National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Front Matter
Suggested Citation:"Executive Summary." National Research Council. 2000. Re-evaluation of Drinking-Water Guidelines for Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9901.
×

Executive Summary

DIISOPROPYL METHYLPHOSPHONATE (DIMP) is a groundwater contaminant at the U.S. Army's Rocky Mountain Arsenal in Colorado. DIMP is a chemical by-product resulting from the manufacture and detoxification of the nerve agent GB (Sarin), which was produced at the arsenal from 1953 to 1957. For some time, there has been disagreement between the Army and the State of Colorado regarding the appropriate drinking-water contaminant guideline for DIMP. In 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established a drinking-water guideline of 600 micrograms per liter (µg/L), but the State of Colorado promulgated a lower guideline of 8 µg/L. The reason for the difference is that different studies were used to calculate the guidelines. Colorado used one-generation reproductive toxicity study in mink, whereas EPA used a subchronic toxicity study in dogs. EPA did not use the mink study, which reported an increase in female mortality, citing natural high mortality in captive mink and uncertainties about the relevance of mink to human health assessment. Colorado disagreed with EPA's assessment, contending that EPA used inappropriate data to assess mortality rates in captive mink and that mink have extrapolative relevance to humans.

To help resolve the disagreement, a two-generation reproductive study in mink was conducted. The Army asked the National Research Council (NRC) for an independent evaluation of that 1997 study and a re-evaluation of the drinking-water guideline for DIMP. The NRC as

Suggested Citation:"Executive Summary." National Research Council. 2000. Re-evaluation of Drinking-Water Guidelines for Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9901.
×

signed this task to the Committee on Toxicology, which convened the Subcommittee on the Toxicity of Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate, a multidisciplinary group of experts. The subcommittee evaluated the two-generation reproductive study, as well as other studies relevant to assessing the toxicity of DIMP. Of particular relevance were a subchronic toxicity study in mink and a comparative metabolism study in mink and rats. Data on the use of mink as a predictive model in toxicology also were reviewed.

The subcommittee evaluated the biology and physiology of mink and found no scientific basis to preclude the use of mink in quantitative human-health risk assessments. In fact, the weight of evidence on DIMP indicates that two studies in mink—the two-generation reproductive toxicity study and the subchronic toxicity study—provide the most appropriate database for deriving a drinking-water guideline for DIMP.

The subcommittee concludes that neither EPA's nor Colorado's drinking-water guideline for DIMP is based on the best currently available data. The subcommittee considers the 1997 two-generation reproductive study to be the best available study for deriving a drinking-water guideline, because it involved the most relevant exposure duration (13 months) and because the most biologically meaningful findings of the study, Heinz body formation (protein aggregates in oxidatively-stressed red blood cells) and cholinesterase (ChE) inhibition, are consistent with the results of the subchronic toxicity study in mink.

Suggested Citation:"Executive Summary." National Research Council. 2000. Re-evaluation of Drinking-Water Guidelines for Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9901.
×
Page 1
Suggested Citation:"Executive Summary." National Research Council. 2000. Re-evaluation of Drinking-Water Guidelines for Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9901.
×
Page 2
Next: Introduction »
Re-evaluation of Drinking-Water Guidelines for Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate Get This Book
×
 Re-evaluation of Drinking-Water Guidelines for Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate
Buy Paperback | $21.00 Buy Ebook | $16.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate (DIMP) is a groundwater contaminant at the U.S. Army's Rocky Mountain Arsenal in Colorado. DIMP is a by-product created from the manufacture and detoxification of the nerve agent GB which the arsenal produced from 1953 to 1957. For awhile the Army and the State of Colorado disagreed upon the appropriate drinking-water contaminant guideline for DIMP. A drinking-water guideline of 600 micrograms per liter was established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1989 but the State of Colorado promulgated a lower guideline of 8 micrograms per liter. The significant difference between the two suggested values arose from the fact that both sides used different studies to determine their values. Colorado used one-generation reproductive toxicity study in mink, whereas EPA used a subchronic toxicity study in dogs.

To resolve the disagreement, a two-generation reproductive study in mink was conducted. The Army asked the National Research Council (NRC) to independently evaluate the 1997 study and re-evaluate the drinking-water guideline for DIMP. This task was assigned to the Committee on Toxicology, which established the Subcommittee on the Toxicity of Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate, a multidisciplinary group of experts. The subcommittee evaluated the two-generation reproductive study as well as other studies relevant to the task. Data on the use of mink as a predictive model in toxicology were also reviewed. Re-Evaluation of Drinking-Water Guidelines for Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate is the subcommittee's report which shows that neither party was corrected in their DIMP guidelines. The report includes the subcommittee's evaluation and recommendations concerning the topic.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!