(a) chemical-physical properties

CHEMICAL UPDATE WORKSHEET

Chemical Name: Dibromochloropropane (DBCP) CAS #: 96-12-8 Revised by: RRD Toxicology Unit

Revision Date: November 18, 2015

(A) Chemical-Physical Properties Part 201 Value Updated Value Reference Source Comments

Molecular Weight (g/mol) 236.34 236.33 EPI EXP

Physical State at ambient temp Liquid Liquid MDEQ

Melting Point (˚C) --- 6.00 EPI EXP

Boiling Point (˚C) 384 196.00 EPI EXP

Solubility (ug/L) 1230 1.230E+06 EPI EXP

Vapor Pressure (mmHg at 25˚C) 0.68 5.80E-01 EPI EXP

HLC (atm-m³/mol at 25˚C) 1.90E-4 1.47E-04 PP EST

Log Kow (log P; octanol-water) 2.68 2.96 EPI EXP

Koc (organic carbon; L/Kg) 431 115.8 EPI EST

Ionizing Koc (L/kg) NR NA NA

Diffusivity in Air (Di; cm2/s) 0.08 3.20E-02 W9 EST

Diffusivity in Water (Dw; cm2/s) 8.0E-6 8.8715E-06 W9 EST

Soil Water Partition Coefficient (Kd; inorganics) NR NR NA NA

CHEMICAL UPDATE WORKSHEET Dibromochloropropane (96-12-8)

2

Part 201 Value Updated Value Reference Source Comments

Flash Point (˚F) 170 NA NA NA

Lower Explosivity Level (LEL; unit less) NA NA NA NA

Critical Temperature (K) NA NA NA

Enthalpy of Vaporization (cal/mol) NA NA NA

Density (g/mL, g/cm3) 2.08 PC EXP

EMSOFT Flux Residential 2 m (mg/day/cm2) 1.40E-05 2.03E-05 EMSOFT EST

EMSOFT Flux Residential 5 m (mg/day/cm2) 1.54E-05 2.94E-05 EMSOFT EST

EMSOFT Flux Nonresidential 2 m (mg/day/cm2) 1.76E-05 2.95E-05 EMSOFT EST

EMSOFT Flux Nonresidential 5 m (mg/day/cm2) 1.84E-05 3.80E-05 EMSOFT EST


3

(B) Toxicity Values/Benchmarks Part 201 Value Updated Value Source/Reference/

Date Comments/Notes

/Issues Reference Dose (RfD) (mg/kg/day) -- 2.0E-4 PPRTV, 2006

RfD details NA

Tier 2 Source: PPRTV: Basis: PPRTV (8/03/2006) pRfD = 2.0E-4 mg/kg-day. PPRTV is the best available chronic value as it is a more recent assessment of the toxicological data. Critical Studies: 1) Foote, R.H., E.C. Schermerhorn and M.E. Simkin. 1986a. Measurement of semen quality, fertility, and reproductive hormones to assess dibromochloropropane effects in live rabbits. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 6: 628-637. 2) Foote, R.H., W.E. Berndtson and T.R. Rounsaville. 1986b. Use of quantitative testicular histology to assess the effect of dibromochloropropane on reproduction in rabbits. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 6: 638-647. Methods: male Dutch rabbits (6/group) were exposed to, 0.94, 1.88, 3.75, 7.5 or 15.0 mg/kg DBCP in drinking water 5 days/week for 10 weeks (0, 0.7, 1.3, 2.7, 5.4 or 10.7 mg/kg-day). Assessments of fertility (mated with untreated females) and serum levels of reproductive hormones were performed during the last week of the study. Critical effect: testicular effects in rabbits End point or Point of Departure (POD): NOAEL = 0.7 mg/kg-day Uncertainty Factors: UF = 3,000 (10 each for intraspecies variability, interspecies extrapolation and use of a subchronic study and 3 for database deficiencies) Source and date: PPRTV, 8/03/2006 Tier 1 and 2 Sources: IRIS: Per IRIS (10/01/1991), no value at this time. MRL: Per ATSDR list (April/2015), intermediate oral MRL = 0.002 (2.0E-3) mg/kg-day Critical Studies: 1) Foote RH, Berndtson WE, Rounsaville TR. 1986a. Use of quantitative testicular histology to assess the effect of dibromochloropropane (DBCP) on reproduction in

Complete


4

Part 201 Value Updated Value Source/Reference/Date

Comments/Notes/Issues

rabbits. Fundam Appl Toxicol 6:638-647. 2) Foote RH, Schermerhorn EC, Simkin ME. 1986b. Measurement of semen quality, fertility, and reproductive hormones to assess dibromochloropropane (DBCP) effects in live rabbits, Fundam Appl Toxicol 6:628-637. Method(s): male Dutch rabbits (6/group) were exposed to 0.94, 1.88, 3.75, 7.5 or 15.0 mg/kg DBCP in drinking water 5 days/week for 10 weeks (0, 0.7, 1.3, 2.7, 5.4 or 10.7 mg/kg-day). Assessments of fertility (mated with untreated females) and serum levels of reproductive hormones were performed during the last week of the study. Critical effect: decreased spermatogenesis and abnormal sperm morphology in rabbits End point or Point of Departure (POD): LOAEL = 1.88 mg/kg-day Uncertainty Factors: UF = 1000 (10 each for intraspecies variability, interspecies extrapolation, and use of a LOAEL) Source and date: ATSDR, 9/1992 Tier 3 Source: MDEQ: Per DEQ-CCD, no value at this time.

Oral Cancer Slope Factor (CSF) (mg/kg-day)-1)

1.2E+0 8.0E-1 PPRTV, 2006

CSF details

Combined stomach, liver, and kidney tumor incidence rate for male rats. 102 week chronic bioassay. Dow Chemical, 1978 as shown in EPA Cancer Work Group "Assessment of

Tier 2 Source: PPRTV: Basis: PPRTV is the only available value. PPRTV (8/03/2006) pCSF = 8.0E-1 (mg/kg-day)-1. Per PPRTV, age dependent adjustment factors (ADAFs) should be applied to this slope factor when assessing cancer risks. EPA has concluded, by a weight of evidence evaluation, that DBCP is carcinogenic by a mutagenic mode of action. Critical Study: Hazelton Laboratories. 1977. 104-Week dietary study in rats, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP). Final Report. Unpublished report submitted to Dow Chemical Co., Midland, MI. October 29, 1977. (Cited in U.S. EPA, 1979, 1988a, 1989a) Methods: Charles River rats (60/sex/group) were exposed to 0, 0.3, 1.0 or 3.0 mg/kg-day DBCP in the diet for 104 weeks. U.S. EPA (1979) estimated that the

Complete


5



the Carcinogenic Potential of 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (DBCP)" Revised species scaling factor of (BWh/BWa) to the 0.25 power used for q* calculation. CCD/RRD date: 1/27/2000.

actual dosage intakes were 0, 0.20, 0.68 and 2.0 mg/kg-day. Adjustment from animal to human slope factor is performed by multiplying the animal value by the ratio of human to animal body weight raised to the 1/4 power.

1) Dose response data: Tumor Type - renal tubular cell adenomas and carcinomas ; Test Species – rats, male; Route - diet

2) Extrapolation method: multi-stage BMD model Carcinogen Weight-of-Evidence (WOE) Class: Under the U.S. EPA (2005) cancer guidelines, DBCP is considered likely to be carcinogenic to humans; carcinogenic by a mutagenic mode of action IRIS WOE Basis: The carcinogenicity of DBCP in humans has been assessed in several cohort mortality and case-control studies. The carcinogenicity of DBCP in animals has been tested by oral and inhalation exposure in rats and mice. DBCP is metabolized via oxidation by cytochrome P450 enzymes and conjugation with glutathione to form reactive products that can bind to cellular DNA and proteins. EPA has concluded, by a weight of evidence evaluation, that DBCP is carcinogenic by a mutagenic mode of action. Source and Date: PPRTV, 8/3/2006 Tier 1 and Sources: IRIS: Per IRIS (10/01/1991), no value at this time. MRL: NA; MRLs are for non-cancer effects only. Tier 3 Source: MDEQ: Per DEQ-CCD/RRD (1/27/2000), CSF = 1.2 (mg/kg-day)-1. See Part 201 Value CSF details.

Reference Concentration (RfC) or Initial Threshold Screening Level (ITSL) (µg/m³)

2.0E-1 2.0E-1 IRIS, 1991/PPRTV,

2006

RfC/ITSL details Based on EPA's RfC from Rao et al

Tier 1 and 2 Sources: IRIS and PPRTV:


6



1982 13 week rabbit inhalation study from reduced sperm counts at 1 ppm. CCD-AQD date: 8/15/1991.

Basis: IRIS RfC = 2E-4 mg/m3. IRIS presents the only chronic RfC available. PPRTV refers to the IRIS RfC. Critical Study: Rao, K.S., J.D. Burek, F. Murray et al. 1982. Toxicologic and reproductive effects of inhaled 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane in male rabbits. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 2(5): 241-251. Methods: New Zealand white males (10/dose group) were exposed to 0, 0.1, 1 or 10 ppm (0, 0.94, 9.4 or 94 mg/m3) DBCP vapor for 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 14 weeks, and observed for the following 32 weeks (0, 0.1 and 1 ppm groups) or 38 weeks (10 ppm group). Critical effect: testicular effects End point or Point of Departure (POD): NOAEL = 0.1 ppm; NOAELADJ/ NOAELHEC = 0.17 mg/m3 Uncertainty Factors: UF = 1,000 (10 each for intraspecies variability and use of a subchronic study and 3 each for interspecies extrapolation and database deficiencies) Source and date: IRIS, Last revision date – 10/01/1991 Tier 2 Sources: PPRTV: PPRTV (8/03/2006) refers to the IRIS chronic RfC. A subchronic p-RfC = 2E-3 mg/m3 is also available. The chronic RfC was based on the same study, critical endpoint and POD (NOAELHEC = 0.17mg/m3) used for the IRIS RfC development, and UF of 1000 (10 for intraspecies variability and subchronic to chronic and 3 each for interspecies extrapolation and database deficiencies). MRL: Per ATSDR (9/1992), no chronic inhalation MRL at this time. An intermediate inhalation MRL = 0.0002 ppm is available for DBCP based on the subchronic NOAEL (0.1 ppm) for changes in spermatogenesis and testicular atrophy in rabbits from the Rao et al. (1982) study. The MRL basis (critical study, critical effect and POD) are similar to that used to derive the IRIS RfC. Tier 3 Source: MDEQ: Per DEQ-CCD, AQD adopted the IRIS RfC. See Part 201 Value RfC/ITSL

Complete


7



details.

Inhalation Unit Risk Factor (IURF) ((µg/m3)-1)

-- 5.6E-3 PPRTV, 2006

IURF details NA

Tier 2 Source: PPRTV: Basis: PPRTV is the only value available. PPRTV (8/3/2006) = 5.6E+0 (mg/m3)-1. Per PPRTV, age dependent adjustment factors (ADAFs) should be applied to this IUR when assessing cancer risks. EPA has concluded, by a weight of evidence evaluation, that DBCP is carcinogenic by a mutagenic mode of action. Critical Study: NTP (National Toxicology Program). 1982. Carcinogenesis bioassay of 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (CAS No. 96-12-8) in F344 rats and B6C3F1 mice (inhalation study). Tech. Rep. Ser. No. 206. Pub. No. 82-1762. p. 188. For inhalation exposure, animal to human adjustment is accomplished in the calculation of the HECs (U.S. EPA, 1994b) prior to modeling. No adjustment was used for shorter-than-lifetime observation periods in the NTP (1982) lifetime inhalation bioassays. Method(s): groups of 50 F344 rats and B6C3F1 mice of each sex by inhalation to concentrations of 0.6 or 3.0 ppm DBCP for 6 hours per day, 5 days per week, for 76 to 103 weeks Dose response data: Tumor Type - nasal cavity tumors in rats and mice of both sexes, lung tumors in mice of both sexes, and adrenal cortical tumors in female mice; Test Species – rats, mice; Route - inhalation

1) Extrapolation method: multi-stage BMD model Carcinogen Weight-of-Evidence (WOE) Class: Under the U.S. EPA (2005) cancer guidelines, DBCP is considered likely to be carcinogenic to humans; carcinogenic by a mutagenic mode of action IRIS WOE Basis: The carcinogenicity of DBCP in humans has been assessed in several cohort mortality and case-control studies. The carcinogenicity of DBCP in animals has been tested by oral and inhalation exposure in rats and mice. DBCP is metabolized via oxidation by cytochrome P450 enzymes and conjugation with glutathione to form reactive products that can bind to cellular DNA and proteins. EPA has concluded, by a weight of evidence evaluation, that DBCP is carcinogenic

Complete


8



by a mutagenic mode of action. Source and Date: PPRTV, 8/3/2006 Tier 1 and 2 Sources: IRIS: Per IRIS (10/01/1991), no value at this time. MRL: NA; MRLs are for non-cancer effects only. Tier 3 Source: MDEQ: Per DEQ-CCD (6/11/2012), AQD adopted PPRTV IURF. The value was based on nasal cavity tumors in male rats from the NTP 1982 inhalation bioassay, and derived by the US EPA in their PPRTV documentation from 2006.

Mutagenic Mode of Action (MMOA)? (Y/N)

-- YES USEPA, 2015

MMOA Details -- Listed as a carcinogen with mutagenic MOA in the USEPA OSWER List of Chemicals with a Mutagenic Mode of Action (MOA) for Carcinogenesis.

Developmental or Reproductive Effector? (Y/N)

No

No- for both oral and inhalation. Although the RfD and RfC/ITSL are based on a reproductive effect, MDEQ did not classify this substance as a developmental toxicant at this

time. Information will be collected and evaluated.

MDEQ, 2015

Developmental or Reproductive Toxicity Details

NA

For RfD: Critical effect: testicular effects in rabbits Critical Studies: 1) Foote, R.H., E.C. Schermerhorn and M.E. Simkin. 1986a. Measurement of semen quality, fertility, and reproductive hormones to assess dibromochloropropane effects in live rabbits. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 6: 628-637. 2) Foote, R.H., W.E. Berndtson and T.R. Rounsaville. 1986b. Use of quantitative testicular histology to assess the effect of dibromochloropropane on reproduction in rabbits. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 6: 638-647. Method(s): male Dutch rabbits (6/group) were exposed to , 0.94, 1.88, 3.75, 7.5 or 15.0 mg/kg DBCP in drinking water 5 days/week for 10 weeks (0, 0.7, 1.3, 2.7, 5.4 or 10.7 mg/kg-day). Assessments of fertility (mated with untreated females) and serum levels of reproductive hormones were performed during the last week


9



of the study. For RfC: Critical effect: testicular effects Critical Study: Rao, K.S., J.D. Burek, F. Murray et al. 1982. Toxicologic and reproductive effects of inhaled 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane in male rabbits. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 2(5): 241-251. Method(s): New Zealand white males (10/dose group) were exposed to 0, 0.1, 1 or 10 ppm (0, 0.94, 9.4 or 94 mg/m3) DBCP vapor for 6 hours/day, 5 days/week for 14 weeks, and observed for the following 32 weeks (0, 0.1 and 1 ppm groups) or 38 weeks (10 ppm group).

State Drinking Water Standard (SDWS) (ug/L)

80 0.2 as DBCP

80 (as total trihalomethanes) SDWA, 1976

SDWS details SDWA, 1976 MI Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 1976 PA 399

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) (ug/L)

-- NO SDWA, 1976 and USEPA SMCL List,

2015

SMCL details NA SDWA, 1976 and USEPA SMCL List, 2015

Is there an aesthetic value for drinking water? (Y/N)

NO Not evaluated. NA

Aesthetic value (ug/L) NA NA NA

Aesthetic Value details NA NA

Phytotoxicity Value? (Y/N) NO Not evaluated. NA

Phytotoxicity details NA NA NA

Others


10

(C) Chemical-specific Absorption Factors Part 201 Value Update Source/Reference/

Dates Comments/Notes

/Issues Gastrointestinal absorption efficiency value (ABSgi)

--- 1.0 MDEQ, 2015/ USEPA RAGS-E, 2004

ABSgi details RAGS E (USEPA, 2004) Default Value

Skin absorption efficiency value (AEd)

--- 0.1 MDEQ, 2015

AEd details

Ingestion Absorption Efficiency (AEi)

1.0 MDEQ, 2015

AEi Details

Relative Source Contribution for Water (RSCW)

0.2 MDEQ, 2015

Relative Source Contribution for Soil (RSCS)

1.0 MDEQ, 2015

Relative Source Contribution for Air (RSCA)

1.0 MDEQ, 2015

Others


11

(D) Rule 57 Water Quality Values and GSI Criteria Current GSI value (g/L) ID

Updated GSI value (g/L) ID

Rule 57 Drinking Water Value (g/L) 0.24

Rule 57 Value

(g/L) Verification Date

Human Non-cancer Values- Drinking water source (HNV-drink) ID* (0.24) 8/2009

Human Non-Cancer Values- Non-drinking water sources (HNV-Non-drink) ID* (0.24) 8/2009

Wildlife Value (WV) NA

Human Cancer Values for Drinking Water Source (HCV-drink) 0.24 8/2009

Human Cancer values for non-drinking water source (HCV-Non-drink) 4.9 8/2009

Final Chronic Value (FCV) ID 8/2009

Aquatic maximum value (AMV) ID 8/2009

Final Acute Value (FAV) ID 8/2009

Sources: 1. MDEQ Surface Water Assessment Section Rule 57 website 2. MDEQ Rule 57 table

http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3313_3686_3728-11383--,00.html

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wb-swas-rule57_210455_7.xls


12

(E) Target Detection Limits (TDL) Value Source

Target Detection Limit – Soil (g/kg) 10 MDEQ, 2015

Target Detection Limit – Water (g/L) 0.2 MDEQ, 2015

Target Detection Limit – Air (ppbv) 2.10E-02 MDEQ, 2015

Target Detection Limit – Soil Gas (ppbv) 6.80E-01 MDEQ, 2015


13

CHEMICAL UPDATE WORKSHEET ABBREVIATIONS: CAS # - Chemical Abstract Service Number. Section (A) Chemical-Physical Properties Reference Source(s): CRC Chemical Rubber Company Handbook of Chemistry

and Physics, 95th edition, 2014-2015 EMSOFT USEPA Exposure Model for Soil-Organic Fate and

Transport (EMSOFT) (EPA, 2002) EPA2001 USEPA (2001) Fact Sheet, Correcting the Henry’s

Law Constant for Soil Temperature. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C.

EPA4 USEPA (2004) User’s Guide for Evaluating Subsurface Vapor Intrusion into Buildings. February 22, 2004.

EPI USEPA’s Estimation Programs Interface SUITE 4.1, Copyright 2000-2012

HSDB Hazardous Substances Data Bank MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality NPG National Institute for Occupational Safety and

Health Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards PC National Center for Biotechnology Information’s

PubChem database PP Syracuse Research Corporation’s PhysProp database SCDM USEPA’s Superfund Chemical Data Matrix SSG USEPA’s Soil Screening Guidance: Technical

Background Document, Second Edition, 1996 USEPA/EPA United States environmental protection agency’s

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment). July, 2004.

W9 USEPA’s User Guide for Water9 Software, Version 2.0.0, 2001

Basis/Comments: EST estimated EXP experimental EXT extrapolated NA not available or not applicable NR not relevant Section (B) Toxicity Values/Benchmarks Sources/References: ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry CALEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CAL DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control CAL OEHHA CAEPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard

Assessment CCD MDEQ Chemical Criteria Database ECHA European Chemicals Agency (REACH) OECD HPV Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development HPV Database HEAST USEPA’s Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables IRIS USEPA’s Integrated Risk Information System MADEP Massachusetts Department of Environmental

Protection MDEQ/DEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality DEQ-CCD/AQD MDEQ Air Quality Division DEQ-CCD/RRD MDEQ Remediation and Redevelopment Division DEQ-CCD/WRD MDEQ Water Resources Division MNDOH Minnesota Department of Health


14

NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

NYDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

OPP/OPPT USEPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs PPRTV USEPA’s Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values RIVM The Netherlands National Institute of Public Health

and the Environment TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA OSWER USEPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency

Response USEPA MCL USEPA Maximum Contaminant Level WHO World Health Organization WHO IPCS International Programme on Chemical Safety

(IPCS/INCHEM) WHO IARC International Agency for Research on Cancers NA Not Available. NR Not Relevant. Toxicity terms: BMC Benchmark concentration BMCL Lower bound confidence limit on the BMC BMD benchmark dose BMDL Lower bound confidence limit on the BMD CSF Cancer slope Factor CNS Central nervous system IURF or IUR Inhalation unit risk factor LOAEL Lowest observed adverse effect level LOEL Lowest observed effect level MRL Minimal risk level (ATSDR) NOAEL No observed adverse effect level NOEL No observed effect level

RfC Reference concentration RfD Reference dose p-RfD Provisional RfD aRfD Acute RfD UF Uncertainty factor WOE Weight of evidence Section (C) Chemical-specific Absorption Factors MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality USEPA RAGS-E United States Environmental Protection Agency’s

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment). July, 2004.

Section (D) Rule 57 Water Quality Values and GSI Criteria GSI Groundwater-surface water interface NA A value is not available or not applicable. ID Insufficient data to derive value NLS No literature search has been conducted

(a) chemical-physical properties

Documents