United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides
and Tone Substances
Washington, DC 20460
EPA-747-S-93-001
August 1993
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
^ EPA PROJECT SUMMARY
Chlorinated Solvents in Consumer Products:
Laboratory Analyses of Shelf Products
and
National Survey of Product Use
Electrical
Equipment
Cleaner
-------
United States Office of Prevention, Pesticides EPA-747-S-93-001
Environmental Protection and Toxic Substances August 1993
Agency Washington, DC 20460
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
PROJECT SUMMARY
Chlorinated Solvents in Consumer Products:
Laboratory Analyses of Shelf Products
and
National Survey of Product Use
Two project reports were prepared:
USEPA. 1987. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Household solvent products: a
"shelf1 survey with laboratory analysis. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. EPA-OTS 560/5-87-006.
USEPA. 1987. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Household solvent products: a
national usage survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA-OTS 560/5-87-005.
• i
Authors and Research Team
EPA provided oversight and direction for the project. Principal EPA contributors
were Mary Frankenberry, Richard Kent, Patrick Kennedy, Cindy Stroup, Susan
Dillman, and Joseph J. Breen of the Exposure Evaluation Division, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
Principal authors at Westat, Inc. included Donna Eisenhower, David M. Maklan,
Stephen K. Dietz, Gary Brown, Paul Flyer, and Skaidrite Fallah. Principal authors at
Midwest Research Institute (MRI) included David H. Steele and Thomas M. Sack.
This summary was abstracted by George Fisher and Bill Devlin of Westat from the
subject reports.
Mass spectral analyses of the shelf products were conducted at MRI. Envirodyne
Engineers and Versar analyzed a portion of the products under subcontract to MRI.
Concentrations of 25 additional analytes were estimated by MRI for the
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Office of Research and
Development.
Battelle - Columbus Laboratories, as the prime contractor for the product usage shelf
survey, provided general contract support through Jean Chesson and Michael
Samuhel. Field work for the usage survey was conducted by Westat.
-------
Summary
Two surveys were conducted in 1987 on the
incidence of chlorinated solvents in common
household consumer products. Comprehensive
technical reports were published at the completion
of the studies (referenced above). This summary
report was prepared to provide an overview of
these studies for a general audience.
In 1986, EPA initiated these surveys of consumer
exposures to methylene chloride and its substitutes
when using one of the many household cleaning,
painting, lubricating and automotive products. Two
studies were conducted to provide information on
the incidence and concentration of methylene
chloride and five other chlorocarbons found in
common household products and to obtain
estimates of the usage of the products. These
studies provided data required to perform
consumer exposure analyses for these
chlorocarbons.
The first of those studies was a "shelf1 study of
household solvent products containing methylene
chloride and/or any of five other chemical
substitutes. The first objective of this study was to
determine which categories of consumer products
frequently contain the chemical methylene
chloride, in particular, and/or one of the five
potential substitute solvents: 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, carbon
tetrachloride, and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane.
The second objective was to analyze brands
representing each product category to determine
the concentration of these chemicals in household
products. To this end, a national sample of
household products was selected and subsequently
laboratory tested to determine the incidence and
concentration of the six target chlorocarbons.
The laboratory data were also subsequently
reanalyzed to determine concentrations of an
additional 25 chemicals relating to indoor air
pollution. The air pollution results will be included
in a forthcoming EPA report.
The results of the shelf survey were used to plan a
separate national survey of nearly 5,000 adults in
households. The household survey results provided
estimates of the frequency and duration of use of
products containing methylene chloride and its
substitute solvents as well as the conditions of
usage, including any protective actions (ventilation)
taken by users. These results provided the EPA's
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics' (OPPT)
Exposure Evaluation Division with inputs for
mathematical models of human lifetime exposure
to these solvent chemicals. (The Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics was formerly the
Office of Toxic Substances.) Further information
on these studies may be obtained from the TSCA
hotline (202) 554-1404,
INTRODUCTION
Methylene chloride and five potential substitute
chemicals are part of the family of aliphatic
halogenated hydrocarbons. The primary function
served by these chemicals in household products is
that of a solvent. For instance, methylene chloride
is effective in removing all types of surface finishes,
including synthetics and epoxies. Methylene
chloride is non-flammable and has a rapid
evaporation rate. Due to these qualities, the
consumer is potentially exposed to methylene
chloride and/or its substitutes in a wide variety of
household cleaning, painting, lubricating, and
automotive products.
In 1985 the National Toxicology Program (NTP)
reported positive results for a bioassay indicating
that methylene chloride is an animal carcinogen.
Subsequently, the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) made a preliminary determination
to list methylene chloride as a "Hazardous Air
Pollutant" under section 112 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and initiated priority review for risks of
human cancer from exposures to methylene
chloride. An interagency Methylene Chloride
Work Group chaired by the then Office of
Pesticides and Toxic Substances (OPTS) was
formed and charged with the responsibility of
conducting the regulatory investigation, which had
as its objective to determine whether or not
methylene chloride presented an unreasonable risk
to human health or the environment, and to
determine if regulatory controls were needed to
eliminate or reduce exposure. (The former Office
of Pesticides and Toxic Substances is now known as
the Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances (OPPTS).)
The investigation revealed that other toxic
chlorinated solvents can be used in combination
with or as substitutes for methylene chloride. Since
-------
regulating methylene chloride alone could lead to
its substitution by these other solvents, the Work
Group recommended broadening the regulatory
investigation to include five other chlorinated
solvents: 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, carbon tetrachloride,
trichlofoethylene, and tetrachloroethylene. The
solvents were selected on the basis of their large
production volumes, their interchangeability, and
their known and potential adverse health and
environmental effects. The EPA found that there
was inadequate information on consumer exposure
to these six chlorinated solvents.
The purpose of the shelf and consumer usage
studies completed in 1987 was to provide
information that would assist in estimating the
magnitude of exposure to these solvents from
consumer products. The shelf survey involved
collecting over 1,200 household cleaning and
polishing, painting and lubricating, and automotive
products from six cities nationwide. These items
were then laboratory tested. The consumer usage
survey looked at 30 types of consumer products
which contain methylene chloride or its substitutes.
Latex and oil based paint, not thought to contain
methylene chloride or its substitutes, were added to
the consumer survey since they are of interest to
EPA for other reasons. The usage survey results
included estimates of the frequency and duration of
use of products containing methylene chloride and
its substitutes and to determine conditions of usage,
including any protective measures (ventilation)
taken by the users.
A subsequent analytical analysis was performed on
the laboratory data to estimate concentrations for
an additional 25 chemicals in the household
products that had been sampled from store shelves.
The target analytes selected for this work include
chemicals studied in the Total Exposure
Assessment Methodology (TEAM) studies and
other analytes recommended by OPPT and other
EPA programs. The purpose of these additional
tests was to support OPPPT and the Office of Air
and Radiation (OAR) in their attempts to define
pollutants and their levels and sources in indoor
air, particularly in residential settings. Also, the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
under the authority of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act, is concerned with
minimizing disposal of household products
containing toxic substances.
Two of the six solvents originally under review by
the Work Group were subsequently withdrawn
from analysis. Carbon tetrachloride was withdrawn
because it was no longer used in the major
applications under investigation. The solvent 1,1,2-
triclorotrifhioroethane was withdrawn because it
was subject to regulation by EPA's OAR as an
ozone depletor. The Work Group completed
hazard assessments of the remaining four solvents.
On June 21,1991, the EPA published a preliminary
draft list of major sources and area sources of
hazardous air pollutants as required under section
112 of the CAA as amended in 1990. Included in
this list is methylene chloride and four of the
chemical substitutes considered in the studies
summarized in this Project Summary report:
perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene), carbon
tetrachloride, trichloroethylene, and 1,1,2-
trichlorotrifluoroethane.
OBJECTIVES
The specific objectives of the studies were:
• To determine which categories of consumer
products contain the chemical methylene
chloride, in particular, and/or 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, tetra-
chloroethylene, carbon tetrachloride, and 1,1,2-
tri-chlorotfifluoroethane.
• To analyze brands representing each product
category to determine the concentration of the
methylene chloride, or substitute chemicals in
household products.
• To analyze previous laboratory data obtained
for the six chlorocarbon solvents to estimate
concentrations of 25 additional analytes to
support other EPA studies of indoor air
pollution.
• To conduct a nationwide survey to determine
characteristics of consumer use of products
containing methylene chloride or its
substitutes.
-------
PROJECT METHODS
AND DESIGN
Shelf Survey
Sample Design
A list of consumer products that potentially contain
methylene chloride or one of its potential substitute
chemicals was first produced based on expert
knowledge. EPA then conducted a pilot study in
stores around the metropolitan Washington, D.C.
area to identify additional products, based in part
on label identification of methylene chloride or
other chemicals of interest. Then, a shelf survey
was conducted in various retail stores in five
additional cities across the U.S. This sample of six
cities was not selected on a probability basis.
Instead, a deliberate attempt was made to
represent regions of the U.S. A purposive sample
of stores from each city was then visited. Store
types visited included: paint stores,
hardware/home centers, auto supply stores,
department stores, stereo shops, video centers,
computer stores, electrical appliance shops, drug
stores, grocery stores, art and crafts supply houses,
convenience stores, catalog stores, and electronic
supply houses. Within each store, a probability
sample of brands within product categories was
purchased. A total of 1,153 containers of
household products was purchased consisting of
1,026 brands. A total of 127 replicates were
purchased from different cities to determine
whether specific brands differ in the amounts of
chlorocarbon across regions of the country.
It is important to note that not all products
containing methylene chloride were included in this
study. Personal care products, pesticides, and
items labelled for professional use only
(occupational, not consumer users) were excluded
due to overlapping jurisdictions and budgetary
considerations.
Some product categories include a relatively small
number of brands, while others include a very large
number of brands. Large sample sizes were
allocated to those product categories having the
largest number of brands (aerosol spray paints,
paint removers, lubricants, and adhesives).
Laboratory Testing
The 1,153 containers were shipped to the
laboratory for analysis using the purge and trap
procedure described in EPA Method 624
"Purgeables." In general, the product samples were
homogenized and approximately 50 mg were
removed from the original containers in such a
manner that volatiles were completely retained.
The samples were then weighed and diluted to a
known volume with methanol. Different sample
preparation techniques were used for liquids, solids
and pastes, and aerosols. The performance of the
analytical system was confirmed on a daily basis.
Subsequent computerized analysis of the gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry data obtained
from the analyses for the six chlorocarbon solvents
was made for an additional 25 common chemical
components including acetone, benzene,
chloroform, and toluene.
Quality Assurance
Field sampling procedures included development
of a sample frame of store types and random
selection of brands within product categories within
selected stores. Sampled products were carefully
coded to indicate city of selection, product
category, container type, and sequence number.
All shipments to and from the laboratory were
carefully logged hi by I.D. coders.
Laboratory testing precision for the six
chlorocarbon solvents was assessed by four
replicate analyses of a standard mixture prior to
sample analysis. In addition, 60 (5%) of the
samples were run in duplicate (including duplicate
preparation) to assess precision. Samples to be
analyzed in duplicate were selected from the data
base printout using random numbers. Prior to
sample analysis, performance samples containing
the six analytes were analyzed to demonstrate the
accuracy of the method. The accuracy of the
analyses was demonstrated by analyses of 77
samples (7%) spiked with analytes at known
concentrations. Samples to be spiked also were
selected from the data base using random numbers.
-------
Usage Survey
Survey Methodology
Based on information gathered in the shelf survey,
a nationwide survey of consumer usage of products
thought to contain chlorocarbon solvents was
made. The main purpose of this survey was to
provide usage statistics for each product that can be
used to calculate exposure assessment of the U.S.
population to methylene chloride and its
substitutes. The sample for the survey was
generated using a random digit dialing procedure.
For each household contacted, the interviewer
introduced the study, sought the respondent's
participation; asked for the mailing address; and
asked for the names of all of the adults in the
household 18 years of age and older. This survey
used a procedure called the Waksberg Method for
implementing random digit dialing (RDD). This
method provides an unbiased sample of households
with telephones, with most households having the
same probability of selection. Moreover, the
method is relatively efficient since it requires fewer
telephone calls than the earlier procedures
developed for RDD.
Next, a questionnaire and a color foldout showing
product pictures from the shelf survey were sent to
each individual respondent. A pretest finding
indicated that each respondent should have
received a package separately from other
respondents in the same household as a measure to
avoid one member filling out each questionnaire
for all respondents in the household. The pretest
also indicated that the product pictures effectively
familiarized the respondents with the products and
aided them in answering the questions. This
finding was confirmed in the study.
Respondents were asked questions as to their
usage of the products. Information included the
following:
• Frequency of use of the product;
• Duration of use;
• Brand names of products used;
• Amount of the products used;
• Location of use; and
• Degree of ventilation and other protective
measures undertaken when using the product.
Every adult member (18 years of age or older)
within a household was included hi the survey. Five
thousand six hundred and seventy-five (5,675)
respondents of 6,700 contacted agreed to
participate and therefore were sent a questionnaire.
Four thousand nine hundred and twenty (4,920)
respondents either sent the questionnaire in or
completed the interview during the telephone
follow-up.
Finally, a telephone follow-up was made to those
who did not respond to the mailed questionnaire
within a four-week period. Telephone follow-up at
the end of the four-week period was thought to be
more effective and efficient than doing a second
mailing or making prompting calls, especially since
time was an important factor. The written
questionnaire was used by the telephone
interviewer and the interview took, on the average,
twenty to thirty minutes. The mailed questionnaire
with product pictures appeared to be a positive
influence on the response rate even when the
questionnaire was administered over the telephone.
Quality Assurance
The survey involved the design of one
questionnaire which addressed consumer use of
chemicals contained in an array of products used
around the home and in the automobile. Extensive
quality assurance procedures were undertaken to
assure that valid and reliable data were collected
via the questionnaire format. Once the
questionnaire was drafted, formal pretests were
scheduled. The pretest involved mailing out the
questionnaire and doing telephone interviews with
nonrespondents.
Quality control was assured during data collection
by substantial training of interviewers and receipt
clerks, careful supervision and monitoring of the
interviewers during the interviewing and the receipt
clerks for the mail-ins, and careful handling and
storing of the questionnaires. All receipt clerks on
the questionnaire mail-in operation received
training by the project director. All interviewers
used in the telephone follow-ups received general
interviewing training and project specific training.
All interviews for this survey were assigned to a
Telephone Center Supervisor. The supervisor
-------
participated in the training efforts and monitored
the interviews once they began. Finally, all the
questionnaires were securely stored. The security
facilities included a vault where completed
questionnaires and other materials were kept.
RESULTS
Shelf Survey
Given the nature of the laboratory tests conducted,
their lower boundary detection limit of 0.1% by
weight (% w/w = 0.1), and the precision of the
results, a concentration level of at least one percent
(% w/w >. 1.0) was selected as the classification
criterion for the purposes of this study. This
criterion was chosen to assure that any product
classified as containing one or more of the six
target analytes did indeed contain that chemical.
Provided as Table 1 is a summary of the number of
product categories and brands which tested
positive, by each of the six analytes. The test
results demonstrate that at least one of the six
target chlorocarbon analytes was found within one
or more of the brands for a majority of the
household product categories studied. Table 1
shows that 58 percent of the 67 product categories
included at least one brand that tested positive on
one or more of the analytes. Methylene chloride
and 1,1,1-trichloroethane lead the way with one or
more of the brands from over one-third of the
product categories found to contain these analytes
(36 % and 48% of the categories, respectively) at
concentrations of at least 1.0 percent. To obtain a
better indication of the extent of use of the six
target analytes in household products, Table 1 also
contains test data summarized by brands. As can
be seen, 48 percent of the 1,026 brands sampled
were found to contain at least one of the analytes.
Again, methylene chloride and 1,1,1-
trichloroethane were the most commonly found
chlorocarbons.
It should be noted that the results summarized by
product category are considered more reliable than
those categorized by product brands. This is due to
the fact that the "shelf survey is fairly exhaustive
with respect types or "categories" of products (e.g.,
adhesives, paint removers) that are to be found in
many households. However, the set of specific
brands and sub-brands purchased within a product
category is not exhaustive of all brands to be found
nationwide.
The following findings relate to specific product
categories:
• The following categories had the highest
percentage of brands with positive results for
at least one of the six target analytes: brake
quieters/cleaners (92%), typewriter correction
fluid (89%); suede protectors (88%), VCR
cleaners (86%); and paint removers/strippers
(78%) (excluding product categories with less
than five brands tested).
• Methylene chloride was found in 78 percent of
the paint removers/strippers and 60 percent of
the aerosol spray paints tested.
• 1,1,1-Trichloroethane was found in 89 percent
of the typewriter correction fluids, 88 percent
of the suede protectors, and 67 percent of the
brake quieters/cleaners tested.
• Trichloroethylene was found in 78 percent of
the typewriter correction fluids tested.
» Tetrachloroethylene was found in 58 percent of
the brake quieters/cleaners tested.
An analysis of regional variations of concentrations .
of chlorocarbon was conducted using a subsample
of replicate brands selected for this purpose. In the
replicate analysis, some product categories and
brands were found to differ significantly across
samples on at least one chemical. Approximately
24 percent of the replicated brands were found to
have significantly different concentrations of at
least one chemical across samples purchased in
different regions of the country.
As part of the initial phase of the shelf survey, the
labels of the brands purchased in Washington,
D.C., were examined to determine whether the
listed chemical ingredients indicated the presence
of methylene chloride or one of the substitute
chemicals. This information was then compared to
the laboratory results to determine whether
manufacturers are informing consumers about the
presence of chlorocarbons in their products. Of
the 243 brands compared, 126 were found to
contain at least one of the target analytes (52%).
-------
Table 1. Presence of chlorocarbon solvents in household items, summarized by product category and
product brand
Product Categories
Analyte
Number of
product
categories
with one or
more brands
tested positive
Percent of
categories
(N=67)
Brands
Number
of brands
tested
positive
Percent
of brands
(N= 1,026)
Methylene chloride
1,1,2-Trichloro-
trifluoroethane
24
11
35.8
16.4
350
22
34.1
2.1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Carbon tetrachloride
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
One or more
None
i
32
0
3
18
39
28
47.8
0.0
4.5
26.9
58.2
41.8
145
0
8
37
491
535
14.1
0.0
0.8
3.6
47.9
52.1
Positive test defined as: % w/w > = 1.0
Of these 126 products, only 71 had labels that
indicated the presence of chlorocarbons.
Methylene chloride was mentioned on 36 labels,
followed by 1,1,1-trichloroethane (15 labels).
Among the 55 insufficiently labeled brands
containing chlorocarbons, 1,1,1-trichloroethane was
the most frequently found chemical (53%).
The subsequent analysis for the additional 25
analytes revealed that 5 of the target analytes
(1,1,2,2-tetrachlorethane, chlorobenzene, styrene,
nonane, and d-limonene) were not found (at the
0.1% or greater level) in any of the household
products tested. Those analytes found most
frequently were acetone, 2-Butanone, cyclohexane,
methyl-cyclopentane, hexane, methylcyclohexane,
and toluene.
Usage Survey
From the shelf product laboratory tests, 30 product
types containing methylene chloride and/or its
chemical substitute were selected for the usage
survey. Two additional product categories (latex
paintj oil paint) not containing methylene chloride
were added because of interest to EPA.
A summary of the usage statistics by product
category using the original questionnaire queries
for the 15 highest incidence of use products is
presented in Table 2. Highlights of the summary hi
Table 2, and of other findings, include the
following:
• Respondents used an average of seven types of
products in their lifetime and an average of five
products during the last twelve months.
-------
• The highest incidence of products "ever used"
was for contact cements, superglues, and spray
adhesives (60.6%). The lowest incidence was
for transmission cleaners (2.1%).
• The highest mean number of times a product
was used during the last twelve months was for
typewriter correction fluid (40.0 times). The
lowest incidence of recent use was for outdoor
water repellents (2.1).
• The most time spent using products other than
latex and oil paint, which are not thought to
contain these chlorocarbon solvents was for
paint removers/strippers (mean of 125.6
minutes). The least time was for ignition/wire
dryers (7.2 minutes).
• The greatest product amount used in units of
ounces per year per user other than for latex
and oil paint, which would otherwise be the
highest (given in mean values), was for outdoor
water repellents (148.7 ounces). The least
amount used was for typewriter correction
fluid (4.1 ounces).
• Most respondents had a window or door open
to the outside when using products for large
jobs that were done on the inside; most
respondents did not have an exhaust fan on
when using these products; most respondents
kept the door to the room open when using
these products; and most people said that they
read the directions on the label.
• In general, use of the products decreases with
increasing age of the user. Gender differences
in use of the products are found with males
using lubricants, specialized electronic
equipment cleaners, and automotive products
more than females, and females using spot
removers, solvent type cleaning fluids, wood
and paneling cleaners, and typewriter
correction fluids more than males.
• Finally, there were no significant differences in
the usage results between questionnaires
completed by mail and those completed by
telephone interview.
The intention in the usage shelf survey was to
match the brand the respondents said that they
used to the brand laboratory tested as the result of
the shelf survey, at least, where a match was
possible. The matches would produce information
on the concentration of the chemicals which would
then be used in calculations of the exposure
assessments of the general population to these six
chemicals. However, many brands indentified hi
the user survey were without laboratory data. The
thirty products (excluding oil and latex paints)
range from a low of 2 percent of the users naming
brands with a match in the laboratory data (glass
frostings, tints, and artificial snow) to a high of 85
percent (nonautomotive lubricants).
A 'brand imputation' model was developed to
provide representative estimates of laboratory data
for those brands without actual laboratory data.
The brand imputation model is described in detail
in the study report.
CONCLUSIONS
In these studies, EPA's research team:
• Determined that at least one of the six target
chlorocarbon analytes was found within one or
more brands for a majority of the household
product categories sampled.
• Determined that 39 of the 67 product
categories included at least one brand that
tested positive on one or more of the target
analytes.
• Found that carbon tetrachloride was in none of
the products tested at the 1 percent
concentration (by weight) level.
• Found that concentration of chlorocarbon
analyte varies considerably between brands of
the same product type.
• Determined that product labels are often
inadequate hi their specification of
chlorocarbon contents.
• Determined that respondents of product usage
survey used an average of 7 types of products
in their lifetime and 5 products during the last
12 months.
-------
Table 2. Usage survey summary data for 15 highest incidence of use (ever used) products
Product Category *
Question 1 23 4 5 678 9 10 11
12
13 14 15
Percent of
respondents
used product
Last time used
Mean months
Median months
Number tunes
used in 12 months
Mean
Median
Time spent using
product
Mean minutes
Median minutes
Time spent in room
after using
Mean minutes
Median minutes
60.6 55.2 42.9 39.1 35.8 35.7 35.4 34.9 343 30.5 29.9 28.1 25.9 21.9 17.9
5.2 16.7 23.2 14.7 20.5 21.5 17.2 12.6 5.0 28.9 30.4 9.9
1.0 8.0 9.0 3.0 9.0 7.0 6.0 3.0 1.0 12.0 12.0 2.0
8.9 3.9 4.2 15.6 3.5 6.8 4.2 8.5 10.6 3.7 5.7 16.5
322322224 214
15.6 295 117 10.7 14.5 39.4 39.5 74.0
4.3 180 60 5.0 10.0 10.0 20.0 30.0
68.9 91.4 93.4 43.7 3.8 32.9 12.7 96.7
10.0 5.0 30.0 5.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 30.0
8.1 126 194 29.5
2.0 60 120 15.0
84.1 31.4 101 33.3
30.0 0.0 30 3.0
6.9 13.1 6.3
0.9 4.0 2.0
40.0 3.8 10.3
12 2 3
7.6 13.6 9.9
1.0 7.0 5.0
128 15 4.5
60 0.0 0.0
Size of product
Mean ounces 7.5 371 65.1 26.3
Median ounces 1.0 256 16.0 5.5
Where used most
frequently2 OR OR OUTS OR
Window open?
(%yes) 41 76 64 45
Fan on? (% yes) 8 16 15 9
Door open?
(%yes) 75 85 74 80
Read dir.? (% yes) 70 64 77 77
<
1 Product Category:
1. Contact cement, super glues, etc.
2. Latex paint
3. Wood stains, varnishes, etc.
4. Spot removers
5. Paint thinners
6. Water repellents
7. Aerosol spray paint (nonauto)
8. Wood/floor/paneling cleaners
11.4 69.5
6.0 20.5
OR OUTS
40 67
8 11
73 68
83 59
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
30.7 28.4 9.9 63.7 169 58.1
13.0 14.0 2.3 32.0 64 16.0
OUTS OR OR OUTS OUTS OR
63 59 43 71 70 57
10 11 6 16 16 15
61 83 70 69 77 74
73 72 45 80 69 68
Other lubricants (nonauto)
Paint removers, strippers
Oil paint
Solvent cleaners
Typewriter correction fluids
Carburetor cleaners
Spray lubricants for cars
4.1 22.0 18.6
0.9 12.0 6.0
OR OUTS OUTS
26 NA NA
8 NA NA
74 NA NA
39 74 55
2 Where used:
OR Room other than garage, living room, or basement
OUTS Outside
-------
• Determined that the highest incidence of
products ever used was for contact cements,
superglues, and spray adhesives.
• Found that most survey respondents had a
window or door open when using products for
large jobs indoors.
• Found that use of these products decreases
with person's age.
• Found gender differences hi product use.
The two survey reports may be obtained from the
National Technical Information Service (NTIS),
Springfield, Virginia.
The data files of survey and laboratory data for
input to mathematical exposure models may be
obtained from EPA through the TSCA hotline
(202) 554-1404.
10
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION
PAGE
1. REPORT NO.
EPA 747-S-93-001
2.
4. Title and Subtitle
Chlorinated Solvents in Consumer Products: Laboratory Analyses of Shelf Products
and National Survey of Product Use
7.Author(s)
Frankenberry, et al
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Westat,Inc.
1650 Research Blvd.
Rockvffle,MD 20850
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
Washington, D.C. 20460
3. Recipient's Accession No.
I
5. Report Date '
August 1993
6.
8. Performing Organization Rept. No.
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
1 1 . Contract (C) or Grant (G) No.
J1008(0725)-604
68-02-4243
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
Technical Summary
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)
Summarv Report on Two Studies of Cholorinated Solvents in Consumer Products:
Two surveys were conducted in 1987 on the incidence of chlorinated solvents in common household consumer products.
Comprehensive technical reports were published at the completion of the studies. This summary report was prepared to
provide an overview of these studies for a general audience.
In 1986, EPA initiated these surveys of consumer exposures to methylene chloride and its substitutes when using one of the
many household cleaning, painting, lubricating, and automotive products. The studies were conducted to provide information
on the incidence and concentration of methylene chloride and five other chlorocarbons found in common household products
and to estimates of the usage of the products.
The chemicals of interest, in addition to methylene chloride, are 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene,
carbon tetrachloride, and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane.
A national sample of household products was selected and subsequently laboratory tested to determine the incidence and
concentration of the six target chlorocarbons.
17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors
Household Contaminants
b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
Consumer products, shelf survey, chlorocarbons, solvents
c. COSATI Reid/Group
18. Availability Statement
Available to public from N"
FIS, Springfield, VA
19. Security Class (This Report) 21. No. of Pages
Unclassified 12
20. Security Class (This Page) 22. Price
Unclassified
(SeeANSI-239.18)
See Instructions on Reverse
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTIS-35)
Department of Commerce
------- |