Deriving uncertainty factors for threshold chemical contaminants in drinking water

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health - Part B: Critical Reviews

Volumn 10, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 527-557

  Ritter, Leonard ^a   Totman, Céline ^b   Krishnan, Kannan ^c   Carrier, Richard ^d   Vézina, Anne ^d   Morisset, Véronique ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^b Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^d Environmental Health Center   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

2,4,6 TRICHLOROPHENOL; ANTIMONY; ATRAZINE; AZINPHOS METHYL; BARIUM; BORON; BROMODICHLOROMETHANE; CARBOFURAN; CARBON TETRACHLORIDE; CHLOROFORM; CHROMIUM; CYANIDE; DICHLOROMETHANE; DIMETHOATE; DIURON; DRINKING WATER; FLUORIDE; LEAD; MERCURY; METOLACHLOR; NITRATE; NITRILOTRIACETIC ACID; NITRITE; PENTACHLOROPHENOL; PESTICIDE; SELENIUM; SIMAZINE; TERBUFOS; TRIHALOMETHANE; VINYL CHLORIDE;

AUSTRALIA; HUMAN; NONHUMAN; REVIEW; TOXICOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; UNITED STATES; WATER CONTAMINATION; WATER QUALITY; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

ANIMALS; AUSTRALIA; CANADA; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; GUIDELINES; HUMANS; NO-OBSERVED-ADVERSE-EFFECT LEVEL; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; TOXICITY TESTS; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED STATES; WATER POLLUTANTS, CHEMICAL; WATER SUPPLY; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 35348830324     PISSN: 10937404     EISSN: 15216950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15287390600975178     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Aldridge, J. E., Gibbons, J. A., Flaherty, M. M., Kreider, M. L., Romano, J. A., and Levin, E. D. 2003. Heterogeneity of toxicant response: Sources of human variability. Toxicol. Sci. 76:3-20.
2. Barnes, D. G., and Dourson, M. 1988. Reference Dose (RfD): Description and use in health risk assessments. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 8:471-486.
3. Beck, B., and Dourson, M. 1993. How toxicity data are used in the process of hazard identification and dose-response assessment. Society of Toxicology 32nd Annual Meeting, March, New Orleans, LA, USA.
4. De Rosa, C. T., Pohl, H. R., Williams, M., Ademoyero, A. A., Chou, J., and Jones, D. E. 1998 Toxicological defense mechanisms and the shape of dose-response relationships. Environ. Health Perspect. 106:275-276.
5. Dourson, M. L., and Stara, J. F. 1983. Regulatory history and experimental support of uncertainty (safety) factors. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 3:224-238.
6. Dourson, M. L.., Knauf, L. A., and Swartout, J. C. 1992. On reference dose (RfD) and its underlying toxicity data base. Toxicol. Ind. Health 8:171-189.
7. Dourson, M. L., Felter, S. P., and Robinson, D. 1996. Evolution of science-based uncertainty factors in non-cancer risk assessment. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 24:108-120.
8. Dourson, M., and Patterson, J. 2003. A 20-year perspective on the development of non-cancer risk assessment methods. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 9:1239-1252.
9. Gadagbui, B. J., Zhao, Q., Maier, A., and Dourson, M. 2005. The scientific rational for deriving database and toxicodynamic uncertainty factors for reproductive or developmental toxicants. Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment. Cincinnati, OH.
10. Gundert-Remy, U., and Sonich-Mullin, C. 2002. IPCS Uncertainty and Variability Planning Workgroup and Drafting Group (International Program on Chemical Safety). The use of toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic data in risk assessment: An international perspective. Sci. Total Environ. 288:3-11.
11. Haber, L. T., Maier, A., Zhao, Q., Dollarhide, J. S., Savage, R. E., and Dourson, M. L. 2001. Applications of mechanistic data in risk assessment: The past, present, and future. Toxicol. Sci. 61:32-39.
12. Health Canada. 1994. Canadian Environmental Protection Act - Human Health Risk Assessment for Priority Substances. Environment Canada and Health Canada. Ottawa, ON.
13. Health Canada. 1995. Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality. Supporting Documentation, Part I, Approach to the Derivation of Drinking Water Guidelines. Environmental Health Directorate, Ottawa, ON.
14. Health Canada. 1996. Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality, 6th ed. Ottawa, ON.
15. Howd, R. A., Brown, J. P., Morry, D. W., Wang, Y. Y., Bankowska, J., Budroe, J. D., Campbell, M., DiBartolomeis, M. .J., Faust, J., Jowa, L., Lewis, D., Parker, T., Polakoff, J., Rice, D. W., Salmon, A. G., Tomar, R. S., and Fan, A. M. 2000. Development of California Public Health Goals (PHGs) for chemicals in drinking water. J. Appl. Toxicol. 20:365-380.
16. International Programme on Chemical Safety. 1987. Environmental Health Criteria 70: Food additives and contaminants in food, principles for the safety assessment of. Geneva: World Health Organization.
17. International Programme on Chemical Safety. 1994. Environmental Health Criteria 170: Guidance values for human exposure limits. Geneva: World Health Organization.
18. International Programme on Chemical Safety. 1999. Environmental Health Criteria 210: Principles for the assessment of risks to human health from exposure to chemicals. Geneva: World Health Organization.
19. International Programme on Chemical Safety. 2001. guidance document for the use of data in development of chemical-specific adjustment factors (CSAFs) for-interspecies differences and human variability in dose/concentration-response assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization.
20. Meek, M. E., Neehook, R., Litepto, R. G., and Armstrong, V. C. 1994. Approach to assessment of risk to human health for priority substances under the Canadian environmental protection act. Environ. Carcinogen. Ectotoxicol. Rev. 12:105-134.
21. Meek, M. E. 1999. Application of uncertainty factors in the Priority Substances Program and international harmonization. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 5:1013-1022.
22. Meek, M. E., Renwick, A., Ohanian, E., Dourson, M., Lake, B., Naumann, B.D. and Vu, V. 2002. Guidelines for application of chemical specific adjustment factors in dose/concentration-response assessment. Toxicology 181-182:115-120.
23. National Health and Medical Research Council. 2004. Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/ eh19syn.htm (accessed 18 September 2008).
24. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 1997. Public health goal for antimony in drinking water. Sacramento: California Environmental Protection Agency.
25. Pest Management Regulatory Agency. 2003. Assessing exposure from pesticides in food. A user's guide. Ottawa, ON: Alternative Strategies and Regulatory Affairs Division, Pest Management Regulatory Agency.
26. Renwick, A. G. 1995. The use of an additional safety or uncertainty factor for nature of toxicity in the estimation of acceptable daily intake and tolerable daily intake values. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 22:250-261.
27. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. The use of the benchmark dose approach in health risk assessment. Report EPA-630/R-94/007. Washington, DC.
28. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Methodology for deriving ambient water quality criteria for the protection of human health. Office of Science and Technology, Office of Water. Report EPA-822-B-00-004. Washington, DC.
29. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. A review of the reference dose and reference concentration processes. Final Report prepared for the U.S. EPA Risk Assessment Forum. Report EPA-630/P-02/00F. Washington, DC.
30. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003a. Setting standards for safe drinking water. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/standard/setting.html
31. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003b. Six year review of chemical contaminants. Health effects technical support document. Office of Water. Report EPA-822-R-03-008. Washington, DC.
32. World Health Organization. 2003. Boron in drinking-water. Background document for development of WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality. Geneva: WHO. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/boron.pdf
33. World Health Organization. 2004. Guidelines for drinking water quality, 3rd ed., vol. 1, Recommendations. Geneva: WHO.
34. World Health Organization. 2005. Chemical-specific adjustment factors (CSAFs) for interspecies differences and human variability in dose/concentration-response assessment: Guidance document for use of data in dose/concentration response assessment. International Programme on Chemical Safety, Harmonization Project Document No. 2. Geneva: WHO.