Contaminant 

Information Sheets 

(CISs) for the Draft 

Fourth Preliminary 

Contaminant 

Candidate List

(PCCL 4) Nominated 

Contaminants
Office of Water (4607M) 

EPA 815-R-15-003

January 2015
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page i of iv 

Contents

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Summary of the Chemicals Classification Process from the PCCL to CCL ...... 3

3.0 CCL 4 Chemicals CISs Explanation ........................................................................ 5

4.0 Summary of the Microbes Classification Process from the PCCL to CCL and 

CISs Explanation ....................................................................................................... 9

5.0 References ................................................................................................................ 10

Appendix 1. Chemical Contaminant Information Sheets A1-1 

Appendix 2. Microbial Contaminant Information Sheets A2-1 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page ii of iv 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page iii of iv 

Abbreviations and Acronyms

CASRN Chemical Abstract Services Registry Number 

CCL Contaminant Candidate List 

CCL 3 EPA’s Third Contaminant Candidate List 

CCL 4 EPA’s Fourth Contaminant Candidate List 

CIS Contaminant Information Sheet 

DWEL Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

EEC Estimated Environmental Concentration

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency 

HA Health Advisory 

FR Federal Register

HRL Health Reference Level

IARC International Agency for Research on Cancer 

IRIS Integrated Risk Information System 

L List

L? List?

LD50 Lethal dose 50; an estimate of a single dose that is expected to cause the death 

of 50 percent of the exposed animals; it is derived from experimental data. 

lbs Pounds 

LOAEL Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level

MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal

MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 

NL Not List

NL? Not List?

NOAEL No Observed Adverse Effect Level

NTP National Toxicology Program 

OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (California)

OPP Office of Pesticide Programs

PCCL Preliminary-CCL

PCCL 4 EPA’s Fourth Preliminary-CCL

PWS Public Water System

RfD Reference Dose 

SRS Substance Registry System/Substance Registry Services

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

WBDO Waterborne Disease Outbreak

WHO World Health Organization
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page iv of iv 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 1 of 11

1.0 Introduction

Section 1412(b)(1) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended in 1996, requires EPA 

to publish the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) every five years. The SDWA specifies that the 

list must include contaminants that are not subject to any proposed or promulgated National 

Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs), are known or anticipated to occur in public 

water systems (PWSs) and may require regulation under the SDWA. EPA uses this list of 

unregulated contaminants to help the agency identify priority contaminants for regulatory 

decision making and to prioritize research and data collection efforts. SDWA also requires the 

agency to consult with the scientific community, including the Science Advisory Board, and 

provide notice and opportunity for public comment prior to the publication of the Final CCL. In 

addition, SDWA directs the agency to consider the health effects and occurrence information for 

unregulated contaminants to identify those contaminants that present the greatest public health 

concern related to exposure from drinking water. 

EPA published the third CCL (CCL 3), which listed 116 contaminants on October 8, 2009 (74 

FR 51850 (USEPA, 2009a)). In developing the CCL 3, EPA implemented a multi-step process to 

select contaminants for the final CCL 3, which included the following key steps: 

(1) The identification of a broad universe of potential drinking water contaminants (CCL 3 

Universe);

(2) Screening the CCL 3 Universe to a Preliminary CCL (PCCL) using screening criteria 

based on the potential to occur in PWSs and the potential for public health concern; 

(3) Evaluation of the PCCL contaminants based on a more detailed review of the occurrence 

and health effects data using a scoring and classification system to identify a final list of 

116 CCL 3 contaminants; and 

(4) Incorporating public input and expert review in the CCL 3 process. 

Steps 1, 2 and 3 in the process are described in detail in the CCL 3 support documents: 

• Final CCL 3 Chemicals: Identifying the Universe (USEPA, 2009b);

• Final CCL 3 Chemicals: Screening to a PCCL (USEPA, 2009c);

• Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Chemicals: Classification of the PCCL to the CCL

(USEPA, 2009d);

• Final CCL 3 Microbes: Identifying the Universe (USEPA, 2009e);

• Final CCL 3 Microbes: Screening to the PCCL (USEPA, 2009f); and

• Final CCL 3 Microbes: PCCL to CCL Process (USEPA, 2009g).

These documents can be found on the EPA web site at: http://www2.epa.gov/ccl/contaminantcandidate-list-3-ccl-3 or at http://www.regulations.gov (docket ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2007-1189). 

After a Final CCL is published, SDWA section 1412(b)(1)(B)(ii) as amended in 1996, requires 

EPA at five year intervals to make determinations of whether to regulate or not to regulate no 

fewer than five contaminants from the CCL in a process called regulatory determinations. This is 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 2 of 11

a separate process from the listing of contaminants on the CCL. The 1996 SDWA Amendments 

specify three criteria to determine whether a contaminant may require regulation: 

• the contaminant may have an adverse effect on the health of persons;

• the contaminant is known to occur or there is a substantial likelihood that the contaminant

will occur in PWSs with a frequency and at levels of public health concern; and

• in the sole judgment of the Administrator, regulation of such contaminant presents a

meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by PWSs.

If EPA determines that these three statutory criteria are met and makes a final determination to 

regulate a contaminant, the agency has 24 months to publish a proposed Maximum Contaminant 

Level Goal1 (MCLG) and NPDWR2. After the proposal, the agency has 18 months to publish 

and promulgate a final MCLG and NPDWR (SDWA section 1412(b)(1)(E))3. 

On February 11, 2011, as a separate action, the agency issued a positive regulatory determination

for perchlorate, a chemical listed in CCL 1, CCL 2 and CCL 3 (76 FR 7762 (USEPA, 2011)). 

Recently, EPA has published preliminary regulatory determinations for five unregulated 

contaminants on the CCL 3 (79 FR 62716 (USEPA, 2014a)). The five contaminants include: 

dimethoate; 1,3-dinitrobenzene; strontium; terbufos and terbufos sulfone. The agency is making 

preliminary determinations to regulate one contaminant (strontium) and to not regulate four 

contaminants (dimethoate; 1,3-dinitrobenzene; terbufos; and terbufos sulfone). Therefore, the 

agency is removing perchlorate and these five contaminants from the Draft Fourth CCL (CCL 4), 

pending the result of the final regulatory determinations for CCL 3. 

EPA conducted an abbreviated evaluation and selection process for the CCL 4. This abbreviated 

CCL 4 process includes a three pronged approach: (1) carrying forward CCL 3 contaminants 

(minus those with regulatory determinations), (2) seeking and evaluating nominations from the 

public for additional contaminants to consider and (3) evaluating any new data for those 

contaminants with previous negative regulatory determinations from CCL 1 or CCL 2 for 

potential inclusion on the CCL 4. 

As part of the process to develop the CCL 4, EPA published a Federal Register notice (77 FR

27057 (USEPA, 2012)) requesting that the public submit nominations for chemical and 

microbial contaminants to be considered for inclusion on the CCL 4. EPA also requested 

supporting information that has been made available since the development of the CCL 3 or 

existing information that was not considered in the development of the CCL 3, which shows that 

the nominated contaminant may have an adverse health effect on people and occurs or is likely to 

1 The MCLG is the "maximum level of a contaminant in drinking water at which no known or anticipated adverse 

effect on the health of persons would occur, and which allows an adequate margin of safety. Maximum contaminant 

level goals are non-enforceable health goals." (40 C.F.R. 141.2; 42 U.S.C. 300g-1) 2 An NPDWR is a legally enforceable standard that applies to public water systems. An NPDWR sets a legal limit 

(called a maximum contaminant level or MCL) or specifies a certain treatment technique (TT) for public water 

systems for a specific contaminant or group of contaminants. The MCL is the highest level of a contaminant that is 

allowed in drinking water and is set as close to the MCLG as feasible using the best available treatment technology 

and analytical methods and taking cost into consideration. 3

 The statute authorizes a nine month extension of this promulgation date. 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 3 of 11

occur in public water systems. EPA reviewed the nominations and supporting information 

provided by nominators to determine if any new data were provided that had not been previously 

evaluated for CCL 3. The agency also collected additional data for the nominated contaminants, 

when it was available, from both CCL 3 data sources that had been updated and from new data 

sources that were not available at the time of CCL 3. A complete list of references provided by

nominators can be found in the support document Summary of Nominations for the Fourth CCL

(USEPA, 2015a). A more detailed description of the CCL data sources collected by EPA may be 

found in the support document Data Sources for the CCL 4 (USEPA, 2015b). EPA evaluated the 

nominated contaminants utilizing the best available health effects and occurrence data and the 

same process for screening and scoring contaminants that was used for CCL 3. 

A summary of the process and data used to screen the contaminants nominated for CCL 4 from 

the CCL 4 Universe to the PCCL 4 is included in the Screening Document for the Draft PCCL 4 

Nominated Contaminants (USEPA, 2015c). This document summarizes the process used to 

select contaminants from the PCCL for the CCL. This document also presents the Contaminant 

Information Sheets (CISs) for the nominated contaminants qualified for inclusion on the PCCL

4. The purpose of the CISs is to summarize the data used to evaluate the nominated contaminants

and to select contaminants for the Draft CCL 4.

For CCL 3, EPA published CISs for the 561 chemicals (USEPA, 2009h) and the 29 microbial 

contaminants (USEPA, 2009g) on the PCCL 3 (these documents include the CISs for the 116 

contaminants on the Final CCL 3 as well). In addition, Appendix E of the Protocol for the 

Regulatory Determinations 3 Including Appendices A-F (USEPA, 2014b) includes a summary 

of updated health and occurrence data used to evaluate 35 CCL 3 contaminants in the regulatory 

determinations process. This document presents 20 chemical CISs for the nominated chemicals 

listed on the PCCL 4 (including CISs for the seven nominated chemicals that made the Draft 

CCL 4) and four microbial CISs for the nominated microbes that are listed on the PCCL 4 

(including CISs for the two nominated microbes that made the Draft CCL 4). 

2.0 Summary of the Chemicals Classification Process from the 

PCCL to CCL 

This section briefly summarizes the process developed under CCL 3 to evaluate contaminants 

from the PCCL to assess if they should move forward to the CCL. EPA used this same process to 

evaluate the nominated contaminants for listing on the Draft CCL 4. A detailed explanation of 

this step in the process is provided in the Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Chemicals:

Classification of the PCCL to CCL (USEPA, 2009d) and its appendices. 

To identify chemicals from the PCCL to include on the CCL, EPA used classification models 

and a scoring system as tools. The classification models were used to process complex data in a 

consistent and reproducible manner. An overarching premise in using classification models to 

prioritize contaminants is that different contaminants can be compared on the basis of similar 

attributes. The attributes are properties used to categorize contaminants for their potential to 

occur in drinking water and for their potential to cause adverse health effects. Four attributes 

were selected including two attributes describing health effects (Potency and Severity) and two 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 4 of 11

attributes describing occurrence (Prevalence and Magnitude); these are discussed in more detail 

in Section 3.0 of this document. Scoring protocols were developed for each of the four attributes 

and these scores were used as input for the classification models. The scores for each attribute 

increase with increasing potential to cause adverse health effects or potential to occur in drinking 

water (e.g., a score of 10 indicates greater concern for adverse health effects or greater potential 

to occur in drinking water, whereas a score of 1 indicates lesser concern). If a chemical had more 

than one data element available for scoring, EPA used a hierarchy to establish which data 

element should be used in scoring the potency attribute, the prevalence attribute and the 

magnitude attribute. For the potency and severity attributes, if data were available for both the 

cancer and noncancer endpoints, the higher of the cancer or noncancer potency scores was 

selected to score the potency and the critical effect associated with the data used to score the 

potency was used to score the severity. The attribute scoring protocols and data hierarchies are 

discussed in more detail in the Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Chemicals: Classification of 

the PCCL to CCL (USEPA, 2009d) (see Appendix A for the Attribute Scoring Protocols). 

The classification models were calibrated using a training data set so that they mimicked an 

expert panel’s decisions to list or not list a contaminant on the CCL. The training data set 

consisted of 202 sets of attribute scores for contaminants and the consensus category (list/not list 

decisions) made by a team of EPA subject matter experts based on evaluating the data and the 

attribute scores for those contaminants. The classification models developed a relationship 

between the contaminant attribute scores (input variables) and the classification of the 

contaminants into list and not list categories (output). The list and not list decisions were placed 

into four primary categories: List (L), List? (L?), Not List? (NL?) or Not List (NL). The L? and 

NL? categories were developed because the expert panel recognized that clear decisions on 

listing contaminants could be made easily for some contaminants, but there was some 

uncertainty associated with the decision for other contaminants. The L? category signifies that 

the decision is leaning towards listing with some uncertainty, and NL? signifies that the decision 

is leading towards not listing, but with some uncertainty. EPA used three classification models 

and each model produced a prediction for each PCCL contaminant. EPA used an additive 

process to combine the results of all three models. If all three models were in 100% agreement 

on the categorical prediction, one of the four primary categorical predictions (L, L?, NL? or NL) 

was assigned to that contaminant. If all three models did not agree, then the contaminant was 

assigned to a category in between the four primary categorical predictions. None of the models 

categorized a contaminant more than one category higher or lower than the other models (i.e., no 

contaminants were categorized by an “L” by one model and by an “NL?” by another model). 

There are three “in between” categories including: L?-L, NL?-L? or NL-NL?. An example of a 

contaminant that would be placed in an “in between” category is if one model placed the 

contaminant into the “L” category and the other two models placed it into the “L?” category, 

then it would be placed in the “L?-L” category. 

As part of the last stage in the CCL 3 classification process, the model output was reviewed by 

internal EPA experts and based upon issues identified by the reviewers, several post-model 

refinements were added by EPA to the CCL 3 process. One important refinement that was added 

to the process was that for contaminants with water data, EPA calculated the ratio between the 

health reference level (HRL) and the 90th percentile concentration level in water. If a 90th

percentile (of detections) concentration level was not available, the agency used the maximum or 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 5 of 11

next highest percentile reported value. This HRL to concentration ratio was calculated for all 

contaminants with water data and serves as a benchmark that suggests a greater concern if the 

ratio is low (concentration close to the HRL) and a lesser concern when the ratio is high

(concentration well below the HRL) . If the ratio was less than 10, the contaminant was typically 

selected for listing on the CCL 3. If the ratio was greater than 10, the contaminant was typically 

not listed on the CCL and remained on the PCCL. For contaminants that had limited finished 

water data, but more robust ambient water monitoring data, the ambient water concentration was

used to develop the ratio. If no measured water data were available EPA used modeled water 

data for pesticides (Estimated Environmental Concentrations (EECs) developed by EPA’s Office 

of Pesticide Programs (OPP)), when available, to calculate the HRL to concentration ratios. 

For contaminants with no water data (either measured or modeled) HRL to concentration ratios 

could not be calculated. For these contaminants (e.g., contaminants that only had release data for 

occurrence), if the three-model categorical prediction was L, L?-L or L?, the contaminant was 

typically listed on the CCL. 

Another important post-model refinement included in the CCL 3 process considered the nature 

of the best available data. Some chemicals on the PCCL were represented by only an LD50 value 

for health effects data and/or only production volume data for occurrence. These data are not 

typically sufficient for a contaminant to be included on the CCL. In such cases, the chemical was 

not included on the CCL and remained on the PCCL. 

3.0 CCL 4 Chemical CISs Explanation

This section presents a walk-through of the CISs with a brief explanatory discussion of the data 

elements on the CIS and how they are used in the CCL process. The CIS for each contaminant is 

a concise, two-page profile with the first page including the attribute scores, three model 

categorical predictions, HRL/concentration ratios, use information, status of the contaminant in 

the CCL process and health effects data. The second page includes occurrence data. (The 

derivation and use of these data are explained in detail in Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 

Chemicals: Classification of the PCCL to CCL (USEPA, 2009d).) For the chemical CISs for the 

nominated contaminants that made the PCCL 4, please see Appendix A.

General and Summary Information 

The top section of the first page of each chemical CIS contains seven sets of information that 

includes contaminant identifiers, use and how the chemical was scored and ranked in the CCL 

process. From left to right, the upper rows include: 

1) Contaminant Identification – the contaminant name, a unique CCL-specific

identification number referred to as a Substance Key (many of which were obtained from

EPA’s Substance Registry System, now known as Substance Registry Services (SRS);

others were assigned during the CCL process if a contaminant was not listed in SRS), and

the contaminant’s Chemical Abstract Services Registry Number (CASRN).
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 6 of 11

2) Attribute Scores – assigned scores for each of the four CCL attributes (which are

derived from the health effects and occurrence data presented on the CISs), which are

defined as follows:

a. Potency – Potency reflects the lowest dose of a chemical that causes an adverse

health effect. Potency for chemicals is reflected in several standard toxicological

parameters, including the Reference Dose (RfD) or its equivalent; cancer potency,

expressed as the concentration in water equivalent to a 10-4 cancer risk; No

Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL); or Lowest Observed Adverse Effect

Level (LOAEL).

b. Severity – Severity is the adverse health effect associated with the dose that is

used as the measure of Potency and is calibrated based on the health-related

significance of the adverse effect (e.g., dermatitis versus cancer).

c. Prevalence – Prevalence is a measure of how widespread the contaminant’s

occurrence is in the environment (specifically in the United States). The data used

to score the prevalence attribute may include the percent of public water systems

or monitoring sites with detections of the contaminants, the number of States

where pesticides are applied or where releases to the environment are reported or

chemical production data in pounds per year (lbs/year).

d. Magnitude – Magnitude relates to the quantity of a contaminant that may be

found in the environment. This may be measured through the use of the median

value concentration of detections in drinking water or ambient water or the total

pounds of a chemical released to the environment. In cases where Magnitude data

are not available, persistence and mobility data (i.e., chemical

property/environmental fate parameters) were used as surrogates for water

occurrence or release data (see USEPA, 2009d for discussion).

3) Health Reference Level (HRL) – Separate HRLs are calculated for non-cancer and

carcinogenic effects. The HRLs are expressed as a concentration of a contaminant in

drinking water (expressed in micrograms per liter, μg/L).

If potency is scored on cancer data, that data is used to calculate the cancer HRL. If the

potency attribute is scored on non-cancer data, the highest ranking cancer data element is

used to calculate the cancer HRL. For cancer, an HRL can be derived either from a slope

factor or from a 10-4 cancer risk. For carcinogens, the HRL is the one-in-a-million (10-6)

cancer risk expressed as a drinking water concentration (in μg/L).

If potency is scored on non-cancer data, that data is used to calculate the non-cancer

HRL. If the potency attribute is scored on cancer data, then the non-cancer HRL is

calculated using the highest ranking non-cancer data element. For non-cancer effects the

HRL can be derived from an RfD (or its equivalent), a LOAEL, or a NOAEL. For noncarcinogens, the HRL is obtained by multiplying the RfD times 70 kg (default body

weight), dividing by a water intake of 2 L/day and multiplying by a 20% relative source

contribution. If a NOAEL or a LOAEL was used for the HRL calculation the equation is

the same as with an RfD, but default uncertainty factors are applied to the NOAEL or

LOAEL to develop an RfD-like value (1,000 for a NOAEL and 3,000 for a LOAEL).
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 7 of 11

4) HRL/Concentration Ratios – The HRL/concentration ratios are presented using the 90th

percentile concentration occurrence value, if available, or the next highest percentile

value or the maximum concentration of detections. Both the non-cancer HRL/

concentration ratio and the cancer HRL/concentration ratio were calculated (if

applicable). The data used to develop the ratio is noted on the CIS.

Moving down the CIS to the next set of three data elements; from left to right are presented:

5) Use – Use information for the contaminant.

6) Three-Model Categorical Prediction – As noted in Section 2.0 above, three calibrated

classification models were used to generate Categorical Predictions based on the

contaminant’s attribute scores. There are four primary Categorical Predictions: L, L?,

NL? and NL. One of these four primary Categorical Predictions was assigned to a

contaminant if all three models were in agreement on the categorical prediction. If the

three models were not in agreement, the contaminant was assigned to a category in

between the four primary categories. There are three “in-between” categories including:

L?-L, NL?-L? or NL-NL?.

7) Status – Presents the status of the contaminant with respect to having been listed on CCL

3 and its status within the CCL 4 process (i.e., was it included in the CCL 4 Universe,

PCCL 4 or Draft CCL 4).

Health Effects Data

The remainder of the first page of the CISs presents the available health effects data for each 

contaminant. Non-cancer data elements are presented first followed by cancer data elements. 

Both the non-cancer and cancer data elements are generally presented in order according to the 

data hierarchy developed for scoring the potency attribute (with the highest ranking data 

elements used for scoring generally being presented closer to the top of the page and the lower 

ranking elements closer to the bottom of the page). The non-cancer data are presented before the 

cancer data. The column headings summarize the data element, the data source acronym, the 

numerical value (or qualitative, for cancer classification), units and the year associated with the 

data element. Typically the year is the date of publication of the data, although given the 

variability of the data sources’ formatting it may represent a toxicological study date or the date 

when the data source website was last updated. If available, the critical effect is noted and a 

notes field is filled in if toxicological study data or other pertinent information for a particular 

data element is available. 

For non-cancer data elements the highest data element in the hierarchy for scoring Potency is the 

RfD, NOAEL or LOAEL from various sources, with EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs and 

Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) values taking precedence over values from other 

agencies or the best available NOAEL or LOAEL from a published study. 

Below the non-cancer values are the cancer values, if applicable. As with the non-cancer values, 

they are presented in hierarchical fashion. For cancer the 10-4 cancer risk, typically from EPA’s 

Health Advisory Tables (HAs) or IRIS, is the highest-ranking cancer data element followed by 

the slope factor. The 10-4 cancer risk or the slope factor is used for Potency scoring, where 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 8 of 11

applicable. In addition, qualitative cancer data, including cancer classifications from EPA, the 

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the U.S. National Toxicology Program 

(NTP) and/or California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) are 

presented, although not quantitative, such values were incorporated into the PCCL screening 

process.

The row for the data element used for scoring the Potency and Severity attributes is shaded grey 

on the CIS. 

At the bottom right of the health effects data section of the CIS are other supporting qualitative 

and quantitative data. These data represent the listing of contaminants as carcinogens and/or 

reproductive toxins or values that are protective of public health via the ingestion of drinking 

water (e.g., EPA Drinking Water Exposure Levels (DWELs), EPA HAs, World Health 

Organization (WHO) Guideline Values, and Health Canada Guideline Values). 

Occurrence Data

The second page of the CISs is focused on occurrence data. The occurrence data are generally 

presented in order of the hierarchy established for scoring Prevalence and Magnitude (i.e., 

finished water data are at the top of the page, followed by ambient water data, supplemental 

water data (often studies from individual States or the primary literature), and application/release 

data, with production data and environmental fate parameters at the bottom of the page). 

Finished water occurrence data is the highest ranking data element in the hierarchy used to score 

the prevalence and magnitude attributes since it represents the best estimation of the potential for 

human exposure. 

The row for the occurrence data element used for scoring Prevalence and Magnitude is shaded 

grey on the CIS. 

The column headers for the water occurrence data include the data source; the number of total 

public water systems (PWS)/sites/samples; the number of positive results (referred to as 

“detects”), an indication as to whether the preceding values correspond to the number of PWSs, 

sampling sites or samples; the percent of detects, and where available; the minimum, maximum, 

median, 90th percentile, 99th percentile of detects; units; sampling year(s) and a notes field. 

Following the water data are data that are used to estimate potential occurrence in water in the 

absence of water data. These include application rate data for pesticides in lbs/year, 

environmental release data to surface water and total environmental releases in lbs/year. 

Following the application/release data are production data ranges for the most recent year for 

which data were available at the time of CCL 4 data collection. 

The final section of the CISs includes available environmental fate parameters with persistence 

metrics of half-life and a degradation code that is either based on structural modeling or the halflife. The remaining properties relate to environmental mobility. 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 9 of 11

4.0 Summary of the Microbes Classification Process from the PCCL 

to CCL and CISs Explanation

This section briefly describes the process developed under CCL 3 to select microbial 

contaminants from the PCCL for the CCL 3 and explains the elements included in the microbial 

CISs. The same process developed for CCL 3 was used to evaluate the nominated contaminants 

for the Draft CCL 4. A detailed description of the process developed to select microbial 

contaminants for the CCL 3 is provided in Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: PCCL 

to CCL Process (USEPA, 2009g).

Microbes are evaluated for their occurrence in water and their ability to cause adverse health 

effects in humans. Pathogens on the PCCL were scored for placement on the CCL using a 

scoring system to assign a numerical value to each pathogen and rank the pathogens based upon 

their occurrence, health effects and waterborne disease outbreaks (WBDO). Those microbes 

receiving high scores were considered for placement on the CCL. 

Each microbe was scored using three scoring protocols, one protocol each for WBDO, 

occurrence in water and health effects. The highest of the individual WBDO score or occurrence 

score is added to the normalized health effects score to produce a composite pathogen score. 

Although the composite score is not shown on the CISs, the scoring summary table at the top left 

corner of each CIS shows the values used to calculate the composite score. The formula for 

calculating the final score is: highest score between the WBDO and occurrence score + [(general 

population health effects score + highest sensitive population health effects score) x 5/14]. 

EPA developed three scoring protocols for CCL 3 to define a hierarchy of the relevance that each 

of these types of data (e.g. occurrence in water, WBDO and health effects) provide in evaluating 

microbes for the CCL. WBDOs are scored on a five-level hierarchy ranging from never caused a 

WBDO (score of 1) to two or more documented WDBOs in the U.S. (score of 5). Occurrence is 

scored on a three-level hierarchy ranging from not detected in the U.S. (score of 1) to detected in 

drinking water in the U.S. (score of 3). Combining WBDO information and occurrence 

information allowed EPA to consider: 1) pathogens that are tracked by public health surveillance 

programs (i.e., CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) and 2) pathogens that are not yet 

tracked by public health surveillance programs but for which occurrence information is available

(e.g., emerging pathogens). 

The health effects scoring protocol evaluates the extent of illness produced in humans from 

drinking water. These scores reflect the most common clinical presentation and are based on data 

from recent clinical microbiology manuals. The severity of disease manifestations produced by a 

pathogen is evaluated across a range of potential endpoints. The seven-level hierarchy developed 

for this protocol begins with mild, self-limiting illness (score of 1) and progresses to death (score 

of 7). For more information on the microbes scoring process, please see Final Contaminant 

Candidate List 3 Microbes: PCCL to CCL Process (USEPA, 2009g). 

The scoring tables developed for CCL 3 were updated for each nominated contaminant. Since no 

new relevant data/information was found by EPA, nor provided by the nominators, the data 

supporting the respective scores for CCL 3 remain the same. The references in the scoring tables 
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants 

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page 10 of 11

were updated to reflect references that became available after EPA published the final CCL3. 

The table presents the final scores for each of the data types under consideration and a brief 

description of the data used to assign those scores with their respective references. For the 

microbial CISs, please see Appendix B. 

Elements of each scoring table include:

1) Scoring Summary – shows the scores used to calculate the final composite score for

each microbial contaminant which include: highest score between the WBDO and

occurrence, health effects score for the general population and highest health effects

score of the sensitive subpopulations.

2) Data Table – shows the categories for each potential score, the scoring data, if

applicable, and reference(s) used to support a particular score. The highest ranking score

for each of the three scoring categories is bolded. The WBDOs scoring results is

presented first, followed by the occurrence results and the health effects.

3) References – presents the full references for the data presented in the table.

5.0 References 

USEPA. 2009a. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 3–Final. Federal Register. Vol. 74, 

No. 194, p. 51850, October 8, 2009. 

USEPA. 2009b. Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Chemicals: Identifying the Universe. EPA 

815-R-09-006. August 2009. 

USEPA. 2009c. Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Chemicals: Screening to a PCCL. EPA 815-

R-09-007. August 2009. 

USEPA. 2009d. Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Chemicals: Classification of PCCL to the 

CCL. EPA 815-R-09-008. August 2009. 

USEPA. 2009e. Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: Identifying the Universe. EPA 

815-R-09-004. August 2009. 

USEPA. 2009f. Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: Screening to the PCCL. EPA 

815-R-09-0005. August 2009. 

USEPA. 2009g. Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: PCCL to CCL Process. EPA 

815–R–09–009. August 2009. 

USEPA. 2009h. Contaminant Information Sheets for the PCCL Chemicals Considered for CCL 

3. EPA 815-R-09-014. August 2009.
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the EPA 815-R-15-003 

Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants

USEPA. 2012. Request for Nominations of Drinking Water Contaminants for the Fourth 

Contaminant Candidate List. Federal Register. Vol. 77, No. 89. p. 27057, May 8, 2012 

USEPA. 2014a. Announcement of Preliminary Regulatory Determination for Contaminants on 

the Third Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List. Federal Register. Vol. 79, No. 202, p. 

62716, October 20, 2014. 

USEPA. 2014b. Protocol for the Regulatory Determinations 3 Including Appendices A-F. EPA 

815-R-14-005. April, 2014. 

USEPA. 2015a. Summary of Nominations for the Fourth Contaminant Candidate List. EPA 815-

R-15-001. January, 2015. 

USEPA. 2015b. Data Sources for the CCL 4. EPA 815-R-15-004. January, 2015. 

USEPA. 2015c. Screening Document for the Draft PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants. EPA 815-

R-15-002. January, 2015. 

Page 11 of 11
EPA-OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets (CISs) for the

Draft Preliminary PCCL 4 Nominated Contaminants

EPA 815-R-15-003 

Page A1-1 

Appendix 1: Chemical Contaminant Information Sheets

The following 40 pages contain tables with health effects and occurrence information for the 20 

chemical contaminants nominated by the public that were included on PCCL 4 or CCL 4. Due to 

the technical limitations of this document Appendix, for further assistance with reasonable 

accommodation please contact Meredith Russell at Russell.meredith@epa.gov or 202-564-0814. 
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

7 8 4 3

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 319846

Substance Key: 6535

Contaminant: alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NAWQA 90%: 949

CAR HRL/NAWQA 90%: 0.102

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: 0.006 ug/L

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 56 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: Yes CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: Yes

Source Use

HSDB Component of benzene hexachloride (BHC) former insecticide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA IRIS 0.0006 mg/L 1986

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA 2.7 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 2005

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE 6.3 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 1986 Slope factor taken from 

IRIS.

Cancer Classification2 EPA IRIS B2 1986

Cancer Classification2 IARC 2B

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

EPA; RAIS; 

OEHHA; 

IARC

Yes

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR 0.008 mg/kg-d 9/2003 Hepatic Basis NOAEL 0.8 mg/kg-d; UF = 100.

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 1.2 mg/kg-d 1991 Biochemical - Enzyme inhibition, induction, or 

change in blood or tissue levels - hepatic 

microsomal mixed oxidase (dealkylation, 

hydroxylation, etc.), Biochemical - Enzyme 

inhibition, induction, or change in blood or tissue 

levels - catalases, Biochemical - Enzyme 

inhibition, induction, or change in blood or tissue 

levels - other oxidoreductases

30-day study in rat; TOLED5 Toxicology Letters. (Elsevier Science Pub. B.V., POB 211, 1000 AE 

Amsterdam, Netherlands) V.1- 1977- Volume(issue)/page/year 56,137,1991

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-2
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

7,119 21 Sites 0.30% 0.0004 0.21 0.011 0.059 0.21 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update No Reports lbs/yr 2002

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 1.2 years

Degradation Code DST DST = Degrades sometimes/recalcitrant; 

hydrolysis only, pH = 7 (HSDB)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 641-1,995 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 3.8 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 6.7E-06 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 2 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 7 %

Supplemental Water Data

Toccalino et al., 2010 512 1 0.2% 0.0327 0.0327 0.0327 0.0327 ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 0.0327 1993-2007

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 2,785 448 Sites 16.09% 0 0.617 0 0.0038 0.0656 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-3
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Manganese

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

4 1 10 9

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 7439965

Substance Key: 18823

Contaminant: Manganese

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NIRS 90%: 2.4

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 300 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: Yes

Source Use

HSDB Manufacturing of steel alloys, in dry-cell batteries, electrical coils, ceramics, 

matches, glass, dyes, fertilizers, welding rods, as oxidizing agents, and as 

animal food additives.

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA IRIS D 1988

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA 1.6 mg/L

Guideline Value (GV) WHODWQ 0.4 mg/L 2011

Health Advisory (HA) EPA HA mg/L The 3-fold modifying factor for bioavailability 

from drinking water was applied when 

calculating HA rather than in determining the 

RfD

0.3

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.047 mg/kg-d 1995 Reflects a modifying factor of 3 to adjust from increased bioavailability when in drinking water

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.14 mg/kg-d 2004 The 3-fold modifying factor for bioavailability from drinking water was applied when calculating HA rather 

than in determining the RfD

EPA HA

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.16 mg/kg-d 2001 11 mg/day = Upper Limit, amount of manganese in 

typical Western diet for adults (NOAEL) 15 mg/kgday LOAEL increased serum manganese and 

manganese dependant lymphocyte SOD activity – 

Concern for neurotoxicity

IOM Not adjusted for the increased bioavailability from drinking water

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) RTECS mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 10 mg/kg-d 2009 Neurodevelopmental effects in mice (Moreno et al, 

2009a). Significant increase in Nitric Oxide 

Synthase 2 expression in brain of animals 

exposed as juveniles and adults (Moreno et al, 

2009b).

Moreno et al, 2009a. Aged-Dependent Susceptibility to Manganese-Induced Neurological Dysfunction. 

Toxicological Sciences 112(2): 394-404. Moreno et al, 2009b. Developmental Exposure to Manganese 

Increases Adult Susceptibility to Inflammatory Activation of of Glia and Neuronal Protein Nitration. 

Toxicological Sciences. 112: 405-415.

Supplemental

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 7 mg/kg-d 2010 Impaired spontaneous motor activity in rats Kern et al, 2010. Preweaning Manganese Exposure Causes Hyperactivity, Disinhibition, and Spatial 

Learning and Memory Deficits Associated with Altered Dopamine Receptor and Transporter Levels. 

Synapse. 64: 363-378.

Supplemental

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-4
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Manganese

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

8,002 6,447 Sites 80.57% 0.051 70,000 19 180 1,300 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 84,545 lbs/yr 31 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 15,872,968 lbs/yr 48 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update 500M - < 1B lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life days

Degradation Code persistent As elemental Mn

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water %

Supplemental Water Data

Toccalino et al., 2010 808 543 67.2% 0.053 1,923 8.99 732 ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 186 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 4,969 2,229 PWS 44.9% 0.001 35,000 70 380 1,455 ug/L 1995-2007

Illinois Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,223 685 PWS 56% 1 2,700 31 190 378 ug/L 1998-2005

North Carolina Drinking Water Monitoring Data 2,382 1,265 PWS 53.1% 0.7 239,000 28 175 779 ug/L 1998-2005

Ohio Drinking Water Monitoring Data 775 641 PWS 82.7% 0.113 216,000 33 246 1964 ug/L 1998-2005

Region 9 Tribes Drinking Water Monitoring Data 154 63 PWS 40.9% 0.85 320,000 80 592 239,860 ug/L 1998-2005

Texas Drinking Water Monitoring Data 6,713 3,898 PWS 58.1% 1 25,910 10 70 290 ug/L 1998-2005

Wisconsin Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,946 1,571 PWS 80.7% 0.006 400,000 28 358 7,000 ug/L 1980-2012

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

1,158 917 Sites 79.2% 0.1 37,000 2 220 2,386 ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 47,550 42,222 Sites 88.79% 0 18,604,000 51 393 7,490 ug/L Updated 2013

Massachusetts Nominations Data 4,976 28,000 7 ug/L Ground Water; Mixed Public and Private Water Supplies; 

Received from Massachusetts for the CCL 4 nominations; 

Ayotte, J. D., J. M. Gronberg, et al. (2011). Trace Elements and 

Radon in Groundwater Across the United States. U.S. 

Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011-5059: 

115. (Source water for public supply wells from the Ayotte et al., 

2011 overlaps with Toccalino et al., 2010.)

Samples 360

Minnesota Nominations Data 1,630 1,589 97.48% 0.1 3,000 110 ug/L Ground Water; Mixed Public and Private Water Supplies; 

Received from Minnesota for the CCL 4 nominations

Samples 500

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

989 672 PWS 67.95% 1 1,341 11.96 126 673 ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-5
CL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

4 8 5 8

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 1634044

Substance Key: 11918

Contaminant: Methyl tert-butyl ether

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/UCMR 90%: 58.3

CAR HRL/UCMR 90%: 0.539

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: 19.4 ug/L

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 2,100 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: Yes CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4:

Source Use

HSDB Octane booster in gasoline; manufacture of isobutene; extraction solvent

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA 0.0018 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 2005

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA

Cancer Classification2 IARC 3 1999

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

OEHHA Yes

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR 0.3 mg/kg-d 8/1996 Hepatic: Decreased blood urea nitrogen levels. Minimal Risk Level - Intermediate Exposure Duration. Basis LOAEL = 100 mg/kg-d; UF = 300

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER 0.01 mg/kg-d 1991 Basis NOAEL 100 mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 300 mg/kg-d 1990 Kidney, Ureter, Bladder - changes in bladder 

weight, Blood - changes in serum composition 

(e.g. TP, bilirubin, cholesterol), Nutritional and 

Gross Metabolic - changes in calcium

90-day study in rat; JACTDZ Journal of the American College of Toxicology. (Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., 165

Third Ave., New York, NY 10128) V.1-12, 1982-1993. Discontinued. Volume(issue)/page/year 

9(5),525,1990

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

C

Methyl tert-butyl ether

Yes

1 

Page A1-6
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Methyl tert-butyl ether

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

4,328 424 Sites 9.80% 0.01 23,000 0.3 7.85 1,800 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 800 lbs/yr 6 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 1,471,221 lbs/yr 35 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update ≥ 1B lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 15 days

Degradation Code BS BS = Biodegrades slow (PBT)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 6 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 0.94 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 5.87E-04 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 51,000 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 42 %

Supplemental Water Data

Toccalino et al., 2010 832 115 13.8% 0.031 12.03 0.173 7.76 ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 1.07 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 4,419 150 PWS 3.4% 0.15 610 5.96 33 214 ug/L 1995-2007

Florida Drinking Water Monitoring Data 31 7 PWS 22.6% 0.09 67.18 0.755 4.56 51.2 ug/L 2004-2007

Illinois Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,161 26 PWS 2.2% 0.5 16 1.3 7 16 ug/L 1998-2005

Ohio Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,306 6 PWS 0.5% 0.5 9.51 1.21 5.36 8.55 ug/L 1998-2005

Region 9 Tribes Drinking Water Monitoring Data 219 1 PWS 0.5% 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 ug/L 1998-2005

Texas Drinking Water Monitoring Data 5,660 41 PWS 0.7% 0.5 48 2.8 10.2 25.6 ug/L 1998-2005

Wisconsin Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,142 38 PWS 3.3% 0.104 64.9 2.2 16.6 45.9 ug/L 1980-2012

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

1,855 101 Sites 5.4% 0.03 28.3 0.12 0.554 2.17 ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 1,210 154 Sites 12.73% 0.046 13,000 1.5 14.5 1,600 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

3,871 19 PWS 0.49% 5 49 9.2 34.6 48.75 ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-7
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Microcystin-LR

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

9 3 10 4

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 101043372

Substance Key: 76859

Contaminant: Microcystin-LR

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/AWWARF Typical Range MAX: 0.21

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 0.021 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: Yes CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: Yes

Source Use

Use Naturally-occurring cyanobacterial toxin

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD)-like value 0.000003 mg/kg-d 2006 Liver effects Draft RfD; Basis NOAEL 3 ug/kg-d. Ueno, Y., Y. Makita, S. Nagata et al., 1999. No chronic oral toxicity of a 

low-dose of microcystin-LR, a cyanobacterial hepatoxin, in female Balb/C mice. Environ. Toxicol. 14(1):45-

55.

Primary 

Literature

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) RTECS mg/kg-d

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-8
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Microcystin-LR

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life length of time

Degradation Code Degradation Code Not Available

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water %

Supplemental Water Data

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 30 30 Sites 100% 0 4.26 0.25 1.22 3.32 ug/L Updated 2013

US and Canadian drinking water (bloom area, 

source, finished water)

677 542 80% 0.002 1,200 ug/L Maximum and minimum of detects (AWWARF, Carmichael). 

Includes possible outliers.

Sites

US and Canadian drinking water (bloom area, 

source, finished water)

677 542 80% 0.1 ug/L Maximum of typical range of detects (AWWARF, Carmichael). 

Excludes possible outliers.

Sites

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-9
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Nonylphenol

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

5 7 10 6

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 25154523

Substance Key: 28410

Contaminant: Nonylphenol

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L? - L

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/Kolpin Max: 2.6

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 105 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: Yes

Source Use

HSDB In the preparation of lubricating oil additives, resins, plasticizers, surface 

active agents; antioxidants for plastics and rubber

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN 60 mg/kg-d

No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) Supplemental 15 mg/kg-d 2004 Reproductive effects World Health Organization (WHO)

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 2 mg/kg-d 2001 Endocrine - androgenic, Reproductive - Paternal 

Effects - testes, epididymis, sperm duct

REPTED Reproductive Toxicology. (Pergamon Press Inc., Maxwell House, Fairview Park, Elmsford, NY 

10523) V.1- 1987- Volume(issue)/page/year 15,293,2001

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) 580 mg/kg Details of toxic effects not reported other than 

lethal dose value

NTIS National Technical Information Service. (Springfield, VA 22161) Formerly U.S. Clearinghouse for 

Scientific & Technical Information. Volume(issue)/page/year OTS0573098

RTECS

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-10
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Nonylphenol

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update < 500K lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life days

Degradation Code BST BST = biodegrades sometimes/recalcitrant; 

aerobic only

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 31,000 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 5.71 dimensionless At 20 degrees Celsius

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 1.1E-06 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 6.35 mg/L At 25 degrees Celsius

Modeled Percent in Water 18 %

Supplemental Water Data

Kolpin et al., 2002 85 43 50.6% 40 0.8 ug/L National Surface Water Reconnaissance; Kolpin, et al., 2002. 

Env. Sci. & Technol., 36(6), pp. 1202-1211.

Sites 1999-2000

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 15 5 Sites 33.33% 3.26 5.17 3.74 4.52 5.11 ug/L Updated 2013

Snyder, 2008 20 17% 0.104 0.084 ug/L Finished Drinking Water Monitoring; Snyder, Shane A. 2008. 

Ozone: Science and Engineering. 30(1): 65-69.

Samples

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-11
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

6 3 10 6

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 335671

Substance Key: 6614

Contaminant: Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/MN MW MAX: 1.22

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 1.1 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: Yes CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: Yes

Source Use

HSDB Production of fluoropolymers (e.g., Teflon) and fluoroelastomers; in firefighting applications, cosmetics, greases and lubricants, paints, polishes 

and adhesives

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

Health Advisory (HA) EPA HA ug/L January 2008; Provisional Health Advisory: 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/drinkin

g/pha-PFOA_PFOS.pdf

0.4

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) RTECS mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 0.46 mg/kg-d 2006 Increased maternal liver weight at term BMDL10, Lau, 2006. Tox. Sci., 90, 2, pp. 510-518. EPA Provisional HA: 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/drinking/pha-PFOA_PFOS.pdf

Supplemental

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-12
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update < 500K lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life length of time

Degradation Code BST BST = Biodegrades sometimes/recalcitrant 

(PBT); BST is the highest category available 

to be awarded to a recalcitrant contaminant

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 631 ± 7.9 L/kg Zareitalabad, et al., 2013

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 0.091 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 10 %

Supplemental Water Data

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 318 232 Sites 72.96% 0.000988 48,500 0.144 47.7 1,304 ug/L Updated 2013

Minnesota (MN) Department of Health (DOH) – 

Aggregate of MN Wells

85 7 8.2% 0.9 ug/L Targeted Sampling 2004-2005 - H. Goeden and J. Kelly. 

Perfluorochemicals in Minnesota, MN DOH, 2/27/06.

Sites

Minnesota (MN) Department of Health (DOH) – 

Select MN Municipal Wells

37 6 16.2% 0.9 ug/L Targeted Sampling 2004-2005 - H. Goeden and J. Kelly. 

Perfluorochemicals in Minnesota, MN DOH, 2/27/06.

Sites

Minnesota (MN) Department of Health (DOH) – 

Select MN Non-Community Wells

22 0 0% ug/L Targeted Sampling 2004-2005 - H. Goeden and J. Kelly. 

Perfluorochemicals in Minnesota, MN DOH, 2/27/06.

Sites

Minnesota (MN) Department of Health (DOH) – 

Select MN Private Wells

26 1 3.9% 0.67 ug/L Targeted Sampling 2004-2005 - H. Goeden and J. Kelly. 

Perfluorochemicals in Minnesota, MN DOH, 2/27/06.

Sites

Little Hocking, OH Municipal Wells (FW) 1.5 7.2 ug/L Emmett, et al., 2006. J. Occ. Env. Med. Little Hocking, OH; 

data from 2002-2005; no data on # PWSs/sites sampled

N/A

NJDEP 23 18 78.3% <0.004 0.039 ug/L Targeted study "Determination of Perfluorooctanoic Acid 

(PFOA) in Aqueous Samples, Final Report." Jan 2007, NJDEP, 

Division of Water Supply.

Sites

Cape Fear Drainage Basin 80 82.3% 0.287 0.0126 ug/L Nakayama et al. 2007. Perfluorinated Compounds in the Cape 

Fear Drainage Basin in N.C. Env. Sci. & Tech., 41, 5271–5276.

Sites 2006

Upper Mississippi Drainage Basin 175 168 97.1% 0.125 0.00207 ug/L Nakayama et al. 2010. Determination of Perfluorinated 

Compounds in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Env. Sci. & 

Tech., 44, pp. 4103–4109.

Sites 2008

Tennessee River, Alabama 40 18 45% 0.14 0.598 0.379 ug/L Targeted sampling - 35 river miles downstream of PFC 

manufacturing facility. Hansen et al. 2002. Quantitative 

Characterization of Trace Levels of PFOS and PFOA in the 

Tennessee River. Env. Sci. & Tech., 36, pp. 1681-1685

Sites

U.S. PWS Study 6 <0.005 0.12 ug/L Quinones, O. and S.A. Snyder. 2009. Occurrence of 

perfluoroalkyl carboxylates and sulfonates in drinking water 

utilities and related waters from the United States. Env. Sci. & 

Tech., 43, pp. 9089-9095.

Sites

Lake Erie and Lake Ontario 16 16 100% 0.015 0.07 0.04 ug/L Boulanger et al. 2004. Detection of Perfluorooctane Surfactants 

in Great Lakes Water. Env. Sci. & Tech., 38, pp. 4064-4070.

Sites 2003

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-13
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Permethrin

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

4 8 10 7

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 52645531

Substance Key: 35815

Contaminant: Permethrin

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L? - L 

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/SWC EEC: 1,944

CAR HRL/SWC EEC: 4.05

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: 3.65 ug/L

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 1,750 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: Yes CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: Yes

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) EPA OPP 0.0096 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 2009

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP Likely 2009

Cancer Classification2 IARC 3 1991

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

EPA; IARC Yes

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.25 mg/kg-d 2009 Neurotox/Clinical signs (i.e., aggression, abnormal 

and/or decreased movement) and increased body 

temperature. Q1* 0.0096 (mg/kg-d)-1. See CAR

EPA OPP Basis NOAEL = 25 mg/kg-d, UF = 100 (rat study)

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.05 mg/kg-d 1986 Increased liver weight Basis = NOEL 5 mg/kg-d; UF = 100.

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE 0.05 mg/kg-d 1986

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR 0.2 mg/kg-d 2003 Neurol. Minimal Risk Level - Intermediate Exposure Duration

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.05 mg/kg-d 1999

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) RTECS mg/kg-d

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-14
CCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Permethrin

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

1,066,056 lbs/yr 48 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 0 lbs/yr 0 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 2,116 lbs/yr 5 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life length of time

Degradation Code BF/BST BF = Biodegrades fast; BST = Biodegrades 

sometimes/recalcitrant

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 178,000 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 6.5 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 1.87E-06 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 0.006 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 6 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 35 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

1,828 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 722 1 Sites 0.14% 0.348 0.348 0.348 0.348 0.348 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP SW Chronic = 0.9 ug/L; GW Chronic = 0 ug/L

Page A1-15
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Azinphos-methyl

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

6 3 8 3

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 86500

Substance Key: 3200

Contaminant: Azinphos-methyl

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NAWQA 90%: 69.5

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 10.5 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP Not likely 2006

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

UMD Yes

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

Maximum Acceptable Concentration 

(MAC)

CADW mg/L Canadian Drinking Water Maximum Acceptable 

Concentration

0.2

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.0015 mg/kg-d 2006 Red blood cell cholinesterase inhibition; increased 

incidence of diarrhea

EPA OPP Basis NOAEL = 0.149 mg/kg-d; UF = 100 (dog study)

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.005 mg/kg-d 1991

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 0.91 mg/kg-d 1997 Brain and Coverings - other degenerative 

changes, Blood - other changes, Biochemical - 

Enzyme inhibition, induction, or change in blood or 

tissue levels - true cholinesterase

FAATDF Fundamental and Applied Toxicology. (Academic Press, Inc., 1 E. First St., Duluth, MN 55802) 

V.1-40, 1981-97. For publisher information, see TOSCF2 Volume(issue)/page/year 35,101,1997; 13-wk rat 

study

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP Equivocal Negative Negative Negative

Page A1-16
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Azinphos-methyl

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

7,103 145 Sites 2.04% 0.002 3.37 0.027 0.151 0.932 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

2,091,014 lbs/yr 42 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 27.9 days

Degradation Code DS DS = Degrades slow (HSDB)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 487-4,644 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 2.75 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 2.4E-08 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 20.9 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 27 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 12 0 PWS 0% ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 11 2 Sites 18.2% 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 5 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 323 8 Samples 2.5% 0.144 ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 228 5 Samples 2.2% 0.114 ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Toccalino et al., 2010 894 0 0% ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 5 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

1,828 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 831 24 Sites 2.9% 0 0.864 0.048 0.196 0.649 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-17
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Bentazon

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

5 6 9 4

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 25057890

Substance Key: 28242

Contaminant: Bentazon

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NAWQA 90%: 276

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 210 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Former herbicide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA IRIS E 1998

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP E 1994

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

Guideline Value (GV) WHODWQ ug/L World Health Organization Drinking Water 

Guideline Value

300

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.03 mg/kg-d 1994 Hematological changes suggestive of anemia, 

decreased weight gain, intestinal inflammation, 

and congestion of the small intestine and spleen 

(dog study) 

EPA OPP UF = 100; Basis NOAEL = 3.2 mg/kg-day

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.03 mg/kg-d 1998 Blood loss into the gastrointestinal tract; 

Coagulation defect in male & female dogs. 

Circulatory system.

IRIS Allen et al., 1989. Dog study; UF = 100, Basis NOAEL 3.2 mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA 0.03 mg/kg-d 1999

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.03 mg/kg-d 1989 blood loss in gastrointestinall tract; coagulation 

defect

RAIS HE UF = 100; dog study

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.1 mg/kg-d 1998

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) RTECS mg/kg-d

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-18
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Bentazon

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

4,540 197 Sites 4.34% 0.002 11.46 0.1 0.76 4.79 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

7,749,130 lbs/yr 45 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 6.7-50 days

Degradation Code BS BS = Biodegrades slow (HSDB)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 37.5 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 2.34 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 2.18E-09 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 500 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 36 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 5,583 2 PWS 0.04% 0.23 6.2 3.11 5.58 ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 13 7 Sites 53.8% 0.0003 0.031 0.0016 0.00712 0.016 ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 7 5 Sites 71.4% 0.0003 0.194 0.0017 0.012 0.061 ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Toccalino et al., 2010 589 16 2.7% 0.0046 0.491 0.00995 0.434 ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 0.0711 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,807 6 PWS 0.3% 0.023 6.2 2.9 5.24 6.1 ug/L 1995-2007

Illinois Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1998-2005

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 694 75 Sites 10.81% 0 16 0.191 2.13 12.4 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

 Conc. Date Notes

Units

95th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

75th 

Percentile 

(Detects

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Percent 

with Detects

PWSs/ 

Sites/ 

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Number

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 225 21 Samples 9.3% 0.019 0.019 ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 312 80 Samples 25.6% 0.344 0.021 ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Page A1-19
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Bisphenol A

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

4 3 10 5

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 80057

Substance Key: 2918

Contaminant: Bisphenol A

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NREC NA SW MED: 1,750

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 350 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Production of polycarbonate and epoxy resins. Formerly used as 

fungicide.

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

UMD Yes

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.05 mg/kg-d 1988 Reduced body weight Basis = LOAEL 50 mg/kg-d; UF = 1,000

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE 0.05 mg/kg-d 1988

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) 0.0006 mg/kg-d 2011 Increase in adjusted terminal end bud (TEB) 

numbers in the offspring of mice for LOAEL 

related to NOAEL

LOAEL = 0.003 mg/kg-d. Ayyanan, A., Laribi, O., Schuepbach-Mallepell, S. et al. 2011. Perinatal exposure 

to bisphenol A increases adult mammary gland progesterone response and cell number. Mol. Endicronol. 

25(11): 1915-1923.

Supplemental

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 2.5 mg/kg-d 26-week oral study in rat. GISAAA Gigiena i Sanitariya. For English translation, see HYSAAV. (V/O 

Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga, 113095 Moscow, USSR) V.1- 1936 - Volume(issue)/page/year 33(7), 25, 1968.

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP Equivocal Equivocal Equivocal Negative

Page A1-20
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Bisphenol A

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

85 35 Sites 41.20% 0.14 ug/L 1999-2004 Surface water; National Reconnaissance

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites 21.07% 0.2 ug/L 1999-2004 Surface water; National Aggregate. Size of dataset not reported.

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites 10.78% 0.2 ug/L 1999-2004 Ground water; National Aggregate. Size of dataset not reported.

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 6,240 lbs/yr 5 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 3,296,213 lbs/yr 27 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update ≥ 1B lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life length of time

Degradation Code BFA-BST BFA = Biodegrades fast with acclimation; 

BST = Biodegrades sometimes/recalcitrant

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 75,200 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 3.32 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 9.2E-12 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 120 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 8 %

Supplemental Water Data

Kolpin et al., 2002 85 41.2% 12 0.14 ug/L National Surface Water Reconnaissance; Kolpin, et al., 2002. 

Env. Sci. & Technol., 36(6), pp. 1202-1211.

Sites 1999-2000

Focazio et al., 2008 73 7 9.6% 1.9 ug/L NREC II Raw Drinking Water; Focazio, et al., 2008. Sci.Tot. 

Env., 402(2-3), pp. 201-216.

Sites 2001

Hopple et al., 2009 43 2.3% 2.5 ug/L Ground water; Phase 2; Source water; Hopple et al., 2009, 

Anthropogenic organic compounds in source water of selected 

community water systems that use groundwater, 2002–05: 

USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2009–5200, p.74

Samples 2002-2005

Hopple et al., 2009 47 Samples 0% ug/L 2002-2005 Ground water; Phase 2; Finished water; Hopple et al., 2009

Hopple et al., 2009 212 Samples 0.9% 6.4 ug/L 2002-2005 Ground water; Phase 1; Source water; Hopple et al., 2009

Kingsbury et al., 2008 145 Samples 0% ug/L 2002-2005 Surface water; Phase 1; Source water; Kingsbury et al., 2008

Kingsbury et al., 2008 87 Samples 9.2% 0.44 ug/L 2002-2005 Surface water; Phase 2; Finished water; Kingsbury et al., 2008

Kingsbury et al., 2008 87 4.7% 0.67 ug/L Surface water; Phase 2; Source water; Kingsbury et al., 2008, 

Anthropogenic organic compounds in source water of nine 

community water systems that withdraw from streams, 2002–05: 

USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2008–5208, p. 66

Samples 2002-2005

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 33 1 Sites 3.03% 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 ug/L Updated 2013

Stackelberg, et al., 2007 12 17% 0.22 ug/L New Jersey Finished Drinking Water; Stackelberg, et al., 2007. 

Sci. Tot. Environ., 377(2-3), pp. 255-272.

Samples

Stackelberg, et al., 2007 12 67% 0.36 ug/L New Jersey Surface Water; Stackelberg, et al., 2007. Sci. Tot. 

Environ., 377(2-3), pp. 255-272.

Samples

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-21
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Butyl benzyl phthalate

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

4 3 8 8

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 85687

Substance Key: 3168

Contaminant: Butyl benzyl phthalate

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/TX 90%: 63.1

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 1,400 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Chemical intermediate; plasticizer

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) EPA PPRTV 0.0019 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 2002

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA IRIS C 1988

Cancer Classification2 IARC 3 1999 Vol. 73, 1999

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA 7 mg/L Drinking Water Equivalent Level

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.2 mg/kg-d 1993 Significantly increased liver-to-body weight and 

liver to-brain weight ratios

IRIS NTP, 1985. Basis NOAEL = 159 mg/kg-d; UF = 1,000 (rat study)

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA 0.2 mg/kg-d 1989

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.2 mg/kg-d 1989 Significantly increased liver-to-body weight & liverto-brain weight ratiosRAIS HE NTP, 1985; Basis NOAEL/LEL, rat, liver, brain, UF=1000

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER 1.3 mg/kg-d 1998 Hammond et al. 1987; Basis BMD 132 mg/kd/day, UF = 100, rat

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 100 mg/kg-d 2000 Gastrointestinal - changes in structure or function 

of salivary glands, Kidney, Ureter, Bladder - 

changes in kidney weight; endocrine - other 

changes

oral study in rat; REPTED Reproductive Toxicology. (Pergamon Press Inc., Maxwell House, Fairview Park, 

Elmsford, NY 10523) V.1- 1987- Volume(issue)/page/year 14,513,2000

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 Some 

Evidence

Equivocal Not Tested Not Tested

Evidence

NTP

Page A1-22
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Butyl benzyl phthalate

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

50M - < 

100M

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life length of time

Degradation Code BF BF = Biodegrades fast (BIODEG)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 9,359 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 4.73 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 1.26E-06 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 2.69 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 22 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 851 24 PWS 2.8% 0.004 124 0.2 59 ug/L Drinking water monitoring

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 264 16 PWS 6.1% 0.003 8.5 0.074 4.3 8.4 ug/L 1995-2007

Florida Drinking Water Monitoring Data 5 0 PWS 0% ug/L 2004-2007

Illinois Drinking Water Monitoring Data 2 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1998-2005

Texas Drinking Water Monitoring Data 2,108 4 PWS 0.2% 3.97 26.4 8.99 22.2 26 ug/L 1998-2005

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 1,221 248 Sites 20.31% 0 629.5 0.043 0.97 27.2 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-23
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Carbaryl

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

5 5 1 5

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 63252

Substance Key: 2448

Contaminant: Carbaryl

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/UCM R2 90%: 70

CAR HRL/UCM R2 90%: 40

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: 40 ug/L

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 70 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide; veterinary medication

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) EPA OPP (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 2002, 

updated 

2008

0.000875 Incidence of 

hemangiosarcomas in 

mice; 2002 and 2007 

Carbaryl Occupational 

Risk Assessment in 

August 2008 Amended 

RED

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP Likely 2007 Likely to be carcinogenic 

in humans; 2003 and 

2007 Carbaryl 

Occupational Risk 

Assessment in August 

2008 Amended RED

Cancer Classification2 IARC 3 1987 Vol. 12, Suppl. 7, 1987

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

EPA; IARC Yes

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

UMD Yes Teratogen

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA 0.4 mg/L 2006; Drinking Water Equivalent Level

Maximum Acceptable Concentration 

(MAC)

CADW mg/L Canadian Drinking Water Maximum Acceptable 

Concentration

0.09

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.01 mg/kg-d 2007 0.01 mg/kg-day is the acute RfD based on brain 

cholinesterase inhibition PND 11. Q1* 0.000875 

(mg/kg-d)^-1 - Likely; see CAR

EPA OPP Basis NOAEL = 1 mg/kg-d, UF = 100 (rat study)

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.1 mg/kg-d 1985 Kidney; liver Carpenter et al., 1961; Basis NOAEL 9.6 mg/kg/day, rat, UF=100, kidney & liver

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA 0.01 mg/kg-d 2006

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.008 mg/kg-d 2001

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 0.23 mg/kg-d 1975 Immunological Including Allergic - decrease in 

humoral immune response

oral study in rabbit; TXAPA9 Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. (Academic Press, Inc., 1 E. First St., 

Duluth, MN 55802) V.1- 1959- Volume(issue)/page/year 32,587,1975

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-24
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Carbaryl

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

7,142 697 Sites 9.76% 0.0005 33.5 0.0167 0.138 1.2 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

85 14 Sites 16.50% 0.04 ug/L 1999-2004 Surface water; National Reconnaissance

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites 5.05% 0.17 ug/L 1999-2004 Surface water; National Aggregate. Size of dataset not reported.

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites 0.12% 0.9 ug/L 1999-2004 Ground water; National Aggregate. Size of dataset not reported.

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

4,857,542 lbs/yr 48 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 12 lbs/yr 3 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 1,653 lbs/yr 7 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 38 days

Degradation Code BSA BSA = Biodegrades slow with acclimation

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 242 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 2.36 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 4.36E-09 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 110 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 13 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 4,671 1 PWS 0.02% 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 7 5 Sites 71.4% 0.0078 0.33 0.02 0.092 0.31 ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 13 5 Sites 38.5% 0.005 0.3 0.02 0.16 0.29 ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 323 7 Samples 2.2% 0.047 ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 312 2 Samples 0.6% 0.063 ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 228 2 Samples 0.9% 0.041 ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 225 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Toccalino et al., 2010 898 6 0.7% 0.00277 0.0196 0.00736 0.0191 ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 0.0146 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,488 2 PWS 0.1% 3.5 24 13.8 22 23.8 ug/L 1995-2007

Florida Drinking Water Monitoring Data 8 0 PWS 0% ug/L 2004-2007

Illinois Drinking Water Monitoring Data 22 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1998-2005

North Carolina Drinking Water Monitoring Data 2,477 2 PWS 0.1% 22 36 29 34.6 35.9 ug/L 1998-2005

Ohio Drinking Water Monitoring Data 43 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1998-2005

Region 9 Tribes Drinking Water Monitoring Data 232 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1998-2005

South Dakota Drinking Water Monitoring Data 256 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1990-2007

Wisconsin Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,447 1 PWS 0.1% 1 1 1 1 1 ug/L 1980-2012

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

1,831 1 Sites 0.05% 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 1,213 21 Sites 1.73% 0 50 0 5.5 38.3 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

12,679 13 PWS 0.10% 0.18 3 0.18 1 3 ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-25
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Chlorothalonil

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

5 6 4 4

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 1897456

Substance Key: 12375

Contaminant: Chlorothalonil

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NAWQA 90%: 342

CAR HRL/NAWQA 90%: 11.2

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: 4.6 ug/L

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 140 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Fungicide; bacteriocide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA HA 0.15 mg/L 1988

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA 0.46 mg/L 1999 Corresponds with OPP 

slope factor.

Slope Factor (Oral) EPA OPP 0.00766 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 1999

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA 0.0031 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 2005

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE 0.011 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP Likely 1999

Cancer Classification2 EPA B2 1988

Cancer Classification2 IARC 2B 1999 Vol. 73, 1999; note: 

OEHHA lists IARCs 

cancer class as 3.

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

CACART; 

IARC; EPA; 

OEHHA; 

RAIS

Yes

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

CACART Yes

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA 0.5 mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.02 mg/kg-d 1999 Increased kidney weights & hyperplasia of the 

proximal convoluted tubules in the kidneys, ulcers 

& forestomach hyperplasia. Q1* 0.00766 

(mg/kgday)^-1. Group B2. See CAR

EPA OPP Basis NOAEL = 2 mg/kg-d; UF = 100

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.015 mg/kg-d 1987 Renal tubular epithelial vacuolation Basis NOEL = 1.5 mg/kg/day, UF = 100, kidney, dog, oral (Diamond Shamrock Chemical, 1970a)

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA 0.015 mg/kg-d 1988

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE 0.015 mg/kg-d 1987 Tubular epithelial vacuolation Diamond Shamrock Chemical, 1970, Basis NOEL/LEL, MF = 1, kidney, dog, UF = 100

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.03 mg/kg-d 1994

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) Supplemental 1.5 mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 75 mg/kg-d 1990 Kidney, Ureter, Bladder - changes in tubules 

(including acute renal failure, acute tubular 

necrosis), Kidney, Ureter, Bladder - changes in 

bladder weight

90-day oral study in rat; TOLED5 Toxicology Letters. (Elsevier Science Pub. B.V., POB 211, 1000 AE 

Amsterdam, Netherlands) V.1- 1977- Volume(issue)/page/year 53,155,1990

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP Positive Positive Negative Negative

Page A1-26
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Chlorothalonil

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

4,547 15 Sites 0.33% 0.007 0.71 0.05 0.41 0.71 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

11,916,713 lbs/yr 48 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 146 lbs/yr 1 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 91,363 lbs/yr 7 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life length of time

Degradation Code BF BF = Biodegrades fast (BIODEG)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 2,392 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 3.05 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 2E-06 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 0.6 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 7 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 4,099 0 PWS 0% ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 6 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 6 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 225 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 312 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Toccalino et al., 2010 507 0 0% ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1,296 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 694 12 Sites 1.73% 0 56 0 1.93 47.1 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-27
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Dichlorvos

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

6 3 1 1

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 62737

Substance Key: 2444

Contaminant: Dichlorvos

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

No data for calculating HRL ratio

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: 0.1 ug/L

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 3.5 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide; veterinary medicine

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA IRIS 0.01 mg/L 1988

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA 0.41 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1 2005

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE 0.29 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP Suggestive 2006

Cancer Classification2 EPA B2 1989 GI, pancreas, leukemia; 

NTP, 1986

Cancer Classification2 IARC 2B 1991 Vol. 53

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

EPA; 

RAISHE; 

OEHHA; 

IARC; 

CACART

Yes

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

UMD Yes Teratogen list

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.0005 mg/kg-d 2006 Plasma and RBC cholinesterase inhibition (dog 

study)

EPA OPP UF = 100; Basis NOAEL = 0.05 mg/kg-day

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.0005 mg/kg-d 1993 Cholinesterase inhibition AMVAC Chemical Corporation, 1990, NOAEL, dog, UF=100; Basis NOAEL = 0.05 mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE 0.0005 mg/kg-d 1990 Plasma and RBC ChE inhibition; blood AMVAC Chemical Corporation, 1990, NOAEL/LOAEL, dog, UF=100

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR 0.0005 mg/kg-d 1997 Neurol. UF = 100

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.004 mg/kg-d 1993

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 0.625 mg/kg-d 1974 Brain and Coverings - other degenerative 

changes, Kidney, Ureter, Bladder - urine volume 

increased, Biochemical - Enzyme inhibition, 

induction, or change in blood or tissue levels - true 

cholinesterase

90-day dog study; NYZZA3 Nippon Yakuzaishikai Zasshi. Journal of the Japan Pharmaceutical 

Association. (Nippon Yakuznishikai, 2-12-15 Shibuya, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 150, Japan) V.1- 1949- 

Volume(issue)/page/year 26,739,1974

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 Some 

Evidence

Some 

Evidence

Equivocal Clear Evidence

Evidence

NTP

Page A1-28
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Dichlorvos

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites 0.00% ug/L 1999-2004 Surface water; National Aggregate. Size of dataset not reported.

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites 0.00% ug/L 1999-2004 Ground water; National Aggregate. Size of dataset not reported.

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

lbs/yr States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 0 lbs/yr 0 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 265 lbs/yr 2 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update No Reports lbs/yr 2002

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life <1-3.5 days

Degradation Code DF DF = Degrades fast (HSDB)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 40.2 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 1.47 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 5.75E-07 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 8,000 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 27 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 107 0 PWS 0% ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 317 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 9002 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 221 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 9002 (GC/MS)

Hopple et al., 2009 221 Samples 0% ug/L 2002-2005 Ground water; Phase 1; Source water; Hopple et al., 2009

Hopple et al., 2009 49 Samples 0% ug/L 2002-2005 Ground water; Phase 2; Finished water; Hopple et al., 2009

Hopple et al., 2009 49 0% ug/L Ground water; Phase 2; Source water; Hopple et al., 2009, 

Anthropogenic organic compounds in source water of selected 

community water systems that use groundwater, 2002–05: 

USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2009–5200, p.74

Samples 2002-2005

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 68 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

1,828 1 Sites 0.05% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 321 7 Sites 2.18% 0.07 0.218 0.178 0.199 0.216 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-29
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Dicofol

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

6 3 10 6

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 115322

Substance Key: 5106

Contaminant: Dicofol

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/SW Chronic EEC: 5.6

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 2.8 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP C 1998

Cancer Classification2 IARC 3 1987

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.0004 mg/kg-d 1998 Inhibition of adrenal corticotropic hormone 3X 

FQPA (dog study) became an uncertainty factor 

(E-mail from OPP; NOAEL - 0.12 mg/kg-day)

EPA OPP UF = 300; Basis NOAEL = 0.12 mg/kg-day

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.002 mg/kg-d 1992

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 22.5 mg/kg-d 2001 Related to Chronic Data - death one year dog study; HBPTO Handbook of pesticide toxicology. Robert Krieger ed, Academic press, 2001 

Volume(issue)/page/year 2,1342,2001

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP Negative Negative Positive Negative

Page A1-30
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Dicofol

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

786,805 lbs/yr 36 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 0 lbs/yr 0 States 2004

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 33 lbs/yr 2 States 2004

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 180 days

Degradation Code BST BST = Biodegrades sometimes/recalcitrant 

(PBT)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 10,500 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 5.02 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 2.42E-07 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 0.8 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 4 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 21 0 PWS 0% ug/L Drinking water monitoring

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 17 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 35 0 Sites 0% ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP SW Chronic = 0.5 ug/L; GW Chronic = 0.069 

ug/L

Page A1-31
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Endosulfan

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

5 6 10 7

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 115297

Substance Key: 5104

Contaminant: Endosulfan

3-Model Categorical Prediction

L? - L

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/SW Chronic EEC: 28

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 42 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA IRIS IN 1994

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP E 2007

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

UMD Yes teratogen list

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.006 mg/kg-d 2007 Reduced body weight gain, enlarged kidneys, 

increased incidences of marked progressive 

glomerulonephrosis; blood vessel aneurysms in 

males.

EPA OPP Basis NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg-d; UF = 100 (rat study)

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.006 mg/kg-d 1994 Reduced body weight gain in males and females, 

increased incidence of marked progressive 

glomerulonephrosis and blood vessel aneurysms 

in males.

IRIS Hoechst, 1989a, Basis NOAEL = 0.7 mg/kg-d (female) and 0.6mg/kg-d (male); UF=100 (rat study)

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR 0.002 mg/kg-d 2000 hepatic; liver Hoechst, 1989c, Basis NOAEL = 0.18 mg/kg-d, dog, UF=100

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.006 mg/kg-d 1998

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) RTECS mg/kg-d

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 Inadequate 

Study

Inadequate 

Study

NTP Negative Negative

Page A1-32
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Endosulfan

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

1,601,195 lbs/yr 44 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 180 days

Degradation Code BST BST = Biodegrades sometimes/recalcitrant 

(PBT)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 22,000 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 3.83 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 6.51E-05 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 0.45 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 4 %

Supplemental Water Data

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 665 105 Sites 15.79% 0.1 0.01 0.01 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP SW Chronic = 1.5 ug/L; GW Chronic = 0.012 

ug/L

Page A1-33
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Fluometuron

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

5 3 9 5

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 2164172

Substance Key: 12839

Contaminant: Fluometuron

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL?

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NAWQA AW 90%: 19.25

CAR HRL/NAWQA AW 90%: 0.97

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: 1.94 ug/L

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 38.5 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Herbicide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) EPA OPP 0.018 (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP C 2005

Cancer Classification2 IARC 3 1987

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

EPA Yes

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA 0.5 mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.0055 mg/kg-d Decreased body weight gain and discoloration in 

the spleen.

EPA OPP Basis NOAEL = 0.55 mg/kg-day; UF = 100

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.013 mg/kg-d 1987 No adverse effects. NCI, 1980, NOAEL 12.5 mg/kg-d, rat, UF=1000

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA 0.01 mg/kg-d 1987

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE 0.013 mg/kg-d 1987

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 100 mg/kg-d Endocrine - changes in spleen weight, Blood - 

changes in spleen, Nutritional and Gross 

Metabolic - weight loss or decreased weight gain

90-day oral study in rat; NTIS National Technical Information Service. (Springfield, VA 22161) Formerly 

U.S. Clearinghouse for Scientific & Technical Information. Volume(issue)/page/year PB80-217904

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP Negative Negative Equivocal Negative

Page A1-34
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Fluometuron

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

4,600 130 Sites 2.83% 0.003 37.77 0.22 2 8.34 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

5,313,290 lbs/yr 15 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 0 lbs/yr 0 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 0 lbs/yr 0 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life length of time

Degradation Code BST BST = Biodegrades sometimes/recalcitrant 

(BIODEG)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 363 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 2.42 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 1.8E-09 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 110 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 12 %

Supplemental Water Data

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 11 2 Sites 18.2% 0.002 0.042 0.007 0.007 0.033 ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 5 2 Sites 40% 0.002 0.028 0.007 0.007 0.019 ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Toccalino et al., 2010 590 6 1% 0.0044 1.22 0.0139 1.17 ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 0.699 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 27 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 505 8 Sites 1.58% 0 0 0 0 0 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

 Conc. Date Notes

Units

95th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

75th 

Percentile 

(Detects

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Percent 

with Detects

PWSs/ 

Sites/ 

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Number

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 225 19 Samples 8.4% 0.1 0.062 ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 312 24 Samples 7.7% 0.264 0.145 ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Page A1-35
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Linuron

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

5 3 1 1

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 330552

Substance Key: 6584

Contaminant: Linuron

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NAWQA 90%: 215

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 56 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Herbicide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA IRIS C 1989

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP C 1995

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

CACART Yes Developmental

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.008 mg/kg-d 1995 Decreased RBC count, hematocrit & hemoglobin 

levels

EPA OPP Basis NOAEL = 0.77 mg/kg-day; UF = 100. du Pont, 1962.

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.002 mg/kg-d 1986 Abnormal blood pigment du Pont, 1962; Basis LEL 0.625 mg/kg-d, dog, UF=300. NOEL not established.

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE 0.002 mg/kg-d Abnormal blood pigment du Pont, 1962; Basis LEL 0.625 mg/kg-d, dog, UF=300. NOEL not established.

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 4.93 mg/kg-d 1975 Blood - changes in serum composition (e.g. TP, 

bilirubin, cholesterol), Biochemical - Enzyme 

inhibition, induction, or change in blood or tissue 

levels - other Enzymes

31-week oral study in rat; GISAAA Gigiena i Sanitariya. For English translation, see HYSAAV. (V/O 

Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga, 113095 Moscow, USSR) V.1- 1936- Volume(issue)/page/year 40(7),46,1975

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-36
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Linuron

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

7,142 105 Sites 1.47% 0.0005 1.4 0.03 0.26 0.74 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

516,133 lbs/yr 35 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 0 lbs/yr 0 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 1 lbs/yr 1 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update No Reports lbs/yr 2002

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 60 days

Degradation Code BST BST = Biodegrades sometimes/recalcitrant 

(PBT)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 350 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 3.2 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 6.26E-09 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 75 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 11 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 142 0 PWS 0% ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 13 2 Sites 15.4% 0.0075 0.315 0.161 0.284 0.312 ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 7 1 Sites 14.3% 0.0042 0.019 0.011 0.017 0.019 ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 323 1 Samples 0.3% 0.035 ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 312 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 228 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 225 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 9060 (HPLC/MS)

Toccalino et al., 2010 512 1 0.2% 0.0123 0.0123 0.0123 0.0123 ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 0.0123 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 42 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

Illinois Drinking Water Monitoring Data 1 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1998-2005

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

753 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 592 15 Sites 2.53% 0 3.5 0 1.3 3.3 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

293 0 PWS 0% ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-37
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Malathion

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

4 3 9 3

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 121755

Substance Key: 5402

Contaminant: Malathion

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/NAWQA 90%: 5,698

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 490 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide; veterinary medicine

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP Suggestive 2006

Cancer Classification2 IARC 3

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

UMD Yes teratogen

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA 0.8 mg/L Drinking Water Equivalent Level

Maximum Acceptable Concentration 

(MAC)

CADW mg/L Canadian Drinking Water Maximum Acceptable 

Concentration

0.19

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP 0.07 mg/kg-d 2006 RBC cholinesterase inhibition in pups Basis BMDL = 7.1 mg/kg-d; UF = 100 (rat study)

Reference Dose (RfD) IRIS 0.02 mg/kg-d 1987 Red blood cell cholinesterase inhibition Moeller and Rider, 1962, basis NOEL 0.23 mg/kg-d, human, UF=10

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA 0.02 mg/kg-d 1992

Reference Dose (RfD) RAIS HE 0.02 mg/kg-d 1987 RDB ChE depression Moeller and Rider, 1962, basis NOEL/LEL, human, UF=10

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR 0.02 mg/kg-d 2003 cholinesterase inhibition Daly, 1996, basis NOAEL 2 mg/kg-d, rat, UF=100

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.3 mg/kg-d 1997

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) 0.34 mg/kg-d 2001 Blood - changes in serum composition (e.g. TP, 

bilirubin, cholesterol), Biochemical - Enzyme 

inhibition, induction, or change in blood or tissue 

levels - true cholinesterase

56-day oral study in human; HBPTO Handbook of pesticide toxicology. Robert Krieger ed, Academic press, 

2001 Volume(issue)/page/year 1,59,2001

RTECS

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) RTECS mg/kg

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP Negative Negative Not Tested Not Tested

Page A1-38
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Malathion

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

7,117 344 Sites 4.83% 0.0015 9.58 0.0137 0.0863 0.394 ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

5,809,943 lbs/yr 42 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water 5 lbs/yr 1 States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total 13,250 lbs/yr 7 States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 11 days

Degradation Code DF DF = Degrades fast (HSDB)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 30.5 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 2.36 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 4.89E-09 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 143 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 25 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 271 0 PWS 0% ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 7 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 13 2 Sites 15.4% 0.01 0.331 0.171 0.299 0.328 ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 323 6 Samples 1.9% 0.106 ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 228 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 2001 (GC/MS)

Toccalino et al., 2010 898 0 0% ug/L Ground water; Source Water; Toccalino et al., 2010, Quality of 

source water from public-supply wells in the United States, 

1993–2007: USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2010-5024, p. 206

Samples 1993-2007

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 58 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

USGS/California Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

1,828 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2004-2011

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 1,491 178 Sites 11.94% 0 3.43 0.048 0.186 1.2 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP

Page A1-39
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Phosmet

HEALTH EFFECTS DATA

Potency Severity Prevalence Magnitude

Attribute Scores

6 3 1 1

Contaminant ID (CASRN): 732116

Substance Key: 9544

Contaminant: Phosmet

3-Model Categorical Prediction

NL

HRL/Concentration Ratio(s)

NC HRL/GWC EEC: 105

Health Reference Level (HRL)1 cancer: N/A

Health Reference Level (HRL)1: 42 ug/L

Status

CCL 3: No CCL 4 Universe: Yes PCCL 4: Yes Draft CCL 4: No

Source Use

HSDB Insecticide

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

1 For the CCL process HRLs were calculated by converting the RfD or other dose to ug/L, assuming 2 L/day of water consumed by a 70 Kg adult, and a Relative Source Contribution of 20%. For carcinogens, the concentration at the 10^-6 cancer risk was used.

2 Cancer classifications were only used for screening. For potency scoring quantitative cancer risk data were used.

 Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Notes

Lifetime Cancer Risk (10^-4) EPA mg/L

Slope Factor (Oral) OEHHA (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Slope Factor (Oral) RAIS HE (mg/kg-d)ˉ1

Cancer Classification2 EPA OPP Suggestive 2010

Cancer Classification2 IARC

 Other Supporting Data Source Value Units Notes

Is contaminant on list of 

carcinogens?

Is the contaminant on a list of 

reproductive toxins?

Drinking Water Equivalent Level 

(DWEL)

EPA HA mg/L

 Non-Cancer Data Source Value Units Date Critical Effect Notes

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA OPP 0.006 mg/kg-d 2010 RBC cholinesterase inhibition (rat study) Basis BMDL = 0.6 mg/kg-day. RfD is for general population.

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.02 mg/kg-d 1986 Red. Body weight; liver cell vacuolization; ChE 

inhibition

IRIS Stauffer Chemical 1967; Basis NOEL 2 mg/kg-d, male rat, UF=100

Reference Dose (RfD) EPA HA mg/kg-d

Reference Dose (RfD) 0.02 mg/kg-d 1986 Reduced body wt; liver cell vacuolization; 

Cholinerase inhibition

RAIS HE Stauffer Chemical 1967; Basis NOEL/LEL, male rat, UF=101

Minimal Risk Level ATSDR mg/kg-d

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) JMPR 0.01 mg/kg-d 1998

Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) CEDI ADI mg/kg-d

Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) ITER mg/kg-d

No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) CTD JPN mg/kg-d

Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) RTECS mg/kg-d

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) HSDB mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) CTD JPN mg/kg

Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) 26 mg/kg 1969 Behavioral - somnolence (general depressed 

activity), Behavioral - muscle contraction or 

spasticity, Lungs, Thorax, or Respiration - dyspnea

HYSAAV Hygiene and Sanitation (USSR). English translation of GISAAA. (Springfield, VA) 1964-71. 

Discontinued. Volume(issue)/page/year 34(1-3),192,1969

RTECS

Source Male Rat Female Rat Male Mouse Female Mouse

Cancer Classification2 NTP

Page A1-40
PCCL 4 Contaminant Information Sheet EPA-OGWDW

Phosmet

OCCURRENCE DATA

Note: Highlighted data indicate value was used in attribute scoring. Blank fields indicate there were no data available.

Ambient Water Data

National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

(NAWQA)

Sites ug/L 1992-2001

National Reconnaissance of Emerging 

Contaminants (NREC)

Sites ug/L 1999-2004

Application/Release Data Amount 

Released

Units Number of 

States

Units Date

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 

(NCFAP) – Application

1,333,468 lbs/yr 40 States 1997

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Surface Water lbs/yr States 2010

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Total lbs/yr States 2010

Amount 

Range

Production Units Date

Chemical Update System/Inventory Update lbs/yr 2006

Reporting (CUS/IUR)

Environmental Fate Parameters Value Units Notes

Half Life 38 days

Degradation Code BSA BSA = Biodegrades slow with acclimation 

(PBT)

Organic Carbon Partitioning Coefficient (Koc) 42.9 L/kg

Log Octanol-water Partitioning Coefficient (Kow) 2.78 dimensionless

Distribution Coefficient (Kd) L/kg

Henry's Law Coefficient 8.39E-09 atm-m3/mol

Solubility in Water 24.4 mg/L

Modeled Percent in Water 41 %

Supplemental Water Data

California Department of Health Services 11 0 PWS 0% ug/L Drinking water monitoring

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 13 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2003-2009 Finished

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 6 0 Sites 0% ug/L 2003-2009 Raw

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 317 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Ambient Water; Method 9002 (GC/MS)

Pesticide Pilot Monitoring Program (PMP) 221 0 Samples 0% ug/L 1999 Finished Water; Method 9002 (GC/MS)

Hopple et al., 2009 34 0% ug/L Ground water; Phase 2; Source water; Hopple et al., 2009, 

Anthropogenic organic compounds in source water of selected 

community water systems that use groundwater, 2002–05: 

USGS Sci. Investigations Report 2009–5200, p.74

Samples 2002-2005

Hopple et al., 2009 211 Samples 0% ug/L 2002-2005 Ground water; Phase 1; Source water; Hopple et al., 2009

Hopple et al., 2009 34 Samples 0% ug/L 2002-2005 Ground water; Phase 2; Finished water; Hopple et al., 2009

California Drinking Water Monitoring Data 2 0 PWS 0% ug/L 1995-2007

STOrage and RETrieval (STORET) 700 20 Sites 2.86% 0 0.222 0 0.198 0.217 ug/L Updated 2013

Number of 

PWSs/Sites/

Samples

Number of 

Detects

Percent 

with Detects

Minimum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Maximum 

Conc. 

(Detects)

Median 

Conc. 

(Detects)

90th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

99th 

Percentile 

(Detects)

 Conc. 

Units

PWSs/ Date Notes

Sites/ 

Samples

Finished Water Data

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 

(UCMR 1)

PWS ug/L 2001-2003

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 1

PWS ug/L 1988-1992

Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) 

Round 2

PWS ug/L 1993-1997

National Inorganics and Radionuclide Survey 

(NIRS)

PWS ug/L 1984-1986

Other Supporting Data Source Value Date

Estimated Environmental Concentration (EEC) OPP SW Chronic = N/A; GW Chronic = 0.4 ug/L

Page A1-41
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets

for Microbes

Appendix 2: Microbial Contaminant Information Sheets

Page A2 - 1 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Adenovirus Scoring Data

Scoring Summary1,2 blank

Occurrence 3

Health Effects blank

 General population 6

 Sensitive subpopulation(s) [CD, C] 4 1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two scores were selected: the 

general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. These 2 scores were added and normalized by 

multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for 

total pathogen score calculation. Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic 

Disease

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

blank blank Waterborne Disease Outbreaks blank

5 

Has caused multiple (2 or 

more) documented WBDOs 

in the U.S. as reported by 

CDC surveillance between 

1990 and 2008

No CDC, 1991 – CDC, 

2011 

4 

Has caused at least one 

documented WBDOs in the 

U.S. as reported by CDC 

surveillance between 1990 

and 2008

No CDC, 1991 – CDC, 

2011 

3 

Has caused documented 

WBDOs at any time in the 

U.S.?

No blank

2 

Has caused WBDOs in 

countries other than the 

U.S.?

Yes 

Europe

Kukkula et al., 1997

1 

Has never caused WBDOs in 

any country, but has been 

epidemiologically associated 

with water related disease?

N/A blank

blank blank Occurrence blank

3 

Detected in drinking water 

in the U.S.?

Yes

PCR in connection with 

an outbreak.

O’Reilly et al., 2007

Fong et al., 2007 

Page A2 - 2 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

2 

Detected in source water in 

the U.S.? 

Yes 

38% of surface water 

samples collected as part 

of the Information 

Collection Rule contained 

Adenovirus 40/41.

USEPA, 2007 

1 Not detected in the U.S.? N/A blank

blank blank Health Effects blank

7 

Does the organism cause 

significant mortality (> 

1/1,000 cases)?

blank blank

6 [G]

Does the organism cause 

pneumonia, meningitis, 

hepatitis, encephalitis, 

endocarditis, cancer, or 

other severe manifestations 

of illness necessitating long 

term hospitalization (> 

week)?

[G] A frequent cause of 

pneumonia among 

(unvaccinated) military 

recruits. Two deaths in 

previously-healthy 

adults. 

ARD is still a significant 

problem in military. 

Less common 

manifestations include 

fatal neonatal disease, 

meningoencephalitis and 

myocarditis.

Gray et al., 2001

Robinson in 

Murray, 2010 

5 

Does the illness result in 

long term or permanent 

dysfunction or disability, i.e. 

sequelae?

None reported blank

4 [C, 

CD]

Does the illness require 

short term hospitalization 

(< week)?

[CD] Children with 

chronic disease required 

respiratory ventilation. 

[C] Young adults may 

contract acute 

respiratory disease. 

CDC, 1983

CDC, 1998 

3 

Does the illness require 

physician intervention? 

Physician office visits are 

indicated for ocular 

infections.

Robinson in Murray, 

2010 

Page A2 - 3 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

2 [E, P] 

Is the illness self-limiting 

within 72 hours (without 

requiring medical 

intervention)? 

[E, P] Approximately 50% 

of cases are asymptomatic, 

symptomatic cases usually 

present as upper 

respiratory infections 

similar to the common 

cold. 

Robinson in Murray, 

2010 

1 

Does the illness result in 

mild symptoms with minimal 

or no impact on daily 

activities?

blank blank

1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two 

scores were selected: the general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. 

These 2 scores were added and normalized by multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The 

higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for total pathogen score calculation. 

Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic Disease.

2

See Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: PCCL to CCL Process. EPA 815-R-09-009. Final. 

August 2009 for a detailed description on how to calculate the total pathogen score.

3

EPA based the WBDO scores on the CDC MMWR reports from 1991 – 2008 and then collected 

occurrence citations if there were no CDC WBDOs. 

References

CDC, 1983. Adenovirus type 7 outbreak in a pediatric chronic-care facility – Pennsylvania. 

1972. MMWR, 1983:32;258-60. 

CDC, 1998. Civilian Outbreak of Adenovirus Acute Respiratory Disease – South Dakota, 1997. 

MMWR 1998: 47(27);567-570. 

CDC, 1991. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1989—1990. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 40(SS-3); 1-21. 

CDC, 1993. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1991—1992. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 42(SS-5); 1-22. 

CDC, 1996. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1993—1994. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 45(SS-1); 1-33. 

CDC, 1998. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1995—1996. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 47(SS-5); 1-33. 

CDC, 2000. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1997—1998. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 49(SS-4); 1-35. 

Page A2 - 4 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

CDC, 2002. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1999—2000. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 51(SS-8); 1-36. 

CDC, 2004. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2001—2002. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 53(SS08); 23-45. 

CDC, 2006. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2003—2004. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 55(SS12); 31-58. 

CDC. 2008. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water and Water not Intended for Drinking — United States, 2005-2006. MMWR 57 (SS-9); 1-

72 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46). 

CDC. 2011. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water - United States, 2007-2008. MMWR 60 (SS-12); 1-80 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46).

Fong, T., L. Mansfield, D. Wilson, D. Schwab, S Molloy and J Rose. 2007. Massive 

Microbiological Groundwater Contamination Associated with a Waterborne Outbreak in Lake 

Erie, South Bass Island, OH. Environmental Health Perspectives.

Gray, G C, P R Goswami, M D Malasig, A W Hawksworth, D H Trump, M A Ryan and D P 

Schnurr. 2001. Adult Adenovirus Infections: Loss of Orphaned Vaccines Precipitates Military 

Respiratory Disease Epidemics. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 31: 663-70.

Kukkula, M., Arstila P., Klossner M.L., Maunula L., Bonsdorff C.H., and P. Jaatinen. 1997. 

Waterborne outbreak of viral gastroenteritis. Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Disease, 29(4): 

415-8. 

O'Reilly, C.E., A.B. Bowen, E.P. Nytzia, J.P. Sarisky, C.A. Shepherd, M.D. Miller, 

B.C. Hubbard, M. Herring, S.D. Buchanan, C.C. Fitzgerald, V. Hill, M.J. Arrowood, L.X. Xiao, 

R.M. Hoekstra, E.D. Mintz, M.F. Lynch, and the Outbreak Working Group. 2007. A 

Waterborne Outbreak of Gastroenteritis with Multiple Etiologies among Resort Island Visitors 

and Residents: Ohio, 2004. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 44:506-512. 

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/CID/journal/issues/v44n4/40825/40825.text.html - 

fn1#fn1http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/CID/journal/issues/v44n4/40825/40825.text.html - 

fn2#fn2 

Robinson, C. and M. Echavarria. 2010. Adenoviruses. In Murray, P. R., E. J. Baron, J. H. 

Jorgensen, M.L. Landry, and M. A. Pfaller (ed.) The Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 10th. 

edition, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC. Vol. 2: p. 1600. 

USEPA. 2007. Adenovirus Health and Criteria Document (Draft). 

Page A2 - 5 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Naegleria fowleri Scoring Data 

Scoring Summary1,2 blank

Waterborne Disease Outbreak 4

Health Effects blank

 General population 7

 Sensitive subpopulation(s) [C, P, E, CD] 7 1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two scores were selected: the

general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. These 2 scores were added and normalized by 

multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for 

total pathogen score calculation. Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic 

Disease

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

blank blank Waterborne Disease Outbreaks blank

5 

Has caused multiple (2 or 

more) documented WBDOs 

in the U.S. as reported by 

CDC surveillance between 

1990 and 2008?

No CDC, 1991 – CDC, 

2011 

4 

Has caused at least one 

documented WBDOs in the 

U.S. as reported by CDC 

surveillance between 1990 

and 2008?

Yes

1 Community

CDC, 2004

3

Has caused documented 

WBDOs at any time in the 

U.S.?

N/A blank

2 

Has caused WBDOs in 

countries other than the 

U.S.?

N/A blank

1 

Has never caused WBDOs in 

any country, but has been 

epidemiologically associated 

with water related disease?

N/A blank

Page A2 - 6 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

blank blank Occurrence blank

3 

Detected in drinking water 

in the U.S.?

Yes

Arizona storage - 

Sampled pre-treatment 

multiple-well study in 

Arizona.

Gerba et al., 2007

Marciano-Cabral et 

al., 2003 

2 

Detected in source water in 

the U.S.? 

Yes Schuster and 

Visvesvara, 2004

1 Not detected in the U.S.? N/A blank

blank blank Health Effects blank

7 [G, C, P, 

E, CD]

Does the organism cause 

significant mortality (> 

1/1,000 cases)? 

[All populations] 

Recovery from primary 

amoebic 

meningoencephalitis is 

rare.

Heymann, 2005

6 

Does the organism cause 

pneumonia, meningitis, 

hepatitis, encephalitis, 

endocarditis, cancer, or other 

severe manifestations of 

illness necessitating long 

term hospitalization (> 

week)?

Acute fulminating 

disease. Only a few 

patients have survived. 

Visvesvara in 

Murray, 2010 

5 

Does the illness result in 

long term or permanent 

dysfunction or disability, i.e. 

sequelae?

No blank

4 

Does the illness require short 

term hospitalization (< 

week)?

All cases are hospitalized 

for diagnosis and 

treatment.

Visvesvara in 

Murray, 2010 

3 Does the illness require 

physician intervention?

blank blank

2 

Is the illness self-limiting 

within 72 hours (without 

requiring medical 

intervention)?

blank blank

Page A2 - 7 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

1 

Does the illness result in 

mild symptoms with 

minimal or no impact on 

daily activities?

blank blank

1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two 

scores were selected: the general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. 

These 2 scores were added and normalized by multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The 

higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for total pathogen score calculation. 

Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic Disease.

2

See Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: PCCL to CCL Process. EPA 815-R-09-009. Final. 

August 2009 for a detailed description on how to calculate the total pathogen score.

3

EPA based the WBDO scores on the CDC MMWR reports from 1991 – 2008 and then collected 

occurrence citations if there were no CDC WBDOs. 

References

CDC, 1991. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1989—1990. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 40(SS-3); 1-21. 

CDC, 1993. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1991—1992. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 42(SS-5); 1-22. 

CDC, 1996. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1993—1994. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 45(SS-1); 1-33. 

CDC, 1998. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1995—1996. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 47(SS-5); 1-33. 

CDC, 2000. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1997—1998. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 49(SS-4); 1-35. 

CDC, 2002. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1999—2000. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 51(SS-8); 1-36. 

CDC, 2004. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2001—2002. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 53(SS08); 23-45. 

CDC, 2006. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2003—2004. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 55(SS12); 31-58. 

CDC. 2008. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water and Water not Intended for Drinking — United States, 2005-2006. MMWR 57 (SS-9); 1-

72 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46). 

Page A2 - 8 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

CDC. 2011. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water - United States, 2007-2008. MMWR 60 (SS-12); 1-80 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46). 

Gerba, C., B. Blair, P. Sarkar, and K. Bright. 2007. Occurrence and Control of Naegleria 

fowleri in Well Water and Chlorine Resistance. Proceedings, Water Quality Technology 

Conference, American Water Works Association, November 5-8, 2007.

Heymann, D. (ed.). 2005. Control of Communicable Diseases Manual, 18th ed. American Public 

Health Association, Washington, DC. pp. 417-419. 

Marciano-Cabral, F., R. MacLean, A. Mensah, and L. LaPat-Polasko. 2003. Identification of 

Naegleria fowleri in domestic water source by nested PCR. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69 (10): 

5864-5869. 

Schuster, F.L. and G.S. Visvesvara. 2004. Free-living amoebae as opportunistic and nonopportunistic pathogens of humans and animals. Int. J. Parasitol. 34: 1001-1027. 

Visvesvara, G. 2007. Pathogenic and Opportunistic Free-Living Amebae. In Murray, P. R., E. 

J. Baron, J. H. Jorgensen, M. A. Pfaller, and R. H Yolken (ed.) The Manual of Clinical 

Microbiology, 10th edition, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC Vol. 2; pp. 

3129. 

Page A2 - 9 
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Toxoplasma gondii Scoring Data

Scoring Summary1,2 blank

Waterborne Disease Outbreak 2

Health Effects blank

 General population 2

 Sensitive subpopulation(s) [P] 7 1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two scores were selected: the 

general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. These 2 scores were added and normalized by 

multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for 

total pathogen score calculation. Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic 

Disease

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

blank blank Waterborne Disease Outbreaks blank

5 

Has caused multiple (2 

or more) documented 

WBDOs in the U.S. as 

reported by CDC 

surveillance between 

1990 and 2008?

No CDC, 1991 – CDC, 

2011 

4 

Has caused at least one 

documented WBDOs in 

the U.S. as reported by 

CDC surveillance 

between 1990 and 

2008?

No CDC, 1991 – CDC, 

2011 

3 

Has caused documented 

WBDOs at any time in 

the U.S.?

No blank

2 

Has caused WBDOs 

in countries other 

than the U.S.?

Yes

Canada and Brazil. 

Bowie et al., 1997

de Moura, 2006 

1

Has never caused 

WBDOs in any 

country, but has been 

epidemiologically 

associated with water 

related disease?

N/A blank

Page A2 - 10
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

blank blank Occurrence blank

3 Detected in drinking 

water in the U.S.?

No blank

2 Detected in source 

water in the U.S.?

No blank

1 

Not detected in the 

U.S.? 

Yes

Groundwater in Poland 

and Canada.

Sroka et al., 2006

Isaac-Renton et al., 

1998

blank blank Health Effects blank

7 [P]

Does the organism 

cause significant 

mortality (> 1/1,000 

cases)?

[P] Congenital infection 

of neonates severe.

Infection during early 

pregnancy may lead to 

fetal infection with death 

of the fetus or other 

severe manifestations. 

Later in pregnancy, 

maternal infection 

results in mild or 

subclinical fetal disease. 

Wilson in Murray, 

2010 

Heymann, 2005

6 

Does the organism 

cause pneumonia, 

meningitis, hepatitis, 

encephalitis, 

endocarditis, cancer, or 

other severe 

manifestations of 

illness necessitating 

long term 

hospitalization (> 

week)?

Immunocompromised 

hosts may experience 

CNS, pneumonitis, and 

myocarditis. 

Wilson in Murray, 

2010 

5 

Does the illness result 

in long term or 

permanent dysfunction 

or disability, i.e. 

sequelae?

blank blank

Page A2 - 11
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

4 

Does the illness require 

short term 

hospitalization (< 

week)?

blank blank

3 

Does the illness require 

physician intervention? 

Treatment is indicated 

only for pregnant women, 

infants and 

immunocompromised 

hosts. 

Wilson in Murray, 

2010 

2 [G, C, 

E, CD]

Is the illness selflimiting within 72 

hours (without 

requiring medical 

intervention)?

[G, C, E, CD] Infection 

is generally 

asymptomatic; however 

10 – 20% of patients 

with acute infection may 

develop cervical 

lymphadenopathy 

and/or flu-like 

symptoms.

Wilson in Murray, 

2010 

1 

Does the illness result 

in mild symptoms with 

minimal or no impact 

on daily activities?

blank blank

1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two 

scores were selected: the general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. 

These 2 scores were added and normalized by multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The 

higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for total pathogen score calculation. 

Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic Disease.

2

See Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: PCCL to CCL Process. EPA 815-R-09-009. Final. 

August 2009 for a detailed description on how to calculate the total pathogen score.

3

EPA based the WBDO scores on the CDC MMWR reports from 1991 – 2008 and then collected 

occurrence citations if there were no CDC WBDOs. 

References

Bowie, W. R., S. A. King, D. H. Werker, J. L. Isaac-Renton, A. Bell, S. B. Eng, and S. A. 

Marion. 1997. Outbreak of toxoplasmosis associated with municipal drinking water. Lancet 350: 

173-177. 

CDC, 1991. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1989—1990. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 40(SS-3); 1-21. 

CDC, 1993. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

Page A2 - 12
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

United States, 1991—1992. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 42(SS-5); 1-22. 

CDC, 1996. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1993—1994. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 45(SS-1); 1-33. 

CDC, 1998. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1995—1996. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 47(SS-5); 1-33. 

CDC, 2000. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1997—1998. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 49(SS-4); 1-35. 

CDC, 2002. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1999—2000. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 51(SS-8); 1-36. 

CDC, 2004. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2001—2002. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 53(SS08); 23-45. 

CDC, 2006. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2003—2004. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 55(SS12); 31-58. 

CDC. 2008. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water and Water not Intended for Drinking — United States, 2005-2006. MMWR 57 (SS-9); 1-

72 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46). 

CDC. 2011. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water - United States, 2007-2008. MMWR 60 (SS-12); 1-80 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46). 

Heymann, D. (ed.). 2005. Control of Communicable Diseases Manual, 18th ed. American Public 

Health Association, Washington, DC. 

Isaac-Renton, J, W.R. Bowie, A. King, G.S. Irwin, C.S. Ong, C.P. Fung, M.O. Shokeir and J.P. 

Dubey. 1998. Detection of Toxoplasma gondii Oocysts in Drinking Water. Appl. Environ. 

Microbiol. 64(6): 2278-2280. 

de Moura L., L.M. Bahia-Oliveira, M.Y. Wada, J.L. Jones, S.H. Tuboi, E.H. Carmo, W.M. 

Ramalho, N.J. Camargo, R. Trevisan, R.M. Graca, A.J. da Silva, I. Moura, J.P. Dubey, and D.O. 

Garrett. 2006. Waterborne toxoplasmosis, Brazil, from field to gene. Emerging Infectious 

Diseases, 12(2): 326-9. 

Sroka J., A. Wojcik-Fatla, J. Dutkiewicz. 2006. Occurrence of Toxoplasma Gondii in Water 

from Wells Located on Farms. Ann Agric Environm Med. 13: 169-175. 

Jones, J., J. McAuley and K. Singh. 2010. Toxoplasma. In Murray, P. R., E. J. Baron, J. H. 

Jorgensen, M.L. Landry, and M. A. Pfaller (ed.) The Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 10th. 

edition, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC. Vol. 2: p. 2127. 

Page A2 - 13
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Vibrio cholerae Scoring Data

Scoring Summary1,2 blank

Waterborne Disease Outbreak 4

Health Effects blank

 General population 3

 Sensitive subpopulation(s) [C, E, P, 

CD]

3

1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two scores were selected: the 

general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. These 2 scores were added and normalized by 

multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for 

total pathogen score calculation. Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic 

Disease

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

blank blank Waterborne Disease Outbreaks blank

5 

Has caused multiple (2 or 

more) documented WBDOs 

in the U.S. as reported by 

CDC surveillance between 

1990 and 2008?

No CDC, 1991 – CDC, 

2011 

4 

Has caused at least one 

documented WBDOs in the 

U.S. as reported by CDC 

surveillance between 1990 

and 2008?

1 Community CDC, 1996

3 

Has caused documented 

WBDOs at any time in the 

U.S.?

N/A blank

2 Has caused WBDOs in 

countries other than the U.S.?

N/A blank

1 

Has never caused WBDOs in 

any country, but has been 

epidemiologically associated 

with water related disease?

N/A blank

blank blank Occurrence blank

3 Detected in drinking water 

in the U.S.?

Yes (outbreak data) CDC, 1996

Page A2 - 14
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

2 Detected in source water in 

the U.S.?

Yes Rhodes et al., 1986

Kaper et al., 1982

1 Not detected in the U.S.? N/A blank

blank blank Health Effects blank

7 

Does the organism cause 

significant mortality (> 

1/1,000 cases)? 

V. cholerae Non-O1: 

third most commonly 

isolated in U.S. - 

Septicemia case fatality 

rate from 24-65%.

Abbott in Murray, 

2010 

6 

Does the organism cause 

pneumonia, meningitis, 

hepatitis, encephalitis, 

endocarditis, cancer, or other 

severe manifestations of 

illness necessitating long term 

hospitalization (> week)? 

V. cholerae O1: 

Extremely rare cases 

causes severe 

extraintestinal infection. 

If untreated, V. cholerae

O1 infection causes 

severe dehydration which 

leads to hypovolemic 

shock, acidosis, 

circulatory collapse, and 

death. Unlike O1 strains, 

non-O1 isolates are 

commonly associated 

with extrainstestinal 

infections such as 

septicemia.

Abbott in Murray, 

2010

5 

Does the illness result in long 

term or permanent 

dysfunction or disability, i.e. 

sequelae?

blank blank

Page A2 - 15
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

Score2 Data Element Scoring Data Reference3

4 

Does the illness require short 

term hospitalization (< 

week)?

In severely dehydrated 

cases (cholera gravis), 

death may occur within a 

few hours, and the casefatality rate may exceed 

50%. With proper and 

timely rehydration, this 

can be less than 1%.

Heymann, 2005

3 [G, C, 

P, E, CD]

Does the illness require 

physician intervention?

[All populations] In 

most cases infection is 

asymptomatic or causes 

self-limiting diarrhea.

Treatment consists of 

fluid replacement by 

oral rehydration 

therapy and/or 

intravenous fluids. 

Abbott in Murray, 

2010 

2 

Is the illness self-limiting 

within 72 hours (without 

requiring medical 

intervention)?

blank blank

1 

Does the illness result in mild 

symptoms with minimal or no 

impact on daily activities?

blank blank

1 Bolded Text indicates the highest score for that particular protocol. For the health effects protocol two 

scores were selected: the general population [G] and the highest score for a sensitive subpopulation. 

These 2 scores were added and normalized by multiplying by 5/14 for a final health effects score. The 

higher score between the WBDO and Occurrence protocols was used for total pathogen score calculation. 

Health Effects protocol: G – General, C - Child, E-Elderly, P - Pregnant Women, CD -Chronic Disease.

2

See Final Contaminant Candidate List 3 Microbes: PCCL to CCL Process. EPA 815-R-09-009. Final. 

August 2009 for a detailed description on how to calculate the total pathogen score.

3

EPA based the WBDO scores on the CDC MMWR reports from 1991 – 2008 and then collected 

occurrence citations if there were no CDC WBDOs. 

References

Abbott, S. L., J. M. Janda, and J. J. Farmer. 2010. Vibrio and Related Organisms. In Murray, P. 

R., E. J. Baron, J. H. Jorgensen, M. A. Pfaller, and R. H Yolken (ed.) The Manual of Clinical 

Microbiology, 8th. edition, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC. Vol. 1: pp. 

666. 

CDC, 1991. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

Page A2 - 16
EPA OGWDW Contaminant Information Sheets EPA 815-R-15-003

for Microbes

United States, 1989—1990. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 40(SS-3); 1-21. 

CDC, 1993. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1991—1992. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 42(SS-5); 1-22. 

CDC, 1996. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1993—1994. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 45(SS-1); 1-33. 

CDC, 1998. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1995—1996. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 47(SS-5); 1-33. 

CDC, 2000. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1997—1998. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 49(SS-4); 1-35. 

CDC, 2002. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 1999—2000. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 51(SS-8); 1-36. 

CDC, 2004. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2001—2002. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 53(SS08); 23-45. 

CDC, 2006. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water ---

United States, 2003—2004. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 55(SS12); 31-58. 

CDC. 2008. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water and Water not Intended for Drinking — United States, 2005-2006. MMWR 57 (SS-9); 1-

72 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46). 

CDC. 2011. Surveillance for Waterborne Disease and Outbreaks Associated with Drinking 

Water - United States, 2007-2008. MMWR 60 (SS-12); 1-80 (Table 4, p. 45; Table 5 p. 46). 

Heymann, D. (ed.). 2005. Control of Communicable Diseases Manual, 18th ed. American Public 

Health Association, Washington, DC. pp. 113-127. 

Kaper, J. B., H. B. Bradford, N. C. Roberts, and S. Falkow. 1982. Molecular epidemiology of 

Vibrio cholerae in the U.S. Gulf Coast. J. Clin. Microbiol. 16(1): 129-134. 

Rhodes, J.B., H.L. Smith Jr., and J.E. Ogg. 1986. Isolation of Non-O1 Vibrio cholerae Serovars 

from Surface Waters in Western Colorado. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 51(6): 1216-1219. 

Page A2 - 17