Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Analyte <br />Residential <br />Worker [4) Groundwater Protection Leachate Reference <br />Water Standard <br />Class f <br />N <br />CDP <br />E P CAS No. Level Concentration <br /> erred <br />ame) <br />( <br />H <br />re <br />m /k I Notes <br />m /k Notes <br />m /k ~ Notes <br />m /L Notes <br />m L Notes <br /> 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 120 ' nc 1000 S,nc Pending NA 0.00011 1 <br />m 2.6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 61 ~ nc 620 ~ nc Pending ~ NA ~ 0.007 ( 2 <br />> 2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluene mix 25321-14-6 0.94 c 4.2 ~ c Pending NA 0.00051 ; 2 <br />o HMX 2691-41-0 1000 ~ 5,nc 1000 ~ S,nc' Pending ~ NA ~ 0.35 2 <br />n 4-Nitrotoluene 99-99-0 38 ~ c 170 c Pending NA 0.027 2 <br />w RDX 121-62-4 5.5 c 24 ~ c Pending ~ NA ~ 0.0021 I 2 <br /> 2,4.6-Trinitrotoluene 118-96-7 19 c 79 c <br />I Pendin NA 0.00035 ~, 2 <br />,n Cyanide (free) 57-12-5 1600 nc 20000 <br />nc NA ~ 4.4 ~ 02 ~ 1 <br /> e(hydrogen) nc NA 3.1 ~ 0.14 2 <br />'E Nitrate 14797-55.8 130000 ~ nc 1600000 <br />nC NA ~ 220 ~ 10 ~ 1 <br /> Nitrite 14797-65-0 7800 nc 100000 nc NA 22 1 1 <br />NOTES: <br />c -Standard based on carcinogenic risk corresponding to a lifetime risk of 1 E-6. <br />nc -Standard based on noncarcinogenic risk corresponding to a hazard quotient (HO) of 1. For facilities where multiple non-carcinogenic chemicals are present, <br />HO values should be divided by a factor of 10 to account for additivity. If adjusted table values are exceeded, consultation with a toxicologist is recommended to <br />assess likely impact on specific target organs. <br />Pending -Table values shown as pending are under review. Users should contact the Division if they have an urgent need for a table value for a constituent <br />currently shown as pending. <br />NA -Not applicable; use of this table to select soil evaluation values under Tier 2 does not allow for the calculation of a soil concentration under this column. <br />1. Water standard based on current state or federal MCL. <br />2. Water standard based on MCL-equivalent calculation. <br />_ 3. Waterstandard based on-state agricultural-standard: --- - - - - -- - - -' - - " - " ' '-'-"'- --"- <br />4. Worker values are considered protective for indoor office workers with occasional contact with outdoor soil, and for outdoor workers engaged in light to moderate <br />activity. Values are NOT APPLICABLE to outdoor workers routinely engaged in contact-intensive activity. For facilities where contact intensive use is <br />anticipated, additional analysis and consultation with a toxicologist will be required to determine appropriate site-specific inputs to the risk equations. <br />5. Table value is capped at an up{>er concentration limit of 1,000 mg/kg. The Division believes it is necessary to cap the chronic risk scenario and soil-to- <br />groundwater modeling concentration outputs, because the two modeling approaches can result in the calculation or soil concentrations that are very high in an <br />absolute sense, possibly leading to acute health impacts, the presence of free-phase contaminant in soil, or leaving behind constituent levels in soil that might <br />constitute a hazardous waste. Users may contact the Division if they have a need for specifc risk-based values, or moeeled groundwater concentrations. <br />6. Based on total chromium. <br />7 Value based on current EPA-recommended methodology for assessment of chemicals causing cancer inrougn a sp=cific mutagenic moue of action (MOA). <br />8. Value based on current CDPHE policy for this chemical. Contact the Division if additonal information is neeeed <br />9. Table value assumes 3% dermal absorption. Vapor pressure ror this volatile organic chemical (VOCI ~s less tnan tnat ror benzene, indicating additional potential <br />for dermal absorption. Table values for VOCs with a vapor pressure greater than that of benzene are calculated basec on derma! ansoption of 0 % . <br />10. For many locations in Colorado, naturally occurring concentrations of arsenic in soil are expected to be higher than the nsk-based value listed in Table 1 It <br />adequate background sampling is available that confirms the naturally occurring background concentration of arsenic adjacent to a facihry is higher than the table <br />value, the background concentration may be used for site screening and remediation purposes. <br />11. Screening levels for lead are based on chemical-specific models, rather than the EPA Region 5 nsk algontnm usec to derive other table values. The residential <br />value is based on default inputs to EPA's IEUBK model for lead in children. The worker value is based on EPA's aeutt lead model (ALFA), using default values <br />recommended in EPA's 2002 review of CDC's NHANES III report. Consideration of site-specific inputs to the IEUBK or ALM lead models and consultation with a <br />toxicologist is strongly recommended for facilities with lead levels in soil that exceed the residential or worker table values Contact the Division for additional <br />information about details of the lead models and site-specific considerations. <br />Version 7, 12/28/2007 Page 3 of 3 <br />