Evaluation of triclosan in Minnesota lakes and rivers: Part II - human health risk assessment.

Triclosan, an antimicrobial compound found in consumer products, has been detected in low concentrations in Minnesota municipal wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluent. This assessment evaluates potential health risks for exposure of adults and children to triclosan in Minnesota surface water, sediments, and fish. Potential exposures via fish consumption are considered for recreational or subsistence-level consumers. This assessment uses two chronic oral toxicity benchmarks, which bracket other available toxicity values. The first benchmark is a lower bound on a benchmark dose associated with a 10% risk (BMDL10) of 47mg per kilogram per day (mg/kg-day) for kidney effects in hamsters. This value was identified as the most sensitive endpoint and species in a review by Rodricks et al. (2010) and is used herein to derive an estimated reference dose (RfD(Rodricks)) of 0.47mg/kg-day. The second benchmark is a reference dose (RfD) of 0.047mg/kg-day derived from a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 10mg/kg-day for hepatic and hematopoietic effects in mice (Minnesota Department of Health [MDH] 2014). Based on conservative assumptions regarding human exposures to triclosan, calculated risk estimates are far below levels of concern. These estimates are likely to overestimate risks for potential receptors, particularly because sample locations were generally biased towards known discharges (i.e., WWTP effluent).

Human health risk assessment of chloroxylenol in liquid hand soap and dishwashing soap used by consumers and health-care professionals.

A quantitative human risk assessment of chloroxylenol was conducted for liquid hand and dishwashing soap products used by consumers and health-care workers. The toxicological data for chloroxylenol indicate lack of genotoxicity, no evidence of carcinogenicity, and minimal systemic toxicity. No observed adverse effect levels (NOAEL) were established from chronic toxicity studies, specifically a carcinogenicity study that found no cancer excess (18 mg/kg-day) and studies of developmental and reproductive toxicity (100 mg/kg-day). Exposure to chloroxylenol for adults and children was estimated for two types of rinse-off cleaning products, one liquid hand soap, and two dishwashing products. The identified NOAELs were used together with exposure estimates to derive margin of exposure (MOE) estimates for chloroxylenol (i.e., estimates of exposure over NOAELs). These estimates were designed with conservative assumptions and likely overestimate exposure and risk (i.e., highest frequency, 100% dermal penetration). The resulting MOEs ranged from 178 to over 100, 000, 000 indicating negligibly small potential for harm related to consumer or health-care worker exposure to chloroxylenol in liquid soaps used in dish washing and hand washing.

Importance of considering the framework principles in risk assessment for metals.

The recent EPA Framework for Metals Risk Assessment provides the opportunity for contextual risk assessment for sites impacted by metals (such as the depicted Dauntless Mine in Colorado).

Use of background inorganic arsenic exposures to provide perspective on risk assessment results.

Background exposures provide perspective for interpreting calculated health risks associated with naturally occurring substances such as arsenic. Background inorganic arsenic intake from diet and water for children (ages 1-6 years) and all ages of the U.S. population was modeled stochastically using consumption data from USDA, published data on inorganic arsenic in foods, and EPA data on arsenic in drinking water. Mean and 90th percentile intakes for the U.S. population were 5.6 and 10.5 microg/day, assuming nationwide compliance with the 10 microg/L U.S. drinking water standard. Intakes for children were slightly lower (3.5 and 5.9 microg/day). Based on the current EPA cancer slope factor for arsenic, estimated lifetime risks associated with background diet and water at the mean and 90th percentile are 1 per 10,000 and 2 per 10,000, respectively. By comparison, reasonable maximum risks for arsenic in soil at 20 (higher typical background level) and 100mg/kg are 4 per 100,000 and 2 per 10,000, using EPA default exposure assumptions. EPA reasonable maximum estimates of arsenic exposure from residential use of treated wood are likewise within background intakes. These examples provide context on how predicted risks compare to typical exposures within the U.S. population, thereby providing perspective for risk communication and regulatory decision-making on arsenic in the environment and in consumer products.