&EPA
Lower Rio Grande Valle
Environmental Monitoring Study
Report to the Community on the Pilot Project
June 1994
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Lower Rio Grande Valley Environmental Monitoring Study:
Report to the Community on the Pilot Project
WHAT IS THIS REPORT ABOUT?
This report explains a pilot investigation of the potential for human contact with
environmental pollutants in the Lower Rio Grande Valley.
WHY WAS THIS RESEARCH DONE?
This research began because of the community's concerns about the potential health
impact of local environmental contaminants.
WHO HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS RESEARCH?
This research was conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
working with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services/Public Health Service
(especially the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug
Administration, and Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry), and the State of
Texas (Governor's Office, Texas Department of Health, Texas Department of
Agriculture, and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission).
The scope and design of the research were developed through an ongoing collaboration
between community leaders and representatives of several state and federal agencies.
HOW WAS THE RESEARCH DONE?
The first part of this study was a small-scale pilot project conducted during 1993.
During the pilot project, samples of indoor and outdoor air, household water, food,
housedust, soil, blood, and urine were collected at each of the nine homes located in the
Valley.
The primary purpose of the pilot project was to provide information that would
strengthen the scientific basis of the design for a larger study of potential exposure in
Cameron and Hidalgo counties.
WHAT DID THE RESEARCH FIND?
In general, we found that the levels of pollutants from the nine households studied were
similar to those often seen in other parts of the country. The people in the project were
reassured that their results did not show significant exposure to most of the contaminants
-------
measured during the brief monitoring period. In addition, several areas were identified
that require further investigation.
The State of Texas has already begun investigations to determine the source of elevated
PCBs found in fish caught in irrigation ditches near the Donna Reservoir.
The levels of pesticides measured in the pilot project were, in general, remarkably low.
Given the widespread use of pesticides over the years, however, it is not surprising that
we found pesticide residues in the blood and urine of several of participants. Thus, it
is recommended that community exposure to pesticides be further documented.
Follow-up investigations should be conducted to identify the source of lead in the diet
and the origins of the higher than average urinary arsenic levels found among most of
the participants of the pilot project. It should be noted that a less harmful form of
arsenic is found in seafood; recent eating of seafood may explain the arsenic levels found
in the urine.
Educational initiatives are suggested to inform residents about the necessity of
disinfecting containers used to store drinking water.
WHAT HAPPENS NOW?
A report to the residents of Cameron and Hidalgo Counties is planned during community
meetings on June 15 and 16, 1994.
A follow-up visit is planned to address the community's questions regarding the results
of the pilot project and to obtain their suggestions for the next phase of the Lower Rio
Grande Valley Environmental Monitoring Study. The U.S. EPA, in conjunction with
the State of Texas, anticipate the continuation of some environmental monitoring
activities during the planning period.
HOW DO I GET MORE INFORMATION?
A report that summarizes the design and results of the pilot project is available from the
local representative from the Texas Department of Health in Harligen, Ramiro Gonzales
(210-423-0130) or Hector Gonzalez at the Office of Border Environmental and Consumer
Health, Texas Department of Health (1-800-693-6699) or Harold Zenick at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (919-541-2245).
-------
&EPA
Lower Rio Grande Valley
Environmental Monitoring Study
Report to the Community on the Pilot Project
June 1994
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Note
This report has benefited from the review and comment from representatives of
participating Federal agencies and agencies of the State of Texas. These agencies are listed in
Appendix 1.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 1 of 41
Table of Contents
Section Page
I. SUMMARY 3
Background 3
The Pilot Project 4
Pilot Project Results 4
Areas Requiring Further Investigation 6
Areas Recommended for Intervention 7
H. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND DESIGN 9
Project Purpose 9
Project Design 9
Limitations of A Pilot Project 10
Participant Selection and Household Description 10
m. SUMMARY OF PILOT PROJECT RESULTS 13
Basis of Interpretation 13
Summary of Results 14
IV. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS ; 17
Dietary Information 17
How the Information Was Collected 17
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations 18
Contaminants in 24-Hour Food Composites 18
Contaminants in Individual Food Items 20
Nutrient Component 20
Fat/Carbohydrates/Energy (calories) 21
Protein 21
Vitamins 21
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 2 of 41
Table of Contents (continued)
Section
Minerals ................................ 21
Summary Comment ......................... 22
Water
22
How the Information Was Collected 22
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations 23
Microbiological Results 23
Chemical Results 24
Indoor and Outdoor Air . 25
How the Information Was Collected 25
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations 25
Elemental Results 26
VOC Results 27
Pesticide Results 28
PAH Results 28
Household Dust and Soil 29
How the Information Was Collected 29
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations 30
Biological Samples 31
How the Information Was Collected 31
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations 32
Urine 32
Blood 32
Appendix 1 - Contributors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley Exposure Study 35
Appendix 2 - A Guide to Understanding the Results of the Pilot Project 37
Appendix 3 - Tables of Pilot Project Results 41
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 3 of 41
I. SUMMARY
Background
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), working with the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services/Public Health Service (especially the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Agency for Toxic Substance and
Disease Registry), and the State of Texas (Governor's Office, Texas Department of Health,
Texas Department of Agriculture, and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission), is
investigating the potential for human contact with environmental pollutants in the Lower Rio
Grande Valley. This research began because of the community's concerns about the potential
health impact of local environmental contaminants. The scope and design of the research were
developed through an ongoing collaboration between community leaders and representatives of
several state and federal agencies.
Valley residents have identified many potential sources of pollution, including cross-
border emissions from industry (maquiladors), agricultural pesticide use, waste burning, and
inadequate water and sewage facilities in the colonias outside the city limits. However, there
is only limited information on emission levels and the resulting ambient pollution concentrations.
Furthermore, prior to this study, there had been no monitoring that indicated which pollutants
residents might actually come in contact with during their daily activities. Without information
on the extent or the causes of the exposure faced by the local population, it is difficult to
evaluate the relationship between local pollutant levels and health effects. Such information is
also needed to formulate effective mitigation strategies.
The Lower Rio Grande Valley Environmental Study was designed because of the need
for data about actual human exposure to environmental contaminants in the Valley. The long-
term goals of this project are:
• to document the types of pollutants and the distribution of exposures to these pollutants
faced by the local population,
• to identify the sources of contamination, and
• to trace the pathways of exposure.
The first part of this study was a small-scale pilot project conducted during the spring
and summer of 1993. The primary purpose of the pilot project was to provide information that
would strengthen the scientific basis of the design for a larger study of potential exposure in the
Valley. This report summarizes the design and results of the pilot project..
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 4 of 41
The Pilot Project
The pilot project was designed to accomplish three specific objectives: (1) to evaluate
the methods required for a larger study, (2) to collect preliminary information about potential
sources and levels of environmental contaminants in Cameron and Hidalgo Counties, and (3) to
develop methods for disseminating the results of environmental investigations to the community
as well as to explain the implications of these results for reducing exposures to environmental
contaminants.
In this small-scale pilot project, samples of indoor and outdoor air, household water,
food, housedust, and soil were collected at each of the nine homes during the spring of 1993.
Additional sampling was performed at six of these nine homes during the summer, to allow
collection of data during the primary agricultural pesticide application season. The samples were
analyzed for elements, pesticides, and other selected organic compounds. Samples of blood and
urine were collected from one or two adults in each participating household. These samples
were also analyzed for elements, pesticides, and other selected organic compounds. In addition,
nutrients and natural toxins were measured in the food, and microbial analyses were performed
on the household water samples in the spring sampling period. Also, to provide information that
might help explain the levels and type of contaminants measured, a questionnaire on household
characteristics and life styles was administered to the study participants. Although breath
samples were collected in the spring, the analytical results were not valid.
The pilot project also included the measurement of contaminants in the outdoor air in
Brownsville, TX, at a site near the U.S./Mexico border. Outdoor air samples were collected
for 22 days during the spring and 14 days during the summer, coinciding with the periods when
sampling was being conducted at the participant's homes.
In interpreting the results presented in this report, it is important to remember that data
from small-scale pilot projects cannot be generalized to the larger population. The data
presented below represent only the people, periods, and locations sampled. The interpretation
of the pilot findings is limited by four factors: (1) the number of participants, (2) the very short
time during which samples were collected in each home, (3) the limited portion of the year
represented by the monitoring period, and (4) the limited reference data to which the results can
be directly compared.
Pilot Project Results
The results of the pilot project provide three types of information. First, the results allow
preliminary identification of the compounds, pathways, and sources of contamination faced by
local residents. Second, the findings identify topics that may require further investigation.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 5 of 41
Third, the findings in specific cases, suggest intervention actions that can mitigate exposures.
Each of these types of findings is discussed below. In addition, this information improves our
ability to plan the design of the larger study for the Lower Rio Grande Valley.
The pilot project provided preliminary information on the three general areas of
environmental concern raised by community leaders: pesticide exposure, trans-boundary
pollution, and inadequate public services to some areas.
• In general, the results for the nine households studied in this pilot project were similar
to those often seen in other parts of the country. Thus, each of the participants was
reassured that their results did not show significant exposure to most of the
environmental pollutants measured during the one-day monitoring period.
Pesticide Exposure Findings:
• Pesticides at low levels were found in each of the media sampled except public drinking
water. The levels of some pesticides observed in the air and dust of several households
exceeded those typically seen in the available comparison databases. The elevated levels
were observed in the summer when application of pesticides is usually heavier. Many
of the detected pesticides have both domestic and agricultural uses, which make it
difficult to determine the exact source of the pesticides found in the domestic
environment. Pesticide residues were also detected in low levels in the blood and/or
urine of many of the participants, particularly metabolites of parathion, DDT, and
heptachlor. DDT and heptachlor are no longer in use in the U.S. Pesticides were not
found in household water used for drinking. The food samples were analyzed for over
200 pesticide residues, and no unusual results were reported. In only two cases (lindane
in one participant's 24-hour diet and dieldrin in another participant's 24-hour diet) did
pesticide levels exceed EPA's health-based standard Reference Dose (RFD), and/or the
World Health Organization's Allowable Daily Intake (ADI). These results do not
indicate that exposures were at levels which are considered to be of health concern.
• Very high levels of PCBs were found in a fish caught in a local irrigation canal. This
fish was in the freezer for later consumption by a participant. Immediately after
notification that these high PCB levels were detected, the Texas Department of Health
and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission conducted more monitoring that
confirms contamination of bottom fish near the Donna Reservoir in Hidalgo County. A
fishing advisory (later changed to a ban) has been issued in this area.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 6 of 41
Industrial and Automobile Pollution Findings:
* Outdoor air pollution levels of chemicals from all sources were very low. In fact, they
were similar or lower than those typically recorded other places in the United States.
However, wind speeds were relatively high, and prevailing winds were from the North,
especially during the spring sampling period, which make it difficult to document the
actual transboundary contribution to the measured air pollution levels.
• Air inside the residences contained elevated levels of the by-products of burning propane
and butane. There are no known health effects associated with such exposures.
• The blood of a few participants showed evidence of very low exposure to organic
compounds associated with automobile exhaust and solvents.
• Elements (calcium, chlorine, iron, potassium, silicon, sulfur, aluminum, and zinc) were
found in the air and dust sampled at the households. These elements are typically found
at elevated levels in the soil of the southwestern U.S. Elements found in the water are
typical of this area of the U.S.; high sulfate levels were found in some water samples.
• Urinary arsenic levels in many participants were somewhat above those typically seen
across the U.S. This finding is being followed up by the Texas Department of Health
to determine whether exposure to arsenic is likely to be of the form which is less toxic,
e.g., coming from seafood or fish.
• Lead levels in the single-day diets of many of the participants were above those typically
seen across the U.S. However, there were no elevated blood lead levels.
Household Water Contamination Findings:
• Microbiological contamination of containers used to store vended water was highlighted
as a potential problem. Coliforms were found in water of several participants who did
not regularly disinfect the containers in which they stored their purchased water.
• The water from the single private well sampled was not suitable for drinking without
further treatment, but was not being used for this purpose.
Areas Requiring Further Investigation
Follow-up investigations should be conducted to identify the source of lead in the diet
found among the pilot project participants.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 7 of 41
• Follow-up investigations should be conducted to identify the origins of the higher than
average urinary arsenic levels found among the pilot project participants.
• The State of Texas (Department of Health and Natural Resource Conservation
Commission) is continuing to investigate the source of the PCB contamination in the
Donna Reservoir area and the potential for elevated PCB levels in fish caught in other
parts of the Lower Rio Grande Valley.
• More information is needed before citizens' concerns about pesticide exposure and
exposure to cross-border contaminants can be adequately addressed.
Areas Recommended for Intervention
Finally, the pilot project identified several areas where immediate action can reduce
exposure to environmental pollutants among the residents of the Lower Rio Grande Valley.
Many of these activities involve environmental health education initiatives. Specifically:
• The nutritional analyses suggest that participants had relatively low intakes of calories
and carbohydrates and limited intakes of many essential water-soluble vitamins and
several essential major and trace minerals. Daily intakes of protein appeared to approach
reference values more closely than did daily intakes of most other nutrients. In general,
intakes of fat and salt (sodium) were above current guidelines. Diets that contain
increased amounts of fresh fruits, fruit juices, and vegetables can help provide essential
vitamins and minerals. Reducing intake of fat and salty foods may help reduce the risk
of heart disease and hypertension. Dissemination of information on the value of eating
a balanced and nutritious diet is suggested.
• Educational initiatives are suggested to reduce the incidence of microbiological
contamination of containers used to store water. Regular disinfection of water storage
containers will reduce exposure to hazardous microbes.
• Although the finding of unsuitable drinking water for the private well tested cannot be
generalized to all private wells, increased publicity about the need for having water from
private wells tested is suggested.
• Guidance on the potential sources of lead in the diet and ways to help reduce exposure
to lead in the diet is being distributed.
• As a general precaution, it is recommended that fishing advisories be used as guidance
for individuals who eat locally caught fish. In addition, the fat and skin of all fish should
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 8 of 41
be removed before cooking to lower exposures to pesticides and PCBs that normally
concentrate in these parts of the fish. This information needs to be disseminated to
communities.
The success of this study depends upon its value to the community. Several aspects of
the pilot study design were based on the issues and concerns raised during a series of meetings
with community leaders (city, county, and state representatives of government agencies and local
activist groups) as well as the general public. As we plan the full study, we will again meet
with community leaders and the public to determine if the pilot project provided the type of
information that the community needs and to solicit ideas for improving the design of the larger
study.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 9 of 41
H. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND DESIGN
Project Purpose
The Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
in conjunction with agencies from the Department of Health and Human Services/Public Health
Service, and the State of Texas, are investigating the potential for human contact with
environmental pollutants in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. As part of this process, a small-scale
pilot project was conducted during the spring and summer of 1993. The primary purpose of this
small-scale pilot was to provide researchers with information that could be used to strengthen
the scientific basis of the design for a larger study of potential exposure in the Valley. The pilot
project was designed to accomplish three specific objectives: (1) to evaluate the methods
required for a larger study, (2) to collect preliminary information about potential sources and
levels of environmental contaminants in Cameron and Hidalgo Counties, and (3) to develop
methods for disseminating the results of environmental investigations to the community as well
as to explain the implications of these results for reducing exposures to environmental
contaminants. Below we describe the pilot project and its findings.
Project Design
In this small-scale pilot project, concentrations of environmental contaminants were
measured in nine homes. Samples of indoor and outdoor air, household water, food, housedust,
and soil were collected at each of the nine homes during the spring of 1993. Additional
sampling was performed at six of these nine homes during the summer to allow collection of
data during the primary agricultural pesticide application season. The environmental samples
collected during the spring and the summer were analyzed for elements, pesticides, and other
selected organic compounds. Samples of blood and urine were collected from one or two adults
in each participating household. These samples were also analyzed for elements, pesticides, and
other selected organic compounds. In addition, nutrients and toxins were measured in the food,
and microbiological analyses were performed on household water samples in the spring sampling
period. To provide information that might help explain the levels and type of contaminants
measured, a questionnaire on household characteristics and life styles was administered to the
study participants. Breath samples were collected during the spring, but analyses were not valid.
The pilot project also included the measurement of contaminants in the outdoor air in
Brownsville, TX, at a site near the U.S./Mexico border. Outdoor air samples were collected
for 22 days during the spring and 14 days during the summer, coinciding with the same periods
that sampling was being conducted at the participant's homes.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 10 of 41
Limitations of A Pilot Project
The primary reasons for conducting pilot projects are to evaluate methods and to provide
information for designing future projects. As such, the data from small-scale pilot projects
cannot be generalized. In the case of this pilot project, it is important to emphasize that the data
presented below is representative of only the people, periods, and locations sampled. The
interpretation of the pilot project findings is limited by four factors: (1) the number of
participants, (2) the very short time during which samples were collected in each home, (3) the
limited portion of the year represented by the monitoring period, and (4) the limited reference
data to which the results can be directly compared.
Information was collected at just nine households in the two-county area, and therefore
may not be representative of the larger study area (Cameron and Hidalgo Counties).
Specifically, the households were chosen to provide information about residences with a variety
of characteristics. The measurements made at these residences were obtained during either a
single 24-hour period, or at six of the nine houses, two separate 24-hour periods. These data
are representative only of these short time periods, and caution must be exercised in using this
type of short-term data to make assumptions about longer-term exposures.
Although this pilot project was a comprehensive attempt to monitor as many chemicals
and media as current technology permits, there were certain limits on the types of measurements
that could be performed. For example, large, noisy monitors could not be placed inside homes.
Also, the list of pesticides looked for in the samples is only a partial list of those which are, or
have been, used in the Valley. The selected list of compounds measured will serve as an
indicator of the types of exposure which could be experienced by people in the Valley. An
additional limitation to this type of pilot project is that the list of compounds being analyzed
varies by media according to the compounds expected to be found in a particular media.
Therefore, the compound lists for air, water, etc., differ somewhat.
Participant Selection and Household Description
The selection of participants for the pilot project was based primarily on residential
location. The nine sites were chosen according to their proximity to: (1) areas downwind of air
pollutants emitted along the Mexican border, particularly from maquiladoras, traffic congestion,
and the occasional burning at the Matamoros Municipal Dump; or (2) areas that bring
individuals into contact with agricultural pesticides. Households were also chosen for
participation so that they provided variations in both: (1) the source of drinking, cooking, and
washing water (municipal, well, or vended); and (2) lifestyle conditions as determined by
socioeconomic status and level of public services available in the community (such as living in
a colonia).
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 11 of 41
The nine households were chosen to reflect maximum variation in exposure sources. Of
the nine participating households, three were located within the city of Brownsville and were
serviced by municipal sewage, garbage, and water systems; the other sites, two located in
colonias in Cameron County adjacent to the Brownsville city limits, and four in the rural
agricultural parts of Cameron and Hidalgo counties, had a mixture of public and private
services. In homes not serviced by the municipal sewage and garbage system, septic tanks were
commonly used and garbage was either burned, dumped into nearby ditches, or picked up by
a private service.
Eight of the nine households participating in this pilot project lived in single family,
single-floor, wood-framed structures. The other family lived in a mobile home. Several of the
homes had unfinished wood floors and/or walls. One home did not have indoor plumbing. Hot
water was not available in three of the homes. Five of the nine homes purchased their drinking
water from local vending stations, even though tap water from municipal water supplies was
available in four of these five homes.
All homes in the city used natural gas for cooking. Bottled propane or butane gas was
used in the other homes. None of the homes had central heating. On the few days each year
that heating was necessary, most participants used small space heaters fueled by electricity or
propane, or used their cooking range to heat the house. Two of the nine homes had window air
conditioning units; the remainder of the homes used electric fans for cooling. None of the
primary participants in the pilot project smoked, but smokers visited seven of the nine homes.
All of the nine families who participated in the pilot project were of Hispanic origin; one
family member in one of the participating households was a Native American. Four of the
primary participants (the adult in the household who answered the questions) were born in the
U.S. Young children (under 10 years) lived in six of the households; children visited frequently
in the other three. The household income in these homes varied from less than $6,000/year to
$25,000/year.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 13 of 41
HI. SUMMARY OF PILOT PROJECT RESULTS
Basis of Interpretation
The interpretation of results is based upon how the information collected in this pilot
project compares with available health-based regulatory levels and/or information on pollutant
levels collected in other geographic areas. The regulatory levels and pollutant level data
available varies from medium to medium, and may not include all of the compounds of interest.
Health-based regulatory values are criteria established by federal or state governments
to protect human health and are available for many of the water and air contaminants that were
studied. For example, the Texas Effects Screening Level (TESL) is the regulatory guideline
used for air data comparisons, and the Federal Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), among
others, is used for water data comparisons. If a compound was detected in the pilot project at
a level higher than the applicable comparison value, the local environmental agency was notified,
and remedial or follow-up actions were initiated.
If the results of the pilot project were below applicable regulatory values, they were then
compared to the high values observed in studies or surveys conducted in other areas in the
United States. Such comparison data, however, are very limited because few exposure studies
have been conducted that are as detailed as the pilot project conducted in the Lower Rio Grande
Valley. Some of the comparison data come from national studies conducted by government
agencies. For instance, the levels of many of the compounds analyzed in blood and urine can
be compared with levels found in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC)
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The contaminants found in food
can often be compared with nationwide market-basket data collected by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). In contrast, the comparison data available for indoor air pollutants is
based on smaller-scale studies limited to only a few cities. The data available for comparing
housedust and soil contamination levels are even more limited, as this form of data collection
is still relatively new, and its relationship to actual human exposure is still unknown.
Because air, dust, and soil comparison information is very limited, the interpretation of
results includes a discussion of whether the compounds were found at levels above or below a
selected cut-off point. The choice of cut-off point was not based upon information relevant to
health effects, but rather was chosen as a point substantially above the detection limit of the
measurement system. Sorting the data based upon such an arbitrary value is useful for two
reasons. First, it allows comparison across media of pollutants that are above the background
levels of the measurement system. For example, was the same compound found in air and dust?
Second, it allows one to relate known sources of contaminants with whether compounds were
actually measured at levels above the background. Thus, the selected cut-off values are most
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 14 of 41
useful in the context of pattern and source identification, and should not be interpreted as having
any known health significance.
In conclusion, given the limited availability of health-based regulatory values and
comparable pollutant level data, the comparisons provided for many of the compounds can be
used only to provide perspective. A result that shows levels of a certain pollutant higher in the
pilot project than in the comparison data does not necessarily imply that health consequences are
likely from such exposure levels, nor that levels are consistently high. Such a result only
implies that further study may be appropriate.
Summary of Results
The results are presented below in five categories: dietary information (food), household
water, indoor and outdoor air, soil and housedust, and biological samples (blood and urine).
The major findings are:
• In general, we found that the results for the nine households studied in this pilot project
were similar to those often seen in other parts of the country. Each of the participants
was reassured that their results did not show significant exposure to most of the
environmental contaminants measured during the one-day monitoring period. It is
important, however, to keep in mind that the results of a 24-hour sampling period may
not reflect longer-term exposures.
• Pesticides were found in air, dust, blood, urine, and food at low levels. Higher levels
of pesticides were observed in the air and dust of several households than those typically
seen in the available comparison databases which represent urban non-agricultural areas.
The elevated levels were observed in the summer, the season when application of
pesticides is usually heavier. Pesticides (or their metabolites) were also detected at low
levels in the blood and/or urine of many of the participants, particularly metabolites of
parathion, DDT, and heptachlor. DDT and heptachlor are no longer in use in the U.S.
Pesticides were not found to be elevated in the drinking water. The food samples were
analyzed for over 200 pesticide residues and no unusual results were reported. In only
two cases (lindane and dieldrin) did a pesticide level exceed the Reference Dose (RFD).
These levels do not indicate that exposures were at levels which are considered to be of
health concern.
• Some elements, particularly those elements typically found at elevated levels in the soil
of the southwestern U.S. (calcium, chlorine, iron, manganese, titanium, bromine,
potassium, silicon, sulfur, aluminum, and zinc), were in the air and dust sampled at
every household. Elements were found in relatively low levels in the water.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 15 of 41
Urinary arsenic levels in many participants tended to be somewhat above those typically
seen across the U.S. This finding is currently being followed up by the Texas
Department of Health to determine whether exposure is to the toxic or the less toxic form
of this metal.
Lead levels in the diets of many of the participants were above those typically seen
across the U.S. Guidance is being distributed to the participants on the potential sources
of lead in the diet and what they can do to help reduce exposure. Follow-up
investigation into the source of lead in the diet is recommended.
Levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as benzene, in the outdoor air were
similar to or lower than those typically recorded. The results show that the air monitored
inside the residences contained elevated levels of the by-products of burning propane and
butane. In all but two cases, the contaminant levels were below the Texas Effects
Screening Levels (TESLs) and generally lower than pollutant results obtained in other
studies. The two exceptions were, first, during the summer, chloroform was measured
in the air inside one home at levels slightly higher than the TESL. Second, propane was
measured in the air inside one home at levels above the TESL. Health officials do not
consider these exposures to be of immediate health concern, however, further
investigation may be required. Levels of organic compounds in the blood were relatively
low; a few participants showed evidence of low-level exposure to compounds that could
be associated with automobile exhaust and solvents.
Microbiological contamination of containers used to store vended water was highlighted
as a potential problem. Coliforms were found in water of several participants who
purchased vended water but did not regularly disinfect the containers in which they were
stored. Educational initiatives to better inform the public on the value of disinfecting the
containers are suggested.
The single private well from which water was tested was not suitable for drinking (but
was not being used for this purpose). Although this finding cannot be generalized to all
private wells, it suggests that it may be necessary to increase publicity about the need for
having the quality of water in private wells tested.
Very high levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were found in a fish caught in a
local irrigation canal. This fish was in the freezer for later consumption by a participant.
Immediately after being informed of the high PCB level detected, the Texas Department
of Health and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission conducted additional
monitoring that confirms contamination of fish caught in the vicinity of the Donna
Reservoir in Hidalgo County. A fishing ban has been issued in this area. As a general
precaution, it is recommended that the public be made aware that the fat and skin of all
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 16 of 41
fish should be removed before cooking to reduce potential exposure to some
environmental contaminants.
• The nutritional analyses suggests that participants had relatively low intakes of calories
and carbohydrates and limited intakes of many essential water-soluble vitamins and
several essential major and trace minerals. Daily intakes of protein appeared to approach
recommended daily reference values more closely than did daily intakes of most other
nutrients. In general, intakes of fat and salt (sodium) were above current guidelines.
Diets that contain increased amounts of fresh fruits, fruit juices, and vegetables can help
provide essential vitamins and minerals. Reducing intake of fat and salty foods may help
reduce the risk of heart disease and hypertension. Dissemination of information on the
value of well-balanced and nutritious diets is recommended.
These results are discussed in more detail in the sections that follow.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 17 of 41
IV. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS
Dietary Information
How the Information Was Collected
One individual in each household was asked to save a "duplicate plate" of all foods and
beverages consumed during the designated 24-hour period. This means that during the
monitoring period, the participant was asked to prepare a second plate of solid food or glass of
liquid that was identical to what they consumed. This second plate or glass was saved in a
cooler for collection by the study team. If the participant ate any meals away from home (at a
friend's home or at a restaurant), that food was not collected. In this project, all of the duplicate
diets were collected by adult females.
All of the participants reported that they were able to collect and provide a duplicate
portion of all foods prepared and consumed at home during the monitoring periods. (This food
was all put into two containers, one for the liquid portion of the sample and one for the solid
sample. Each of these samples represent the composite liquid or composite solid portion of the
diet.) One participant in the spring consumed two meals away from home during the 24-hour
collection period, thus, the results of this participant's diet were not included in the description
of the nutritional findings. Two other participants in the spring 1993 phase ate one meal each
away from home during the monitoring period. Even though this meal was not included in the
composite food and beverage samples analyzed, the results of contaminant analyses for these two
participants are reported with those who reported providing all meals.
It is important to note that these duplicate food collections may not be representative of
the amounts or types of foods consumed over time (over a week, month, or year). Thus, the
results reported below should be interpreted cautiously. For example, underestimates may occur
during 24-hour food collections if duplicate portions of all foods consumed are not provided by
the participants. In addition, a person may "skip" breakfast or lunch on a particular day. If
collections were made on such a day, the results may suggest lower than actual nutrient intake
or may underestimate the individual's typical intake of contaminants.
Food composites representing the 24-hour consumption in each of the homes were
analyzed by the FDA according to standard analytical methods. Solid foods and beverages were
collected and analyzed separately. However, for ease of comparison in this report, the total 24-
hour intake of contaminants from beverages and solids has been added together.
The specific list of chemicals chosen for analysis represented those most frequently
analyzed by regulatory agencies to estimate chemical contamination. The FDA analyzed each
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 18 of 41
composite diet sample for nutrients and a broad range of pesticides and chemical contaminants,
including pesticides, toxic elements and PCBs. A private laboratory, Research Triangle
Institute, performed analyses of the food samples for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).
The nutrient, pesticide, PCB, PAH, and elemental results are expressed on an "intake
per day" basis. These results are compared with EPA's health-based values (Reference Dose,
RED) or the World Health Organization/Food and Agriculture Organization Acceptable Daily
Intake (ADI) values, when available. In addition, the results are compared with the findings
from the FDA's Total Diet Study, in which foods were collected from grocery stores across the
U.S. and prepared in kitchens before analysis. The data from the Total Diet Study can be used
as an indication of the levels of contamination frequently found in foods in the U.S. However,
because the types of food collection conducted in this pilot project may not be representative of
amounts or types of foods consumed over time and may underestimate the actual food intake of
participants, comparisons with national databases must be interpreted cautiously.
In addition to the 24-hour diet composites collected from the homes of participants,
selected individual food items of local origin were collected both from the residences and from
places where these individuals shop, particularly local vendors on both sides of the border.
Preference was given to locally grown or locally produced foods to determine if such foods were
contaminated with pesticides and other chemical contaminants found in environmental samples
collected in the pilot project. The individual foods were analyzed for the same list of potential
contaminants as were the 24-hour composites, with the exception of PAHs. In addition, selected
corn-based products were analyzed for aflatoxins and fumonisins, two classes of naturally
occurring toxic compounds produced by certain molds.
The results from the analyses of these individual foods are compared with information
compiled by the FDA for the maximum levels found in monitoring programs across the U.S.
and with the same health-based values (RFDs or ADIs) noted above.
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations
Contaminants in 24-Hour Food Composites
In most cases, no unusually high level of any element (e.g., calcium, zinc) was found
in the nine diet composites collected during the spring and six diet composites collected during
the summer. The levels of contaminants found in this one day collection from each home were
similar to levels found in foods collected throughout the U.S. However, estimated intake of
some contaminants from several of the 24-hour diet composites did exceed the calculated,
average daily intakes found in FDA's market basket survey known as the Total Diet Study. For
example, in some of the homes during the single 24-hour monitoring period, the estimated intake
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 19 of 41
of lead (a toxic metal sometimes found in food or products that come in contact with food)
exceeded the average intake seen by the Total Diet Study. Lead is a common environmental
contaminant often present in dust, soil, in some house paints, and some consumer products such
as ceramic cookware. The findings of this one-day study do not indicate that a serious problem
with lead exposure exists in the Valley. Nonetheless, general precautions should be taken by
individuals to reduce or eliminate potential sources of dietary exposure to lead; FDA suggestions
on how to do so are being provided to all participants. Additional investigation of the sources
of lead in the diet in this area should, however, be conducted in association with future
monitoring activities. Broad dissemination of this information throughout the community is
warranted.
A similar, somewhat elevated 24-hour intake was noted for arsenic in one of the homes.
Again, the finding itself does not indicate a problem, but does indicate the need for additional
monitoring to determine if this finding recurs on a continuing basis.
The nine beverage composites were essentially free of toxic elements. The absence of
toxic elements in beverages is typical of results obtained in FDA's market basket survey.
The 24-hour diet composites were analyzed for over 200 pesticide residues. No unusual
results were reported. Although the observed 24-hour intake of some of the pesticide residues
exceeded the typical values found by the Total Diet Study, FDA notes that they commonly find
low levels of pesticide residues in about half of the foods tested throughout the country. In the
pilot project, only traces of two pesticide residues were found in the beverage samples (DDE
and dieldrin). The residues detected in solid foods included: chlorpropham (a commonly used
inhibitor of sprouting in stored potatoes), DCPA (an herbicide), DDE (a break down product
of DDT, a currently banned insecticide which was once used extensively and persists in the
environment, or is stored in fatty foods, fish and root crops), chlorpyrifos (an insecticide
commonly used to control household pests), dieldrin (a currently banned insecticide which
persists in the environment, or is stored in fatty foods), permethrins and lindane (insecticides
used on fruits and vegetables and indoors for fly control), and malathion and pirimiphos-methyl
(insecticides commonly used on grain). However, in only two cases (lindane and dieldrin) did
the observed 24-hour intake exceed that of the health-based value. Again, additional monitoring
is warranted to determine the frequency of this occurrence.
PAHs were found at very low levels (less than 20 ppb) in some of the diet composites.
These compounds are sometimes found when foods are smoked, fried or grilled. The levels
found in the composites are most likely due to cooking rather than to environmental
contamination from petroleum or other local sources. However, PAHs can also result from
contamination of foods in the field or garden from air or soil pollution.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 20 of 41
Contaminants in Individual Food Items
The most important finding associated with the individual food items is the detection of
an extremely high level of PCBs in one locally caught fish (a carp). Five of the participants
reported eating locally caught fish at some point during the past year. Common sources of
locally caught fish included local irrigation canals, the Rio Grande, the Arroyo Colorado, and
off South Padre Island. The fish with the high PCB levels was provided by a participant who
had caught it in an irrigation canal in Hidalgo county. This fish sample also had relatively high
levels of some elements, including lead, mercury, and nickel. The high level of PCBs found
in this sample prompted considerable additional sampling by the Texas Department of Health
and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and has resulted in fishing advisories and
subsequent closing of some local waters for fishing in parts of Hidalgo County. Efforts are
continuing to identify the source of the PCB contamination.
With the exception of this fish sample, the element and pesticide levels found in the
individual food items were, for the most part, similar to the findings for the 24-hour diet
composites, and are typical of those found in nationwide samples. In addition, no new or
unusual chemicals were found. However, some individual findings were higher than the
corresponding typical (average) findings of FDA's Total Diet Study. Again, this does not
indicate an unusual situation, but does indicate the need for some additional follow-up
monitoring to determine if a consistent pattern emerges. For example, locally prepared white
cheese appears to contain somewhat higher than usual levels of lead; the source of the lead
should be sought to determine if it is associated with the milk, with contaminated equipment
used to produce or store the cheese, or from environmental sources in and around the home.
Similarly, while the pesticide residue findings are not outstanding, some of the results indicate
usage patterns which are not consistent with U.S. regulations, for example, methamidophos in
squash. Some of these situations may warrant further educational activities, since they represent
possible pesticide misuse, even though these levels are not known to be associated with adverse
health risks. No unusual findings were noted for the levels of the naturally occurring aflatoxins
and fumonisins in the local corn-based items.
Nutrient Component
In interpreting the nutritional results, it is necessary to keep several caveats in mind.
First, the analysis reported below is based only on the solid food component of the 24-hour
"duplicate plate" samples provided. Beverages consumed by the participants may have provided
some additional nutrients that are not included in these estimates. Second, because vitamins C,
A, and riboflavin may be lost during sample collection and preparation procedures, values for
these nutrients may be lower than amounts actually consumed. Third, because participants may
not have included all of the food items that they consumed in their duplicate plate, the nutrient
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 21 of 41
values may be underestimated. Finally, the nutrient results reported in the table do not include
food collected from the participant who ate most of her meals away from home during the
collection period.
Fat/Carbohvdrates/Energv (calories^. Calorie intakes were low during both the spring
and summer phases of the project, even after taking into consideration the lower calorie
requirements of females. For instance, 5 of 8 participants who participated during the spring
consumed less than 1300 calories per day. Intakes of carbohydrates by most subjects in both
phases were below average reference values. The percentage of calories derived from fat was
similar to that observed in usual U.S. diets, which is higher than the current Federal
recommendations.
Protein. In general, daily intake of protein by most participants was only slightly below
the recommended range of 46 to 63 g. Daily protein intakes in 5 of 8 participants in the spring
and in 3 of 6 participants in the summer fell within the recommended range. These observations
are consistent with the participants' dietary records. All participants reported that they
consumed at least one portion of beef, pork, lamb, or poultry during the monitoring periods.
Two of 8 participants in the spring, however, had protein intakes below 30 grams per day.
Vitamins. Participants reported consumption of fruits, fruit juices, and vegetables less
frequently than consumption of protein-containing foods. Some participants appeared to have
low intakes of several essential water-soluble vitamins. For example, in the spring, values in
the range of half or less of the recommended intakes were found for riboflavin, niacin, folic
acid, biotin, and vitamin B12. Analyses of a wider range of vitamins were included for the
summer. Again, low intakes were observed for riboflavin, niacin, folic acid, biotin, and vitamin
B12. In addition, low intakes were also observed for pantothenic acid, thiamin, and vitamin B6.
Ranges of intake of folic acid were about 67 to 108 meg per day for participants in the spring
and 31 to 75 meg per day for participants in the summer. These values are significantly below
the recommended daily intake (180-200 meg/day) for this vitamin.
Vitamin C was not detectable in 3 of 8 samples analyzed during the spring, and was very
low in 3 of the 5 samples in which it was detected. It was not detected in any of the 6 samples
analyzed during the summer phase. As noted above, vitamin C is very unstable and loss of this
vitamin during processing of the samples may account for the observations. Alternatively, since
concentrations of all other water-soluble vitamins were also low, the participants' diets may have
contained little vitamin C. In general, daily intakes of vitamins A and E exceeded
recommendations. This may reflect contributions from specific foods as well as contributions
from oils used in cooking.
Minerals. For many participants, daily intakes of calcium, phosphorous, and magnesium
from the solid food composites collected during both the spring and summer fell significantly
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 22 of 41
below recommended ranges, while average intakes of sodium and chloride were well above daily
reference values. "Low values" in the range of about half or less of the recommended daily
intakes were found for the essential trace minerals iron, zinc, manganese, and copper during
both phases of the project.
Summary Comment. During the 24-hour study periods, the solid food consumed by a
number of participants appeared to provide low carbohydrate and calorie intakes, and also
appeared to provide limited intakes of many essential water-soluble vitamins and several essential
major and trace minerals. Daily intakes of protein appeared to approach reference values more
closely than did daily intakes of most other nutrients. In general, intakes of fat and salt (sodium)
were above current guidelines. Diets that contain increased amounts of fresh fruits, fruit juices,
and vegetables, and lower amounts of fiat and salty foods, can help provide essential vitamins
and minerals, and may improve the overall dietary pattern. Dissemination of information on the
value of well-balanced and nutritious diets is recommended.
Water
How the Information Was Collected
The purpose of the water sampling was to identify the occurrence and range of
concentrations of environmental contaminants in the water residents used for drinking or other
household uses, such as cooking, bathing, and dish washing. Only one water source was
sampled at each household. When the family used both vended and tap water for household
purposes, the sample source chosen was the source less frequently tested at that point in the pilot
project. Of the resulting nine samples collected during the spring, seven were drinking water
samples and two were samples only used for other household purposes. The same water sources
(municipal, well or vended) collected in the spring were repeated in the six summer homes.
All household water samples were collected in private residences, directly from the
source used by the participants to dispense the water. In the case of tap water, the water was
collected from the kitchen tap after first removing the aerator, but leaving any final filtering
devices in place. In homes where containers were filled at local vending machines, samples
were collected from the containers currently being used by the family. Due to the frequent use
of vended water for drinking water, an additional sample (non-household sample) was collected
directly from a vending machine.
The water samples collected in this pilot project were traceable to essentially three
sources that are inspected/regulated for use as drinking water by specific authorities. These
sources include: 1) public utilities, which are the responsibility of the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC), 2) vending machines, which are inspected by the Texas
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 23 of 41
Department of Health, Division of Food and Drugs, and 3) private wells, which are not
routinely inspected.
The water samples were analyzed at the U.S. EPA laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Analyses were conducted for a broad range of chemical contaminants and for microbial quality.
The results were compared to the U.S. EPA's standards, which are appropriate for regulating
public drinking water supplies (those serving at least 25 persons or having at least 15 service
connections).
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations
Microbiological Results
Analyses for microbiological organisms were performed only on the water samples
collected during the spring. The results indicate that some water being used for either drinking
or household purposes would not pass federal drinking water regulations designed for public
water supplies. Of particular interest is the presence of bacteria (such as coliforms, including
Escherichia coli and heterotrophs), in samples taken from containers used by participants for
storing drinking water. Similar contaminants were found in the kitchen tap water sample
supplied from the private well.
The explanation for this bacteriologic contamination differs between the water sources.
Water vending machines (locally referred to as "water mills") are sanitized routinely and are
inspected by local health officials. It is likely that the source of contamination in the vended
water sampled in this pilot was the use of unsanitary storage containers after the water was
purchased by the participants. Instructions to customers regarding the proper procedures to
sanitize containers used to transport and store vended water are posted on the vending machines.
It is possible that customers do not sanitize their containers on a routine basis. Furthermore,
in some cases it would be difficult to implement the instructions without a readily available
source of safe water with which to cleanse the containers. As follow-up to this project,
customers of vended water supplies should be provided with materials or community training
on the importance of sanitizing containers. They also should be informed that the public water
is safe, but that improper handling and storage of any water may make safe water unsafe for
household uses.
The source of contamination in the private well water sampled in this project was likely
related to the well's shallowness and its proximity to irrigation ditches. It is known that shallow
wells can be contaminated by nearby sources, including untreated sewage and chemical wastes
or residues produced by industrial or fanning practices. Furthermore, the owners of the well
did not further treat or sanitize the water before piping it into their home. It is recommended
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 24 of 41
that the public be made aware that the quality of well water should be tested before it is used
for drinking or other hygienic purposes.
Participants at households where microbiologic problems were identified were notified
that their water was not safe to drink. Those who purchased vended water were advised of the
recommended sanitation procedures. The owner of the well water received retesting and advice
from the Texas Department of Health.
Chemical Results
Analyses for inorganic and organic chemicals and pesticides were performed on both
spring and summer samples. The results indicate that all federal criteria established for
regulating drinking water from public water supplies were met, with only one exception. During
the summer phase, a sample was collected (in a home served by a public drinking water supply)
which exceeded the current health-based standard, the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), for
trihalomethanes (THMs). THMs are defined as the total of the concentrations of
bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform, and dibromochloromethane. These pollutants
are formed from the reaction of chlorine with organic material in the water. THMs are
regulated in drinking water because long-term high-level exposures have been associated with
health effects. But because the same water source did not exceed the MCL for THMs when
sampled in the spring, it is unlikely the household experienced long-term exposure to elevated
THMs. Local authorities were notified of the situation for appropriate follow-up action.
Haloacetic acids, another by-product of chlorination that is not currently regulated under federal
statute, were also found in relatively high levels in this sample.
High sulfate levels were found in several water samples. Although not harmful, this may
cause a bad taste or smell, or change the color of the water. Water samples taken in 1986-1991
of the Cameron County Public Water Supply Systems also indicated that sulfate levels were
relatively high when compared with EPA's Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level, which is
based on taste, smell, and color. In addition, the pilot project found that one sample from a
municipal water supply contained tetrahydrofuran, an unregulated compound in drinking water,
commonly used as a solvent. Tetrahydrofuran is not associated with health effects at low levels.
Tetrahydrofuran was also detected in the Cameron County Water System (FWSD #1) during the
1989-1990 sampling period.
The private well water had observable levels of contamination in addition to the microbial
contaminants noted above. Specifically, two agricultural pesticides were detected in the well
water (atrazine and dacthal), but neither were at levels of concern. The well water also had
relatively high nitrate, chloride, manganese, and molybdenum levels. These results are not
unusual for a shallow (< 50 feet) well located in a rural, agricultural area of the country.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 25 of 41
Indoor and Outdoor Air
How the Information Was Collected
Air pollution sampling systems were placed both inside and outside each residence. The
outdoor samplers were placed in the participant's yard. The indoor samplers were placed in the
primary living space of the participant's home. The air sampling at each residence was
performed for a 24-hour period. Separate pieces of equipment were used to collect each type
of air pollutant measured: PAHs, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and chemical
elements. The same types of equipment were used to collect outdoor air samples at a measuring
station on top of a building in Brownsville, TX, near the border with Mexico. This outdoor
measuring station is referred to as a "fixed site", because the measurements were always taken
at the same location.
The air samples were sent to various private laboratories for analysis: Research Triangle
Institute performed the analyses for PAHs, Southwest Research Institute performed the analyses
for pesticides, ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc., weighed the samples and performed
the carbon and elemental analyses, and Biospherics, Inc., performed the analyses for VOCs.
The results are compared with contaminant concentrations documented in the air during
monitoring in other cities. For some compounds, there is an extensive database, whereas for
other compounds, comparative data are not available. Thus, the ability to offer interpretation
of the levels of air contamination found at these residences, with respect to levels found
elsewhere, varies by compound.
The results are also compared with health-based screening levels set by the State of
Texas. These Texas Effects Screening Levels (TESLs) are designed to evaluate potential health
impacts. If measured airborne levels of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level,
it is interpreted to mean that adverse health effects are not expected. If the measured level
exceeds the screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather
is an indication that some follow-up action, or further review, is warranted.
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations
The results do not document unusually high levels for any of the compounds measured
at either the indoor or outdoor residential sites or fixed site. In all but two cases, the
contaminant levels were below the Texas Effects Screening Levels (TESLs) and generally lower
than pollutant results obtained in other studies. The two exceptions were, first, during the
summer, chloroform was measured in the air inside one home at levels slightly higher than the
TESL. Because the levels measured at this home were very low during the spring, it is unlikely
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 26 of 41
that the family has received elevated exposure over a prolonged period, and no immediate
follow-up is planned. Second, propane was measured in the air inside one home during the
summer at levels above the TESL. Levels in the spring were elevated above the comparison
data, but below the TESL. Health officials do not consider this exposure to be of immediate
health concern, however, further investigation is planned when we present the results to the
participant. These results suggest that there may be a malfunctioning gas burner and/or very
small leak around a pipe fitting.
As has been found in other studies, indoor contaminant levels generally exceeded outdoor
levels. VOCs and PAHs were higher in the spring than in the summer, possibly reflecting
increased use of combustion sources. In contrast, concentrations of chemical elements and
pesticides were higher in the summer, a finding that is consistent with increased fanning
activities and pesticide usage. Because the prevailing wind direction was from the north during
the spring monitoring period, evaluation of air pollutant transport from Mexico was precluded.
In general, the winds were more favorable for this type of comparison in the summer. A brief
description, by type of chemical analysis, follows.
Elemental Results
Among the 42 elements assessed, only 13 to 20 were detected, depending on the season
or the location (fixed, indoor, or outdoor). The total elemental loading (found by adding the
concentration levels of all the elements) was higher in the summer than in the spring, and higher
indoors than outdoors. For example, the total mass loading of measured elements was 11.2
/ig/m3 indoors during the summer and 8.2 ng/m3 indoors during the spring. In contrast, the
loading was 10.4 ftg/m3 outdoors in the summer, an increase from 3.8 ng/m3 in the spring. Six
elements had concentration levels above the chosen cut-off point of 100 ng/m3 in each of the
seasons and locations: calcium, chlorine, iron, potassium, silicon, and sulfur. Aluminum was
found above 100 ng/m3 in all locations except in the spring at the fixed location in Brownsville.
In addition, zinc was found indoors during both sampling periods above 100 ng/m3. The
residential monitoring results exceed comparison values for bromine, calcium, chlorine, silicon,
zinc, aluminum, iron, and lead in indoor air; and for bromine, calcium, chlorine, silicon,
aluminum, iron, manganese, potassium, and titanium in outdoor air. Also, chlorine, silicon,
iron, potassium, and titanium exceeded comparison values in outdoor air as measured at the
fixed site. All of these elements are normally found in the soil in the southwest, and the
concentrations most likely reflect transfer from the soil into the air.
Lead was measured indoors above the comparison value in one home during the spring
at very low levels, but it was not detected at any of the residences (indoor or outdoor) in the
summer. In addition, titanium, another element found in soil, was measured above 100 ng/m3
outdoors and at the fixed site during the summer. The sulfur found in the air samples at the
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 27 of 41
central site was primarily in the fine paniculate. This sulfur is generally in the form of
ammonia sulfate and is derived from sulfur dioxide (SO^ from power plants using fossil fuels.
In summary, the naturally occurring elements appear to be slightly higher in the air in the Valley
than were documented in studies in non-agricultural areas, but the levels observed here are,
nevertheless, very low.
VOC Results
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are air pollutants that are emitted into the air
through a variety of mechanisms. Some VOCs are produced as a result of combustion
processes; sources of combustion emissions including automobiles, cooking stoves, space
heaters, and power tools such as lawn mowers. VOCs are also used in solvents. Examples of
commercial facilities that may emit VOCs include dry cleaning establishments, automobile repair
shops, and shoe repair shops. Some manufacturing processes also produce VOCs.
The indoor and outdoor air samples were analyzed for 78 VOCs; about 80 to 85% of
these compounds showed measurable concentrations. In general, the concentrations of the
compounds that were detected were lower than those observed in other exposure studies. There
were some seasonal differences — in the spring, 10 compounds were above 100 ng/m3 indoors
in at least one household: cis-2-butane, i-butane, i-butene, n-butane, n-pentane, trans-2-butane,
methane, propane, propene, and 1-butane. However, in the summer, only 4 compounds were
above this level — i-butane, n-butane, methane, and propane. These observations are consistent
with our knowledge of local sources. Specifically, the compounds found at elevated levels are
typically found in auto exhaust, and they are also products from incomplete combustion of
propane and butane gases used in kitchen stoves and home heating. For some residences, the
VOC measurements indicated there were substantial levels of these VOCs which may be the
result of a poor burner maintenance. The residential monitoring results exceed comparison
values for i-butane, n-butane, n-pentane, propane, ethane, ethylene, 3-methylhexane, n-
propylbenzene, and p-ethyltoluene in indoor air; and for cis-2-pentane, methyl cyclohexane, and
propane in outdoor air. Also, cis-2-butene, cis-2-pentene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and
trichloroethene exceeded comparison values in outdoor air as measured at the fixed site. These
combustion by-products were found at higher levels indoors in the spring than during the
summer, possibly because the appliances were not in use during the summer sampling, or doors
and windows were more likely to be open during the summer. There are few outdoor sources
of these compounds, with the exception of methane, which is a natural, biologically related
compound that is seen throughout the world.
The low concentrations of VOCs observed outdoors are consistent with the low air
emission estimates for the area.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 28 of 41
Pesticide Results
Pesticides are actively used in agriculture as herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides.
Pesticides are also used for a variety of household purposes, including control of roaches, ants,
and flies indoors, for control of weeds and pests in yards and gardens, and for control of fleas
and ticks on pets.
In this pilot project, 22 separate pesticides were analyzed. However, because this list
does not include all pesticides that have been used in the past or are being used currently in the
Valley, conclusions cannot be drawn about whether residents are exposed to the other,
unmeasured pesticides.
All levels of pesticides measured in the air were low. Consistent with the increased use
of pesticides in the summer, more compounds were found above the detection limit in the
summer monitoring season than in the spring monitoring season. In addition, the types of
pesticides (herbicides vs. insecticides vs. fungicides) varied between the two monitoring seasons.
For example, 3 of the 5 herbicides measured were detected in outdoor air in the spring, but only
1 was detected in the summer. DDT and atrazine were measured at levels greater than the
comparison level at the fixed location in Brownsville. Indoors at the residential sites, atrazine,
DDE, DDD, and DDT were greater than outdoor comparison values. Outdoors at the residential
sites, DDD and permethrins were detected at levels above the comparison values. In contrast,
4 herbicides were detected in at least one of the indoor air samples in both seasons, an indication
that these compounds persist or can be tracked indoors and are resuspended in the air during
normal activities, such as sweeping or vacuuming.
When the compounds are sorted by whether or not they were measured above 100 ng/rn3,
a similar seasonal pattern to that described in the preceding paragraph is displayed. Only two
pesticides were found in the indoor air samples in the spring above the cut-off point: propoxur
and chlorpyrifos. In the summer, four pesticides were found indoors (lindane, malathion,
propoxur, and permethiin) and two pesticides were found outdoors (malathion and methyl
parathion) above the cut-off point. These insecticides are commonly used during the respective
sampling periods.
PAH Results
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are air pollutants that result from combustion
processes and, as such, have a number of sources. Potential indoor sources include smoking,
burning wood, and grilling or frying food. The most common outdoor source of PAHs is
automobile exhaust. Because PAHs are usually present in air samples at very low levels,
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 29 of 41
sophisticated and expensive monitoring methods are required and, as a consequence, only a few
monitoring studies have been performed which include both indoor and outdoor measurements.
The indoor and outdoor air samples were analyzed for 17 separate PAHs in the spring
and 15 PAHs in the summer. Fifteen of the 17 compounds were identified in the spring at the
fixed location, as well as at the residences, both indoors and outdoors. However in the summer,
whereas 13 of the 15 compounds were identified at the fixed location in Brownsville, only 7
were identified indoors and 6 outdoors at the residences. The concentrations in all of the air
samples were typical of results found in other indoor monitoring studies.
The residential monitoring results exceed comparison values for benzo[g,h,i]perylene,
pyrene, and anthracene in indoor air; and benzo[a]anthracene and coronene in outdoor air.
Also, anthracene, benzo[g,h,i]perylene, coronene, fluoranthene, and pyrene exceeded
comparison values in outdoor air as measured at the fixed site. With few exceptions, however,
the PAH measurements were less than 100 ng/m3. One indoor spring measurement of
naphthalene did have a value of over 1100 ng/m3. Naphthalene is commonly found in
mothballs and is sometimes used as a wood preservative. Two other compounds had levels
above 100 ng/m3: phenanthrene and fluorene. Both of these compounds, which are usually
found in indoor and outdoor air samples, serve as general indicators of combustion, and typically
account for 50-75% of the total PAH mass. In this pilot project, phenanthrene and fluorene
accounted for over 80% of the total PAH mass in the indoor samples (1.3 /tg/m3 in the spring
and l.ljig/m3 in the summer). The total PAH mass outdoors was only 10-15% of the indoor
PAH mass. The contribution of phenanthrene and fluorene accounted for about 50% of the
outdoor total mass in the spring and about 70% in the summer. Total PAH mass loading in the
spring was about 0.1 ^ig/m3 higher than in the summer at the indoor, outdoor, and fixed site
locations.
Household Dust and Soil
How the Information Was Collected
Elements, pesticides, and PAHs can accumulate in surface soil and street dust. These
materials may then be carried into a home on shoes, clothing, and pets, and can be measured
as "housedust." Information about levels of contaminants in soil and dust provides an indication
of possible sources of exposure. Specifically, an individual may be exposed to contaminants by
touching dusty or dirty surfaces. Particular concern has been raised about children, because they
generally spend more time sitting and crawling on the floor and/or on the ground outdoors.
Walking bare-foot is another way in which people come into contact with dust and soil. The
presence of contaminants, particularly pesticides and chemical elements, in dust within the
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 30 of 41
residence means that if they become resuspended in indoor air and that foods may become
contaminated with soil and dust during preparation or consumption.
Samples of soil were collected from the surface of the roadway in front of each
participant's home and from bare spots in their yard. Housedust was collected by vacuuming
a part of the main living areas inside each participant's residence using a specially designed
heavy-duty vacuum cleaner. To collect a sample of sufficient size for analysis, participants were
asked not to sweep the room from which the sample would be taken on the day before
monitoring.
The dust samples were analyzed for both pesticides and chemical elements; the soil
samples were analyzed only for chemical elements. Laboratory analysis of the housedust
samples for pesticides was performed by Southwest Research Institute. Laboratory analysis of
both the housedust and outdoor soil samples for elements was performed by ManTech
Environmental, Inc. Laboratory analysis of the housedust samples for PAHs was performed by
Research Triangle Institute.
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations
It is important to reiterate that the measurement and interpretation of housedust and soil
samples is a new and evolving science. Interpretation of measurements collected in this pilot
project is difficult because there are few data with which to compare the results. In addition,
the implications of contaminant levels in dust for potential human exposure is not well
understood at this point. Because of these limitations, we simply present the results below, with
little interpretation.
The laboratory analyses found 20 elements, 23 pesticides, and 17 PAH's in the housedust
samples collected during the spring. This compares with 19 elements, 20 pesticides, and 14
PAHs detected in the summer. There was about 10 times more total pesticide residue in the
housedust collected in the summer than in the spring. In addition, more herbicides and
fungicides were found in the spring, whereas more insecticides were found in the summer. All
of the households reported problems with roaches for which they used some method for insect
control, including the use of household insecticides. Even though there were a large number of
pesticides detected, the concentrations were low. The fact that all participants in this project
reported sweeping their floors with a broom 3-5 times a day and wet-washing on the weekends,
probably reduced the tendency to accumulate high concentrations in the housedust on the floor.
The pesticides found in housedust are similar to those found in indoor air. For example,
in the spring, the pesticides found in the highest levels in the air were propoxur, chlorpyrifos,
diazinon, and chlordane. These same four pesticides, as well as permethrin, were found to be
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 31 of 41
the pesticides of highest concentrations in housedust during the spring. A similar relationship
occurs for the summer results. In a few homes, levels of permethrins and carbaryls were
detected at levels above comparison values, but below levels thought to cause health effects.
The consistency between the compounds found in the indoor air and in the housedust also
holds for the chemical elements. In addition, the four roadway elements with the highest
concentration levels are identical with the highest levels of elements in housedust. Also, the six
elements with the highest concentrations in yardway soil samples are identical to the list of the
first six elements in the housedust samples. Because this suggested that there was a redundancy
in the measurements, soil sampling was discontinued in the subsequent summer sampling. In
some homes, potassium and sulfur were detected in housedust at levels above the comparison
values. In addition, copper, manganese, potassium, and sulfur were detected in the soil at levels
above the comparison values. We are not aware of health effects associated with exposure to
the levels of these elements that were found in this study.
For PAHs, we found cyclopenta[cd]pyrene in dust at a level above the comparison value,
but below the level thought to cause health effects. There is little consistency between the PAH
compounds identified in the air and the dust, which may be due to the very low levels of PAHs
measured. Phenanthrene was the only compound that showed consistency between air and dust.
Biological Samples
How the Information Was Collected
Ideally, examination of blood and urine for the pesticide, elemental, and VOC metabolites
monitored in air, water, food, and dust can be used to estimate the extent to which the
compounds with which people come into contact actually get inside the body. Unfortunately,
however, there are limitations to this approach. Some compounds breakdown and disappear
very quickly, and thus do not remain in the body. Others are stored in various tissues, rather
than blood or urine. In addition, analytical methods do not exist for a number of the compounds
measured in the air, water, food, and dust. Therefore, comparisons between the environmental
measurements and these "internal" measures of actual exposures are only possible for a few
compounds.
During both the spring and summer, two adults in each household were asked to provide
blood and urine samples. The blood was drawn by a specialist from a local hospital. Analysis
of the blood and urine samples was performed by CDC. The blood samples were analyzed for
selected pesticides, elements, and VOCs in the spring and for pesticides and elements during the
summer. The urine samples were analyzed for pesticides and elements during both seasons.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 32 of 41
The results are compared with data collected in 1988-1993 by the CDC's National Center
for Health Statistics, as part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES
HI). For the compounds for which data from NHANES HI were not available for comparison,
the results were compared with those from previously published studies.
What the Results Show: Summary and Possible Explanations
In general, analysis of body fluids provides the best indication that a person has been
exposed to a pollutant. However, the results from the analyses used in the pilot project should
not be used to assess a person's health status.
Urine
With the exception of arsenic and 4-nitrophenol, a metabolite of the pesticide parathion,
the measured concentrations of compounds in urine were within the range of values found in
NHANES m or other health studies. Higher than average arsenic levels may be indicative of
eating shellfish, since a less harmful form of arsenic is known to be contained in seafood, and
most of the families reported eating fish or shellfish on occasion. Higher than average arsenic
levels may also be indicative of past exposures to pesticide materials containing arsenic. Arsenic
was not detected in indoor or outdoor air, soil, or household dust. However, the levels detected
in the food and water samples were not sufficient to explain the levels observed in the urine
samples.
Pesticide residues, including naphthol, nirrophenol, 2,4-D, 2,4,5-trichlorophenol, and
cnlorpyrifos were found in the urine of some of the participants at levels above the comparison
values. These levels may be indicative of past or present exposure to agricultural and household
pesticides. It is not unusual to find small amounts of pesticides in urine from people across the
country, particularly in agricultural areas, and no known health problems have been associated
with these low levels.
Blood
Pesticide residues, including trans-nonachlor, DDE, heptachlor epoxide,
hexachlorobenzene, and oxychlordane were found in the blood of some of the participants at
levels above the comparison values. These residues are very persistent in human blood and can
be detected long after exposure. The observed levels may be indicative of past or present
exposure to agricultural and household pesticides. It is not unusual to find small amounts of
pesticides in blood from people across the country, particularly in agricultural areas, and no
documented health problems have been associated with these low levels. ,
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 33 of 41
In general, the concentrations of VOCs, pesticides, and elemental metabolites found in
the blood in this pilot project were comparable to those detected in NHANES HI. Elevated PCB
levels were measured in the two participants who ate fish contaminated with high levels of
PCBs. Metabolites of some persistent chlorinated pesticides, especially DDT and heptachlor,
neither of which are allowed to be used in the U.S. anymore, were found in the blood of several
participants. Further study is warranted however, to determine actual pesticide exposures to the
community.
In addition, certain VOCs (bromodichloromethane, bromoform, dibromochloromethane,
butanone, xylene, and tetrachloroethene) were detected in the blood of several of the
participants. These compounds may result from the type of water supply disinfection used in
the Valley, which includes the use of chlorine. No known health significance is attached to
these findings, but it is suggested that they be explored more thoroughly in future studies.
In summary, with the exception of PCBs in the participants' blood from one household,
the blood and urine values for the participants in this pilot project were similar to those often
seen in other parts of the country. Thus, participants were reassured that at this time, their
results do not show significant exposure to the environmental contaminants that were measured.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 35 of 41
Appendix 1
Contributors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley Exposure Study
United States Environmental Protection Agency:
Office of Research & Development
Region 6 Office (Texas Region)
Region 9 Office (Arizona and California)
United States Public Health Services:
Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Food and Drug Administration
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
Office of International Health
Texas Region/USPHS
State of Texas:
Office of the Governor
Texas Department of Agriculture
Texas Department of Health
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
University of Texas at Brownsville
Under contract to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:
Biospherics, Inc.
Eastern Research
ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc.
Research Triangle Institute
Southwest Research Institute
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 37 of 41
Appendix 2
A Guide to Understanding the Results of the Pilot Project
Tables of Results
This Appendix contains tables that display the results of the pilot project of the Lower
Rio Grande Vallev Environmental Monitoring Study. The tables for each type of sample
collected are presented in different sections. The sections include: indoor and outdoor air
(residential), fixed monitoring station air, household water, 24-hour diet, individual foe. sterns,
housedust, soil, blood, and urine. Within each section, a separate table is provided for each
class of compound analyzed: elements, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nutrients, and natural
toxins. Each table has three parts: the first part summarizes the results of the monitoring
conducted during the spring, the second part summarizes the results of the monitoring conducted
during the summer, and the third part displays the available comparison data.
Part One: Spring Results
Part one of each table summarizes the results of the monitoring conducted during the
spring of 1993. The first column lists the name of the compounds analyzed in the given
compound class for the specific type of sample (e.g., elements in air or VOCs in blood). This
column only lists compounds that were detected in at least one household. The @ footnotes list
the other compounds for which laboratory analysis was performed, but no samples had results
above the limit of detection. The second column gives the number of households in which the
compound was found above the detection limit. For instance, aluminum was detected in the
indoor air in 6 homes and in the outdoor air at 1 home. The maximum number in this column
will be nine, as only nine households were monitored during the spring. The third column
shows the lowest value that was found at a level above the limit of detection. Thus, if the
compound was only detected in six of the nine households, the number listed in the column
labeled "lowest" is the lowest among the six households in which the compound was detected.
The fourth column lists the highest concentration above the limit of detection recorded across
the nine households.
In addition, tables for residential air include separate columns of results for indoor versus
outdoor air sampling. The tables of blood and urine results include separate columns for the
results of samples collected from the primary versus the secondary participant. And the tables
of soil results include separate columns for the results from samples collected from the road
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 38 of 41
versus the yard. The tables for local food items include a description of the food item and the
location where it was collected. Nutrient results also include the median value from the nine
households.
In reviewing these data, it is important to emphasize that the results of this small-scale
pilot project cannot be generalized. The data presented below represents only the people,
period, and locations sampled. The interpretation of the pilot findings is limited by four factors:
(1) the number of participants, (2) the very short time during which samples were collected in
each home, (3) the limited portion of the year represented by the monitoring period, and (4) the
comparison values available to represent other monitoring results.
Specifically, information was collected at nine households in the two-county area. These
nine households may not be representative of the larger study area (Cameron and Hidalgo
Counties). Rather, the households were chosen to provide information for households with a
variety of characteristics. In addition, the measurements collected at these residences were
obtained during a single 24-hour period, with a 24-hr follow-up in six of the nine houses. Thus,
these data are indicative only of those short time periods. Caution must be used in using 24-
hour measurements to make assumptions about chronic or long-term exposures.
Part Two: Summer Results
The second part of each table presents the results of the monitoring conducted in the
summer of 1993. The format of the tables is identical to that in part one. The differences that
are important for interpretation of the results are as follows. First, only six of the nine
household who participated in the spring monitoring participated in the summer. Thus, the
maximum number of household that can be listed in the "# Detects" column is 6. Second, some
of the classes of compounds analyzed during the spring were not analyzed during the summer.
In particular, there are no summer results for VOCs in blood, for elements in food, for
microbiologicals and other selected chemical elements in water, for PAHs in food, or elements
in soil. Third, some individual compounds were added to the list of analytes for summer that
were not included in the spring; similarly, a few of the individual compounds analyzed in the
spring were not analyzed in the summer. Thus, the lists of compounds are not identical between
parts one and two of the tables. Footnotes to the tables explain the differences in the compound
lists between the seasons.
Part Three: Comparison Data
The third part of each table lists the compounds detected in either the spring or the
summer along with the available comparison data. Two types of comparison data are provided:
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 39 of 41
health-based regulatory values and/or information on pollutant levels collected in other places.
Regulatory values are criteria established by federal or state governments to protect human
health. Such regulatory values are available for many of the water and air contaminants that
were studied. The comparison data table for water lists the Maximum Contaminant Levels
(MCLs) or Health Advisory Levels relevant to each compound, where available. The
comparison portions of the air tables list the Texas Effects Screening Levels (TESLs), where
available.
Each of the tables, with the exception of the water and food tables, also lists typical and
high values documented in previously conducted exposure studies. The water table only
provides health-based levels for comparison and the food tables provide advisory levels and,
where relevant, contaminants found in food are compared with Market-Basket data collected by
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The footnotes on each table define the "typical" and "high" values provided in each table.
In most cases the typical value is either the median (i.e., the 50th percentile) or the arithmetic
average. The high value listed is usually the 95th percentile, but is sometimes the maximum.
The availability of comparison data for many of the compounds studied in this project,
however, is very limited. Few exposure studies have been conducted that are as detailed as the
pilot project conducted in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Some of the comparison data come
from national studies conducted by government agencies. For instance, the levels of many of
the compounds analyzed in blood and urine can be compared with levels found in the CDC's
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. On the other hand, the comparison data
available for indoor air pollutants is based on smaller-scale studies limited to only a few cities.
The data available for comparing housedust and soil contamination levels is even more limited,
as this form of data collection is still new.
The limited availability of comparison data and regulatory screening levels suggests that
the comparisons provided can be used only to provide perspective. A result that shows that
levels of a certain contaminant are higher in the Lower Rio Grande Valley than in the
comparison data does not imply that there is likely to be health consequences from such exposure
levels, nor that levels are consistently high. Such a result only implies that further study may
be appropriate.
DEFINITION OF TERMS:
Metabolite: a compound that results when a chemical is broken down by the body or
in the environment.
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 40 of 41
Median:
Mean:
95th %:
Maximum:
Detection Limit:
Primary
Participant:
Secondary
Participant:
the midpoint value: exactly half of the participants will have a result
equal to or higher than the median and half of the participants will have
a result equal to or lower than the median.
the value which is halfway between the highest and the lowest value; the
average
95 of 100 people tested might be expected to have a result equal to or
lower than this value.
the highest value recorded.
the smallest amount which can be reliably measured by the procedure
used.
the person who answered most of the questions during the study
a second adult who provided blood and/or urine samples
-------
June 2, 1994
Page 41 of 41
Appendix 3
Tables of Pilot Project Results
Food Nutrient Results from Residential Monitoring
24-Hour Combined Solid Food and Beverage Elemental Results from Residential Monitoring
Pesticide Results for 24-Hour Solid Food Sample
Food PAH Results from Residential Monitoring
Elemental Results for Local Foods
Pesticide Results for Local Foods
Biotoxin Levels Found in Local Food Samples
Household Water Results from Residential Monitoring
Air Elemental Fine Particle Results from Residential Monitoring
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Elemental Fine Particle Results
Air VOC Results from Residential Monitoring
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results
Air Pesticide Results from Residential Monitoring
Fixed Site Air Pesticide Results
Air PAH Results from Residential Monitoring
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Monitoring Results for PAHs
House Dust Elemental Results from Residential Monitoring
Soil Elemental Results from Residential Monitoring
House Dust Pesticide Results from Residential Monitoring
House Dust PAH Results from Residential Monitoring
Urine Element Results from Residential Monitoring
Urine Pesticide Results from Residential Monitoring
Blood Element Results from Residential Monitoring
Blood Pesticide and Polychlorinated Biphenyl Results from Residential Monitoring
Blood VOC Results from Residential Monitoring
-------
Food Nutrient Results1 from Residential Monitoring (24-hour Composite Diet for 9 Participants)
Units in Daily Intake for 24 Hours
NUTRIENT*
SPRING RESULTS
lAnalyaaa*
SOLID FOOD
Detectable
R««uttt
Lowaat
Hlgheet
Median
MAJOR NUTRIENTS & CALORIES
Protein (g)
Carbohydrate (g)
Fat (g)
Caloriaa (call
Fat (% Total cat)
VITAMINS
Vitamin C (mg)
Rlboflavln (mg)
Nlacin (mg)
Vitamin B12 U/gl
Follc Acid U/g)
Blotln (//gl
Total Vitamin A (IU)
Vitamin E (IU|
8
8
8
8
8
5
73
8
8
6
4
8
6
19.7
84.1
16.0
631
22.8
0.02
0.4
7.1
1.1
66.7
10.2
5550
33.2
58.2
263
98.7
2050
54.5
32.8
1.2
16.8
3.0
108
11.3
11000
95.8
47.3
137
44.7
1180
35.1
2.9
0.8
11.4
2.1
91.0
10.8
9360
46.0
MINERALS
Calcium (mgl
Phoaphorua (mg)
Magnesium (mgl
Potassium (mg)
8
8
8
8
215
419
126
987
395
1060
291
2320
308
682
159
1470
Page 1 of 2
May 12, 1994
-------
Food Nutrient Results1 from Residential Monitoring (24-hour Composite Diet for 9 Participants)
Units in Daily Intake for 24 Hours
NUTRIENT*
Sodium (mg)
Chloride (mg)
Iron (mgl
Manganese (mg)
Copper Img)
Zinc (mg)
Selenium (//g)
SPRING RESULTS
^Analyses1
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
SOLID FOOD
Detectable
Reeulte
Lowest
1440
2080
8.1
0.9
0.6
2.9
34.2
Highest
2860
4050
15.3
2.6
1.5
10.1
90.1
Median
2000
2870
8.9
1.4
0.7
5.2
70.9
1 Samples analyzed by FDA - Washington DC, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition; information listed
is for solid foods only.
2 The data for one participant who ate most meals out of the home was excluded from this table.
3 One value excluded due to laboratory QA.
@ The following vitamins were not measured in the Spring:
Pantothenic acid
Thiamin
Vitamin B,
Page 2 of 2
May 12, 1994
-------
Food Nutrient Results1 from Residential Monitoring (24-Hour Composite Diet for 6 Participants)
Units in Daily Intake for 24 Hours
NUTRIENT*
SUMMER RESULTS
*Analya«a
SOLID FOOD
Dateotebto
Raaulta
Lowaat
Hlghaat
Median
MAJOR NUTRIENTS & CALORIES
Protein (g)
Carbohydrate* (gl
Fat (o)
Caloric* leal)
Fat (% Total eal)
VITAMINS
Vitamin C (mgl
Vitamin B6 (mgl
Rlboflavln (mg)
Thlamln (mg)
Nlaoln (mgl
Pantothenlc Acid (mgl
Vitamin 812 (//g)
Folio Acid
-------
Food Nutrient Results1 from Residential Monitoring (24-Hour Composite Diet for 6 Participants)
Units in Daily Intake for 24 Hours
NUTRIENT*
Phosphorite (mg}
Magne«lum (mg)
Potaeelum (mg)
Sodium (mgl
Chloride (mg)
Copper
Iron (mgl
Manganese (mg)
Zinc (mg)
SUMMER RESULTS
SOLID FOOD
^Analyses
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Detectable
Results
Lowest
593
83.1
928
1320
1840
0.4
5.0
0.9
3.0
Highest
845
192
169O
2470
3490
0.6
10.4
1.8
9.8
Median
636
145
1280
2090
3250
0.5
8.0
1.4
5.0
1 Samples analyzed by FDA - Washington DC, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition; information listed
is for solid foods only.
+ One value was at the limit of quantitation.
NR Not reported.
@ The following mineral was not measured in the Summer:
Selenium
Page 2 of 2
May 12. 1994
-------
Food Nutrient Comparison Data
All Units in Daily Intake for 24 Hours
NUTRIENT
COMPARISON DATA'
DAILY REFERENCE
VALUE
MAJOR NUTRIENTS A CALORIES
Protein (0)
Carbohydrate (gl
Calorie* (eal)
Fat (% Total oat)
VITAMINS
Vitamin C (mg)
Vitamin B6 (mg)
Rlboflavln
Folio Add (f/fll
Blotln Uigl
i Total Vitamin A (IU)
Vitamin E (IU)
MINERALS
Calcium (mgl
Phoephorue (mg)
Magnesium (mg)
Potassium (mg)
46-63
177-287
1900-2900
S30
60
1 .6-2.0
1.2-1.7
1.0-1.2
13-19
4-7
2-3
1 80-200
30-100
8000
30
800-1200
800-120O
280-350
2000
Page 1 of 2
May 12, 1994
-------
Food Nutrient Comparison Data
All Units in Daily Intake for 24 Hours
NUTRIENT
Sodium (mg)
Chloride (mg)
Iron (mg)
Manganese (mg)
Copper (mg)
Zinc (mg)
Selenium (//g)
COMPARISON DATA1
DAILY REFERENCE
VALUE
500
750
10-15
2-5
1.5-3.0
12-15
55-70
Reference values listed are ranges of average daily intakes for adults, females and males, ages 19-50 and 51 + years. Values are from the 10th edition (1989) of the
National Research Council's Recommended Daily Allowances. Dietary allowances are average daily intakes over time. Although the reference daily allowances (RDAs)
are most appropriately applied to groups of individuals, a comparison of individual intakes, averaged over a sufficient length of time, to the RDA allows an estimate to be
made about the probable risk of deficiency for that individual.
Page 2 of 2
May 12, 1994
-------
24-Hour Combined Solid Food and Beverage Elemental Results1 from Residential Monitoring
Units in //g/day - Daily Intake
ELEMENT*
Aluminum
ArMnlc
Cadmium
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Strontium
«OETECT8
Solid*
9
1
8
6
2
9
9
Beverage*
9
0
1
9
3
8
9
SPRING RESULTS*
Detectable
Results
Lowest
785
43.6
4.1
3.6
1.1
28.6
2080
Highest
41200
43.6
12.5
126
2.3
420
3760
1 Analyzed by FDA - Kansas City Laboratories.
2 Reported for Spring phase only; no elemental analyses for foods in the Summer phase.
@ The following analyte was analyzed for but was not detected:
Antimony
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
24-Hour Combined Solid Food and Beverage Elemental Comparison Data
All Units in //g/day - Daily Intake
ELEMENT*
Aluminum
Arsenic
Cadmium
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Strontium
COMPARISON DATA
12000'
23. 3 2
9.0*
3.31
2.4J
1063
9993
1 Pennington, J.A.T. and Jonas, J.W. Aluminum and Health: A Critical Review. Ed. by H. Gitelman, 1989. Marcel Dekkar Publisher, p.67.
2 Five market basket surveys conducted by FDA-KC Lab between April 1990 and April 1991 for females age 25-30.
3 Pennington, J.A.T. and Jones, J.W. Journal of the American Dietetic Association Vol. 87, 1987, p. 169. (One market of 234 foods in June/July 1984).
Page 1 of 1
May 12. 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for 24-Hour Solid Food Sample (9 Households)
PESTICIDE*
Chlorpropham
OCPA
DDE, p.p'-
Undane
Malathlon
Permethrin, cl«
Permethrin, tram
Pirlmlphoa-mathyl
SPRING RESULTS
Results In //g/g
fDetecta
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
Detectable
RMulte
Lowest
0.020
0.002
0.009
0.116
0.004
0.055
0.074
0.005
Highest
0.030
0.002
0.009
0.116
0.006
0.055
0.074
0.064
Raaulta In //g/kg body
weight par day
Dataetabla
Raaulta
Lowaat
0.203
0.021
0.092
1.18
0.041
0.454
0.611
0.057
Hlghaat
0.342
0.021
0.092
1.18
0.068
0.454
0.611
1.00
1 Data provided by FDA-Kansas City; data reported for solid foods only; only DDE was found in the beverage samples (one positive finding of ,002//g/g).
@ The following pesticides were analyzed for but were not detected.
Acephate
Alachlor
Aldrin
Anllazine
Azinphos-ethyl
Azinphos-methyl
Azinphos-methyl oxygen analog
Benfluralin
Benoxacor
Bensulide
Bifenox
Bromophos
Bromophos-ethyl
BHC. alpha-
BHC. beta
BHC. delta
Cadusafos
Captan
Carbophenothion
Carbophenothion oxygen analog
Carbophenothion sulfone
Chlorbenside
Chlorbrortuiron
Chlordane, cis-
Chlordane, trans-
Chlordecone
Chlordene
Chlorfenvinphos, alpha-
Chlorfenvinphos, beta-
Chlornitrofan
Chlorobenzilate
Chloropropylata
Chlorothalonil
Chlorpyrifos
Chlorpyrifos oxygen analog
Chlorpyrifos-methyi
Chlorthiophos
Chlorthiophos oxygen
Chlorthiophos sulfone
Chlorthiophos sulfoxide
Coumaphos
Coumaphos oxygen analog
Crotoxyphos
Crufomate
Cyanofenphos
Cyanophos
Cypermethrin
Deltamethrin
Demeton-0
Demeton-0 sulfone
Demeton-0 sulfoxide
Demeton-S
Demeton-S sulfone
Dea-N-isopropyl isofenphos
analog Dialifor
Diazinon
Diazinon oxygen analog
Dichlobenil
Dichlofanthion
Dichlorobenzene, p-
Dichlorvos
Diclofop-methyl
Dicloran
Dicofol, p,p'-
Dicrotophos
Dieldrin
Dimethoate
Dioxabenzofos
Dioxathion
Disulfoton
Disulfoton sulfona
DDE, o,p'-
DDT, o,p'-
DDT, p,p'-
DEF
Endosulfan sulfata
Endosulfan I
Endosulfan II
Endrin
Endrin alcohol
Endrin aldehyde
Page 1 of 2
May 31, 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for 24-Hour Solid Food Sample (9 Households)
Endrin ketone
Esfenvalerate
Ethalfluralin
Ethiofencarb
Ethion
Ethion oxygen analog
Ethoprop
Etridiazola
Etrimfos
Etrimfos oxygen analog
EPN
Famphur
Famphur oxygen analog
Fenamiphos
Fenamiphos sulfone
Fenamiphos sulfoxide
Fenarimol
Fenitrothion
Fenitrothion oxygen analog
Fenoxaprop ethyl ester
Fensulfothion
Fensulfothion oxygen analog
Fensulfothion sulfone
Fenthion
Fenthion oxygen analog
Fenthion oxygen analog sulfoxida
Fenthion sulfone
Fenvalerata
Fluazifop butyl ester
Fonofos
Fonofos oxygen analog
Formothion
Gardona
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxida
Hexachlorobenzene
Iprobenfos
Isofenphos
Isofenphos oxygen analog
Lactofen
Laptop hos
Laptophos oxygen analog
Leptophos photoproduct
Linuron
Malathion oxygen analog
Mecarbam
Mephosfolan
Merphos
Metasystox thiot
Methamidophos
Methidathion Mathoxychlor olefin
Methoxychlor, p, p'-
Mevinphos, (E)-
Mevinphos, (Z)-
Mirex
Monocrotophos
Naled
Nitrofen
Nitrofluorfan
Nonachlor, cis
Nonachlor, trans
Octachlor epoxide
Omethoate
Ovax
Oxadiazon
Oxydeme to n-methyl
Oxydemeton-methyl sulfone
Parathion
Parathion oxygen analog
Parathion-methyl
Pentachloroaniline
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorobanzonitrile
Pentachlorophenyl methyl ether
Pentachlorophenyl methyl sulfide
Pert ha no
Phenthoate
Phorate
Phorate oxygen analog
Phorate sulfone
Phorate sulfoxide
Phosalone
Phosalona oxygen analog
Phosmet
Phosphamidon
Photodieldrin
Phoxim oxygen analog
Piperophos
Pirimiphos-ethyt
Pirimiphos-ethyl oxygen analog
Polychlorinated biphanyls
Procymidone
Profenofos
Prometryn
Propetamphos
Prothiofos
Prothoate
Pyrazophos
Pyridaphenthion
PPG-1576
Quinalphos
Quintozene
Ronnel
Ronnel oxygen analog
Schradan
Strobane
Sulfallate
Sulfotep
Sulprofos
Sulprofos oxygen analog sulfone
Sulprofos sulfone
Sulprofos sulfoxide
Tecnazene
Terbufos
Terbufos oxygen analog
Terbufos oxygen analog sulfone
Terbufos sulfone
Tetradifon
Tetraiodoethylene
Tetrasul
Thiobencarb
Thiometon
Thionazin
Toxaphene
Tri-allate
Triazophos
Trichlorfon
Trichloronat
Trichloronat oxygen analog
Tris(beta-chloroethyl) phosphate
Tris(chloropropyl) phosphate
TDE, o,p'-
TDE. p,p'-
TDE, p,p'-, olefm
TEPP
Vinclozolin
1,2,3-trichlorobenzene
Page 2 of 2
May 31. 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for 24-Hour Solid Food Sample (6 Households)
PESTICIDE*
Chlorpropham
Chlorpyrifos methyl
Dlaldrin
DDE, p.p'-
DDT, p,p'-
Malathlon
Profenofos
SUMMER RESULTS
Result* In j/g/g
*D«tect»
3
1
1
1
1
4
1
Detectable
Results
Lowest
0.010
0.004
0.018
0.030
0.004
0.003
O.O09
Highest
0.053
0.004
0.018
0.030
O.O04
O.O09
0.009
Results In //g/kg body
weight per day
Detectable
Results
Loweet
0.085
0.036
0.162
0.270
0.036
0.017
0.069
HlyfMMt
0.494
O.O36
0.162
0.270
0.036
0.072
0.069
1 Data provided by FDA-Kansas City; data reported for solid foods only; only Dieldren was found In one beverage at 0.002 pg/g.
9 The following pesticides were analyzed for but were not detected:
Acephate
Alachlor
Aldicarb
Aldicarb sulfone
Aldrin
Anilazine
Azinphos-ethyl
Azinphos-methyl
Azinphos-methyl oxygen analog
Benfluralin
Benoxacor
Bensulide
BHC, alpha-
BHC, beta
BHC, delta
Bifenox
Bromophos
Bromophos-ethyl
Bufencarb
Cadusafos
Captan
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
Carbophenothion
Carbophenothion oxygen analog
Carbophenothion sulfone
Chlorbenside
Chlorbromuron
Chlordane, cis-
Chlordane, trans-
Chlordecone
Chlordene
Chlorfenvlnphos, alpha-
Chlorfenvinphos, beta-
Chlornitrofen
Chlorobanzilate
Chloropropylate
Chlorothalonil
Chlorpyrifos
Chlorpyrifos oxygen analog
Chlorthiophos
Chlorthiophos oxygen analog
Chlorthiophos sulfone
Chlorthiophos sulfoxide
Coumaphos
Coumaphos oxygen analog
Crotoxyphos
Crufomata
Cyanofenphos
Cyanophos
Cypermethrin
Deltamethrin
Demeton-O
Demeton-0 sulfone
Demeton-O sulfoxide
Demeton-S
Demeton-S sulfone
Des-N-isopropyl isofenphos
Dialifor
Diazlnon
Diazinon oxygen analog
Dichlobenil
Dichlofenthion
Dichlorobenzene, p-
Dichlorvos
Diclofop-methyl
Dicloran
Dicofol, p,p'-
Dicrotophos
Dimethoate
Dioxabenzofos
Dioxathion
Disulfoton
Disulfoton sulfone
DDE, o,p'-
DDT, o,p'-
DEF
Endosulfan sulfate
Endosulfan I
Endosulfan II
Endrin
Endrin alcohol
Endrin aldehyde
Endrin ketone
Esfenvalerate
Ethalfluralin
Ethiofencarb
Ethion
Ethion oxygen analog
Ethoprop
Etridiazola
Page 1 of 2
May 31, 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for 24-Hour Solid Food Sample (6 Households)
Etrimfos
Etrimfos oxygen analog
EPN
Famphur
Famphur oxygan analog
Fenamiphos
Fenamiphos sulfone
Fenamiphos sulfoxide
Fenarimol
Fenitrothion
Fenitrothion oxyg°n analog
Fenoxaprop ethyl ester
Fensulfothion
Fensulfothion oxygen analog
Fensulfothion sulfone
Fenthion
Fenthion oxygen analog
Fenthion oxygen analog tulfoxide
Fenthion sulfone
Fenvalerate
Fluazifop butyl ester
Fonofos
Fonofos oxygen analog
Formothion
Gardona
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Iprobenfos
Isofenphos
Isofenphos oxygen analog
Lactofen
Leptophos
Leptophos oxygen analog
Leptophos photoproduct
Lindane
Linuron
Malathion oxygen analog
Mecarbam
Mephosfolan
Merphos
Matasystox thiol
Methamidophos
Methidathion
Methoxychlor olefin
Methoxychlor, p, p'-
Mevinphos, (E)-
Mevinphos, (Z)-
Mirex
Monocrotophos
Methiocarb
Methomyl
Nitrofen
Nitrofluorfen
Nonachlor, cis
Nonachlor, trans
Octachlor epoxide
Omethoate
o,p'- Methoxychlor
Ovex
Oxadiazon
Oxydemeton-methyl
Oxydemeton-methyl sulfone
Parathion
Parathion oxygen analog
Parathion-mathyl
Pentachloroaniline
Pentachlorobenzena
Pentachlorobenzonitrile
Pentachlorophenyl methyl ether
Pentachlorophenyl methyl sulfida
Perthane
Phenthoate
Phorate
Phorate oxygen analog
Phorate sulfone
Phorate sulfoxide
Phosalone
Phosalona oxygen analog
Phosmet
Phosphamidon
Photodieldrin
Phoxim oxygen analog
Piperophos
Pirimiphos-ethyl
Pirimiphos-ethyl oxygen analog
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Procymidone
Prometryn
Propetamphos
Prothiofos
Prothoate
Pyrazophos
Pyridaphenthion
PPG-1576
Quinalphos
Qulntozene
Ronnel
Ronnel oxygen analog
Schradan
Strobana
Sulfallate
Sulfotep
Sulprofos
Sulprofos oxygen analog sulfone
Sulprofos sulfone
Sulprofos sulfoxide
Tecnazene
Terbufos
Terbufos oxygen analog
Terbufos oxygen analog sulfone
Terbufos sulfone
Tetradifon
Tetraiodoethylene
Tetrasul
Thiobencarb
TNometon
Thionazin
Toxaphene
Tri-allate
Triazophos
Trichlorfon
Trichloronat
Trichloronat oxygen analog
Tris(beta-chloroethyl) phosphate
Tris(chloropropyl) phosphate
TDE. o.p'-
TDE. p.p'-
TDE, p,p'-, olefin
TEPP
Vinclozolin
1,2,3-trichlorobenzene
2,3,6-TBA
2,4-D
2.4,5-T
3-Hydroxy carbofuran
4(2,4-DB)
4(2,4,5-TB)
Naled
Page 2 of 2
May 31. 1994
-------
Pesticide Results for 24-Hour Solid Food Sample
Comparison Data
PESTICIDE
Chlorpropham
DCPA
DDE, p,p'-
Llndane
Malathlon
P«rm«thrln, da
Permethrln, train
Plrlmlphoa-mathyl
Chlorpyrlfos-mathyt
Dleldrln
DDT.p.p'-
Profenofoa
COMPARISON DATA
ADI1
NA
NA
20*
8
20
50*
50*
10
1
0.1
20*
10
RFD*
200
BOO
0.61
0.3
20
60"
50*
10
NA
0.05
0.5'
NA
TOTAL
DIET
0.1824
0.0029
0.0103*
0.0005
0.0446
0.0391s
0.039 19
0.0014
0.013
0.0016
0.0103*
<0.0001
1 Acceptable Daily Intake (1990 revisions) established by FAO/WHO expressed in//g/kg body weight/day
2 Reference Dose established by EPA; (1991 revisions), expressed in //g/kg body weight per day.
3 Total Diet Study conducted by the Food & Drug Administration for females age 60-65 years old, 1990, expressed inpg/kg body weight per day.
4 Includes parent compound.
6 Parent compound only.
6 Denotes that reference information is for the sum of concentrations for cis and trans permethrin.
NA Not available.
Page 1 of 1
May 31, 1994
-------
Food Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary Participants)
Units In //g/day - Daily Intake
PAH°
B«nzo(a)anthrac«n»/Chryeen«l
B«nzo{alpyrene
Benzo(g,h,ilperylene
Benzo(e|pyr«ne/Benzo(klfluorenthenel
Fluor anthsn*
Naphthalene
Pyrene
SPRING RESULTS
#D«tectt
2
3
2
2
7
5
1
Detectable
Retutu
Loweet
1.5
0.3
0.6
0.2
1.5
1.2
1.4
Higheet
1.6
0.6
1.0
0.3
10.1
4.4
1.4
1 Samples analyzed by RTI.
2 Sum of two compounds reported.
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Anthracene
Coronene
Dibenzo(a,h|anthracene
Fluorene
lndeno(1,2,3,c,d|pyrene
Phenanrtirene
Pefle 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
Food Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Comparison Data
All Units in jig/day - Daily Intake
PAH
Banzolalanthracene/Chrysene1
Benzo(a)pyrane
Benzo(g,h,l)perylene
B«nzo{« |pyren«/Berwo(k|fluoranthene
Fluoranthana
Naphthalene
Pyrana
COMPARISON
DATA1
1.89
0.29
0.36
N A/0. 14
2.7
NA
NA
1 No comparison data ara available for PAH'a in 24-hour diets consumed in the US; comparison values are the maximum values for diets for the Netherlands and United
Kingdom (deVos, R.H. at al., Food Cham. Toxic. 28(4), 1990).
2 Sum of two compounds reported.
NA Not available.
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
Elemental Results1 for Local Foods (Spring)
Units in //g/g
I
ELEMENTS* | FOOD
AI-Alumlnum*
As-Arsenic
Black Drum Fish
Cabbage
Cabbage
Calf Liver
Carp
Catfish
Cilantro
Cola
Fish-Gar
Garlic
Grapefruit
Jalapeno Pepper
Mexican Squash
Orange
Potato
Shrimp
Tomato
White Cheese
White Cheese
White Cheese
White Cheese
Black Drum Fish
Calf Liver
Catfish
Cilantro
Garlic
Shrimp
TYPE
Cleaned
Raw
Raw
Fresh
Cleaned & Frozen
Whole
Fresh
Canned
Cleaned
Whole
Whole
Fresh
Whole
Whole
Whole
Headless, in-shell, fresh
Whole
Soft
Soft
Soft
Soft
Cleaned
Fresh
Whole
Fresh
Whole
Headless, in-shell, fresh
LOCATION2
L
R
R
L
R
L
M
R
M
M
R
M
M
M
M
L
M
M
R
R
R
L
L
L
M
M
L
SPRING
RESULTS
0.211
0.402
2.81
0.219
6.68
0.166
22.1
0.168
0.328
28.7
0.214
1.82
0.661
0.223
1.49
9.06
0.198
0.407
1.03
1.46
2.06
2.65
0.042
0.032
0.069
0.033
2.26
COMPARISON
VALUE1
NA
0.130
0.130
0.540 (Beef)
NA
NA
0.081 (Lettuce)
0.114
NA
NA
0.041
0.386 (Sweet)
0.793
0.148
25.8
8.09
0.546
41 1 (Anrwr. Proc. OIMM)
411
411
411
7.31 (Cod/Haddock)
0.06
7.31 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
NA
5.46
Pag* 1 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Elemental Results1 for Local Foods (Spring)
Units in fjg/g
ELEMENTS*
Cd-Cadmlum
Hg-Marcury (Total)
FOOD
Avocado
Black Drum Fish
Cabbaga
Cabbage
Calf Uvar
Carp
Catfish
Cilantro
Cola
Fish-Gar
Garlic
Grapefruit
Jalapano Pappar
Mexican Squash (Tatome)
Orange
Potato
Shrimp
Tomato
White Cheese
Whita Cheese
Black Drum Rsh
Carp
Catfish
Cilantro
Fish-Gar
Garlic
Orange
Shrimp
Tomato
TYPE
Whole
Cleaned
Raw
Raw
Fresh
Cleaned ft frozan
Whole
Freah
Canned
Cleaned
Whole
Whole
Freah
Whole
whole
Whole
Headleee, In-shell, fresh
Whole
Soft
Soft
Cleaned
Cleaned ft frozen
Whole
Freeh
Cleaned
Whole
Whole
Headless, In-shell, fresh
Whole
LOCATION1
M
L
R
R
L
R
L
M
R
M
M
R
M
M
M
M
L
M
R
M
L
R
L
M
M
M
M
L
M
SPRING
RESULTS
0.006
0.018
0.011
0.005
0.043
0.008
0.002
0.163
0.001
0.001
0.016
0.002
0.027
0.002
0.002
0.052
0.001
0.016
0.001
0.001
0.078
0.271
0.036
0.002
0.223
0.002
0.002
0.016
0.002
COMPARISON
VALUE1
0.16
0.054 (Cod/Haddock)
0.014
0.014
0.334
0.054 (Cod/Haddock)
0.054 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
0.006
0.054 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
0.005
0.110 (Sweet)
0.021 (Summer)
0.007
0.094 (Baked)
0.055
0.052
0.016 (American)
0.016 (American)
0.494 (Cod/Haddock)
0.494 (Cod/Haddock)
0.494 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
0.494 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
ND
0.050
0.010
Page 2 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Elemental Results1 for Local Foods (Spring)
Units in //g/g
ELEMENTS9
Ni-Nlck.l*
Pb-Laad
FOOD
Avocado
Black Drum Fish
Cabbage
Cabbage
Calf Uver
Carp
Catfish
Cilantro
Egg
Fish-Gar
Garlic
Grapefruit
Jalapeno Pepper
Mexican Squash
Orange
Potato
Shrimp
Tomato
White Cheese
White Cheese
White Cheese
Black Drum Fish
Cabbage
Cabbage
Calf Uver
Carp
Catfish
Cilantro
Cola
Egg
Fish-Gar
Garlic
Grapefruit
Jalapeno Pepper
Mexican Squash (To tome)
Orange
Potato
Shrimp
Tomato
White Cheese
White Cheese
White Cheese
White Cheese
TYPE
Whole
Cleaned
Raw
Raw
Fresh
Cleaned & Frozen
Whole
Fresh
Fresh
Cleaned
Whole
Whole
Fresh
Whole
Whole
Whole
Headless, in-shell, fresh
Whole
Soft
Soft
Soft
Cleaned
Raw
Raw
Fresh
Cleaned & frozen
Whole
Fresh
Canned
Fresh
Cleaned
Whole
Whole
Fresh
Whole
Whole
whole
Headless, in-shell, fresh
Whole
Soft
Soft
Soft
Soft
LOCATION1
M
L
R
R
L
R
L
M
R
M
M
R
M
M
M
M
L
M
R
R
M
L
R
R
L
R
L
M
R
R
M
M
R
M
M
M
M
L
M
R
R
M
R
SPRING
RESULTS
0.194
0.031
0.059
0.156
0.015
0.265
0.132
0.263
0.128
0.017
0.150
0.039
0.531
0.774
0.069
0.070
0.027
0.016
0.027
0.054
0.116
0.024
0.014
O.OO4
0.054
0.093
0.011
0.107
0.007
0.028
0.015
0.014
0.022
0.007
0.004
0.015
0.011
0.011
0.003
0.004
0.050
0.059
0.520
COMPARISON
VALUE*
0.361
NA
0.019
0.019
0.038 (Beef)
NA
NA
0.171 (Lettuce)
0.014
NA
NA
0.023
0.016 (Sweet)
0.041
0.024
0.169
0.143
0.146
0.061 (American)
0.061
0.061
0.080 (Cod/Haddock)
0.040
0.040
0.140
0.080 (Cod/Haddock)
0.080 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
0.020
0.06
0.080 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
0.030
0.070 (Sweet)
0.070 (Summer)
0.52
0.070
0.200
0.040
0.080 (Cheddar)
0.080 (Cheddar)
0.080 (Cheddar)
0.080 (Cheddar)
Page 3 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Elemental Results1 for Local Foods (Spring)
Units in //g/g
ELEMENTS*
8r-8trontlum4
FOOD
Avocado
Black Drum Fish
Cabbage
Cabbage
Calf Uvar
Carp
Catfish
Cilantro
Cola
Egg
Fish-Gar
Garlic
Grapefruit
Jalapano Pappar
Mexican Squash
Orange
Potato
Shrimp
Tomato
White Cheese
Whita Cheese
White Cheese
Whita Cheese
TYPE
Whole
Cleaned
Raw
Raw
Frash
Cleaned & Frozen
Whole
Frash
Canned
Frash
Cleaned
Whole
Whole
Frash
Whole
Whole
Whole
Headless, in-shell, fresh
Whole
Soft
Soft
Soft
Soft
LOCATION1
M
L
R
R
L
R
L
M
R
R
M
M
R
M
M
M
M
L
M
R
R
R
M
SPRING
RESULTS
2.23
9.63
6.95
9.41
0.118
62.0
7.32
6.39
1.25
1.79
5.40
17.3
4.65
0.306
2.33
3.72
0.913
18.9
1.07
2.51
3.02
6.63
11.6
COMPARISON
VALUE*
0.638
NA
0.587
0.587
0.053 (Beef)
NA
NA
0.458 (Lettuce)
0.080
1.01
NA
NA
0.581
0.1 58 (Sweet)
0.341
4.03
0.583
24.2
2.72
4. 1 8 (Artw . Proc. Ch«M»)
4.18
4.18
4.18
1 Analyzed by FDA-KC Laboratory.
2 Local foods were identified by participants as food items normally consumed that are grown locally or obtained from local sources. Local foods ware collected from residences (R) or from sources identified
by participants in the lower Rio Grande Valley (L) or in Matamoras, Mexico (M).
3 FDA - Total Diet Study Comparative Result, 37 market basksts (maximum)
4 FDA Comparison Values, 1984 Total Diet Market Basket, unpublished data; not routinely analyzed for in FDA's Total Diet Study.
NA Not available.
ND Not detected.
9 The following analyte was analyzed for but was not detected:
Antimony
Page 4 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for Local Foods (Spring)
Units In //g/g
PESTICIDES*
Chlordane
Chlorothalonll
Chlorpyrlfos
Dlazlnon
Dleldrln
Dlmethoate
DCPA
DDE, p,p'-
DDT, o,p'-
FOOD
Catfish
Fish-Gar
Cabbage
Carp
Cilantro
Diced cactus
Mexican Squash (Tatome)
Potato
Tomato
White Cheese
Carp
Jalapeno Pepper
Manzanilla Tea
Calf Liver
Carp
Catfish
Egg
Jalapeno Pepper
Carp
Catfish
Black Drum Fish
Cabbage
Calf Liver
Catfish
Egg
Fish-Gar
Manzanilla Tea
White Cheese
Manzanilla Tea
TW
Whole
Cleaned
Raw
Cleaned & frozen
Fresh
Raw
Whole
Whole
Whole
Soft
Cleaned & frozen
Fresh
Dried
Fresh
Cleaned & frozen
Whole
Fresh
Fresh
Cleaned & frozen
Whole
Cleaned
Raw
Fresh
Whole
Fresh
Cleaned
Dried
Soft
Dried
LOCATION3
L
M
R
R
M
M
M
M
M
R/M
R
M
R
L
R
L
R
M
R
L
L
R
L
L
R
M
R
R/M
M
R/M
R
R
fiODIKtrt
RESULTS
0.013
TRACE
0.019
TRACE
TRACE
TRACE
0.006
0.003
0.155
0.007
TRACE
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.012
TRACE
TRACE
0.033
0.113
TRACE
0.019
TRACE
0.018
0.091
0.006
0.112
0.007
0.002
0.004
0.008
0.075
TRACE
COMPARISON VALUES
FDA 1992
MONITORING FINDINGS
(U.S. & Mexican!
MAXIMUM
0.151
NA
TRACE
ND
NA
NA
0.03
ND
0.33
ND
ND
0.05
NA
NA
0.05
0.107
0.01
1.4
TRACE
0.08
NA
ND
NA
1.01
TRACE
NA
NA
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
NA
EPA TOLERANCE
or FDA
ACTION LEVEL*
-------
Pesticide Results1 for Local Foods (Spring)
Units in //g/g
PESTICIDES*
DDT, p,p'-
Endoeulfan Sulfate
Endoaulfan 1
Endoaulfan II
Ethlon
Ethion oxlygen analog
Fenvalerate
Hexachlorobenzene
UndaiM
Malathlon
Methamldophoe
Omathoata
Parathlon-methyl
FOOD
Manzanilla Taa
Cabbage
Calf Liver
Jalapano Pappar
Manzanilla Taa
Tomato
Cabbage
Carp
Jalapano Pappar
Manzanilla Taa
Tomato
Cabbaga
Jalapano Pappar
Manzanilla Taa
Tomato
Oranga
Orange
Tomato
Egg
Potato
Potato
Onion
Cilantro
Jalapano Pappar
Tomato
Jalapano Pepper
Cilantro
im
Dried
Raw
Fresh
Freeh
Driad
Whole
Raw
Cleaned & frozen
Fraah
Driad
Whole
Raw
Fraah
Dried
Whole
Whole
Whole
Whole
Freeh
Whole
Whole
Whole
Fraeh
Freih
Whole
Fresh
Freeh
LOCATION'
R
R
L
M
R
M
R
R
M
R
M
R
M
R
M
M
M
M
R
M
M
R
M
M
M
M
M
SPRING
RESULTS
TRACE
0.005
0.072
0.015
0.003
0.005
0.021
0.007
0.007
0.014
TRACE
0.050
0.002
0.018
0.014
TRACE
0.095
0.009
TRACE
0.037
TRACE
0.060
0.003
0.005
0.002
0.869
0.188
0.048
0.018
COMPARISON VALUES
FDA 1992
MONITORING FINDINGS
(U.S.* Mexican!
MAXIMUM
NA
1 1 .66 (Total)
(0.06 max from Mexico)
NA
1.61 (Total)
NA
0.68 (Total
(See above)
ND
(See above)
NA
(See above)
(See above)
(See above)
NA
(See above)
0.40
ND
0.06
ND
ND
ND
TRACE
NA
6.93
0.38
1.77
NA
EPA TOLERANCE
Ar FDA
ACTION Leva*
tAU
NA
2.0
2.0
0.2
2.0
24.0
2.0
See above, which
la applicable to
"Total" Endosulf an
residues
Sea above, which
is applicable to
"Total" Endosulf an
residues
2.0
2.0
1.0
NA
NA
0.5 AL
8.0
NA
1.0
1.0
2.0
NA
FDA TOTAL
DIET STUDY*
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.06 (Sweet)
ND
0.019
See above, which
is applicable to
"Total"
Endoaulfan
residues
Sea above which
is applicable to
"Total"
Endosulfan
residues
0.011
ND
ND
0.0003
0.001
0.0005
ND
NA
0.49 (Sweet)
0.121
0.1 85 (Sweet)
NA
Page 2 of 3
May 31, 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for Local Foods (Spring)
Units in //g/g
PESTICIDES*
Pentachloroaniline
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorophenyl
methyl sulflde
Parrrwthrin, cl«
Permethrln, trane
Polychlorlnated
blph«nyt« (PCB«)
Quintozena
Tecnazana
FOOD
Potato
Potato
Potato
Tomato
Tomato
Black drum fish
Carp
Catfish
Fish-Gar
Shrimp
Potato
Potato
rm
Whola
Whole
Whola
Whole
Whole
Cleaned
Cleaned & frozen
Whole
Cleaned
Headless, in-shell, fresh
Whole
Whole
LOCATION*
M
M
M
M
M
L
R
M
M
L
M
M
RESULTS
0.045
0.025
0.062
TRACE
TRACE
TRACE
399.000
0.056
0.423
TRACE
0.082
0.008
COMPARISON VALUES
PDA 1992
MONITORING FINDINGS
(U,8.&M»xlc*n»
MAXIMUM
(See quintozene)
ND
(See quintozene)
0.21 (Total)
(See above)
TRACE
3.63
1.59
NA
ND
0.01 (Total)
ND
EPA TOLERANCE
or FDA
ACTION teva*
-------
Pesticide Results1 for Local Foods (Summer)
Units in fjglg
PESTICIDES*
Aeephata
BHC, alpha
Chlordana, cla
Chlordana, trana
Chlorpyrifoa
Dlatlnon
Dialdrin
DCPA
DDE, p.p'-
DDT. p.p'-
Endosulfan Sulfata
FOOD
Jalapeno Pappar
Carrot
Chile
Squash
Carp
Tomato
Carp
Tomato
Carp
Jalapeno Pappar
Tomato
White Cheese
Carp
Tortilla Mix
Jalapeno Pappar
Tomato
Unidentified Fish
Unidentified Fish
Carp
Daar Meat
Unidentified Fish
Whita Cheese
White Cheese
Carp
Whita Cheese
Carp
Potato
Squash
Unidentified Fish
Twe
Fresh
Raw
Varda
Raw
Fresh
Whole
Fresh
Whole
Fresh
Fresh
Raw
Soft
Fresh
Corn
Fresh
Whole
Whole & gutted
Whole & gutted
Fresh
Frozen
Whole & gutted
Soft
Soft
Fresh
Soft
Fresh
Whole
Raw
Whole & gutted
LOCATION*
R
M
M
M
L
R/M
L
R/M
L
R
R
R/M
L
L
R
R/M
L
L
L
R
L
R/M
R/M
L
R/M
L
R
M
L
fiVIMftfCB
RESULTS
0.005
0.002
0.002
TRACE
0.004
TRACE
0.004
TRACE
0.003
TRACE
TRACE
TRACE
0.002
TRACE
O.O09
TRACE
0.002
0.008
0.256
0.002
0.071
0.003
0.008
O.008
0.021
0.039
TRACE
0.004
0.007
COMPARISON VALUES
FDA 19992
MONITORING FINDINGS
(U.S. 4 Mexican)
MAXIMUM
2.90
NO
NA
0.043
0.1 6 (Total)
ND
(Sae above)
(See above)
ND
0.27
0.33
ND
ND
NA
0.05
0.19
NA
NA
0.58 (Total)
NA
NA
0.03 (Total)
(See above)
(See above)
ND
ND
0.64
EPA TOLERANCE
or FDA
ACTION U5V61*
(ALJ
4.0
0.3 AL
NA
0.05 AL
0.3 AL
0.1 AL
8aa above appliaa to
•Total' Chlordana
NA
1.0
0.5
0.25 (fat)
NA
NA
0.5
0.75
0.3 AL
NA
5.0 AL
NA
5.0 AL
1.25
(Milk fat)
(See above)
NA
NA
0.2 (Total)
2.0 (Total)
NA
FDA TOTAL
DIET STUDY*
0.72 (Sweet)
ND
NA
0.003
ND (Cod/Haddock)
ND
ND (Cod/Haddock)
ND
NO (Cod/Haddock)
0.078 (Sweet)
0.028
ND
0.003 (Cod/Haddock)
0.023 (Flour tortilla)
0.01 5 (Sweet)
0.022
ND
ND
0.023 (Cod/Haddock)
NA
NA
0.31 (Cheddar)
ND
ND
NDICod/Haddockl
0.025 (Baked)
0.057 (Summer)
NA
Page 1 of 3
May 31, 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for Local Foods (Summer)
Units in //g/g
PESTICIDES*
Endoeulfan 1
Endosulfan II
Hexachlorobenzene
Llndane
Malathlon
Methamidophoa
Parathion methyl
Pentachlorophenyl
methyl ether
Permethrln, cia
Permethrin, tran»
Phorate aulfone
Phorate •ulfoxide
Polychlorinated biphenyla
TOE. p.p'
FOOD
Carp
Unidentified Fish
Carp
Unidentified Fish
Deer Meat
Carrot
Chile
White Cheese
Tortilla Mix
Corn Mass Mix
Jalapeno Pepper
Squash
Carp
White Cheese
Broccoli
Jalapeno Pepper
Broccoli
Jalapeno Pepper
Potato
Potato
Carp
Carp
Unidentified Fish
White Cheese
type
Fresh
Whole & gutted
Fresh
Whole & gutted
Frozen
Raw
Verde
Soft
Corn
Instant
Fresh
Raw
Fresh
Soft
Raw
Fresh
Raw
Fresh
Whole
Whole
Fresh
Fresh
Whole & gutted
Soft
lOCATIOM*
L
L
L
L
R
M
M
R/M
L
L
R
M
L
R/M
R
R
R
R
R
R
L
L
L
R/M
SUMMER
RESULTS
0.194
0.002
0.055
TRACE
0.002
TRACE
TRACE
O.OO9
0.003
TRACE
0.014
0.001
0.004
TRACE
0.008
0.051
0.008
0.070
0.004
0.004
1.340
0.021
0.009
0.002
COMPARISON VALUES
FDA 19992
MONITORING FINDINGS
(U.S. & Mexican)
MAXIMUM
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
6.93
0.79
ND
ND
0.19 (Total)
0.96 (Total)
(See above)
(See above)
0,1 04 (Total)
0.1 04 (Total)
3.63
0.58 (Total)
0.03 (Total)
EPA TOLERANCE
or FDA
ACTION LEVEL*
iALf
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.5 AL
NA
0.3 AL (Fat)
8.0
8.0
1.0
NA
NA
NA
1.0
NA
1.0
NA
0.5 (Total)
0.5 (Total)
2.0
5.0
5.0
1 .25 (Milk fat)
FDA TOTAL
DIET STUDY*
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.003 (BMf ttaak)
ND
NA
0.008 (Cheddar)
0.087 IRour tortilla)
0.087 (Flour tortilla)
0.49 (Sweet)
0.008 (Summer)
NO (Cod/Haddock)
0.0001 (Cheddar)
0.009
0.062 (Sweet)
0.007
0.067 (Sweet)
0.002 (Baked)
0.011 (Baked)
0.01 4 (Cod/Haddock)
ND (Cod/Haddock)
ND (Cod/Haddock)
ND
Page 2 of 3
May 31, 1994
-------
Pesticide Results1 for Local Foods (Summer)
Units in fjglg
1 Analyzed by FDA-KC Laboratory.
2 Local foods ware identified by participant* aa food Itamt normally consumed that ara grown locally or obtained from local sources. Local foods were collected from residences (R) or from sources
identified by participants in the lower Rio Grande Valley (L) or in Matamoras, Mexico (M).
3 FDA - Total Diet Study Comparative Result, 37 market baskets (maximum)
4 Tolerance and Action Level (AD rafar to regulatory limits used by FDA for enforcement purposes.
NA Not available.
ND Not detected.
O Detected compounds only; see footnote of 24 hour solid foods table for complete analyte list.
Page 3 of 3
May 31, 1994
-------
Biotoxin Levels Found1 in Local Food Samples (Spring)
Units in ng/g
BIOTOXINS*
Aflatoxin-ABI
Aflatoxin-AB2
Fumonl«ln-FB1
TYPE OP FOOD it LOCATION1 1 SPRING | COMPARISON
RESULTS VALUE*
Corn Rour II M 11 1 .2 20.0
Corn Flour || R || 4.8 | 20.0
Corn Rour M TRACE 20.0
Corn Rour | R | 0.6 || 20.0
Corn Rour R 1 24 NA
Corn Rour M 246 NA
Ear Com L 61 NA
Tortillas L 63 NA
Tortillas M 88 || NA
1 Analyzed by FDA - Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
2 Local foods were idendified by participants as food items normally consumed that are grown locally or obtained from local sources. Local foods were collected from
residence (R) or from sources identified by participants in the lower Rio Grande Valley (L) or in Matamoras, Mexico (M).
3 Action level - Regulatory limits used by FDA for enforcement purposes.
NA Not available.
@ The following toxin was analyzed for but was not detected:
Fumonisin-FB2
Page 1 of 2
June 2. 1994
-------
Biotoxin Levels Found1 in Local Food Samples (Summer)
Units in ng/g
BIOTOXINS
Aflatoxin-AB1
TYPE OF FOOD
Corn Tortilla Mix
Corn Tortilla
Inttant Corn Maaa Mix
Aflatoxin-AQI Corn Tortilla Mix
|| Instant Corn Mesa
LOCATION*
L
M
L
L
L
SUMMER
RESULTS
2.2
2.7
2.0
1.4
1.1
COMPARISON
VALUE*
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
1 Analyzed by FDA - Centar for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
2 Local foods were (dandified by participants as food items normally consumed that are grown locally or obtained from local source*. Local foods were collected from
residence (R) or from sources identified by participants in the lower Rio Grande Valley (L) or in Matamoras, Mexico (M).
3 Action level - Regulatory limits used by FDA for anforoement purposes.
@ The following toxin was analyzed for but was not detected:
Fumonisin-FBI
Fumonisin-FB2
Aftatoxin-AB2
Aflatoxin-AG2
Page 2 of 2
June 2, 1994
-------
Household Water Results1 from Residential Monitoring at 9 Households
Units as noted
COMPOUND?
AN/ON in mg/T
Bromide
Chloride
Nitrate (as N)
Sulfate (as S)
SPRING RESULTS
#Detects*
1
8
8
8
Detectable
Result*
Lowest
1.8
71.9
0.4
170
BACTERIA
Avg Presumptive Total Coliforms
(TC/100 ml)
Avg Confirmed E.coU (EC/100 ml)
Avg Heterotrophic Total Bacteria
(CFU/ml)
HALOACETK ACO> mugA
Bromoacetic Add
Bromochloroacetic Add
Dibromoacetic Add
Dichioroacetic Add
Trichloroacstic Add
4
1
9
5
5
5
5
4
METALS in figA
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Chromium
Cob ah
Copper
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Uranium
2
6
7
2
1
8
1
7
1
6
8
3
1
1
6
0.3
1.5
0.1
Highest
1.8
528
8.3
785
6430
1.5
310000
3.6
6.7
10.7
3.3
2.7
0.6
1.1
3.0
1.0
1.0
2.7
2.0
0.3
0.1
7.1
0.5
8.8
0.1
0.3
2.6
5.7
20.0
19.2
17.4
14.0
0.8
4.5
115
2.6
1.0
24.7
2.0
713
0.1
48.7
2.7
14.3
0.1
0.3
7.9
Pmgel of3
May 31, 1934
-------
Household Water Results1 from Residential Monitoring at 9 Households
Units as noted
COMPOUND?
Vanadium
Zinc
MISCELLANEOUS ISwnrVrftfAr Orytnfc GvtnfHHtmt) i
SPRING RESULTS
^Detects*
6
7
bpg/l
Detectable
Result*
Lowest
4.8
2.1
BM(2-ethylhaxyl)adipatex | 5 | 0.2
PAHandffSTtCtDESinvafl
MCPA/2.4-D*
Atrazina
1
1
3.1
0.5
Highest
17.3
51.4
1.7
3.1
0.5
PHTHALATE (S*tnlvot*tif OrguJe Compound) tnfiyA
Bis(2-elhytttexvl)phtnalat»
Butyl banzylphthalata
Di-n-butytphthalat*
Diethyfphthalate
VOCio&l
Ac* ton*
Sromochloromathana
Bromodichloromathana
Bromoform
2-Butanona
Chlorofonn
Dibromochlorometnane
Dbromomethane
Methylene Chloride
Tatrahydrofuran
Toluana
8»
72
8»
82
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
1
1
7
7
1
7
7
2
4
1
1
10.7
0.6
3.2
1.0
1.2
1.1
3.3
0.3
0.4
6.9
0.9
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.3
10.7
0.6
24.4
14.1
1.2
26.1
17.3
0.7
0.7
6.9
0.9
1 Samples analyzed by EPA/EMSL Cincinnati or its contractor.
2 Values shown are about the same levels as blanks.
3 Method cannot identify specific compound.
4 Bacterial analyses were conducted for all 9 households; chemical analyses were only conducted for 8
residences.
9 The following were analyzed for but were not detected:
Acid*
Acifluorfen
Bentazon
CNoramben
Dicamba
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
2,4-DB
Oinoseb
5-Hydroxydicamba
MCPP/Dichloroprop
4-Nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
2,4,5-T
2,4.5-TP
Pmg*2ot3
May 31, 1994
-------
Household Water Results1 from Residential Monitoring at 9 Households
Units as noted
Benzidines
Benzidine
Benzoylprop ethyl
Carbaryl
3,3'-Dimethoxybanzidine
3,3'-Oimethytbenzidine
Diuron
Linuron
Monuron
Rotenone
Siduron
Haloacatic Add*
Chloroacatic Acid
Metals
Beryllium
Cadmium
Thorium
Miscellaneous
Cyanazine
Isophorona
2,4-Dinitrotoluena
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
PAH« and Pesticides
Acenaphthylene
Alachlor
Aldrin
Anthracene
Benzo(a]anthracena
Banzolalpyrane
Benzo|b]fluoranthena
Benzo{g,h,i}perylene
Benzo{k}fluoranthene
Bromacil
Butachlor
alpha Chlordane
gamma Chlordane
Chrysane
Dachthal
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dieldrin
Endrin
Fluorene
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobonzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
lndeno[1,2,3,c,d)pyrene
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Metolachlor
Metribuzin
Nonachlor, trans
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Prometon
Propachlor
Pyrene
Simazine
Trifluralin
PCB»
2-Chlorobiphenyl
2.2',3.3'.4,4',6-Heptachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3,3',4,5'.6,6'-
Octachlorobinphenyt
2,2',3',4,6-PentachIorobipheny)
2,2',4,4',-Tetrachlorobiphenyl
2.2',4,4',5.6'-
Haxachlorobiphenyt
2,3-Dichlorobiphenyl
2,4,5-Trichlorobiphenyl
VOCs
Benzene
Bromobenzene
Bromomethane
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloromethane
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropana
1,2-Dibromoethane
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Oichlorobenzene
Dichlorodifluorome thane
1,1 -Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethana
1,1 -Dichloroethone
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
1,2-DicMoropropane
1,3-DicWoropropane
2,2-Dichloropropane
1,1-Dichloropropene
cis-1,2-Dichloropropene
trans-1,3-Oichloropropene
Diethyl ether
Ethylbenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
HexacNoroethane
2-Hexanone
Isopropylbenzane
4-lsopropyltoluene
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
Methyl-tert-butyl ether
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
n-Propylbenzene
Styrene
1.1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
TetracNoroethene
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,1,1 -TrichJoroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Vinyl Chloride
o-Xylene
Xylene (m + p)
Phthalates
Oimethylphthalata
P*g»3of3
May 31. 1994
-------
Household Water Results1 from Residential Monitoring at 6 Households
Units as noted
COMPOUND?
AWQNinmg/l
SUMMER RESULTS
fDetects
Detectable
Results
Lowest
Nitrate (M N) f 6 || 0.2
HALO ACETIC AOD InftgA
BromoaceticAcid
Bromochloroaoetic Add
Dtbromoacetic Add
Dichtoroaoatic Add
TrichloroaeeticAdd
PAH *t*l PESTICIDES in Mil
4
4
4
4
3
3.0
0.2
3.2
2.0
2.6
Highest
8.5
S.8
24.5
21.3
12.4
12.9
Dacthal \ 1 f 6.0
VOCtotigA
Bromodichlorofne thane
Bromofonn
Chloroform
Dibromochloromethane
Dibromome thane
Toluene
Triohlorofluoromethane
5
5
5
5
1
1
1
2.3
1.6
2.0
1.8
1.5
0.8
8.8
6.0
34.4
31.7
18.2
49.9
1.5
0.8
8.8
1 Samples analyzed by EPA/EMSL Cincinnati or its contractor.
9 The following were analyzed for but were not detected:
Hatoacatic Add*
Chloroacetic Acid
MieceBaneous
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)adipate
Cyanazine
Isophorone
2,4-Dinitrotoluone
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
PAHs and Pesticide*
Acanaphthytene
Acifluorfan
Alachlor
Aldicarfa
Aldrin
Anthracene
Atrazine
Baygon
Bentazon
Benzo[a]anthracene
Benzo[b]fluoranthene
Benzo{k}fluoranthene
Benzo{g,h,i}perylene
Benzolalpyrene
Bromacil
Butachlor
alpha Chlordana
gamma Chlordane
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
Chlorothalonil
Chlorpyrifos
Chrysene
Dachthal
Dyfonate
2,4-D
2.4-DB
4.4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4.4'-DDT
Oiazinon
Oibenz(a,h}anthracene
Dicamba
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
Dichloroprop
Dicloran
Dieldrin
Oinoseb
Endrin
Ruorene
Ptg»1of2
May 31. 1994
-------
Household Water Results1 from Residential Monitoring at 6 Households
Units as noted
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
5-Hydroxydicamba
Indenoll ,2,3,c,dlpyrene
LJndane
Malathion
Metalaxyl
Methomyl
Methoxychlor
Matolachlor
Metribuzin
1-Naphthol
Nonachlor, trans
Oxamyl
Pentachlorophenol
Permathrin, cis
Permethrin, trans
Phananthrene
Phorata
Picloram
Promaton
Propachlor
Propoxur
Pyrane
Simazine
Sulfone
Sulfoxida
2.4.5-T
2,4,5-TP (Silvax)
Tarbufos
Toxaphena
TrifturaUn
Triphenylphosphate
PCBs
2-Chlorobiphonyt
2,2'.3,3',4.4',6-Heptachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3.3',4.5'.6,6'-Octachlorobinphenyl
2.2',3',4,6-Pentachlorobiphenyt
2,2',4,4',-TotracHorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4',5,6'-Hexachlorobiphenyl
2,3-Dichlorobiphanyl
2,4,5-Trichlorobiphenyl
4,4'-Dichlorobiphenyl
Phthalat*
Bis(2-athylhaxYl)phthalate
Butyl banzylphthalata
Di-n-butylphthalate
Diethylphthalata
Dimethylphthalate
VOCs
Acetone
Benzene
Bromobenzene
Bromomethane
n-Butylbenzena
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butytbenzene
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloromethane
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
1,2-Dibromo-3-cHoropropane
1,2-Dibromoethane
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Oichlorobenzena
1,4-Dtchlorobenzene
Oichlorodifluoromethane
1,1 -Dichloroethane
1,2-Oichloroathana
1,1 -Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
1,2-Dichloropropane
1,3-Dichloropropane
2,2-Dichloropropane
1,1 -Die Woropropene
cis-1,2-Dichloropropene
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
Diethyl ether
Ethylbenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachloroethana
2-Hexanone
Isopropylbenzene
4-lsopropyltoluene
Methytene chloride
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
Methyl-tert-butyl ether
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
n-Propylbenzene
Styrene
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethana
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1,2,3-Trichloropropano
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzane
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Vinyl Chloride
o-Xylene
Xylene (m-t-p)
Pigu2of2
M»y 31. 1994
-------
Household Water Comparison Data'
All Units as Noted
COMPARISON DA TA
COMPOUND I REGULATION
|| LEVELS
AtUONinmsff
Bromida
Chloride
Nitrate (a* N)
SuHato (M SI
NA
250'
10^i
250*
BACTERIA
Avg Presumptive Total Coltf orms
(TC/100 mil
Avg Confirmed E.coU (EC/100 mil
Avg Heterotrophtc Total Bacteria (CFU/mll
O2
O1
NA
HALOAC£TICACa>iaitffA
Bromoacetic Add
Bromochloroaeatic Add
Dibromoacatic Add
Didtloroaeetic Add
Tridiloroacetic Add
NA
NA
NA
4000*
3OO*
METALS tons*
Antimony
AnMnic
Barium
Chromium
CobaH
Coppw
Uad
Manganaa*
Mareury
Molyfadanum
Nickel
Salanium
Silvar
Thaffium
Uranium
Vanadium
6.0'
BO1
20001
1001
NA
1300*
15"
60*
2.01
40*
100'
BO1
100*
2.01
201
NA
Paga 1 of 3
May 31. 1994
-------
Household Water Comparison Data'
AH Units as Noted
COMPARISON DATA
COMPOUND
Zinc
REGULATION
LEVELS
SOOO*
MISCELLANEOUS (Semivolatil* Orgtric Compound) inpgfl
Bis(2-athyttMxyl)adipate || 4001
PAH tntt pesTKiDES tit jigA
MCPA
2,4-0
Atrazine
Dacthal
101
701
31
NA
PHTHALATE {Semivolttfo Oryunic Compound) in pg/l
Bis(2*thythMyt)phthalaU
Butyl bmuylphthalatt
Di-n-butylphthalat*
Dtothytphthalat*
61
7000s
3500'
5000*
VOCinpg/l
Ac*tOTM
BromochloronMthana
BromodichloronMthan*
Bromoform
2-Butanon*
Chloroform
DibromochloromcthaiM
Dibromom«thaiM
M«thyl«iM Chlorid*
Tatrahydrofuran
ToltMIM
Trichlorofluorotnethan*
3500*
903
1007
1007
NA
10O7
1007
NA
21 00^
NA
1000'
NA
Page 2 of 3
May 31. 1994
-------
Household Water Comparison Data*
All Units as Noted
a Comparison data are for regulated compounds in drinking water even though all samples were
not water used for drinking.
1 Maximum Contaminant Level (MCU. USEPA.
2 Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG), USEPA.
3 Lifetime exposure health advisory for 70 kg adult.
4 Total for nitrate and nitrite.
5 Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCU, USEPA.
6 Screening criteria as provided by USEPA Region VI.
7 Total for all four Trihalomethanes.
NA Not available - not currently regulated by EPA.
Page 3 of 3
Mav31. 1994
-------
Air Elemental Fine Particle Results1 from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
ELEMENT9
Aluminum
Bromine
Calcium
Cesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Gallium
Iron
Lanthanum
Lead
Manganese
Phosphorous
Potassium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Titanium
Zinc
SPRING RESULTS
^Detects
6
9
9
1
8
2
2
O
9
1
4
4
4
9
9
8
9
4
9
INDOOR
Detectable
Results
Lowest2
192.2
17.9
280.6
33.6
54.9
3.6
4.2
S1.7
37.0
98.6
7.8
4.0
47.1
84.9
294.4
3.0
680.9
23.6
3.7
Highest
517.3
2S.3
1425.9
33.6
863.1
4.1
6.8
—
314.6
98.6
209.7
5.9
50.9
376.0
1798.6
7.7
1 640.0
35.5
763.8
OUTDOOR
IDetects
1
9
9
0
4
4
3
2
9
0
2
1
0
9
9
2
9
0
9
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
187.4
17.2
71.9
£22.3
21.5
3.0
4.1
2.4
9.5
£66.8
11.0
3.0
S27.0
44.3
115.2
3.3
721.1
S12.5
3.0
Highest
187.4
27.5
621.8
-
109.5
5.6
6.0
2.4
147.5
-
13.9
3.0
-
201.6
704.8
3.8
1730.8
-
15.6
Page 1 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Air Elemental Fine Particle Results1 from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
1 Collected using • m!cro«nvironmental sampler (MES); analyzed using XRF.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit Is listed. For this table, the quantification limit is calculated by multiplying
the standard deviation of the blank filters by 3.
- Not applicable.
O The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Cobalt
Germanium
Gold
Iodine
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Palladium
Rhodium
Rubidium
Scandium
Selenium
Silver
Tellurium
Tin
Tungsten
Vanadium
Yttrium
Zirconium
Page 2 of 2
June 1. 1994
-------
Air Elemental Fine Particle Results1 from Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
CLCNICni
Aluminum
Bromine
Calcium
Chlorine
Iron
Manganese
Potassium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
SUMMER RESULTS
^Detects
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
1
6
INDOOR
Detectable
Result*
Lowest*
300.1
6.8
286.9
113.0
197.9
4.3
148.4
953.6
4.0
150.2
25.0
7.8
3.7
Highest
1359.7
20.0
1401.2
639.6
762.6
12.9
435.2
2686.5
7.1
733.6
87.2
7.8
3039.0
IDetect*
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
6
6
1
3
OUTDOOR
Detectable
Results
Lowest2
256.4
6.0
327.5
79.6
151.0
4.2
107.1
634.3
3.7
295.2
18.0
11.0
3.6
Highest
2090.0
9.8
957.4
564.0
1266.6
24.4
417.3
4119.8
8.3
774.2
149.5
11.0
7.8
1 Collected using a microenvironmental sampler (MES); analyzed using XRF.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed. For this table, the quantification limit is calculated by multiplying
the standard deviation of the blank filters by 3.
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Cesium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Gallium
Germanium
Gold
Iodine
Lanthanum
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Palladium
Phosphorus
Rhodium
Rubidium
Scandium
Selenium
Silver
Tellurium
Tin
Tungsten
Yttrium
Zirconium
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Air Elemental Fine Particle Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
ELEMENT
Aluminum
Bromine
Calcium
CM him
Chlorln*
Chromium *
Copp«r
Gallium
Iron
Lanthanum*
Lead
ManganM*
Phoaphoroua
Potassium
Silicon
Strontium*
Sulfur
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
COMPARISON DATA
TESL1
2000O
2640
20000
8000
600O
4OO
40OO
40
20000
NA
1500s
12000
400
8000
20000
8000
2240
20000
200
20000
TYPICAL1
Indoor
502
10
312
NA
128
NA
13
NA
284
NA
23
12
110
241
565
8
1292
60
1
39
Outdoor
488
11
235
NA
140
NA
12
NA
324
NA
24
13
110
181
534
8
1556
58
4
40
HIGH VALUE*
Indoor
764
21
926
NA
473
NA
35
NA
750
NA
65
24
144
700
1500
11
3425
94
NA
100
Outdoor
630
24
527
NA
553
NA
32
NA
700
NA
54
24
142
376
1190
11
4044
78
NA
120
Paga 1 of 2
Jun« 1, 1994
-------
Air Elemental Fine Particle Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
1 Texas Effects Screening Levels adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval as used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk
Assessment Section in its evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information unless the
compound Is followed by a + sign. If measured airborne levels of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or
welfare effects are not expected. If the measured level exceeds the screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather an indication that
some followup action (or further review) is warranted.
2 Typical value is the mean from H. Ozkaynak, J. Xue, R. Weker, D. Butler, and J. Spengler. "The Particle Team (PTEAM) Study: Analysis of the Data." Draft Final
Report, Volume III; EPA Contract No. 68-02-4544, Harvard University School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115 (September, 1993).
3 NAAQS, averaging time is 3-month average based on 24-hour samples.
4 The high value listed is the 95th percentile from H. Ozkaynak, J. Xue, R. Weker, D. Butler, and J. Spengler. "The Particle Team (PTEAM) Study: Analysis of the Data."
Draft Final Report, Volume III; EPA Contract No. 68-02-4544, Harvard University School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115 (September, 1993).
NA Denotes that there is no available data for comparison.
•f See footnote 1 above.
Page 2 of 2
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Elemental Fine Particle Results1
All Units in ng/m3
ELEMENT*
Bromine
Calcium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganaee
Potatalum
Rubidium
Selenium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
SPRING RESULTS
iKDetecta1
21
22
22
1
4
22
14
5
22
1
3
20
5
22
2
3
21
Detectable
Reeufta
Loweet*
3.2
28.4
30.3
1.3
1.8
7.3
3.9
1.5
30.1
1.6
1.2
62.6
1.5
280.6
8.3
3.0
1.8
Hlgheet
9.3
190.0
1133.0
1.3
9.6
164.4
15.5
2.0
193.2
1.6
1.8
336.1
2.3
1783.0
9.2
3.4
87.8
Page 1 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Elemental Fine Particle Results1
All Units in ng/m3
1 Collected using VAPS; analyzed using XRF; 22 days monitored at fixed site.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
3 The maximum number of detects Is 22 (days of monitoring).
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Cesium
Cobalt
Gallium
Germanium
Gold
Iodine
Lanthanum
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Palladium
Phosphorus
Rhodium
Scandium
Silver
Tellurium
Tin
Tungsten
Yttrium
Zirconium
Page 2 of 2
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Elemental Fine Particle Results1
All Units in ng/m3
ELEMENT*
Aluminum
Bromlna
Calcium
Chlorlna
Chromium
Gold
lodina
Iron
Laad
Manganaaa
Potaaalum
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Yttrium
Zinc
Zirconium
SUMMER RESULTS
fDatacta*
12
10
14
14
2
1
10
14
4
12
14
14
12
14
14
13
7
2
12
1
Datoctabki
RaauHa
Lowatt*
429.8
2.0
97.2
133.3
2.1
4.3
15.9
45.4
4.5
3.4
31.5
152.7
2.9
283.8
19.9
12.1
4.2
13.1
1.8
12.2
Hlghaat
1882.9
3.9
518.6
769.1
2.5
4.3
33.0
1136.4
7.8
19.4
376.9
3717.4
7.3
950.9
77.5
128.3
6.7
13.6
6.1
12.2
Paga 1 of 2
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Elemental Fine Particle Results1
All Units in ng/m3
1 Collected using VAPS; analyzed using XRF; 14 days monitored at fixed site.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
3 The maximum number of detects is 14 (days of monitoring).
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Cesium
Cobalt
Copper
Gallium
Germanium
Lanthanum
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Palladium
Phosphorus
Rhodium
Rubidium
Scandium
Selenium
Silver
Tellurium
Tungsten
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Elemental Fine Particle Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
ELEMENT
Bromine
Calcium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganeae
Potaaelum
Rubidium
Selenium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
Aluminum*
Gold*
Iodine*
Tin*
COMPARISON DATA
TE8L1
2640
20000
6000
400
4OOO
20000
15003
12000
8000
.
800
2OOOO
8000
224O
20000
200
20000
20000
NA
NA
NA
TYPICAL1
11
235
140
NA
12
324
24
13
181
~
1
534
8
1556
58
4
40
NA
NA
NA
NA
MAXIMUM4
24
527
553
NA
32
700
61
54
376
-
NA
1190
11
4044
78
NA
120
NA
NA
NA
NA
Page 1 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Elemental Fine Particle Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
ELEMENT
Yttrium*
Zirconium*
COMPARISON DATA
TESL1
NA
NA
TYPICAL2
NA
NA
MAXIMUM4
NA
NA
Texas Effects Screening Levels adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval as used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk
Assessment Section in its evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information unless the
compound is followed by a + sign. If measured airborne levels of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or
welfare effects are not expected. If the measured level exceeds the screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather an indication that
some followup action (or further review) is warranted.
Typical values are the mean from H. Ozkaynak, J. Xue, R. Weker, D. Butler, and J. Spengler. "The Particle Team (PTEAM) Study: Analysis of the Data." Draft Final
Report, Volume III; EPA Contract No. 68-O2-4544, Harvard University School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115 (September, 1993).
NAAQS, averaging time is 3-month average based on 24-hour samples.
The high value listed is the 95th percentile from H. Ozkaynak, J. Xue, R. Weker, D. Butler, and J. Spengler. "The Particle Team (PTEAM) Study: Analysis of tha Data."
Draft Final Report, Volume III; EPA Contract No. 68-02-4544, Harvard University School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115 (September, 1993).
This element was measured only during the summer monitoring period.
NA Denotes that there is no available data for comparison.
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in pg/m3
VOC*
cla-2-Butana
cia-2-Haxana
cla-2-Pantana
i-Butana
l-Butarw
l-Pantana
l-Propylbanzana
m-Ethykoluana
m-Xytana & p-Xy)ene
n-Butana
n-Dacana
n-Heptena
n-Hexana
n-Nonana
n-Octana '
n-Pantana
n-Propylbanzana
o-Ethyltoluena
o-Xy(«na
p-Ethyltoluana
trana-2-But«na
SPRING RESULTS
JDatacta
6
0
6
9
e
9
i
5
9
9
8
9
9
9
7
9
5
5
9
7
6
INDOOR
Datactabto
RaauHa
Lowaat*
0.3
S0.1
0.3
2.6
0.7
1.6
0.2
0.5
1.0
10.6
O.S
0.4
0.7
0.3
0.5
1.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.4
Highaat
199.0
_
1.0
850.9
439.0
22.2
0.2
1.7
8.3
1379.0
5.2
2.4
3.5
1.6
1.6
545.1
1.2
2.5
3.4
4.1
296.5
OUTDOOR
IDatact*
9
1
9
9
9
9
2
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
7
9
9
9
DataotabU
Raautt*
Lowaat*
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.8
0.2
1.3
0.1
0.1
0.5
2.0
0.3
0.8
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
Highaat
1.5
0.3
0.8
9.4
2.6
12.6
0.3
0.8
5.5
17.8
1.2
1.5
2.3
O.S
0.9
4.5
1.0
1.5
2.3
2.0
2.0
Page 1 of 4
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in f/g/m3
voc°
trarM-2-Pentene
Acetylene
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachlorlde*
Chloroform2
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentana
Cyclopentene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
leoprene
Methane
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
Propane
Propane
Styrene
Tetrachloroe thane1
Toluene
Trichloroethene*
SPRING RESULTS
IDetect*
4
9
9
9
7
3
6
3
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
1
9
9
6
INDOOR
Detectable
Result*
Lowest*
0.5
1.3
1.3
0.7
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
3.4
0.4
0.5
S0.1
1094.0
0.5
0.4
2.3
0.9
0.7
0.0
1.7
0.3
Hlgheat
1.9
48.9
5.0
0.7
2.1
1.1
0.5
0.6
80.2
2.3
34.6
—
1278.0
7.7
2.7
3384.0
1916.0
0.7
0.7
8.1
3.5
OUTDOOR
^Detects
7
9
9
9
1
9
9
6
9
9
9
6
9
9
9
9
9
2
8
9
1
Detectable
Reauha
Lowest1
0.1
0.7
0.5
0.7
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.7
0.2
0.4
0.1
1078.0
1.0
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.7
0.1
1.1
0.4
Hlgheat
1.9
4.0
2.7
0.7
0.2
0.7
0.5
0.4
8.7
1.6
2.8
0.6
1178.0
4.9
1.7
25.6
7.8
0.8
0.3
6.0
0.4
Page 2 of 4
June 1. 1994
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in //g/m3
VOC*
1-But«M
1-Haxana
1 -Pantana
1.1,1-Trlchloroathana1
1,2,4-Trlmathylbarwana & aac-Butylbaruana
1,3-Butadlana
1 ,3.6-Trl mathylbanzana
2-Mathyl-1-butana
2-Mathyl-2-butana
2-Mathyl-1 -pentana
2-Mathylheptana
2-Mathylhexana
2-Methylpentana
2,2-Dlmethylbutana
2,3-Dlmathylbutana
2,3-Dlmathylhaxana
2,3-Dlmathylpantana
2,3,4-Trimethylpantana
2,4-Dlmathylhaxana
2,4-Dlmathylpentana
3-Ethylhexana
SPRING RESULTS
#Datacta
6
2
e
9
8
6
6
7
6
2
5
4
9
4
6
4
2
6
3
3
5
INDOOR
Dataotabla
RaauKa
Lowaat*
0.4
0.2
0.4
1.0
0.8
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.5
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.8
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.4
Hlghaat
335.6
0.4
1.3
18.1
7.3
12.0
2.6
1.6
2.5
O.S
1.4
4.4
2.8
1.9
0.8
1.1
1.3
2.2
1.7
1.2
1.4
OUTDOOR
IDatacta
7
1
9
9
9
7
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
7
9
9
9
Datactabte
Raautta
Lowaat*
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.9
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.1
O.S
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.1
Hlghaat
2.2
0.2
0.8
1.6
2.9
0.4
1.1
1.3
2.0
0.4
0.6
2.8
4.3
1.3
1.1
0.7
0.8
1.4
1.1
0.8
1.1
Paga 3 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in //g/m3
voc°
3-Methyl-1-butene
3-Methylhexane
3-Methylpentana
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
SPRING RESULTS
^Detects
5
4
e
1
INDOOR
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
0.2
1.3
0.8
0.1
Highest
2.8
4.5
4.0
0.1
OUTDOOR
fDetecta
7
9
9
1
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
0.1
1.4
0.2
0.2
Hlghact
0.3
2.5
2.3
0.2
1 Collected with steel canisters and analyzed using an Fl Detector by Biospherics Research.
2 For this compound, electron capture detector used in the analysis by Biospherics Research.
3 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
- Not applicable.
O The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
alpha-Pinene
beta-Pi none
cis-4-Methyl-2-pentene
trans-2-Hexene
Ethylcyclohexane
Methylstyrene
1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1,3-Diethylbenzene
1,4-Diethylbenzene
2-Methyl-2-pentene
2,2-Dimethylpropane
The following analytes were not measured in the Spring:
2,2-Dimethylheptane
2,2,4-Trimethylhexane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,4,4-Trimethyl-1 -pentene
2,4,4-Trimethyl-2-pentene
2,5-Dimethylhexane
Page 4 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in j/g/m3
VOC*
da-2-Butana
da-2-Haxana
da-2-Pantana
l-Butana
l-Butana
i-Pantana
m-Ethyltoluana
m-Xylana & p-Xytana
n-Butana
n-Oaeana
n-Haptana
n-Haxana
n-Nonana
n-Octana
n-Pantana
n-Propylbanzana
o-Ethyltoluana
o-Xylena
p-Ethyltoluana
trana-2-Butana
trana-2-Pantena
SUMMER RESULTS
fDataeta
3
1
3
6
2
6
4
6
6
5
4
8
5
4
6
4
4
6
5
4
3
INDOOR
Oataotabto
Result*
Lowaat1
0.5
0.7
0.3
2.7
0.3
0.7
0.8
0.3
1.1
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.4
1.4
0.8
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.3
Hlghaat
1.2
0.7
6.8
629.0
1.7
43.2
7.7
53.8
180.0
34.4
1.9
5.0
12.1
5.9
16.3
5.1
10.O
17.1
15.O
1.6
2.6
OUTDOOR
IDataeta
3
0
2
6
1
6
3
6
6
5
6
6
5
5
6
2
2
6
3
3
3
Datactabto
Raauto
Lowaat*
0.2
<0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.2
Hlghaat
0.4
_
0.4
2.3
0.4
5.6
0.5
2.2
2.9
0.8
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.6
2.1
0.4
0.6
1.0
1.0
0.4
0.8
Page 1 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in //g/m3
voc°
Acetylene
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride1
Chloroform1
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
Icoprene
Methane
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
Propane
Propane
Styrene
Toluene
Trichloroethene*
1 -Butane
1 -Pentene
SUMMER RESULTS
iTDetects
6
6
6
4
3
3
1
6
5
6
3
6
4
6
6
6
2
6
2
1
2
INDOOR
Detectable
Result*
Lowest*
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.9
0.2
1.1
0.7
1043.0
0.3
0.2
10.9
0.5
1.3
1.1
0.6
1.1
0.4
Highest
46.0
4.0
0.7
54.6
0.9
1.6
0.2
86.0
17.7
46.0
4.0
1798.0
5.9
3.1
12132.0
26.0
2.2
15.0
5.9
1.1
2.0
JPDetecte
6
6
6
0
1
3
0
6
4
6
3
6
4
5
6
6
3
6
0
0
2
OUTDOOR
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
0.2
0.6
0.6
^.0.02
0.3
0.2
.
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in /ig/m3
VOC*
1,1,1-Trlchloro.than.1
1.2,4-Trlmathytbaniana & aac-Butylbanxana
1,3-Butadlana
1 ,3,6-Trlmathylbanzana
2-Mathyl-1-butana
2-Mathy1-2-butana
2-Mathythaptana
2-Mathythaxana
2-Mathylpantana
2,2-Dlmathylbutana
2,2,4-Trlmathylpantana
2,3-Dlmathylbutana
2,3-Dlmathylhaxana
2,3-Dimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trlmathytpantana
2,4-Dlm«thylhaxane
2,4-Dlmtthylp«ntan*
2,4,4-Trlmethyl-1 -pantana
2.5-Dlmathylhaxana
3-Ethylhexana
3-MethyM-butena
SUMMER RESULTS
fDatacta
6
6
1
4
3
3
4
5
6
3
4
4
2
3
3
2
2
3
1
3
2
INDOOR
Dataetabla
Raaulta
Lowatt*
0.8
0.3
1.4
1.1
0.1
1.0
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.8
0.7
0.4
Hlghaat
5.3
28.0
1.4
8.1
4.4
2.9
0.9
2.6
11.0
0.9
2.5
2.9
0.4
1.1
0.9
0.8
0.7
1.0
0.8
1.8
1.0
OUTDOOR
ffDatacta
6
6
0
3
2
4
3
6
6
4
5
4
2
0
2
1
2
4
1
2
1
Dataotabla
Raault*
Lowaat1
0.8
0.2
<0.1
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
<0.1
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
Hlghaat
1.3
1.5
-
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.6
1.1
1.7
0.6
1.0
0.5
0.3
-
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.1
Paga 3 of 4
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Results1 for Residential Monitoring
All Units in pg/m3
voc°
3-Mathythexane
3-Methylpantana
SUMMER RESULTS
INDOOR
IDetecta
5
5
Datactabla
Result*
Lowaat*
0.9
0.2
Hlghe.t
3.4
6.4
fDatacts
6
4
OUTDOOR
Datactabla
Results
Lowest1
0.7
0.4
Highest
1.3
1.0
1 Collected with steel canisters and analyzed using an Fl Detector by Biospherics Research.
2 For this table, electron capture detector used by Biospherics Research.
3 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
Not applicable.
® The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
cis-4-Methyl-2-pentene
i-Propylbenzene
trans-2-Hexene
Ethylcyclohexane
Tetrachloroathene
1-Hexene
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
2-Mathyl-2-pentene
The following were not measured in the Summer:
1,3-Diethylbenzene
1,4-Diethylbenzene
Methylstyrene
alpha-Pi none
beta-Pinene
1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethy) heptane
2,2-Dimethylpropane
2,2,4-Trimethylhexane
2,4,4-Trimethy1-2-pentene
4- Methyl-1 -pentene
Page 4 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Comparison Data
All Units in //g/m3
VOC
cla-2-Butana*
cla-2-Haxana1
cto-2-Pantana*
l-Butana'
1-Butana*
l-Pantana4
i-Propylbanzana4
m-Ethyttoluana*
m-Xylana & p-Xylana1
n-Butana*
n-Dacana1
n-Haptana*
n-Haxana1
n-Nonana'
n-Octana1
n-Pantana*
n-Propylbenzana*
o-Ethyltoluana*
o-Xytena1
p-Ethyttoluena*
trana-2-Butana*
tran»-2-Pentenel
TE8L*
NA
NA
NA
7600
NA
1400
NA
BOO
1480
7600
NA
1400
704
4200
1400
1400
NA
500
1480
500
NA
NA
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
Indoor
NA
NA
NA
25.6
NA
24.6
NA
NA
30
25.0
7
1.8
120.7
5.7
5.4
2.4
O.O
NA
12
3.9
NA
NA
Outdoor
0.3
0.2
0.4
5.4
1.5
17.3
0.2
3.2
18
20.3
1.8
2.9
6.5
2.0
2.4
9.5
0.8
1.7
6.5
2.1
0.6
0.4
HIGH VALUE
Indoor
NA
NA
NA
114.4
NA
55.1
NA
NA
170
182.8
66
4.7
1139
55
24
6.5
0.6
NA
68
7.4
NA
NA
Outdoor
5.7
35.8
0.5
11.9
236.9
3202
138.9
504.9
90
43.5
8.3
5.3
14.1
5.6
10
18.9
912
479
29
505
13.0
8.7
Page 1 of 4
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Comparison Data
All Units in j/g/m3
VOC
Acetylene*
Benzene1
Carbon Tetrachlorlde1
Chloroform'
Cyclohexane*
Cyclopentane1
Cyclopentene1
Ethane1
Ethylbenzene1
Ethylene*
leoprene2
Methane4
Methylcyclohexane*
Methyl cyclopentane*
Propane1
Propane2
Styrane1
Tetrachloroe thane1
Toluene*
Trlehloroethene1
1 -Butane2
1-Hexene4
COMPARISON DATA
TESL*
10648
12
50
40
574
1360
NA
NA
800
468
NA
NA
NA
NA
7200
NA
172
136
752
540
NA
NA
TYPICAL
Indoor
18.7
13
0.8
1.4
1.1
NA
NA
15.4
5.8
1.1
NA
NA
4.0
26.4
25.9
NA
2.9
6.8
21.6
1.2
NA
NA
Outdoor
8.0
7.1
0.7
0.5
2.3
6.0
0.5
8.6
3.2
14.4
4.0
1084
1.7
2.9
7.2
1.6
1.7
4.3
16.7
0.2
1.7
0.0
HIGH VALUE
Indoor
83.8
97
2.2
12
5.7
NA
NA
57.9
40
2.3
NA
NA
13.2
251.8
138.6
NA
23
53
58.8
15
NA
NA
Outdoor
11.7
25
1.8
7.5
4.0
279.4
15.3
12.9
16
28.2
33.8
7937
3.4
5.7
13.3
13.2
13
18
32.4
1.6
16.4
1275
Page 2 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Comparison Data
All Units in /yg/m3
VOC
1-P«nt«n«*
1,1,1-Trlchloroathane1
1,2,4-Trlmathylbenzene ft MC-Butylbenzene
1.3-Butadiene*
1 ,3,6-Trlmathylbenzane*
2-Methyl-1-but«n«*
2-M«thyl-2-butenea
2-M«thyl-1-pentene*
2-M«thylhiptane4
2-Methylhexane*
2-Methytpentan*1
2,2-DImathylbutane2
2,3-Dlmethylbutan«J
2,3-Dlmethyihexane*
2,3-Dlmethylpantane2
2,3,4-Trlmethylpentane*
2,4-Dimathylhexane4
2,4-Dlmathylpentane1
3-Ethylhexan«*
3-Methyl-1-buten«2
3-Methylh«xane*
3-Methylp«ntane3
TE8L0
36
4320
-
44
500
NA
NA
NA
1400
1228
NA
NA
1400
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
Indoor
NA
19
-
NA
1.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.2
15.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
1.8
NA
NA
2.3
24.7
Outdoor
0.6
11
_
0.4
1.0
0.5
1.0
0.3
1.6
5.9
6.5
1.3
6.2
0.0
1.0
1.8
0
1.8
0
0.2
4.1
4.7
HIGH VALUE
Indoor
NA
90
„
NA
39.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.9
131.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.2
NA
4.1
NA
NA
3.5
193.7
Outdoor
11.2
40
„
525
608
3186
12.3
6.8
125
12.9
13.5
42.7
286.1
294
14.1
3.5
294
4.1
266
12.6
7.0
9.4
Page 3 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Air VOC Comparison Data
All Units in //g/m3
VOC
4-MethyM -pentena
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane*7
2,4,4-Trlmathyt- 1 -pantena7
2,5-Dlmethylhexane4'
COMPARISON DATA
TESL*
NA
NA
NA
NA
TYPICAL
Indoor
NA
NA
NA
NA
Outdoor
NA
2.0
NA
0
HIGH VALUE
Indoor
NA
NA
NA
NA
Outdoor
NA
824.7
NA
8.8
7
NA
The typical value is tha arithmetic average and the high value is the 12-hour maximum from L. Wallace, et al. "The Los Angeles TEAM Study: Personal Exposures, Indoor-Outdoor Air
Concentrations, and Breath Concentrations of 25 Volatile Organic Compounds." J. Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 1:157-192.
The typical value is the average, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppbC converted to //g/m3 from Atlanta Ozone Precursor Monitoring Study Data Reporting, EPA/600/R-92/157,
pp 62-64. AREAL, ORD, USEPA, RTF, NC 27711 Sept 1992.
The typical value is the arithmetic average, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppbC converted to //g/m3 from C. Lewis and R.B. Zweidinger. "Apportionment of Residential
Indoor Aerosol, VOC and Aldehyde Species to Indoor and Outdoor Sources, and their Source Strengths." Atmospheric Environment, 26A:2179-2184 (1992). NOTE: Data collected at 10
homea during the winter.
The typical value is the median, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppb converted to //g/m3 from J. Shah, D. Joseph. "National Ambient VOC Data Base Update: 3.0" prepared
for USEPA, AREAL (Contract No. 68-D80082) AREAL Mail Drop 77, RTP NC 27711, May 1993.
The typical value is the arithmetic average, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppbC converted to //g/m3 from C. Lewis. "Sources of Air Pollutants Indoors: VOC and Fine
Paniculate Species." J. of Exp. Anal. & Env. Epi. 1, p. 42 (1991).
Texas Effects Screening Levels adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval as used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk Assessment Section in its
evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information unless the compound is followed by a + sign. If measured
airborne levels of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or welfare effects are not expected. If the measured level exceeds the
screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather an indication that some followup action (or further review) is warranted.
This VOC was measured only during the summer monitoring period.
Not available.
Not applicable.
Page 4 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in j/g/m3
voc»
cla-2-Butana
cla-2-Pantana
l-Butana
l-Butana
l-Pantana
m-Ethyltoluana
m-Xylana & p-Xylana
n-Butana
n-Dacana
n-Haptana
n-Haxana
n-Nonana
n-Octana
n-Pentana
n-Propylbanzena
o-Ethyltoluana
o-Xylana
p-Ethyltoluana
trana-2-Butana
trana-2-Pantana
Acatylan*
SPRING RESULTS
(KOataota4
20
20
22
20
22
17
22
22
22
22
22
21
22
22
17
13
22
18
20
17
22
Datactabla
Raauha
Lowaat1
0.1
0.1
1.0
0.1
1.3
0.1
0.5
1.4
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.8
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.4
Hlflhaat
6.8
0.8
6.6
1.7
17.9
1.0
6.3
19.9
1.3
1.4
3.7
1.0
3.5
10.8
0.7
1.4
2.4
2.2
1.1
1.7
6.3
Page 1 of 4
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in //g/m3
VOC*
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride2
Chloroform2
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
Ethytene
Is op re ne
Methane
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcydopentane
Propane
Propene
Styrene
Tetrachloroethene2
Toluene
Trlchloroethene*
1-Butene
1-Hexene
SPRING RESULTS
IDetacta4
22
22
10
19
20
15
22
22
22
4
22
21
22
22
22
11
20
22
2
14
8
Detectable
Reaulta
Loweet*
0.6
0.7
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.7
0.2
0.4
0.2
1068
0.1
0.2
O.8
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.8
0.3
0.1
0.1
Hlgheet
3.2
2.2
8.8
0.9
0.6
0.3
10.6
1.7
5.4
0.4
1326
1.1
1.7
10.4
2.6
2.5
1.6
7.8
3.7
1.1
0.5
Page 2 of 4
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in f/g/m3
VOC*
1-Pantana
1,1,1-TrlchloroathaM1
1,2,4-Trlmathylbenian* & aac-Butytbanzan*
1,3-Butadlana
1 ,3,6-Trlmathylbanrana
2-M«thyl-1-butana
2-Mathyl-1-pan
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in //g/m3
VOC*
'3-Methylpentane
SPRING RESULTS
^Detects*
22
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
0.3
Highest
3.3
1 Collected with Summa polished stainless-steel canisters and analyzed using gas chromatography/flame ionization detector by Biospherics Research.
2 Electron Capture Detector used to analyze this compound by Biospherics Research.
3 If all measured results were below the repotting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
4 The maximum number of detects is 22 (days of monitoring).
& The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
alpha-Pinene
beta-Pinene
cis-2-Hexene
cis-4-Methyl-2-pentene
i-Propylbenzene
trans-2-Hexene
Ethylcyclohexane
Methylstyrene
1,2,3-Trimethytbonzene
1,3-Diethylbenzene
1,4-Diethylbenzene
2-Methyl-2-pentene
2,2-Dimethylpropane
4-MethyM -pentene
The following analytes were not measured in the Spring:
2,2-Dimethylheptane
2,2,4-Trimethylhexane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,4,4-Trimethyl-l-pentene
2,4,4-Trimethyl-2-pentene
2,5-Dimethylhexane
Page 4 of 4
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in A/g/m3
VOC
da-2-Butana
cia-2-Pantana
l-Butana
l-Butana
I -Pen tin*
m-Ethyltoluana
m-Xylana & p-Xylana
n-Butana
n -Ocean*
n-H«ptan*
n-H«xan*
n-Nonana
n-Octan*
n-P*ntana
n-Propylbanzana
o-Ethyltotuana
o-Xylan*
p-Ethyltoluana
trana-2-Butana
trana-2-Pant*na
Ac*tylena
SUMMER RESULTS
ffDatacta*
13
14
14
14
14
10
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
1O
4
14
14
14
14
14
Dataotabla
Raiult*
Lowaat1
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.2
1.2
0.1
0.8
1.3
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
O.1
0.1
0.8
Highaat
0.2
0.2
1.4
0.5
3.7
0.4
4.1
2.6
1.4
0.5
0.9
0.9
6.2
1.9
0.4
0.4
1.3
0.9
0.4
0.4
2.2
Paga 1 of 4
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in //g/m3
VOC
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachlorlde2
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
Ethan*
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
leoprene
Methane
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
Propane
Propene
Styrene
Tetrachloroethene*
Toluene
1 -Butane
1 -Hexene
1 -Pentene
1,1.1-Trichloroe thane2
SUMMER RESULTS
IDetecte*
14
3
7
14
2
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
8
2
13
14
6
14
3
Detectable
Reaults
Lowest*
0.5
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.8
0.3
1022.0
0.2
0.2
1.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.9
Hlgheat
1.0
0.7
0.5
0.2
0.1
1.6
1.0
1.6
0.7
1058.0
0.5
0.5
4.6
1.1
0.9
0.4
2.2
0.5
0.2
0.3
1.5
Page 2 of 4
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in //g/m3
VOC
1,2,4-Trlmathylbaniana & •ac-Butylbanzaiw
1.3-Butadlana
1 ,3,B-Trlmathytbaruana
2-MathyM-butana
2-MathyM -pantana
2-Mathyl-2-butana
2-Mathylheptana
2-Mathylhaxana
2-Mathylpantana
2,2-Dlmathytbutana
2,2,4-Trimethy)pantana
2,3-Dimathylbutana
2,3-Dimathylhaxana
2,3-Dlmathylpantana
2,3,4-Trlmathylpantana
2,4-Dimathylhaxana
2,4-Dimathylpantana
2,4,4-Trlmethyl- 1 -pantana
2,5-Dimathylhaxana
3-Ethylhexana
3-Methyl-1-butena
SUMMER RESULTS
JTDatoota*
14
14
10
14
B
14
14
14
14
12
14
14
10
2
8
5
3
12
4
14
10
Dataetabla
Raaufta
Lowaat*
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.6
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Hlghaat
1.0
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.5
2.5
0.9
1.8
0.3
0.9
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2
4.6
0.1
Pag* 3 of 4
Juna 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Results1
All Units in //g/m3
VOC
3-Methylhexane
3-Methytpentana
SUMMER RESULTS
^Detects*
14
14
Detectable
Result*
Lowaat*
0.7
0.2
Highaat
1.2
0.8
1 Collected with Summa polished stainless-steel canisters and analyzed using gas chromatography/flame ionization detector analysis by Biospherics Research.
2 Electron Capture Detector used to analyze this compound by Biospherics Research.
3 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
4 The meximum number of detects Is 14 (days of monitoring).
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
cis-2-Hexene
ci- '" 'hyl-2-pentene
i-Pn,j ylbenzene
trens-2-Haxene
Chloroform
Ethylcyclohexane
Trichloroethene
2-Methyl-2-pentene
2,2-Dimethylheptane
2,2-Dimathylpropane
2,2,4-Trimethylhexane
2,4,4-Trimethyl-2-pentene
4- Methyl-1 -pentene
The following analytes were not measured in the Summer:
elpha-Pinene
beta-Pi nene
Methytstyrene
1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1,3-Diethylbenzene
1,4-Diethylbenzene
Page 4 of 4
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Comparison Data
Units in fjg/m3
VOC
cl«-2-But«n«*
cls-2-Pantana*
l-Butane*
l-But«m4
l-P«ntan«4
m-EthyltohMn«4
m-Xyterra ft p-Xyton*'
n-Butana*
n-Decane'
n-Heptane*
n-Hexane*
n-Nonena1
n-Octana1
n-Pentane1
n-Propylbenz«na*
o-Ethyltoluene*
Q-Xyl«n«1
p-Ethyttoluene*
trana-2-Butanaz
tran«-2-P«nt«n»2
Acetylene*
COMPARISON DATA
TE8L§
mmimmm
NA
NA
760O
NA
1400
BOO
1480
760O
NA
1400
704
420O
1400
1400
NA
BOO
1480
BOO
NA
NA
10648
TYPICAL
Outdoor
^•••••••B
0.3
0.4
S.4
1.S
17.3
3.2
18
20.3
1.8
2.9
6.S
2.0
2.4
9.5
0.8
1.7
6.5
2.1
0.6
0.4
8.0
HIGH
VALUE
Outdoor
5.7
0.5
11.9
236.9
3202
504.9
90
43.5
8.3
5.3
14.1
5.6
10
18.9
912
479
29
505
13.0
8.7
11.7
Pag* 1 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Comparison Data
Units in j/g/m3
VOC
Benzene1
Carbon Tetrachlorlde1
Chloroform1
Cyclohexane*
Cyclopentane*
Cyclopentene2
Ethane*
Ethytbanzene1
Ethylene6
laoprene2
Methane4
Mathylcyclohaxana*
Methylcyclopentane*
Propane*
Propane2
Styrene1
Tetrachloroathena1
Toluene*
Trlchloroethene'
1 -Butane2
1-Hexene*
COMPARISON DATA
TESL*
12
50
40
574
1360
NA
NA
800
468
NA
NA
NA
NA
7200
NA
172
136
752
540
NA
NA
TYPICAL
Outdoor
ssssssssas
7.1
0.7
0.5
2.3
6.0
0.5
8.6
3.2
14.4
4.0
1084
1.7
2.9
7.2
1.6
1.7
4.3
16.7
0.2
1.7
0.0
HIGH
VALUE
Outdoor
=ss^=
25
1.8
7.5
4.0
279.4
15.3
12.9
16
28.2
33.8
7937
3.4
5.7
13.3
13.2
13
18
32.4
1.6
16.4
1275
Page 2 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Comparison Data
Units in //g/m3
I
I VOC
1-P«ntMMs
1,1,1-Trlchloroathana1
II 1.2,4-Trim«thytb«ni«n« fc •«o-Buty«b«ni«n«4
r-
1.3-Butadlan*4
1 .3,6-Trim«thylbanian«4
2-M«thyM-butan«4
|2-Mathyl-2-butarM1
2-M«thyM-p«ntaM*
2-Mathylhaptarw4
2-IWUthylhaxana*
Z-Methyfpentarw*
2,2-Dlmathylbutan*1
2.3-Dimathylbutan*1
2,3-Dtmathylhaxana4
12,3-Dlmethytpantana2
2,3.4-Trimathylpantana*
2,4-Dlmethythaxam4
2.4-Dlmathylpentana*
3-Ethythaxan*4
|3-M«thyl-1-butana2
COMPARISON DATA ||
TE8L*
36
4320
500
44
600
NA
NA
NA
1400
1228
NA
NA
1400
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
TYPICAL
Outdoor
0.6
"1
3.5
0.4
1.0
0.5
1.0
0.3
1.6
5.9
6.5
1.3
6.2
0.0
1.0
1.8
0.0
1.8
0.0
II °-2
HIGH
VALUE I)
Outdoor
11.2
40
33617
525
608
3186
12.3
6.8
125
12.9
13.5
42.7
286.1
294
14.1
3.5
294
4.1
266
II 12-6 II
NA || 4.1 1 7.0 1
Page 3 of 4
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air VOC Comparison Data
Units in //g/m3
VOC
3-Methytpentane1
4-Methyt-1-pentene
COMPARISON DATA
TESL*
NA
NA
TYPICAL II HIGH
|| VALUE
Outdoor || Outdoor
4.7 || 9.4
NA I NA
2,2,4-Trlmethylpentane*7
2,4,4-Trimethyl-1 -pentene7
2,5-Dimethylhexane"
NA
NA
NA
2.0 824.7
NA NA
0.0 8.8
1 The typical value is tha arithmetic average and the high value Is the 12-hour maximum from L. Wallace, et al. "The Los Angeles TEAM Study: Personal Exposures,
Indoor-Outdoor Air oncentrations, and Breath Concentrations of 25 Volatile Organic Compounds." J. Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 1:157-192.
2 The typical value is the average, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppbC converted to //g/m3 from Atlanta Ozone Precursor Monitoring Study Data Report,
EPA/600/R-92/157, pp 62-64. AREAL, ORD, USEPA, RTP, NC 27711 Sept 1992.
3 The typical value is the arithmetic average, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppbC converted to //g/m3 from C. Lewis and R.B. Zweidlinger. "Apportionment
of Residential Indoor Aerosol, VOC and Aldehyde Species to Indoor and Outdoor Sources, and their Source Strengths." Atmospheric Environment, 26A:2179-2184
(1992). NOTE: Data collected at 10 home* during the winter.
4 The typical value is the median, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppb converted to //g/m3 from J. Shah, D. Joseph. "National Ambient VOC Data Base
Update: 3.0" prepared for USEPA, AREAL (Contract No. 68-D80082) AREAL Mail Drop 77, RTP NC 27711, May 1993.
6 The typical value is the arithmetic average, and the high is the maximum value; units in ppbC converted to //g/m3 from C. Lewis. "Sources of Air Pollutants Indoors:
VOC and Fine Participate Species." J. of Exp. Anal. & Env. Epi. J., p. 42 (1991).
6 Texas Effects Screening Levels adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval as used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk
Assessment Section in its evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information unless the
compound is followed by a * sign. If measured airborne levels of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or
welfare effects are not expected. If the measured level exceeds the screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather an indication that
some followup action (or further review) is warranted.
7 This VOC was measured only during the summer monitoring period.
NA Not available.
Page 4 of 4
June 1, 1994
-------
Air Pesticide Results1 from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICIDE*
Acaphata
Atrazlna
alpha-Chlordana
gamma-Chlordana
ChlorpyrHoa
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
Dlazlnon
Dleldrin
Heptachlor
Llndana
Malathlon
Mathyl Parathlon
Pendlmethalln
clt-Parmathrtn
Propoxur
Simazina
Trlfluralin
SPRING RESULTS
(TDataota
0
6
3
S
8
1
2
3
4
1
4
5
2
O
4
0
8
1
6
INDOOR
Dataetabla
Raaulta
Lowaat*
<5.6
1.8
1.0
0.8
2.5
1.3
1.9
2.0
1.6
3.4
2.1
7.1
1.5
£0.4
1.3
S1.2
5.1
8.8
2.4
Hlghaat
-
6.6
24.5
31.1
115.0
1.3
1.9
4.0
60.4
3.4
8.4
21.8
5.6
-
10.6
-
125.0
8.8
43.6
OUTDOOR
(CDataota
1
4
2
2
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
2
1
0
0
5
Dataotabla
Raaulta
Lowaat1
30.9
1.8
1.0
0.9
2.3
1.0
8.0
S1.5
S0.4
Sl.O
S0.7
3.9
2.8
6.2
1.7
4.6
£0.4
30.3
5.2
Hlghaat
30.9
9.8
3.5
3.1
2.9
1.0
8.0
_
..
—
-
3.9
9.6
6.2
23.7
4.6
-
--
82.7
Page 1 of 2
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Air Pesticide Results1 from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
1 Collected with a Low Volume Sampler; analyzed by SWRI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit ie listed. For this table, the reporting limit is based upon a volume of 5.5 m3 and the detection limit.
- Not applicable.
@ The following enalytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Azinphos-methyl Metolachlor
Captan trans-Permethrin
Cerbaryl
Carbofuran
Ethyl Parathion
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Air Pesticide Results1 from Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICIDE*
Atrazlna
Azlnphoa-mathyl
Captan
Carbaryl
alpha-Chlordana
gamma-Chlordana
Chlorpyrifoa
4.4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
Diazlnon
Dlaldrin
Ethyl Parathlon
Heptachlor
Llndana
Malathlon
Mathyl Parathlon
Pandlmathalln
cla-Parmathrin
trana -Parma thrln
Propoxur
SUMMER RESULTS
IDatacta
2
0
1
2
1
1
6
2
3
4
2
1
3
3
2
5
3
1
1
4
INDOOR
Dataetabl*
Raauto
Lowaal1
7.2
<.1.1
7.0
5.3
25.9
33.9
5.7
1.4
1.8
2.5
2.1
2.2
1.4
20.5
10.0
1.4
1.3
70.9
67.4
25.0
Highest
52.4
--
7.0
24.6
25.9
33.9
66.7
2.8
3.1
78.1
5.4
2.2
3.8
769.0
379.0
49.1
1.9
70.9
67.4
228.0
OUTDOOR
ODataota
0
1
1
0
1
1
4
2
0
1
1
0
2
1
2
2
0
2
2
0
Datactabto
Raauha
lOWMt*
^1.0
1.2
1.7
il.1
5.1
5.3
1.5
1.3
0.0
1.8
2.1
<1.3
1.1
2.2
6.6
24.4
^.1.2
6.6
6.7
<5.4
Hlghaat
„
1.2
1.7
_
5.1
5.3
4.3
1.3
_
1.8
2.1
_
2.1
2.2
733.0
103.0
-
7.2
8.9
-
Paga 1 of 2
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Air Pesticide Results1 from Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICM-'
Slmazlne
Trifluralin
SUMMER RESULTS
INDOOR
^Detects
1
3
Detectable
Results
10.8
1.8
10.8
6.2
^Detects
0
2
OUTDOOR
Detectable
Result*
<.1.0
1.0
-
5.9
1 Collected with a Low Volume Sampler; analyzed by SWRI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed. For this table, the reporting limit is based upon a volume of 5.5 m3 and the detection limit.
- Not applicable.
© The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Acephate
Carbofuran
4,4'DDD
Metolachlor
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Air Pesticide Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICIDE
Acaphata
Atrazlna
alpha-Chlordana
gamma-Chlordan*
ChlorpyrHoa
4,4'-DOO*
4,4'-DDE+
4,4'-DDT+
Oiazlnon
Dieldrln
Heptachlor
Llndana
Malathlon
Mathyt Parathlon
Pandimathalln
cb-Parmathrln
Propoxur
Simazlna
Trifluralin
COMPARISON DATA
TESL1
NA
20000
2000*
200O4
800
400*
400*
400*
400
1000
200
2000
20000
20OP
NA
20000*
2000
NA
NA
INDOOR
Typical1
NA
NA
84
NA
182
0
0
0
73
6
10
0
0
NA
NA
0
113
NA
NA
High Valua'
NA
NA
3020
NA
1600
0
16
17
5400
177
1580
245
38
NA
NA
33
7920
NA
NA
OUTDOOR
Typical*
NA
NA
0
NA
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
0
0
NA
NA
AzinphM-mathyl* NA H NA
NA H NA
High Valua'
NA
NA
628
NA
206
0
0
0
292
8
627
23
6
NA
NA
0
686
NA
NA
NA
Paga 1 of 2
Juna 1, 1994
-------
Air Pesticide Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICIDE
Captan*
Carbaryl*
Carbofuran*
Ethyl Parathlon1
Metolachlor*
trans -Permethrin*
COMPARISON DATA
TESL1
NA
NA
400
NA
NA
200004
INDOOR
Typical1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
High ValiM*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
OUTDOOR
Typical*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
High Value*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
1 Texas Effects Screening Levels adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval as used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk Assessment
Section in its evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information. If measured airborne levels
of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or welfare effects are not expected. If the measured level exceeds the
screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather an indication that some follow-up action (or further review) is warranted.
2 Typical value is the median taken from Nonoccupetional Pesticide Exposure Study (NOPES) Final Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-90/003, Jan
1990, Washington DC 20460. Note that the comparison city is Jacksonville, Rorida, Summer, 1987, with a sample size of 72.
3 The high value listed is the 95th percentile from Nonoccupational Pesticide Exposure Study (NOPES) Final Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-90/003,
Jan 1990, Washington DC 20460. Note that the comparison city is Jacksonville, Florida, Summer, 1987, with a sample size of 72.
4 Denotes reference information is for the sum of the concentrations across all compounds identified (e.g. DDT, DDE, and DDD or alpha and gamma chlordane or cis and trans
permethrin).
6 This pesticide was measured only during the summer monitoring period.
P For parathion only (i.e., not specific to methyl parathion).
+ For these compounds, the comparison data are from the Spring monitoring season.
NA Denotes that there are no available data for comparison.
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Air Pesticide Results1
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICIDE*
Atrazln*
Carbofuran
Llndane
Malathlon
Pandlmethalln
Trifluralin
SPRING FIXED SITE
fDetecta
4
2
1
1
1
1
Detectable
Results
Lowaat1
1.5
1.4
6.4
3.0
1.4
1.1
Hlghaat
12.7
2.1
6.4
3.0
1.4
1.1
1 Collected with a Low Volume Sampler; analyzed by SWRI.
2 If all measured results wera below the reporting limit, the reporting limit ie listed.
The following analytes ware analyzed for but were not detected:
Acephate
Azinphos-methyl
Captan
Carbaryl
alpha-Chlordane
gamma-Chlordane
Chlorpyrifos
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
Oiazinon
Dieldrin
Ethyl Parathion
Heptachlor
Methyl Parathion
Metolachlor
cls-Permethrin
trans-Permethrin
Propoxur
Simazine
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Air Pesticide Results1
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICIDE9
Atrazina
Carbaryl
alpha -Chlordan*
gamma-Chlordan*
Chlorpyrifo*
4,4'-DDT
Diazinon
Dlaldrin
Ethyl Parathlon
Lindana
Malathion
Methyl Parathlon
SUMMER FIXED SITE
^Detects
4
1
1
2
6
1
2
1
1
3
1
4
Datactabla
Raaulta
Loweat*
1.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.7
1.1
0.3
0.2
0.2
1.2
0.4
0.1
Hlghaat
1.6
0.1
0.1
0.2
1.9
1.1
0.3
0.2
n 2
1.2
0.4
3.4
1 Collected Low Volume Sampler; analyzed by SWRI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Acephate
Azinphos-methyl
Captan
Carbofuran
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
Heptachlor
Metolachlor
Pendimethalin
cis-Permethrin
trans-Permethrin
Propoxur
Simazine
Trifluralin
Paga 1 of 1
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Air Pesticide Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
PESTICIDE
Atrazin*
Carbofuran
Llndarui
Malathlon
P*ndlm*thalln
Trlfluralln
COMPARISON DATA
TESL1
20000
400
2000
20000
NA
NA
TYPICAL*
0
NA
0
0
NA
NA
HIGH VALUE*
0
NA
23
6
NA
NA
Carbaryl*
alpha-Chlordana1
gamma-Chlordana*
Chlorpyrlfoe*
4,4'-DDT§
Dlezlnon*
Dlaldrln1
Ethyl Parathlon*
Methyl Parathlon'
NA
2000*
2000*
800
400*
400
1000
NA
200f
NA
0
9
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
NA
628
206
17
0
292
8
NA
NA
Page 1 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Air Pesticide Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
1 Texas Effects Screening Levels adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval as used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk Assessment
Section in its evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information. If measured airborne levels of
a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or welfare effects are not expected. If the measured level exceeds the
screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather an indication that some followup action (or further review) is warranted.
2 Typical value listed is the median from Nonoccupational Pesticide Exposure Study (NOPES) Final Report.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-90/003, Jan 1990,
Washington DC 20460. Note that the comparison city Is Jacksonville, Florida, Summer, 1987, with a sample size of 72.
3 The high value listed is the 99th percentile from from Nonoccupational Pesticide Exposure Study (NOPES) Final Report.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-
90/003, Jan 1990, Washington DC 20460. Note that the comparison city is Jacksonville, Florida, Summer, 1987, with a sample size of 72.
4 Denotes reference information is for the sum of the concentrations across all compounds identified (e.g., DDT, DDE, and DDD or alpha and gamma chlordane).
6 This pesticide was measured only during the summer monitoring period.
P For parathion only (i.e., not specific to methyl parathion).
NA Not available.
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Air PAH Results1 from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
PAH°
Acenaphthena
Anthracene
Banzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(k]fluoranthene
Benzo[g,h,l]perylerve
Benzo[e]pyrene
Banzo[a]pyrana
Chryaana
Corona na
Fluoranthana
Fluorana
lndano(123-cd)pyrana
Naphthatana
Phananthrana
Pyrene
SPRING RESULTS
INDOOR
JDetecta
7
8
2
6
3
4
4
5
2
9
9
4
9
9
8
Detectable
Raauha
Loweat*
1.9
0.7
0.4
0.5
1.6
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.8
1.2
6.5
0.2
7.3
8.2
1.6
Hlghaat
27.8
1.9
0.8
3.2
5.6
1.1
1.3
1.0
1.7
7.8
41.2
1.9
1115.6
49.6
20.3
OUTDOOR
IDetecta
5
7
1
3
1
1
1
2
2
7
9
1
8
9
6
Detectable
Raaulta
Loweat1
1.4
0.6
0.9
0.4
1.0
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.4
1.6
1.4
0.4
3.7
2.7
1.9
Hlgheet
7.6
1.8
0.9
1.8
1.0
0.3
0.7
1.4
0.9
4.4
24.2
0.4
23.6
29.8
4.6
1 Collected with a low volume sampler; analyzed by RTI.
2 If all measured results ware below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
<3> The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Cyclopenta|c,d]pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
The following was not measured in the Spring:
Benzolbjfluoranthane
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Air PAH Results1 from Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
All Units in ng/m3
PAH*
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
SUMMER RESULTS
^Detects
5
6
6
6
4
6
6
INDOOR
Detectable
Result*
Lowest*
2.4
0.8
1.2
4.1
28.8
11.2
1.1
Hlgheet
52.3
24.9
6.2
402.0
92.8
517.0
10.6
OUTDOOR
IDetect*
2
4
4
4
0
4
4
Detectable
Reeulte
Lowest*
2.8
0.6
0.7
3.1
j<19.4
8.6
0.6
Hfgheet
4.5
1.9
3.4
9.8
-
25.3
1.9
1 Collected with a low volume sampler; analyzed by SWRI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
Not applicable.
@ The following analytes ware analyzed for but were not detected:
Benzo|a]anthracene Benzolalpyrene
Benzo|b|fluoranthene Chrysene
Benzo[k]fluoranthene Dibenz[a,hlanthracene
Banzo[g,h,ilpery1ena lndeno(1,2,3,cd)pyrene
The following were not measured in the Summer:
Benzolelpyrene
Coronene
Cyclopentalc.dlpyrene
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Air PAH Comparison Data
All Units in ng/m3
PAH
Acenaphthena
Anthracene
Benzolalanthracene
Benzotelpyrene
Benzo[e]pyrene
Benzo(g,h,l]perylene
Benzo[klfluoranthene
Chrysene
Coronene
Fluoranthene
Fluor«n«
lndeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene
Naphthalene
Phertanthrena
Pyrana
COMPARISON DATA
TE8L1
NA
200
NA
12
NA
NA
NA
200
NA
NA
800
NA
176000
NA
200
TYPICAL1
Indoor
36
6
1
1
3
1
2
2
0.6
11
NA
1
1600
110
8
Outdoor
4
1
0.4
0.2
0.6
O.S
1
1
0.3
6
NA
0.4
170
31
4
HIGH VALUE1
Indoor
120
15
3
3
10
2
5
7
1.4
23
NA
2
4200
210
17
Outdoor
10
2
0.8
0.5
0.9
1
2
2
0.7
9
NA
0.7
330
54
9
1 Texas Effects Screening Level adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval a* used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk Assessment
Section in its evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information unless the compound is followed
by a * sign. If measured airborne level* of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or welfare effects are not
expected. If the measured level exceeds the screening level, it does not necessarily mean there is a health problem, but rather an indication that some follow-up action (or
further review) is warranted.
2 The typical value listed is the median from J.C. Chuang, G.A. Mack, M.R. Kuhlman, and N.K. Wilson. "Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and their Derivatives in Indoor
and Outdoor Air in an Eight-Home Study." Atmospheric Environment, 258; 369-380 (1991).
3 The high value listed is the maximum from J.C. Chuang, G.A. Mack, M.R. Kuhlman, and N.K. Wilson. "Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and their Derivatives in Indoor
and Outdoor Air in an Eight-Home Study." Atmospheric Environment, 25B; 369-380 (1991).
NA Not available.
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Monitoring Results1 for PAHs
Units in ng/m3
PAH*
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benzotalanthracene
Benzo[k]fluoranthan«
Benzo(g,h,l]perylene
B«nzo[a)pyrene
Banzo[e]pyren«
Chrysene
Corona n«
Fluoranthene
Fluorena
ldeno[1.2,3-c,d]pyr«ne
Naphthalene
Phenanthrena
Pyrene
SPRING RESULTS
rfDetecU1
19
22
10
18
18
9
18
22
21
22
22
17
22
22
22
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
0.3
0.6
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
4.5
1.9
0.1
1.3
17.1
2.2
Highest
7.9
4.9
0.2
0.9
1.1
0.1
0.5
0.9
0.9
17.8
25.9
0.4
36.3
83.9
11.5
1 Collected with a VAPS; analyzed by RTI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
3 Monitoring was conducted for 22 days; tho maximum number of detects is 22.
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Cyclopanta[c,d]pyrene
Dibenzo[a,hlanthracene
The following analyte was not measured in the Spring:
Benzolblfluoranthene
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air Monitoring Results1 for PAHs
Units in ng/m3
PAH*
Acanaphthan*
Anthracene
B«nzo[a]anthrac«n*
Benzolblfluoranthane
Benzo[k]fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,l]perytene
Chrycene
Fluoranthana
Fluorana
Idanol 1 ,2,3-c,d]p yrena
Naphthalana
Phenanthrene
Pyrane
SUMMER RESULTS
(((Detects'
7
9
1
1
1
2
2
9
9
1
9
9
9
Detectable
Result*
Lowaat1
1.8
1.6
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
4.2
3.3
0.1
6.6
13.8
2.4
Hlghaat
3.9
5.7
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
15.3
13.0
0.1
22.6
73.3
7.6
1 Collected with a low volume fine particle sampler; analyzed by SWRI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
3 Monitoring was conducted for PAH's on 9 of the 14 days; the maximum number of detects is 9.
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Benzo(a|pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h]anthracene
The following analyte was not measured in the Summer:
Coronene
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air for PAHs Comparison Data
Units in ng/m3
PAH
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benzo(a]anthracene
Benzolklfluoranthena
|Benzo[g,h,ilperYlena
Benzofalpyrene
Benzo[e]pyrene
Chrysene
Corona ne
IFIuoranthene
Fluorene
IdenoCI ,2.3-c,d]pyrena
Naphthalene
Phenantnrene
Pyrene
COMPARISON DATA
TESL' TYPICAL1
1
NA
200
NA
NA
NA
12
NA
200
NA
NA
800
NA
176000
NA
200
4
1
0.4
1
0.5
0.2
0.5
1
0.3
6
NA
0.4
170
31
4
HIGH VALUE*
10
2
0.8
2
1
0.5
0.9
2
0.7
9
NA
0.7
330
54
9
II" " j|
NA (I NA || NA
Page 1 of 2
June 1. 1994
-------
Fixed Site Outdoor Air for PAHs Comparison Data
Units in ng/m3
1 Texas Effect* Screening Level adjusted for 24-hour sampling interval as used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Toxicology and Risk Assessment
Section in its evaluation of the potential impacts of various air contaminants. These screening levels are based on health effects information unless the compound is followed
by a * sign. If measured airborne levels of a certain chemical do not exceed the screening level, it is interpreted to mean that adverse health or welfare effects are not
expected. If the measured level exceeds the screening level, it does not necessarily mean there Is a health problem, but rather an indication that some follow-up action (or
further review) iswerrented.
2 The typical value listed is the median from J.C. Chuang, G.A. Mack, M.R. Kuhlman, and N.K. Wilson. "Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and their Derivatives in Indoor
and Outdoor Air in an Eight-Home Study." Atmospheric Environment, 25B; 369-380 (1991).
3 The high value listed Is the maximum from J.C. Chuang, G.A. Mack, M.R. Kuhlman, and N.K. Wilson. "Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and their Derivatives in Indoor
and Outdoor Air in an Eight-Home Study." Atmospheric Environment, 25B; 369-380 (1991).
4 This PAH was measured only during the summer monitoring period.
NA Not available.
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
House Dust Elemental Results1 for Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
Units in
I
ELEMENT0
Aluminum
Barium
Bromine
Calcium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Rubidium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
I Titanium
|| Vanadium
Zinc
|| Zirconium
SPRING RESULTS
fDetects
7
5
1
9
9
6
9
9
3
9
3
9
8
9
9
9
9
1
9
8
Detectable
Results
Lowest
9724
549
123
35693
784
51
78
13136
105
242
70
5351
44
47687
265
1250
1499
188
325
186
Highest
34803
1100
123
95398
12390
150
391
31842
416
477
209
14274
100
141972
526
13347
3377
188
2217
1044
Page 1 of 2
May 12, 1994
-------
House Dust Elemental Results1 for Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
Units in //g/g
Collected via HVS3; analyzed by METI using XRF.
The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Antimony Cobalt Iodine Palladium Selenium Tungsten
Arsenic Gallium Lanthanum Phosphorus Silver Yttrium
Cadmium Germanium Mercury Rhodium Tellurium
Cesium Gold Molybdenum Scandium Tin
Page 2 of 2
May 12. 1994
-------
House Dust Elemental Results1 for Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
Units in f/g/g
ELEMENT*
Aluminum
Barium
Bromine
Calcium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Rubidium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Titanium
Zinc
Zirconium
^Detects
5
5
2
6
6
5
6
6
5
6
1
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
SUMMER
Detectable
Reaulte
Lowest
16576
688
47
46701
1559
55
142
15522
109
239
169
7868
39
52128
325
1545
2140
383
268
Highest
29983
1395
131
118543
8511
86
588
30503
649
521
169
13890
101
131849
576
21438
3832
2044
747
Paoe 1 of 2
May 12, 1994
-------
House Dust Elemental Results1 for Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
Units in i/g/g
Collected via HVS3; analyzed by METI using XRF.
The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Antimony Cobalt Iodine Palladium Selenium Tungsten
Arsenic Gallium Lanthanum Phosphorus Silver Vanadium
Cadmium Germanium Mercury Rhodium Tellurium Yttrium
Cesium Gold Molybdenum Scandium Tin
Page 2 of 2
May 12, 1994
-------
House Dust Elemental Comparison Data
Units in //g/g
ELEMENT
Aluminum
Barium
Bromine
Calcium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Rubidium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
Zirconium
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
90O1
NA
160O'
230'
230'
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1550'
NA
HIGH VALUE
100.0003
50003
NA
320.0O03
NA
20003
77002
100,000"
32002
20O02
1200'
30003
210'
440.0003
30003
48003
20.0003
5003
50002
15003
1 The typical value listed is the mean from Roberts, J.W., Camann, D.E., and Spittler, T.M. (1991). "Reducing lead exposure from remodeling and soil track-in in older
homes." In: Proc. of the Annual Meeting of Air and Waste Management Assoc. Vancouver, BC. Paper No. 91-134.2.
2 The high value listed is the maximum value from Roberts, J.W., Camann, D.E., and Spittler, T.M. (1991). "Reducing lead exposure from remodeling and soil track-in in
older homes." In: Proc. of the Annual Meeting of Air and Waste Management Assoc. Vancouver, BC. Paper No. 91-134.2.
3 The high value is the maximum value from range of metal concentration found in soil from the Western US; ATSDR Public Health Assessment Guidance Manual.
NA Not available.
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
Soil Elements Results1 from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
Units in j/g/g
ELEMENT*
Aluminum
Barium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
lodlna
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Potaaalum
Rubidium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Tellurium
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
Zirconium
SPRING RESULTS
iTDetecta
9
4
9
3
8
1
9
2
9
1
9
6
9
9
8
1
9
1
6
S
ROADWAY
Detectable
Reeuhe
Loweat1
9461
636
40319
77
117
1116
11251
117
180
124
4071
56
45833
225
442
344
1267
123
60
387
Higheat
40499
1415
142751
87
1303
1116
25302
171
509
124
12564
105
145385
465
2051
344
2750
123
406
509
IDetecte
7
4
9
1
7
0
9
1
8
0
8
6
9
8
9
0
8
0
6
1
YARD
Detectable
Raaurta
Loweat1
13224
852
18215
61
160
S57O
3243
125
210
£110
6153
57
67247
265
542
=£460
1061
£200
81
304
HlQTMCt
36757
1169
205373
61
6498
_
37635
125
690
-
18860
152
205346
758
15478
-
4828
-
434
304
Page 1 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Soil Elements Results1 from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
Units in
1 Surface sample only, analyzed by MET).
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed. (For this table, the reporting limit is defined as the median value of 3 times the sample
uncertainty.)
Not applicable.
6> The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Antimony
Arsenic
Bromine
Cadmium
Cesium
Chlorine
Cobalt
Gallium
Germanium
Gold
Lanthanum
Mercury
Molybdenum
Palladium
Phosphorus
Rhodium
Scandium
Selenium
Silver
Tin
Tungsten
Yttrium
Page 2 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Soil Elements Comparison Data
All Units in //g/g
ELEMENT
Aluminum
Barium
Calcium
Chromium
Coppar
lodlna
Iron
Laad
Manganaaa
Nlckal
Potaaalum
Rubidium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Tallurlum
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
Zirconium
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
74.0002
670*
33,000*
662
272
NA
26,000*
1000'
300'
651
18O04
742
3OO.OOO*
2702
1900'
NA
26002
88*
300'
1902
HIGH VALUE
100.0003
sooo3
32O.0003
20003
3003
NA
100,000*
5O001
5301
1501
3O003
2103
440.O003
30003
48003
NA
20.0003
5003
8001
15003
Paga 1 of 2
June 1, 1994
-------
Soil Elements Comparison Data
All Units in pg/g
1 Comparison data from Roberts at al.. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology. Suppl. 1, 127-146 (1992); Typical •> median; High = maximum.
2 The typical value is the estimated arithmetic mean concentration (unless otherwise noted) for background levels of metals in soils from the Western US; ATSDR Public
Health Assessment Guidance Manual.
3 The high value is the maximum value from range of metal concentration found In soil from the Western US; ATSDR Public Health Assessment Guidance Manual.
4- The typical value is the geometric mean for background levels of metals In soils from the Western US; ATSDR Public Health Assessment Guidance Manual.
NA Not Available.
Page 2 of 2
June 1. 1994
-------
House Dust Pesticide Results1 for Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
Units in //g/g
PESTICIDE*
Atrazlne
Captan
Carbaryl
alpha-Chlordane
gamma-Chlordane
Chlorpyrlfo*
2,4-0
4,4'-DDD
4,4' -DDE
4.4--DDT
Dlazlnon
Dicamba
Dleldrln
Lindane
Malathlon
Methyl Parathlon
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophanol
cis-Parmethrln
trans -Permethrin
Propoxur
Trifluralin
SPRING RESULTS
IDetect*
4
2
5
1
1
9
1
3
5
8
5
1
3
2
4
2
4
3
5
9
8
2
Detectable
Revuh*
LowMt
0.2
0.6
0.1
1.7
1.9
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.04
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.1
Hlgheet
0.4
1.2
0.2
1.7
1.9
1.7
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.6
1.8
0.2
0.2
0.1
1.0
0.3
0.7
0.3
3.2
4.9
3.2
0.2
Page 1 of 2
May 9, 1994
-------
House Dust Pesticide Results1 for Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
Units in 1*9/9
Sample collected by HVS3 and analyzed by SWRI.
The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Acephate Metolachlor
Azinphos-methyl Simazine
Carbofuran
Ethyl Parethion
Heptachlor
Page 2 of 2
May 9, 1994
-------
House Dust Pesticide Results1 for Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
Units in //g/g
PESTICIDE
Azinphoe-mathyl
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
alpha-Chlordane
gamma-Chlordane
ChlorpyrHoe
2,4-D
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
Diazinon
Llndane
Malathion
Mathyl Parathion
Pendimathalin
Pentachlorophenol
ci»-Parmethrin
trana-Permethrin
Propoxur
Trifluralin
SUMMER RESULTS
*Detecta
1
3
2
1
1
6
4
1
4
5
4
4
2
1
2
5
6
6
5
1
Detectable
Raeulta
Loweet
1.2
0.1
0.1
1.1
1.4
0.2
0.02
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.4
0.4
0.1
0.4
1.0
0.1
0.2
Hlgheet
1.2
6.6
0.9
1.1
1.4
1.7
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.8
0.9
0.4
1.4
0.8
0.3
96.9
100.0
1.9
0.2
Page 1 of 2
May 9, 1994
-------
House Dust Pesticide Results1 for Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
Units in /yg/g
Sample collected by HVS3 and analyzed by SWRI.
The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Acephate Dieldrin Simazine
Atrazine Ethyl Parathion
Captan Heptachlor
Dicamba Metolachlor
Page 2 of 2
May 9, 1994
-------
House Dust Pesticide Comparison Data
Units in fjg/g
PESTICIDE
Atrazlne
Captan
Carbaryl
alpha-Chlordane
gamma-Chlordana
Chlorpyrlfo*
2,4-0
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
Dlazinon
Dicamba
Dleldrln
Lindane
Malathlon
Methyl Parathion
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
cls-Permethrin
trans-Permethrln
Propoxur
Trlfluralln
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
0.7
0.57
1.0
6.3"
6.3'3
4.7'
NA
NA
0.3'
0.4'
0.4'
NA
0.51
-------
House Dust Pesticide Comparison Data
Units in //g/g
PESTICIDE
Acephate*
Aiinpho«-m«thyi*
Carbofuran4
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
NA
NA
NA
HIGH VALUE
NA
NA
NA
1 The typical value listed is the median from Roberts, et al; Journal of Exposure Analysis. Vol. 1, No. 2, 150, (1991).
2 The high value listed is the maximum from Roberts, et al; Journal of Exposure Analysis. Vol. 1, No. 2, 150, (1991).
3 Denotes reference information is for the sum of all compounds indentified.
4 This pesticide was measured only during the summer monitoring period.
NA Not available.
Page 2 of 2
May 9, 1994
-------
House Dust Poly cyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Results1
from Residential Monitoring (9 Households)
All Units in ng/g
PAH*
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benz o[a] anthracene
Benzo[k]fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,l)perylene
Benzo[a]pyrene
Benzo(e]pyrene
Chrysene
Coronene
Cyclopenta[c,d]pyrene
Dlbenzo(a,h]anthracene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
lndeno[1,2,3,c,d)pyrena
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
SPRING RESULTS
fDetecU
1
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
6
7
4
9
1
5
6
9
9
Detectable
ReeuKe
Loweat1
99
4
29
105
56
34
39
69
44
22
80
63
81
71
52
82
85
Highest
99
79
606
1051
489
470
426
586
141
204
265
814
81
515
824
582
881
1 Sample collected via HVS3; analyzed by RTI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
@ The following analyte was not measured in the Spring:
Benzo|b]fluoranthene
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
House Dust Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Results1
from Residential Monitoring (6 Households)
All Units in ng/g
PAH*
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benzo[a]anthracene
Benzo[b]fluoranthen«
B«nzo[k]fluoranthana
Benzo[g,h,l]parylana
Banzo[a]pyr*n«
Chrysena
Dibenzo[a,h]anthracena
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Indenol 1 ,2,3,c,d]pyrena
Phenanthrene
Pyrane
SUMMER RESULTS
^Detects
1
1
4
6
4
5
5
6
1
6
2
5
6
6
Detectable
Results
Lowest1
98
125
74
40
82
39
41
43
115
95
40
43
142
86
Highest
98
125
560
619
493
417
614
591
115
1330
159
468
1640
1480
1 Sample collected via HVS3; analyzed by RTI.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
@ The following analyte was analyzed for but not detected:
Naphthalene
The following analytes were not measured in the Summer:
Benzolelpyrene
Coronene
Cyclopenta|c,d]pyrene
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
House Dust Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Comparison Data
All Units in ng/g
PAH
Acenaphthen*
Anthracene
Benzo(a)anthrac«n«
B«nzo(b]fluoranth«ne
Be nz o (k ]f luoranthene
Benzo[g,h,i)parylane
Benzo[a)pyr*ne
Benzo[e]pyrane
Chryeene
Coronene
Cyclopanta[c,d]pyr«n«
Dlbenzo(a,h]anthracen*
Fluoranthene
Fluorena
lndeno[1,2,3,c,d]pyrana
Naphthalene
Phenanthrena
Pyrena
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
NA
120'
540'
NA
1500'
870'
730'
700'
960'
200'
12
210'
1400'
90'
630'
NA
1200'
1200'
HIGH VALUE
NA
4002
1S002
NA
3500'
1300*
1700'
1500'
24OO'
480'
60'
510'
3900'
280'
1400'
NA
31002
30002
1 The typical value listed is the mean from J.C. Chuang, P.J. Callahan, S. Gordon, "Evaluation of HVS3 Sampler for Sampling
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Polychlorinated Biphenyls", EPA Contract 68-DU-007, AREAL RTP NC 27711.
2 The high value listed is th« maximum from J.C. Chuang, P.J. Callahan, S. Gordon, "Evaluation of HVS3 Sampler for Sampling
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Polychlorinated Biphenyls", EPA Contract 68-DU-007, AREAL RTP NC 27711.
NA Not available.
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
Urine Element Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary and 9 Secondary Participants)
Units in //g/l
ELEMENT
Arsenic
Cadmium
Mercury
SPRING RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
^Detects
8
7
9
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
8.0
0.1
0.2
Highest
41.0
0.7
6.9
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
tfDetects
3
5
9
Detectable
Results
Lowest*
8.0
0.2
0.3
Highest
26.0
0.8
2.1
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control.
2 If ell measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
Urine Element Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(6 Primary and 6 Secondary Participants)
All Units in f/gl\
ELEMENT
Arsenic
Cadmium
Mercury
SUMMER RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
IDetecta
6
6
6
Detectable
RaauH*
Lowest'
20.3
0.7
2.5
UIj*U***
niynwi
106.5
1.3
5.1
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
fOataota
6
6
6
Dataotabla
Raaulta
Lowaat1
16.8
0.1
2.4
Highaat
427.4
2.3
8.6
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control; Primary Participant - 24 hour composite; Secondary Participant - first morning void.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
Page 1 of 1
May 12, 1994
-------
Urine Element Comparison Data
All Units in /ig/l
ELEMENT
Arsenic
Cadmium
Mercury
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
7.5'
0.5'
-------
Urine Pesticide Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary and 9 Secondary Participants)
Units in //g/l
PESTICIDE METABOLITES*
Pentachlorophenol
1-Naphthol
2-Uopropoxyphenol
2-Naphthol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenoxy-acetic Acid
2,4,5-Trlchlorophenol
2,4,6-Trlchlorophenol
2,5-Dichlorophenol
3,5,6-Trichloro-2-pyridinol
4-Nitrophenol
PARENT
COMPOUND
Pentachlorophenol
Naphthalene
Carbaryf
Propoxur
Naphthalene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
Dichlofenthion
Prothiofos
Phosdiphen
2,4-D
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Fanchlorphos
Trichloronate
1 ,3,5-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Lindane
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorpyrifos
Chlorpyrif os-methyl
Parathion
Methyl Parathion
Nitrobenzene
EPN
SPRING RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT | SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
IDetecte
3
9
0
9
5
3
4
0
9
7
6
Detectable
Retult* || ffDetects
Lowect1
1.0
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.0
5.1
1.0
1.4
Highest
1.2
6.6
-
14.0
3.3
1.3
1.6
--
92.0
4.7
2.7
2
7
1
7
3
2
3
1
8
6
6
Detectable
Reeulte
Loweet*
1.6
1.9
1.1
1.6
1.2
1.5
2.5
2.2
4.4
1.0
1.1
Hlgheet
3.2
38.0
1.1
38.0
2.7
2.8
4.2
2.2
50.0
6.4
5.5
Page 1 of 2
May 9, 1994
-------
Urine Pesticide Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary and 9 Secondary Participants)
Units in //g/l
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
-- Not applicable.
@ The following analyte was analyzed for but was not detected:
7-Carbofuranphenol
Page 2 of 2
May9, 1994
-------
Urine Pesticide Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(6 Primary and 6 Secondary Participants)
All Units in //g/l
PESTICIDE METABOLITES
Pentachlorophenol
1-Nephthol
2-Naphthol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenoxy-acetic Acid
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,6-Dichlorophenol
3,5,6-Trlchloro-2-pyridinol
4-Nitroptienol
PARENT
CUM POUND
Pentachlorophenol
Naphthalene
Carbaryt
Naphthalene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
Dichlofenthion
Prothiofos
Phosdiphen
2,4-D
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Fenchlorphos
Trichloronate
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorpyrifos
Chlorpyrifos-methyl
Parathion
Methyl Parathion
Nitrobenzene
EPN
SUMMER RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
fDatecte
5
6
6
5
2
2
6
6
6
Detectable
Results
Lowest1
1.1
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.1
8.4
2.0
1.1
Highest
3.8
12.0
12.0
4.3
1.4
3.9
260.0
11.0
8.6
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
^Detects
3
5
6
5
2
1
6
5
6
Detectable
Results
LowMt1
2.5
1.7
1.1
2.1
1.4
1.3
2.0
1.8
1.3
Hlflheet
7.0
22.0
11.0
6.8
1.6
1.3
240.0
8.4
13.0
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
@ The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
2-lsopropoxyphenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Page 1 of 1
May9. 1994
-------
Urine Pesticide Comparison Data
All Units in //g/l
PESTICIDE METABOLITES
Pentachlorophenol
1-Naphthol
2-laopropoxyphenol
2-Naphthol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenoxy-acetlc Acid
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,5-Dichlorophenol
3,5,6-Trichloro-2-pyrldinol
4-Nitrophenol
PARENT
COMPOUND
Pentachlorophenol
Naphthalene
Carbaryl
Propoxur
Naphthalene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
Dichlofenthion
Prothiofos
Phosdiphen
2,4-D
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Fenchlorphos
Trichloronate
1 ,3,5-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Lindane
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorpyrifos
Chlorpyrif os-methyl
Parathion
Methyl Parathion
Nitrobenzene
EPN
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL1 HIGH VALUE1
1.3
4.2
NO
3.0
1.7
NO
NO
NO
28
2.1
ND
7.7
37
1.6
30
47
1.8
3.0
3.6
760
11
3.0
%FOUND*
57
91
7
75
61
9.6
18
12
97
70
34
1 The typical value listed is the median based upon NHANES III (1988-present) N= approx. 1000 participants.
2 The high value listed is the 95th percentile based upon NHANES III (1988-present) N = approx. 1000 participants.
3 Percent samples analyzed in NHANES III that had a quantifiable level of the analyte.
ND Not detected above reporting limit.
Page 1 of 1
May 9, 1994
-------
Blood Element Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary Participants, 7 Secondary Participants)
Units as Noted
ELEMENT
Cadmium U/g/I)
Lead U/g/dl)
Mercury U/g/I)
SPRING RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
^Detects
5
9
8
DeMotabla
Result*
Lowest
0.2
1.3
0.2
Highest
0.4
6.0
6.6
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
IDetect*
3
7
6
Detectable
Rmulto
Lowact
0.3
2.4
0.4
Hlghaat
0.5
6.4
7.3
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control.
Page 1 of 1
May 11, 1994
-------
Blood Element Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(6 Primary Participants, 6 Secondary Participants)
Units as Noted
ELEMENT*
Lead Vfl/dll
SUMMER RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
#Detect«
6
Detectable
Rnults
Lowest
1.6
Highest
4.9
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
^Detects
6
Detectable
RecuKe
Lowett
2.0
Highest
8.0
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control.
@ The following metals were not measured in the Summer.
Cadmium
Mercury
Page 1 of 1
May 11, 1994
-------
Blood Element Comparison Data
Units as Noted
ELEMENT
Cadmium (//a/I)2
Lead (w/dll*
Mercury U/g/tl4
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL
S - 3.0
NS « 0.4
3.S
<5.0
HIGH VALUE
S « 6.9
NS • 4.2
12.7
30.0
% FOUND1
NA
98
NA
1 Percent samples analyzed in NHANES III with quantifiable level of analyte.
2 Median and 95th percentile from Wyaowaks, D., Landrigan, P., et al. "Cadmium Exposure in a Community Near a Shelter". Amer. J. Epid. 107:27-35, (1978).
3 Median and 95th percentile for NHANES III (1988-Prosent) N »10629 participants age 30-70 years.
4 Median and 95th peroentile from Clarkson. T., Friberg L, et al (eds) Biological Monitoring of Toxic Metals. New York: Plenum Press (1988).
NA Not Available.
8 m among smokers
NS « among nonsmokare
Page 1 of 1
May 11, 1994
-------
Blood Pesticide and Polychlorinated Biphenyl Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary Participants and 7 Secondary Participants)
Units in ppb
PESTICIDE*
(p,p'-ODT|
trana-Nonachlor
beta-Haxachlorocydohexane
DDE
gamma-Hexachlorocydohexane
Heptachlor Epoxlde
Hexachlorobenzene
Oxychlordane
PCB (aa Aroclor 1260)
SPRING RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
^Detect*
2
8
6
9
0
7
2
3
3
Detectable
Result*
Lowest*
0.97
0.20
0.47
1.76
£0.12
0.19
0.12
0.24
1.81
Highest
2.28
1.70
1.42
137.00
-
0.84
0.19
0.45
99.30
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
^Detects
1
5
5
7
2
5
1
3
3
Detectable
R««utt»
Lowaat2
0.60
0.37
0.40
3.37
0.19
0.15
0.14
0.19
2.40
Hlghaat
0.60
3.49
1.88
48.40
0.24
0.68
0.14
1.32
72.30
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control.
2 If ell measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
Not applicable.
@ The following analyte was analyzed for but was not detected:
(o,p'-DDT)
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Blood Pesticide and Polychlorinated Biphenyl Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(6 Primary Participants and 6 Secondary Participants)
Units in ppb
DPeTirinc
(p.p'-ODT)
trana-Nonachlor
beta-Hexachlorocydohaxana
DDE
Heptachlor Epoxlde
Hexachlorofaenzene
Oxychlordane
PCB (a* Aroctor 1280)
SUMMER RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
(TDataota
1
e
4
6
3
6
2
2
Detectable
Raaulta
Lowaat*
1.26
0.20
0.36
3.17
0.20
0.04
0.19
1.66
Hlohaat
1.26
2.03
0.98
109.00
1.06
0.30
0.55
93.40
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
IDetecta
1
5
3
6
3
8
3
3
Dataetabla
Raaulta
Lowaat2
1.09
0.22
0.34
1.83
0.14
0.10
0.18
1.19
Highest
1.09
1.21
1.43
75.70
0.34
0.16
0.42
99.4O
1 Sample* analyzed by the Cantera for Disease Control.
2 If all measured results ware balow the reporting limit, the reporting limit la listed.
@ The following analytea were analyzed for but were not detected:
-------
Blood Pesticide and Polychlorinated Biphenyl Comparison Data
Units in ppb
1
PESTICIDE
(o.p'-DDT)
(p,p'-ODT|
trant-Nonachlor
beta-Hexachlorocyctohexan*
DDE
gamma-Hexachlorocyclohexane
Heptachlor Epoxlde
Hexachlorobenzen*
Oxychlordane
PCB (aa Aroclor 1260)
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL1
ND
T
T
T
12.6
ND
T
T
ND
4.2*
HIGH VALUE2
T
2.7
1.2
2.4
52.9
ND
T
T
ND
304
KFOUND*
0.4
35.7
7.1
17.2
99.5
0.2
4.3
4.9
2.5
NA
1 The typical value is the median from NHANES II (1976-1980) N - 7265 participants, age 12-74 years.
2 The high value is the 95th percentile from NHANES II (1976-1980) N - 7265 participants, age 12-74 years.
3 Percent of samples analyzed in NHANES II with quantifiable level of analyte.
4 For PCBs, the typical value is the median and the high value is the maximum from Stehr-Green, "Demographic and Seasonal Influences on Human Serum Pesticides
Residue Levels," J. Tox. and Environ. Hlth.. 1989, 27:405-421 (N- 990 for the study).
T Trace detected.
ND Not detected.
NA Not available.
Page 1 of 1
June 1, 1994
-------
Blood Volatile Organic Compound Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary Participants and 7 Secondary Participants)
Units in ppb
VOl<
Acaton*
Banzana
Bromodlchloromethane
Bromoform
2-Butanona
Carbon Tetrachlorlde
Chloroform
Dlbromochloromethane
1 ,4-Dlchlorobanzane
1 , 1 -Dichloroathane
Ethylbanzana
Haxachloroathana
m&p-Xylane
o-Xylene
Styrena
Tatrachloroethane
Toluana
trana- 1 ,2-Dichloroathana
SPRING RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
IDatacta
84
9
1
2
8'
1
5
3
3
0
6
1
8
8
3
2
7
1
Datactabla
Raaulta
LowMt1
535.00
0.09
0.03
0.05
3.10
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.41
S0.01
0.02
0.14
0.12
0.04
0.02
0.07
0.14
0.03
HlQfMflt
2560.00
0.21
0.03
0.08
12.80
0.03
0.03
0.05
1.80
--
0.17
0.14
0.69
0.18
0.04
0.19
0.50
0.03
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
*D«t«ct*'
7
7
2
1
7
1
3
3
4
1
5
0
7
7
4
2
6
0
Datactabla
Raaultt
Lowait2
330.00
0.10
0.02
0.03
1.80
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.09
0.01
0.02
£0.08
0.09
0.07
0.02
0.04
0.10
S0.01
Hlghaat
4420.00
0.16
0.02
0.03
11.00
0.02
0.04
0.04
1.50
0.01
0.19
--
0.60
0.34
0.08
0.98
0.90
--
Page 1 of 2
May 20, 1994
-------
Blood Volatile Organic Compound Results1 from Residential Monitoring
(9 Primary Participants and 7 Secondary Participants)
Units in ppb
voc°
1.1,1-Trichloroe thane
SPRING RESULTS
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
^Detects
5
Detectable
Results
0.09
0.46
SECONDARY PARTICIPANT
^Detects1
4
Detectable
Results
0.12
0.40
1 Samples analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control according to methods used in NHANES III.
2 If all measured results were below the reporting limit, the reporting limit is listed.
3 Blood samples only taken from seven (7) secondary participants.
4 One sample had an unvalidated value.
Not applicable.
<§> The following analytes were analyzed for but were not detected:
Chlorobenzene
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Dibromomethane
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,1-Oichloroethene
1,2-Dichloropropane
Methylene Chloride
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Page 2 of 2
May 20, 1994
-------
Blood Volatile Organic Compound Comparison Data
Units in ppb
voc
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodlchlorome thane
Bromoform
2-Butanone
Carbon Tetrachlorlda
Chloroform
Dlbromochlorome thane
1 ,4-Dlchlorobenzene
1,1-Dlchloroe thane
Ethylbenzene
Hexachloroethane
m&p-Xylene
o-Xylene
Styrana
Tatrachloroathana
Toluene
trana-1 ,2-Dlchloroathena
1,1,1 -Trichloroathana
COMPARISON DATA
TYPICAL'
1800
0.1
ND
ND
5.4
ND
0.0
NO
0.3
ND
0.1
ND
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.3
ND
0.1
HIGH VALUE1
>eooo
0.6
0.021
0.034
16.9
+
0.1
0.024
9.2
+
0.3
+
0.8
0.3
0.2
0.6
1.5
+
0.8
Page 1 of 2
May 20, 1994
-------
Blood Volatile Organic Compound Comparison Data
Units In ppb
1 The typical value listed is the median from NHANES III 1988-present, subsampla of 1100 participants.
2 The high value listed is the 95th percentile from NHANES III 1988-present, subsample of 1100 participants.
•f Detected in less than 5% of the comparison population.
NO Not detected.
NOTE: There were no samples analyzed for Summer.
Page 2 of 2
May 20, 1994
------- |