United States Environmental
                    Protection Agency	
                               Office of Research and Development
                               Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                                                                    EPA/600/N-97/001   Fall/Winter 1996
 &EFA
Inside   I A  Q
   EPA's Indoor Air Quality Research Update
COST ANALYSIS OF VOC AIR CLEANERS: ACTIVATED
CARBON VS. PHOTOCATALYTIC OXIDATION

Historically,  gaseous air cleaners  for  removing  volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from indoor air have been utilized only infrequently.
In such cases, the most common technology is adsorption on granular
activated carbon (GAC). Common concerns about GAC air cleaners are:
1) they are generally not designed and operated to handle spikes in the
airborne VOC concentrations, so that they become overloaded by spikes
and may thus serve to shave the peaks rather than to actually reduce
cumulative occupant exposure; and 2) the sorbed organics remain on the
carbon, and thus still must be disposed of in some manner.

Photocatalytic oxidation (PCO) might be considered an alternative to GAC
for VOC air cleaners. PCO should destroy the organics, so that the need for
subsequent disposal would  be eliminated.  However,  PCO is  a
developmental process, with insufficient kinetic data to demonstrate its
ability to completely and economically destroy the full range  of organic
compounds that can be found in the indoor environment at relatively low
concentrations, without producing organic intermediates in the off-gas.
There are no successful commercial demonstrations of PCO reactors for
this application, and only limited consideration of practical reactor designs.

To assess the economic potential of PCO, a comparison was made of the
capital and annual costs for two indoor air cleaners based on GAC vs.
PCO technology. Both air cleaners were assumed to be challenged with
a steady inlet VOC concentration of 1 ppmv.

The GAC estimates are based on one commercially available unit (see
Figure 1). Equipment and carbon replacement costs were obtained from
the manufacturer.  Installation and incremental air handler costs were
derived using R. S. Means Mechanical Cost Data. Energy cost impacts
were computed using the DOE-2 building energy model.  Carbon
replacement frequency  (every 2 months) was estimated based upon
independent data.

The  PCO estimates were  based on one  possible generic reactor
configuration (see  Figure 2). The reactor is assumed to be a packed bed
with an enhanced  titanium dioxide (TiO2) photocatalyst deposited on
suitable supports [transparent to ultraviolet (UV) radiation], irradiated
by
                                         COMING!
                                       July 21-23, 1997
                             Engineering Solutions to Indoor Air
                                 Quality Problems Symposium
                                  (See page 12 for announcement)
                            In This Issue
Page
                            Cost Analysis of VOC Air Cleaners:
                              Activated Carbon vs. Photocatalytic
                              Oxidation	 1
                            Evaluation of VOC Emissions from an
                              Alkyd Paint	4
                            Glossary of Acronyms	5
                            Reducing Solvent and Propellant Emissions
                              from Consumer Products	6
                            Possible Role of Radon Reduction Systems
                              in Combustion Product Spillage  	8
                            Summaries of Recent Publications	9
                            Symposium Announcement  	 12
                            Inside IAQ is distributed twice a year and
                            highlights indoor air quality (IAQ) research
                            conducted  by   EPA's  National  Risk
                            Management Laboratory's (NRMRL) Indoor
                            Environment Management Branch (IEMB). If
                            you would like to be added to or removed from
                            the mailing list, please mail, fax, or e-mail
                            your name and address to:
                             Inside IAQ
                             Art. Kelly Leovic (MD-54)
                             U.S. EPA
                             Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                             Fax: 919-541-2157
                             E-mail: kleovic@engineer.aeerl.epa.gov
                    (Continued on Page 2)

-------
a suitable UV source. This is one of several generic reactor
designs considered in the literature. The reactor is assumed
to operate  at  40 °C, necessitating the recuperative heat
exchanger configuration shown in the Figure 2.

Best-case  assumptions were  used  for the PCO  reactor
design and operation to provide what might be an optimistic
estimate of PCO costs. The reaction rate for oxidation of
the range of VOCs present in the inlet was assumed to be 4
x  106  g  of catalyst per gmol/sec  of VOC feed. This
represents perhaps the fastest kinetics for the most reactive
individual organic compounds reported in the literature with
effective irradiation. In practice, with the range of (probably
less reactive) organics  that will be  present, the kinetics
would be poorer. Also, it was assumed (based on essentially
no data) that the catalyst  bed  will have to be regenerated
every  4  months, and replaced every  5  years.  These
assumptions are  probably  optimistic, especially  at the
relatively low operating temperature.

The equipment and installation  costs for the reactor and
other components in Figure 2 - also including the costs of
a larger air handler - were judiciously estimated using the
Means data, the W. W.  Grainger Catalog, and heating,
ventilating, and air-conditioning (FfVAC) texts. Catalyst
costs were developed based upon contacts  with specialty
catalyst manufacturers (including Degussa Corp., a major
TiO2 photocatalyst vendor), and are  felt to  be reasonably
good. System pressure drops were estimated using Perry's
Chemical Engineers' Handbook. Total building energy cost
impacts were computed using  the DOE-2 model.

The results of this cost analysis are presented in Table 1, in
terms of $  (or $/year)  per 1,000 ftVmin (MCFM) of air
throughput. As shown, the installed cost of the PCO system
is about 10 times that of the  GAC.  This due to the high
costs of the PCO reactor (about three-quarters of which is
associated with the UV-related electrical equipment), the
initial catalyst charge, the recuperative heat exchanger, and
the added ducting.

But the annual cost  of the  PCO system is only about 2
times that of the GAC. The difference is reduced to a factor
of 2 because the  GAC carbon is assumed to have to be
replaced 6 times  per year, whereas the PCO catalyst is
optimistically assumed to be  replaced only once every 5
years.

                (Continued on Page 3)
Table 1.  Summary Cost  Comparison of GAC Versus
         PCO for VOC Control in Indoor Air

Cost Item
Equipment and Installation
Costs ($/MCFM)
Reactor (excluding
carbon/catalyst)
Initial carbon/catalyst charge
Duct heater and controls
Air-to-air heat exchanger
Enlarged central air handler
(increased static pressure)
Additional ducting, elbows,
dampers, etc.
TOTAL INCREMENTAL
INSTALLED COSTS
Cost ($/MCFM or
$/yr/MCFM)
Activated
Carbon
$ 530
240
~
~
40
370
$ 1,180
Photo-
catalytic
$ 3,300
3,400
600
2,600
150
2,000
$ 12,050
Total Annual Costs ($/yr/MCFM)
Operating
Electricity cost (increased
HVAC cooling load and fan
static pressure, power for
photocatalytic reactor)
Maintenance
Regeneration of catalyst
Replacement of UV bulbs
Replacement of carbon
Capital Charges
Catalyst depreciation (5 yr
straight)
Equipment depreciation (10 yr
straight)
Interest, taxes, insurance
TOTAL INCREMENTAL
ANNUAL COST
$ 50
2,170
120
70
$ 2,410
$ 1,150
650
500
750
850
750
$ 4,650
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                              Page 2

-------
Even with the optimistic assumptions used for the PCO
system, the  PCO  reactor  configuration used here is
estimated  to  cost significantly more than GAC for  this
application.   To  reduce   costs,   the   developers   of
photocatalytic processes must: 1) demonstrate improved
catalysts offering faster reaction rates and longer lifetimes
at ambient reaction temperatures; and 2) develop improved
reactor designs  that  provide greater exposed catalyst
surface per unit volume, improved catalyst irradiation, and
reduced pressure drop.
If PCO systems are more expensive to install and operate
than GAC systems, it is critical that commercial-scale PCO
reactors be demonstrated to reliably achieve consistently
high destruction of a wide array of organic compounds
without the appearance of intermediate oxidation products
in the off-gas. To justify the higher cost, PCO units must be
able to handle the VOC spikes that cause overloading of
GAC units. (EPA Contact: Bruce Henschel, 919-541-4112,
bhenschel@engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
                   Return
                   Air
                                                  Carbon Filter
                           I
                                                                                      To
                                                                                   Air Handler
                                                                                   and Coils
                               Figure 1. Granular Activated Carbon VOC Air Cleaner
                           (Equipment added as part of VOC air cleaner shown with solid lines)
                                                                    Reactor
                                                                    (40°C)
                          Regeneration
                          Bypass Loop
                                Figure 2. Photocatalytic Oxidation VOC Air Cleaner
                           (Equipment added as part of VOC air cleaner shown with solid lines)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                              Page 3

-------
EVALUATION OF VOC EMISSIONS FROM AN
ALKYD PAINT

Despite increased use of latex paints indoors in the past few
decades,  large quantities of alkyd paints continue to be
used. Alkyd paints  are of concern because they normally
contain high percentages of organic solvents. As a result,
use of alkyd paints in indoor environments may result in
exposure  of building occupants  to  volatile  organic
compounds (VOCs) emitted as the paint dries.

A primer and an alkyd semigloss paint produced by a major
U.S. paint manufacturer were selected for lEMB's current
source characterization research. The objectives of the
research include: 1) determining VOC emission rates and
patterns; 2) measuring specific emission profiles and peak
concentrations of C-9 aromatics, alkanes, and other major
VOCs emitted; 3) developing source emission models, with
emphasis on the fundamental mass transfer models; 4)
determining the effects of indoor sinks on exposure risk to
alkyd paint VOCs; 5) comparing  total  VOC  (TVOC)
emission profiles measured in small  chambers, a  large
chamber, and the EPA test house; and 6) evaluating source
management options and demonstrating the effectiveness of
selected options.

Table 2 shows the  volatile contents and densities of the
primer and the alkyd paint as  determined by EPA Method
24, "Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water
Content, Density, Volume of Solids, and Weight of Solids
of Surface Coatings." Table 3 shows the content of VOCs
in the  test products determined by the  proposed  EPA
Method  311, "Analysis  of Hazardous  Air  Pollutant
Compounds in Paints and Coatings by Direct Injection into
a Gas Chromatograph." Decane and undecane are the most
abundant components in the primer and paint, respectively,
indicating that the primer is more volatile than the paint.

For this study, small chamber tests were conducted using a
yellow pine board  as the substrate  to  characterize VOC
emissions. The pine board was purchased locally and cut
into  16 by 16 cm pieces. The exposed  edges of the board
were sealed with sodium silicate solution. The primer was
applied to one side  of the board with a 10 cm paint roller,
and then the board was placed in the  chamber for VOC
emission measurements.  After 1.14 hours, the board was
taken out of the chamber and 2.67 g of the alkyd paint was
applied as a topcoat to the side of the board already painted
with the  primer. The painted board was  returned to the
chamber for additional VOC emission measurements.
The measured TVOC concentration profiles are shown in
Figure 3. A mass balance indicated that almost all the
VOCs were emitted within the 20 hour test period. The
measured TVOC concentration profiles were simulated by
using a mass transfer model developed by EPA:

      dC/dt = L- k- (CV-M/M0 - C) -N-C

      dM/dt = -k- (CV-M/M0 -C)

where
      C = chamber concentration, mg/m3;
      t = time, h;
      L= loading factor (0.48), nr1;
      k = mass transfer coefficient, m/h;
      Cv = total concentration for TVOC, mg/m3;
      M = TVOC mass remaining in the  source, mg/m2;
      M0 = TVOC mass applied, mg/m2; and
      N = air exchange rate (0.525), h"1.

The initial condition was t =0, C =  0, and M  = M0. The
value of mass  transfer  coefficient, k, was  6 m/h  as
determined previously in the 5 3 -L chamber. The total vapor
pressure, Cv, was estimated by the following model based
on the formulation data (i.e., all identified compounds): Cv
= X(CV1 • x:). The estimated total vapor pressure was 28.2
g/m3 for the primer and 11.1  g/m3 for the paint.
                           10
                       Elapsed Time (h)
Figure 3. TVOC Concentrations Predicted by the Model
         and Measured in a Small Chamber with a Primer
         and Alkyd Paint on  a Pine Board. (Primer
         applied at time = 0. Alkyd paint applied at time
         = 1.14; i.e., vertical line)
                                                                          (Continued on Page 5)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                            Page 4

-------
A comparison of the predicted chamber concentrations and
the measured concentration profiles is shown in Figure 3.
The mass transfer model predictions are in good agreement
with the experimental data. Since the model was developed
based on the assumption that the emissions were controlled
only by gas-phase mass transfer, the results in Figure 3
indicate that VOC emissions from the primer and the alkyd
paint are governed by a gas-film-diffusion-controlled and
fast evaporation-like process. This was also confirmed by
the mass balance results which indicated that almost 100%
of the VOCs  were  emitted within 20  hours after the
painting. (EPA  Contact:   John  Chang,  919-541-3747,
jchang@ engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
          GLOSSAR YOFA CRONYMS

AARST-American Association of Radon Scientists
         and Technicians
ASD-Active Soil Depressurization
DOT-Department of Transportation
ELA-Effective Leakage Area
GAC-Granular Activated Carbon
FfVAC-Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning
lAQ-Indoor Air Quality
lEMB-Indoor Environment Management Branch
NRMRL-National Risk Management Research
         Laboratory
NTIS-National Technical Information Service
PCO-Photocatalytic Oxidation
SOG-Slab-on-Grade
TVOC-Total Volatile Organic Compound
UV-Ultraviolet
VOC-Volatile Organic Compound	
Table 2.  Volatile Contents and Densities of the Primer and
         the Alkyd Paint Determined by EPA Method 24
Parameter
Volatile Contents, %
Density, g/cm3
Primer
33.3
1.33
Alkyd Paint
33.1
1.26
Table 3.  Content of Selected VOCs Determined by EPA
         Method 311
Compound
undecane
decane
dodecane
p-xylene
o-ethyltoluene
trans-decahydra-
naphthalene
nonane
propyl-
cyclohexane
methyl ethyl
ketoxime
p-ethyltoluene
ethylbenzene
1,2,4-trimethyl-
benzene
o-xylene
1,2,3-trimethyl-
benzene
1,3,5-trimethyl-
benzene
toluene
n-propylbenzene
octane
TVOC
Primer, mg/g
7.42
33.0
ND*
1.82
ND
2.55
19.4
4.34
ND
0.21
0.27
0.16
0.23
ND
ND
0.34
0.01
12.2
352
Alkyd Paint, mg/g
37
15.1
11.6
6.33
21.0
4.92
3.79
2.04
2.28
0.79
1.26
1.06
0.91
0.33
0.31
0.26
ND
ND
408
                                                          *ND= Not Detected
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                            Page 5

-------
REDUCING   SOLVENT  AND   PROPELLANT
EMISSIONS FROM CONSUMER PRODUCTS

Consumer  products  typically contain an active  agent,  a
solvent, and a propellant. For example, hair styling products
are made  up of a  polymer, alcohol, and  isobutane, all
contained in a precharged package. The polymer, as the active
ingredient, holds the hair strands in place. Alcohol is added for
two reasons. The first is to reduce product viscosity while it is
flowing out of the dispenser. Without the alcohol solvent, the
polymer would plug the dispenser orifice and refuse to leave
the package. The second reason for the alcohol is to reduce the
product viscosity  and  surface tension  during the  spray
formation process - a number of researchers have shown that
lower viscosity and surface tension fluids are easier to form
into the sprays desired by customers.

The propellant, isobutane, is used to force the product out of
the can and to direct it at the intended target. Isobutane, or
another hydrocarbon, is usually employed because it resides in
the can  as a liquid  which  rapidly  evaporates when  the
dispenser is activated. The large volume change that occurs
when a liquid vaporizes to a gas allows only a small volume of
isobutane to be used when spraying a large volume of product.
The small volume of stored isobutane  reduces package size.

To minimize indoor exposures from consumer products, the
objective of this project is  to develop  a mechanism for
removing the need  for VOC solvents  and hydrocarbon
propellents in consumer products, replacing them with water
and air, respectively. There are two barriers to be surmounted
before this  goal can be achieved: product efficacy and spray
formation.

Product efficacy involves the ability of the  product active
ingredient to perform its assigned task; e.g., linking strands of
hair together in the case of a hair styling product. Some active
ingredients lose their linking ability  when dissolved in water.
Such concerns are best left to the product formulators.

However, when active ingredients can be dissolved in water
without losing their effectiveness, they must  still be formed
into a spray. This requires the dispenser designer to overcome
the increase in both viscosity and surface tension that results
from replacing alcohol with water. In addition, the quantity of
propellant  must be substantially reduced when replacing
isobutane with a more environmentally friendly gas such as
air, nitrogen, or carbon dioxide. The spray formation problem
has been the focus  of this  research project at Purdue
University.
The project  has accomplished  two  things  thus  far:  1)
development of a dispenser (Figure 4) whose performance is
nearly independent of product viscosity and surface tension,
and  2)  demonstration  of  markedly  reduced propellant
consumption   so  that  isobutane,  or  other  hydrocarbon
propellants, can be replaced by an inert gas such  as  air,
nitrogen, or carbon dioxide. These  accomplishments were
achieved through the two unique dispenser features discussed
below.

The first feature is the manner in which the product is formed
into sprays.  Conventional  dispensers use the  "scrubbing
action"  of the propellant, a process termed "aerodynamic
shear," to break up large liquid globules into much smaller
drops. Conventional aerodynamic shear is inefficient because
only a small fraction of the propellant actually contributes to
the scrubbing process. Consequently, a substantial fraction of
the propellant is wasted. In contrast, the effervescent atomizer
dispenser  developed  in this  project intimately mixes  the
product and propellant during the spray formation process,
thereby involving a much larger fraction in the scrubbing
process. As a result, there is less waste so that less propellant
needs to be stored in the package (in fact a reduction factor of
about 100, by mass, can be obtained). This reduction in
propellant consumption facilitates replacement of hydrocarbon
propellants by gases.
Brass Top
Plate 	 f
Liquid —

Acrylic
Containment

Acrylic
Exit ^^
Orifice
1
-»•



^
•IB!
T
J
•*-
\^^


J 	 —
BB
f V

— Liquid
^ Brass
Aerator
Tube


Air
— Injectio
Holes
                                 Porous Insert
Figure 4.  Prototype of New Spray Dispenser Developed by
          Purdue University
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                                Page 6

-------
The second feature of the dispenser developed at Purdue is the
method used to prepare the product for spray formation.
Conventional  dispensers  (and  even  early   effervescent
atomizers) simply routed the product to a circular exit orifice
and let the propellant do the rest. This approach worked well
as long as there was sufficient propellant available to keep the
liquid flowing around the edges of the exit orifice and gaseous
propellant down the center, an arrangement termed "annular
flow." The annular flow configuration resulted in the breakup
process proceeding through two steps: filament (or ligament)
formation and the subsequent breakup of filaments into drops.
Unfortunately, reductions in propellant consumption always
lead to the collapse of the annular flow resulting in large
chunks of liquid exiting the dispenser, producing large drops.
The Purdue research has shown that the annular flow can be
preserved at very low propellant consumption  rates  by
replacing the conventional circular exit orifice with a small
porous disk. These disks are commercially available and made
of sintered plastics with a wide variety of pore diameters.
The research at Purdue has demonstrated several important
advantages of ligament-controlled  effervescent atomizers.
First,  that products  having viscosities many times that of
current consumer products can be successfully  formed into
sprays. This means that these dispensers can be expected to
meet both future needs and current demands. Second, that
acceptable sprays are formed from water-based products so it
is  possible to replace alcohols with water. Finally,  that
propellant consumption is low enough that current package
sizes  can  be  used  without  exceeding  Department of
Transportation (DOT) pressurization restrictions or deceptive
packaging guidelines, while replacing hydrocarbon propellants
with air.

The design guidelines for the new dispenser will  be available
in late 1997. (EPA Contact: Kelly Leovic, 919-541-7717,
kleovic@ engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
                    THE INDOOR AIR QUALITY INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE
                                                   (IAQ INFO)

     IAQ INFO is an easily accessible, central source of information on IAQ. It is supported by EPA's Office of Air and
     Radiation's Indoor Environment Division.
     IAQ INFO can provide information on many aspects of
     IAQ:

     ^     Indoor air pollutants and their sources
     ^     Health effects of indoor air pollution
     ^     Testing and measuring indoor air pollution
     ^     Controlling indoor air pollutants
     ^     Constructing   and  maintaining   homes   and
           commercial buildings to minimize IAQ problems
     ^     Existing standards  and guidelines related to IAQ
     ^     General information on lAQ-related federal and
           state legislation


     You may call a  toll-free  number  to   speak  to  an
     information specialist Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m.
     to 5:00 p.m. EST. After  hours, you may leave a voice
     message. You may  inquire by fax or mail anytime.
IAQ INFO contains:


^    Citations and abstracts on more than 2,000 books,
      reports, newsletters, and journal articles
^    An inventory of publications prepared by  the
      federal  government,  including  fact  sheets,
      pamphlets,  directories,  training materials, and
      reports
^    Information  on  more  than  150  government
      research, public interest,  and  private  sector
      organizations in the IAQ field
   IAQ INFO
   P.O. Box 37133
   Washington, DC 20013-7133
1-800-438-4318
202-484-1307
Fax: 202-484-1510
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                               Page 7

-------
POSSIBLE  ROLE  OF  RADON  REDUCTION
SYSTEMSW COMBUSTION PRODUCT SPILLAGE

EPA's Radon Mitigation Standards currently require that back-
draft testing be conducted following the installation of active
soil depressurization (ASD) systems for residential reduction.
This testing is specified to ensure that the ASD system is not
causing sufficient additional depressurization of the house to
create or exacerbate spillage of combustion products from
natural draft combustion appliances.

A computational sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess
whether there are conditions where it can safely be assumed
that serious spillage will not be caused by the ASD system. If
so, it might be possible to relax the requirement for back-draft
testing under such conditions.

The parameters varied in conducting this sensitivity analysis
included: house floor area (from 100 to 280 m2); normalized
shell leakage area (0.7 to 9.0  cm2 at 4 Pa per m 2 of floor
area); the rate at which the ASD system is exhausting house
air (5 to 35 L/s); and the combined exhaust rate of appliances
other than the ASD system (50 to 140 L/s). The ranges
selected for each parameter cover typical ranges that would be
encountered in the U.S. housing stock.

The results of these computations are summarized  in Tables 4
and 5, for two cases:
1)  Conditions representative of the spillage test specified in
    a recent standard issued by  the  Canadian  General
    Standards  Board  (Standard   CAN/CGSB-51.71-95).
    These conditions assume that a potential threat of serious
    spillage exists when house depressurizations  are greater
    than 5 Pa with the ASD and all exhaust  appliances
    (except bathroom  fans)  operating. Results are shown in
    Table 4.
2)  More conservative (stringent) conditions. These conditions
    assume that a potentially serious spillage threat can exist
    when house depressurization  reaches 3.5 Pa with all
    exhausts (including bathroom fans) operating. See Table
    5.

Tables 4 and 5 show the normalized house leakage areas that
would be required to avoid exceeding these depressurizations
(5 and 3.5 Pa), as a function of floor area and ASD exhaust
rate. The values assume an exhaust rate for the non-ASD
exhaust appliances (not shown in the tables), dependent on
house size.

Table 5 shows that - even with the smallest house (100 m2)
and the highest ASD exhaust flows - the ASD system would
not be predicted to create or exacerbate serious spillage, even
under conservative assumptions reflected by the table, as long
as the normalized leakage area is greater than about 4 cm2/m2.
For a reference point, one data set containing over 12,000
houses suggests that the mean leakage area for U.S. houses
might be as high as 10 cm2/m2. Thus, it would appear that
ASD systems should not create or exacerbate serious spillage
in most of the housing stock. On the other hand, Table 4
shows that -  even with the largest house (280 m2) and the
lowest ASD exhaust flows - the ASD system could contribute
to spillage even under the more lenient assumptions reflected
by that table, if the normalized leakage area is less than about
2 cm2/m2. Some fraction of the U.S. housing stock does have
leakage areas below this amount, especially in colder climates.
Thus, ASD can contribute to spillage in  some portion of the
housing stock.

These results indicate that, in the absence of data on the
leakiness of the house shell, it is not possible to use the house
size and ASD system flow rate to reliably estimate the risk that
an ASD installation might contribute  to spillage in a given
house. Consequently, spillage testing  would be needed for
essentially  all ASD installations. (EPA  Contact: Bruce
Henschel, 919-541-4112, bhenschel@engineer.aeerl. epa.gov)

Table 4.  Maximum  Allowable  Depressurization=5 Pa,
         Bathroom Fans Excluded (ELA=Effective Leakage
         Area)
ASD exhaust out of house/
(approx. total ASD system
flow) (L/s)

0 / (0) (ASD off)
5/(10)
12 / (24)
20 / (40)
35 / (70)
Minimum ELA @ 4 Pa, per
unit floor area (cmVm2), to
ensure house depressuriza-
tion < 5 Pa for various house
floor areas
100m2
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.3
2.8
190m2
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.1
2.3
280m2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.6
Table 5.  Maximum  Allowable  Depressurization=3.5 Pa,
         Bathroom Fans Included
ASD exhaust out of house/
(approx. total ASD flow)
(L/s)

0 / (0) (ASD off)
5/(10)
12 / (24)
20 / (40)
35 / (70)
Minimum ELA @ 4 Pa, per
unit floor area (cm2/m2), to
ensure house depressuriza-
tion < 3.5 Pa for various
house floor areas
100m2
2.9
3.1
3.4
3.7
4.4
190m2
2.6
2.7
2.9
3.1
3.4
280m2
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.4
2.6
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                               PageS

-------
                                   SUMMARIES OF RECENT PUBLICATIONS
  This section provides summaries of
  recent publications on EPA's indoor
  air  research.  The source  of the
  publication is  listed  after  each
  summary. Publications with NTIS
  numbers  are  available (prepaid)
  from the National Technical Infor-
  mation Service (NTIS) at: 5285 Port
  Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161,
  703-487-4650 or 800-553-6847.
A Method for Testing the Diffusion
Coefficient of  Polymer Films-This
paper discusses  the  development and
evaluation of a method to measure the
diffusion of radon through thin polymer
films. The system was designed so that a
simple, one-dimensional transport model
could be used. The system uses radium-
bearing rock  as a  high  level  radon
source.  The test film is  sealed in the
system with the high concentration radon
gas on one side  and an alpha detector
sealed on the other side. Three polymer
films with published values of the radon
diffusion   coefficient   (polyethylene,
polyester, and latex) were  tested  in
duplicate to evaluate the  method and
determine its comparability to values in
published literature.  The results  show
good repeatability  (10%)  and  some
comparability to  similar published data
(20 to 200%). Source: "Proceedings of
the  American Association of  Radon
Scientists and Technicians' (AARST)
1996 International Radon Symposium,"
Sept. 29 - Oct. 2,  1996. (Lead Author
and  EPA Contact: Richard  B. Perry,
919-541-2721,  rperry@engineer.aeerl.
epa.gov)

An  Evaluation  of Indoor  Radon
Reductions Possible with the Use of
Diffusion-Resistant   Flexible   Con-
struction  Membranes-This   paper
provides a modeling assessment of the
indoor radon reductions possible through
the use of "improved" radon resistant
membranes. The evaluation considers the
application of radon resistant membranes
to slab-on-grade  (SOG) construction,
source strengths,  and  site conditions
typical of Florida. Guidance  for non-
Florida construction and site conditions
is provided. Conclusions from the paper
show:  1)  Placement  of an  integral
impermeable flexible membrane (vapor
barrier) under  SOG construction can
produce significant (lOOx) reductions in
indoor radon concentration from the no
barrier case; 2) In most cases, even for
floating SOG  construction, on moder-
ately high  radon  potential (10  pCig"1,
226Ra) sites, currently available diffusion
resistant  membranes can keep  indoor
radon concentrations below 4 pCiL"1; 3)
Enhanced diffusion limiting membranes
(e.g., going from IxlO"11 to 1 x 10"13mV
1 diffusion coefficients) may become cost
effective  on high radon potential sites
(e.g., sites greater than 20 pCig"1226Ra);
4) The placement of a completely intact
vapor barrier is critical to limiting radon
entry  into new and existing structures
even   at  the   well-balanced  indoor/
outdoor pressure differential condition (-
2.4 Pa) used  in this analysis; and  5)
Comparison of the performance of new
house  evaluation  study results with
model predictions indicates the potential
for enhanced  radon  entry   limiting
performance of vapor barriers, perhaps
through enhanced placement practices.
Source: "Proceedings of the  AARST
1996 International Radon Symposium,"
Sept. 29  - Oct. 2, 1996. (Lead Author
and EPA Contact: David C.  Sanchez,
919-541-2979,  dsanchez@engineer.
aeerl.epa. gov)

Assessment of Fungal (Penicillium
chrysogenum) Growth on ThreeHVAC
Duct Materials-This paper summarizes
experimental   results   evaluating  the
susceptibility  of three  types  of duct
materals:   fibrous  glass  ductboard,
galvanized  steel, and insulated flexible
duct. The results indicate that, of newly
purchased  duct  materials,  only  the
flexible duct supported moderate growth
of P.  chrysogenum. No fungal growth
was detected on the fibrous glass and
galvanized steel. Wetting the clean duct
samples  with  sterile  water did  not
increase amplification of the P. chryso-
genum  over levels without  wetting.
Soiling the samples with dust collected
from   residential  heating  and   air-
conditioning  systems  enhanced  the
susceptibility of all three duct materials
to fungal growth.  The results suggest
that dust  accumulation  and/or  high
humidity should be properly controlled in
any HVAC  duct  to  prevent  fungal
growth.  Source:  Environment Inter-
national, 22,4,  425-431, 1996. (Lead
Author and EPA Contact:  John C. S.
Chang,   919-541-3747,   jchang@
engineer.aeerl.epa .gov)

Characterization   of Manufacturing
Processes and Emissions and Pollution
Prevention Options for the Composite
Wood Panel  Industry-This  report
summarizes information in the literature
on  emissions from the composite wood
industry   and   potential   pollution
prevention  options. Little information
exists  in  the literature pertaining  to
pollution  prevention.  Most  of  the
available literature focuses on ways to
reduce raw  material consumption and
improve   manufacturing   processes.
Potential  pollution  prevention options
presented in this report include: conveyor
belt drying; low temperature drying; high
moisture   bonding   adhesives;  foam
extrusion; variable glue  application rate;
use of alternative fiber  sources such as
agricultural  fiber and  recycled  wood
waste; and naturally derived adhesives.
Source: EPA Report,  EPA-600/R-96-
066 (NTIS PB96-183892), June 1996.
(Lead  Author:  Cybele Martin; EPA
Contact: Elizabeth M. Howard, 919-541-
7915, bhoward@engineer. aeerl.epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                                                     Page 9

-------
Description of a Method for Measuring
the  Diffusion  Coefficient  of  Thin
Films to 222Rn Using a Total Alpha
Detector-This paper describes a method
for using  a total  alpha  detector  to
measure the diffusion coefficient of a thin
film by monitoring the accumulation of
radon that  penetrates the film. Results
show that a virtual steady state condition
exists in the thin film during the early
stages  of  accumulation that allows
reliable  measurements of the diffusion
coefficient without having to wait for the
final condition of equilibrium or having
to  analyze  the   complex   transient
solutions.   Source:   "Proceedings   of
AARST  1996  International  Radon
Symposium," Sept. 29 - Oct. 2,  1996.
(Lead Author and EPA Contact: Ronald
B.  Mosley, 919-541-7865, rmosley@
engineer.aeerl. epa.gov)

Development of a Radon Protection
Map for Large Buildings in Florida-
This report discusses a radon  protection
map that uses soil and geologic features
to show areas of  Florida that require
different levels of radon protection for
large  building construction.  The  map
was proposed as a basis for implement-
ing   radon-protective   construction
standards in areas of high radon risk and
avoiding unnecessary regulations in areas
of  low radon  risk.  Separate model
analyses estimated the effectiveness of
different building construction features.
The map  was compared with   over
275,000 measurements in 20,156 large
buildings.  A statewide bias  of only -
0.004   ±1.067   standard   deviations
suggests excellent  average agreement.
Observations of 306 buildings with the
greatest bias showed that, with  crawl
spaces,  89% measured low  and  only
11%  measured  high.   Source:  EPA
Report,   EPA-600/R-96-028  (NTIS
PB96-168216),  March  1996.  (Lead
Author:  Kirk K. Nielson; EPA Contact:
David   C.  Sanchez,  919-541-2979,
dsanchez@engineer.aeerl .epa.gov)
Effectiveness   of  Radon   Control
Features in New House Construction,
South Central Florida-This report gives
results   of a  study to  evaluate   the
effectiveness  of   two   slab  types
(monolithic  and  slab-in-stem wall)  in
retarding radon entry in new houses built
in accordance with the State of Florida's
proposed  radon  standard  for new
construction over high radon potential
soils. Fourteen houses were  monitored
during their construction on sites whose
soil  gas  radon  concentrations  were
screened  to  be >1000  pCi/L. Slab
integrity was monitored over time, and
post-construction ventilation and radon
entry were measured in all the houses.
The  houses  with  slab-in-stem wall
foundations  exhibited   more  slab
cracking than those with monolithic
slabs and also had higher average radon
entry rates, radon entry velocities, and
concentration ratios. However, both slab
types proved to be effective in retarding
radon entry, especially when penetrations
were  properly  sealed.  Source:  EPA
Report,   EPA-600/R-96-044   (NTIS
PB96-177761),  April  1996.  (Lead
Author:   Charles  S.  Fowler;  EPA
Contact: David C. Sanchez,  919-541-
2979.   dsanchez@  engineer.aeerl.
epa.gov)

Indoor   Environment  Management
Branch-This pamphlet describes lEMB's
in-house and extramural programs.  In-
house research studies are conducted on
a variety of bench-, pilot-, and full-scale
test facilities in Research Triangle Park,
NC. Test facilities  include eight small
environmental  chambers,   a  large
environmental  chamber,  an  IAQ  test
house,  24 biological static chambers, a
biological dynamic chamber, a large soil
chamber, and a pilot scale ventilation test
facility. A three-phase research approach
[chamber(s)-model-test house] forms the
core of  lEMB's   in-house  research
program. This approach ensures that test
methods,  emission  factors,   and
source/sink  models  developed   are
validated  in a full scale  environment.
Source: EPA  Report,  EPA-600/F-96-
004, March 1996. (EPA Contact: John
Chang,   919-541-3747,  jchang@
engineer.aeerl .epa.gov)

Large Building HVAC Simulation-This
report gives the  results from a project
that  established the  potential for using
models to analyze radon levels in large
buildings. This was done  by  applying
modeling tools developed in earlier work
to analyze  pressures,   airflows,  and
indoor radon levels in a school building
monitored  by  IEMB   and  Southern
Research Institute. Source: EPA Report,
EPA-600/R-96-116   (NTIS   PB97-
104715),  September   1996.    (Lead
Author: Lixing Gu; EPA Contact: Marc
Y.    Menetrez,   919-541-7981,
mmenetrez@ engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)

Research  Agenda  on  Air   Duct
Cleaning-Duct   cleaning  practices
currently include: removal of dust and
dirt  from the  ducts and other HVAC
system   components;   application   of
antimicrobial agents to kill bacteria and
fungi; encapsulants  and  sealants  to
contain imbedded contaminants; and the
introduction of ozone to mask odors and
kill microbiological organisms. All have
the potential to affect IAQ. Four priority
research  areas are discussed to reduce
exposure  to  indoor  pollutants:   1)
contaminant  control   techniques,   2)
application  and  use of antimicrobial
agents,  3)  HVAC  system  sealants/
encapsulants, and 4) use of ozone  in
ventilation systems. Source: Accepted for
publication in Indoor Air. (Lead Author:
Marie S. O'Neill; EPA Contact: R. N.
Kulp,    919-541-7980,
rkulp@engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                                                   Page 10

-------
Site-specific Protocol for Measuring
Soil Radon  Potentials for  Florida
Houses-This report describes a protocol
for site-specific measurement of radon
potentials  for Florida houses  that is
consistent with existing residential radon
protection  maps.  The protocol gives
further guidance on the possible need for
radon-protective   house   construction
features. Sensitivity analyses identified
radium concentration, soil layer depth,
soil density, soil texture, and water table
depth as the  independent parameters
dominating   indoor  radon.   Radium
concentration and water table depth were
most important. Soils up to 2.4 m deep
contributed to indoor radon in uniform-
radium scenarios, and soil layers about
0.6 m thick significantly affected radon
in  cases   of  non-uniform   radium
distributions. Source: EPA Report, EPA-
600/R-96-045 (NTIS PB96-175260),
April  1996.  (Lead Author:  Kirk K.
Nielson;  EPA  Contact,  David  C.
Sanchez,   919-541-2979,
dsanchez@engineer.aeerl .epa.gov)
Sources and Factors Affecting Indoor
Emissions  from  Engineered  Wood
Products: Summary and Evaluation of
Current  Literature-Engineered  wood
components  (e.g.,  particleboard  and
medium-density fiberboard) are common
to several  types  of consumer  wood
products (e.g., residential and ready-to-
assemble furniture and kitchen cabinets).
The resins used to bind the wood, the
wood  itself,  coatings,  and  laminates
applied to  the  components  all  affect
emissions  of formaldehyde and  other
VOCs from the products to the indoor
environment. This  report  evaluates
existing data and testing methodologies.
Information  in the report was used to
select engineered wood components with
various finishing and resin systems for a
cooperative  research project  between
IEMB, Research Triangle Institute, and
industry. The research objectives are to
characterize  indoor air emissions from
engineered   wood  products  and  to
identify   and   evaluate  pollution
prevention  approaches  for reducing
indoor  air  emissions   from  these
products. Source: EPA Report,  EPA-
600/R-96-067 (NTIS  PB96-183876),
June 1996. (Lead Author: Sonji Turner;
EPA  Contact: Elizabeth M.  Howard,
919-541-7915,    bhoward@engineer
.aeerl.epa.gov)
Technical  Basis for a  Candidate
Building Materials Radium Standard-
This report  summarizes the technical
basis for a candidate building materials
radium standard. It contains the standard
and a summary of the technical basis for
the standard. Source: EPA Report, EPA-
600/R-96-022  (NTIS PB96-157565),
March 1996. (Lead Author: Vern C.
Rogers;  EPA   Contact:   David  C.
Sanchez,   919-541-2979,
dsanchez@engineer.aeerl .epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1996
                                                                  Page 11

-------
                                  SYMPOSIUM ANNOUNCEMENT

                  Engineering Solutions to Indoor Air Quality Problems

   The second biennial Engineering Solutions to Indoor Air Quality Problems Symposium, an international symposium
   cosponsored by EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory and the Air & Waste Management Association, will
   be held July 21-23,1997, at the Sheraton Imperial Hotel and Conference Center in Research Triangle Park, NC.

   Topics will include:

    !  Managing the Risk of Indoor Air Pollution                !   Ventilation for Indoor Air Quality
    !  Indoor Air Source Characterization Methods              !   HVAC Systems as Sources of
    !  Indoor Air Source Management                            Indoor Air Pollution
    !  Low Emitting/Low Impact Materials  Development        !   Air Duct Cleaning
      (Pollution Prevention)                                 !   Particles in Indoor Air
    !  Biocontaminant Prevention and Control                  !   Indoor Air Quality Modeling
    !  Indoor Air Cleaning Methods                           !   Costs of Managing Indoor Air Quality

   For registration information, please contact the Registrar, Air & Waste Management Association, phone: (412) 232-3445 or
   (412) 232-3444 ext. 3142.

   For information on exhibition opportunities, please contact David Randall, phone: (919) 677-0249, ext. 5139# or fax: (919)
   677-0065.
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Indoor Environment Management Branch                                                        _ p.
MD-54
Research Tnangle Park, NC 27711                                                      PERMIT Na
    FIRST CLASS MAIL
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300

EPA/600/N-97/001, Fall/Winter 1996

An Equal Opportunity Employer

-------