United States Environmental
                     Protection Agency	
         Office of Research and Development
         Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                                                               EPA/600/N-01/002 Spring/Summer 2001
                                      Inside    I A Q
                                               EPA's Indoor Air Quality Research Update
 We are  pleased to be able to resume semiannual
 publication of Inside IAQ  after an unavoidable 2-year
 suspension. This issue is being distributed via first class
 mail using our  most recent mailing list; in addition,
 copies of this and previous editions of the newsletter
 are available on the internet at:
 www.epa.gov/appcdwww/crb/iemb/insideiaq.htm
                                                      In This Issue
                                               Page
Testing Demonstrates that Nominally Identical
Photocopier Toners Can Have Significantly Different
VOC Emissions	
Identification of Hazardous Air Pollutants
  Emitted from a Shower Curtain	
A Pilot Home Asthma Intervention Study
  In Boston Public Housing  	
Candle Burning as a Potential Source of
  Indoor Air Pollution	
                                                      The Impact of Ozone on Indoor Air Quality	5

TESTING  DEMONSTRATES   THAT   NOMINALLY  IDENTICAL   PHOTOCOPIER   TONERS  CAN  HAVE
SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT VOC EMISSIONS
A laboratory  study has been completed on  a  series of
nominally identical toners, manufactured for use in a specific
dry-process photocopier. The objective was to determine the
extent to which the emissions of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) from a given toner  might  be reduced through
judicious selection of the process and  the polymer feedstock
used in the manufacture of that toner.

A cooperating toner manufacturer produced  four nominally
identical batches of toner for a selected copier, according to
a 2x2 matrix:  using two different manufacturing processes
(vented and unvented extrusion); and using two different lots
of polymer feedstock,  to be  fed  to the extruder.   The
manufacturer also provided samples of the two unprocessed
feedstocks. In addition to these manufacturer samples, toner
cartridges for this same copier were purchased from two
local retailers, representing three different toner lots.  The
manufacturer,  manufacturing  process,  and  feedstock
characteristics for these retailer toners were unknown.
These toners  were tested using  a flow-through thermal
desorption test method, developed for this project.  In this
method,  toner samples  were ballistically  heated to  the
temperature range of the copier (180 to 200 °C), and the
VOCs driven off were captured on Tenax® sorbent.  These
Tenax® cartridges were then desorbed and analyzed using
gas chromatography (GC) with a  flame ionization detector
(FID), calibrated for up to 21 selected individual VOCs.

Statistical analysis  of the  results  from  the  manufacturer
samples showed that (p < 0.05):

    •   The manufacturing  process (vented  vs. unvented
       extrusion) had no effect on toner emissions  in this
       study. That  is  almost certanly  because only  a
       negligible vacuum (2 Pa below  atmospheric) was
       applied in producing the vented toners available for
       this study;  a vacuum perhaps 4 orders of magnitude
       greater would  have been required  for effective
       removal of VOCs.
Inside IAQ, Spring/Summer 2001
                                             Page 1

-------
    •   The feedstock had little or no effect on the emissions
        from the toners because there was no difference in
        the emissions between the two feedstocks used in
        this study.

        Each  unprocessed feedstock generally has  15 to
        30% higher emissions of ethylbenzene, p-xylene, and
        styrene, compared to the toners manufactured using
        that feedstock. This observation would be consistent
        with   the thesis   that  some  fraction  of  these
        compounds - present as impurities in  the feedstock
        - is driven off during the extrusion process.

        Each unprocessed feedstock consistently has about
        30 to  60%  lower emissions  of benzaldehyde  and
        acetophenone, compared to the toners  manufactured
        using that feedstock. These observations would be
        consistent with the thesis that  some amount of these
        oxygenated  compounds  is   created  by  thermal-
        oxidative degradation of the  polymer  during  the
        extrusion process.

Statistical analysis of the  results  from  the retailer toners
showed that (p < 0.05):

        All  of the   retailer toners  have  emissions  of
        ethylbenzene, xylenes,  styrene,  and  acetophenone
        that are  significantly lower (by  15  to 100%) than
        those  from  the  manufacturer toners (with  either
        feedstock).

        All of  the  retailer  toners  have   emissions  of
        benzaldehyde that are significantly higher (by 125 to
        350%) than those from the manufacturer toners.

        In general, the total VOC (TVOC) emissions from
        the retailer toners are statistically the same  as those
        from  the manufacturer  toners,  even though  the
        emissions of  individual  compounds  can  vary
        significantly.

        In general,  there is no  statistical   difference  in
        emissions between the  retailer  toners,  within the
        statistical power of this analysis (two samples per
        toner).

Overall, the conclusions from this study are:

    1.   From  comparison of the manufacturer and retailer
toners tested here, it is clear that nominally identical toners -
manufactured  to  meet the fuser specifications for a single
photocopier - can have significantly different emissions of
individual VOCs when heated in the laboratory.   Emissions
of a given  compound can vary by a factor of 2 or more
between toners.

    2.   Even significant differences in emissions of individual
VOCs  between toners might  not  indicate one as a clearly
preferable  low-emitting  product.     Comparison  of  the
manufacturer and retailer toners indicates that - while the
retailer  toners  had   much  lower  emissions  of  some
compounds  (ethylbenzene,  xylenes, styrene,  acetophenone)
-  they  had  higher  emissions   of  other  compounds
(benzaldehyde,  phenol).  (All of these compounds, except
benzaldehyde,   are  Hazardous  Air  Pollutants.)     The
difference in TVOC emissions between the two toner sets is
modest at best, and often not statistically significant.

    3.   The   differences   in  emissions   between   the
manufacturer and retailer toners are almost certainly due to
differences between the manufacturing processes  and/or the
feedstock polymers used  in the two  cases.  But  without
information  on  the retailer process(es) and  feedstocks, the
specific  factors  creating  the  differences   could  not  be
identified in this study.

    4.   Because the specific  factors  creating the emission
differences  between the manufacturer  and  retailer toners
cannot be identified, it is not possible from this study to make
specific  recommendations   regarding  how process   or
feedstock might be  modified  in  order to produce lower-
emitting toners for a given copier.

    5.   The tests on  the manufacturer toners showed that
vented  extrusion did  not  produce toners  having lower
emissions than  did unvented extrusion; but  this result was
almost certainly  obtained because  only a negligible vacuum
(2 Pa) was  applied during vented extrusion.  These tests also
showed that the feedstock had only  modest, if any, impact
on toner emissions; but the feedstocks were almost identical,
creating this result.

    6.   The tests on the manufacturer toners  and feedstocks
demonstrated that essentially all of  the compounds observed
in the toner  emissions result, at least in part, from impurities
that  are present in the feedstocks  to begin with.  The tests
also  demonstrated that the concentrations of some species
can be increased during the extrusion process, presumably by
oxidative degradation  of the polymer.   These observations
can be used to  postulate explanations for the differences in
emissions between  the manufacturer  and  retailer  toners.
(EPA   Contact:   Bruce    Henschel,   919-541-4112,
henschel.brucefSiepa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Spring/Summer 2001
                                                 Page 2

-------
IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS EMITTED FROM A SHOWER CURTAIN
A single soft vinyl shower curtain was tested. The 70  by 72-
inch shower curtain was 100% vinyl, manufactured in China
for a large U.S. retailer. The product was purchased at a
local retail outlet. The shower curtain was colored, primarily
blue. It had a strong "plastic" odor when removed from the
package.

Equilibrium  headspace  was   analyzed  using   a  newly
developed  static  chamber test method.  The  test  was
performed by placing samples of the shower curtain in a 53-
L stainless steel chamber. After loading the shower  curtain
samples, the chamber was sealed and placed in an incubator
set  at 23°C. The tests were static  with no  air flow to the
chamber.  Special racks  were constructed  to  suspend the
shower curtain in the chamber to maximize  the exposed
surface area and  accelerate  the  experiments.  The racks
consist of a frame with  stainless steel bars on the top and
bottom spaced approximately  2  cm  apart.  The shower
curtain was cut into strips with nominal width of 34.3 cm and
the strips were woven through the bars.

Headspace chamber  air samples were  collected on  Tenax
sorbent tubes using  a sampling pump. The samples  were
analyzed  by  thermal  desorption  interfaced  to  a gas
chromatograph equipped with a flame ionization detector.
Figure 1 is a chromatogram of the headspace sample taken
at the 168th h. Among the  14 compounds identified, methyl
alcohol (methanol), methylene chloride, toluene, and phenol
were classified as hazardous air pollutants by the 1990 Clean
Air Act Amendments. (EPA Contact: John Chang, 919-541-
3747, chang.john(g),epa. gov)

Figure   1.  Chromatogram  identifying   hazardous
compounds.
                       Peak ID
                        A
                        B
                        C
                        D

                        F
                        G
                        H
                        I
                        J
                        K
                        L
                        M
Compound
Methanol
Bthanol
TnoJiloromonofluorDmethmie
Methylsne chloride
Toluene
6-Methyl-l -actene
Phenol
2,2-Dimethyl deoans
2-Elhyl-l-hBxanal
Uideoane
Dodsoans
                               Hexadeoane
A PILOT HOME ASTHMA INTERVENTION STUDY IN BOSTON PUBLIC HOUSING
A small  study  was recently  completed to investigate the
feasibility of implementing asthmagen reduction measures in
Boston  Public   Housing.  The  study  is   a  community/
university/government  collaboration  between  the  Tufts
University  School  of Medicine,  the  Harvard  University
School of Public Health,  the Committee for Boston Public
Housing, the Tenant Task Force of the Franklin Hill Housing
Development (Figure  2),  Boston Medical Center,  and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research
and Development and Region 1.  The goal  of the program
was  to  reduce household environmental factors,  such as
allergens, airborne particles, and irritant gases, that contribute
to the exacerbation of asthma symptoms. The program was
designed to  carry out  interventions  in   a manner  that
maximized participation from both community organizations
and individual tenants involved in the study. This was a pilot-
scale study, intended primarily to gain experience working in
the public housing  arena in order to develop hypotheses and
methods for future research projects.
Nine families with asthmatic children living in Franklin Hill
Housing Development in Boston were enrolled in the asthma
intervention  program.  At the beginning of the  study, the
asthmatic   children   were   evaluated  by  a  pediatric
pulmonologist.  The  evaluation  included administration of a
symptom frequency questionnaire, review of medication use,
and  physical   examination.      A   computerized
pneumotachometer   (MultiSpiro)  was   used  to  perform
pulmonary function testing  on all children over 4 years of
age. Allergy skin testing was performed for cat, mouse, dog,
cockroach, and dust mite antigens.  Over the course of the
study, the participants kept  a diary of asthma symptoms and
medication use.
Asthmagen-r eduction Interventions
Interventions  started  with  thorough   cleaning  of  the
apartments and furniture, using a machine that  applied  an
atomized water-based solution  at  200 psi,  which  was
extracted to leave little moisture in fabric, upholstery, and
Inside IAQ, Spring/Summer 2001
                                                Page 3

-------
carpeting. In addition, cracks and crevices that might allow
pest entry were  sealed, and pest  repellant devices were
installed in some apartments. In many cases, exposed steam
piping was present, resulting in high  indoor temperatures and
burn hazards. This was insulated.  Mattresses and pillows on
the children's beds, and any other beds the children slept on,
were encased in dust-mite-proof covers.  Some tenants were
provided with high-efficiency particulate  air (HEPA)-filtered
vacuum cleaners for their own use.  Some apartments were
equipped with  air filtration  systems:   electrostatic filters,
HEPA filters, or a modified  clean-room  system containing a
HEPA filter  and an  ozone lamp,  followed by an activated
charcoal filter.    The  filter systems  were  maintained  by
project  staff.   The  specific intervention used  for  each
apartment was  tailored to   „.     - „    ...  TT... .
 ,        ,             ,     Figure 2. Franklin Hill Apartments
the   conditions   in  that
apartment.
Data  Collection
In-depth  qualitative   and
quantitative   information
was collected from these
nine apartments and their
residents.   The qualitative
information   included
asthma  symptom  diaries
and resident responses in
focus  group  discussions
both before and  after the
interventions    were
implemented.      This
provided  valuable  insight
into the institutional, social,
economic, and personal factors that affect the use of asthma
prevention interventions in public housing. Quantitative data,
from  intensive  environmental monitoring, was  collected  to
thoroughly characterize the state of  the nine  public housing
apartments, and to cull hypotheses about the effectiveness  of
the interventions.

Monthly  monitoring visits were made to each apartment.
During these visits, the study team made a visual inspection
for mold,  wetness, cockroaches,  rodent droppings,  etc.
Temperature and relative humidity were measured. Inhalable
and  respirable   particulate  matter-with   aerodynamic
diameters  of <  10  Cm (PM10)  and  <  2.5  Om  (PM25),
respectively- were collected  on  37 mm  Teflon 2 Cm-pore
filters.  Twenty- four hour, time-integrated passive nitrogen
dioxide  (N02)  samples  were  taken  using  Yanagisawa
Badges and analyzed by light spectrometry.   Twenty-four
hour VOC  samples  were collected passively  on thermal
desorption tubes packed with Carbotrap B, and analyzed by
gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy (GC/MS).

Dust samples were collected on cellulose extraction thimbles
(Whatman  Inc.,  Hillsboro,  OR)  using  a  small,  portable
vacuum cleaner (Eureka Mighty Mite).  Composite samples
were  taken  from   asthmatic  children's  bedrooms   by
vacuuming the  children's bedding and the carpeting around
the beds .  These were  analyzed for dust mite antigens, Der
p 1 and Der f  1; cat antigen, Pel d 1; dog antigen, Can f 1;
                                 fungi;  and  endotoxin.
                                 Other   samples   were
                                 collected from  the seats
                                 and   carpeting of  the
                                 apartments' main living
                                 areas, and analyzed for
                                 dust mite antigens, Der
                                 p  1  and Der  f  1;  cat
                                 antigen, Pel d  1;  fungi;
                                 and dog antigen,  Can f
                                 1.    A third set  of
                                 samples  was  collected
                                 from kitchen  cabinets
                                 and analyzed for rodent
                                 antigen, Mus m 1; and
                                 cockroach antigen,  Bla
                                 g  1.    Dust was  also
                                 analyzed   for  viable
                                 fungus  by plating onto
malt extract agar.  Endotoxin, and dust mite,  cat, dog, roach,
and   mouse  antigens   were   measured   using   a
spectrophotometric   Enzyme-Linked-Immunosorbent-Assay
(ELISA) method.
Current Progress
Initial results and recommendations from this study  were
presented at the Engineering Solutions to Indoor  air Quality
Symposium held July 17-19, 2000, in Raleigh, North Carolina.
The conference was sponsored  jointly by the Air & Waste
Management  Association and the U.S. EPA.  The  research
was completed  in the autumn of 2000, and final  articles are
being  prepared for  submission to peer reviewed  journals
(EPA   Contact:   Betsy  Howard,   919-541-7915,
howard.betsvffliepa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Spring/Summer 2001
                                                 Page 4

-------
CANDLE BURNING AS A POTENTIAL SOURCE OF INDOOR AIR POLLUTION
Candle  burning  has  been associated with  human living
conditions  for at least  1,000 years.   Although no  longer
primarily a means of lighting, candles are still popular in
households and certain public places, mainly  for creating a
unique atmosphere.   Candle sales in the United States keep
growing - about  10 to  15%  per year in the  last 10 years.
Industry estimates put 1999 sales at $1.3 billion for scented
candles and up to  $2.3 billion for all candles.

A special issue that  has drawn some attention  recently is the
lead emissions from lead-wick candles.  According  to the
National Candle Association, most U.S. manufacturers have
ceased lead-wick  production,  but some imported candles on
the market still contain lead in their wicks.  EPA bought 100
sets of candles that  appeared  to contain  metal-cored wicks.
Eight sets had lead wicks with lead contents ranging from 51
to 74%.  While burning, they  emitted lead at a rate from 100
to 1400  Og/hour.  Under certain indoor  conditions, burning
these candles may result in lead concentrations above EPA
recommended thresholds.  Furthermore,  inhalation exposure
is not  the only pathway for lead intake. Unlike gaseous air
pollutants,  particle-bound  lead tends to  settle on  interior
surfaces, where young children can  be exposed to lead  dust
through skin  contact.  The U.S. Consumer Product  Safety
Commission is currently in the process banning the sales of
lead-wick candles in the United States.

Another issue associated with  candle  burning is the emissions
of  fine  particulate  matter  (PM).   Although  all  candles
generate carbon particles during the burning process,
a well-designed and well-maintained  candle emits negligible
fine PM because almost all the particles are consumed by
the flame.   In fact, it is  the  combustion  of the  carbon
particles  that gives the flame its bright golden color.  This
process was artfully described by Michael Faraday in!861 in
his famous book The  Chemical History of a Candle.   On
the other hand, several factors (e.g., candle composition and
design, wick length, and drafty air) may result in imperfect
combustion. A smoldering candle could cause an indoor fine
PM concentration higher than permitted by the ambient air
quality standards.  Heavy  and frequent candle burning in
homes may be a contributing factor to  soot  deposition on
interior  surfaces, causing  blackened walls,  ceilings,  and
carpets.  The exact mechanism of this phenomenon is not
well understood, however.

Protecting the public from these potential indoor pollution
problems requires a joint effort by the industry, the public,
and governments.  Some manufacturers are developing low-
emission candles.  Product  labeling may help   consumers
identify  cleaner products and learn how to use them.   To
some  extent, burning candles is an art, and proper use of this
product can reduce emissions. Thus, public education is  a
cost-effective way to  deal with this kind of product.   We
observed that blowing out candles could instantly produce a
large amount of particles.  Some simple measures  ~ using  a
wet cloth, candle scissors, or snuffer - could  greatly reduce
such emissions.  Emissions from candles vary from product
to product and from time to time.   To obtain  representative
emissions data, there is a need to develop standard methods
for testing.   (EPA  Contact: Zhishi  Guo,  919-541-0185,
guo. zhishi(g),epa. gov)
THE IMPACT OF OZONE ON INDOOR AIR QUALITY
EPA's Indoor Environment Mangement Branch  (IEMB)  is
conducting experiments to characterize the impact of ozone
on indoor air quality (IAQ). The goal of this research is  to
improve our understanding of the relationship between ozone
and  risk  in  indoor  environments.   Ozone is transported
indoors from ambient air  and may be generated indoors by a
variety of sources including office equipment and consumer
appliances. Consumer appliances marketed as air  cleaners
that  intentionally produce ozone  are of particular  interest
because of their potential to create high ozone concentrations
and because they are advertised to improve IAQ by reacting
objectionable or odor causing volatile organic compounds
 (VOCs) with ozone.  The immediate focus  of our work is to
characterize sources  of ozone in indoor environments  and
determine   how  ozone  affects   VOC  and   particle
concentrations in indoor air.

Little  data  are  available  that may  be  used to model  and
predict the impact of ozone on IAQ.  To fill this gap, we have
characterized ozone and oxides  of nitrogen (NOJ emission
rates from  selected consumer appliances  under controlled
conditions  in  a room-sized  environmental chamber  and
evaluated their performance  in  our research test house.
These tests  include limited evaluation of a feedback control
Inside IAQ, Spring/Summer 2001
                                                 Page 5

-------
system   designed  to  maintain  in-room  ozone
concentrations  at or below 50 parts per billion
(ppb).

We  are currently  investigating  the  impact of
operating an ozone generator air cleaner on VOC
concentrations in the controlled environment of the
test chamber.  The objectives of these tests are to
identify  reaction  products  and   determine if
reactions proceed at rates that are consistent with
reaction rate constants that have been determined
for the  troposphere.  The reason for this objective
is  obvious: ozone reacts  too slowly with most
VOCs   to  have  much impact  on  indoor  air
concentrations - emission rates from the source(s)
and   air   exchange   rates   generally   govern
concentrations.  However, if an ozone generator
produces other radicals such as hydroxyls ("OH)
that  react with  VOCs much more quickly than
ozone, then operation of the device may actually
alter indoor air concentrations of  some VOCs.
Whether or not this improves indoor air quality is
another matter.   Some of our current  research
findings are presented below.
Characterization   of   Ozone   Generator  Air
Cleaner Appliances

Emissions characterization tests were conducted
in the room sized environmental chamber (see
Figure 3) to determine how much ozone and NOx
these devices generate and what factors influence
generation rate.

Ozone emission  rates  for  a  widely  marketed
appliance  were determined at  various dial set
points (in ft2 of floor treatment area) at 50% RH
in the room-sized environmental chamber and are
shown  in   Figure  4.  We  found   that  ozone
generation rates (<1 to >150 mg/h) were generally
consistent   with  the   rates   stated  by  the
manufacturers, although the relationship between
dial  setting  of the  ozone generator and  ozone
emission rate was not  linear across  the range of
the dial.

The   chamber  tests  also revealed   that  ozone
generation  rates  decreased  as  relative humidity
increased  for  all appliances  tested.  As  may  be
seen in Figure 5, the  rate of decrease was greatest
for the appliance with the highest ozone generation
rate.
Figure 3.  Characterizing ozone emission  rates in EPA's  room-
sized test chamber.
                                     Exhaust
                 n?nnp Monitor
             C ^J.at Air Cleaner Inlet
.Chamber Exhaust
 Ozona,Monno ^-'''
                                                     Chamber Inlet
                                                             onitor
                   Clean Air In
Figure  4.    Ozone  emission  rates  at  generator  set  points
determined for an ozone generator air cleaner.
™,
£"
0) 120<
s
c
'in
tn
o>
o>
8
° 20.

i
!

A
A
a

.-• . " .
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Generator set point (ft2)

1 A 2 Large Plates O 1 Large Plate • 1 Small PI ate 1

NOX [as nitrogen dioxide (N02)] is generated by silent discharge ozone
generators. As  shown in Figure 6, NOX emission rates, determined at
50% RH, varied between appliances  from different manufacturers and
ranged from 6 to 16 % mg/h of the ozone emission rate.
Performance  of the Ozone Generator Appliance  in  the Research
Test House

A series  of tests in the research test house investigated our ability to
predict indoor ozone concentrations from chamber  derived emission
rates, and investigated the performance of a  sensor-feedback control
system designed to maintain ozone concentrations at  or below 50 ppb.
Inside IAQ, Spring/Summer 2001
                                                           Page 6

-------
We determined the ozone deposition velocity in the
house,  determined the  penetration factor  for
ambient ozone, and used the IAQ model RISK to
predict  the  time  history of ozone  in  the  house
during operation of an ozone generator air cleaner.
We  found  that  steady  state predictions were
generally good (e.g., within ± 15% of observed)
though  the model did not always  represent the
concentration/time  history  as well.   We  also
observed that in-room ozone concentrations stayed
at or below 50 ppb when the generators were
operated with  the controller activated (see Figure
7).  The tests of the ozone generator air  cleaner
with the sensor-controller activated were of 14 to
24  hr  duration.    Thus,  these  tests  do  not
characterize long-term performance or  effects of
environmental  variables   on   sensor-controller
performance.

We are in the process  of evaluating  data from
tests  conducted to investigate the impact of the
ozone generator on concentrations of VOCs in the
environmental test chamber.   Preliminary  tests
with  styrene and  limonene, common  indoor  air
contaminants,  suggest that  the  effect that  the
ozone generator  has  on IAQ can be predicted
from ozone/VOC reaction rate constants published
by  atmospheric  researchers  over  the past  30
years. Reaction products  for the styrene/ozone
tests    are    primarily  benzaldehyde   and
formaldehyde.

To  summarize what  we  have  learned to  date:
Ozone generators may produce sufficient ozone to
create hazardous  ozone concentrations in indoor
environments.   The ozone emission rates vary as
a function  of RH.   NOX  is  produced as  a
byproduct of ozone generation. The model RISK
appears   to  be useful  for  prediction  of  indoor
concentrations  of ozone.   Limited  tests  in the
research test  house indicate  that  the feedback
control  system  provided  by one manufacturer
maintains  ozone  concentrations  at  or  below  50
ppb.  On the  other hand,  though  tests  to date
indicate  that operation of an ozone generator air
cleaner   may  result   in   somewhat   lower
concentrations  of some  compounds,  greater
exposure to  formaldehyde and  other  aldehydes
and  organic acids is  likely  to result.    (EPA
Contact:    Mark  A.  Mason,  919-541-4835.
mason.mark @epa.gov)
Figure 5. The relationship between ozone generation rate and
RH for three ozone generator air cleaners.
  11
       y=-07563x+114.23
        y=-02317x + 45.415
                 20      3]
                          Charter RH(!4|
|     •MI.McdElA
                            'M1, McdelB
                      !M2,McdelB
Figure 6.  NOx  emission rates for selected  ozone generator air
cleaners determined at 50% RH.
12.00 •
.c
~O)
0)
c
o
UJ
X
o

*
,.-'••
0
>'''
A m '
?. • ..?
/,..--
*, - *
*B
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Ozone Emission Rate (mg/h)
^ M1 , Model A • M1 , Model B ^M2,ModelA
x M2, Model B - - Regression All M1 ^^— Regression All M2
Figure 7. Ozone concentration out of doors and in a room of the
research test house with ozone sensor-controller system of the
ozone generator air cleaner activated.
I Ozone in Den
                                       Ozone Outdoors
Inside IAQ, Spring/Summer 2001
                                                          Page 7

-------
                 EPA's Indoor Environment Management Branch is cosponsoring
                                     Indoor Air 2002
                         the largest international conference dedicated to
                   scientific and professional research in the indoor air sciences.
           The conference will be held in Monterey, California, June 30 to July 5, 2002.
                             Plan now to attend this important event.
               Abstracts must be submitted by October  1, 2001. Further information
                     is available from the web site at www.indoorair2002.org.
United States                                                            	
Environmental Protection Agency                                                  FIRST CLASS MAIL
National Risk Management Research Laboratory                                     POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
                                                                                 PPA
Indoor Environment Management Branch
MD-54                                                                      PERMIT No. G-35
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300

EPA/600/N-01/002, Spring/Summer 2001

An Equal Opportunity Employer

-------