Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0181-0016
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2006-03-22T05:00Z

UNITED
STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WASHINGTON,
D.
C.
20460
September
29,
2005
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Assessment
for
4­
Tertiary­
Amylphenol
and
Salts.

From:
Siroos
Mostaghimi,
Ph.
D.,
Senior
Scientist
Risk
Assessment
and
Science
Support
Branch
(
RASSB)
Antimicrobials
Division
(
7510C)

To:
Mark
Hartman,
Acting
Branch
Chief
Regulatory
Management
Branch
II
Antimicrobials
Division
(
7510C)

Through:
Norm
Cook,
Chief
Risk
Assessment
and
Science
Support
Branch
(
RASSB)
Antimicrobials
Division
(
7510C)

Re­
Registration
Case
No.:
3016
DP
Barcode:
316290
Chemical
name
PC
Codes
CAS
#
Common
Name
4­
tert­
Amylphenol
064101
80­
46­
6
p­
tert­
amylphenol
Potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenol
064111
53404­
18­
5
Potassium
p­
tert­
amylphenol
Sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenol
064112
31366­
95­
7
Sodium
p­
tert­
amylphenol
Attached
please
find
the
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Assessment
RED
Chapter
for
4­
Tertiary­
Amylphenol
and
Salts.
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1.0
INTRODUCTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
1.1
Purpose
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
1.2
Criteria
for
Conducting
Exposure
Assessments
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
1.3
Chemical
Identification
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
1.4
Physical/
Chemical
Properties
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
2.0
USE
INFORMATION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
2.1
Formulation
Types
and
Percent
Active
Ingredient
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
2.2
Summary
of
Use
Pattern
and
Formulations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
3.0
SUMMARY
OF
TOXICITY
CONCERNS
RELATING
TO
EXPOSURE
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3.1
Acute
Toxicity
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3.2
Summary
of
Toxicity
Concerns
Relating
to
Exposures
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3.3
FQPA
Considerations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4.0
RESIDENTIAL
EXPOSURE
ASSESSMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4.1
Summary
of
Registered
Uses
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4.2
Dietary
Exposure/
Risk
Pathway
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4.3
Drinking
Water
Exposure/
Risk
Pathway
 
To
be
added
by
EPA.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4.4
Residential
Exposure/
Risk
Pathway
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4.4.1
Residential
Handler
Scenarios
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4.4.2
Postapplication
Exposure
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
4.4.2.1
Hard
Surface/
Floor
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
4.4.2.2
Textiles
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
4.4.2.3
Aerosol
Deodorizers
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
4.4.3
Data
Limitations/
Uncertainties
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
5.0
RESIDENTIAL
AGGREGATE
RISK
ASSESSMENTS
AND
RISK
CHARACTERIZATION
.
.
23
5.1
Acute
and
Chronic
Dietary
Aggregate
Risk
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
5.2
Short­,
Intermediate­,
and
Long­
Term
Aggregate
Risk
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
6.0
OCCUPATIONAL
EXPOSURE
AND
RISK
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
6.1
Occupational
Handlers
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
6.2
Occupational
Postapplication
Exposure
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
30
6.3
Data
Limitations/
Uncertainties
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32
7.0
REFERENCES
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
APPENDIX
A:
Summary
of
CMA
data
and
PHED
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
34
APPENDIX
B:
Input/
Output
from
E­
FAST/
CEM
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
37
APPENDIX
C:
Input/
Output
from
MCCEM
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
44
1
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This
document
is
the
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Chapter
of
the
Reregistration
Eligibility
Decision
Document
(
RED)
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
(
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate).
It
addresses
the
potential
risks
to
humans
from
use
of
these
chemicals
in
occupational
and
residential
settings.

At
this
time,
products
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
are
active
ingredients
in
disinfectant
and
deodorizer
products
used
in
agricultural,
food
handling,
commercial/
institutional/
industrial,
residential
and
public
access,
and
medical
settings
(
Use
Site
Categories
I,
II,
III,
IV,
and
V,
respectively).
Examples
of
registered
uses
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
include
application
to
hard
surfaces
(
e.
g.,
walls,
floors,
tables,
fixtures),
textiles
(
e.
g.,
clothing,
diapers,
mattresses,
bedding),
carpets,
medical
instruments,
and
agricultural
equipment.
Additionally,
there
are
registered
uses
for
fogging
in
occupational
settings
and
air
deodorization
in
both
occupational
and
residential
settings.
Concentrations
of
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
in
products
range
from
0.0027%
to
10%.
The
products
are
formulated
as
soluble
concentrates,
ready­
to­
use
liquid
solutions,
pressurized
sprays,
and
impregnated
wipes.
The
application
rates
used
in
this
assessment
were
the
maximum
application
rates
as
recommended
on
the
product
labels.

The
endpoints
used
in
this
document
to
assess
risks
to
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
4­
tertamylphenol
salts
are
for
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal,
inhalation,
and
incidental
oral
exposures.
The
short­
and
intermediate­
term
(
non­
cancer)
dermal
NOAEL
is
25
mg/
kg/
day,
which
is
based
on
the
lack
of
systemic
effects
identified
up
to
and
including
a
dose
of
25
mg/
kg/
day
in
a
sub­
chronic
toxicity
study
in
rats.
The
short­
and
intermediate­
term
(
non­
cancer)
inhalation
and
incidental
oral
NOAEL
is
50
mg/
kg/
day.
The
NOAEL,
which
was
defined
in
an
oral
developmental
toxicity
study
in
rats,
is
based
on
clinical
signs,
decreases
in
body
weight
and
body
weight
gain,
coupled
with
decreased
food
consumption
at
200
mg/
kg/
day.
The
long­
term
inhalation
NOAEL
is
also
50
mg/
kg/
day,
based
on
the
same
effects.

Uncertainty
factors
or
"
target"
margins
of
exposure
(
MOE)
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
4­
tertamylphenol
salt
dermal
exposures
are
100
for
occupational
scenarios
and
1,000
for
residential
scenarios.
For
inhalation
exposures,
the
uncertainty
factors
are
300
for
occupational
scenarios
and
3,000
for
residential
scenarios.
For
incidental
oral
exposures,
the
uncertainty
factor
is
3,000.
The
dermal
and
inhalation
margins
of
exposure
were
not
combined
for
the
risk
assessment
because
the
toxicity
endpoints
for
the
dermal
and
inhalation
routes
of
exposure
are
based
on
different
toxicological
effects.
Additionally,
since
the
toxicological
endpoints
selected
for
4­
tertamylphenol
and
4­
tert­
amylphenol
salts
are
identical,
a
separate
assessment
was
not
conducted
for
each
active
ingredient.

Based
on
examination
of
product
labels
describing
uses
for
the
product,
it
has
been
determined
that
exposure
to
handlers
can
occur
in
a
variety
of
occupational
and
residential
environments.
Additionally,
postapplication
exposures
are
likely
to
occur
in
these
settings.
The
representative
scenarios
selected
by
AD
for
assessment
were
evaluated
using
maximum
2
application
rates
as
recommended
on
the
product
labels.
The
maximum
application
rates
were
from
products
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol.

To
assess
the
handler
risks,
AD
used
surrogate
unit
exposure
data
from
both
the
proprietary
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
(
CMA)
antimicrobial
exposure
study
and
the
Pesticide
Handlers
Exposure
Database
(
PHED).
Additionally,
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(
SOPs)
for
Residential
Exposure
Assessments
and
MCCEM
(
Multi­
Chamber
Concentration
and
Exposure
Model)
were
used
to
estimate
postapplication/
bystander
exposures.

Handler
Risk
Summary
For
the
residential
handler
dermal
and
inhalation
risk
assessment,
short­
and
intermediate­
term
risks
are
above
the
respective
target
MOEs
for
all
scenarios
(
i.
e.,
dermal
MOEs
were
>
1,000
and
inhalation
MOEs
were
>
3,000).
For
the
occupational
handler
dermal
and
inhalation
risk
assessment,
the
short­
and
intermediate­
term
risks
calculated
at
baseline
exposure
(
no
gloves
and
no
respirators)
were
also
above
target
MOEs
for
all
scenarios
(
i.
e.,
dermal
MOEs
were
>
100
and
inhalation
MOEs
were
>
300).
Note,
however,
that
the
high
pressure
spray
application
method
in
the
agricultural
use
site
category
was
assessed
using
gloved
data.

Postapplication
Risk
Summary
For
the
residential
postapplication
scenarios
assessed
in
this
document,
risks
are
below
the
respective
target
MOEs
for
the
following
scenarios
(
i.
e.,
dermal
MOEs
were
<
1,000,
inhalation
MOEs
were
<
3,000,
and
oral
MOEs
were
<
3,000):

°
Incidental
oral
exposure
from
children
mouthing
treated
textiles
(
Oral
MOE
=
650)
°
Dermal
exposure
from
children
wearing
treated
clothing
(
Dermal
MOE
=
0.86
with
a
100%
transfer
factor
and
Dermal
MOE
=
17
with
a
5%
transfer
factor).
°
Dermal
exposure
from
children
playing
on
a
treated
hard
surface
in
a
daycare
center
(
Dermal
MOE
=
940)
°
Dermal
exposure
from
adults
wearing
treated
clothing
(
Dermal
MOE
=
140
with
a
100%
transfer
factor;
however,
with
a
5%
transfer
factor
the
Dermal
MOE
=
2,700,
which
is
above
the
target
MOE)
°
Dermal
exposure
from
children
,1
year
old
wearing
diapers
(
dermal
MOE=
59
with
100%
transfer
factor;
however,
with
5%
transfer
factor
the
dermal
MOE
=
1200,
which
is
above
the
target
MOE)

Though
several
residential
postapplication
scenarios
yielded
dermal
risks
of
concerns,
it
should
be
noted
that
based
on
the
sub­
chronic
dermal
toxicity
in
the
rat,
no
systemic
toxicity
was
seen
at
the
highest
does
tested.

For
most
of
the
occupational
scenarios,
postapplication
dermal
exposure
is
not
expected
to
occur
or
is
expected
to
be
negligible
based
on
the
application
rates
and
chemical
properties
of
the
3
chemical.
Postapplication/
bystander
inhalation
exposures,
however,
were
assessed
for
entry
into
a
building
after
a
fogging
application.
The
representative
building
selected
was
a
poultry
barn.
The
calculated
inhalation
MOEs
were
above
the
target
MOE
of
300
for
all
fogging
postapplication
scenarios.

There
are
a
number
of
uncertainties
associated
with
this
assessment
(
see
Sections
4.4.3
and
6.3).
In
general,
conservative
values
were
used
in
cases
where
data
were
lacking.
Assessments
for
these
scenarios
should
be
considered
as
screening­
level.

1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Purpose
In
this
document,
EPA
presents
the
results
of
its
review
of
the
potential
human
health
effects
of
occupational
and
residential
exposure
to
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
4­
tert­
amylphenol
salts
(
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate).
This
information
is
for
use
in
EPA's
development
of
the
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
4­
tert­
amylphenol
salts
Reregistration
Eligibility
Decision
Document
(
RED).

1.2
Criteria
for
Conducting
Exposure
Assessments
An
occupational
and/
or
residential
exposure
assessment
is
required
for
an
active
ingredient
if
(
1)
certain
toxicological
criteria
are
triggered
and
(
2)
there
is
potential
exposure
to
handlers
(
mixers,
loaders,
applicators,
etc.)
during
use
or
to
persons
entering
treated
sites
after
application
is
complete.
For
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
4­
tert­
amylphenol
salts,
both
criteria
are
met.

1.3
Chemical
Identification
Three
chemicals
are
considered
in
this
document:
4­
tert­
amylphenol,
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate.
Table
1.1
shows
chemical
identification
information
for
the
three
chemicals.

Table
1.1.
Chemical
Identification
Information
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
4­
tert­
amylphenol
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Chemical
Code
064101
064111
064112
CAS
Number
80­
46­
6
31366­
95­
7
53404­
18­
5
Molecular
Formula
C11H16O
C11H15NaO
C11H15KO
4
1.4
Physical/
Chemical
Properties
Table
1.2
shows
physical/
chemical
characteristics
that
have
been
reported
for
4­
tertamylphenol
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate,
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate.

Table
1.2.
Physical/
Chemical
Properties
of
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
Salts
Property
4­
tert­
amylphenol
Sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Molecular
Weight
164.25
186.23
202.34
Melting
Point
95
°
C
205
°
C
(
estimated)
1
206
°
C
Boiling
Point
263
°
C
485
°
C
(
estimated)
1
486
°
C
Vapor
Pressure
1.16
x
10­
3
mm
Hg
at
25
°
C
7.7
x10­
10
(
estimated)
1
at
25
°
C
7.7
x10­
10
mm
Hg
at
25
°
C
(
estimated)
1
Solubility
(
water)
113.4
mg/
L
4595
mg/
L
(
estimated)
1
3811
mg/
L
at
25
°
C
(
estimated)
1
Henry
Law
Constant
(
HLC)
2.03
x
10­
6
atm­
m3/
mol
(
estimated)
1
4.10
x
10­
14
atm­
m3
/
mole
(
estimated)
1
5.38
x
10­
14
atm­
m3
/
mole
(
estimated)
1
Log
Koc
3.57
(
estimated)
1
3.57
3.57
(
estimated)
1
Log
Kow
3.91
1.23
1.23
(
estimated)
1
Physical
State
White
Solid
Solid
Solid
Persistence
in
Air
(
t
½

in
Air)
3.073
hours
(
measured
against
hydroxy
radical)
1
4.67
hours
(
measured
against
hydroxy
radical
4.67
hours
(
measured
against
hydroxy
radical)
1
1.
USEPA's
Estimation
of
P/
Chem
Properties
Program,
EPS
Suite
2.0
USE
INFORMATION
2.1
Formulation
Types
and
Percent
Active
Ingredient
The
products
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol
as
the
active
ingredient
(
a.
i)
are
formulated
as
soluble
concentrates,
ready­
to­
use
solutions,
pressurized
sprays,
and
impregnated
wipes.
Concentrations
of
4­
tert­
amylphenol
in
these
products
range
from
0.0027%
to
10%.
Sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
are
formulated
as
soluble
concentrates
containing
2.25
to
2.49%
a.
i.
and
3.74
to
4.3%
a.
i.,
respectively.
5
2.2
Summary
of
Use
Pattern
and
Formulations
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
are
active
ingredients
in
numerous
disinfecting
and
deodorizing
products.
The
majority
of
the
products
are
virucidal,
fungicidal,
tuberculocidal,
bactericidal,
pseudomonacidal,
or
staphylocidal.
The
Agency
determines
potential
exposures
to
handlers
of
the
product
by
identifying
exposure
scenarios
from
the
various
application
methods
that
are
plausible,
given
the
label
uses.
These
scenarios
are
identified
in
Table
2.1.
Based
on
a
review
of
product
labels,
products
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
are
intended
for
use
in
agricultural,
food
handling,
commercial/
institutional/
industrial,
residential
and
public
access,
and
medical
settings
(
Use
Site
Categories
I,
II,
III,
IV
and
V,
respectively).
Examples
of
registered
uses
for
4­
tertamylphenol
and
salts
include
application
to
hard
surfaces
(
e.
g.,
walls,
floors,
tables,
fixtures,
household
objects),
textiles
(
e.
g.,
clothing,
diapers,
mattresses,
bedding),
carpets,
medical
instruments,
and
agricultural
equipment.
Additionally,
there
are
registered
uses
for
air
deodorization
and
fogging.

From
Table
2.1,
AD
selected
representative
exposure
scenarios
to
assess
in
this
document.
These
scenarios
were
selected
to
be
representative
of
the
vast
majority
of
uses
and
are
believed
to
provide
high
end
degrees
of
dermal,
inhalation,
or
incidental
ingestion
exposure.
The
representative
scenarios
assessed
in
this
document
are
shown
in
Table
4.1
(
residential)
and
Table
6.1
(
occupational).

Table
2.1.
Potential
Use
Scenarios
Based
on
Product
Labels
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol,
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate,
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Use
Site
Category
Example
Use
Sites
Scenarios
4­
tert­
amylphenol
Use
Site
Category
I
Agricultural
Premises
and
Equipment
Poultry
houses;
Livestock
facilities;
Mushroom
houses;
Hatching
facilities;
Incubators
°
Application
to
hard
surfaces
and
equipment
through
low
pressure
handwand,
high
pressure
handwand,
trigger
pump
spray,
fogger,
foaming
apparatus,
sponge,
mop,
and
immersion
°
Application
to
hatching
eggs
through
immersion,
automatic
washing
system,
foaming
apparatus,
low
pressure
handwand
and
fogging.

°
Shoebaths
Table
2.1.
Potential
Use
Scenarios
Based
on
Product
Labels
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol,
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate,
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Use
Site
Category
Example
Use
Sites
Scenarios
6
Use
Site
Categories
II,
II,
and
V
Food
Handling,
Commercial/
Institutional/
Industrial,
Medical
Food
processing
plants;
Hospitals;
Public
places
(
e.
g.,
restaurants,
hotel/
motel
rooms);
Medical/
Dental
offices;
Nursing
home;
Schools
°
Application
to
hard
surfaces
through
trigger
pump
spray,
low
pressure
spray,
aerosol
spray,
mop,
cloth,
sponge,
impregnated
wipe,
and
automatic
scrubbing
machine
°
Application
to
instruments
(
e.
g.
surgical,
dental
and
salon
tools)
through
immersion
and
spray
°
Application
to
ultrasonic
machines
through
liquid
pour
°
Application
to
carpets
though
extraction
machine,
spin
bonnet,
and
immersion
°
Application
to
textiles
such
as
bedding,
linens,
and
uniforms
through
aerosol
spray,
trigger
pump
spray,
immersion
°
Air
deodorization
though
aerosol
spray
(
can
or
can
placed
in
metering
device)

Use
Site
Category
IV
Residential
and
Public
Access
Premises
Homes,
bathrooms,
laundry
rooms,
trash
cans
°
Application
to
indoor
hard
surfaces
(
e.
g.,
floors,
walls)
through
mop,
sponge,
and
cloth
°
Application
to
indoor
household
contents
(
trash
cans,
fixtures)
through
trigger
pump
spray
and
aerosol
spray
°
Application
to
textiles
such
as
bedding,
clothing
and
upholstery
through
trigger
pump
spray
and
aerosol
spray
°
Air
deodorization
through
aerosol
spray
°
Application
to
carpets
and
rugs
though
extraction
machine
and
immersion
Potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Use
Site
Category
I
Agricultural
Premises
and
Equipment
Poultry
houses;
Livestock
facilities;
Mushroom
houses;
Hatching
facilities;
Incubators;
Aquaculture
facilities
°
Application
to
hard
surfaces
and
equipment
through
mop,
cloth,
pressure
spray,
fogger
and
immersion
°
Shoebaths
Table
2.1.
Potential
Use
Scenarios
Based
on
Product
Labels
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol,
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate,
and
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Use
Site
Category
Example
Use
Sites
Scenarios
7
Use
Site
Categories
II,
II,
and
V
Food
Handling,
Commercial/
Institutional/
Industrial,
Medical
Hospitals;
Public
places
(
e.
g.,
restaurants,
hotel/
motel
rooms);
Medical/
Dental
offices;
Nursing
home;
Schools
°
Application
to
hard
surfaces
through
cloth,
mop
sponge,
trigger
pump
spray,
and
bowl
mop
°
Application
to
instruments
(
e.
g.
surgical,
dental
and
salon
tools)
through
immersion
and
spray
Sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
Use
Site
Category
I
Agricultural
Premises
and
Equipment
Poultry
houses;
Livestock
facilities;
Mushroom
houses;
Hatching
facilities;
Incubators;
Aquiculture
facilities
°
Application
to
hard
surfaces
and
equipment
through
mop,
cloth,
pressure
spray,
and
immersion
°
Shoebaths
Use
Site
Categories
II,
II,
and
V
Food
Handling,
Commercial/
Institutional/
Industrial,
Medical
Hospitals;
Public
places
(
e.
g.,
restaurants,
hotel/
motel
rooms);
Medical/
Dental
offices;
Nursing
home;
Schools
°
Application
to
hard
surfaces
through
cloth,
mop
sponge,
and
mechanical
spray
°
Application
to
instruments
(
e.
g.
surgical,
dental
and
salon
tools)
through
immersion
and
spray
3.0
SUMMARY
OF
TOXICITY
CONCERNS
RELATING
TO
EXPOSURE
3.1
Acute
Toxicity
At
present,
there
is
no
data
available,
neither
guideline
studies
nor
open
literature
reports,
on
the
acute
inhalation
toxicity
or
dermal
sensitization
related
to
amylphenol.
While
there
are
no
other
guideline
acute
toxicity
data
available,
Rinehart
et
al.
(
1967,
Ind.
Hyg.
Found.
Am.
Chem.
Tox.
6:
1­
11)
have
reported
on
acute
oral,
acute
dermal,
acute
inhalation,
and
primary
dermal
irritation
toxicities.
However,
these
studies
were
deemed
inadequate
due
to
protocol
inadequacies,
and
the
percent
active
ingredient
was
not
specified.
Therefore,
adequate
acute
toxicity
data
are
not
available
at
this
time.

3.2
Summary
of
Toxicity
Concerns
Relating
to
Exposures
Table
3.1
summarizes
the
toxicological
endpoints
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
(
USEPA,
2005).
The
toxicological
endpoints
selected
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
4­
tert­
amylphenol
salts
are
identical.
8
Table
3.1
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
Hazard
Endpoints
and
Uncertainty
Factors
Exposure
Scenario
Dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Endpoint
Study
Acute
Dietary
females
13+
(
b.
w.
=
60
kg)
NOAEL
=
200
UF
=
3000a
offspring
effects
at
200
mg/
kg/
day
developmental
toxicity
B
oral
rat
Acute
RfD
=
0.067
Chronic
Dietary
(
b.
w.
=
70
kg)
NOAEL
=
50
UF
=
3000a
clinical
signs,
decreases
in
body
weight
and
body
weight
gain
and
decreased
food
consumption
at
200
mg/
kg/
day
developmental
toxicity
B
oral
rat
Chronic
RfD
=
0.017
Incidental
Oral
Short­
and
intermediate­
term
(
b.
w.
=
70
kg)
NOAEL
=
50
UF
=
3000a
clinical
signs,
decreases
in
body
weight
and
body
weight
gain
and
decreased
food
consumption
at
200
mg/
kg/
day
developmental
toxicity
B
oral
rat
Dermal1
Short­
and
intermediate­
term
(
b.
w.
=
70
kg)
NOAEL
=
25
UF
=
1000
(
residential)
a
100
(
occupational)
a
No
systemic
effect
identified
up
to
and
including
a
dose
of
25
mg/
kg/
day.
subchronic
dermal
study­­
Rat
Inhalation
All
durations
(
b.
w.
=
70
kg)
NOAEL
=
50
UF
=
3000
(
residential)
a
300
(
occupational)
a
clinical
signs,
decreases
in
body
weight
and
body
weight
gain
and
decreased
food
consumption
at
200
mg/
kg/
day
developmental
toxicity
B
oral
rat
UF
=
uncertainty
factor,
RfD
=
reference
dose,
MOE
=
margin
of
exposure
a
Uncertainty
factors:

Acute
and
chronic
dietary:
10x
interspecies
extrapolation,
10x
intraspecies
variation,
10x
FQPA
safety
factor,
3x
database
uncertainty
factor.
Incidental
oral:
10x
interspecies
extrapolation,
10x
intraspecies
variation,
10x
FQPA
safety
factor,
3x
database
uncertainty
factor.
Dermal
Residential:
10x
interspecies
extrapolation,
10x
intraspecies
variation,
10x
FQPA
safety
factor.
Dermal
Occupational:
10x
interspecies
extrapolation,
10x
intraspecies
variation
Inhalation
Residential:
10x
interspecies
extrapolation,
10x
intraspecies
variation,
10x
FQPA
safety
factor,
3x
database
uncertainty
factor
Inhalation
Occupational:
10x
interspecies
extrapolation,
10x
intraspecies
variation,
3x
database
uncertainty
factor
3.3
FQPA
Considerations
The
toxicology
data
base
is
not
complete
with
respect
to
assessing
the
increased
susceptibility
to
infants
and
children
as
required
by
FQPA
for
4­
t­
amylphenol.
The
rat
prenatal
developmental
study
showed
no
quantitative
evidence
of
increased
susceptibility
(
i.
e.,
developmental
NOAELs/
LOAELs
were
the
higher
than
those
for
maternal
effects).
However,
there
was
qualitative
evidence
of
increased
susceptibility
(
i.
e.,
fetal
effects
(
skeletal
abnormalities,
decreased
body
weight
gain)
were
considered
to
be
more
severe
than
the
maternal
toxicity
(
reversible
9
clinical
signs)
observed
at
the
same
dose
level).
In
addition,
there
is
an
absence
of
developmental
toxicity
data
in
the
rabbit,
and
an
absence
of
reproductive
toxicity
data.
In
the
open
literature
(
Yamasaki
et
al.
2003),
an
increase
in
non­
pregnant
uterine
weight
was
observed
in
rats
following
4­
t­
amylphenol
exposure.
Another
study
(
Soto
et
al.
1995)
suggested
that
4­
t­
amylphenol
may
have
estrogenic
effect.
Wysowski
et
at.
(
1978)
reported
elevated
blood
levels
of
bilirubin
in
children
exposed
to
4­
t­
amylphenol
and
other
phenols
in
disinfectant.
These
studies,
while
not
indicative,
are
suggestive
of
a
basis
for
increased
concern
for
reproductive
and/
or
developmental
effects
due
to
exposure
to
4­
t­
amylphenol.

On
the
basis
of
a
lack
of
guideline
studies,
qualitative
evidence
of
sensitivity
in
the
developmental
toxicity
study,
and
the
suggestive
evidence
in
the
open
literature
of
possible
endocrine
effects,
the
ADTC
has
determined
that
the
FQPA
Safety
Factor
should
be
retained
(
10x)
at
this
time.

4.0
RESIDENTIAL
EXPOSURE
ASSESSMENT
4.1
Summary
of
Registered
Uses
Some
products
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol
are
labeled
for
residential
use
as
disinfectants
and
deodorizers.
These
products
are
for
use
on
hard
surfaces
(
e.
g.,
floors,
walls,
bathroom
fixtures,
trash
cans,
household
contents),
textiles
(
e.
g.,
clothing,
diapers,
and
bedding),
and
carpets.
Additionally,
there
are
products
which
can
be
used
to
deodorize
air
in
the
home.
Table
2.1
identifies
the
plausible
exposure
scenarios
for
the
residential
use
site
category
based
on
examination
of
product
labels.
Table
4.1
identifies
the
representative
exposure
scenarios
assessed
in
this
document.
There
are
no
residential
uses
for
products
containing
sodium
4­
tert­
amylphenate
or
potassium
4­
tert­
amylphenate.

4.2
Dietary
Exposure/
Risk
Pathway
Will
be
discussed
in
PRA.

4.3
Drinking
Water
Exposure/
Risk
Pathway
Will
be
discussed
in
PRA.

4.4
Residential
Exposure/
Risk
Pathway
4.4.1
Residential
Handler
Scenarios
The
exposure
scenarios
assessed
in
this
document
for
the
representative
uses
selected
by
AD
are
shown
in
Table
4.1.
The
table
also
shows
the
maximum
application
rate
associated
with
the
representative
use
and
the
EPA
Registration
number
for
the
product
label.
For
handlers,
the
representative
uses
assessed
include
application
to
hard
surfaces
and/
or
textiles
using
mopping,
10
wiping,
and
trigger
pump
equipment,
and
application
to
air
using
an
aerosol
spray
can.

Table
4.1.
Representative
Uses
Associated
with
Residential
Exposure
Representative
Use
Application
Method
EPA
Reg.
No.
1
Application
Rate2
(
Dilution
rate)
Exposure
Scenario
Assessed
Indoor
hard
surfaces
°
Mopping
°
Wiping
surfaces
66171­
2
0.0013
lbs
ai/
gal
(
2%
ai
x
1
oz
product/
gal
water
x
1
gal/
128
oz
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
ST
Postapplication:
°
Child
­
dermal
and
incidental
ingestion
exposures
through
contact
with
treated
floors
in
residential
homes
IT
Postapplication3:
°
Child­
dermal
and
incidental
ingestion
exposures
through
contact
with
treated
floors
in
a
commercial
daycare
facility
(
using
application
rate
from
commercial/
instutional
use
site
category)

°
Trigger
pump
spray
10088­
105
0.0048
lb
ai/
gal
(
0.058%
ai
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
°
Aerosol
spray
1043­
19
0.074%
ai
by
weight
ST
Handler
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
ST
Postapplication/
Bystander:
4
°
Adult
and
child
­
inhalation
(
vapor)

IT
Postapplication/
Bystander:
3,4
°
Child
­
inhalation
(
vapor)

Textiles
(
clothing
and
cloth
diapers)
°
Trigger
pump
spray
10088­
105
0.0048
lbs
ai/
gal
(
0.058%
ai
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
5
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
ST
Postapplication:
°
Adult
­
dermal
contact
with
treated
clothing
°
Child
­
dermal
and
incidental
oral
contact
with
treated
clothing;
dermal
contact
with
treated
diapers6
Table
4.1.
Representative
Uses
Associated
with
Residential
Exposure
Representative
Use
Application
Method
EPA
Reg.
No.
1
Application
Rate2
(
Dilution
rate)
Exposure
Scenario
Assessed
11
Air
Deodorization
°
Aerosol
spray
1043­
19
0.074%
ai
by
weight
ST
Handler:
5
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
ST
Postapplication/
Bystander:
7
°
Adult
and
child
­
inhalation
(
vapor)

IT
Postapplication/
Bystander:
7
°
Child
­
inhalation
(
vapor)

Notes
for
Table
4.1:
ST
=
Short
term
IT
=
Intermediate
Term
1.
All
EPA
Registration
numbers
refer
to
products
that
contain
4­
tertiary
amylphenol
as
the
active
ingredient.
No
products
containing
4­
tertamylphenol
salts
can
be
used
in
residential
settings.
2.
All
application
rates
for
the
soluble
concentrate
and
ready­
to­
use
liquid
products
were
calculated
assuming
the
product
has
the
same
density
as
water
(
8.34
lb/
gal).
The
basic
formulas
for
calculating
the
application
rates
are
as
follows:

°
For
products
requiring
dilution
(
soluble
concentrates):
Application
rate
(
lb
ai/
gal)
=
Percent
active
ingredient
(%)
/
100
x
density
of
water
(
8.34
lb
ai/
gal)
x
dilution
rate
(
ounces
product/
gallon
water)
x
conversion
factor
(
1
gallon/
128
ounces)

°
For
products
not
requiring
dilution
(
ready­
to­
use
liquids)
Application
rate
(
lb
ai/
gal)
=
Percent
active
ingredient
(%)
/
100
x
density
of
water
(
8.34
lb
ai/
gal)

3.
An
IT
postapplication
scenario
for
children
using
the
commercial/
institutional/
industrial
application
rate
is
necessary
because
these
products
can
potentially
be
used
in
a
daycare
facility.
4.
Since
4­
tert
amylphenol
has
a
relatively
high
vapor
pressure,
it
was
necessary
to
assess
postapplication
inhalation
exposure
to
the
vapor.
5.
The
handler
exposure
is
represented
by
the
handler
exposure
for
aerosol
application
to
indoor
hard
surfaces.
6.
The
treated
diapers
will
most
likely
be
washed
prior
to
use;
however,
a
dermal
exposure
assessment
for
children
wearing
diapers
immediately
after
treatment
of
the
diaper
was
conducted
as
a
conservative
measure.
7.
The
postapplication
exposure
is
represented
by
the
postapplication
exposure
for
aerosol
application
to
indoor
hard
surfaces.

Exposure
and
Risk
Calculations
In
this
document,
handler
scenarios
were
assessed
by
using
unit
exposure
data
to
estimate
exposures.
Unit
exposures
are
estimates
of
the
amount
of
exposure
to
an
active
ingredient
a
handler
receives
while
performing
various
handler
tasks
and
are
expressed
in
terms
of
micrograms
or
milligrams
of
active
ingredient
per
pounds
of
active
ingredient
handled.
A
series
of
unit
exposures
have
been
developed
that
are
unique
for
each
scenario
typically
considered
in
assessments
(
i.
e.,
there
are
different
unit
exposures
for
different
types
of
application
equipment,
job
functions,
and
levels
of
protection).
The
unit
exposure
concept
has
been
established
in
the
scientific
literature
and
also
through
various
exposure
monitoring
guidelines
published
by
the
USEPA
and
international
organizations
such
as
Health
Canada
and
OECD
(
Organization
For
Economic
Cooperation
and
Development).

Using
surrogate
unit
exposure
data,
application
rates
from
labels,
and
EPA
estimates
of
daily
amount
handled,
exposure
and
risks
to
handlers
were
assessed.
The
exposure/
risks
were
calculated
using
the
following
equations.
12
Daily
Exposure:
Daily
dermal
or
inhalation
handler
exposures
are
estimated
for
each
applicable
handler
task
with
the
application
rate,
quantity
treated/
handled
in
a
day,
and
the
applicable
dermal
or
inhalation
unit
exposure
using
the
following
formula:

Daily
Exposure:
E
=
UE
x
AR
x
AT
(
Eq.
1)

Where:
E
=
Amount
(
mg
or
µ
g
ai/
day)
deposited
on
the
surface
of
the
skin
that
is
available
for
dermal
absorption
or
amount
inhaled
that
is
available
for
inhalation
absorption;
UE
=
Unit
exposure
value
(
mg
ai/
lb
ai)
derived
from
August
1998
PHED
data
or
from
CMA
data;
AR
=
Maximum
application
rate
based
on
a
logical
unit
treatment,
such
as
acres,
square
feet,
gallons,
or
cubic
feet.
Maximum
values
are
generally
used
(
lb
ai/
A,
lb
ai/
sq
ft,
lb
ai/
gal,
lb
ai/
cu
ft);
and
AT
=
Normalized
application
area
based
on
a
logical
unit
treatment
such
as
acres
(
A/
day),
square
feet
(
sq
ft/
day),
gallons
(
gal/
day),
or
cubic
feet
(
cu
ft/
day).

Daily
Dose:
The
daily
dermal
or
inhalation
dose
is
calculated
by
normalizing
the
daily
exposure
by
body
weight
and
adjusting,
if
necessary,
with
an
appropriate
absorption
factor.
A
dermal
endpoint
was
used,
therefore
no
dermal
absorption
factor
was
applied.
Since
the
inhalation
endpoint
is
from
an
oral
study,
one
hundred
percent
inhalation
absorption
is
assumed.
Daily
dose
was
calculated
using
the
following
formula:

Daily
Dose:
ADD
=
E
x
(
ABS
/
BW)
(
Eq.
2)

Where:
ADD
=
Absorbed
dose
received
from
exposure
to
a
chemical
in
a
given
scenario
(
mg
active
ingredient/
kg
body
weight/
day);
E
=
Amount
(
mg
ai/
day)
deposited
on
the
surface
of
the
skin
that
is
available
for
dermal
absorption
or
amount
inhaled
that
is
available
for
inhalation
absorption;
ABS
=
A
measure
of
the
amount
of
chemical
that
crosses
a
biological
boundary
such
as
lungs
(%
of
the
total
available
absorbed);
and
BW
=
Body
weight
determined
to
represent
the
population
of
interest
in
a
risk
assessment
(
kg).

Margins
of
Exposure:
Non­
cancer
inhalation
and
dermal
risks
for
each
applicable
handler
scenario
are
calculated
using
a
Margin
of
Exposure
(
MOE),
which
is
a
ratio
of
the
daily
dose
to
the
toxicological
endpoint
of
concern.

Margins
of
Exposure:
MOE
=
(
NOAEL
or
LOAEL)
/
ADD
(
Eq.
3)

Where:
MOE
=
Margin
of
exposure,
value
used
to
represent
risk
or
how
close
a
chemical
exposure
is
to
being
a
concern
(
unitless);
NOAEL
or
LOAEL
=
Dose
level
in
a
toxicity
study,
where
no
observed
adverse
effects
(
NOAEL)
or
where
the
lowest
observed
adverse
effects
(
LOAEL)
occurred
in
the
study;
and
ADD
=
Average
daily
dose
or
the
absorbed
dose
received
from
exposure
to
a
chemical
in
a
given
scenario
(
mg
ai/
kg
body
weight/
day).

Assumptions
13
A
series
of
assumptions
and
exposure
factors
served
as
the
basis
for
completing
the
handler
risk
assessment.
Each
general
assumption
and
factor
for
both
residential
and
occupational
assessments
is
detailed
below.
Assumptions
specific
to
the
use
site
category
are
listed
in
each
separate
section
of
this
document.

The
general
assumptions
and
factors
include:

°
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salt
products
are
widely
used
disinfectants
and
have
a
large
number
of
use
patterns
that
are
difficult
to
completely
capture
in
this
document.
As
such,
AD
has
patterned
this
risk
assessment
on
a
series
of
likely
representative
scenarios
for
each
use
site
that
are
believed
by
AD
to
represent
the
vast
majority
of
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
4­
tertamylphenol
salt
uses.

C
The
adverse
effects
for
the
dermal
and
inhalation
endpoints
are
based
on
studies
where
the
effects
were
observed
in
males
and
females;
therefore,
the
average
body
weight
of
an
adult
handler
(
i.
e.,
70
kg)
is
used
to
complete
the
noncancer
risk
assessment.

C
Exposure
factors
used
to
calculate
daily
exposures
to
handlers
are
based
on
applicable
data,
if
available.
When
appropriate
data
were
lacking,
values
from
a
scenario
deemed
similar
were
used.

C
The
maximum
application
rates
allowed
by
labels
were
assumed.

The
assumptions
and
factors
specific
for
the
residential
handler
scenarios
include:

C
Unit
Exposure
Values:
Unit
exposure
values
were
taken
from
the
proprietary
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
(
CMA)
antimicrobial
exposure
study
(
USEPA,
1999:
DP
Barcode
D247642)
or
from
the
Pesticide
Handler
Exposure
Database
for
residential
scenarios
(
USEPA,
1998).

<
For
mopping,
the
CMA
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
ungloved
mopping
were
used
(
71.6
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
2.38
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively).
These
values
are
based
on
data
collected
from
six
replicates
mopping
floors
and
receiving
exposure
via
contact
with
the
mop
or
with
the
bucket.

<
For
wiping,
the
CMA
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
ungloved
wiping
were
used
(
2,870
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
67.3
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively).
These
values
are
based
on
data
collected
from
six
replicates
(
dental
technicians)
who
used
a
finger
pump
sprayer
to
apply
the
product
and
then
wiped
the
surfaces
with
a
paper
towel.

<
For
trigger
pump
spray
and
air
deodorization
(
aerosol
spray),
the
PHED
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
residential
aerosol
applications
were
used.
The
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
are
220
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
2.4
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively.
The
values
are
based
on
homeowners
applying
an
aerosol
insecticide
to
baseboards
in
kitchens.

°
Quantity
handled/
treated:
The
quantities
handled/
treated
were
estimated
based
on
14
information
from
various
sources,
including
the
Draft
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(
SOPs)
for
Residential
Exposure
Assessments
(
2000
and
2001).
In
certain
cases,
no
standard
values
are
available
for
some
scenarios.
Assumptions
for
these
scenarios
are
based
on
AD
estimates
and
could
be
further
refined
from
input
from
affected
sectors.
The
following
assumptions
were
made:

<
For
mopping
scenarios,
it
is
assumed
that
1
gallon
of
diluted
solution
is
used.

<
For
wiping
and
trigger
pump
spray
scenarios,
it
is
assumed
that
0.5
liter
(
0.13
gal)
of
diluted
solution
is
used.

<
For
aerosol
sprays,
it
is
assumed
that
one
16­
oz
can
of
product
is
used.

°
Duration
of
Exposure:
Although
the
dermal
and
inhalation
endpoints
represent
shortand
intermediate­
term
durations,
the
exposure
duration
of
most
homeowner
applications
of
disinfectant/
deodorizing
products
is
believed
to
be
best
represented
by
the
short­
term
duration.

Results
The
results
of
the
MOE
analysis
for
the
representative
scenarios
are
presented
in
Table
4.2.
The
calculated
dermal
MOEs
are
above
the
target
MOE
of
1,000
for
all
of
the
scenarios
and
the
calculated
inhalation
MOEs
are
above
the
target
MOE
of
3,000
for
all
scenarios.

Table
4.2
Short­
Term
and
Intermediate­
Term
Risks
Associated
with
Residential
Handlers
Method
of
Application
Target
of
Application
Unit
Exposure
(
mg/
lb
ai)
Application
Rate
Quantity
Handled/
Treated
per
day
Daily
Dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
MOE
(
ST/
IT)

Derma
l
Inhalation
Dermala
Inhalationb
Dermalc
Inhalationd
Mopping
hard
surfaces
71.6
2.38
0.00125
lb
ai/
gallon
1
gallon
0.00128
4.25x10­
5
20,000
1,200,000
Wiping
hard
surfaces
2,870
67.3
0.00125
lb
ai/
gallon
0.13
gallon
0.00666
1.56x10­
4
3,800
320,000
Trigger
Pump
Spray
hard
surfaces,
textiles
220
2.4
0.0048
lb
ai/
gallon
0.13
gallon
0.00198
2.16x10­
5
13,000
2,300,000
Aerosol
Spray
air
deodorization,
hard
surfaces
220
2.4
0.074
%
ai
by
weight
one
16­
oz
can
0.00233
2.54x10­
5
11,000
2,000,000
a
Dermal
Daily
Dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
[
unit
exposure
(
mg/
lb
ai)
*
dermal
absorption
(
1.0)
*
application
rate
*
quantity
handled
/
body
weight
(
70
kg).
b
Inhalation
Daily
Dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
[
unit
exposure
(
mg/
lb
ai)
*
inhalation
absorption
(
1.0)
*
application
rate
*
quantity
handled
/
body
weight
(
70
kg).
c
Dermal
MOE
=
NOAEL
(
25
mg/
kg/
day)
/
Daily
Dose.
Target
dermal
MOE
is
1,000.
d
Inhalation
MOE
=
NOAEL
(
50
mg/
kg/
day)
/
Daily
Dose.
Target
inhalation
MOE
is
3,000.

4.4.2
Postapplication
Exposure
For
the
purposes
of
this
screening
level
assessment,
postapplication
scenarios
have
been
developed
that
encompass
multiple
products,
but
still
represent
a
high
end
exposure
scenario
for
15
all
products
represented.
As
shown
in
Table
4.1,
representative
postapplication
scenarios
assessed
include
contacting
treated
hard
surfaces/
floors
(
dermal
and
incidental
oral
exposure
to
children),
wearing
treated
clothing
(
dermal
exposure
to
adults
and
children),
wearing
treated
diapers
(
dermal
exposure
to
children),
and
mouthing
treated
textiles
such
as
clothing
and
blankets
(
incidental
oral
exposure
to
children).
Additionally,
postapplication/
bystander
inhalation
exposures
were
assessed
for
use
of
the
disinfecting/
deodorizing
products
(
vapor
exposure
to
adults
and
children).

Typically,
most
products
used
in
a
residential
setting
result
in
exposures
occurring
over
a
shortterm
time
duration
(
1
 
30
days).
If
the
products
are
used
on
a
routine
basis
(
i.
e.,
once
a
week)
and
the
active
ingredient
has
a
long
indoor
half­
life,
exposures
may
occur
over
an
intermediateterm
time
duration
(
30
days
 
6
months).
At
this
time,
AD
does
not
have
residue
dissipation
data
or
reliable
use
pattern
data,
including
the
frequency
and
duration
of
use
of
antimicrobial
products
in
the
residential
setting.
Even
though
AD
does
not
believe
that
the
use
patterns
of
many
residential
products
result
in
intermediate­
term
exposure,
they
are
assessed
to
provide
an
upper
bound
estimate
of
exposure.
AD
does
believe,
however,
that
intermediate­
term
exposure
to
children
may
occur
in
day
care
centers
where
disinfecting
products
are
used
more
frequently.

4.4.2.1
Hard
Surface/
Floor
Dermal
Exposure
to
Children
from
Treated
Floors
Exposure
Calculations
There
is
the
potential
for
dermal
exposure
to
toddlers
crawling
on
hard
floors
after
mopping
with
4­
tert­
amylphenol.
Risks
were
calculated
for
children
contacting
treated
hard
surface
floors
in
residential
homes
(
short­
term
exposure)
and
in
commercial
daycare
centers
(
intermediate­
term
exposure).
To
determine
toddler
exposure
to
floor
residues
(
mopping),
the
following
equation
was
used:

(
Eq.
4)
PDD
AR
DTF
DRF
CF
CF
SA
BW
=
×
×
×
×
×
1
2
where
PDD
=
Potential
daily
dose;
AR
=
Application
Rate
(
lb/
ft2);
DTF
=
Dermal
transfer
factor
(
fraction,
unitless);
DRF
=
Disinfectant
fraction
remaining
on
floor
(
unitless);
CF1
=
Conversion
factor
(
4.54x105
mg/
lb);
CF2
=
Conversion
factor
(
10.8
ft2/
m2);
SA
=
Surface
area
of
the
body
which
is
in
contact
with
floor
(
m2);
and
16
BW
=
Body
weight
(
kg)

Assumptions
Due
to
limited
data,
a
number
of
conservative
assumptions
have
been
made:

°
Toddlers
(
3
years
old)
were
used
to
represent
the
1
to
6
year
old
age
group.
A
body
surface
area
of
0.657
m2
and
a
body
weight
of
15
kg
has
been
assumed,
which
are
the
median
values
for
3
year
olds
(
USEPA,
1997).
°
The
label
did
not
provide
information
on
the
volume
of
disinfectant
to
be
used
for
cleaning
surfaces
such
as
floors.
It
was
assumed
that
the
diluted
treatment
solution
is
applied
at
a
rate
of
1000
sq.
ft.
per
gallon.
The
maximum
application
rate
on
the
product
labels
for
application
to
hard
surfaces
is
0.00125
lb
ai/
gal
for
a
residential
setting
and
0.0050
lb
ai/
gal
in
an
institutional
setting
(
i.
e.
daycare
center).
Therefore,
the
application
rates
used
in
the
postapplication
scenarios
were
0.00000125
lb
ai/
ft2
and
0.0000050
lb
ai/
ft2.
°
No
transferable
residue
data
were
available
that
could
be
used
to
estimate
the
transfer
of
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
from
the
floor
to
skin.
Therefore,
it
is
assumed
that
10%
of
the
deposition
rate
is
available
for
dermal
transfer
(
USEPA,
2000,
and
2001).
°
No
data
could
be
found
regarding
the
quantity
of
solution
residue
left
on
the
floor
after
treatment.
As
a
conservative
measure,
it
has
been
assumed
that
25%
of
the
cleaner
remains
after
the
final
mopping.
°
It
was
assumed
that
the
exposed
toddler
plays
regularly
on
the
treated
floor.
In
a
residential
home,
a
short­
term
exposure
duration
is
most
likely
since
homeowners
are
expected
to
clean
the
floor
only
intermittently.
In
a
commercial
daycare
center,
an
intermediate­
term
exposure
duration
is
most
likely
since
it
is
expected
that
the
floors
are
cleaned
daily.

Results
The
calculation
of
the
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
dose
and
the
dermal
MOE
is
shown
in
Table
4.3.
The
dermal
MOE
(
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
endpoint
is
the
same)
is
above
the
target
MOE
of
1,000
for
residential
settings
(
MOE
=
3,700)
and
slightly
below
the
MOE
for
daycare
centers
(
MOE
=
940).

Table
4.3.
Short­
and
Intermediate­
term
Dermal
Risks
Associated
with
Postapplication
Exposure
to
Toddler
from
a
Treated
Hard
Surface
Floor
Exposure
Scenario
Application
Rate
(
lb
ai/
sq
ft)
Product
remaining
after
mopping
Percent
Trans.
Residue
Body
Area
in
contact
with
floor
(
m2)
Potential
dose
rate,
normalized
to
body
weighta
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Dermal
MOEb
(
ST/
IT)

Hard
surfaces
­
residential
setting
1.25x10­
6
25%
10%
0.657
0.0067
3,700
17
Hard
surfaces
­
daycare
center
5.00x10­
6
25%
10%
0.657
0.0267
940
a
Potential
Dose
Rate
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
[(
Application
rate,
lb/
ft2)*(
conversion
factor,
454
g/
lb)*
(
conversion
factor,
1,000
mg/
g)
*
(
conversion
factor,
1
ft2/
0.093
m2)
*
(
product
remaining
after
mopping,
25%)
*
(
dermal
transfer
factor,
10%)
*
(
body
surface
area
in
contact
with
floor,
0.657
m2)]/
(
body
weight,
15
kg)
b
Dermal
MOE
=
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg/
day)
/
Potential
Dose
Rate
(
mg/
kg/
day)
[
Where
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
NOAEL
=
25
mg/
kg/
day].
Target
MOE
=
1,000.

Child
Incidental
Ingestion
Exposure
to
Treated
Floors
Exposure
Calculations
In
addition
to
dermal
exposure,
toddlers
crawling
on
treated
hard
floors
will
also
be
exposed
to
4­
tert
amylphenol
via
incidental
oral
exposure
through
hand­
to­
mouth
activity.
To
calculate
incidental
ingestion
exposure
to
these
chemicals
due
to
hand­
to­
mouth
transfer,
the
scenarios
established
in
the
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(
SOPs)
for
Residential
Exposure
Assessments
(
USEPA
2000
and,
2001)
were
used.
These
scenarios
use
assumptions
that
are
similar
to
those
used
in
calculating
exposures
due
to
dermal
contact
of
4­
tert
amylphenol
from
toddlers
crawling
on
treated
hard
floors.
Risks
were
calculated
for
children
contacting
treated
floors
in
residential
homes
and
in
commercial
day
care
centers.
The
following
equations
were
used
to
determine
risks
from
hand­
to­
mouth
transfer
of
pesticide
residues
to
toddlers:

PDR
norm
=
SR
x
DTF
x
SA
x
EF
x
ET
x
SE
x
CF1
(
Eq.
5)
BW
where:

PDR
norm
=
Potential
dose
rate
(
mg/
kg/
day);
SR
=
Indoor
Surface
Residue
(:
g/
cm2);
DTF
=
Dermal
transfer
factor
(
unitless
fraction);
SA
=
Surface
area
of
the
hands
that
contact
both
the
treated
area,
and
the
individuals
mouth
(
cm2/
event);
FQ
=
Frequency
of
hand­
to­
mouth
events
(
events/
hr);
SE
=
Saliva
extraction
efficiency
(
unitless
fraction);
ET
=
Exposure
Time
(
4
hrs/
day);
CF1
=
Unit
conversion
factor
(
0.001
mg/
µ
g);
and
BW
=
Body
weight
(
15
kg)

And
SR=
AR
x
DRF
x
CF2
x
CF3
(
Eq.
6)

Where:
18
SR
=
Surface
residue
(
µ
g/
cm2);
AR
=
Application
rate
(
lb
ai/
ft2);
DRF
=
Disinfection
fraction
remaining
on
floor
(
unitless);
CF2
=
Unit
conversion
factor
(
4.54x108
µ
g/
lb);
and
CF3
=
Unit
conversion
factor
(
1.08x10­
3
ft2/
cm2)

Assumptions
Due
to
limited
data,
a
number
of
conservative
assumptions
have
been
made.

°
Toddlers
(
3
years
old)
were
used
to
represent
the
1
to
6
year
old
age
group
and
are
assumed
to
weigh
15
kg,
the
median
for
male
and
female
toddlers
(
USEPA,
2000,
and
2001).
°
Based
on
the
SOP,
it
is
assumed
that
the
surface
area
used
for
each
hand­
to­
mouth
event
is
20
cm2,
and
that
there
are
20
events
per
hour
for
short
term
(
90th
percentile,
according
to
the
SOP)
,
and
9.5
event/
hour
for
the
intermediate
term
(
mean
value).
The
time
is
4
hours
a
day
and
saliva
is
50%.
°
The
label
did
not
provide
information
on
the
volume
of
disinfectant
to
be
used
for
cleaning
surfaces
such
as
floors.
It
was
assumed
that
the
diluted
treatment
solution
is
applied
at
a
rate
of
1000
sq.
ft.
per
gallon.
The
maximum
application
rate
on
the
product
labels
for
application
to
hard
surfaces
was
0.00125
lb
ai/
gal
for
a
residential
setting
and
0.0050
lb
ai/
gal
in
an
institutional
setting
(
i.
e.
daycare
center).
Therefore,
the
application
rates
used
in
the
postapplication
scenarios
were
1.25x10­
6
lb
ai/
ft2
and
5.00x10­
6
lb
ai/
ft2.
°
No
data
could
be
found
regarding
the
quantity
of
solution
residue
left
on
the
floor
after
treatment.
As
a
conservative
measure,
it
has
been
assumed
that
25%
of
the
cleaner
remains
after
the
final
mopping.
°
No
transferable
residue
data
were
available
that
could
be
used
to
estimate
the
transfer
of
4­
tert­
amylphenol
and
salts
from
the
floor
to
skin.
Therefore,
it
was
assumed
that
10%
of
the
deposition
rate
is
available
for
dermal
transfer
(
USEPA,
2000,
and
2001).

Results
The
calculation
of
the
short­
and
intermediate­
term
oral
dose
and
the
oral
MOEs
is
shown
in
Table
4.4.
The
oral
MOE
(
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
endpoint
is
the
same)
is
above
the
target
MOE
of
3,000
for
residential
settings
(
MOE
=
61,000)
and
daycare
centers
(
MOE
=
32000).

Table
4.4.
Short­
and
Intermediate­
term
Incidental
Oral
Risks
Associated
with
Postapplication
Exposure
to
Children
from
a
Treated
Hard
Surface
Floor
Exposure
Scenario
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
sq
ft)
Percent
transferabl
e
residue
Product
remaining
after
mopping
Surface
area
mouthed
(
cm2/
event)
Exposure
Frequency
(
events/
hr)
Saliva
Extraction
Factor
Exposure
Time
(
hrs/
day)
Surface
Residuea
(
µ
g/
cm2)
Potential
Dose
Rateb
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Incidental
Oral
MOEc
Hard
surfaces
­
1.25x10­
6
10%
25%
20
20
50%
4
0.153
0.000817
61,000
(
ST)
Table
4.4.
Short­
and
Intermediate­
term
Incidental
Oral
Risks
Associated
with
Postapplication
Exposure
to
Children
from
a
Treated
Hard
Surface
Floor
Exposure
Scenario
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
sq
ft)
Percent
transferabl
e
residue
Product
remaining
after
mopping
Surface
area
mouthed
(
cm2/
event)
Exposure
Frequency
(
events/
hr)
Saliva
Extraction
Factor
Exposure
Time
(
hrs/
day)
Surface
Residuea
(
µ
g/
cm2)
Potential
Dose
Rateb
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Incidental
Oral
MOEc
19
residential
setting
Hard
surfaces
­
daycare
center
5.00x10­
6
10%
25%
20
9.5
50%
4
0.613
0.00155
32000
(
IT)

a
Surface
residue
(
µ
g/
cm2)
=
(
application
rate,
lb
ai/
ft2)*(
Disinfectant
fraction
remaining
on
floor,
0.25)*(
conversion
factor
to
convert
lb
to
µ
g,
4.54E+
08
µ
g/
lb)*(
conversion
factor
to
convert
ft2
to
cm2,
1.08E­
03
ft2/
cm2)
b
Potential
Dose
Rate
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
[(
Surface
residue,
µ
g/
cm2)*(
transferable
residue,
0.10)*(
product
remaining
on
floor
after
mopping,
25%)*(
exposure
time,
4
hrs/
day)*(
surface
area
of
hands,
20
cm2/
event)*(
frequency
of
hand­
tomouth
activity,
20
events/
hr,
and
9.5
event
for
intermediate
term)*(
4
exposure
time,
hrs/
day)*(
extraction
by
saliva,
50
%)*(
conversion
factor
to
convert
µ
g
to
mg,
0.001
mg/
µ
g)]/(
body
weight,
15
kg)
c
MOE
=
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg/
day)
/
potential
dose
rate
(
mg/
kg/
day)
[
Where
short­
and
intermediate­
term
oral
NOAEL
=
50
mg/
kg/
day].
Target
MOE
=
3,000.

4.4.2.2
Textiles
Dermal
Exposure
to
Adults
and
Children
from
Wearing
Treated
Clothing
Exposure
Calculations
There
is
the
potential
for
dermal
exposure
to
adults
and
children
from
wearing
clothing
treated
with
a
trigger­
pump
spray
product
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol.

Potential
doses
are
calculated
as
follows:

PDR
norm
=
(
C
*
SA*
ET
*
TR
*
CF1)
/
BW
(
Eq.
7)

Where:

PDR
=
potential
dose
rate
(
mg/
kg/
day);
C
=
concentration
on
clothing
(
mg/
cm2/
day);
SA
=
surface
area
of
skin
covered
by
clothing
(
mg/
cm2);
ET
=
exposure
time
(
hours/
day);
TR
=
transferable
residue
from
clothing
to
skin
(%);
CF1
=
conversion
factor
from
hour
to
day
(
1/
24);
and
BW
=
body
weight
(
kg).

And
C
=
A
*
WF
(
Eq.
8)
20
Where:
C
=
Concentration
on
clothing
(
mg/
cm2/
day)
A
=
Water
absorption
rate
of
Whatman
absorbent
materials
(
198
mg/
cm2);
and
WF
=
Weight
fraction
of
product.

Assumptions:

The
following
assumptions
were
made:

°
There
is
one
product
labeled
for
use
on
clothing:
#
10088­
00105.
The
instructions
state:
"
hold
spray
opening
about
6
to
8
inches
away
from
surface
and
spray
until
its
[
sic]
thoroughly
wetted.
For
proper
disinfection,
apply
at
approximately
20
°
C,
then
allow
10
minutes
for
it
to
act."
Because
the
label
does
not
state
otherwise,
it
was
assumed
that
the
clothing
is
to
be
worn
after
spraying,
without
any
subsequent
washing.
Because
no
specific
application
rate
information
is
available
from
the
label,
surrogate
data
were
used.
Whatman,
Inc.
sells
"
absorbent
sinks",
reels
of
absorbent
materials
for
use
in
laboratories
(
Whatman,
2005).
One
of
their
products,
CF7,
is
composed
of
100%
cotton
and
is
1.9
mm­
thick.
This
product
has
a
stated
water
absorption
rate
of
198
mg/
cm2.
Since
1.9
mm
seems
a
reasonable
thickness
for
clothing,
and
the
product
label
states
that
the
clothing
is
to
be
thoroughly
wetted,
an
application
rate
of
198
mg
product/
cm2
was
used
for
this
assessment.
Because
the
product
contains
0.058%
4­
tert­
amylphenol,
this
corresponds
to
an
application
rate
of
0.115
mg
a.
i./
cm2.
°
The
median
surface
area
for
a
3­
year­
old
toddler,
minus
the
head,
is
5,670
cm2
(
USEPA,
1997).
For
adults,
the
median
surface
area,
minus
the
head,
is
16,900
cm2.
°
No
data
were
available
from
which
a
transfer
factor
could
be
estimated.
Potential
doses
were
calculated
using
a
conservative
transfer
factor
of
100%,
which
assumes
that
all
residues
are
transferable
from
clothing
surfaces.
Potential
doses
were
also
calculated
using
a
less
conservative
transfer
factor
of
5%,
which
is
based
on
the
amount
of
residue
assumed
to
be
transferrable
from
carpeted
surfaces
(
USEPA,
2000,
and
2001).
°
An
exposure
time
of
16
hours
has
been
used
(
waking
hours).
°
Toddlers
(
3
years
old)
are
assumed
to
weigh
15
kg.
This
is
the
mean
of
the
median
values
for
male
and
female
toddlers
(
USEPA,
1997).
For
adults,
a
body
weight
of
70
kg
has
been
assumed.

Results
The
calculation
of
the
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
dose
and
the
dermal
MOE
for
wearing
treated
clothing
is
shown
in
Table
4.5.
The
dermal
MOE
(
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
endpoint
is
the
same)
for
toddlers
is
below
the
target
MOE
of
1,000
using
both
the
100%
transfer
factor
(
MOE
<
1)
and
the
5%
transfer
factor
(
MOE
=
17).
For
adults,
the
dermal
MOE
is
below
the
target
MOE
of
1,000
using
the
100%
transfer
factor
(
MOE
=
140)
and
above
the
MOE
using
the
5%
transfer
factor
(
MOE
=
2,700).

Dermal
Exposure
to
Children
from
Wearing
Treated
Diapers
21
There
is
the
potential
for
dermal
exposure
to
children
wearing
diapers
treated
with
a
triggerpump
spray
product
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol.
Though
it
is
likely
that
the
diapers
would
be
washed
prior
to
use,
a
postapplication
assessment
was
conducted
as
a
conservative
measure.
The
exposure
was
calculated
using
equations
7
and
8
and
the
following
assumptions:

°
The
application
rate
of
the
product
is
0.115
mg
a.
i./
cm2,
which
is
based
on
the
product
containing
0.058%
a.
i.
and
the
diaper
having
a
water
absorption
rate
of
198
mg/
cm2
(
see
discussion
above).
°
The
median
surface
area
of
the
body
area
covered
by
a
diaper
is
462
cm2/
diaper.
This
was
calculated
for
a
<
1
year
old
assuming
that
a
diaper
covers
1/
3
of
the
trunk
area
(
professional
judgement)
and
the
trunk
area
is
35.7%
of
the
body
surface
area
(
USEPA
1997).
The
total
body
surface
area
was
assumed
to
be
3,925
cm2.
°
It
was
assumed
that
a
child
<
1
year
old
wears
8
diapers
per
day
(
Professional
judgement).
°
Potential
doses
were
calculated
using
a
transfer
factor
of
5
and
100%.
°
A
child
under
1
year
old
was
assumed
to
weigh
10
kg.

Results
Table
4.5
shows
the
calculations
of
the
dermal
dose
and
MOE
for
children
wearing
treated
diapers.
When
using
a
transfer
factor
of
100%,
the
MOE
is
below
the
target
MOE
of
1000
(
MOE=
59).
However,
when
using
a
transfer
factor
of
residue
to
skin
of
5%,
the
MOE
is
above
the
target
MOE
of
1,000
(
MOE
=
1200).
The
5%
transfer
factor
is
based
on
residue
transfer
from
carpets
(
USEPA,
2000,
and
2001).
A
confirmatory
study
is
needed
to
verify
the
transfer
factor
for
clothing.

Table
4.5.
Short­
and
Intermediate­
term
Dermal
Risks
Associated
with
Postapplication
Exposure
to
Children
and
Adults
from
Treated
Textiles
%
a.
i.
Water
absorption
rate
(
mg/
cm2)
Concentration
on
clothinga
(
mg/
cm2/
day)
Surface
area
of
skin
covered
by
textile
(
cm2)
Percent
transferable
residue
from
textile
Exposure
time
(
hours/
day)
Potential
dose
rateb
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Dermal
MOEd
(
ST/
IT)

Wearing
Treated
Clothing
­
Children
b
0.058
198
0.11484
5670
100%
16
28.9
0.86
5%
16
1.45
17
Wearing
Treated
Clothing
­
Adults
b
0.058
198
0.11484
16900
100%
16
0.185
140
5%
16
0.00920
2,700
Wearing
Treated
Diapers
­
<
1
year
old
c
0.058
198
0.11484
462
100%
8
diapers/
day
0.4240
59
Table
4.5.
Short­
and
Intermediate­
term
Dermal
Risks
Associated
with
Postapplication
Exposure
to
Children
and
Adults
from
Treated
Textiles
%
a.
i.
Water
absorption
rate
(
mg/
cm2)
Concentration
on
clothinga
(
mg/
cm2/
day)
Surface
area
of
skin
covered
by
textile
(
cm2)
Percent
transferable
residue
from
textile
Exposure
time
(
hours/
day)
Potential
dose
rateb
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Dermal
MOEd
(
ST/
IT)

22
5%
8
diapers/
day
0.0212
1,200
a
Concentration
on
clothing
(
mg/
cm2/
day)
=
%
active
ingredient
/
100
*
Water
absorption
rate
(
198
mg/
cm2)
b
Potential
Dose
Rate
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
[(
Concentration
on
clothing,
mg/
cm2/
day)
*
(
surface
area
of
skin
covered
by
clothing
or
diaper,
cm2)
*
(
percent
transferable
residue
from
textile)
*
(
exposure
time,
hrs/
day)
*
(
conversion
factor,
1
day/
24
hours)
/
(
body
weight,
kg).
c
Potential
Dose
rate
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=(
conc.
on
diapers,
mg/
cm2)
*
(
surface
area
covered
by
diaper,
cm2/
diaper)*
(
Exposure
frequency
#
diapers/
day)*(
percent
transfer
residue
from
diapers)/(
body
weight,
kg)
d
MOE
=
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg/
day)
/
potential
dose
rate
[
Where
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
NOAEL
=
25
mg/
kg/
day].
Target
MOE
=
1,000.

Incidental
Oral
Exposure
to
Children
Mouthing
Treated
Textiles
Exposure
Calculations
There
is
the
potential
for
incidental
oral
exposure
to
children
from
mouthing
textiles
treated
with
a
trigger­
pump
spray
product
containing
4­
tert­
amylphenol.

Potential
doses
are
calculated
as
follows:

PDR
norm
=
(
C
*
SA*
SE)
/
BW
(
Eq.
9)

Where:

PDR
=
potential
dose
rate
(
mg/
kg/
day);
C
=
concentration
on
clothing
(
mg/
cm2/
day);
SE
=
saliva
extraction
efficiency
(
unitless
fraction);
SA
=
Surface
area
mouthed
(
cm2);
BW
=
body
weight
(
kg).

Assumptions:

The
following
assumptions
were
made:

°
The
concentration
of
the
chemical
on
clothing
was
determined
using
Equation
8
and
using
the
same
assumptions
as
were
used
to
determine
dermal
exposure.
°
The
surface
area
of
textiles
mouthed
by
children
is
20
cm2
(
professional
judgement).
°
The
saliva
extraction
efficiency
is
50%
23
°
Toddlers
(
3
years
old)
are
used
to
represent
the
1
to
6
year
old
age
group.
For
three­
year
olds,
the
median
body
surface
area
is
0.657
m2
and
the
median
body
weight
is
15
kg
(
USEPA,
1997).

Results
Table
4.6
shows
the
calculation
of
the
oral
dose
and
oral
MOE
for
children
mouthing
treated
textiles.
The
MOE
value
is
below
the
target
MOE
of
3,000
(
MOE
=
650).

Table
4.6.
Short­
and
Intermediate­
term
Incidental
Oral
Risks
Associated
with
Postapplication
Exposure
to
Children
from
Treated
Textiles
%
a.
i.
Water
absorption
rate
(
mg/
cm2)
Concentration
on
clothinga
(
mg/
cm2/
day)
Area
mouthed
(
cm2/
day)
Saliva
Extraction
Factor
Potential
dose
rate
(
mg/
day)
Potential
dose
rate,
normalized
to
body
weightb
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Incidental
Oral
MOEc
(
ST/
IT)

0.058
198
0.11484
20
0.50
1.148
0.077
650
a
Concentration
on
clothing
(
mg/
cm2/
day)
=
%
active
ingredient
*
Water
absorption
rate
(
198
mg/
cm2)
b
Potential
Dose
Rate,
normalized
to
body
weight
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
(
Concentration
on
clothing,
mg/
cm2/
day)
*
(
area
mouthed,
cm2)
*
(
saliva
extraction
factor,
unitless
fraction)
/
(
body
weight,
kg).
c
MOE
=
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg/
day)
/
potential
dose
rate
[
Where
short­
and
intermediate­
term
dermal
NOAEL
=
50
mg/
kg/
day].
Target
MOE
=
3,000.

4.4.2.3
Air
Deodorizers
No
postapplication
air
concentration
data
have
been
submitted
for
4­
tert­
amylphenol
to
determine
potential
vapor
inhalation
risk.
Therefore,
the
Multi­
Chamber
Concentration
and
Exposure
Model
(
MCCEM
v1.2)
was
used
to
present
a
screening­
level
estimate
of
the
potential
inhalation
risk
to
adults
and
children.
MCCEM
estimates
average
and
peak
indoor
air
concentrations
of
chemicals
released
from
products
or
materials
in
houses,
apartments,
townhouses,
or
other
residences.
The
data
libraries
in
MCCEM
contain
information
about
residential
settings.
MCCEM
estimates
inhalation
exposures
to
chemicals,
calculated
as
single
day
doses,
chronic
average
daily
doses,
or
lifetime
average
daily
doses.
(
All
dose
estimates
are
potential
doses;
they
do
not
account
for
actual
absorption
into
the
body.)

Assumptions
used
to
calculate
inputs
for
MCCEM
and
the
calculated
exposure
values
are
presented
in
Table
4.7.
The
following
assumptions
were
made:

°
The
area
being
deodorized
is
a
bedroom
in
a
generic
house.
The
product
is
deployed
just
before
bedtime
(
i.
e.,
8­
hr
exposure
while
sleeping).
°
Deodorization
occurs
instantaneously,
so
that
the
entire
mass
of
product
is
mixed
homogeneously
with
the
indoor
air
as
soon
the
product
is
deployed.
It
was
assumed
that
100%
of
the
product
is
available
as
inhalable
vapor.
°
The
label
for
product
#
1043­
19
states
that
the
product
is
to
be
sprayed
"
upward
toward
24
the
center
of
the
room
for
3­
5
seconds."
The
label
does
not
state
a
specific
rate
of
use
for
the
product.
Therefore,
surrogate
data
were
used
to
estimate
the
quantity
of
product
deployed
per
use.
The
label
for
product
#
44446­
67
states
that
one
can
(
16.5
oz,
0.046%
4­
tert­
amylphenol)
can
be
used
to
deodorize
one
6,000
ft3
area
for
30
days.
As
a
conservative
measure,
it
was
assumed
that
one
can
of
product
#
1043­
19
(
16
oz
can,
0.074%
4­
tert­
amylphenol)
can
be
used
in
one
bedroom
(
35
m3)
for
30
days
(
30
uses).

Details
of
the
MCCEM
modeling
can
be
found
in
Appendix
B.
Results
of
the
MCCEM
calculation
are
shown
in
Table
4.7.
For
both
adults
and
children,
the
calculated
inhalation
MOE
is
greater
than
the
target
MOE
of
3,000.

Table
4.7.
Postapplication/
Bystander
Residential
Exposure
to
Air
Deodorizer
Applications
Parameter
Value
Rationale
Adult
Child
House*
Generic
House
(
2­
chambers:
35
m3
bedroom,
373
m3
other
rooms)
MCCEM
default
Activity
Schedule*
In
bedroom
at
start
of
modeling,
out
after
8
hours
EPA
Assumption
Concentration
of
product
0.074%
by
weight
Product
label
#
1043­
19
Quantity
in
Can
1
lb
product
Product
label
#
1043­
19
Quantity
Used
per
Day
0.0333
lb
product
Assuming
1
can
of
product
can
be
used
for
30
rooms
Quantity
ai
Used
per
Day
2.47x10­
5
lb
ai/
day
(
1.12x10­
2
g/
day)
(
Quantity
per
day)
*
(
Concentration)

Concentration
in
Bedroom
after
spraying
(
Initial
Concentration
in
Bedroom)*
3.20x10­
4
g
ai/
m3
(
Quantity
ai
per
day)
/
(
Bedroom
volume)

Body
Weight*
70
kg
15
kg
Average
body
weights
for
adults
and
young
children
25
Inhalation
Rate*
11.6
m3/
day
8.88
m3/
day
Average
resting
rate
for
adults
and
young
children
(
USEPA,
1997)

MCCEM
Outputs
Dose
0.00186
mg/
kg/
day
0.00666
mg/
kg/
day
MCCEM
Output
Inhalation
MOE
27,000
7,500
NOAEL
(
50
mg/
kg/
day)/
Dose
*
Used
as
MCCEM
input.
Default
values
from
MCCEM
were
used
for
all
inputs
not
listed
in
the
table
above.

4.4.3
Data
Limitations/
Uncertainties
There
are
several
data
limitations
and
uncertainties
associated
with
the
residential
handler
and
postapplication
exposure
assessments.
These
include:

°
Surrogate
dermal
unit
exposure
values
were
taken
from
the
proprietary
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
(
CMA)
antimicrobial
exposure
study
(
USEPA,
1999:
DP
Barcode
D247642)
or
from
the
Pesticide
Handler
Exposure
Database
(
USEPA,
1998).
See
Appendix
A
for
summaries
of
these
data
sources.
°
The
quantities
handled/
treated
were
estimated
based
on
information
from
various
sources,
including
the
Draft
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(
SOPs)
for
Residential
Exposure
Assessments
(
USEPA
2000,
and
2001)
and
the
AD
Draft
SOP
use
table.
In
certain
cases,
no
standard
values
were
available
for
some
scenarios.
Assumptions
for
these
scenarios
were
based
on
AD
estimates
and
could
be
further
refined
from
input
from
affected
sectors.

5.0
RESIDENTIAL
AGGREGATE
RISK
ASSESSMENTS
AND
RISK
CHARACTERIZATION
5.1
Acute
and
Chronic
Dietary
Aggregate
Risk
Will
be
discussed
in
PRA
section.

5.2
Short­,
Intermediate­,
and
Long­
Term
Aggregate
Risk
Will
be
discussed
in
PRA
section.

6.0
OCCUPATIONAL
EXPOSURE
AND
RISK
6.1
Occupational
Handlers
Potential
occupational
handler
exposure
can
occur
in
various
use
sites,
including
agricultural
premises,
food
handling,
commercial/
institutional/
industrial
premises,
and
medical
premises.
Table
6.1
provides
the
representative
use
scenarios
that
were
assessed
in
this
risk
assessment.
The
table
also
shows
the
maximum
application
rate
associated
with
the
representative
use
and
the
EPA
Registration
number
for
the
product
label.
26
Table
6.1.
Representative
Uses
Associated
with
Occupational
Exposure
Representative
Use
Application
Method
EPA
Reg.
No1
Application
Rate2
(
Dilution
rate)
Exposure
Scenario
Assessed
Agricultural
Premises
and
Equipment
(
Use
Site
Category
I)

Indoor
Hard
Surfaces
°
High
pressure
spray
°
Low
pressure
handwand
°
Mopping
°
Wiping
surfaces
°
Trigger
pump
spray
11725­
9
0.0034
lb
ai/
gal
(
5.25%
ai
x
1
oz
product/
gal
water
x
1
gal/
128
oz
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
Indoor
Fogging
°
Fogger3
65020­
7
11725­
8
0.163
lb
ai/
gal
(
undiluted)

(
Fog
1
gallon
undiluted
product
(
1.95%
ai
x
8.34
lbs/
gal)
for
each
6,000
to
8,000
ft2
floor
space)

0.00326
lb
a.
i./
gal
(
10%
ai
x
1
gal
product/
256
gal
water
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
(
mixing/
loading
only4)
­
dermal
and
inhalation
ST
Postapplication/
Bystander:
°
Adult
­
inhalation
(
vapor)

Food
Handling
(
Use
Site
Category
II)

Indoor
Hard
Surfaces
°
Low
pressure
handwand
°
Mopping
°
Wiping
surfaces
1043­
914
0.0025
lb
ai/
gal
(
7.6%
ai
x
0.5
oz
product/
gal
water
x
1
gal/
128
oz
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
°
Trigger
pump
spray6
(
also
represents
aerosol
spray)
10088­
1054
0.0048
lb
ai/
gal
(
0.058%
ai
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
Commercial/
Institutional
Premises
(
Use
Site
Category
III
)
and
Medical
Premises
(
Use
Site
Category
V)

Indoor
Hard
Surfaces
°
Low
pressure
handwand
°
Mopping
°
Wiping
surfaces5
°
Trigger
pump
spray6
(
also
represents
aerosol
spray)
1043­
117
0.0050
lb
ai/
gal
(
7.66%
ai
x
1
oz
product/
gal
water
x
1
gal/
128
oz
x
8.34
lb/
gal)
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
Air
Deodorization
°
Aerosol
spray
1043­
19
0.074%
ai
by
weight
ST
Handler:
°
Adult
­
dermal
and
inhalation
Notes:
ST
=
Short
term
IT
=
Intermediate
Term
27
1.
All
EPA
Registration
numbers
refer
to
products
that
contain
4­
tertiary
amylphenol
as
the
active
ingredient.
The
products
with
4­
tertiary
amylphenol
salts
as
the
active
ingredient
have
the
same
or
lower
application
rates
and
therefore,
handler
exposures
were
not
assessed.
Post
application
inhalation
exposure
to
the
vapors
of
the
salts
were
also
not
assessed
because
the
salts
have
a
lower
vapor
pressure
than
4­
tert
amylphenol.
2.
All
application
rates
for
the
soluble
concentrate
and
ready­
to­
use
liquid
products
were
calculated
assuming
the
product
has
the
same
density
as
water
(
8.34
lb/
gal).
The
basic
formulas
for
calculating
the
application
rates
are
as
follows:

°
For
products
requiring
dilution
(
soluble
concentrates):
Application
rate
(
lb
ai/
gal)
=
Percent
active
ingredient
(%)
x
density
of
water
(
8.34
lb
ai/
gal)
x
dilution
rate
(
ounces
product/
gallon
water)
x
conversion
factor
(
1
gallon/
128
ounces)

°
For
products
not
requiring
dilution
(
ready­
to­
use
liquids)
Application
rate
(
lb
ai/
gal)
=
Percent
active
ingredient
(%)
x
density
of
water
(
8.34
lb
ai/
gal)

3.
The
labels
that
indicate
that
fogging
can
be
conducted
in
Food
Handling,
Commercial/
Institutional,
and
Medical
Premises
do
not
provide
specific
use
rate
instructions.
Therefore,
the
fogging
scenario
in
the
Agricultural
Premise
Use
Site
Category
represents
all
fogging
scenarios.
4.
This
product
can
be
used
on
food
contact
surfaces.
5.
Wiping
surfaces
is
assumed
to
be
representative
of
impregnated
wipes.
6.
The
trigger
pump
spray
scenario
also
represents
the
aerosol
scenario
because
the
trigger
pump
spray
application
rate
is
higher
than
the
aerosol
application
rate
and
the
same
unit
exposure
data
(
aerosol)
is
used
to
estimate
exposure
for
both
scenarios.

Exposure
Calculations
The
risks
were
assessed
to
the
handlers
using
Equations
1
through
3
shown
in
the
Residential
Handler
Section
(
4.4.1).

Assumptions
The
general
assumptions
based
on
best
professional
judgement
and
are
used
to
calculate
occupational
handler
risks
are
provided
in
Section
4.4.1.
Assumptions
specific
to
occupational
exposures
are
outlined
below:

°
Quantity
handled/
treated:
The
quantities
handled/
treated
were
estimated
based
on
information
from
various
sources.
In
certain
cases,
no
standard
values
are
available
for
some
scenarios.
Assumptions
for
these
scenarios
are
based
on
AD
estimates
and
could
be
further
refined
from
input
from
affected
sectors.
The
following
assumptions
were
made:

<
For
low
pressure
handwand,
it
was
assumed
that
10
gallons
of
solution
are
used
in
agricultural
uses
and
2
gallons
are
used
in
all
other
(
indoor)
applications.

<
For
high
pressure
spray,
it
was
assumed
that
40
gallons
of
solution
are
used.

<
For
mopping,
it
was
assumed
that
two
gallons
of
solution
are
used
in
the
food
handling
and
commercial/
institutional/
industrial
setting
and
45
gallons
are
used
in
the
medical
setting.
In
hospitals,
a
janitor
cleans
approximately
28
rooms
a
day
and
must
change
the
cleaning
water
every
three
rooms
(
phone
conversation
between
K.
Riley
of
Versar
and
D.
Helwig
of
Johnson
Diversy
on
11/
11/
2003).

<
For
wiping,
it
was
assumed
that
0.26
gallons
were
used.

<
For
trigger
pump
spray,
it
was
assumed
that
0.26
gallons
were
used.

<
For
air
deodorization,
it
was
assumed
that
3
cans
of
product
are
used
(
3*
16
oz
=
48
oz,
or
3.0
lbs
product).

<
For
fogging,
it
was
assumed
that
15,000
ft2
of
floor
space
is
treated,
based
on
the
estimated
dimensions
of
a
poultry
barn
(
300
ft
x
50
ft
x
10
ft).
28
°
Unit
Exposure
Values:
Dermal
unit
exposure
values
were
taken
from
the
proprietary
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
(
CMA)
antimicrobial
exposure
study
(
USEPA,
1999:
DP
Barcode
D247642)
or
from
the
Pesticide
Handler
Exposure
Database
(
USEPA,
1998).

<
For
low
pressure
handwand,
the
CMA
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
ungloved
use
of
a
low
pressure
spray
were
used
(
191
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
0.681
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively).
These
values
are
based
on
data
collected
from
eight
replicates
who
hand
sprayed
carpet
using
200
psi,
then
used
a
push
broom
rake
to
raise
the
carpet
nap.

<
For
high
pressure
spray,
the
PHED
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
liquid/
open
pour/
high
pressure
spray
(
PHED
scenario
35)
were
used
(
single
layer
of
clothing
and
gloves).
The
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
are
2.5
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
0.12
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively.

<
For
mopping,
the
CMA
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
ungloved
mopping
were
used
(
71.6
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
2.38
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively).
These
values
are
based
on
data
collected
from
six
replicates
mopping
floors
and
receiving
exposure
via
contact
with
the
mop
or
with
the
bucket.

<
For
wiping,
the
CMA
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
ungloved
wiping
were
used
(
2,870
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
67.3
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively).
These
values
are
based
on
data
collected
from
six
replicates
(
dental
technicians)
who
used
a
finger
pump
sprayer
to
apply
the
product
and
then
wiped
the
surfaces
with
a
paper
towel.

<
For
aerosol
sprays
and
trigger
pump
sprays,
the
PHED
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
for
aerosol
applications
(
PHED
scenario
10)
were
used
(
single
layer
of
clothing,
ungloved).
The
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
are
190
mg/
lb
a.
i.
and
1.3
mg/
lb
a.
i.,
respectively.
In
addition,
the
dermal
unit
exposure
value
for
gloved
aerosol
applications
was
used
(
81
mg/
lb
ai).

<
For
fogging,
it
was
assumed
that
most
of
the
exposure
to
the
handler
will
be
due
to
preparing
the
fogger,
and
that
the
handler
leaves
the
room
immediately
after
fogging
commences.
Therefore,
the
CMA
dermal
and
inhalation
unit
exposure
values
were
used.
For
dermal
exposure,
CMA
data
for
liquid
pour
of
disinfectants
was
used
(
36.5
mg/
lb
a.
i.).
This
value
is
based
on
data
collected
from
two
gloved
replicates
involving
pouring
a
disinfectant
product
from
a
jug
into
sterilization
trays
designed
for
dental
instruments,
adding
water
and
instruments
to
the
tray,
removing
the
instruments,
and
discarding
the
old
solution.
For
inhalation
exposure,
CMA
data
for
liquid
pour
for
disinfectants
was
used
(
1.89
mg/
lb
a.
i).

°
Duration
of
Exposure:
It
was
assumed
that
all
occupational
scenarios
are
intermediateterm
duration
activities
(
1­
6
months).
Therefore,
the
intermediate­
term
inhalation
and
dermal
endpoints
were
used
in
this
assessment
(
see
Table
3.1).

Results
The
calculated
dermal
and
inhalation
MOEs
are
shown
in
Table
5.2.
All
MOEs
in
the
occupational
setting
were
above
the
target
MOE
of
100
for
dermal
exposures
and
the
target
MOE
29
of
300
for
inhalation
exposures.
30
Table
6.2
Short­,
Intermediate­,
and
Long­
Term
Risks
Associated
with
Occupational
Handlers
Exposure
Scenario
Method
of
Application
Unit
Exposure
(
mg/
lb
a.
i.)
Application
Rate
(
lb
ai/
gallon)
Quantity
Handled/

Treated
per
day
(
gallons)
Daily
Dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
c
MOEd
Baseline
Dermala
PPEGloves
Dermal
b
Baseline
Inhalation
Baseline
Dermala
PPEGloves
Dermal
b
Baseline
Inhalation
Baseline
Dermala
PPEGloves
Dermal
b
Baseline
Inhalation
Agricultural
Premises
and
Equipment
(
Use
Site
Category
I)

Application
to
hard
surfaces
Low
Pressure
Handwand
191
No
data
0.681
0.0034
10
0.0928
No
Data
3.3e­
04
270
No
Data
150,000
High
Pressure
Handwand
No
data
2.5
0.12
0.0034
40
No
data
0.0049
2.3e­
04
No
data
5,100
210,000
Mopping
71.6
No
data
2.38
0.0034
2
0.00696
No
Data
2.3e­
04
3,600
No
Data
220,000
Wiping
2870
No
data
67.3
0.0034
0.26
0.0362
No
Data
8.5e­
04
690
No
Data
59,000
Trigger
Pump
Spray
190
81
1.3
0.0034
0.26
0.00240
0.001
1.6e­
05
10,000
24,000
3,000,000
Fogger
Liquid
Pour
of
soluble
concentrate
36.5
No
data
1.89
0.163
lb
ai/
gal/
6,000
ft2
15,000
ft2
0.212
No
data
3.7e­
03
120
No
data
4,500
Food
Handling
(
Use
Site
Category
II)

Application
to
indoor
hard
surfaces
Low
Pressure
Handwand
191
No
data
0.681
0.0025
2
0.0136
No
Data
4.9e­
05
1,800
No
Data
1,000,000
Mopping
71.6
No
data
2.38
0.0025
2
0.0051
No
Data
1.7e­
04
4,900
No
Data
290,000
Wiping
2870
No
data
67.3
0.0025
0.26
0.0267
No
Data
6.2e­
04
940
No
Data
80,000
Trigger
Pump
Spray
190
81
1.3
0.0048
0.26
0.0034
0.0015
2.3e­
05
7,300
17,000
2,100,000
Exposure
Scenario
Method
of
Application
Unit
Exposure
(
mg/
lb
a.
i.)
Application
Rate
(
lb
ai/
gallon)
Quantity
Handled/

Treated
per
day
(
gallons)
Daily
Dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
c
MOEd
Baseline
Dermala
PPEGloves
Dermal
b
Baseline
Inhalation
Baseline
Dermala
PPEGloves
Dermal
b
Baseline
Inhalation
Baseline
Dermala
PPEGloves
Dermal
b
Baseline
Inhalation
31
Commercial/
Institutional
Premises
(
Use
Site
Category
III
)

Application
to
indoor
hard
surfaces
Low
Pressure
Handwand
191
No
data
0.681
0.0050
2
0.0273
No
Data
9.7e­
05
920
No
Data
510,000
Mopping
71.6
No
data
2.38
0.0050
2
0.0102
No
Data
3.4e­
04
2,400
No
Data
150,000
Wiping
2870
No
data
67.3
0.0050
0.26
0.0533
No
Data
1.2e­
03
470
No
Data
40,000
Trigger
Pump
Spray
190
81
1.3
0.0050
0.26
0.0035
0.0015
2.4e­
05
7,100
17,000
2,100,000
Air
deodorization
Aerosol
Spray
190
81
1.3
0.074
%
ai
by
weight
3
16­
oz
cans
0.0060
0.0026
4.1e­
05
4,100
9,700
1,200,000
Medical
Premises
and
Equipment
(
Use
Site
Category
V)

Application
to
indoor
hard
surfaces
Low
Pressure
Handwand
191
No
data
0.681
0.005
2
0.0273
No
Data
9.7e­
05
920
No
Data
510,000
Mopping
71.6
No
data
2.38
0.005
45
0.2301
No
Data
7.7e­
03
110
No
Data
6,500
Wiping
2870
No
data
67.3
0.005
0.26
0.0533
No
Data
1.2e­
03
470
No
Data
40,000
Trigger
Pump
Spray
190
81
1.3
0.005
0.26
0.0035
0.0015
2.4e­
05
7,100
17,000
2,100,000
Air
deodorization
Aerosol
Spray
190
81
1.3
0.074
%
ai
by
weight
3
16­
oz
cans
0.0060
0.0026
4.1e­
05
4,100
9,700
1,200,000
a
Baseline
Dermal:
Long­
sleeve
shirt,
long
pants,
no
gloves.

b
PPE
Dermal
with
gloves:
baseline
dermal
plus
chemical­
resistant
gloves.

c
Daily
dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
[
unit
exposure
(
mg/
lb
ai)
*
absorption
(
1.0)
*
Application
rate
*
quantity
treated
/
Body
weight
(
70
kg).

d
MOE
=
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg/
day)
/
Daily
Dose
[
Where
short­
and
intermediate­
term
NOAEL
=
25
mg/
kg/
day
for
dermal
exposure
and
short­,

intermediate­,
and
long­
term
inhalation
NOAEL
=
50
mg/
kg/
day
for
inhalation
exposure].
Target
MOE
is
100
for
dermal
exposure
and
300
for
inhalation
exposure.
32
6.2
Occupational
Postapplication
Exposure
For
most
of
the
occupational
scenarios,
postapplication
dermal
exposure
is
not
expected
to
occur
or
is
expected
to
be
negligible
based
on
the
application
rates
and
chemical
properties
of
the
chemical.
Postapplication/
bystander
inhalation
exposures,
however,
were
assessed
for
entry
into
a
building
after
a
fogging
application
using
the
Multi­
Chamber
Concentration
and
Exposure
Model
(
MCCEM
v1.2).
MCCEM
estimates
average
and
peak
indoor
air
concentrations
of
chemicals
released
from
products
or
materials
in
houses,
apartments,
townhouses,
or
other
residences.
Although
the
data
libraries
contained
in
MCCEM
are
limited
to
residential
settings,
the
model
can
be
used
to
assess
other
indoor
environments.
MCCEM
estimates
inhalation
exposures
to
chemicals,
calculated
as
single
day
doses,
chronic
average
daily
doses,
or
lifetime
average
daily
doses.
(
All
dose
estimates
are
potential
doses;
they
do
not
account
for
actual
absorption
into
the
body.)

Two
fogging
chemicals
were
assessed:

°
Product
#
65020­
7,
a
product
with
a
diluted
concentration
of
0.0813
lb
a.
i./
gal.
The
label
states
that
the
product
is
to
be
applied
at
a
maximum
rate
of
1
diluted
gallon
per
6,000
square
feet.
After
using
the
product
to
fog
a
poultry
house
or
livestock
building,
the
label
states
that
the
building
should
be
kept
closed
for
24
hrs.
Therefore,
exposure
was
calculated
for
a
person
entering
the
building
24
hours
after
all
the
applied
fogger
has
been
deployed.
°
Product
#
11725­
8,
a
product
with
a
diluted
concentration
of
0.00326
lb
a.
i./
gal.
The
label
states
an
application
rate
in
terms
of
minutes
of
fogger
use
per
room
volume.
As
it
is
not
clear
the
rate
at
which
the
fogging
equipment
will
be
dispensing
the
fogging
solution,
a
surrogate
datum
from
another
label
was
used
for
the
application
rate.
The
label
for
product
#
1043­
91
states
that
the
product
can
be
used
for
fogging
at
a
rate
of
64
fl
oz
of
diluted
solution
per
1000
ft3
of
room
volume.
After
using
the
product
to
fog
a
poultry
house
or
livestock
building,
the
building
should
be
kept
closed
for
2
hrs.
Therefore,
exposure
was
calculated
for
a
person
entering
the
building
2
hours
after
all
the
applied
fogger
has
been
deployed.

Assumptions
used
to
calculate
inputs
for
MCCEM
and
the
calculated
exposure
values
are
presented
in
Table
6.3.
The
following
assumptions
were
made:

°
The
area
being
fogged
is
a
one­
chamber
barn
with
dimensions
of
300x50x10
ft
and
an
air
exchange
rate
of
4
per
hour.
°
Fogging
occurs
instantaneously,
so
that
the
entire
mass
of
product
is
mixed
homogeneously
with
the
indoor
air
as
soon
as
fogging
commences.
°
A
number
of
labels
for
fogging
products
state
that,
if
used
in
well­
ventilated
areas
such
as
hatcheries,
the
re­
entry
interval
can
be
as
low
as
10
minutes.
Scenarios
in
well­
ventilated
areas
such
as
hatcheries
were
not
assessed
in
this
document.
33
Table
6.3.
Short­,
and
Intermediate­
term
Risks
Associated
with
Postapplication
Exposure
to
Fogged
Barns
Parameter
Value
Rationale
Product
#
65020­
7
(
24­
hr
Reentry
Interval)
Product
#
11725­
8
(
2­
hr
Reentry
Interval)

Barn
Dimensions*
300x50x10
ft,
15,000
ft2
floor
area,
150,000
ft3
(
4,248
m3)
volume
EPA
Assumption
Air
Changes
per
Hour
(
ACH)*
4/
hr
EPA
Assumption
based
on
personal
communication
with
L.
Jacobson,
Professor
and
Ext.
Engineer,
Univ
of
Minnesota,
9/
27/
05
Activity
Pattern*
8
hour
Time
Weight
Average(
TWA)
starting
at
expiration
of
REI
Based
on
products'
re­
entry
intervals.

Diluted
Concentration
of
Fogging
Liquid
0.163
lbs
a.
i./
gal
0.00326
lbs
a.
i./
gal
See
Table
6.1.

Use
rate
1
gal/
6000
ft2
64
fl
oz/
1000
ft3
(
0.0005
gal/
ft3)
Product
labels
(
application
rate
from
label
#
1043­
91
was
used
as
surrogate
data
for
product
#
11725­
8)

Mass
applied
to
barn
0.408
lbs
a.
i.
(
185
g
a.
i.)
0.2445
lbs
a.
i.
(
111
g
a.
i.)
(
Use
rate)
x
(
Diluted
concentration)
x
(
Floor
area
or
Volume)

Concentration
in
barn
after
fogging
(
initial
concentration
at
time
0)*
0.0435
g/
m3
0.0261
g/
m3
Mass
/
Volume
MCCEM
Output
Peak
concentration
at
re­
entry
interval
time
period
0.577
mg/
m3
18.2
mg/
m3
MCCEM
Output
8­
hr
Dose
(
mg/
kg/
day)
1.85x10­
2
0.583
MCCEM
Output
8­
hr
short
and
intermediate
term
MOE
2.9
x10
44
2,900,000
NOAEL
(
50
mg/
kg/
day)
/
Dose
*
Used
as
MCCEM
input.
Default
values
from
MCCEM
were
used
for
all
inputs
not
listed
in
the
table
above.
34
Detailed
model
reports
are
presented
in
Appendix
C.
Based
on
MCCEM
output,
MOE
values
were
calculated.
All
MOEs
were
above
the
target
MOE
of
300.

6.3
Data
Limitations/
Uncertainties
There
are
several
data
limitations
and
uncertainties
associated
with
the
occupational
handler
and
postapplication
exposure
assessments.
These
include:

°
The
exposure
factors
used
to
calculate
daily
exposures
to
handlers
are
based
on
applicable
data,
if
available.
For
lack
of
appropriate
data,
values
from
a
scenario
deemed
similar
enough
by
the
assessor
were
used.
°
Surrogate
dermal
unit
exposure
values
were
taken
from
the
proprietary
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
(
CMA)
antimicrobial
exposure
study
(
USEPA,
1999:
DP
Barcode
D247642)
or
from
the
Pesticide
Handler
Exposure
Database
(
USEPA,
1998).
See
Appendix
A
for
summaries
of
these
data
sources.
°
The
amounts
handled/
treated
were
estimated
based
on
information
from
various
sources,
including
the
Draft
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(
SOPs)
for
Residential
Exposure
Assessments
(
2000,
and
2001).
Assumptions
for
these
scenarios
are
based
on
AD
estimates
and
could
be
further
refined
from
input
from
affected
sectors.
°
Although
the
data
libraries
contained
in
MCCEM
are
limited
to
residential
settings,
the
model
can
be
used
to
assess
other
indoor
environments.
For
this
assessment,
assumptions
were
made
regarding
barn
dimensions
and
air
changes
per
hour.
The
results
could
be
refined
with
actual
ventilation
rates.
Also
the
half­
life
for
the
chemical
would
help
to
refine
the
results.
°
Confirmatory
data
are
needed
for
all
handlers
and
several
post
application
scenarios
such
as
residue
transfer
data
from
treated
diapers
and
clothing.
There
is
a
need
for
user
information
data
for
residential
handlers.

7.0
REFERENCES
Helwig,
D.
(
2003)
Personal
Communication
between
D.
Helwig
(
Johnson
Dirersy,
Inc)
and
K.
Riley
(
Versar,
Inc.),
November
11,
2003.

USEPA.
1997.
Exposure
Factors
Handbook.
Volume
I­
II.
Office
of
Research
and
Development.
Washington,
D.
C.
EPA/
600/
P­
95/
002Fa.

USEPA.
1998.
PHED
Surrogate
Exposure
Guide.
Estimates
of
Worker
Exposure
from
the
Pesticide
Handler
Exposure
Database
Version
1.1.
Washington,
DC:
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.

USEPA.
1999.
Evaluation
of
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
Antimicrobial
Exposure
Assessment
Study.
Memorandum
from
Siroos
Mostaghimi,
Ph.
D.,
USEPA,
to
Julie
Fairfax,
USEPA.
Dated
November
4,
1999.
DP
Barcode
D247642.

USEPA.
2000.
Residential
SOPs.
EPA
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs 
Human
Health
Effects
Division.
Dated
April
5,
2000.
35
USEPA.
2001.
HED
Science
Advisory
Council
for
Exposure.
Policy
Update,
November
12.
Recommended
Revisions
to
the
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(
SOPs)
for
Residential
Exposure
Assessment,
February
22,
2001.

USEPA.
2005
a
.
ADTC
memo.
Product
Chemistry
of
Para­
Tertiary­
Amylphenol(
PC
Code:
64101),
Par­
Tertiary­
Amylphenol,
Sodium
Salt
(
PC
Code
64112),
and
Para­
Tertiary­
Amylphenol,
Potassium
Salt
(
PC
Code
64111).
Memorandum
from
Shamim,
A.
Najm.

USEPA's
Estimation
of
P/
Chem
Properties
Program,
EPS
Suite
Whatman,
2005.
Whatman
Absorbent
Sinks.
http://
www.
whatman.
com/
products/?
pageID=
7.32.42,
Accessed
March
2005.

C:\
Myfiles\
2005
Reports\
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Assessment
for
4­
Tertiary
CC:
Chemical
Files/
RASSB
Siroos
Mostaghimi/
RASSB
36
APPENDIX
A:
Summary
of
CMA
data
and
PHED
37
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
(
CMA)
Data:
In
response
to
an
EPA
Data
Call­
In
Notice,
a
study
was
undertaken
by
the
Institute
of
Agricultural
Medicine
and
Occupational
Health
of
The
University
of
Iowa
under
contract
to
the
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association.
In
order
to
meet
the
requirements
of
Subdivision
U
of
the
Pesticide
Assessment
Guidelines
(
superseded
by
Series
875.1000­
875.1600
of
the
Pesticide
Assessment
Guidelines),
handler
exposure
data
are
required
from
the
chemical
manufacturer
specifically
registering
the
antimicrobial
pesticide.
The
applicator
exposure
study
must
comply
with
the
assessment
guidelines
for
"
Applicator
Exposure
Monitoring"
in
Subdivision
U
and
the
"
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Test
Guidelines"
in
Series
875.
For
this
purpose,
CMA
submitted
a
study
on
28
February,
1990,
entitled
"
Antimicrobial
Exposure
Assessment
Study
(
amended
on
December
8,
1992)"
which
was
conducted
by
William
Popendorf,
et
al.
It
was
evaluated
and
accepted
by
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Branch
(
OREB)
of
Health
Effect
Division
(
HED),
Office
of
Pesticides
Program
(
OPP)
of
EPA
in
1990.
The
purpose
of
this
CMA
study
was
to
characterize
exposure
to
antimicrobial
chemicals
in
order
to
support
pesticide
reregistrations
(
CMA,
1992).
The
unit
exposures
presented
in
the
most
recent
EPA
evaluation
of
the
CMA
database
(
USEPA,
1999)
were
used
in
this
assessment.

The
Agency
determined
that
the
CMA
study
had
fulfilled
the
basic
requirements
of
Subdivision
U
­
Applicator
Exposure
Monitoring.
The
advantages
of
CMA
data
over
other
"
surrogate
data
sets"
is
that
the
chemicals
and
the
job
functions
of
mixer/
loader/
applicator
were
defined
based
on
common
application
methods
used
for
antimicrobial
pesticides.
A
few
of
the
deficiencies
in
the
CMA
data
are
noted
below:

!

The
inhalation
concentrations
were
typically
below
the
detection
limits,
so
the
unit
exposures
for
the
inhalation
exposure
route
could
not
be
accurately
calculated.

!

QA/
QC
problems
including
lack
of
either/
or
field
fortification,
laboratory
recoveries,
and
storage
stability
information.

!

Data
have
an
insufficient
amount
of
replicates.

The
Pesticide
Handlers
Exposure
Database
(
PHED):
The
Pesticide
Handlers
Exposure
Database
(
PHED)
has
been
developed
by
a
Task
Force
consisting
of
representatives
from
Health
Canada,
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA),
and
the
American
Crop
Protection
Association
(
ACPA).
PHED
provides
generic
pesticide
worker
(
i.
e.,
mixer/
loader
and
applicator)
exposure
estimates.
The
dermal
and
inhalation
exposure
estimates
generated
by
PHED
are
based
on
actual
field
monitoring
data,
which
are
reported
generically
(
i.
e.,
chemical
specific
names
not
reported)
in
PHED.
It
has
been
the
Agency's
policy
to
use
"
surrogate"
or
"
generic"
exposure
data
for
pesticide
applicators
in
certain
circumstances
because
it
is
believed
that
the
physical
parameters
(
e.
g.,
packaging
type)
or
application
technique
(
e.
g.,
aerosol
can),
not
the
chemical
properties
of
the
pesticide,
attribute
to
exposure
levels.
[
Note:
Vapor
pressures
for
the
chemicals
in
PHED
are
in
the
range
of
E­
5
to
E­
7
mm
Hg.]
Chemical
specific
properties
are
accounted
for
by
correcting
the
exposure
data
for
study
specific
field
and
laboratory
recovery
values
as
specified
by
the
PHED
grading
criteria.

PHED
handler
exposure
data
are
generally
provided
on
a
normalized
basis
for
use
in
exposure
assessments.
The
most
common
method
for
normalizing
exposure
is
by
pounds
of
active
ingredient
(
ai)
handled
per
replicate
(
i.
e.,
exposure
in
mg
per
replicate
is
divided
by
the
amount
of
ai
handled
in
that
particular
replicate).
These
unit
exposures
are
expressed
as
mg/
lb
ai
handled.
38
This
normalization
method
presumes
that
dermal
and
inhalation
exposures
are
linear
based
on
the
amount
of
active
ingredient
handled.
39
APPENDIX
B:
Input/
Output
from
for
Residential
Scenario
40
MCCEM
SUMMARY
REPORT
TITLE:
MCCEM
Postapplication
Adult
Exposure
to
Aerosol
Spray
(
Residential)

NOTES:

EXECUTED
FILE:
H:\
AD\
4­
tert
amylphenol\
MCCEM
Residential
Aerosol
Postapp
Adult.
mcm
RESULTS
SAVED
IN
FILE:
H:\
AD\
4­
tert
amylphenol\
MCCEM
Residential
Aerosol
Postapp
Adult.
csv
RUN
Day
Hour
Min
Length
Days
Hours
Min
Reporting
TIME
Start:
0
0
0
of
Run:
1
0
0
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Generic
house
State:
NA
Code:
GN001
Season:
SUMMER
Zones:
2
Infiltration
Rate:
0.18
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
666666
6666
666666666666666
66666666666666666666666666666
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
6666
6666
6666666666666
6666666666666666666666666666666
1
2
3
4
41
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
YES
DOSE
Events/
yr:
255
Yrs
of
Use:
1
Weight(
kg):
70
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m
³
)
:
NONE
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m
³

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
:
g/
m
³

Zone
1:
320
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0
____________________________________________________________________________
RESULTS
6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666
LADD:
1.7362e­
05
mg/(
kg
day)
LADC:
0.00010477
mg/
m
³
ADD:
0.0013022
mg/(
kg
day)
ADC:
0.0078579
mg/
m
³
Single
Event
Dose:
0.13056
mg
Peak
Concentration:
0.3154
mg/
m
³
APDR:
0.0018651
mg/(
kg
day)
Time
when
APDR
occurred:
0.33368
days
Average
Inhalation
Rate:
11.6
m
³
/
day
____________________________________________________________________________
42
MCCEM
SUMMARY
REPORT
TITLE:
MCCEM
Postapplication
Child
Exposure
to
Aerosol
Spray
(
Residential)

NOTES:

EXECUTED
FILE:
H:\
AD\
4­
tert
amylphenol\
MCCEM
Residential
Aerosol
Postapp
Child.
mcm
RESULTS
SAVED
IN
FILE:
H:\
AD\
4­
tert
amylphenol\
MCCEM
Residential
Aerosol
Postapp
Child.
csv
RUN
Day
Hour
Min
Length
Days
Hours
Min
Reporting
TIME
Start:
0
0
0
of
Run:
1
0
0
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Generic
house
State:
NA
Code:
GN001
Season:
SUMMER
Zones:
2
Infiltration
Rate:
0.18
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
666666
6666
666666666666666
66666666666666666666666666666
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
6666
6666
6666666666666
6666666666666666666666666666666
1
2
3
4
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
YES
43
DOSE
Events/
yr:
255
Yrs
of
Use:
1
Weight(
kg):
15
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m
³
)
:
NONE
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m
³

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
:
g/
m
³

Zone
1:
320
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0
____________________________________________________________________________
RESULTS
6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666
LADD:
6.2025e­
05
mg/(
kg
day)
LADC:
0.00010477
mg/
m
³
ADD:
0.0046519
mg/(
kg
day)
ADC:
0.0078579
mg/
m
³
Single
Event
Dose:
0.099947
mg
Peak
Concentration:
0.3154
mg/
m
³
APDR:
0.0066631
mg/(
kg
day)
Time
when
APDR
occurred:
0.33368
days
Average
Inhalation
Rate:
8.88
m
³
/
day
____________________________________________________________________________
44
APPENDIX
C:
Input/
Output
from
MCCEM
for
Occupational
Scenario
45
MCCEM
SUMMARY
REPORT
TITLE:
MCCEM
Postapplication
Adult
Exposure
to
Aerosol
Spray
(
Residential)

RUN
TIME
Day
Hour
Min
Start:
0
0
0
Length
of
Run:
1
0
0
Reporting
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Hypothetical
house
State:
NA
Code:
HY13
Season:
NA
Zones:
1
Infiltration
Rate:
4
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
46
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
NO
DOSE
Events/
yr:
255
Yrs
of
Use:
1
Weight(
kg):
70
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m*):
0
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m*

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
g/
m*

Zone
1:
0.00032
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0
_______________________________________________________________________
RESULTS
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
LADD:
5.0567e­
06
mg/(
kg
day)
LADC:
3.0515e­
05
mg/
m*
ADD:
0.00037925
mg/(
kg
day)
ADC:
0.0022886
mg/
m*
Single
Event
Dose:
0.038026
mg
Peak
Concentration:
0.30951
mg/
m*
APDR:
0.00054323
mg/(
kg
day)
Time
when
APDR
occurred:
0.33368
days
Average
Inhalation
Rate:
11.6
m*/
day
______________________________________________________________________
47
MCCEM
SUMMARY
REPORT
TITLE:
MCCEM
Postapplication
Child
Exposure
to
Aerosol
Spray
(
Residential)

RUN
TIME
Day
Hour
Min
Start:
0
0
0
Length
of
Run:
1
0
0
Reporting
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Hypothetical
house
State:
NA
Code:
HY13
Season:
NA
Zones:
1
Infiltration
Rate:
4
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
NO
DOSE
48
Events/
yr:
255
Yrs
of
Use:
1
Weight(
kg):
15
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m*):
0
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m*

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
g/
m*
Zone
1:
0.00032
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0
_____________________________________________________________________

RESULTS
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
LADD:
1.8065e­
05
mg/(
kg
day)
LADC:
3.0515e­
05
mg/
m*
ADD:
0.0013549
mg/(
kg
day)
ADC:
0.0022886
mg/
m*
Single
Event
Dose:
0.029109
mg
Peak
Concentration:
0.30951
mg/
m*
APDR:
0.0019406
mg/(
kg
day)
Time
when
APDR
occurred:
0.33368
days
Average
Inhalation
Rate:
8.88
m*/
day
______________________________________________________________________

MCCEM
SUMMARY
REPORT
49
TITLE:
MCCEM
Barn
Scenario
(
2­
hr
REI,
8­
hr
Exposure,
ACH
=
4)

RUN
TIME
Day
Hour
Min
Start:
0
0
0
Length
of
Run:
1
0
0
Reporting
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Hypothetical
house
State:
NA
Code:
HY14
Season:
NA
Zones:
1
Infiltration
Rate:
4
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
NO
DOSE
Events/
yr:
1
50
Yrs
of
Use:
50
Weight(
kg):
70
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m*):
0
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m*

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
g/
m*

Zone
1:
0.0261
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0
______________________________________________________________________

RESULTS
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
LADD:
3.1433e­
08
mg/(
kg
day)
LADC:
1.6925e­
07
mg/
m*
ADD:
4.7149e­
08
mg/(
kg
day)
ADC:
2.5388e­
07
mg/
m*
Single
Event
Dose:
0.0012055
mg
Peak
Concentration:
0.0087554
mg/
m*
APDR:
1.7221e­
05
mg/(
kg
day)
Time
when
APDR
occurred:
0.41702
days
Average
Inhalation
Rate:
13
m*/
day
____________________________________________________________________

MCCEM
SUMMARY
REPORT
51
TITLE:
MCCEM
Barn
Scenario
(
24­
hr
REI,
8­
hr
Exposure,
ACH
=
4)

RUN
TIME
Day
Hour
Min
Start:
0
0
0
Length
of
Run:
2
0
0
Reporting
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Hypothetical
house
State:
NA
Code:
HY14
Season:
NA
Zones:
1
Infiltration
Rate:
4
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
1
2
3
4
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7
52
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
YES
DOSE
Events/
yr:
1
Yrs
of
Use:
50
Weight(
kg):
70
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m*):
0
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m*

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
g/
m*

Zone
1:
0.0435
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0
______________________________________________________________________

RESULTS
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
LADD:
3.171e­
46
mg/(
kg
day)
LADC:
1.7075e­
45
mg/
m*
ADD:
4.7565e­
46
mg/(
kg
day)
ADC:
2.5612e­
45
mg/
m*
Single
Event
Dose:
1.2161e­
41
mg
Peak
Concentration:
8.8326e­
41
mg/
m*
APDR:
1.7373e­
43
mg/(
kg
day)
Time
when
APDR
occurred:
1.9587
days
Average
Inhalation
Rate:
13
m*/
day
______________________________________________________________________
53
TITLE:
MCCEM
Barn
Scenario
(
2­
hr
REI,
8­
hr
Exposure,
ACH
=
0.18)

RUN
Day
Hour
Min
Length
Days
Hours
Min
Reporting
TIME
Start:
0
0
0
of
Run:
2
0
0
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Hypothetical
house
State:
NA
Code:
HY03
Season:
NA
Zones:
1
Infiltration
Rate:
0.18008
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
1
2
3
4
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
1
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
NO
DOSE
Events/
yr:
1
Yrs
of
Use:
50
Weight(
kg):
70
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m*):
0
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m*

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
g/
m*
Zone
1:
0.0261
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0
54
MCCEM
SUMMARY
OF
INPUTS
TITLE:
MCCEM
Barn
Scenario
(
24­
hr
REI,
8­
hr
Exposure,
ACH
=
0.18)

RUN
Day
Hour
Min
Length
Days
Hours
Min
Reporting
TIME
Start:
0
0
0
of
Run:
2
0
0
Interval:
15
minutes
HOUSE
Type:
Hypothetical
house
State:
NA
Code:
HY03
Season:
NA
Zones:
1
Infiltration
Rate:
0.18008
ACH
EMISSIONS
Source
Zone
Type
Details
1
2
3
4
SINKS
Sink
Zone
Model
Details
1
2
3
4
5
6
ACTIVITIES
Primary
Activity
Pattern
is
used
on
days:
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7
OVERRIDE
ACTIVITIES:
YES
DOSE
Events/
yr:
1
Yrs
of
Use:
50
Weight(
kg):
70
Length
of
Life(
yrs):
75
MONTE
CARLO:
NO
Number
of
Trials:
1
Seed
No:
Random
OPTIONS
Single
Chamber:
NO
Saturation
Concentration
(
mg/
m*):
0
Output
Concentration
Units:
mg/
m*

Initial
Concentrations
Units:
g/
m*
Zone
1:
0.0436
Zone
2:
0
Zone
3:
0
Zone
4:
0
Outdoors:
0