09.02.2014 Views

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

ARSENIC (INORGANIC)<br />

CAS No: 7440-38-2<br />

I. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES (From HSDB, 1998)<br />

Molecular weight 74.92<br />

Boiling point<br />

613 °C (sublimes)<br />

Melting point<br />

817 °C @ 28 atm<br />

Vapor pressure 1 mm Hg at 372 °C<br />

Air concentration conversion 1 ppm = 2.21 mg/m 3<br />

II.<br />

HEALTH ASSESSMENT VALUES<br />

Unit Risk Factor: 3.3 E-3 (µg/m 3 ) -1<br />

Slope Factor: 1.2 E+1 (mg/kg-day) -1<br />

[Human occupational exposure lung tumor incidence (Enterline et al., 1987a);.<br />

relative risk model, adjusted for interaction with tobacco smoking (CDHS, 1990).]<br />

Oral slope factor: 1.5 E+0 (mg/kg-day) -1<br />

[Human skin cancer incidence (Tseng et al., 1968, 1977), time- and dose-related formulation<br />

of the multistage procedure (U.S. EPA, 1988).]<br />

III.<br />

CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS<br />

Human Studies<br />

Inhalation<br />

Cancer mortality has been studied among workers employed in three major smelters in the U.S., in (1)<br />

Tacoma, Washington, (2) Anaconda, Montana, and (3) Garfield, Utah. Smelter workers in Sweden<br />

(Ronnskarverken) and in Japan (Sagnoseki-Machi) and cohorts of both miners and smelter workers in<br />

China have also been studied.<br />

Enterline and Marsh (1982) and Enterline et al. (1987a) examined the longest follow-up period for the<br />

Tacoma, Washington cohort. The 1982 report used cumulative doses based on urinary arsenic<br />

measurements. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) for respiratory cancer ranged from 170 for those<br />

receiving the lowest intensity and shortest duration of exposure, to 578 for those with the highest<br />

intensity and with 20-29 years duration of exposure. A strong dose-response relationship was evident<br />

only when the analysis was limited to the 582 retired workers in the cohort. In the 1987 reanalysis,<br />

Enterline and colleagues incorporated newly available historical air sampling data (Enterline et al.,<br />

1987a); in this study, the dose-response relationship appears more clearly.<br />

62

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!