (HEOD). Part II. Comparative long

term oral toxicology studies in mice with dieldrin, DDT, phenobarbitone, beta

- BHC and
gamma

- BHC. Food Cosmet. Toxicol. 11: 433

- 441.

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1980. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aldrin/Dieldrin. Office of Water. Washington, DC. EPA

- 440

- 5

- 80

- 019. http://water.ep a.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/upload/2001_10_12_criter ia_ambientwqc_aldrindieldrin.pdf

.

11Dieldrin 60

- 57

- 1

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1986a. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. Federal Register 51: 33992

- 34003.

USEPA (U.S. Environme ntal Protection Agency). 1986b. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. Risk Assessment Forum. Washington, DC. EPA

- 630

- R

- 00

- 004. http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/pdfs/C A%20GUIDELINES_1986.PDF

.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1993. Dieldrin (CASRN 60

- 57

- 1). Integrated Risk Information System . Retrieved 09 July 2013. http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0225.h tm

.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2000. Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health. Office of Water. Washington, DC. EPA

- 822

- B

- 00

- 004. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/upload/2005_05_06_criteria_hum anhealth_method_complete.pdf

.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2002a. Estimated Per Capita Fish Consumption in the United States. Washington, DC. EPA

- 821

- C

- 02

- 003. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/health/upload/consumpti on_report.pdf

.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 20 02b. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria: 2002. Office of Water. Washington, DC. EPA

- 822

- R

- 02

- 047. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swg uidance/standards/upload/2008_04_29_criteria_wqct able_nrwqc

- 2002.pdf

.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition. Office of Research and Development. Washington, DC. EPA

- 600

- R

- 09

- 052F. http://www.epa.gov/ncea/efh/pdfs/efh

- complete.pdf

.

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2012a. Estimation Programs Interface SuiteTM for Microsoft® Windows, v 4.10. United States Environmental Protecti on Agency, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm

.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2012b. Framework for Human Health Risk Assessment to Infor m Decision Making. Office of the Science Advisor. Washington, DC. EPA

- 601

- D

- 12

- 001. http://www.epa.gov/raf/files/framework

- document

- 7

- 13

- 12.pdf

.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protecti on Agency). 2014. Estimated Fish Consumption Rates for the U.S. Population and Selected Subpopulations (NHANES 2003

- 2010). Office of Water. Washington, DC. EPA

- 820

- R

- 14

- 002.

Walker, A.I.T., E. Thorpe and D.E. Stevenson. 1972. The toxicology of dieldrin (H EOD). I. Long

term oral toxicity studies in mice. Food Cosmet. Toxicol. 11: 415

- 432.

12