|
goto download area
The California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office
of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), as the lead agency
for the implementation of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement
Act of 1986 (Proposition 65 or the Act), has received a request
from the Sorptive Minerals Institute (SMI, Washington, DC) that
OEHHA grant a safe use determination for packaged sorptive mineral-based
pet litter containing crystalline silica, pursuant to its authority
under Section 12104 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations
(22 CCR). The products that are the subject of the request are clay-based
pet litters that are purchased and poured by the consumer, used
by the pet, disposed of by the consumer, and replenished by the
consumer. Crystalline silica (airborne particles of respirable size)
has been listed under Proposition 65 as a chemical known to the
State to cause cancer since October 1, 1988.
In accordance with the process set forth in Section
12104(f) of 22 CCR, public comment on this request was solicited
on November 27, 1998, particularly with respect to the potential
for exposure to airborne particles of crystalline silica of respirable
size that may result from the use of pet litter commercially produced
from clay-containing mineral deposits as in packaged sorptive mineral-based
pet litter. A public hearing was convened on the last day of the
30-day comment period, January 6, 1999, in Sacramento, California.
Based on the results of a screening level assessment
using testing data submitted by SMI on the amounts of respirable
crystalline silica produced from the normal use of both conventional
and scoopable pet litter products, and a review of the comments
submitted by the public, OEHHA has decided to issue a safe use determination
to SMI for crystalline silica in mineral-based pet litter. The essential
elements and results of this screening level assessment are described
below.
SMI provided testing data on 12 conventional pet litters
and nine scoopable pet litters originating from clay deposits from
different parts of the country (termed East and West Coast litters
by SMI). Briefly, the key data consisted of laboratory measurements
over time of respirable dust (<10 µm) generated from activities
related to the use of pet litter including initial pouring, clump
removal (in the case of scoopable pet litter) and replenishment.
Respirable dust collected from the different activities was further
evaluated by SMI for quartz content. Quartz was assumed to be the
only form of crystalline silica in pet litter. Data provided by
the requester also included parameters on normal use in terms of
time and amount used by the average consumer. In accordance with
the process set forth in Section 12104(f) of 22 CCR, OEHHA has previously
deemed the submitted data adequate and appropriate for performing
this screening level assessment.
The primary sources of exposure to dust containing
crystalline silica from the use of conventional pet litter are from
the filling of the litter pan and subsequent disposal following
use. Using the data generated during 10 pound pour tests measuring
the respirable dust generated over time (up to three minutes), the
quartz content of the respirable dust, and the annual use and frequency
of activities related to the use of conventional pet litters, average
yearly exposure levels were estimated for each of the 12 products
for which testing data were submitted. The testing data indicate
that the average concentration of exposure to respirable crystalline
silica from the use of conventional litter ranges from 0.0007 to
0.01 µg/m3.
The primary sources of exposure to dust containing
crystalline silica from the use of scoopable pet litter are from
the filling of the litter pan, clump removal, replenishment of removed
litter, and subsequent disposal following use. Data provided by
SMI for scoopable pet litters included measurements over time (up
to ~2˝ minutes) of respirable dust generated from 10 pound pour
tests, clump removal tests and tests of clump removal with replenishment
of litter. Parameters on the annual use and frequency of activities
related to the use of scoopable pet litters were also provided.
Using this information, average yearly exposure levels were estimated
for each of the nine products for which testing data were submitted.
The testing data indicate that the average concentration of exposure
to respirable crystalline silica from the use of scoopable litter
ranges from 0.002 to 0.06 µg/m3.
A number of factors may tend to increase or decrease
estimates of exposure relative to the approach used to develop the
exposure levels described above. We believe, on the whole, that
the assumptions made are likely to have resulted in overestimates
of exposure levels for the average user of pet litter.
For the estimation of risk of cancer from the exposure
to crystalline silica, readily available potency estimates in the
scientific literature were used. Estimates derived from epidemiological
studies were considered to be most appropriate for this screening
evaluation of carcinogenic risk. Goldsmith et al. (1995; Scand J
Work Environ Health 21(Suppl 2):104-7) has developed estimates of
risk based upon the increase in lung cancers observed in epidemiological
studies of gold miners in South Africa and diatomaceous earth workers
in California. Cancer slope factors derived from these studies ranged
from 6.8 ´ 10-7 to 1.85 ´ 10-5 for exposure to 1 µg/m3 silica
dust and were derived using occupational exposure assumptions of
40 years of employment, eight hour workshifts, 50 hour workweeks,
and 50 workweeks per year. Based on these estimates, concentrations
associated with excess cancer risk of one in 100,000 would range
from 0.54 to 15 µg/m3 silica dust. Active research is being
conducted with respect to the relationship between silicosis and
lung cancer in humans, the contribution of reactive oxygen species
to the development of malignancy, and the "biological activity"
of crystalline silica. Additional data and increased confidence
in information regarding crystalline silica’s mode of action in
the induction of human malignancy will likely lead to reductions
in cancer potency estimates. Thus we expect that the upper end of
the screening cancer slope factors presented above represent "worst
case" estimates of the true low dose cancer slope factor for crystalline
silica present in clay-based pet litter.
With the assumption that a consumer uses a single
product throughout his/her lifetime, the highest estimate produced
is an annual time weighted average exposure of 0.06 µg/m3
quartz dust for a scoopable litter product. This exposure level
is approximately nine-fold lower than the lowest concentration (0.54
µg/m3) associated with one in 100,000 persons exposed derived
from occupational epidemiological studies. Thus, the estimated exposure
of the average user of either conventional or scoopable pet litter
to crystalline silica under the conditions used to produce this
assessment corresponds to an excess cancer risk of less than one
in 100,000, and would not trigger the Proposition 65 warning requirement.
As stated in 22 CCR, Section 12104 (a) and (k), this
safe use determination is specific to the requester, SMI, and for
crystalline silica in packaged sorptive mineral-based pet litter
as used in accordance with the facts presented in the request, and
is advisory only. Moreover, the issuance of a safe use determination
does not affect the authority of the Attorney General, district
attorneys, certain city attorneys and any other person in the public
interest to prosecute violations of the Act pursuant to Health and
Safety Code Section 25249.7 nor does it affect the responsibility
of courts to interpret the Act and apply the provisions of the Act
to particular facts.
Follow this link to download a copy of this notice as a pdf file.
Follow this link to OEHHA's May 20, 1999 response.
Questions regarding this notice should be directed
to:
Cynthia Oshita
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Post Office Box 4010
Sacramento, CA 95812-4010
FAX: (916) 327-1097
Telephone: (916) 445-6900
In order to be considered, comments must be postmarked (if sent
by mail) or received at OEHHA (if hand-delivered or sent by FAX)
by 5:00 p.m., January 6, 1999.
You will need the free program Adobe Acrobat Reader to view or
print PDF files 
For questions regarding Proposition 65, please contact the Cynthia
Oshita in the Proposition 65 Implementation Program
For help with this web site please contact the Web
Mistress
|