## ft

# EA~ United States**~** 

### Environmental Protection 

## "' Agency



# Age Dependent Adjustment Factor (ADAF) Application

Office of Water Policy Document

## Age Dependent Adjustment Factor (ADAF) Application Office of Water Policy Document

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (4304T) Health and Ecological Criteria Division Washington, DC 20460

www.epa.gov/safewater /ccl/pdf!XXXX.pdf

EPA Do cument Number: Date: March 2011

2

## AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS AND REVIEWERS

Joyce M. Donohue , Ph.D. Health and Ecological C riteria Division Office of Water U.S

. Environmental Protection Agency
Melissa J. Simic, MS Health and Ecological Criteria Division Office of Water U.S. Environmental Protection Agency



## INTERNAL EPA REVIEWERS

Brenda Foos, MS Office of Children ' s Health Protection U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Edward V. Ohanian, Ph.D. , Associate Director for Science 

### Office of Water U.S

. Env ironmental Protection Agency
Rita Schoeny, Ph.D. Senior Science Advisor Office of Water U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

3

### 1.0 Background
The Environmental Protection Agency 

### Guidelines for Carcinogen RiskAssessment (EPA, 2005b) require the consideration of the possibility of risks for cancer from early life stage exposure. In particular, the 

### Guidelines recommend that life stage-specific, cancer slope factors be calculated when the data permit. In the absence of such data, the 

### Guide lines specify the application of Age Dependant Adjustment Factors (ADAFs) in determining tumorigenic risk for chemicals that have a demonstrated mutagenic mode of action (MOA). In cases where it is not possible to determine that the response to dose is nonlinear through an identified MOA, EPA has chosen to use a default of low do s e linear extrapolation without ADAF.
The Office of Water (OW) has yet to apply the ADAF guidance in any of its regulatory risk-based assessments of chemical contaminants under the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) related activities. As part ofthe IRIS training for the Agency Reviewers , the National Center for E nvironmental Assessment (NCEA) indicated that IRIS documents would include a statement as to the advisability of inclusion of the ADAF in a Program Office risk assessment, but that the policies for its application would be developed by the Program Office.
Thi s document was prepared for the purpose of establishing the policies the OW will follow when applying the ADAFs in the quantification ofthe risk ofdrinking water exposures from mutagenic carcinogens. Application ofthe ADAFs has no impact on the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) because it is zero for all carcinogens that lack a demonstrated non-mutagenic mode of action. On the other hand, the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) is based on technical (analytical and treatment limitations) and cost-benefit consideratio ns which consider risk as an important benchmark in its determination. The MCL is generally selected so that the cancer risk falls within the onein ten thousand to one-in-million risk range.
The 

### Supplemental Guidancefor Assessing Susceptibility from Early-Life Exposure to Carcinogens (EPA, 2005a) was published at the same time as the 

### Cancer Guidelines. This document reviewed existing data for chemicals with early life exposures and conc luded that exposure to chemical carcinogens with a mutagenic MOA are likely to increase incidence or reduce latency for cancer by comparison to exposure s that begin after attainment of developmental maturity. The document r ecommends that when considering childhood exposure, ADAFs be applied to cancer slope factors calculated from studies (bioassay or epidemiological) that involve only adult exposures. Three age periods are delineated for the ADAFs ; each is associated with a numeric value for the increase in risk during that age period. These are to be used with age-specific exposure inform ation in risk characteriza tion. The three age periods and their associated ADAFs
are as follows:

• Birth to less than age 2 years: a I 0-fold increase in slope factor (2 year duration)
• Age 2 to less than age 16: a 3-fold increase in slope factor ( 14 year duration)

4• Age 16 to 70 years: risk as calculated from the adult only exposure (54 year duration).
The equation for the calculation of risk is as follows:
Risk = CSF x ADAF x dose (mg/kg/day) x exposure duration/70 years
Where:
CSF = Cancer Slope Factor (mg/kg/day)" 1

The risk is calculated for each ofthe three exposure periods with application of its ADAF and then added together to obtain the total risk for a 70 year period initiated at birth. Risks can also be calculated for any exposure duration of interest combined with the doses for the age group of interest.


### 2.0 Consideration of Variables for the Office of Water (OW) Calculations Drinking water is the exposure medium of concern for the OW. The following sections explain the OW policy development process and subsequent policy recommendations. The OW considered the following variables in the development of their policies: normalization of drinking water intakes and body weights (independent versus ratio), percentile level for analysis (90th versus 95th), and selection of drinking water intakes (all individuals versus consumer-only).


### 2.1 Normalization of Drinking Water Intakes and Body Weights across the ADAF Ages
For drinking water the dose for each ofthe three exposure durations will vary with the normalized water intake and the normalized body weight of t he individual over the specified time period. The information needed to determine the normalized drinking water intakes and body weights can be identified in the 

### Child-Specific Exposure Factor's Handbook (EPA , 2008) and the OW 

### Estimated Per Capita Water Ingestion in the United States (EPA, 2004). In both cases the values presented are derived from the USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII 1994-1996 and 1998).
There are several policy options that the OW can consider in obtaining the dose (water intake and body weight) estimates. They are as follows: Approach 1: Use independent body weight (kg) and water intake (Liday) values Approach 2: Use ratio of water intake to body weight in terms ofL/kg/day
For the first approach the statistical analysis of body weights and water intakes of the populations were evaluated independently. For the second measure , the ratio of water intake to body weight was determined for each individual in the population and the ratios
were analyzed statistically.

5

### The differences between the two data sets for the two normalization approaches can be described as follows:

• Approach 1: The distributions for body weight were derived from all of the body weight data in the CSFII without consideration of the water intak e associated with each body weight. The situation was similar for the distribution of the drinking water intake inf ormat ion. The analysis was derived for each measure of drinking water intake without consideration ofthe body we ight associated with each intake.

• Approach 2: The ratio data are linked at the level ofthe individual rather than the

population. The analysis of the expo sure values using the Llkg body weight measures i s based on a set ofmonitoring values in which the water intake of each study participant was first divided by their body weight before completing the statistical analysis of the data.
The OW consulted the Office of Children 's Health Protection (OCHP) on the approach to use for normalizing body weights and drinking water intakes across the age range for each ofthe ADAF periods. The OCHP recommended that the product ofeach age
specific variab le multiplied by the its fraction ofthe total duration be summed to obtain the normalized drinking water intake , body weight, and L drinking water/kg body weight variables for each ADAF age period. It was further recommended that the Child Specific Exposure Factors Handbook (U.S

. EPA, 2008) be used as the source for the body weight and exposure variables. Table 1 provides an example for normalization of body weights across the four age subgroupings within the 2 year to <16 year age period using the body weight values from the Child

- specific Exposure Factor's Handbook (2008). In order to be consistent with the data source for the drinking water intakes (CSFII)], the OW has used the mean body-weight data from Kahn and Stralka (200 8) , Table 8-24 in EPA (2008), in place ofthe data derived from the NHANES 1999-2006 data (EPA [2008] Table 8-1).


### Table 1: Normalized Body Weight for t he 2-year to 16 year Age Period (Kahn and Stralka, 2008) Table 3-24 (EPA, 2008) Age Range Body Weight Duration Product (body wt. x duration Years kg Fraction fraction) years k2 2 to <3 14 1114 1 3 to <6 18 3/14 3.857 6 to <11 30 5/1 4 10.714 11to<16 54 5/14 19.286 Normalized value (sum of the age specific products) 34 .857
The same approach (i.e. multiplication of the variable by the fraction ofthe ADAF age period and summing the results) is used for each of the ADAF age groups and each of the variables (body weight, drinking water intakes or L drinking water / Kg body weight ) 

### needed for the calculations. Tables 1 through 9 in the supporting data attachment show the derivation ofthe normalized values for body weight, drinking water intake , and



### 6

### drinking water intak e body weight ratios for each of the three ADAF age groupings using the data from EPA (2008) and EPA (2004).
In order to illustrate the impact of variable selection, OW calculated the unit risk and total 70 year unit risk after application of the ADAFs for the 90th percentile consumer-only direct and indirect water intakes and average body weights (T able 2) as compared to the values calculated using drinking water intake body weight ratios (Likg/day) using the same assumption s (Table 3). Both sets of calculations are based on a sample CSF of 21 (mg/kg/dayr 1 • 

### The unit ri s k is defined as the risk associated with a drinking water concentration of 1 1-1g/L (0.001 mL/day)

. 

### Table 2: Approach 1

- Unit Risk Derived from 90tnPercentile Drinking Water Intakes and**Avera~e** 

### Body**Wei~hts** 

### {CSF 

### = 21/mwkwday)
Unit Risk= CSF 

### x ADAF x DWI/bw x 

### 0.001 mg/L x 

### Exposure Duration/70 years Age Range Body Weight ADAF Drinking Exposure Unit Risk years (bw) Water Intake Duration 1-lg/L 

### kg (DWI) years L/day Birth to< 2 9.71 10 0.861 2/70 5.320 X 

### 104 

### 2 to< 16 34.857 3 1.012 14/70 3.658 X 

### 10-4 16 to 70 75.277 1 2.237 54/70 4.814 X 

### 10-4 Total 

### unit risk 1.379 x 1 

# o-J

Table 3: Approach 2- Unit Risk Derived from 90 1 n 

### Percentile Drinking Water Intakes Average Body Weight Ratios (CSF 

### = 21/mg/kg/day)
Unit Risk= CSF x ADAF x DWI/bw Ratio x 0.001 mg/L x Exposure Duration/70 years Age Range Drinking Water ADAF Exposure Unit Risk Jlg/L 

### Intake I 

### body Duration weight ratio years L/kWday Birth to< 2 0.104 10 2/70 6.240 X 

### 10 4 

### 2 to< 16 0.037 

### 3 14/70 4.662 X 

### 10-4 16 to 70 0.032 

### 1 54/70 5.184 X 104 

### Total unit risk 1.609 x 1 

# o-J

The total 

### unit risk values can be converted to the concentration in drinking water equivalent to a 1 X 

### 1 Q- 6 

### risk USing the foll owing equation:
Concentration ( !lg/L) at 1 X 10-6 

### risk = 

### 1 X 

# w-6 7 

### unit risk (Jlg/Lr 1



### 7

### The concentration equivalent to a one
-in-a million risk for a 70 year exposure init iated at birth as calculated in Table 2 is 0.000725**~giL** 

### rounded to 0.7 ng!L
The concentration equivalent to a one-in-a million risk for a 70 year exposure initiated at birth as calculated in Table 3 is 0.000622**~giL** 

### rounded to 0.6 ng/L.
Tables 2 and 3 demonstra te the difference in one-in- a-million risk concentrations for a 70 year exposure initiated at birth based on the using two different data sets to repres ent the relationship between drinking water intakes and body weights. It 

### is the OW policy to express the fmal risk value using one significant figure.


### 2.1 Percentile Level for Analysis
A second variable that was considered for the OW policy development process was the percentile level to se lect for the analysis: 90th versus 95th. The OW has traditionally used an adult body weight of70 kg (once a mean value) and a 2 Llday water intake (-90th percentile) in its chronic exposure assessments for cancer endpoints. The Child-Specific Exposure Factor ' s Handbook (EPA, 2008) recommends that the 95th percentile values be used. However, as per EPA (2008) the 95th percentile va lues are problematic for some age groups because the sample size (CSFII (1994-1996, 1998) did not meet minimum requirements as described in the third report on nutrition monitoring in the United States

. Although this is also the case at the 90th percenti le, fewer groups are affected. For example, the minimum requirements are not met for data on water consumption from birth to 6 months and ages 16-21 years at the 95th percentile with the direct and indirect water intake estimates for consumers only (EPA, 2008). At the 90th percentile value only the birth to <3 month groups fail to meet the size requirement.


### 2.3 Selection of Drinking Water Intakes
Another variable for consideration is selection of the drinking water intakes for all individuals or for consumers only. The earlier OW defaults of2 Ll day for adults and 1 Llday for children were approximate estimates for the 90 1

### h percentile of all individuals in a study by Ershow and Cantor (1989) which were reaffirmed in the analysis that produced the updated evalua tion of population drinking water intakes based on the most recent CSFII data( EPA(2004). These estimates are not appropriate in carrying out the ADAF evaluations wherein age
- specific intakes are needed. Several ongoing assessments which do not involve cancer have used the consumers-only data as the preferred values to protect sensitive populations. It is the recommendation of this document to continue use of the more recent consumers-only policy.


### 3.0 Calculating Risk for a Less than Lifetime Exposure
As mentioned above, the ADAF's allow the user to calculate risks for a le ss than lifetime exposure such as the first 7 years of life. Seven years is the age period used by the OW in the derivation ofthe longer-term health advisory for a child because that is frequently the duration granted by a variance or exemption for a public drinking water system to



### 8

### achieve the MCL for a regulated contaminant. Table 4 provides an example of the risk calculation for this exposure period using the drinking water intake/body weight ratio.

Table 5: 

### Unit Risk Derived from 90th 

### Percentile Drinking Water Intake Average Body Weight Ratios for a Birth to 7-year Exposure (CSF 

## = 21 /mg!kg!day)
Unit Risk= CSF x ADAF 

### x DWI/bw Ratio x 0.001 mg/L x Exposure Duration/70 years Age Range Drinking Water ADAF Exposure Unit Risk J.lg/L Intake I 

### Body Duration Weight Ratio years L/kglday Birt h to < 2 0.104 10 2170 6.240 X**0-'~** 

### 2 to< 7 0.046 3 5170 2.070 X 

### 10-4 Total unit risk 8.310 xl0-4
The concentration equivalent to a one-in

-million risk for developing cancer during a 70 year lifetime with an exposure that lasts from birth to age 7 is calculated by dividing the total unit risk into 1 x 10-6

. The resultant value is 0.00120 J.lg/L rounded to I 

### ng/L. Calculating this value makes it possible to compare the cancer risk for such an exposure to the longer term health advisory for non-cancer effects. Providing estimate of the lifetime cancer risk for a longer term exposure as well as a value protective for non
cancer effects from the same exposure provides important information to the risk manager during decision making for mutagenic chemicals present in public drinking water supplies.
4.0 Internal Peer Review
The preceding portions ofthis document were reviewed by Rita Schoeny of the OW and Brenda Foos of the Office of Children's Health Protection (OCHP). Recommendations ofthe peer reviewers were accommodated in the revisions to the draft document. Additional input on evolving policies related to perchlorate was provided by Eric Bumeson ofthe Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water (OGWDW). Other alternatives to thi s process were suggested by the OCHP during the internal review ofthis document. They are as follows:

• Use the data from all 11 child-specific age periods as provided by the EPA (2008) combined with 20+ data from (EPA, 1004) derived from the same CSFII data set rather than the compressed three data sets.

• Work with the ORD Expo sure researchers to obtain appropriate values for the three ADAF age periods from the CSFII (1994-1996 , 1998) data directly.
The OW feels t hat communication ofthe 

### ADAF adj ustment to its stakeho lder community is facilitated by a presentation using the three age groupings as established by the ADAF



### 9

### guidelines. Once the policy decisions related to drinking water intake and body weight relationships for each ofthe age groups have been established they will be a constant for the calculation, simplifying presentation and supported by a citation to this document. The first OCHP suggestion could be accommodated in an appendix to the OW reports for those who desire refined breakdown ofthe individual impacts for the 12 component age ranges. Postponing the application of the ADAFs until ORD could reanalyze the original data would be preferred ifthey would be able to do it within a time period where it could be used for Regulatory Determinat ions 3 , but that is unlikely.


### 5.0 Recommendation
After considering the options discussed above, the OW recommends the use ofthe 90th percentile consumers-only drinking water intake body weight ratio data (Likg/day) when applying ADAFs 

### to risk values for carcinogens with an established mutagenic mode of action. The 90 1h 

### percentile data were selected because, for all but the birth to < 

### 3 month age groupings , the population size was sufficient for the drinking water intake body weight ratio ana lysis thereby minimizing the uncertainty in the values. U se of the 90th percentile is consistent with the long term OW policy. Use ofthe consumers-only values insures that the resultant risk values are applicable for those totally reliant on drinking water (direct and indirect) from public drinking water systems. The ratio data are preferable to using the body weight and water intake parameters s eparately because the two parameters are linked at the level of the individual rather than the population.


### 6.0 References: Ershow, A.G. , and K.P. Cantor. 1989. Total water and tapwater intake in the United States: population-based estimates of quantities and sources. National Cancer Inst itute Contract No. 263-MD-81 0264. Life Sciences Research Office. Federation ofAmerican Societies for Experimental Biology. Bethesda, MD.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2004. Estimated Per Capita Water Ingestion in the United States. Office of Water. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington , CD. EPA. 822-R-00

-001. http: //water.epa.gov/action/advisories /drinking/upload/2005 05 06 criteria drinking per capita 2004.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2005a. Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency , Washington, DC. EPA/630/P-03/00lF. http:/ /cfuub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid= 116283
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2005b. Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Susceptibility from Early

- Life Exposure to Carcinogens. Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency , Washington, DC. EPA/630/R-03 /003F. http: //www
.epa.gov/ttnlatw/childrens supplement final.pdf

10

### U.S. Environmental Protective Agency (USEPA). 2008. Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook. National Center for Environmenta l Assessment. Office ofResearch and Development. Washington, DC. EPA/600RJR-06/096F. http: //cfpub.epa.gov/ ncealcfm/recordisplay.cfm ?deid =56747



### 11

### Supporting Information
The supplemental information describes how drinking water intake and body weight were normalized based on age ranges for the three ADAF adjustment periods. The OW 

### believes that the normalization of the body weight and drinking water intake data across the three age periods spec ified in the ADAF guidance document rather than including calculations for each of the eleven age periods included in the Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook simplifies the presentation of the data for stakeholders without having a substantial impact on the outcome of the analysis. Body Weights: Approach 1
Table 1: Normalized Body Weight for the Birth to< 2-year Age Period EPA, 2008 Table 8-24) Age Range Body Weight Duration Fraction Product Months 

### kg kg Birth to <1 4 1124 0.167 1 to <3 

### 5 2/24 0.417 3 to <6 7 3/24 0.875 6 to< 12 9 6/24 2.250 12 to <24 12 12 /24 6.000 Normalized value (sum ofthe age specific numbers) 9.71
Table 2: Normalized Body Weight for the 2-year to <16-year Age Period EPA, 2008 Table 8-24) Age Range Body Weight Duration Fraction Product Years 

### kg kg 2 to <3 14 1 / 14 1 3 to <6 18 3/ 14 3.857 6 to <1 1 30 5/14 10.714 llto<16 54 5/14 19.286 Normalized value (sum ofthe age specific products) 34.857
Table 

### 3: Normalized Body Weight for the 16-year to 70-year Age Period (EPA , 2008 Table 8-24; EPA, 2004 Table 7.2 Age Range Body Weight Duration Fraction Product Years kg 

### kg 16 to <18 67 2/54 2.481 18 to <21 69 3/54 3.833 20+ 76 49/54 68.963 Normalized value (sum of the age specific numbers) 75 .2 77

12

### Drinking Water Intakes: Approach 1
Table 4: Consumers only direct and indirect drinking water intakes normalized for the birth to <2-year Age Period (EPA, 2008 Table 3-14) Age Range Drinking Water I ntake Duration Product Months L/day Fraction L/day Birth to <1 0.849* 1/24 0.035 I 

### to <3 0.943* 2/24 0.079 3 to <6 1.021 3/24 0.128 6 to< 12 0.971 6 /24 0.243 12 to <24 0.674 12 /24 0.337 Normalized value (sum of the age specific numbers) 0.822
Table 5: Consumers only direct and indirect drinking water intakes normalized for the 2-year to 16-year Age Period (EPA, 2008 Table 3-14) Age Range Drinking Water Intake Duration Product Years L/day Fraction L/day 2 to <3 0.700 1/ 14 0.050 3 to <6 0.867 3114 0.186 6 to < 11 0.994 5114 0.355 11 to< 16 1.432 5114 0.511 Normalized value (sum ofthe age specific numbers) 1.102
Table 6: Consumers only direct and indirect drinking water intakes normalized for the 16-year to 70 year Age Period (EPA, 2008 Table 3-14; EPA, 2004 Table A2 P. E100) Age Range Drinking Water I ntake Duration Product Years L/day Fraction L/day 16 to <18 1.647 2 / 54 0.061 18 to <21 1.860 3/5 4 0.103 21 to 70 2.284 49/5 4 2.073 Normalized value (sum ofthe age specific numbers) 2.237

13

### Drinking Water Intake Body Weight Ratios: Approach 2
Table 7: Consumers only direct and indirect drinking water intake/body weight ratios normalized for the birth to <2 year Age Period (EPA, 2008 Table 3-19) Age Range Drinking water intake/ Duration Product Months body weight ratio Fraction L/ kglday Llkg/day Birth to <1 0. 235 1/2 4 0.010 1 to <3 0.228 2/24 0.019 3 to <6 0.148 3/24 0.019 6 to< 12 0.112 6 /24 0.02 8 12 to <24 0

. 056 12 /24 0.028 Normalized value (sum of the age specific numbers) 0.104
Table 8: Consumers only direct and indirect drinking water intake/body weight ratios normalized for the 2-year to 16 year Age Period (EPA, 2008 Table 3-19) Age Range Drinking Water Intake/ Duration Product Years body weight ratio Fraction Llkglday L/kg/day 2 to <3 0.052 1114 0.004 3 to <6 0.049 3/14 0.011 6 to <11 0.035 5/14 0.013 11 to< 16 0.026 5/ 14 0.009 Normalized value (sum of the age specific numbers) 0.03 7
Table 

### 9: Consumers only direct and indirect drinking water intake/body weight ratios normalized for the 16-year to 70 year Age Period (EPA, 2008 Table 3-19; EPA, 2004 Table A1 page E 139) Age Range Drinking Water Intake/ Duration Product Years body weight ratio Fraction Llkg!day L/kg/day 16 to <18 0.024 2/54 0.001 18 to <21 0.029 3/ 54 0.002 20+ 0.032 49/54 0.029 Normalized value (sum of the age specific numbers) 0.032

14

### Birth to Seven Year Exposure Using a Drinking Water Intake/ Body Weight Ratio: Approach 2
Table 10: Consumers only direct and indirect drinking water intake/body weight ratios normalized for the 2-year to <7 year Age Period (EPA, 2008 Table 3-19) Age Range Drinking Water Intake/ Duration Product Years body weight ratio Fraction Llkg/day Llkg/day 2 to <3 0.052 1/5 0.010 3 to <6 0.049 3/5 0.029 6 to <7 0.035* 

### 115 0.007 Normalized va lue (sum of the age specific numbers) 0.046 *Value applies to the 6 to < 11 age range as reported in the Exposure Factor's Handbook

15Child-Specific Expos ure Factors Handbook Chapter 8- Body Weight

Tab l e 8-23. Estimated Body W eights ofTypical Age Groups of Interest in U.S. EPA Risk Assessments' Age Group NHANES Males (kg) Females (kg) Overall (kg) Mean so N Mean so N Mean so N n 17.0 4.6 2.097 16

.3 4 .7 1,933 16

.7 4

. 5 4,030 I to 6 years Ul 16.9 4.7 3 , 149 16.5 4 .9 3,221 16.8 5.0 6.370 IV 17.1 4

.9 633 17

. 5 5.0 541 17 .3 5.0 1,I74 IJ 45.2 17

. 6 1 ,6 18 43.9 15.9 I ,507 44

. 8 17.5 3.125 7 to 16 years lii 49.3 20. 9 2,549 46.8 18

.0 2,640 47.8 18.4 5 ,189 I V 47

. 9 20

. 1 1,203 47.9 19.2 1, 178 47.7 19

. 1 2,381



# . Estimates were weighted using the samp le weights provided with each survey
. so**~** S tandard Deviation. N = Number of individuals.
Source: Portier et a!. 2007.

Table 8-24. Estimated Percentile Distribution of Body Weight by Fine Age Categories Derived From 1994-96, 1998 CSFU Weight (ki lograms) Age Gr o up Sample Mean Percentile Si7-e I " 5'" 10'" 2 5'" 5 0'" 75'. QO' h 95 ' " 99'b
Birth to I month 88 4 I ' 2 ' 3' 3 3 4 4' 5' 5'
I to <3 months 245 5 2" 3' 4 4 5 6 6 7' 8"
3 to <6 months 411 7 4' 5 5 6 7 8 9 10 12'

6 to <12 months 678 9 6' 7 7 8 9 10 II 12 13'
I to <2 years 1,002 I2 8' 9 9 10 II 13 14 15 19'
2 to <3 years 994 14 10' 10 11 12 14 16 18 19 22"
3 t

o <6 years 4, 1 12 I 8 II 13 13 16 18 20 23 25 32

6 to < II years 1.553 3 0 16' 1 8 20 23 27 35 4 1 4 5 5 7'

I I to< l 6years 975 54 29' 33 36 44 52 61 72 82 95'
16to<l8 years 360 67 41 " 46' 50 56 63 73 86 100' 114'
18 to <21 years 383 69 45' 48' 51 58 66 77 89 100' 117'



# . Sample size does meet minimum reporting requirements as described in the " Third Report on Nutrit ion Monitoring in the United Sta tes" (LSRO, 1995).
Source : Kah n and Stralka, 2008.

Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook Se

ptember 2008 Page 8-35C hild-S p ecific Exp os ur e Fa ctor s H and book
C

ha p ter 3
- Wa ter In gestion

Table 3-14. Consumers Only" Estimates of Combined Direct and Indirectb Water Ingestion : Community Water (rnUday) Age Sample Mean Percentiles size 10 25 50 75 90 95 99 Birth to <I month 40 470* 32* 215* 482* 692* 849 * 858* 919* I to <3 months 114 552 67* 339 533 801 943 * 1,053 * 1,264* 3 to <6 months 281 556 44 180 561 837 1, 021 1 , 171* 1 ,440* 6 to < 12 months 562 467 44 105 426 7 10 971 1,147 1,586* I to <2 years 916 308 43 10 7 229 428 674 893 1,248 * 2 to <3 years 934 356 49 126 281 510 700 912 1,388* 3 to <6 years 3,960 4 17 57 146 336 581 867 1,099 1,684 6 to < II years 1, 555 480 74 177 373 682 994 1,251 2 ,024* 11 to < l6 years 937 652 106 236 487 873 1 ,432 1,744 2,589* 16 to <18 years 341 792 106 266 591 987 1,647 2,002* 3,804* 18 to <21 years 364 895 114 295 674 1,174 1,860 2,565* 3,917*



# . Excludes individuals who did not ingest water from the source during the s urvey period

. b Direct water defined as water ingested directly as a beverage; indirect water defined as water added in the preparation of food or beverages. * The sample size does not meet minimum requirements as described in the "Third Report on Nutrition Monitoring in the United States" (LSRO, 1995).
Source : Kahn and Stralka, 2008 and supplementary data

.

Table 3-15

. Consumers Only" Estimate s of Combined Direct and lndirectb Water Ingestion: Bottled Water (mUday) Sample Mean Percentiles Age size 10 25 50 75 90 95 99 Birth to <I month 25


## - - 

## - - - - 

### - - I to <3 months 64 450 * 3 1* 62* 329* 74 3* 886 * 1, 045* 1, 562* 3 to <6 months 103 507 48* 88 493 747 1,04 1 * 1,436 * 1,506 * 6 to <12 months 200 425 47 114 353 630 945* 1,103* 1,413* 1 to <2 years 229 262 45 88 188 324 600 709 * 1,083* 2 to <3 years 232 352 57 1 16 241 471 736 977* 1,665 * 3 to <6 years 1,021 380 72 149 291 502 796 958 1,635* 6 to < II years 332 430 88 168 350 55 7 850 1,081 * 1,823 * 11 to <16 years 192 570 116* 229 414 719 1 , 162* 1,447* 2,705* 16 to <18 years 63 615 * 85* 198* 446* 779* 1 ,365* 1,613* 2,639* 18 to <2 1 years 97 769 118* 236 4 39 943 1 ,78 8 * 2,343 * 3 ,957 *



# . Exclude s individuals who did not ingest water from the source during the survey period

. b Direct water defined as water ingested directly as a beverage; indirect water defined as water added in the preparation offood or beverages.



### - I n sufficient sample size to est imate m ean and percentiles. * The sample size does not meet minimum requirements as described in the ''Third Report on Nutrition Monitoring in the United States" (LSRO, 1995).
Source: Kahn and Stralka, 2008 and supplementary data

.

P

age 3-20 C hild-Specific Ex p os ure Fa ctor s Handbook Se

pt ember 2008Child -Specific Exposure Factors Handbook
Cha pter 3- Water Ingestion

Ta

ble 3- 19. Consumers Only" Estimates ofDir ect and Indirectb Wa ter Ingestion : Community Water (mL!kg-day ) Age Sample Mean Percentiles size 10 25 50 75 90 95 99 Birth to <I month 37 137 * I I * 65* 138 * 197* 235* 238* 263 * I to <3 months 108 119 12* 7 1 10 7 15 1 228* 285* 345 * 3 to < 6 month s 269 80 7 27 77 11 8 148 173* 222* 6 to < 12 months 534 53 5 12 

### ..iZ 81 ill 129 1 86* I to <2 years 880 27 4 9 20 36 56 75 109* 2 to <3 years 879 26 4 9 21 36 52 62 121* 3 to <6 years 3,703 24 3 8 19 33 49 65 97 6 to < 11 years 1,439 17 3 6 13 23 35 45 72* 1 1 to < 16 years 911 13 2 5 10 17 26 3 4 54* 16 to < 18 years 339 12 I 4 9 16 24 32* 58* 18 to <21 years 361 13 2 5 !Q 17 29. 35* 63 * • Excludes individuals who did not ingest water from the source during the survey period

. b Direct water defined as water inges ted directly as a beverage; indirect water defi n ed as water added in the preparation of food or beverages.

... The sample s ize doe s not meet m inimum requirements as described in the "Third Report on Nutrition Monitoring in the Uni ted States" (LSRO , 1995).
Source Kahn and St ralka, 2008 and supplementary data

.
Table 3-20

. Consumers Only" Estimates ofDirect and lndirectb Water Ingestion: Bottled Water (rnUkg-day) Age Sample Mean Percentiles size 10 25 50 75 90 95 99 Birth to <I month 25 

### - - - 

## - - 

### - 

## - - I to <3 month s 64 92* 7* 12* 76 * 15 1* 164* 220* 411* 3 to <6 month s 95 72 6* 15 69 100 149* 184 * 213* 6 to <12 months 185 47 5* 11 34 73 104* 120 * 166* I to <2 years 216 22 5 8 16 27 49 66* 103* 2 to <3 years 2 11 25 4 8 17 35 54 81 * 91 * 3 to < 6 years 946 21 4 8 16 29 45 57 90* 6 to <I I years 295 IS 3 5 II 19 30 42* 69 * 11 to <16 years 180 I I 2* 4 8 14 24 * 27* 44* 16 to <18 years 63 10 * I * 3* 7 * II * 23* 27 * 37* 18 to <21 years 93 I I 2* 3 6 14 27 * 30 * 54* 

### • E x cludes individuals who did not ing est water from the source during the survey period

. b Dir ect water defined as water ingested directly as a b everage; indirect water defined as water added in the preparation of food or beverages.

- Insufficient sample size to estimate means an d percentile s. 

### • The sample size doe s not meet minimum requirements as described in the "Third Report on Nutriti on Monitoring in the United S tates " (LSRO, 1995).
Source: Kahn and Stralka, 2008 and supplementary data.

Child-Specific Ex posure Facto r s Handbook September 2008 Page 3
-23Gen der

b

. Ma le

c . Both sexes Age

<0.5 O.S

- 0.9 1

- 3 4-6 7- 1 0 11 -14 1 5- 1 9 20

- 2 4 25

- 54 55-64 65 +
20 + <2 2-15 15 + <6 6-15 All ag es
<0.5 0.5 -0

. 9 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-14 15

- 19 20-2 4 25-54 SS-6 4 65 +
20 + <2 2-15 15 + <6 6-15 All ages Sampsiz e

361 333 1,851 1,520

5 37 392 4 0 9 336 2, 4 99

775 1,114
4,724 1, 1 97 3 ,7 97 5 , 13 3 3,7 9 1 1,203 10,127

7 4 4 67 8 3,6 4 5 2,988 1,028

790 816 676 4 , 830 1 ,516 2,139
9,161 2,424 7,4 4 9 9, 977 7 , 5 30 2,3 4 3 19,85 0 Table 7. 2

. Estimate d Di stribution of Bod y W eigh t Gender and F i n e A ge Cat e g ori es All I n di v iduals

Kilograms ••

Population

954,525 872, 4 10 6,127,169 5,799,447 7,645,2 0 0 7 , 522 , 213 9, 294 , 12 1 9,172,756 56,219,5 4 8 9,564,795 12,993,304
87,950, 4 03

3

. 917.90 2 25 , 003 , 062 97,2 44 ,524 11,889,007 17,031,957 126,165,488

1 , 890, 4 6 1 1 , 7 7 0 , 7 0 0 11,7 4 6 , 1 4 6 11,570,747 14,541,011 15,183,156 17,825,164 18 , 402,877 111,382, 8 77 20 , 691,260 30,578 , 2 1 0
181,055,22 4

7,695,535 49 , 006,686 198,880,388 23 , 160,1 74 33,542,047 25 5,582,609 Mean

6 9 14 21 32 52 7 3 80 85 84 80

84 10 3 3 8 2 15 40 70

6 9 1 4 21 32 51 67 72 77 77 72

76 10 33 75 15 4 0 65 P 1

3 • 6 ' 9 • 13 • 1 8 • 28 • 4 4 • 52• 5 4 54 • 51 •
5 4 3* 11 52 4 18 • 9
2• 6• 8 1 2 17 • 28 • 42 ' 4 5 • 4 5 46 44

45

3 11 4 5 4 17 8 P5

3 • 7 • 10 15 21 32 • 53 58 63 61 59

61 4 13 60 7 20 15

14 20 32 47 49 52 52 so

51 4 13 so 6 20 15 P10

4 7 11 16 22 35 56 61 66 67 63
65 6 15 63 8 22 22

7 10 16 22 35 so 53 54 57 54

54

5 15 54 8 2 2 22 P 25

5 8 12 1 8 27 4 1 6 1 68 75 74 70

72 8 1 9 72 11 27 59
4 8 11 17 26 4 2 56 59 63 6 5 6 2

6 3 7 19 61 11 27 52 P5 0

9 l4 20 31 50 6 8 78 83 83 78

82 10 2 8 81 15 36 76

13 20 29 so 63 68 75 75 71
73 10 28 72 l4 36 67 P75

7 10 16 22 36 60 80 86 93 93 88
91 1 2 43 91 18 so 87

7 10 16 22 36 58 73 81 86 87 81

86 11 43 84 1 8 50 8 1 P9 0

11 18 26 44 72 94 100 104 103 99

104

13 57 1 0 3 21 61 100

8 11 18 2 6 43 68 85 9 4 1 00 99 93
98 13 56 97 2 1 59 95 P9 5

9 • 12 • 19 28 4 8 8 1 • 107 112 111 109 104

110 1 4 66 109 23 71 109

9 1 2 19 28 4 8 79 99 104 1 09 1 0 5 100
107 l4 63 106 2 3 68 10 4 P99

11• n • 23 • 36 • 63 ' 92 • 116 • 134 ' 131 125 • 117 •
130 1 7• 8 4 129 29 86 • 126

11' 13. 23 36 59 • 89 • 113 • 130 • 127 1 24 113

126 17 82 125 28 as 122

Source of data: 1994 -1996, 1998 USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Indi v iduals(CSFII) 1SAPR0 3 18:59**:\ PW** **OS~ ATER** **\R EQ006\R006**  Gl.LST

• : The sample size does not meet minimum reporting requirements a s described in t h e " Third Repo r t on Nutrition Monitoring in the Un i ted States.•

-

•• : M ultiply va l u es b y 2.2 to c onvert to esti ma t ed w eight in p o unds

. NO

TE: 757 indi vi d u als did no t rep ort body wei g ht. They represent 6 , 3 1 4,627 indi v i d ualn in the pop ulation.

7

-8Gender Age

c. Both se x es Direc t and Indire ct <0.5 0.5-0

. 9 <2 1-3 4

- 6 <6 7-10 11 -14 15

- 19 20 + "'20-24 25

- 54 5 5 -64 65 + All ages Part II I : Es ti m ates of Direct, I n di rec t, and Bo th Direct and I nd irect W a t er Ingest i o n T able A2

. community W ater: Gender by Fine A ge Categori e s Consumers Only

Millil i ters/Person/Day

Sampsize Population Mean P1 P5 P10 P25 PSO

435 1 , 057,243 548 1 0 * 29 52 209 552 562 1 ,4 37 , 057 46 7 3 * 2 5 4 4 10 5 4 26 1,913 6,176,837 386 3 ' 22 4 4 11 4 301 3,422 11,011,095 349 3 2 3 48 119 270 2,916 11,352,187 442 4 29 61 152 355 6,807 21,037,341 398 4 25 51 130 315 1,027 14 , 327,436 4 87 6 * 3 4 7 2 180 382

759 1 4,4 32 , 607 6 4 1 7 • 5 9 115 235 4 73 777 16 , 7 44 ,959 817 7 * 51 99 266 608 8,611 172,088,785 1,176 13 1 03 208 524 995

644 17,658,027 1.033 10 ' 68 122 359 711 4,599 106,779,569 1 ,171 14 100 201 503 965 1,410 19 , 48 4 ,112 1 , 242 11 115 23 7 651 1,111 1 , 958 2 8, 1 67' 077 1. 242 24 155 310 70 4 1. 149 1 8, 509 2 4 2,451,36 9 1 , 000 9 64 127 355 786 II!-8

P75 P90 P95 P99

814 985 1,139 1 ,4 33• 71 0 971 l , 14 7 1 ,586* 587 856 1, 0 14 1, 4 01 * 485 723 946 1,393 607 943 1,176 1,729 564 842 1 ,051 1, 5 73 707 993 1 , 241 1 , 9 4 2 * 8 33 1, 41 5 1 ,7 4 2 2 , 564 * 1,065 1 ,671 2 ,161 3, 86 2 * 1,572 2,284 2,848 4,63 1 1,218 2,175 3,082 5, 35 6 * 1,561 2,326 2,926 4 , 7 35 1 , 657 2 , 297 2 , ?21 4,2 22 1. 657 2, 1 90 2 , 604 3,668 1,375 2,069 2, 6 01 4 , 2 7 4

Source of data: 1994-1996, 1998 USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals(CS F II) 19FEB04 09:04 M:\PW\OSTWATBR\REQ006\R006

_ E4.LST Estimates are b ase d on 2-day averages. A

l l estimates exclude commer cial and b i o l o gical w a te r
. M

eans ze r o.

• : Th e sample s iz e does not m eet minimum r eporting requirements as described in the "Third Report on Nutrition Monitoring in the United States

. "

E- 100Part IV: Est i mates o f Direct, Ind i r ect, and Bo t h Direct and I ndirect W ater Ingestion IV-2 Table A1

. Community Water: Gender by Broad Age categories Consurr.ers Only

M i lliliters/Kg of Body W eight/Day

Gender Age Sampsize Population Mean Pl PS PlO P25 PSO P7S P90 P9S P99

c. Both sexes Direc t < 1 398 1 , 012,461 18 p 2 • 3 5 11 23 39 57• 117 • 1-10 5 , 087 26 , 870,32 4 1 7 1 2 3 6 1 2 22 36 4 7 7 8 11-19 1,245 25,303,467 11 1 * 1 2 4 8 13 22 28 58 * 20 • 6,583 130. 511,025 11 1 1 2 

## " 8 14 23 30 so All ages 13,313 183,697,277 12 1 1 2 4 8 15 25 33 57
Indirece < 1 898 2,247,324 67 1 * 2 5 12 57 100 1 4 1 172 249• 1

- 10 6,331 30 ,7 01,858 a 1 2 6 1 1 1 9 2 6 4 5 11-19 1,282 2 6 , 304,246 5 

## - 

## - - 1 3 6 10 14 25* 20 • 8,055 160,396,393 8 1 3 6 11 17 22 39 All ages 16,566 219,649,821 8 

## - - 1 2 6 11 17 23 51
Direct a nd Indirect < 1 948 2,373,335 71 1* 3 6 17 62 106 145 185 2 61* 1-10 6 , 901 34 ,527,95 7 21 1 3 7 16 28 4 4 57 n 11 -19 1. 507 30 , 759,097 13 1 2 4 10 17 26 34 60* 20 + 8, 459 16 8 ,957,363 16 1 3 7 13 22 32 39 62 All ages 17,815 236.617. 752 17 

## - 1 3 7 13 22 33 44 77

Source of data: 1 994- 1 996 , 1998 USDA Cont inu i ng Survey of Food Intakes by Indi v i duals(CSFII) Est i mates are b a s e d on 2-day a v erages. 13S EP0 1 16:52 M:\P W

\OSTW ATER\REQ 006\R006_Fl.LST
All estimates e xclude commercial and b i ological wa te r. -: Means zero.

• : The sample size does not meet minimum reporting r e quirements as described in the •Third Report on Nutritlon Monitoring in the United St
. ates.• N

OTE: 757 individuals did not report body weight. They represent 6 , 314,627 individuals in the populati on
.



### E-1 39