-------
06. 2*7. SB 02: 3 3 J»lv! ~EP>k-ERB
t • o n.
Table 2A
Analysis Results
Room
CO (PPM) CO? (PPM) < RH Temp j'F) Tjjne
7 250 59 79.0 6:40 am
4 275 63 77.0 11:15 am
5 500 67 76.5 2:30 pm
S-226 7 300 60 78.5 8:27 am
5 300 60 75.0 11:00 am
5 350 62 73.9 2:35 pm
S-274 6 325 52 77.0 8:34 em
4 300 61 75.0 11:54 am
5 375 51 72.2 2:40 pm
2611 6 300 59 72.0 6:45 am
5 275 55 73.0 11:09 am
5 275 59 70.0 2:50 pm
2627 5 275 65 71.0 8:46 am
5 375 60 68.1 11:13 am
5 275 61 72.0 3:00 pm
2708 1/2 5 275 61 72.0 8:53 am
5 300 61 74.0 11:18 .am
5 425 60 71.7 3:05 pm
2710 C 5 275 69 69.0 8:52 am
5 275 69 68.0 11:20 am
5 450 65 70.0 3:06 pm
2632 5 275 60 73.0 9:04 am
5 275 59 71.0 11:24 pm
5 525 67 73.0 3:17 pm
3241 5 350 50 76.0 9:20 am
5 300 59 77.0 11:30 am
4 375 52 75.0 3:54 pm
3304 C 5 300 61 73.0 9:30 am
6 275 61 73.0 11:40 am
4 375 52 72.0 3:26 pm
C-15
-------
o e. 2
Ed i cent M J
1 6
(Cont'd) Table 2A
Room No.
935
1015 C
Roof
5.
6
4
5
5
5
5
4
3
CO? (PPM)
350
325
350
350
350
200
275
300
RH
60
65
43
60
59
56
79
84
86
Room
Temp CF]
76.0
75.0
74.0
77.0
77.0
76.0
59.0
62.0
65.5
Time
9:36 am
11:55 am
3:45 pm
9:45 am
11:50 am
3:50 pm
9:07 am
11:08 am
3:25 pm
C-16
-------
O'6.2T.8e O 2 : 3 3 F M wEPA — ERB E d I • o n. M J PIT
Table 3A
Formaldehyde Analysis Results
Cone. Units ppb
Location 5/24/88 5/25/88
New Room (S-226) <4.1 <4.1
S-274 48.9 7.3
2811 9.0 <4.1
2818 NA <4.1
2827 46.4 <4.1
2708.5 <4.1 36.6
2710 58.7 <4.1
2632 429.0 284.0
Roof <4.1 9.0
3241 58.7 5.7
3304 <4.1 <4.1
935 <4.1 <4.1
1015 <4.1 <4.1
C-17
-------
ce.2-r.ee o 2 : 3 3 z» M - E r» >. — ER B Edison. M j
i e
Table 4A
Formaldehyde Analysis Results
Cone. Units ppb
Location 6/3/8B
2632-1 2.4
2632-2 <2.4
2632-3 2.4
2632-4 <2.4
2632-5 3.3
2632-6 9.0
2710 2.4
Day Care Center (Outside) 9.0
Day Care Center (Class #3) 2.4
Day Care Center (Class #5) 4.8
C-18
-------
TABLE 5A
Mi AM MNLim Of
om
wuam
••2*
217-01
V24/00
tar/m
-5-224 S-22t
nr-ot 507-02
S/24Stt 5/25/08
4/ovoi
s-274
217-01
9/24/tt
5/2JVOO
1-274
507-OS
5/15/01
ail
2U-*
307-Ot
i
Mttf
Mtl
•own
•.04
t.M
2.1*
i.n
t.tt
I.Of
4.M
2.U
•.55
1.12
•.n
•B
•.a
•.«
i.vt
••»
"o.n
2.21
••
0.1f
4.21
2.M
•.IS
•.91
m
4.M
.•.n.
«.4> I
1.50
1.M
0.45
0.5f
0.4*
•.8
7.Jf
•.41
•.ft
S.M
•.ft
t.M
1.M
2.5«
•.12
«.7f
•.M
3J5
•.94
•.29
•.42
•.23
O.Ii
2.54
0.05
•.20
2.52
2.M
•.S3
1.0
9J»
•.40
0,14
M
O
N
. J
CD
0)
O
N
W
W
i
n
i
hi
»
w
14
a
o
y
I•}. OMy ••pAfli •» 5/25/01.
•L MM AMlyntf tar; «M
(0
C-19
-------
-fMKf
TABLE SA (cont'd)
•M AM MNL9IU Of
Mlf
MTttSMMU*
MM
Mil MMVO»
MOOI. te.
•-2U KM MM
VS/M 5/M/M
5/2VM
VJr/M
t-zn
2I74D
S/24/M
5/MUM
•0042
t-?n
5W-09
S/25/M
Zlf-M
2*11
5W-M
Wt
•II
•I
•II
11.
l.M
•.It
t.W
t.$»
•.!•
«.M
l.M
2.M
•II
2.M
5.M M.40
eM
MMlc acM kutyt
(II
C1MMO)«t«r (2}
2^1
4.M
U.
*.«
u.oo
2.SO
11.00
t.It
M
5.M
2.fO
1.M
5.48
MMff
3,40
1.M
•.ft
2.90
I.M
IM
1.1
1.3
•.St
•.M
2.7t
2.ft
D
(D
M
-I
0)
(D
O
IV)
U
U
•d
i
(4
I
(4
5!
L,
HI
f
V
MtOT.
cM, t
•tf
M
O
C-20
-------
TXBLE 5A (cont1
g
ira0M» MI Mtttsu 0? mim
MM
21F-
I. OC.
2701.5
217-04
VM/00
•no
2108.5
507-OT
S/25/00
4/07/01
MIH
2710
217-or
ino
SI7-M
MS2
217-lt
Vlt/M
win
V5I/M
II
am
MT-«»
V25/W
w/m
W1I7
•L4SC*!
I.W
•.4?
1.01
0.17
m
0.15
0.72
0^*7
2.00
0.40
•K1)
1.01
0.00
•ID
0.10
2.«9
S.20'
0.S2
0.5f
2.20
0.22
1.2*
m
i^M*l
U2««*
m
O.J0
W.U
I.M
ri.7f
'i.0r
^0.»4
0.21
0.01
0.07
m
m
1.00
0J4
O.Z
0.27
S.00
OJf\
IJlj
_— ^S/
0.47
0J0
0.01
0.11
0JJ
0.10
14.00
1.0
I.OS
S.M
1.20
0.00
O.fl
•.If
m
0.42
MM
•v
o.os
4 ^4
4J0
0,05
2.12
0.77
o.n
0^0
O.W
M
-I
(B
0)
O
N
• *
U
y
i
M
II
>
I
14
14
ky •
N
C-21
-------
TABLE 5A (cont'd)
tin
IflCftftOl
•Ml
•MtMMJm
III
121
MIBUM IMU.
*ttf
5/K/M
. K.
2IW.S
I7M.S
271*
MT-M
V2SSM
907-0*
V2VM
•otu
MOM
t1«
Ml IS
1.M
*••*•
1.M
2.4*
1.W
1.M
§.«•
2.40
2.M
2.M
2.M
t.M
1.10
41.4*
1.W
«.20 IJ*
t.M 2.50
2.11
I.M
•.40
1.M
«.!«
1.90
I.M
1.
1.00
VS1/M
M
J.li
l.lt
l.lt
1.M
1.70
S.4»
S.I*
•0117
2.9*
1.M
2.M
1.10
O
M
CD
0)
O
N
U
U
I
(4
I
14
0
14
a
o
y
It 150 ppb of 2,2-dl^thylhexanc
M
M
C-22
-------
TABLE 5A (cont'
MIMMi All MMifSIt
•IN
Mil, MMIMHM, K.
3241
tir-m
BM
SO/-11
VZVW
VIM «/«/«•
W1M «MU
SMI
ttf-11
l/34/tt
I/SUM
sm
§«r-tt
V29/M
217-U
MfK
W1M
•.M
t.
•.10
$.«*
•.IT
».n
2.U
l.ft
f.M
•.IS
t.u
•.a
1.41
•.41
1.H
•.OB
•J4.
•.or
S.M
it
2.4S
I.4S
•.I?
•.a
•-IL.
•.4*
•.•7
•.2t
».4S
q
CD
IV)
1
CD
CO
u
u
1
I
H
I
(4
»
V
14
a
o
y
f.
lmltn
tlutl«t t»
rwvtta fncanclu»l««. •
tni reported.
it taUfrattm mi
IV)
0)
C-23
-------
TMLR 5A (cont'd)
O
9
M
-J
-w ro-w
w-ti w-tt str-u
S/ZVM SAW VJVW
9V-U
1.
4.
2.«l
tJt 1.4t
4.5*
ttl
4J§
O
N
U
U
i
M
I
N
X
H
a
ai
a»
N
C-24
-------
TAftLK SA (cont'd
1W-W
SM-«I
p
9
N
-J
O
a
o
ID
U
u
ft,«f
4J1
».tt
1.W
ft.8
ftJB
ros
•LSI
*.»
ft.**
lull
•.If
•.«•
ft.n
•.it
•.a
*.«
•.tt
•.•r
ft.lt
I
M
I
H
y
M
N
a
3
S!
N
(P
C-25
-------
IMMf
Ml MMfltt If
TABLK 5 (cont'd)
•in
WIBSJM Mil, MMMMriB. K.
ITCD
•I
•ItaM/cyclMl
•llyttaNMMM, d-Cf
pMpOTMttc
•lit
en
m
217-11 MM4
%iuim
i/si/fli
•tin
d)
9M-«0
VtV«
/tt
1I9
MfSO
41.4
n.u ti.M IM.M
O.JO tt.l
*.«0
tjt
.0
0)
M
-J
a>
a>
0
w
• •
u
u
I
M
I
H
M
a
o
y
s.st
Ill
at
M. I
w
0)
C-26
-------
TABLE 5A (con«
•m
MU. MMilKMI,
O
0)
M
-J
vat turn
ar-urn 217-ncn Mr-nun MT-UMII »u-nc2>
VM/M S/M/M V2VM S/25/M «/U/flB
M127
1.«
-1.2-41*1
M
1.2-4KM
1.1.1-
i 4tkytt*tt
4-*HvU|cU«
t.42
•.M
•Jtf 1.42
•.12
•J» •.(»
•.02 •
•.•1
1.12
O.M
0,
•
•.0
0»
(B
O
M
••
U
U
i
14
I
W
M
a
o
y
C1H
t* • !•.• Illw
w • U.7 liter
C-27
N
-J
-------
TABLE 5A (cont'd)
Itttff ClflKMH
tnmm AM iMLitit 0? K/M
•m
. 0e.
llf MM.1
10W0UMK IIW
tir*ucii zir-ncn
IOT
sti-nm
§.it
•.It
0.4*
0.10
0.10
t.W
0.10
0.00
O,
0)
N
-J
0>
O
10
u
u
I
H
I
14
V
W
N
o
9
t.M
OJO
0.07
0.40
0.10
0.W
en
en
,4-
C-28
-------
APPENDIX D
July 15, 1988, Internal EPA Report
AN INDOOR AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENT STUDY AT THE
EPA HEADQUARTERS FACILITY IN WASHINGTON, DC
D-l
-------
AN INDOOR AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENT STUDY
AT THE EPA HEADQUARTERS FACILITY IN WASHINGTON, DC
by
V.R. Highsnlth, C.E. Rodes, A.J. Hoffman, and J.D. Pleil
Environaental Monitoring System* Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
July 15. 1988
D-2
-------
July 15, 1988
AN INDOOR AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENT STUDY
AT THE EPA HEADQUARTERS FACILITY IN WASHINGTON, DC
V.R. Highsmlth, C.E. Rodes, A.J. Hoffman, and J.D. Pleil
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711
INTRODUCTION
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) headquarters is
located in the Vaterside Mall office complex at 401 M Street SW, Washington,
DC. Approximately 5000 personnel work in this facility performing
administrative, technical, and office related tasks. The facility is
structurally complex with an integral parking garage and two high rise
sections (the East and West towers) interconnected by an office section
located over a shopping nail. The heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
(HVAC) system is equally complex, incorporating more than 20 independent air
handling systems.
In October 1987, the EPA Office of Administration at headquarters
Initiated an office renovation program for the Vaterside Mall complex which
included the installation of new carpeting, divider partitions, and office
furnishings. In most areas, a nylon pile carpet and fibrous padding were
scheduled for installation without the use of adhesives. In high traffic
areas, a similar nylon pile carpet Manufactured with a latex backing was to be
installed with adhesives. Other facility improvements, e.g. painting,
cleaning, waxing, etc, were also ongoing. An increase was noted in
complaints, illnesses, and absences from employees working in and near the
refurbished offices. These complaints were tentatively linked by the
employees and management with the implementation.of the refurbishment program.
The complaints of personal discomfort included aye and nasal area irritations,
nausea, headaches, and skin rashes. Several employees axperiencing
significant irritations were advised by health personnel not to return to the
newly renovated office areas until the problem could be rectified.
An EPA Task Force was formed during February, 1988 to review the employee
eomplaints and determine if a direct relationship existed between these
discomfort symptoms and the renovation program and provide recommendations for
any necessary corrective actions. The personnel in the newly refurbished
offices were temporarily relocated, pending problem identification. The EPA
Environmental Response Team (ERT) from Edison, N.J. was asked to collect a
limited number of samples during March, 1988 to determine the concentrations
D-3
-------
of possible irritants, primarily Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC's), present
in the office environment. The ERT's initial tests identified no compounds at
levels of concern based on previous indoor or anbient air quality atudies. A
concurrent literature search by the Office of Toxic Substance* revealed the
recent identification by Van Ert, et al. (1987) of 4-phenyl-cyclohexene
(referred to as 4-PC) as a possible causative agent in buildings with indoor
air quality problems. This compound is an extremely odorous organic by-
product of the reaction of 1,3-butadiene and styrene inherent in the latex
Manufacturing process used to bond the fibers to the carpet backing. The
presence of this compound, according to the Van Ert, at al. report (also
discussed by Vogelmann, at al. (1988) at the 1988 American Industrial
Hygienist Association meeting in May and Van Ert at a program review for the
EPA Indoor Air program held at RTP on June 7, 1988) in concentrations
exceeding approximately 1 ppb produces personal discomfort symptoms in
sensitive individuals similar to those reported by the EPA employees. He also
noted that the odor threshold for 4-PC appears to be below 0.5 ppb.
In order to further investigate the possible link between the indoor air
quality and carpeting, samples were taken directly from a new roll and from
carpeting installed 2 months previously. They were forwarded to the
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory (EMSL) at RTP on May 11, 1988 for
evaluation. Cas chromatography/mass apectrometry (GC/MS) analyses of both the
headspace gases being emitted from the carpet samples and methylene chloride
extracts of the carpet revealed that 4-PC was present in both samples in
concentrations well above the background level. The chromatograms from the
headspace analysis of the new and 2 month old samples are shown in Figure 1.
The non-availability at that time of high purity 4-PC from which to develop
analytical standards prevented accurate quantification; however, the
concentration of 4-PC was estimated to be in the range of 90 ppb for the new
sample and approximately 50 ppb for the older sample. The large peak to the
right of the 4-PC peak was identified as 2.6-bis(l,l-dimethylethyl)4-
•ethylphenol, also know as butylated hydroxy toluene or BHT, an anti-oxidant
preservative commonly found in foods and medicines. In this case it appears
to be a constituent of the latex used in the carpeting. The new carpet sample
was also examined under simulated chamber conditions (at room temperature
only) to estimate the decay rate at 1 air change per hour for selected organic
constituents. The results of this test (see Figure 2) suggest that 4-PC does
not diminish at either the same rate or in the same manner as styrene, which
also outgasses from carpeting. An extrapolation of these data suggests that
4-PC has an estimated half life under the conditions of the test of about 8
days. The latter result is consistent with the findings of Van Ert, et al.
(1987), who also noted that a period of approximately 2 months was required to
decrease to the 1 ppb level in a room situation.
The EPA Task Force, in concert with employee and employee union
representatives, recommended that a second, more extensive problem
identification program be conducted to better characterize the existing
Waterside Mall indoor air environment and propose mitigation strategies. It
was recognized that this effort would only be partially representative of the
conditions present during the initial round of employee complaints. The RTP
laboratories conducting studies under the Indoor Air Program were contacted
and requested to assist the Task Force by: 1) collecting and analyzing
samples at the EPA facility to determine the presence and concentration of
D-4
-------
possible Irritants and 2) conducting clumber studies to better characterize
aelected emission aourcac and to assist in developing appropriate mitigation
atrategies. The Environaental Monitoring Systems Laboratory took the lead at
RTF in the Monitoring activities, while the Air and Energy Engineering
Laboratory (AEERL) planned the chamber atudiec. The ERT was alao requested to
conduct a parallel investigation on a alightly different acalc. The present
raport ia primarily concerned vith the EMSL monitoring activities and
analytical raaulta.
PRELIMINARY TESTS
A team of RTF acientists from EMSL and AEERL visited the EPA
headquarters complex on May 13, 1988 to survey the Waterside Mall facility,
informally interview affected employees, evaluate newly renovated as well as
non-renovated areas by collecting some air aamples, inspect the air handling
systems, and meet with the EPA Headquarters Indoor Air and Task Force
representatives. Areas carpeted within the past six months were noted to have
a sharp distinguishing odor attributed to the new carpet. Some refurbished
areas also included new partitions and office furniture. A damaged new
partition was examined and found to contain a center of compressed hardboard
covered by a fibrous material with cloth axterior. In aeveral areas visited,
attempts to measure the flowrates from the HVAC vents into the office work
areas yielded minimal (and often unmeasurable) flow into the rooms.
Instantaneous grab aamples were collected from the air in two newly
refurbished rooms into evacuated canisters. These samples, atored at ambient
conditions, were analyzed on May 17. 1988 by CC/MS. The presence of the
suspected A -PC compound was confirmed in these aamples. Accurate
quantification was atill not possible because atandard materials had not yet
been developed, but the levels were estimated to be aubstantially less than
the earlier carpet head apace analysis.
P STUDY
A more extensive monitoring study was planned and conducted in the
headquarters facility from May 23 thru the 25, 1988 by EMSL/RTP personnel.
Samples for particulate, semi -volatile organic compound (SVOC), VOC, and
aldehyde analyses were collected during two daytime (7AM to 7PM) and one
nighttime (7PM to 7AM) 12 hour aampling periods. Samples were collected
simultaneously in two newly refurbished offices representing different parts
of the Vateraide complex, two nearby but unrefurblahed offices, and one
outdoor (roof) location. Carbon dioxide (CO-), temperature, and relative
humidity were monitored and air exchange rates (AER's) estimated. Bulk
particle and aemi -volatile organic samplea were collected over the entire
period to assist in target compound -identification. The ERT monitoring study
vas conducted in a broader range of office locations for VOC's, aldehydes and
CO. concurrently vith the EMSL measurements using different monitoring
techniques .
D-5
-------
Limitations
Several factor* had an inpact on the design and implementation of this
atudy. The tine between the EPA Task Force'a raquest for assistance and
EKSL/RTP'a response was axtrenely short and provided minimal preparation time.
The tine constraints limited to aoae degree the lumber and type of samples
that could be collected. The chemical and physical characteristics of 4-PC
were relatively unknown in the Indoor air community prior to this study. It
had not been routinely included in prior EMSL indoor monitoring programs and
the methodologies needed for analytical analysis had not been previously
attempted. A sample of high purity 4-PC from which to prepare standards was
only located immediately prior to the initiation of the first sampling period.
The retention and removal characteristics of 4-PC from the evacuated canisters
and SVOC collection substrates had to be determined in parallel with the
sampling study.
Experimental
On May 23, 1988 the EMSL/RTP team arrived at the Waterside Mall facility
and set-up the particulate and gaseous monitors. Sampled areas included two
newly renovated office areas, room 3241 in the Mall area (designated Mall
3241) and East Tower 935 and two existing office areas, Mall 3304 and East
Tower 1015. Monitors were also setup on the Mall roof to represent an outdoor
location. The Mall 3241 refurbished office area included newly installed
carpet, panels, and furniture while the East Tower area included only newly
installed carpet. The Mall 3304 and East Tower 1015 offices aerved as paired
control areas. These offices had not been refurbished, had experienced no or
few incidences of employee illnesses that could be directly related to the
facility renovations, were in close proximity to the newly refurbished
offices, and were supplied by the same air handling system as the newly
refurbished areas. The outdoor monitors on the Mall roof were placed in close
proximity to the fresh air intake of the HVAC system affecting the Mall
offices sampled. Three consecutive 12 hour sampling periods (changeover at 7AM
and 7PM) were conducted from 7AM on Tuesday, May 24 through 7PM on
Wednesday, May 25.
PM.Q dlchotomous samplers (0.0167 • /Bin) vere operated at each location
to collect FINE (less than 2.5 urn, aerodynamic diameter) and COARSE (2.5 to
10.0 urn) particles on pre-weighed Teflon 37mm diameter filters. Particle
samples collected on Teflon media vere conditioned at 20 deg C and 40% RH for
24 hours prior to pre- and post- gravimetric analyses. PUF/XAD-2 cartridges
vere installed immediately below the dichotomous FINE particle filter for
collection of SVOC'a.
VOC's vere collected by integrating collection over the entire sampling
period using flow controlled passive samplers as described in the EPA Indoor
Air Methods compendium (19B8). The identification of 4-PC as a target
compound required a significant amount of methods evaluation to qualify and
optimize the collection and analysis schemes. Additional Instantaneous VOC
samples vere collected at aelected times by opening an evacuated canister in
Che office environment as a grab sample.
D-6
-------
All evacuated VOC canisters (12-hour and frab) were analyzed by CC/MS for
eelected target compounds (4-PC, etyrene, toluene, and o-xylene). Other
organic species routinely detected by the EKSL/EPA lab were not quantified for
most of the •anplec, as the CC/MS operating system was calibrated and eetup
apecifically to provide maximum eencitivity for 4-PC. The target compounds
listed eluted in the 4-PC maximized operating range. Detailed CC/MS VOC
analyses were conducted on the two May 13 grab aaaples and the May 25 7AM
Mall 3241 and East Tower 935 12-hour aanples.
Estimates of the Air Exchange Rate (AER) vere Bade in each office area
using the SF, (an inert tracer) active decay technique and sequential syringe
samplers. Prior to the initiation of each 7AM sample period, the newly
refurbished office areas were closed off from the other office areas and a
known volume of ST. released. The amount was based on the calculated office
air volume -- without considering exchange rates between offices, HVAC system
inputs/mixtures, or building exchanges with outdoor air. The SF, was allowed
to mix in the area for 1 hour before the doors were opened and sampling
initiated. Syringe samplers were operated in both newly refurbished and
control office areas to estimate mixing and the transfer of pollutants within
the building. The SF, syringes were analyzed by gas chromatography.
Instantaneous CO, concentrations were monitored at each sampling location
at approximately hourly intervals using a portable CO. monitor borrowed from
NIOSH. The monitor was calibrated by NIOSH immediately prior to shipment, but
was not recalibrated at Waterside, since a standard CO, mixture was not
available. The CO. data are expected to provide a relative pattern of
concentrations witft the accuracy estimated to be +/- 50 ppm. Indoor humidity
and temperature were monitored at each location using recording
hygrothermographs that had been calibrated prior to the initiation of
sampling.
Integrated bulk particle and associated vapor phase SVOC samples were
collected from 5PM on Monday through 7AM on Thursday using medium flow (0.113
m /min) samplers. The particle samples were collected on 102mm quartz fiber
filters while the SVOC samples were collected on XAD-2 adsorbent filled
canisters installed immediately below the particle filter. One medium flow
sampler was operated in Mall 3241 while a second sampler was operated in the
carpet storage area located in the Mall basement. Upon completion of
sampling, these samples were frozen (-4 deg C) until extracted and analyzed
for SVOC target compound identification.
The bulk medium flow particle and XAD-2 cartridges were sepsrately
extracted with methylene chloride. The axtrects were concentrated and each
analyzed for the target compounds by CC/MS. The PUF/XAD-2 samples were
independently extracted with an ethyl ether/hexane mixture. Each extract was
concentrated and analyzed for 4-PC, para-dichlorobenzene, atyrene, o-xylene,
and toluene.
Aldehydes vere collected on 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazlne (DNPH) coated
ailica gel cartridges. The DNPH tubes were analyzed by liquid ehromatography
for aelected aldehydes using the method of Tejada (1986).
D-7
-------
Quality Assurance
Laboratory prepared saapling filters and substrates were stored in an
area away fron suspected or confounding sources prior to sampling.- Teflon
filter media, VOC canisters, and SF. syringes vere stored at ambient
conditions. FUF/XAD-2 cartridges vere individually stored in sealed Teflon
bags. DKPH tubes were stored in individual vials in a refrigerator.
Following completion of the aample period, Teflon and VOC aanples were stored
at aabient conditions until returned to the laboratory for analysis. PUF/XAD-
2 aanples were frozen (-15 deg C) until shipped to the laboratory for
extraction/analysis. Field blank Teflon, VOC, PUF/XAD-2, and aldehyde samples
were also collected during the monitoring progran. With the exception of the
VOC sampler, a collocated set of Bonitors was set up and operated in the
refurbished Mall 3241 office to obtain estimates of sampling precision. Based
on the collocated measurement* the coefficients of variation for the particle
concentrations were +/- 17, 14 and 18 % for the FINE, COARSE and PM.Q
fractions, respectively. The precision for the 4-PC measurements in the 1 ppb
range using evacuated canisters was estimated to be +/- 13 %. The precision
for analysis (only) was estimated to be +/- 3 %. The precision of the 4-PC
Measurements using the SVOC approach was estimated to be approximately +/-
20%, or better.
RESULTS
Several observations were Bade during the sampling that Bay have had an
impact on the results being reported. A very noticeable increase in office
air Bovement was observed by the RTP team members on Monday, May 23rd.
Comments to the sane affect were Bade by headquarters employees working near
the sampling locations, noting that the air quality aeemed much improved.
Significant increases in supply vent outputs were recorded in most locations
by late Tuesday, May 24. An inspection of the Bechanical fan rooms servicing
the areas being monitored revealed that these areas had apparently just been
cleaned and that new filters had recently been placed into the system.
Although confirmation has not yet been obtained, it is surmised that
substantial changes were Bade to the HVAC systems in the affected areas prior
to and shortly after campling was initiated.
The indoor temperature remained relatively constant in all areas during
the study, ranging from 23 to 27 deg C. A significant decrease in overall
indoor relative humidity (RH) was observed at all locations during the second
day as shown in Figures 3 and 4. Generally the humidity levels were in the
comfort cone. The general downward trend possibly indicates that changes were
being Bade in the HVAC system operation or the outdoor RH (not recorded) was
affecting the system.
The AER Beasured in Mall 3241 during the daytiae sampling period on
Nay 24 was very low and estimated to be 0.2 air changes/hour (ACH). SFfc was
observed in Mall 3304 during this test, indicating some transfer of air from
Mall 3241 by the HVAC system. The AER for Esst Tower 935 for the same time
period was Buch higher, 1.5 ACH. Concurrently SF. was observed in East Tower
1015. Attempts to Beasure the AER on May 25 were nearly negated by the
changes that were being Bade to the air handling systems. Although the
D-8
-------
procedure used en the previous day vac duplicated, only the first two syringes
(out of 12) In both Mall 3241 and East Tower 935 contained quantities of ST
above the detection level. None of the Mall 3304 or East Tower 1015 syringes
contained Measurable ST, levels. The AER for both areas are estimated to have
been improved by at least a factor of 10 fron Tuesday to Wednesday to a level
well above 2.0 ACH. This supports the physical observations recorded during
the sampling program.
Figures 5 and 6 summarize the CO, levels observed during the study for
the Mall and East Tower offices, respectively. The CO, generally increased
from slightly above the normal outdoor background level to a maximum of 700-
800 ppm around noon or early in the afternoon. Even the peak levels are
relatively low and suggest that occupant density was the only source of CO,
(no tobacco smoking was observed during sampling).
The results of analyses on the particulate samples collected are
•ummarired in Table 1. Indoor particle concentrations are quite low for both
size fractions at all locations and the size distributions are nearly
identical for the office areas monitored. Nighttime indoor particulate
concentrations were generally lower than daytime values. Increased COARSE
particle concentrations, which are normally associated with human and
mechanical activity, were observed during the daytime sampling periods. The
Indoor and outdoor FINE particle concentrations are essentially identical,
within the range of experimental error.
Analysis of the 12-hour VOC samples as shown in Table 2 yielded low (as
compared to those reported by Vogelmann, at al. for a newly carpeted home) but
detectable 4-PC values in both Mall 3241 and East Tower 935. The newly
renovated Mall office averaged 1.5 ppb of 4-PC, which is approximately 10
times the values observed in Mall 3304. The 4-PC concentrations in East Tower
935 averaged 0.9 ppb which was significantly higher than the East Tower 1015
concentrations. The poorer AER in the Mall locations during sampling accounts
at least in part for the difference in levels. No 4-PC was observed in the
outdoor samples.
Unlike the 4-PC, the levels of toluene, o-xylene, and styrene values in
the Mall offices were slightly higher than the concentrations in the East
Tower. No significant differences were observed between newly carpeted and
existing areas for these three VOC's. This suggests that there are sources
present for these compounds other than the carpeting. The grab VOC sample
concentrations were comparable to the corresponding 12-hour values. No
appreciable differences vere observed in VOC concentrations between the
preliminary grab camples collected on May 13 and those collected on May 24
in Mall 3241 and East Tower 935.
The results of more detailed VOC analyses carried out on 4 selected
samples reveal typical concentrations of various organic compounds found in
the indoor and outdoor environment. Data from the canisters collected on
May 13 and 25 are given in Table 3. The only notable results (but probably
of no real concern) are those showing elevated levels of Freon 11 on both days
and slightly elevated levels of dichloromethane and 1,1,1-trichloroethane on
May 25 in East Tower 935. The source of the Freon 11 has not been determined.
D-9
-------
Unlike many of the ether Freons, it is not used as • refrigerant, but often in
the manufacture of foam rubber. The other two organics are solvents,
reflecting aone »aintenance or personal activities that occurred between the
aaapling dates. In general the VOC data in the extended speciationc did not
indicate significant changes in concentrations over the 11 day period between
the preliminary grab aampling on May 13 and the Bore extensive tests on the 24
and 25.
Analysis of the bulk medium flow particle sample extracts indicated that
4-PC was not detected in the particle phase. 4-PC was, however, the most
significant compound identified in the Mall 3241 and storage area bulk vapor
phase SVOC samples. The 4-PC concentration in the basement sample was
relatively large and masked all other potentially present compounds. This
sample was collected immediately adjacent to the ends of a large number of new
carpet roles, and could be considered similar to a headspace collection. All
of the target organic compounds •• 4-PC, toluene, atyrene and o.m.p-xylenes -•
were identified in the Mall 3241 bulk SVOC sample. In addition p-
dichlorobenzene (commonly found in air fresheners and pesticides), 2-
butoxyethanol (found in cleaning aolvents), and methyl benzoate (a perfume
constituent) were also identified along with a aeries of alkanes and branched
alkanes (CB to C14). For Mall 3241 and East Tower 935 the alkane levels
increased significantly in the daytime, as a result of sources associated with
increased office worker activities.
Analysis of the dichotomous sampler PUF/XAD-2 vapor phases SVOC extracts
yielded 4-PC concentrations as shown in Table 4, comparing very favorably with
those determined through the VOC collection and analysis scheme. This
suggests that even though more analytical development work is needed, both
procedures can be used to quantify this compound. Two additional peaks
aluting aoon after 4-PC were not positively identified. Based on peak area,
the concentration of these two unknowns approximates the 4-PC concentration.
Mass and infrared spectra indicate the two hydrocarbons are similar with both
containing hydroxyl as well as carbonyl functional groups. The PUF/XAD-2
background masked out the quantification of the other target SVOC compounds.
Analysis of the DNPH cartridges showed no significant differences in the
carbonyl concentrations (see Table 5) in any of the office areas with the
axception of formaldehyde. The formaldehyde levels in Mall 3241 were slightly
higher than Mall 3304 concentrations, while the levels in East Tower 1015 were
somewhat higher than East Tower 935. The single (slightly) alevated East
Tower nighttime value of 51.1 ppb on May 24 is probably an outlier, but
should be cross-checked with the ERT results. None of the formaldehyde levels
could be considered as unusually high and the levels do not appear to
correlate with the renovation activities. Nighttime formaldehyde measurements
were higher (by 4-5 ppb) than the daytime concentrations, which is consistent
with turning the HVAC system off at night.
D-10
-------
pISCUSSTON/CONCLUSIONS
The primary objective of this study vac to better characterize the
Vateraide Mall environmental situation in an expedient Banner. In order to
•ccooDodate tine constraints eone compromises were made in the study design,
but none that affected our ability to estimate the quality of the data. The
data set is recognized to be very Halted and, »o§t importantly, not
necessarily representative of the prior conditions, but reasonable inferences
can be made as to the conditions that may have existed when the health
complaints were the most prevalent. The initial low AER, measured at the
outset of the experiment, may have been typical of many of the offices in the
Waterside facility prior to readjustments of the HVAC systems. Based on the
subjective comments of the office occupants and sampling team members, the
significant air movement at the end of the experiment was atypical and
refreshing. The low AER's during work hours, combined with turning the HVAC
systems completely off over the weekend and back on Just prior to the Monday
workday, could have resulted in uncomfortable environmental conditions for
many employees, even without the presence of irritating pollutants. Uneven air
distribution and resulting stagnant areas would make localized situations even
worse. The AER measurements attempted after the first study day indicate that
if the number and strength of indoor pollutant sources can be limited,
improvements can be made to make the Waterside HVAC systems acceptable (up to
ASHRAE standards) in the areas studied for at least significant portions of
year. The proposed HVAC system evaluation should be implemented to identify
and rectify any ventilation problems.
The pollutant measurements made during the study indicate that based on
the Waterside locations sampled, there are currently only a limited number of
pollutant sources and concentrations present that have been identified in
previous studies as causing problems. Even assuming that the current air
exchange rates have been adjusted artificially high as a safety measure, the
carbon dioxide levels, used as a surrogate for other pollutants, should pose
no comfort problems at proper AER levels with the current occupant density.
The indoor particulate levels were very low, reflecting primarily outdoor FINE
particle loadings and indicating no real inside sources of concern. No
biological measurements were made, but should be considered on a limited
scale if satisfactory explanations for the employee health complaints cannot
be found. However, it is not anticipated that biological contamination would
be associated with the renovation activities.
The organic compounds outgassing from the carpeting, including 4-PC and
styrene, were positively identified in the vapor phase (only) and quantified
by two independent techniques. The relatively low concentration levels at the
time of the measurements on May 24 and 25 indicate that significant
outgassing has already occurred. Based on consideration of a) our headspace
tasting of samples of the new carpet, b) the May 24 levels in Mall 3241,
c) the aingle room levels reported by Van Ert, at al. (1987) and Vogelmann,
•t al. (1988) • admittedly for different brands of carpet, and d) their
outgassing decay rate studies in residential axperiments, the 4-PC levels
eould easily have been in the 5 to 15 ppb range prior to the study in the
newly renovated Waterside offices. The chamber experiments planned to be
conducted by AEERL/RTP ahould help to estimate the maximum levels under
various conditions, the rate of outgassing decay, and the best strategies to
D-ll
-------
reduce the 4-PC concentration level*. Observations by our lab personnel while
•ixing the 4-PC standards suggest that the odor threshold may be below the
0.5 ppb level. This may be important in dealing with some of the responses to
the presence of the 4-PC odor. Based on the discussions lead by Mark Van Ert
at the EPA Indoor Air program review, 1 ppb was Mentioned as a target
reduction level to eliminate health responses for * majority of individuals.
With the appropriate HVAC adjustments at the Waterside facilities and
Appropriately outgassing the carpeting prior to installation, the office level
of 4-PC can be reduced below the 1 ppb level.
The other organic compounds identified as VOC'a or SVOC's after
preliminary review do not appear to be at concentration levels reported to be
of concern in previous studies. A »ore detailed review of the VOC data
comparing them to previous Total Exposure Assessment Monitoring (TEAM) study
results should be conducted. The identification in the SVOC samples of the
anti-oxidant BHT was surprising, but probably of little consequence, given its
long history as an additive in foods and drugs. The formaldehyde levels were
also below expected levels of concern, and did not appear to correlate with
the renovation activities.
Even though this has been a very limited study, some positive
contributions were made in characterizing the indoor environment in portions
of the Waterside facilities and in the area of methods development for 4-PC.
If continued health work ahows that this compound is a significant contributor
to indoor air quality problems, the monitoring methods developed will be very
useful. Mark Van Ert noted that their health response tests for 4-PC were
very preliminary and need to be followed by more definitive tests to better
establish threshold levels for sensitive populations. The experiences gained
in the process of collecting the study data will contribute to developing
better indoor air quality investigation protocols.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A number of EPA personnel and supporting organizations assisted in this
measurement study to provide the results as expediently as possible. The
field collection of samples and the weighing of particulate filters were done
by Mack Wilkins (EMSL/RTP) and Charlie Weant of Northrop Services. Karen
Oliver, Bob Whiton and Jeff Childers of Northrop Services conducted many of
the VOC and SVOC analyses on-site at RTP in coordination with the authors and
Nancy Wilson (EMSL/RTP). Samples of the pure 4-PC material were provided by
Bob Lewis (EMSL/RTP) and Mark Van Ert (Univ. of Arizona). Analyses of the
aldehyde samples were provided by Roy Zweidinger and Sylvestre Tejada of
ASRL/RTP. Extended VOC speciations were conducted by Battelle Columbus
personnel. The FUF/XAD extractions were done by PEL Analyses of the SF,
samples were done by Accurex. A special thanks to Joe Peach of NIOSH for the
loan of a CO, monitor.
D-12
-------
Van Ert, M.D., Clayton, J.V.. Crabb. C.L. and Valah, D.V., 'Identification and
Characterization of 4-Phenylcyclohexene • an Emission Product from .New
Carpeting", unpublished research report, University of Arizona, College of
Pharmacy, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Tucson, AZ, January 8,
1987
Vogelaann, I., Clayton, J.V., Cmtchfield, C.D., and Van Ert, M.D.,
•Evaluation of 4-Phenylcyclohexene Concentrations in Hone and Chamber
Environments", paper *83, presented at the American Industrial Hygiene
Conference, San Francisco, CA, May, 1988
Vihberry, W.T., Murphy, N.T., and Coronna, B., "Method for the Determination
of Volatile Organic Compounds in Indoor Air using Subatmospheric or
Pressurized Canister Sampling Followed by Gas Chromatography Analysis", Method
1A01, in Compendium of Methods for the Determination of Air Pollutants in
Indoor Air, prepared for C. Rodes, project officer, Environmental Monitoring
Systems Laboratory under contract 68-02-4467, May 1988
Tejada, S., "Evaluation of Silica Gel Cartridges Coated in situ with Acidified
2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine for Sampling Aldehydes and Ketones in Air", Intern.
J. Environ. Anal. Chen.. 2£:167, 1986
D-13
-------
Able I. Particle tat Concentrations bf Sin fraction
Ml 3241
M133N
tnt Twer 935
last Twer 935
Ml
llttlMIMI
fim
COARSI
TOTAL
FTJI
CMRSf
TOTAL
fTil
OOARSI
TOTAL
nut
OOARSI
TOTAL
nut
COARSI
TOTAL
7AN
••••••I
12.2
1S.9
28.1
11.2
19.9
39.2
9.S
19.1
21.7
9.3
S.I
14.3
15.4
9.9
24.4
toTPN
collocated
iiitttitiiiii
11.3
29.1
37.1
COWCWTMTIOHS, ilcrograaa/cfbic Kter
***S/2S/881***
7AH to Tffl
col located
7PH to 7AH
collocated
13.1
4.7
2.1
13.9
I.I
3.1
lt.9
11.7
2.1
13.7
9.1
2.6
11.6
12.5
6.2
11.7
11.7
21.4
32.1
I.I
3.1
11.1
f.2
12.S
11.7
S.2
18.1
23.2
19.1
I.I
11.9
II.1
21.9
31.1
HEARS
unit
12.9
1«.9
26.0
19.3
1.3
11.6
1.2
11.6
19.1
1.7
1.6
17.1
11.5
I.I
11.3
do not include collocated data
FIRE > «2.S ilcroKten
OMRSt * 2.S to 10 •icrowten
TOTAL t MO •icroaeten
D-14
-------
Title 2. folatlh frfHde Moom* fVOC's) * the SUNK canister (MM
, pert! per billion (ppb) by volne
7fW to 7m 7m to 7M 7M to 7m
•ttllMflttMttlllttlltlllttttttttMttttlMMtttttttttttllltttlttlttttttttllttlimtttltttt tltttltttttttttftl
7Mt to TrK
frab
Ml SMI
Toltene
e-Iflene
Stjnene
MI3JM
Tblvene
t-frlene
Slyiew
tet Twer
tat Twer 111$
Tbl
t-Xirleiie
Styrene
4-PC
Tbliene
t-xyiene
Slfrew
4-PC
Toliene
o-Iylene
Styrene
l.t
9.1
l.t
O.I
t.i
3.1
l.i
1.1
4
.4
7
9
I
.1
.3
I
I
.5
.3
.3
.1
.7
.7
.2
.0
.2
.5
.1
I.S
7.t
l.t
1.5
1.2
7.7
7.
I.S
I.I
3.
I.
t.
3.
I
1.4
S.2
3.3
9.0
9.0
3.4
l.t
0.0
HEWS
mifiitt
I.S
7.4
4.1
1.2
I.I
4.6
0.1
1.9
S.4
3.7
1.4
1.3
3.1
3.S
0.1
0.0
2.9
2.S
0.0
Oonvenion factors (Ifeltlpl? W* tralvn to get flg/MI:
nt • not
MEM 4o« not inclwte jrtb SMBla
factor
4-fC (.07
Tolvne 3.90
0-Xrlene 4.39
Styme 4.30
D-15
-------
Dble3. fctaded IOC fteclitiot of leltctad Culsters
Owaetmioc, |irtt per billion (*t) fcy vote
»y 13, 1966 »y 25, 1966
tapoun) . 1*1132*1 tut Toner 935 fall 3241 last Twer 935
1.09 3.12 O.B3 0.53
•ethyl Chloride • 0.24 0.48 O.Sl
IrtoolM • • • •
tinyl Chloride • • • •
•ethyl Iraide • • • •
Ithyl Chloride • • • •
fcton-11 3.81 16.91 1.79 47.22
1,1-tochloroethene • • • •
fiichloroKthine 0.66 0.56 0.63 5.12
3-Chloropropene • • 0.15 0.12
rrton-113 0.12 4.80 0.15 0.34
U-Mchlowethane • • • •
cis-l,2-Mchloroethene • ' • •
JrichloroMthane 0.13 0.16 • 0.14
1.2-Uchloroethane • • 0.15 •
1,1,1-Trichloraethane 1.01 2.06 1.22 6.36
•eazene 0.72 0.57 0.69 0.77
torbon Tetrichloride 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.11
1,2-ttchloroproptne • • ' •
Trichloroethene 0.18 ' 0.10 0.22
cis-l,3-Dichloropropene • * • *
Trms-i.S-Dichloropropene ' • • 0.10
1,1,2-TrichloroethMe • • • . •
Toluene 3.22 2.60 4.26 4.20
1,2-Dibroioethine • • • •
Tetrachloroethene 0.17 0.73 0.72 0.54
Chlorobenzene • ' ' '
Ithyl toluene 0.35 0.30 0.36 0.36
0-lylene 0.42 0.94 . 0.41 0.45
I.P-Xylenc 1.01 0.81 1.09 1.10
Ityrene 0.36 0.36 0.22 •
1.1,2.2-letrachloraethMe • • ' '
4-Ithyl Toluene 0.19 0.21 0.14 0.16
1.3,S-TriMthylbemene 0.19 0.18 0.13 0.15
a,2,4-TriKthylbenzene O.S9 O.S4 0.47 0.53
fcnryl Chloride • • 0.12 •
O-ttchlorotauene • • • '
i-Dichlorobeniene • • 1.72 0.15
P-Hchlorobenzene 0.45 • ' '
1,2,4-Trlchlorobeftzene 0.17 • ' '
•euchlorobuudiene • • ' '
• • IMS tkin 0.10 ppb
D-16
-------
fable 4. Cblfertloa mi fcnlftla for 4-K aa a SNl-friitile Orfirie Coapumd !SWC)
COHCWTMTIOHS, parti per billion (pool tf volvae
LOCATOR
•tintiiMimti
Mil SMI
Ml 3394
tat fow 935
tat lUau IflS
Ml KMT
?M
mini
l.t
9.1
9.5
9.3
9.9
factor
i to 7m 7m to 7m
collocated collocated
ltl«tttltlt!tttltft«Mllltltt«tttltlt«lMttlttlt»tt!ttl»t
1.1 1.1 1.1
9.2
9.7
9.9
9.9
fltolttol? vpb nlvea to tet «g/MI: factor
4-PC 6.97
•«««VZ5/W««««
7«Mto7Ffl
collocated
tffiftiiiitiitiiiii
M 9.9
9.9
1.2
9.2
9.9
HEMS Iftpai
f roa Table :
M • not analyzed
do not Inelade collocated data
wws
Mtltllltttttf
1.1 (LSI
9.1 (9.1)
9.9 (9.91
1.3 (9JJ
9.9 (9.91
D-17
-------
TftlcS.
otter Carbonyli by the fejada fethod
IflCftTTOR
CDPCWTMTWS, parti per billion (ppb) b?
7MI
collocated
TmtoTMf
collocated
7NttO 7FW
collocated
ffifflS
Ml 3241
MI 3*4
lilt Tooer t35
bat Twer 1015
other Ctrtonyli
Total Cartonyli
•omldeMe
other Caibonyli
Total Cartonyli
other Ctrbonyli
Total Carbonylf
other Carbonyli
vHtnow
Total Ctrtwtyli
Fonalowiyoe
other Garbonfli
Total Cirbonyls
17.6
LS
47.7
20.9
1J
37.9
21.7
21.9
1.1
44.7
23.9
20.5
1.2
44.7
3.4
4.9
0.5
I.I
27.1
11.3
0.9
46.3
31.6
24.9
0.9
57.4
25.9
23.5
1.0
50.4
25.
II.
0.
44
51.
35.
I.
M.
4.
4.
0.
9,
33.4
26.7
1.3
61.4
23.4
16.1
0.5
40.6
16.2
13.4
0.6
30.2
24.9
21.5
1.0
47.4
21.4
24.5
1.0
43.9
1.5
3.4
0.2
5.0
22.9
16.5
0.6
39.9
27.5
20.1
1.0
41.6
20.7
17.9
0.9
3?.5
23.1
20.0
0.9
44.7
31.1
26.9
1.3
59.0
3.9
4.4
0.4
7.7
HEMS tfo not Include collocated data
D-18
-------
APPENDIX E
August 23, 1988, Technical Memorandum
Evaluation of Organic Emissions from
Waterside Mall Carpets and Office Partitions
E-l
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AIR AND ENERGY ENGINEERING RESEARCH LABORATORY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
NORTH CAROLINA 27711
DATE: August 25, 1988
SUBJECT: Evaluation of Organic Emissions from Waterside Mall
Carpets and Q£ficepartitions
FROM: fcruce A. TicheTior
Indoor Air Branch (MD-54)
i
TO: David J. Weitzraan
Direc.or, Occupational Health and Safety Staff (PM-273)
The purpose of this memorandum is to present the results of
the study conducted by the Indoor Air Branch to evaluate the
emissions from samples of carpet and partitions received from
your office.
Please call me (FTS 629-2991) if you have any questions or
need additional details concerning our study-
INTRODUCTION
As part of the Agency's effort to deal with indoor air
quality complaints in the Waterside Mall EPA Headquarters
facility, the Indoor Air Branch, Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory (AEERL), was asked to evaluate the emission
characteristics of carpeting and office partitions being used in
:.:":" ice rer.cv^cicn activities and to investigate possible means
f— reducing or eliminating these emissions.
FACTORS AFFECTING EMISSIONS AMD INDOOR CONCENTRATION'S
A number of factors may affect the rate of emissions of
organic compounds from carpets and partitions, including:
Composition, of Materials - The materials used in the carpet
: i.-.d fi:-c it ions : cb'.iously aff-scr. the potential for eniissicr.J.
For er-.ample, the styrene-butadier.e rubber (S3R) latex adhesive
ust»d to bind the carpet pile tc the back is suggested as the
source of 4-phenylcycIchexene (4-PC) emissions. The carpet
padding may also act as an organic source. For the partition,
th«? fabric, insulation rn.-iteri.il, and th« p-'ssed wooc core could
ail t-? s-iuf^es of ory.xr.i- -niioS Lin:*.
E-2
-------
Methods of Installation - Solvent emissions from carpei
adhesives are known sources of indoor organics.
Material Age - The age of the carpet (and partition) and the
time since installation are important in determining emission
rates, since new materials generally have higher emission rates
than aged materials.
Environmental Variables - Temperature, humidity, air
exchange, and the concentration of organics in the air may affect
the rate at which organics are emitted from the carpets or
partitions.
Finally, several additional factors may affect the indoor
organic concentrations;
Building Air Exchange Rate - The building's air exchange
rate (amount of outside air infiltration) determines the dilution
and flushing in the building. For a given organic emission rate,
the higher the air exchange rate, the lower the indoor organic
concentration. The air exchange rate is expressed in air changes
per hour (ACH or hr'1.).
HVAC Svstem - The operation of the HVAC (Heating,
Ventilating, Air Conditioning) system in the building affects the
mixing and movement of air- Buildings are generally well-mixed whe:
the HVAC fan (air handling unit) is operating. This would cause
the organic concentrations to be fairly consistent from room to
room. Inadequate mixing can cause higher concentrations to occur
in some rooms.
Sink Effects - Materials in the building may adsorb
organics and gradually release them over time. Such an effect
would lower initial concentrations but extend the exposure time.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
A short term study was conducted to answer two questions:
1) What are the emission factors (e.g., ug/a»2-hr) and decay
rates for the carpet and partition? The organic compounds cf
interest are 4-phenylcyclohexene (4-PC) and aldehydes.
2} Would airing out the carpet prior to installation be
effective in reducing the organ!-: emissions?
ST'.'P" PLAN
A modest experimental prsira-Ti was developed to meet the
study objectives. The approach included: a) emission
characterisation using small environmental test chambers and
IAvJ modeling t.-, ev.-iluate imioor c -no or.* rat ion:: a.-:
•Jiu ii:-: ion r-it.ss ar.tj buillirrj v ::.*.: 1 iv i .r. p-vr vni-rr.-er
b)
E-3
-------
A study consisting of two phases was conducted:
Phase I - An initial screening evaluation to develop sampling and
analysis strategies.
Phase II - a) Tests to provide estimates of emission factors and
decay rates; b) Estimate, using simple IAQ models, the effect of
air exchange on indoor concentrations; c) Estimate the
effectiveness of airing out the carpet prior to installation.
RESULTS
Phase I - Initial Screening Evaluation
The small chamber test facility at AEERL uses gas
chromatography (GO with flame ionization detection (FID) to
measure the levels of organics emitted from indoor materials.
Sampling is conducted by adsorption on Tenax/charcoal followed by
thermal desorption and concentration in a purge and trap device.
This methodology has proven successful in evaluating a large
variety of indoor materials. In some cases, high boiling point
compounds (such as 4-PC) may be incompatible with Tenax/charcoal
sampling, and other adsorbents may be required.
The preliminary screening study involved: 1) evaluation of
our standard Tenax/charcoal sampling strategy; 2) investigation
of a "graphitized carbon" sorbent; 3) investigation of cryo-
trapping as an alternative to thermal purge and trap.
Under "normal" circumstances, the Tenax/charcoal
cartridges are desorbed at about 220°C. At this temperature, the
4-PC was net effectively removed from the sorbent. Thus,
desorption at 300°C was used. At this temperature, the Tenax
"breaks down" and a number of artifacts are produced. However, a
reasonable calibration curve for 4-PC was produced at this
eiivat-ii t im?*ru* jrs.. K-3t-
-------
Phase "jf - a) Estimates of Emission Factors and Decav Rates
Small chamber studies were conducted under a single set of
environmental conditions (i.e., T - 20°, RH = SOX, ACH = 1 ) on
the following materials:
- New carpet
- "Old" carpet (6 month old sample removed from a Waterside
Mall office) >
- Office partition /*, i
Testing was conducted in 53 liter chambers; each material was
tested in two chambers. The loading (m2/m3) for the carpet
samples was 0.4; for the partition material, the loading was 1.8.
The concentrations of 4-PC and aldehydes were determined as
discussed above. Based on the measured concentrations, the
emissions rates of these compounds for the three materials were
determined:
4-PC Emission Factors - Concentrations of 4-PC -rre measured
over time for a period of two weeks. Neither the "old" carpet
nor the partition material emitted measurable quantities of 4-PC.
The concentrations of 4-PC for the new carpet ranged from 75
ug/m3 to 15 ug/m3 over the sampling period. A simple first order
emission rate equation was used to analyze the chamber data:
EF = EFo(e-k«)
where: EF = emission factor (ug/m2-hr)i EFo = initial emission
factor (ug/m2-hr), k = first order rate constant (hr*1), and t =
time (hr). Using this equation, one can also determine the
emission rate half-life (i.e., the time required for the emission
factor to be reduced by 50%):
2) = (In2)/k
'-hers: til/2' - emission rats half-life ( hr ) and lr.2 = natural
log of 2.
Based on the chamber data, the following 4-PC emission
factors and decay rates (plus half-lives) were determined:
New Carpet - EFo = 150 ug/m2-hr, k * 0.0036 hr- : ,
ttl/2) = 132 hrs (8 days).
"Old" Carpet - Nc measurable 4-PC emissions.
Office Partition - No measurable 4-PC emissions.
Note thar. the 4-PC emission rate half-life of 3 days for the
new carpet is consistent with results obtained by headspace
analyses conducted by EMSL and with the data reported by VanErt.
E-5
-------
Aldehvde Emission Factors - Only one set of samples was
collected for analysis of aldehydes. A total of 22 compounds
were analyzed for; only three were detected: formaldehyde,
acetaldehyde, and acetone.
The emission factors were calculated based on an assumed
constant emission rate (i.e., no decay):
where: EF
(hr-M, L
(ug/m3).
EF = (N/L)C
emission factor (ug/m2-hr), N = air exchange rate
material loading (m2/m3), and C = concentration
The Table 1 shows the measured concentrations and calculated
emission factors for the three compounds for the three materials
tested:
Table 1. Aldehyde Emission Factors
Material
Compound
Chamber
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Emission Factor
(ug/m2 -hr)
New Carpet
"Cld" Carpet
Office
?2.r .1 cion
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
3.8
4.0
17.7
3.3
2.7
3.4
23.4
Not Detected
5.1
9.5
10.0
44.3
8.3
6.8
8.5
13.0
_
2.8
The formaldehyde emission factors shown in Table 1 are well below
the values normally expected for particleboard and plywood.
b) Estimates of the Impact of Carpets and Partitions or.
Indoor Concentrations - Based or. the calculated emission
factors, a simple one cosip-zrtmer.-., well-mixed IAQ model was be
•isei to estimate the contribut i-r. of the new carp-el tz the
concentration of 4-PC inside Wa-.-rs ide Mal-i based or. several
assumed air exchange rates. Fix-ire 1 shows the results of these
calculations. As would b-i e:•:?*-:ed , increasing the air exchar.s-e
rate will lower the estimated i.-.-ioor concentration of 4-PC. Note
th.xt the A5HRAE ventilation gui-irc-? f-sr IAQ corresponds ts an
air exchange rate of appr?::ini:ir.^ 1 •• 1 hr'1.
E-6
-------
Table 2 shows similar estimates for the aldehyde emissions
Note that these calculations were made assuming no decay in
emission rates over time. The loadings were assumed to be 0.3
m2/m3 for the carpets and 0.4 m2/m3 for the partitions.
Table 2. Estimated Indoor Concentrations of Aldehydes (ppb)
Air Exchange Rate (hr'1)
Material Compound
0.1 0.5 1.0 2.0
New Carpet
"Old" Carpet
.
Office
Partition
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Formaldehyde
Acetone
22
15
51
19
10
10
39
4.3
4.3
3.1
10
3.7
2.1
2.0
7.5
0.8
2.2
1.5
5.0
1.9
1.0
1.0
3.9
0.4
1.0
0.8
2.5
0.9
0.5
0.5
1.9
0.2
Again, the low concentrations are associated with the high air
exchange rates. Note that at the ASHRAE recommended air exchange
rate of 1 hr~x none of concentration exceed 5 ppb.
c) Estimates of the Effectiveness of Carpet Airing Out -
Based on the estimated emission factor and decay rate, the simple
IAS model was used to determine how the indoor concentration
wculd be affected by airing out the new carpet prior to
installation. Figure 2 shows the results of these calculations
for an air exchange rate of 1 hr-1 . These calculations indicate
that by airin* the carpet fcr cr.e month prior to installation the
maximum indoor concentration of 4-PC due to the carpet would be
less than 1 ppb.
DISCUSSION
In evaluating the results presented above the reader is
urged to consider the following factors:
1. The experimental d.it.i uzt-i to make the calculations are
based on a very limited study. The 4-PC data were collected
using ncn-standard Tenax desorption, and only one set of aldehyde
samples were collected.
E-7
-------
2. The calculations of indoor concentrations used a very
simple IAQ model which did not include consideration of the
complexities of the true Waterside Mall HVAC system nor the true
configuration of the many office layouts at the EPA Headquarters
facility. Sink effects were also not considered.
Given the limited experimental program and the many
simplifying assumptions, the reader is cautioned against
rigorously applying the quantitative results to a specific
situation at Waterside Mall. It is felt that the results
provide a reasonable qualitative "picture" and can be used to
compare the impacts of the various materials on the indoor air
quality at EPA Headquarters.
Enclosures
cc: Kevin Teichman (RD-672)
Mike Berry (MD-52)
Ross Highsmith (MD-56)
E-8
-------
XI
0.
CL
C
o
»
S
4-*
C
0)
o
C
o
o
o
a.
90
BOH
70
60
50
40
t
30
20
10H
O-5
0
8
12 16
Time (days)
28
Rat.c (ACID on Indoor
E-9
-------
JD
a
c
o
c
Q)
O
C
o
o
o
a.
No Airing Out
Aired 1 Week
^
' 2 Weeks
20
24
28
Time (days)
Figure 2. Effect of Carpet Airing Out Prior to I nsl.nl I «t. ion on
the Indoor Concentrations of -l-l'-
E-10
-------
APPENDIX F
October 25, 1988, Internal EPA Report
A FINAL SUMMARY REPORT ON THE INDOOR AIR MONITORING
PERFORMED AT EPA HEADQUARTERS, WASHINGTON, DC, ON
MAY 24, 25, AND JUNE 6, 1988
F-l
-------
A FINAL SUMMARY REPORT ON THE
INDOOR AIR MONITORING PERFORMED
AT EPA HEADQUARTERS. WASHINGTON, O.C.
ON MAY 24, 25 AND JUNE 6, 19B8
October 25, 1988
Prepared By:
Rajeshmal S1nghv1, Rodney Turpln, Sella Burchette
Environmental Response Branch
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Edison, New Jersey 08B37
F-2
-------
INTRODUCTION;
The Waterside Mall Is an H-shaped structure which houses more than
6000 employees of the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), plus a shopping mall at street level, and parking garage. In
October 1987, the renovation program was Initiated 1n the EPA offices.
After new carpeting and partitions were Installed 1n some of the offices,
several employees complained of nausea, headaches, skin rashes, eye
Irritation, and respiratory problems associated with the chemical odors.
The employees suspected that the odors were coming from the newly Installed
carpet/partitions or the adhesive used 1n laying down the carpet. The
USEPA Environmental Response Team (ERT), Analytical Support Section,
performed a variety of sampling and analytical work for Superfund and
environmental emergencies was called upon to evaluate the sources and
the nature of chemicals causing these complaints.
The Initial Indoor air monitoring study1 conducted 1n March 1988,
showed the presence of low ppb level of volatile organic compounds in the
EPA offices monitored. The detected volatile organic compounds normally
found 1n cleaning products, paints, adhesives and building products. A
literature search conducted by Office of Toxic Substance (OTS) revealed
• recently Identified compound 4-Phenylcyclohexene 1n the carpets by Dr.
M. D. Van Ert2 and his group at University of Arizona. According to Or.
M.O. Van Ert, 4»Pheny1cyc1ohexene has a noxious odor with a threshold odor
of O.Sppb. In May 1988 ERT Identified? the presence of 4»Pheny1cyclohexene
1n the carpets stored 1n the warehouse at EPA headquarters by three
different techniques.
In order to further Investigate the presence of chemical contaminates
1n the EPA office building, ERT conducted extensive sampling during May
1988 at the request of the Indoor Air Task Force. The ERT coordinated
sampling efforts with the Office of Administration and Resources Management
(OARM), Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), Environmental
Health Safety Division (EHSD), Environmental Monitoring System Laboratory
at Research Triangle Park and facility staff.
SAMPLING;
The sampling locations were selected at the request of EPA Headquarters
employees and Information available from various sources. A total of 13
sampling locations (Including outside the building on the roof top, Table 1)
were selected to monitor low levels of volatile organic compounds, 4-Phenylcyclo-
hexene, and formaldehyde. Also carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, temperature
and relative humidity were Measured.
F-3
-------
Two sets of 12-16 hours time average air samples were collected 1n
conformant with EPA and NIOSH specified methods with some Modification
to meet the objective of this study. The sampling Instruments were fitted
with a variety of absorbent material In order to trap many different types
of contaminants, such as: volatile organic compounds, 4»Pheny1cyclohexene
and formaldehyde. The target and non-target compounds are listed In
Table 2.
Analytical;
Volatile Organic compounds and 4-Phenylcyclohexene:
Indoor air samples were collected on Tenax/Carbon molecular sieves
(CHS) for volatile organic compounds and 4-Phenylcydohexene. The Tenax/CHS
tubes were analyzed by thermal desorptlon on to a cryogenic trap, followed
by GC/HS analyses. A Tekmar model 5010 and Hewlett Packard 5996 6C/MS were
used. These samples were spiked with bromofluorobenzene and brochloromethane
as surrogate compounds prior to analysis. The Tekmar desorbing unit and "EC/MS
temperatures were maximize to detect volatile organic compounds and
4-Phenylcyclohexene a semi-volatile organic compound.
4-Phenylcyclohexene:
Indoor air samples were collected on SKC charcoal tube (600mg) for 4-
Phenylcyclohexene for quantltatlon and confirmation analyses. The organic
compounds absorbed on charcoal were desorbed using carbon sulflde. The
carbon d1sulflde extract were analyzed for 4-Phenylcyclohexene using
HP-5890 GC equipped with flame 1on1zat1on detector (FID) and 1nt1grator
for data recording. The carbon dlsulflde extracts were also analyzed by
GC/MS to confirm the presence of 4-Phenylcyclohexene.
Formaldehyde:
Indoor air samples were collected and analyzed using NIOSH 3500 method.
Other Parameters:
Relative humidity was measured using a sling psychometer. Levels of
carbon monoxide were measured using Monotox Carbon monoxide monitor.
This 1s passive monitor which employs an 1on solution chamber and membrane
with specificity for carbon monoxide. The carbon dioxide levels ware.
measured using a portable C02 monitor (Sastech model 4776).
F-4
-------
Summary of Results;
The analyses results of Tenax/CMS and charcoal are summarized 1n
Tables 3 and 4. The Tenax/CMS analyses results showed the presence of
volatile organic compounds -and 4«Phenylcyclohexene at low ppb levels 1n the
EPA offices monitored. The Tenax/CMS analyses results for 4«Phenycyc1ohexene
were estimated using toluene response, due to dlffcultles experienced 1n
preparing 4-Phenylcyclohexene standard 1n gas phase. However, The results
were quantified and confirmed using charcoal tube analyses.
The air analyses results show 150 ppb of 2,2-d1methylhexane 1n Room
2827 on May 25, 1988 and was not detected on May 24, 1988.
The formaldehyde analyses results are summarized 1n Table 5. On
May 24 and 25, 1988, 430 and 280 ppb of formaldehyde was detected 1n
the Room 2632. A subsequent re-sampling was conducted on June 3, 1988
found less than 10 ppb of formaldehyde. The higher results on May 24
and 25 could be due to new furniture and/or from the cardboard boxes
where sampling trains were placed.
The carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, temperature and relative humidity
were Measured and are listed 1n Table €.
Discussion:
The objective of this study was to determine the chemical contaminants
present 1n the Indoor air at EPA Headquarters offices. The results of this
study shows the presence of low ppb levels of several volatile organic compounds
and 4-Phenylcydohexene. The highest concentration of 4«Pheny1cyclohexene
was 6.6 ppb 1n Room S-226 on May 24, 1988, which was reduced to 4 ppb on
May 25, 1988.
In two cases (Room 2827 and 3304 on May 25, 1988*), the concentration
of alkanes exceeded the values reported 1n Table 7. Table 7 contains
values reported by several researcher for Indoor air concentration4 for
toluene, benzene, ethyl benzene, xylene, alkanes (pentane and lower),
alkane (hexane and high molecular weight hydrocarbon), nethylene chloride,
tHchloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, -and 1,1,1-trlchloroethane.
Relative humidity, carbon dioxide, and temperature found to be normal
for the office environment. The carbon dioxide levels In Indoor offices
(250 to 375 pp») was slightly above the outside carbon dioxide level
(lightly
(200 to
taken at the roof top (200 to 300 pom) during this study.
The results from the Day Care Center air sampling showed the absence
of 4-Phenyl cyclohexene but the presence of low ppb levels of organic
compounds.
F-5
-------
TABLE-1
Indoor Air Monitoring Phase II
Sampling Locations (Room Number)
S-226 (New Room)
S-274
S-216 (Xerox Room)
2611
2816
2627
2807.5
2710 (Control)
2632
ROOf
3241
3304 (Control)
935 East Tower)
1015 East Tower (Control)
2632 Resampled for Formaldehyde on 6/3/88
Day Care Center Outside front entrance
Day Care Center Class *3
Day Care Center Class f5
F-6
-------
TAJLE-2
INDOOR MR MONZTORZNG PAUSE ZZ
LZST OF TARGET CONFOUNDS
vinylchlorld* n-p«ntan«
1,l-dichloro«thant n-h«x*n«
trichlorofluorom«than« ehloreforv
••thyltn»chlorid« cyelohtxint
t-1,2-dichlorotth«n« n-hapt«n«
1,2-dichloro«th«n« 1,2-dichloropropAn«
l,l,l-trichloro«tlun« »«thyl eycioh«x«nt
carbon tttrachlorid* n-octftnc
b«n««n« broaofem
tricnioro«th«nt oai«n«
•thylb«nf«n« alpha-Mthyl ttyrtnt
o,«,p-xyl«n« Bfp-Mthylatyrtn«
•tyr«n« o,p-dichlorob«ni«n«
•-•thyltolu«n« b«n*ylchlorid«
4-PKZKYLCTCLQKOCDa
4-t«r-butyl tolu«n«
rOMALDDIYDE
F-7
-------
TABLE-2 (eooclnu.d)
INDOOR XXR MONITERING PKXSE ZZ
LIST OF NON TARGET COMPOUNDS
n-htxant
2,2,6-trintthyloctant
CIO alkant
alkant,>C11
phtnol + Cll alkant
alkant «• CIO alktnt/cycloalkant
octanal
C4 alkylbtnxtnt
n-undtcant
napthaltnt
C4 alkant
C9 alkan* • C3 alkylb«nsan«
2,2 dlatthyl d«can«
CIO t«rp«n«
N-nitro-N-ph«nyl-b«n««n«a«in«
C6 eyclealkana
C12 alkant
2-butoxytthanol
2,2,4,6,6-ptntaatthylhtptant
C12 alkant + liaontnt
2-butoxytthanol + ttyrtnt
Cll alkant <*• C3 alkylbtnctnt
alkant • tthyltolutnt
2-Btthylbutant
n-ptntant <•> trlchlorofluoremtthant
2-oxy-propanoic acid
C7 alkant
alkant • trimtthylbtnttnt
2-furancarboxaIdthydt
2-furanttnanol
btnsaldthydt
phtnol
chloroatthant
2-furan»tthanol
dtcahydronaptnaltnt
C12H2403 tfttr (1)
C12H2403 tfttr (2)
acttic acid • Cl alkant
acttic acid butyl ttttr
dichlorobtnztnt isoatr
4-»tthyl-2,ibis(l,1-diBtthyltthyl)phtnol
acttaldthydt
C8 alktnt/cycloalkant
htxanal
n-nonant
htptanal
2-butoxytthano1
alkant
2-«tthyIpropant
n-butant
btnsaldthydt
Cl alktnt/cycloalkant
Cl alkant
tiloxant
Ct alkant
n-octant
liaontnt
n-butant * C02
n-tridtcant
C13 alkant • clloxant
n-butyltthtr
2-butyltttrahydrofuran
Cll alkant
n-dtcant
Cll alkant
J-Mthy i-5-propy inonant
siloxant + C3 alkylbtnztne
alkant • C3 alkylbtnztnt
nonanal
C5 alkylbtnstnt
n-htptant
C3 alkylbtnstnt
2-(2-butoxytthoxy)-tthano1
acttont
2-propanol
2,2-diMthy Ihtxant
octanal
dtcanal
ptntadtcant
acttic acid
ClCHlOpah
C« alkant
F-8
-------
TMIC-1
initial Mt MNiTSit if ot/wi
•lit
UHPtf lOCATtOO
MIC
Mtf
.TIO
t MTdSIOt Mil. VUOIKNM. K.
l-m t-214 0-224
2tT-01 507-01 217-02
5/24/01 9/25/M 5/24/M
4/04/M 5/20/M
0-224
507-02
5/25/M
W100
0-274
5/24/M
00042
0-274
507-03
5/25/M
2011
217-04
5/24/M
9/20/M
00041
2111
507-04
5/25/M
507-05
5/25/M
00102
0010S
M O.TKO)
trlckl«r«fl
1.1.1-trlcfit
•••ylvw
•tvr
•tt*
.ZO
.19
.II
.54
.20
.12
.04
t.10
i.n
«.90
0.10
0.00
m
2.H
1.52
0.5S
1.42
•.59
•.04
•.10
O.U
t.09CO>
4.M
1.04
1.03
•M
•M
11.11
•.00
O.U
1.19
O.S5
•.21(0)
O.U
9.19
MS
9.70
•.12
0.55(1)
•.07»
4.00
•.57
0.41
1.91
•.55
0.94
•.11
2.45
•.99COI
1.12
0.5J(i>
•.29
•.04
9.01
•.7*
•.71
2.21
•.II
O.«1
1.04
•.00
O.WOJ
I.OKO)
•.15
•.51(0)
4.24
•.71
•.40
1.50
0.41
0.45
0.50
0.40
0.2Ui)
•.25
7.10
0.41
0.02
1.04
0.00
1.50
1.00
2.50
•.2110)
1.40
4.21
I.I5CO)
.12
70
,04
.15
54
M
.74
.2!
.42
.21
70
1.15
2.94(0)
0.05
•.20(0}
m
2.52
2.04
1.11
1.01
O.U
•.40
0.14
total
l'.02
10.10
27.54
20.25
15.49
12.74
•»•*•••••»»•!
10. M
14.17 10.40
••••••••••*«••••••••
(•). Only ••pled en 5/25/80.
M. Hot HiMlyccd for; scon t«mlnot«d before tct**xrd olwtlon.
•: fstlMtcd conccntrotlon belov Halt of quint I tat ton.
••: Hot • torffet covpowid; rosult* or* «*tiMt«a.
(•)t Moaunta Mtro not ilonlf Icontly obovo bockflroml lo«oU.
F-9
-------
IKO MM-TMttT OMPOUOM IMlt-3
•» MM.TSIO IT OC/NI
01 ft MM
SMOHC lOttTIOl
^mptyt ff oVM^EXoVJNKoi
Mff UMHfO
Mtf MMITK0
»n
1 NMtHIOt MU
0-2*6
217-01
5/24/00
9/27/00
,„„,„•,,„. ^T^XX
i. MMiocra
0-214
907-01
9/25/00
4/06/00
00099^
1. OC.
t-224
217-02
5/24/00
9/20/00
00041
S-224
507-02
9/25/00
4706/00
00100
0-274 0-274
217-01 907-01
5/24/00 5/25/00
5/20/00 6/06/00
•0042 00101
2011
217-04
5/24/tt
5/20/00
00041
2011
507-04
9/25/00
6/06/00
00102
201M.)
507-05
5/25/00
6/06/00
00103
alkann
alkenM/cyttaatkanea
MkyiDMflnMf C1-C9
palyaraartlc fc^ecaibana (MM)
acetaldriiyde f
bentetdifcydt
0t WoTw* SI O0nyBt9
alccnaU
pMC**wW
cMwauthane
acetene
acetic ecld
acetic Kid butyl nt«r
C12N24O1 ecter «1>
C12N2401 nter (2>
•tlWJC 0M^0VIIC0
1.07
•.20
•.10
....
0.20
0.10
•.M
0.20
....
0.20
0.00
....
0.10
0.20
1.60
0.40
1.10
....
• •*•
•.70
0.90
....
1.10
....
3.10
1.40
....
....
2.00
4.90
0.00
21.40
1.00
2.90
....
....
2.90
1.10
....
1.40
2.40
....
....
....
14.00
20.00
2.20
9.10 27.00
1.90
1.40
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
9.90 2.70
.... ....
2.40
••»• *•••
9.00 10.70
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
9.00 11.00
16.00 1.70
1.40
22.40 5.30
.... ....
0.90 4.40
....
.... ....
.... ....
— - 1.50
0.90
1.90 2.60
•»•• *•••
12.90 11.40
....
.... ....
.... ....
5.00 4.20
7.00 5.40
7.70
0.50
1.00
....
9.90
0.60
....
0.90
0.90
»**•
1.00
1.10
....
0.70
1.20
1.00
2.70
0.50
2.30
• * ••
....
....
0.90
1.20
2.70
• »••
2.90
....
....
....
....
M««M«
,„,.! 4.55 25.20 71.70 40.90 97.30 50.30 36.10 20.30 13.20
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••MM*******
(•) Only twetcd en 5/25/80.
(1) •rofMnoic ecld. 2 wthyl-Z.2-<*iMtltyt-1-(2-livdr«iy-1-MthyUtM>pr«fi|fl *"*r.
(2) Propanoic ccid. 2 Mthyl-3-hrdrc«y-2.4.4-trlMtliylp*'Myt ester.
I Known Tenax contaminant. F-10 07/22/8*
-------
U8tt-S(OMT*8)
18118101 «I8 8MLTf 18 8T 8C/N8
aa«««««a»iaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
•ITIMOC
t MTOnnt OJ&l. UM8I86T08. 8C.
tMMI 1
umt i
Mtf 8M
MTt MM
m
LOCATIOl
MMAB88K8
•H.18
U.TH8
ma
217-45
5/14/88
5/28/88
88844
2827
587-0*
5/25/88
4/87/88
88111
2708.5
217-04
S/24/88
S/28/88
80099
2788.5
507-07
S/25/88
4/07/88
88114
2718
217-07
S/24/8*
5/11/88
88050
2710
507-08
S/25/88
4/07/88
88115
2412
217-88
S/24/88
5/11/88
•0051
2412
507-09
5/25/88
4/07/88
80117
vinyl cMarlda
I.
•atfcytm cftlwld*
tMM* 1,2*tf IcklVTCVtWIM
t (
2.2*
4.24
1.94
0.02-
•tyrcra
•.47(81
.04
.24
.41
.84
.41
U
84
•.77
1.09
•.U
1.15
•.a
8.18
8.59
1.18
•.IS
•8
4.72
0.95
0.47
2.08
0.40
•.52
•.59
2.20
1.04(01
8.89
8.18
2.99
5.28
8.27
•.74
•.28
•.22
•.22
1.24
•.38(8}
•.IS
88
18.44
1.54
•.75
1.97
•.54
8.28(8)
8.08(8}
8.87
1.89
•.M
88
88
•
2.27(8}
•8
•.04(0)
.27
.80
.M
.21
a
.47
.M
.81
8.33(8)
8.18
14.08
1.11
1.05
1.34
1.29
0.98
8.91
8.19
•.42
1.55(8}
0.05(0)
4.8*
4.18
8.45
2.12
8.77
0.71
0.*8
0.18
•••••••
total
•••«•«••»••«••••««••••••••••*••••••««
14.89 17.41 14.98
»••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
11.90 21.51 18.21
»••«•••••••«•«••»••••••••••••••
(•). Split pert. «fcM Integration p«rt«.
<«. CeopMvi Mytot prMtnt. •pectrwi i«» **Tti*6t*e4 br • M«««»*«« P**.
•i l«i•••ted conc«ntratlon beloM Halt of quvttltatlon.
••t 8ot • tartet coaipomf; r«*wlta are Mtlaat**.
flit ajvtunt* •»••• nnt ««nr,l«lr»nHv ofinv* hM-kar«nl laiWlt. F— 1 1
-------
IK* m-VMNtf
fMU-SfOOOT'O)
titttiot «io MMum or o
lilt MM 1
MM*.! UKA1I08 (
umt WM/MMII i
MtE UNFtCO 1
0*11 MMLTIfO t
rn i
•IkyltantenM. CS-C3
l»t»«inMlli fcyOi Knb»»
•emtdriiydi f
tawiMldrftydt
•tfctr •IdtfiydM
•UefMtt
ffctnoU
Iterant
dlcM«r*e««» IKOT
cMw«*tlMr»
•cetera
•Nile KM
•Mile Kid tarty! Mt«r
•-«! tr*-H-ptenrt -tamnriM
C12N2UB Mtw 11}
C12N2403 cttvr C2)
•tlMr •rfanlct
c^t
WmtlOfMU
•BfT
117*01
*mim
9/20/08
1.88
1.00
CMOI
....
»**•
2.40
2.00
0.90
1.00
***•
9.20
3.40
....
0.90
BjflMI *•*•
1.30
2.20
1.30
24.40
— -. .-. -^ — -- — fc^^ AA^^ a^^A^^A* a
, **.,*«».
2827
507-06
9/23/88
6/07/00
00113
ft*
163.20*
4.60
....
*••*
2.48
14.60
4.90
»*•*
....
»»*•
9.90
2.30
»••*
....
2.30
....
....
....
2M.40
DC.
2708.3
217-0*
5/24/88
3/28/88
00039
ft*
23.00
0.80
2.30
2.30
1.60
....
• *•*
• <•*•
0.90
*** *
S.18
....
1.38
....
6.20
9.60
...-•
31.10
******* «M
2708.3
307-07
3/23^8
tnrim
00114
ft*
44.10
• *••
....
—
0.40
....
• *•*
• ***
0.60
....
4.00
....
0.60
1.10
....
1.30
2.30
....
34.80
2710
217-07
5/24/88
5/31/88
OOOM
ft*
9.18
1.48
....
****
• *••
8.58
0.30
0.88
1.38
0.38
2.58
....
0.60
0.40
** ••
1.30
1.90
...*
17.00
2710
507-08
3/23/88
6/07/88
00113
ft*
8.28
1.38
....
*•**
»*•*
....
8.38
0.00
0.60
0.00
2.50
....
0.30
....
0.50
0.70
1.00
17.40
2632
217-08
5/24/88
5/31/88
00051
ft*
10.90
3.80
....
1.40
....
1.80
....
1.70
1.10
4.00
....
....
1.00
....
3.40
5.10
36.20
••*••••••••••<
2632
507-09
5/23/08
6/07/88
00117
ft*
it.Tt
•«.*
*••*
•»**
•***
•*••
....
*•**
2.30
1.60
6.70
• *••
....
• **»
....
3.90
5.30
• *»*
69.70
!••••••••»•
ID fr«p*»ic Kid. 2 wtM-2.2-dlwtliyl-1-<2-liy<*r Propvwic »eid. 2 •elhy1-J-*Vl*wiy2.4.4-lrl«nliirlptntyl e«ltr.
* Includes ISO ppfc of 1.2 dlaethylhexane.
f RnqO^lxTenax cont«tnant.
07/??/oo
-------
TMtff
MM.f-3(Cm'0)
itmiM AIR AMirm or oc/m
Slit
I MTBNIM Mil. MMIM1W. K.
fJMHf IOCATIM
•Alt
OATE AMM.T2O
M7-09
9/24/M
9/31/M
S241
9*7-10 217-10
9/29/tt 9/24/M
•V07/M 9/31/M
Mill 00053
S241 550* 3304 9550 9550
907-11 117-11 907-12 217-12 907-13
3/25/M S/24/M 9/25/M 5/24/M 9/25/M
•VM/M 9/31/M A/08/M 9/31/M A/M/M
M122 MOM 0012* M059 M124
vinyl cMarld*
1.1-tflckl
•••»(•>
•.08(0)
1.S9 «.92(«)(0)
•.29 1.2*
MtraMtrMt
•.•9(0) «.20(0)
•.*•(•) •.••(•>
•eta atftytm
4-ananytcycl
3.9*
•.77
•.73
2.91
1.M
10
1.14
•.IS
•.27
•.23
0.05
•.32
•.12
•.02
,10
,01
,19
,09
,91
.10
,M
.01
.72
.4*
M
.10
1.99
0.40
•.27(0)
•
0.05»•••••«•»••>•••••«»
14.39 10.41
•><•••««•••«•»«•••>•
0. Cast 1«
(a). Split peak, added Integration peak*.
•t CatlMtcd concentration belox Halt of ajMntltatlan.
••t «ot a tarfct coapoml; results are ettlaatet.
(•): taouM* nero not tlanlf Icantly above backfromd levela.
F-13
-------
TMCtf OHMUM VMLf-SCCWO)
IVTftlOl All MMTSIS 8T 0C/N8
tilt MM t WfOtnt MIL. IMMIKTOI. DC.
ftMOnt
WMPtt
MTt «
MTt M
»M
laamoB
mm/warn*
MK9
IM.V1X0
•OOF
W-00
9/24/00
5/31/08
80032
100?
ser-1*
S/29/M
•^r/M
Milt
SMI
217-19
9/24/tt
5/S1/M
•ooss
SMI
SOM1
S/»/«
•708/88
801Z2
SSM
217-11
5/J4/88
5/11/88
880M
SSOl
M7-12
S/25/81
*^»/88
8012ft
fSM
217-12
5/24/88
5/J1/88
80055
vm
507-11
9/25/88
4/08/88
801M
28.08 17.48 88.7f 21S.98 S8.08 40.18
• — -— 2.88
2.S8
S.S0 •••• •••• •••• •-•• ••••
4.80 1.20 2.90 14.08 7.48 2.28
2.90 0.«0 2.80 — • I.S0
1.90 4.20 — • — • 1.50 2.S9
1.40 1.28 2.08 4.90 0.90 1.70
S.S0 2.90 •— S.90 9.88 2.90
.... .... .... .... 1.30 ....
.... .... .... .... .... ....
.... 1.48 •••• •••• •-••
4.90 4.30 2.00 -— 2.38 1.70
7.40 4.40 4.S0 — • 4.10 •—
>•••••••••••••••••••••••••••«•••««•••>••••••••••••••*•"*•••••••••••••••*•••••••••••
tet.t 19.08 19.18 41.40 40.30 104.78 230.30 94.88 70.90
f fast lower
fit •ropanoie acid. 2 •»thrl-2.2-dl»»H»yl-1-<2-hr««ro«y-1-«»thyletliyl>pr«W« »•««•.
C21 •ropraic acid. 2 avthyfS-kydraay-2.4.4-triactliylpentyl ester.
It Kqjutn Tenax contaainant. r-^ 07/22/88
-------
IMMCT
TMU-3(0»t'0>
loftoieo AII MMtmt tr OC/M
•m
SMPtt lOCATIM
IMM.I MM/WNHt
MTt SMT10
Mtt MMLTKO
t WTtnnc mil. MMIOCTW. K.
tIMS
5/24/00
S/31/OB
ioi5f wtomcD WMOTCZ)
507-14 514-01 514-02
5/25/OB «/03/00 4/03/01
«^0^8 4^8/M «/OB/M
M1Z5 M12I 0012*
514-03
4V03/00
MtM
vinyl cMor
trlcfilorofl
trm-1.2-41c»iUr«ttfM>«
1. 1 . 1-
caftan t«trttM«rl*
t.30«
t.SS(0)
•
•.OttO)
0.65
0.«9
0.40
t.Tf
0.77
0.44
0.73
0.25
O.ffCO)
4.51
0.12
.15
,09
.32
.47
.7*
.34
.07
.1*
.13
03*
.03
0.07
0.10
m
5.99
0.34
0.77
2.35
0.92
m
0.50
0.11
7.33
0.01(0)
0.52
0.10
0.40
0.12
2.47
0.39
0.13
0.17
0.07
O.OSVO)
0.21
15.44
.4*
.11
.45
.10
.54
.42
.20
.53
.It
.15
.10
total
26.95
11.14
12.07
>•••••••>«
21.12
0. CMt lower
(1). Outside. <2>. ClM* Ho.3. (3). Cl«t> Ho.5.
•t C«tlo«t«d canccntrotlon beloM tl»lt of ojumtltotlon.
••t Mot o torffet coipatxd; retultt oro Mtlootn.
(•»: imuantm MITO not •tontllcontty obow* bKkfround towolt.
-------
MCtf
UMC-KCWD)
MtMIOI All MMlTtlt OT CCSM
Slit MM
UMHI lotAiioi
MHPII
MTt
Mil AMU.no
UMtMIM MU. IMMIMCTW. DC.
9/24/0*
9/st/ft
WIM Msnrci) WNEtrm
M7-U $14-01 514-02
9/23SM *^5/W «/03/M
i/M/tt «/oa/n «/oa/M
M1ZS M12C M12*
914-03
«/03/M
M1M
•lk«M
9S.M
U.W
. CS-C5
btnsaldrfiytf*
•ttar
•Icckol*
CfllWOMttMM
•Mount
ac*t«n»
•cede Kid
•cctlc
1.
S.10
O.«0
I.It
M.tt
— •
7.M
t.M
— •
•.«•
0.56
----
1.30
t.M
O.M
1.20
— •
•—
9.19
----
0.30
0.70
3.7»
••••
J4.20
1.30
3.21
2.00
1.70
C12N240f «tt«r (4)
C12H240S «tttr «$»
•thcr
t.TO
S.5«
••*•
total M.10 W.» 38.40 tt.W
••••••^•••••••^••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••^••••••••••••^
fit Outtidr.
12) ClMt •«. 3
(SI ClMB Mo. 5
(4}
. 2
cslcr.
-------
MtCtt
TMtt-scenf'0)
IRTtfIOB All MMfcnit 0? 0C/W
•III
t MfOnitt Mil. WmiKTON. DC.
lOCATIflU
MftVlf Ml
Mtf SMTtO
Mil MMlTZf0
tii» turn wi» turn tor tuw wi»
HMMII 2ir-t«i> sor-mco SOMMCO su-raczy
9/M/M 9/24/M S/25/M S/ZS/M
WMMt
BOOM
MNWr
127
vinyl efcleriat
1.1
trn-1.2
cerben Mtr«M«rl*
tetrKftler**t*y««»
0.05
0.1S
•.1*
0.20
0.02*
0.04*
0.12
0.05
O.M*
1.42
0.1*
1.42
0.25
0.05
m
0.01*
0.0S*
0.0S*
0.0S*
0,
••••••••*•••*••*•••••
0.11 1.«2
••«•••••••*••«•*•••••
1.12
0.M
0.M*
«.0t
0.0S*
0.0S*
0.02*
t«tat
S.S?
O.M
2.2*
(1)t Ctnecntratlcra ffqulMltnt t« • 18.0 IKcr iMpt* welt
<2)t Conctntratlona «|ulv«l«nt to • U.7 liter e«fiU.
•t fctlMtcd concentration beleM ll*lt of quentitctlon.
••t Hot • tartet ceBcmnd; remit* ere MtlMtee.
-------
im m-tMOt
TAaic-3(cwo>
•» MMITSIS or te/w
lift
SMaHt tOCftTIOI
MUniN MU. IftMIKTM. K.
Mil SMaXft
Mlt MMLYHt
*17-U<1»
9/M/fcV
5/27/M
m» OUMK n» turn tor OUMK nir
217-fO(1> 507-TMCD 907-IOM1) S14-TOC2)
S/M/M
9/31/M
MMMf
5/25/M 5/»/M
4/CO/M
4/M/M
MOM
alkanet
alkonaa/
atkytba*
•Hi
acetont
other
yelaalkMV
tanea. O-C5
rtle fcydracartam f*M)
*•» ||
•Vda
•^•Matffak*
•myvm
lantern laawrt
Ihana
eld
eld butyl attar
•-rtenyl lianiiiuaalm
attar CD
attar (4)
•anica
•.2* 0.10
•.07
0.30
• ••>•> »•••
•.08 0.20
.... ....
0.40
.... ....
0.20
.... ....
0.20
•••* ••••
•.10 2.20
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
0.20
.... ....
0.30
0.4* 4.10
t.79
0.17
0.70
t.07
1.20
0.20
2.2*
O.It
0.20
0.00
•>••»
*••>•
1.47
0.30
....
....
0.40
0.10
....
....
0.13
O.U
t.07
t.so
....
0.90
o.n
O.flf
0.40
0.10
....
....
....
O.TO
0.07
....
,7»
.20
.20
.20
.40
.20
.30
.10
.00
...
.00
.00
.40
.10
.30
.... ....
0.10
0.10
.... ....
0.10
3.0* 9.01
total
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••a
>+»«>•••••••••••••»•••••••>••••••••••••••«•>«••••••••'
(1) Concentration* equivalent to a 18.0 liter
(2) Concentration* equivalent to a 14.7 liter ••*>!•.
I)) Propanoic acid. 2 a»thyl-2.2-dia»thyl-1-<2-li»dro«r-1-a»tliyl«thyl>P«Wl ««*«r-
(4) Propanoic acid. 2 •etH»l->-'|ydrMy-2.4.4-tri«tliylpentyl ester.
contavinant. p_,fl
/
-------
TABLE-4
ANALYSIS RESULTS
4-PHENYLCYCLOHEXENE
SAMPLE LOCATIONS 5/24/88 5/25/88
S-226 (NEW ROOM) 6.65 3.70
S-274 1.30 0.67
2811 2.78 1.70
2827 0.44 0.41
2708.5 3.86 2.63
2710 0.13J NO
2632 0.37 0.26J
3241 1.86 1.69
3304 0.21J ND
935 1.19 1.27
1015 0.44 NA
ROOF NO ND
2816 * 0.28J
CONC. UNITS PPB.
ND: NOT DETECTED
NA: NOT ANALYZED
* SAMPLE WAS NOT COLLECTED ON 5/24/88
F-19
-------
Table 5 (Cont'd)
Formaldehyde Analysis Results
Cone. Units ppb
Location 6/3/88
2632-1 ND
2632-2 ND
2632-3 NO
2632-4 NO
2632-5 ND
2632-6 9.0 J
2710 ND
Day Care Center (Outside) 9.0 J
Day Care Center (Class 13) ND
Day Care Center (Class 15) ND
ND - Not Detected (Detection Limit 10 ppb)
J - Detected Below Detection Limits
F-20
-------
Table 5
Formaldehyde Analysis Results
Cone. Units ppb
Location 5/24/88 5/25/88
New Room (S-226) ND • NO
S-274 48.9 7.3 J
2811 9.0 J ND
2816 NS NO
2827 46.4 ND
2708.5 NO 36.6
2710 ' 58.7 ND
2632 429.0 284.0
Roof ND 9.0 J
3241 58.7 5.7 J
3304 ND ND
935 ND ND
1015 ND ND
ND • Not Detected (Detection Limit 10 ppb)
J • Detected Below Detection Limits
NS - Not sampled on 5/24/88
F-21
-------
Table 6
May 24, 1988
Analysis Results
Room No.
RH
Room
Temp CF]
Time
S-216
S-226
S-274
2811
2827
2708 1/2
2710 C
2632
3241
3304 C
935
1015 C
Roof
7
8
8
7
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
400
400
400
400
400
400
375
400
400
350
400
400
300
61
69
59
51
68
60
61
61
50
60
52
49
71
75.7
74.8
74.9
71.4
69.9
77.8
72.0
72.8
78.0
74.0
77.0
76.7
85.0
5:
5:
5:
5:
:30 pm
:35
:37
:*2
:45
:50
55
59
25
30
5:12
F-22
-------
Table 6 (Cont'd)
May 25. 1988
Analysis Results
S-226
S-274
2811
2827
2708 1/2
2710 C
2632
3241
3304 C
7
4
5
7
5
5
6
4
5
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
S
4
5
6
4
250
275
500
300
300
350
325
300
375
300
275
275
275
375
275
275
300
425
275
275
450
275
275
525
350
300
375
300
275
375
< RH
59
63
67
60
60
62
52
61
51
59
55
59
65
60
61
61
61
60
69
69
65
60
59
67
50
59
52
61
61
52
Room
Temp CF)
79.0
77.0
76.5
78.5
75.0
73.9
77.0
75.0
72.2
72.0
73.0
70.0
71.0
68.1
72.0
72.0
74.0
71.7
69.0
68.0
70.0
73.0
71.0
73.0
76.0
77.0
75.0
73.0
73.0
72.0
Time
8:40
11:15
2:30
8:27
11:00
2:35
8:34
11:54
2:40
8:45
11:09
2:50
8:48
11:13
3:00
8:53
11:18
3:05
8:52
11:20
3:08
9:04
11:24
3:17
% 9:20
11:30
3:54
9:30
11:40
3:26
•
am
am
pm
am
am
pm
am
am
pm
am
am
pm
am
am
pm
am
am
pm
am
am
pm
am
pm
pm
am
am
pm
am
ant
pm
F-23
-------
(Cont'd) - Table 6 (May 25, 1988)
RpomNp.
935
1015 C
Roof
5
6
4
5
5
5
5
4
3
350
325
350
350
350
200
275
300
X RH
60
65
43
60
59
56
79
84
86
Room
Tetnp CF1
76.0
75.0
74.0
77.0
77.0
76.0
59.0
62.0
65.5
Time
9:36 am
11:55 am
3:45 pm
9:45 am
11:50 am
3:50 pm
9:07 am
11:08 am
.3:25 pm
P-24
-------
TABLE ?.
TYPICAL INDOOR CONCENTRATIONS OF SELECTED COMPOUNDS
Compound
Toluene
Concentration
3 - 160 CD
33.7 13), 14.6 (41
2.4 (5)
COBBMHI sources
Petroleum based cleaning solvents. Paints ft
paint recovers, spray deodorants. Nail base-
coat ft polish, furniture polish;.silicon
caulking
Bensene
Ethyl benxene
7
ro
Cn
3-16 111 Saiae sources as toluene vith exception of nail
9.4 (2) basecoat and polish; cigeratto smokers in house-
16.3 131, 3.1 14) hold! Additional source -particle board
4.7 C6a ft 6d), 1.4 Ue ft 6fl
3.4 <6g)
1-9 11) Same sources as bensene vith exception of
l.S 12 ft 6a), 9.3 13) particle board
1.2 (4 ft 6c), 1.1 C6b)
1.8 (6d), 0.6 <6e ft 6h)
0.4 (6f), O.S(6g)
Xylenes
Alkanes (pentana and
lover)
3-29 (1)
1.2 - 3.7 (2)
2.0 - 21.• 16)
28.8 13). 4.8 44)
no data in ppb
Sane sources as ethyl bensene
9a»e sources as toluene plus general cleaning
solvents, floor waxes, lover MM alkanes also
occasionally used as spray propellents
-------
TABLE 7 Jcont.)
TYPICAL INDOOR CONCENTRATIONS OF SELECTED COMPOUNDS
Conpound Concentration COBSMMI Sources
(ppb)
Alkane (hexana and 1.4 - 122 (1)
higher Molecular weight
hydrocarbons)
SOMS glass cleaners, rooM deodorisers, floor
polishes, wood stains, and furniture polish
(basically pentane and hexana will be found in any substance
containing petroleosi distillates or kerosene)
Nethylene Chloride
372
ft
(3)
Tar
reMovers ft tire patch, paint strippers.
Mothballs, car engine cleaners ft co*Mon
spray can propellent
(• value found in detached table w/ no reference)
Trichloroethylene
ro
.4-13 (1) General cleaning solvents, Mtal cleaners,
O.S 12!, 3.S (3) tire patches, ft degreaaers
0.3 (4 ft «c). 0.4 (Cat
0.5 Kb), 0.2 (td ft ig)
0.1 Ue ft *». <0.1 Uf)
Tetrachloroethane
1,1,1-Tr ichloroethane
(Methyl Chloroform)
O.t - 29 (1)
0.3 - 1.2 (ft)
2.5 (3), O.ft (4)
0.9
1.7 (2)
2.7 - 53 (1)
4.0 (3), 3.1 (fta)
2.2 (ftb), 3.3 (ftc)
4.8 (ftd), 1.3 (fte)
0.8 (ftf). 4.8 (ftg)
ft. 8 (6h)
Latex paints, residual dry cleaning solvents
in clothing, aetal degreasers, dewaxing and
stripping solvents, upholstery cleaners,
general household cleaning solvents.
General cleaning solvents, dry cleaning solvents,
non-caustic drain cleaners, carpet ft upholstery
cleaners. Metal cleaners, auto engine cleaners,
and degreaser compounds.
-------
TABLE 7(cent.)
TYPICAL INDOOR CONCENTRATIONS OP SELECTED COMPOUNDS (REFERENCES)
(1) •Indoor Mr and Human Health"; R.B. Gammage ft S.V. Kaye, ed.; Lewis Publishers. Inc..
1985; •Volatile Organic Compounds in Indoor Airs An Overview of Sources, concentrations.
and Health Effects*. Sterling. D.A.; pp. 387-402.
12) Bnvlronaant 1nt+n*Hnn»\ Vol. 12. 389. 1986; "Total Exposure Assessment Methodology
(TEAM) Studyi Personal Exposures. Indoor-Outdoor Relationships, and Breath Levels of
Volatile Organic Compounds in New Jersey"; Wallace. L.A.. et. al. (concentrations are the
reported GeosMtric Mean of overnight personal air values)
(3) "Proceedings of the*3rd International conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate";
B. Berglund. T. Lindvall. ft J. Sundell. ed.; Liber Tryck AB. Stockholm, 1984; "Integrating
•Real Life* Measurements of Organic Pollution in Indoor and Outdoor Air of Hoees in
Northern Italy". M. De Bortoli et. al.; pp. 21-2*.
•
(4) "Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate";
B. Berglund. T. Lindvall. ft J. Sundell. ed.; Liber Tryck AB. Stockholm. 1984; "Volatile
7 Hydrocarbons in Dutch Howes", E. Lebret. et. al.; pp. 169-174.
to
"** (S) •Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate";
B. Berglund, T. Lindvall. ft J. Sundell. ed.; Liber Tryck AB. Stockholm. 1984; "Sources and
Characterisation'of Organic Air Contaminants Inside Manufactured Housing". O.K. Monte 1th,
T.H. Stock, ft tf.E. Seifert. Jr.; pp. 285-290.
(6) "The Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM) study: Summary and Analysis: Volume 1";
L.A. Nallace. U.S. EPA Report t EPA/600/6-87/002a. June 1987. Concentration data used
were mean values from Tables 25. 26 ft 46. Reference suffices indicate the location and
times for the collected datas 6a - New Jersy. rail 1981; 6b - New Jersey. Summer 1982;
*c - Ne| Jersey. Winter 1983; 6d - Los Angeles. CA. Jan. 1984; 6e - Los Angeles CA. May 1984;
6f - Contra Costa County CA. June 1984; 6g - Greensboro NC, May 1982; and 6h - Devils Lake
ND, October 1982.
-------
Project Participants
Rajeshmal Singhvi USEPA/ERT
Sella Burchette USEPA/ERT
Rodney Turpin USEPA/ERT
Martin O'Neill REAC (Roy F. Weston)
Adly Michael REAC (Roy F. West on)
Brian Macceorge TAT (Roy F. Weston)
Anthony Lombard© TAT (Roy F. Heston)
Linda D'Leia TAT (Roy F. Heston)
Robert Isaacs TAT (Roy F. Weston)
F-28
-------
REFERENCES
1. Singhvi, R.; Burchette, S.M.; Rodney, T. 1988 (Aug. 18).
A final summary report on the indoor air monitoring
performed at USEPA Headquaters, Washington, DC. on
March 4 and 5, 1988. Environmental Response Branch,
USEPA, Edison. N.J.08837.
2. Van Ert, M.D.; Clayton, J.W.; Crab, C.L.; Walsh, D.W.
1987 (Jan). Identification and Characterization of
4- Phenylcyclohexene an emission product from new
carpeting. Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology,
University of Arizona, Tuscon, AZ.
3. Singhvi, R.; Burchette, S.M.; Rodney, T. 1988. Final
report on the Sampling and Analyses of Carpet and Barter
partition off gases collected at the Warehouse and Navy
yard at USEPA HQ., Washington, DC. on May 6,1988.
Environmental Response Branch, USEPA, Edison, N.J. 08837.
4. Pritchett, T.H. 1988 (June). Personal communication.
F-29
-------
APPENDIX G
February 17, 1989, Internal EPA Report
A FINAL SUMMARY REPORT ON THE INDOOR AIR MONITORING
PERFORMED AT USEPA HEADQUARTERS, WASHINGTON, DC
ON NOVEMBER 6-8, 1988
G-l
-------
A FINAL SUMMARY REPORT ON THE
INDOOR AIR MONITORING PERFORMED
AT USEPA HEADQUATERS, WASHINGTON, D.C,
ON NOVEMBER 6-8, 1988
February 17, 1989
Prepared By:
Rajeshmal Singhvi, Rodney Turpin, Sella Burchette
Environmental Response Branch
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Edison, New Jersey 08837
G-2
-------
Indoor Air Quality Monitoring
U.S. EPA Headquaters, Washington, DC.
Introduction;
During November 6 through November 8, 1988, the Environmental
Response Team (ERT), assisted by the Response Engineering
Analytical Contract (REAC), conducted an Indoor Air Quality
(IAQ) Survey at EPA Headquarters in Waterside Mall. This survey
was undertaken at the request of the Director, Hazardous
Site Control Division (HSCD), to determine whether indoor airborne
contaminants were present, since a number of employee health
complaints had been received, from the South East section of the
Mall. In addition, concerns were still being expressed over the
air quality in the day care center, and it too was resampled.
Sampling;
The sampling locations were selected in consultation with
several concerned employees and in consideration of the
operating schedule of the ventilation system and the real-time
carbon dioxide concentrations, which indicate areas of low air
circulation. The sampling locations in the day care center were
selected based on a previous study (1). The eight locations
selected for the IAQ survey were Offices 2123, SE-274D, 2827,
2710, day care center classrooms 2 and 5, and the south entrance
of the day care center, and the Roof for outdoor ambient air.
Indoor air samples were collected on November 6 and 7. 1988, for
volatile organic compounds, formaldehyde/acrolein and
4-Phenylcyclohexene (4PC). The purpose of the Sunday (November
6) monitoring was to collect data when the ventilation system
was off and poential off-gasing products could accumulate in the
offices. The Monday (November 7) monitoring was conducted to
determine the level of various compounds during normal office
activities (ventilation turned on)..The air supply vents were
operating in the day care center on both days of the indoor air
monitoring.
On November 7. 1988, indoor air samples were also collected for
volatile organic compounds in the evening in the absence of
normal office work activities. Microbial monitoring was
conducted by the Environmental Health and Saftey Division (EHSD)
and performed on November 8, 1988, by EHSD'S contract (Science
Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Virginia).
G-3
-------
ANALYTICAL!
The volatile organic compounds were collected on Tenax/CMS tubes
for a five hour period and analyzed by Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectroscopy (GC/MS) quantitatively for several target compounds
and semiquantitatively (relative to the toluene response) for
the non-target compounds. The 4PC samples were collected on 600
mg charcoal tubes for ten hours and analyzed using Gas
Chromatography/Flame lonization Detector (GC/FID). Selected
samples were confirmed by GC/MS. The details of these
collection procedures are shown in Table 1. Also, GC/FID
results were used for fingerprinting purposes. The
formaldehyde/acrolein samples were collected on Orbo tubes
supplied by Galson Laboratories and analyzed by Gas
Chromatography/Nitrogen Phosphrous Detector (GC/NPD) using OSHA
Method 52.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control!
Each type of analysis conformed with standard methods with some
modification to meet the objective of this study. In almost all
cases, the quality control checks were within the accepted
limits for the particular analysis performed.
Summary of Results;
The analytical results of the IAQ Survey are summarized in
Appendix A. Low ppb levels of organic compounds were found in
all the offices monitored and in the day care center on all two
days. The concentration of trichlorofluoromethane was in the
range of 6.72 to 43.19 ppb, with an average of 19 ppb and a
standard deviation of 12.9 ppb. In the previous studies, the
highest concentration of trichlorofluoromethane found was 4 ppb.
This compound, however, is a common laboratory contaminant, and
the results are suspect. Formaldehyde was detected at 40 ppb in
the outside air. This value is significantly above the normal
ambient level found in the U.S., and the data are questionable.
Also, on Sunday (November 6) in office S-274D, 20 ppb of
formaldehyde was detected, but it was not detected on Monday
(November 7). Acrolein was not detected at any location. The
4PC, one of the main off-gas components of the carpets was
detected on Sunday in two offices at the 0.1 ppb level. No
significant differences were observed between this study and the
previous ERT studies (1-3) conducted at Waterside Mall for
volatile organic compounds.
Indoor air samples collected for a ten-hour period on charcoal
tubes and analyzed by GC/FID were used to compare the indoor air
quality for Sunday and Monday monitoring. The day care center
fingerprinting comparisons are presented in appendix B Figures
1, 2 and 3. The estimated organic concentration in the day care
G-4
-------
INDOOR Alt MONITORING, U8EPA, NO. (Nov. 4 through Nov. •. 19M.)
TAilE-1
SAMPLING AMD AHALTSCS S
PARAMETER ANALYTICAL TOTAL SAMPLING SAMPLING MEDIA INSTRUMENTS USED
METHOD SAMPLE TINE
VOLUME MOUtS
LITEIS
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS MOD inED EPA TO-1 * 5 TENAX/CMS CC/MS
4-PNENYLCTCLOHEXENE ERT-10 1200 10 CHARCOAL CC/FIO CONFIRMED IT CC/MS
FORHALDEHYDE/ACROLEIN • OSHA 52 SO S ORSO TUBE GC/NPO
• ANALYSES IT fiALSON LABORATORIES.
G-5
-------
center on Sunday (November 6) was in the range 2 to 5 ppb and on
Monday (November 7) 10 to 36 ppb. The GC/MS analyses shows the
presence of hydrocarbons at low ppb levels. The hydrocarbon
presence could be attributed to the parking garage. Further
investigation would be necessary to identify the source. The EPA
Headquarters fingerprinting comparison are presented in appendix
B Figures 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. The fingerprinting pattern in
office 2710 is similiar to the day care center, 3 ppb on Sunday,
and 10 ppb on Monday. In other offices, there were no
significant differences in volatile organic compound
concentrations between the two days.
There was not enough information available on the ventilation
system to evaluate its contribution to the problem. However,
the following observations were made: Office 2123 air supply
vents were disconnected; Day care center air supply vents were
operating on both days; air supply vents were Off on Sunday and
were operating on Monday in Offices 2710, 2827 and SE-274D. The
carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, percent relative humdity and
temperatures were found to be normal for office environments.
Conclusions;
The low ppb levels of organic compounds found in this study are
the same as those found in the Waterside Mall, EPA offices
indoor air in the previous EPA studies (1-3). The only compound
that was found at different concentrations during the last ten
month period was 4PC. In general 4PC decreased from 6.65 ppb
(May 24, 88) to 0.12 ppb (November 6, 88). The results are
listed in Table 2.
G-6
-------
APPENDIX A
G-7
-------
:REFERENCES:
1. Singhvi, R.; Burchette, S.M.; Turpin, R.D. 1988 (Oct. 25).
A Final Summary Report on the Indoor Air Monitoring Performed
at USEPA Headquaters, Washington, D.C. on May 24, 25 and June
6, 1988. Environmental Response Branch, USEPA, Edison, N.J.
08837.
2. Singhvi, R.; Burchette, S.M.; Turpin, R.D. 1988 (Aug. 18).
A Final Summary Report on the Indoor Air Monitoring Performed
at USEPA Headquaters, Washington, D.C. On March 4 and 5,
1988. Environmental Response Branch, USEPA, Edison, N.J.
08837.
3. Singhvi, R.; Burchette, S.M. 1988 (Sept.14). A Memo to
Timothy Field Jr., Director, Emergency Response Division.
Final Report on Indoor Air Monitoring at USEPA Headquaters,
Washington, D.C. on Aug. 11, 1988. Environmental Response
Branch, USEPA, Edison, N.J. 08837.
G-8
-------
tASLE-2
MULTSEf tESULTf
4'Mitnylcyelohiitnt
(Cone. In p**»
Swplt location 5/24/88 5/25/88 4/29/88 8/11/88 11/6/88 11/7/88
Sf-274 I.JO 0.*7 US M 0.07 ND(0.07)
Sf-226 4.65 3.70 0.76 0.22 MS NS
2708.5 3.86 2.63 0.56 NS NS MS
2710 MO(O.SO) M0(0.30) 0.21 • ND(0.20) ND(O.M) M0(0.06)
3241 1.64 1.69 ND(O.IS) NS NS NS
2827 O.M 0.41 NS NS 0.12 ND(0.10)
• 6C/NS anatysU do** not confirm thi prntnc* of 4»C.
NO: not dttoctod.
( ): dtnotM SM^II cone, bolow ll«lt of qMntiflcotion.
NS: not
G-9
-------
IMDOtX Alt MONITORING. USCM. M
TMlt-U
i-Mwnylcyc lohoMna
(Core. In ppb)
>la Location 11/6/88 11/7/88
•oof(outs ND(O.Oft4>
t/SC-2740 f 0.074 »(0.087)
1/2827 • 0.122 MX0.100)
2710 0 W(O.OM) KX0.06A)
South Cntrancc(0oy Car*) K>(0.06t) »(0.120)
Day Cart date 02* 110(0.064) »(0.090)
Oay Car* Class 05* »(0.064) IB(0.064)
MO: dctwtts not dttactad.
( ): danotM aaapt* cone. teloM Halt of quontlf (cation.
• air supply vtnts on both days.
0 air supply vonts OFF en 11/A/88 and OH on 11/7/88.
S air supply wants dlscamactod.
G-10
-------
IWDCIX Alt NDNITOtlNG. UKM. NO.
TAILC-2A
Acroltln
(Cone. In ppb)
tMplt Location 11/4/88 11/7/18
toof(auts(20)
2710 9 »(20) M>(20)
South Entr«nec(Day Cart) • MD(20) »(20)
Day Cart Class 12* N0(20) MD(20)
Day Cart Class «• MD(20) H>(20)
•0: dtnotts not dtttettd.
( ): dtnotts ssnplt dtttctfon Units.
• air supply vtnts on both days
t air supply vtnts OFF on 11/6/88 and OH 11/7/88.
t air supply vtnts dlscomtcttd.
G-ll
-------
INDOOt M* HONITWIHC U$t»A, NO.
TABLE -U
fonaaldthydt
(Cone. In ppb)
Saaplt location
11/6/88
11/7/88
•oof(outsidt air) 40
2123 S «D(8)
SE-2740 f 20
282? • ND(8)
2710 • N0(8)
South tntranct(Day Cart) • MD(8)
Day Cart Cl«*» 02* M0(8)
Day Cart Clats «5* H0(8)
SO
•0(8)
•(8)
•0(8)
MD(8)
MO: dtnott* not dtttcttd.
( ): dtnottt aanplt dtttctlon Knits.
• air supply vtnts on both days
• air supply vtnts OFF on 11/6/88 and ON en 11/7/88
t air supply wonts discomtctod.
G-12
-------
fMGET COMPOUNDS
TAMC-4A-1
INDOOR AIR ANALYSIS BY
SITE NAME
SAMPLE MPX/NUNKR
SANPLIN6 LOCATION
DATE ANALYZED
DATE SAMPLED
PRH
porowter
vinyl cMorlde
trlehlorofluorowthoni
1,1-dlcMoroethena
Mthyl*"* dilorlda
tmmmmm
OC/NS
:UATERSIOE MAIL
•TRAVEL
tMJC
(11/18
(11/4
(•1005
PPb
•
• •4.72
ND
0.54
trans-1.2-dlchloroethom NO
1.1-dleMoroethene
1.1.1-trleMoroethene
carbon tetracMorlda
bontene
1.2-dlcMoroethane
trlcMoroethylar*
toluene
tetrachloroetliylone
ethyl beniene
at* ityl ana
o* Ryl one
atyrone
^^Bkfl>AAAO>fea«l tfroiiNONflat
•BfB*VlHVl«OtlaW
•D
0.44
ND
S.27
NO
ND
0.24
MOO
MOO
•LOO
NO
•LOO
NO
7322-A
•OOP
11/21
11/4
• 11/4/08
7322-0
•OOP
11/23
ii/r
01021 01051
PPb
NO
11.54
NO
2.29
ND
ND
0.84
MOO
0.59
0.19
ND
1.05
ND
0.10
0.42
0.25
ND
0.27
PPb
NO
14.29
NO
1.52
NO
ND
MOO
ND
0.43
ND
ND
0.93
MOO
MOO
0.32
MOO
MOO
ND
7322-C
•OOP
11/30
11/0
01007
PPb
»
20.00
ND
3.06
ND
ND
1.87
0.33
1.47
0.49
0.41
4.65
0.41
0.91
1.49
0.40
MOB
0.32
7336-A 7336-8
2827 2827
11/21 11/23
11/6 11/7
81023 81044
PPb ppb
ND ND
32.77 41.19
ND ND
8.92 7.53
ND ND
ND ND
1.47 0.33
0.27 MOO
0.55 .47
0.74 .47
0.37 .23
2.97 .79
0.91 .28
0.53 .33
0.90 .47
0.50 .37
ND MOO
0.32 0.24
7334-C
2827
11/29
11/8
81075
PPb
ND
1.82
ND
1.50
ND
ND
0.90
ND
0.74
ND
ND
1.03
MOO
0.24
0.84
0.28
MOO
0.32
OUP DUP DUP
7205-A 7205-8 7205-0 7205-C 3412-A 3412-8 3412-0 3412-C 7S42-A 7342-A 7342-0 7342-C
2710 2710 2710 2710 2123 2123 2123 2123 S-274 S-274 S-274 S-274
11/21 11/23 11/23 11/29 11/21 11/23 11/23 11/29 11/10 11/21 11/23 11/29
11/6 11/7 11/7 11/8 11/6 11/7 11/7 11/8 11/6 11/4 11/7 11/8
•1025 01043 11044 11067 C1026 11049 11050 11072 82006 01027 11047 BIOTT
ppbppbppbppbppbppbppbppbppbppbppbppb
NDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDND
9.70 43.19 24.28 2.47 30.03 10.72 24.17 7.83 14.14 25.14 14.53 MOB
NDNDNDNDNDNDNDND MOO ND ND ND
1.27 8.04 4.31 0.85 7.41 1.39 5.82 3.24 2.24 4.45 1.29 0.94
NDNDNDNDNDHDNDNDNDNDNDND
NDND*NDNDNONDNDNDNDNDNDND
1.01 .96 .90 0.54 1.09 0.34 .33 1.70 1.87 .77 8.31 0.73
MOO .10 .20 ND 0.25 ND .18 ND MOO .28 ND MOO
0.67 .74 .62 1.12 0.53 .43 .73 1.42 0.97 .49 0.74 1.15
MOO .62 .58 ND 0.64 .45 .56 MOO 0.35 .24 ND MOD
ND .28 .27 ND 0.32 .22 .25 MOO 0.27 .17 ND MOB
1.30 .97 .70 2.10 4.31 .19 .73 5.45 4.32 .10 .71 2.11
0.24 .34 .35 MOO 1.10 MOO .29 0.41 1.16 .79 .29 ND
MOO .41 .40 0.32 0.49 .36 .44 0.44 0.74 .30 .24 .34
0.43 .73 .49 1.05 0.96 .79 .05 1.95 1.74 .93 .73 .94
0.19 .36 .41 0.40 0.43 .35 .51 0.76 0.70 .20 .31 .35
MOO .30 .28 0.18 0.30 MOO .33 0.33 0.07 .39 M08 .29
MOO .32 .28 0.52 0.23 0.18 .43 0.01 0.80 .37 0.29 .42
Mat ftoroets) W.I 17.6 17.S 40.4 51.5 55.1 0.5 14.0 59.5 38.3 9.4 48.2 18.4 40.0 24.4 30.S 37.0 20.3 7.3
total noTtarMt* f 9.9 20.0 3.0 23.4 40.9 33.9 13.5 12.4 34.7 49.2 31.2 26.4 25.0 48.2 58.3 62.4 35.7 23.0 32.5
TOTAL VOC 23.2 30.4 22.5 72.0 92.4 09.0 22.0 27.4 96.2 87.5 40.0 74.6 43.4 89.0 82.9 92.9 73.5 43.3 39.8
Ll.lt of Ouantltatlon 0.167 0.147 0.147 0.147 0.147 0.147 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.147
Cln ppb) 8 _._^
^^ !••••••••••••••••••••••••«>••••••••••••••••
8 Calculated Llaiit of Ouantltatlon • _
0-13 »•«• i ef r*bi« t» i
ND. No
MOO. Below Li«it of Ouantltatlon.
• possible lab contamination
• Non target total fro» page 2 of Table 4A-1.
(Louest Calibration VoluwUCStandird Concentration)
-------
COMBIHCD NOM-TARCET CONPOUHM
IHOOOM AIR ANALYSIS 8T CC/NS
1A81C-4A-1
SITE NAME
itMTCMIDE Mil • 11/6/88
SAIMHE MAM/NUMBER tTRAVEl 7322-A 7322-8 7322-C 7336-A
SANHIN lOCATION :BUC ROOf ROOf ROOf 2827
BATE AMAIT2EB s 11/18 11/21 11/23 11/29 11/21
BATE SANPiEO :11/6 11/6 11/7 11/8 11/6
FRN tBIOOS 81021 81051 81087 81023
parameter p
alkanee
alkenee/eycloatkanee
olkybenienee.C3-C5
bantaldehyde
other aldehydet
alcohol*
phenol*
1 loflneno
chtoroBethane
eUonane •
acetone
acetic acid
acetic acid butyl eater
N.r.B.A. .13)
C12N2403 eater CD
C12N2403 eeter (2)
other arfanlc*
total
Pb
1.S
MB
MB
«•
8.3
8.4
8.6
MB
MB
Mh
MB
.4
8.4
8.7
MB
NB
MB
8.3
8.4
9.9
ppb ppb ppb ppb
1.8 1.1
8.3
8.2
1«
3.1
1.8
8.6
8.4
NB
It
NB
.2
3.7
8.4
MB
MB
HD
HO
0.8
20.8
MB
MB
*A
8.2
MB
1.8
MB
MB
8.2
.7
1.2
MB
MB
MB
MB
HO
MB
9.8
9.8 9.9
2.4 MB
8.7 8.9
0. •
.*•
MB
8.4
MB
NB
NB
7.2
Sm
.3
MB
MB
mW
.4
.4
.0
.8
.5
.6
.2
.0
MB MB
MB MB
NO NO
HO HO
NO HO
23.4 40.9
7336-8
2827
11/23
11/7
610(6
PDb
7.4
0.3
HO
.4
1.3
0.3
9.1
0.7
MO
01
0.3
»•
• >
2.7
0.8
MB
HO
HD
HD
HO
33.9
7336-C
2827
11/29
11/8
81075
4.6
HO
1.3
HD
HD
8.3
HD
HO
HD
5*
• 1
1.1
0.3
HD
HD
HO
HO
7205-A
2710
11/21
11/6
81025
M*
5.6
HO
HD
HD
0.8
0.3
HD
0.3
HD
HD
Sm
.1
HD
1.6
MO
HD
HD
HO
our
7205-8 7205-6 7205-C
2710 2710 2710
11/23 11/23 11/29
11/7 11/7 11/8
810(3 81044 81067
3412-A
2123
11/21
11/6
•1026
3412-8
2123
11/23
11/7
810(9
our
3412-8
2123
11/23
11/7
61050
3412-C
2123
11/29
11/8
81072
17.0
HD
0.4
m «
I.C
HD
0.3
2.6
HD
0.5
07
0.4
Wf
3.1
0.4
MO
HO
HD
HO
21.4
0.3
HD
.4
.9
HD
0.3
10.4
HD
HD
0*
HD
3.8
HD
HD
HO
HO
HD
HO 0.3 HD HO
13.3 12.6 36.7 49.2
16.1
HD
0.8
.0
1.3
0.6
0.7
HO
0.6
HO
1.9
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
31.2
11.0
0.4
HD
HO
1.3
HD
0.5
HD
HD
HD
3.5
3.8
0.2
HD
HD
HD
HD
HO
26.4
7.9
0.6
HD
HD
.3
HD
1.2
2.7
HD
HD
0.3
7.1
MO
HD
HD
HD
HO
HD
25.0
22.4
0.8
0.5
.8
.3
2.8
HD
2.3
0.6
HD
In
HO
3.8
1.5
HO
HO
HD
HO
HD
48.2
41.9
0.8
1.3
HO
.f
HD
HD
2.8
HD
1.5
HD
2.1
HD
HD
HO
HD
HD
HO
58.3
7342-A
S-274
11/18
11/6
82006
25.9
HO
0.9
.4
1.8
2.1
2.8
12.1
HD
HD
t«
.1
HD
.3
4.2
HO
HD
HD
HD
NO
MB
62.6
our
7342-A 7342-8
S-274 S-274
11/21 11/23
11/4 11/7
81027 81047
14.1
0.3
1.5
MB
.9
MB
0.7
4.1
MB
1.0
Om
NB
•4
3.7
1.2
MB
HD
HD
HD
HD
35.7
8.6
1.3
1.1
MB
.7
MB
HD
0.9
MB
0.2
m
•7
1.9
MB
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
23.0
7342-C
S-274
11/29
11/8
81077
18.2
HD
0.3
HD
.5
HD
0.3
HD
HD
0.5
HD
.3
1.2
0.2
HD
HD
HD
HO
HD
32.5
HD: Not Detected
fl) Propvwlc acid. 2 •»thyl-2.2-dl««thyl-»-<2-hr(lry»tcB contMlnation
« known ta^ai cantwination
Page 2 of table (A-1
-------
1AOCC1 CONFOUNDS
»••••••••••••••••••••*••••••
limn AIR MMIYSIS IT CC/Nt
•••••••*•••••»••••••••••••••
TAIIE-4A-2
SITf NAME »
IMTERSIDE NALL • 11/6/88
00»
SAMPLE HNNE/NME8
SAMPLIN6 LOCATION
OATt AMALT2CO
OATE SAMPLED
rm
p~-.t*r
vinyl cftlorldt
trfeMorof luorawHiant •
MtHylana chlorlda
trorn- 1 .2-dlcMorotthant
1.1-dlcMoroetHane
1,1,1-trleMoroathant
carbon tatrachlorlde
baraant
1,2-dlchloi otthana
trldiloroathylant
toluana
totracMorotthylw*
•ttiyl bantam
•Mcytona
o- Kyi ant
•tyrant
•at a-atnyt tolumo
total CtartataJ
total nan tarfata 9
TOTAL VOC
llajlt of Ouantltatlon
(In pft» 8
T8AVEL
8LK
11/18
11/6
81005
PPb
88
6.72
HO
•.56
MO
HO
•.46
HD
5.27
NO
HO
0.24
•LOO
8108
8100
HO
8L08
HO
13.3
9.9
23.2
0.167
7322-4 7322-8
7322-C 7327-A 7327-8 •
•OOP HOOP tOW 8.E8TRANCE 8.ENTRAHCE
11/21 11/25
11/6 11/7
81021 81051
•Pb PPb
88 88
11.54 14.29
NO MD
2.29 1.52
ND NO
HO MD
8.84 8100
MOO HD
0.59 0.43
•.19 ND
HD MO
1.05 0.93
HO 8100
•.18 MOO
•.42 0.32
•.25 MOO
HO MOO
0.27 NO
17.6 17.5
20.8 5.0
38.4 22.5
0.167 0.167
11/30 11/21 11/23
11/8 11/6 11/7
81087 81022 81052
PI*
HO
ppb ppb
ND NO
28.08 41.25 7.31
NO
HD MOO
S.06 6.98 1.73
HO
HD
1.87
0.33
1.67
0.69
0.41
6.65
0.41
0.91
1.49
0.68
•LOO
0.32
ND HO
HD ND
.78 8100
.22 ND
.51 2.67
.54 BLOQ
.30 ND
.76 0.20
.67 MOO
.37 MOO
.68 MOO
.36 MOO
.30 MOO
.25 HD
48.6 56.0 11.9
23.4 30.5 5.6
72.0 86.5 17.5
0.167 0
H11...1111....
.167 0.167
>•••••«•••*•••••«
7127-C
•.ENTRANCE
11/29
11/8
81068
PPb
ND
19.17
HD
3.29
HD
HD
2.43
ND
1.90
HO
HD
4.69
MOO
MOO
1.98
MOO
MOO
ND
33.5
26.5
60.0
1.04
>••••>•••»«
3413-A
OATCAKE 02
11/21
11/6
81024
PPb
NO
10.30
HD
1.75
HD
ND
0.85
MOO
0.29
HO
HD
1.06
0.26
8100
0.43
BLOQ
HD
HD
14.9
9.3
24.2
0.167
~~~~~~
3413-8
OATCAKE n
11/23
11/7
•1045
PPb
HD
14.21
HD
2.68
NO
HD
0.54
MOO
0.68
0.26
ND
2.95
0.43
0.33
0.85
0.40
0.25
0.38
24.0
129.5
153.5
0.167
!«•»««««*»»
3413-C 3413-C 7167-A
OATCAKE n DAYCARE §2 OATCAKE 85
11/29 11/29 11/18
11/8 11/8 11/6
61069 81071 81007
PPb
HD
PPb ppb
HD ND
38.15 37.15 11.87
ND
HO MOO
7.59 9.81 2.40
HO
ND
1.29
0.35
1.33
0.84
0.40
4.15
0.38
BLOO
•100
HD
HD
HD
HO ND
MD HD
.18 0.80
.35 MOO
.33 0.67
.81 0.22
.39 MOO
.86 1.97
.54 0.33
.71 0.37
.31 1.00
.71 0.44
.51 0.27
.43 0.29
54.5 60.1 20.6
13.8 44.7 21.8
68.3 104.8 42.4
0.167 0.
*««*~.......«
167 0.167
'••••«••«••>••••<
7167-8
DAYCAK 05
11/21
11/7
81048
PPb
HD
3.24
MD
1.00
MD
MD
0.33
HO
0.51
HD
HD
2.41
0.30
0.17
0.54
0.23
HO
0.22
9.0
• 30.8
39.8
8.167
7167-C
DAYCARE 85
11/29
11/8
81073
PPb
HD
20.96
m
2.41
88
HD
6.80
HD
1.10
HD
MD
2.45
0.24
0.34
1.09
8.46
8.18
8.39
30.4
20.0
50.4
0.167
,
MD. Mot Dtttctcd.
•100. Mlow K»lt of OuMtftotton.
• poMtbt* t*b contamination
t low turrowte recoveries, d»to rejected.
8 Calculated Halt of Ouantltatlon •
(lowMt Calibration Voluv)K(Stano»rd Concentration)
Sample Volt
-------
CONOINEO WM>TMGET COMPOUND* TANIE-4A-2
••••••••••••••*•••••••••••••
INDOOR AIR AWITSIS tT CC/NS
SITE NAME
SANPIE MANE/NUMER
UMPIIN6 IOCATION
DATE ANAU2ED
DATE UNTIED
FRN
raww
t IMTERSIDE
TRAVEl
M.K
11/18
11/6
81005
MALI •
7322-ft
•OOP
11/21
11/4
81021
11/6/88
73Z2-8 7322-C
•OOP ROOF
11/23 11/30
11/7 11/8
81051 81087
7327-A
•.ENTRANCE
11/21
11/6
81022
7327-B *
•.ENTRANCE
11/23
11/7
•1052
7327-C
•.ENTRANCE
11/29
11/8
•1068
S41J-A
OATCARE 02
11/21
11/6
•1024
3413-1
OATCARE 02
11/23
11/7
•1045
3413-C
DATCARE 02
11/29
11/8
•1069
our
3413-C
DATCARE 02
11/29
11/8
•1071
7167-A
OATCARE 05
11/18
11/6
•1007
7167-«
OATCARE 05
11/23
11/7
•1048
7167-C
OATCARE 05
11/29
11/8
81073
ppb ppb ffb ********
alkanes
atkoneo/cyetoalkanee
elkybensenae.C3-C5
polyeroMtlc hydrocarbon*
aceteldehyde 0
bansoldehyde
other aldehyde*
alcohols
phenols
damme
dlchlorobentene leoaera
diloroaetnone
alloMne •
acetone
acetic acid
acetic acid butyl eater
N.».*.A. CSl
C12N24QS eater CD
C12N2403 eater (2}
1.3
MO
ND
ND
1.1
8.3
8.4
0.6
ND
ND
NO
ND
4.4
0.4
0.7
NO
ND
ND
8.3
0.4
1.8
8.3
8.2
ND
1.2
S.I
1.8
8.6
8.4
ND
1.1
NO
4.2
3.7
8.4
ND
NO
ND
ND
0.8
1.1
ND
ND
ND
8.6
8.2
ND
1.8
NO
ND
ND
8.2
0.7
1.2
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
9.0
2.4
0.7
0.4
ND
ND
8.4
NO
• ND
ND
ND
7.2
3.3
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
6.2
ND
0.3
0.3
0.8
1.4
1.0
9.6
ND
0.3
0.6
0.4
6.0
3.6
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
1.0
ND
ND
ND
0.4
ND
ND
0.9
ND
ND
NO
ND
1.8
1.2
0.3
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
14.5
ND
ND
ND
1.3
ND
ND
3.8
ND
ND
NO
ND
5.7
1.2
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
1.6
ND
NO
NO
0.5
0.6
0.3
1.1
NO
ND
NO
ND
2.9
0.8
0.7
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.8
96.9
ND
NO
3.6
1.7
ND
ND
7.6
ND
ND
ND
ND
11.3
6.0
ND
2.4
ND
ND
NO
ND
7.4
0.4
ND
ND
0.7
ND
ND
0.3
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.7
4.3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
27.3
8.9
NO
ND
0.6
NO
ND
7.4
NO
ND
NO
NO
4.3
4.2
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
6.2
ND
0.2
ND
1.3
ND
2.4
3.6
NO
ND
8.4
ND
4.5
3.2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
20.2
ND
ND
NO
0.9
ND
NO
1.4
ND
0.8
ND
ND
5.1
1.8
NO
0.6
ND
ND
ND
ND
12.3
NO
8.6
•
8.7
•
ND
1.1
ND
ND
NO
NO
3.8
1.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
total 9.9 20.8 S.8 23.4 30.5 5.6 26.5 9.3 129.5 13.8 44.7 21.8 30.8 20.0
NO: Not Ottwtcd
(1) Fropwwic acid. 2 •Hi./l-2.2-dl«BtM-1-«-hydr«nf1-«ttM«tt«yl)prop|fl *tt*r.
(2) PropMwIc Kid. 2 •tthyl-3-hydroiiv2.4.4>trlMthytp«ttyt «tt*r.
(3) N>nitro-N-|*icnyl-iMnMfWMliw
• tystMi contamination
• knnwn ft^LVcont«nin*tion I 5
-------
APPENDIX B
G-17
-------
INDOOR AIR MONITORING. MEM. M.
TAKE -11
TOTAL VOLATILE ORGANIC ESTIMATED CONC. IN •»•••
SAMPLING LOCATIONS SUNDAT(11.6.B8) NONDAT(11.7.a8)
OAT CAM CENTER 12 • S3)
OAT CARE CENTER f5 • 2 10
OAT CARE CENTER SSUTN ENTRANCE • 3 56
2710 • 3 10
2123 S 12 16
2827 « 7 S
SE-2740 f 10 8
ROOF 2 4
• a(r ucply vtntt en both days.
* air tuppty v«nt» OFF on 11/6/88 and ON 11/7/88.
ft air simply vents disconnected.
•• CHARCOAL TME AHALTSES (ORGANIC COMMUHO FOWIO ARE INCLUDED IN TABLE -4)
Calculated Mlth retptct te 4^C CC/F1D retponst.
Results used for coeperfton purpose only.
G-18
-------
tun •
— 1.141
•70*
Day Care Center Class* 2
Monday (11.7.88)
Ctettn*
tUMt 4«
-------
14.
,T-«T
1.414
4.24*
Day Care Center Class I 5
Sunday (11.6.88)
«.4)4
14.421
I I .)»4
•UN* ?•
J499A «OHT
•CTNOO NriHCt «I^CN_4.«fT
NOV tt. I9M •411412*
13
tUN •
tTART
«• NOV
•irttilt
r tt.«ts
lt.4»t
Cletin* «i«n«t
•UNI 4t
MOV It
SAWPLC NAHCl 94t«l FIONT
•CTNOO NAHEl HIPCN.4.MCT
0«IV
Day Care Center Class I 5
Monday (11.7.88)
§)!•!> 12
tICNAL
HlQ7«4t2rf.SMC
G-20
-------
MQ.-J
:-* r
. ».>.<
-.*%•»
•CTN60
«t»CM.4.HCT
South entrance to Day Care Center
Sunday (II.6.88)
Clciir.t «inn«| tll4 Ml wr»44ft»S. CMC
."pi Hiiv 14 .
tUH • St
$T«tT
HOV !•. IMS
It.434
South entrance to Day Care Center
Monday (11.7.88)
Clo.ln.
-------
STUtT
STOP
1.232
- 9.030
10.523
11.9*3
* 11.420
II.MS
Office 2710 (control)
Sunday (11.6.88)
Clo«ln« «i«n*l file AIQ7i40C0t.0HC
•UNt (2 MOV 10. 1*00 0313*149
•AMPLC NABEl 73' ** FKONT SAMPLE! 23
•CTHOO NAMEl * .'CH.4.HCT
T. flCtO 0
ftUH 0 33-003
00M 0 94
START
MOV 10. 1900 0M03H3
STOP
Clo«in9.
•UHf
• .§••
- It.ltP
It.4)8
file ntepiii
MOV 10; 1»SO
P999I
flCTMQO ttQBft
i.230
Office 2710 (control)
Monday (11.7.88)
G-22
-------
141
• I.*T
• 1.44
» ti*n«l «il« HlOr
*4 MOV
NAHCl ?14*« flONT
•CTHOO
•ICS Off ICt
I. i \\
Office 2123
Sunday (11.6.88)
»UN t
• UN •
START
S2
NOV It. IMS
1.14t
- I.9M
Office 2123
Monday (11.7.88)
Clotin* «i«nat fll* Al0^490Clt.tNC
tUNC « NOV 10. tttt *Otit«i9I
•AHPLC NAMCl 79400 FtOMT
HCTHOO NANfl NIPCN.4.NCT
•AHfLCI 19
G-23
-------
rig.-o
tUH • 9t
• TOIT
NOV It. (MS tH43i9l
1.137
Office 2827
Sunday (11.6.88)
STOP
Cletln* «t*n«t ,«tlt «it7t3Ft09.tNC
tUHl 9* NOV It. tttt ttl43l9l
SAHFLC NAME! 733tt rtOHT t«H^CC» I*
HCTNOO NAHCf M(PCH.4.MCT
tOOll
tlJM •
if.IT
I*. 1*44
12.422
11.12?
O.ttt
t. 2 »r
Office 2827
Monday (11.7.88)
tuns 72
NDMCi
•CTMOD
ftONT
0irCM.4.llCT
MOV It. I«M tii92<99
39
-------
fl.tl •
ir.fr
11.425
11.122
1».**3
STOP
Clo«tn« «i
tUNt 4«
Office SE-274D
Sunday (11.6.68)
NOV It. !••• §41971*4
SAMPLE NMlICi 7|73« MONT
•CTNOO N«*Ci •IPCH.4.MET
»U*$ HYEI f« S274
• UN • 49-M3
• UN •
tT*«T
4* NOV ». t*M ttl3tl2t
Office SE-274D
Honday (11.7.88)
IJ.Mt
It.489
trap
Cl*«ln« %t«nal flic
•UNi -44 ' NQV . t* i«M ttraiitr
• • • *
•ANPLC NAME I ?!?«• FiONT tnMFL.Ct. •
METHOD MANE* NlPCN^4.«ET G-25
•Utt HVER
-------
•-< r
».***
Roof
Sunday (11.6.88)
STC?
Miu.~i4423t.tNC
V 10.
r»ONT
•CTNOO NriHCi HlfCM.4.«CT
HUM 0 49-003
•UN 0 90
tTftIT
NOV 9. Ifftt
• I.t41
STOP
CIo«tn«
•UN0 S0
Roof
Monday (11.7.88)
NANCl 7JZ3i ftOMT
METH09 NAME I MirCH.4.HET
toor
NOV 9* 1999 MI 47140
tANFLC* tt
c-26
-------