United States Environmental
                     Protection Agency	
                              Office of Research and Development
                              Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
 a EPA
                                                                   EPA/600/N-98/003 Fall/Winter 1998
Inside   I A Q
         EPA's Indoor Air Quality Research Update
In This Issue

Evaluation of Low-VOC Latex Paints
A Compilation of Data on Emissions
  from Indoor Sources	
Page
Volatile Organic Emissions from Printed
  Circuit Board Laminates	6
Factors Influencing IAQ, Immunity,
  and Health 	9
Modeling Emissions From Water-Based
  Cleaning Supplies	 10
Antimicrobial Agents Used in HVAC Systems 12
Summaries of Recent Publications	 12
Glossary  	 15
Inside  IAQ is  distributed  twice  a year and
highlights  indoor  air quality  (IAQ) research
conducted by EPA's National Risk Management
Research  Laboratory's   (NRMRL's)  Indoor
Environment Management Branch  (IEMB) and
other parts  of EPA's Office of Research and
Development.
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, Attn. Kelly Leovic
   U.S. EPA -MD-54
   Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
   Fax: 919-541-2157
   E-Mail: kleovic@engineer.aeerl.epa.gov
Also, check our home page on the Internet at:
http//www.epa.gov/docs/crb/iemb/iembhp.htm
EVALUATION OF LOW-VOC LATEX PAINTS

Low-volatile organic compound (VOC) latex paints are advertised as the
"perfect choice" for application in occupied buildings (e.g., hospitals,
nursing homes, schools, hotels, offices, and homes) during normal
business hours. IEMB recently evaluated four commercially available
low-VOC interior latex paints. Formaldehyde emissions were detected
in two of the paints, and detailed analyses were performed on the one
paint with the highest formaldehyde emissions. This paint is promoted
by its manufacturer as "no solvent" and "VOC free" based on EPA
Reference Method 24. The sales brochure claims "virtually no harmful
emissions into the air" and "no unfriendly or irritable odors."

A bulk analysis was performed by extracting the paint with methanol
and  then  analyzing  the  extract by gas  chromatography/mass
spectrometry  (GC/MS). While Method 24  measures only the total
volatile organic compound (TVOC) content, bulk analysis provides more
accurate and precise data for the  content of individual VOCs. It was
found that most of the individual VOC concentrations in the paint were
below or near the quantification limit of the analytical techniques used.
The TVOC content (less than 0.1  wt.%) was well below that (about 5
wt.%) of an ordinary latex paint.

Small chambertests were also performed on the paint. The flow-through,
dynamic chambers have a volume of 53 liters and are constructed with
electropolished stainless steel interior surfaces to minimize adsorption of
VOCs. Small fans were used to enhance mixing and provide a velocity
near the  test surface  of 5-10  cm/s, which is typical of  indoor
environments.  Emissions testing  was  conducted by placing freshly
painted (2-3 minutes) gypsumboard (16.3 x 16.3 cm) in the chamber,
painted side up.  The chamber was closed, and clean air (< 5(jg/m3
TVOCs) flow was  started through the chamber. A flow rate of 0.44
L/min, equivalent to 0.5 air change per hour, was used. Testing was
conducted at 23 °C with an inlet relative humidity (RH) of 50%.

Small chambertests also showed very low VOC emissions for this paint;
however, the  peak concentration of formaldehyde in the chamber air
reached as high  as 2.0  mg/m3 about 30 minutes after painting. The
chamber air formaldehyde concentration decreased by about 85% in the
                    (Continued on Page 2)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                            Page 1

-------
first 24 hours, and the concentration decrease slowed down
considerably in the second 24 hour period. After 120 hours,
the formaldehyde concentration was 0.16 mg/m3.

Formaldehyde is a primary upper respiratory tract irritant,
and its odor is characterized as "pungent." The lowest listed
odor detection threshold is  0.04 mg/m3. Symptoms of eye,
nose, and throat irritation, such as tearing, running nose, and
a burning sensation in these areas, are relatively common with
formaldehyde exposure. Formaldehyde is also classified as a
probable carcinogen based on sufficient evidence in animal
studies. The World Health Organization guideline for indoor
air formaldehyde concentrations  is 0.1 mg/m3.  The  U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development recommends
that indoor formaldehyde concentrations from all sources not
exceed 0.5 mg/m3.   The California Air Resources Board
recommends for homes an "action level" of 0.12 mg/m3 and
a "target  level" of 0.06 mg/m3 or lower.

It was suspected and later confirmed that the biocide used in the
paint was a source of the formaldehyde (up to 50%). (Biocide is
used as an additive to prevent paint degradation by microbial
growth.)    However, the source of the remainder  of the
formaldehyde is not certain, though it is possible that it is from
the paint formulation, side reactions, or other additives.

The results illustrate that "no-VOC" does not necessarily
mean no-emissions. The common indoor  air definition of
VOC only includes those organic compounds with boiling
points between 50 and 260°C. A number  of hazardous air
pollutants (e.g., formaldehyde with a boiling point of -21°C)
are not accounted for by this  definition. Also,  the  VOC
contained in the bulk paint may not be the VOC emitted since
VOCs can be formed as byproducts of chemical reactions
after the paint is applied.

The results also indicate that EPA Reference Method 24 is
probably not an adequate method for measuring the VOC
content of low-VOC latex paints. Since it is a gravimetric
method relying on the difference between weight loss upon
heating and water content of the sample paint, the analytical
precision is 1.5 and 4.7% for within- and between-laboratory
data, respectively. Current  bulk analysis and emission test
results showed that the VOC contents of low-VOC latex
paints (e.g., less than 0.1%) are well within the uncertainty
range of Method 24, and the method is apparently not precise
enough to accurately define the VOC content of those paints.

IEMB has shared the results from this  study with the paint
manufacturer who was willing to reformulate the paint. To
determine the extent of formaldehyde emissions from interior
paints on the market, a major effort involving the testing of a
number of interior paints would be needed.  (EPA Contact:
John Chang, 919-541-3747, jchang@engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
A COMPILATION OF DATA ON EMISSIONS FROM
INDOOR SOURCES

There is a growing amount of data in the scientific and technical
literature on pollutant emissions from indoor sources. Most of
the  data  have been  reported by  researchers  interested in
developing testing methods, understanding mechanisms of mass
transfer from source to air, or studying a particular class of
indoor sources. IEMB has been compiling such data primarily to
support its in-house source characterization studies by seeing
where the data gaps are, and to develop descriptive statistics that
might  be useful  in designing new products,  buildings, or
ventilation systems. This article summarizes the approach being
taken by IEMB and the current status of the compilation.

An Excel spreadsheet is used as the structure of the compilation.
Twenty  fields  (columns  in  the  spreadsheet)  have  been
established; they are listed and described in Table 1. Note that
data are included only from references that report emission
factors  (pollutant   emission  rate  per  unit of source), or
experimental data  from which emission  factors can be
calculated.

Table 2  summarizes the  source categorization scheme used.
Source categories and examples of source "types" are shown.
IEMB  is trying to use a nomenclature that is compatible with
industrial and commercial terminology, which can be variable.

While care is taken in selecting references, there are no detailed
acceptability criteria. Articles and reports from peer-reviewed
scientific and technical literature are preferred; these are labeled
"primary" references in the bibliography  listed in Table 3.
References that may not have been through peer review but
appear to have been based on good measurement practices are
labeled "secondary" references in the bibliography. References
that summarize results from studies by other authors are used
very little in this  database;  those that have  been are labeled
"tertiary" references in the bibliography.

The database currently has  about 5000 records covering
about 60 source types, extracted from about 60 references.
Emphasis to date has been on development of the structure
and data  entry guidelines.  One round of quality  assurance
(QA) has been completed,  and  a second QA review is
planned.  Over the next year,  the  emphasis will shift to
additional data entry and analysis. IEMB has started to look
at the  data  with an eye toward developing representative
emission  factors   for  product,  building, and  heating,
ventilating,  and air-conditioning  (HVAC) system design.
Developers of other emission data bases will also be contacted
to compare compilation and analysis approaches. Comments
are   welcome,  as are  recommendations for  additional
references. (EPA Contact: W. Gene Tucker, 919-541-2746,
tucker.gene@epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                 Page 2

-------
                              Table 1. Names of fields in indoor emissions database
Name of Field

Record
Number
Description Data Entry Guidelines

Number assigned to first field of each record.
Records (rows) generally represent emissions data
for a single pollutant or pollutant class from a single
sample, or set of samples, of a source type.
Occasionally, a record will represent two or more
pollutants.
Source Information
Category
Type
NAICS
Source category of the sample that was tested. (See
Table 2 for listing of source categories.)
Source type of the sample that was tested. (See
Table 2 for listing of some source types.) Use
judgement creating new source types; consider
author's descriptions.
North American Industrial Classification System
code number. (NAICS replaced the Standard
Industrial Classification, or SIC, system in 1997.)
Enter the code of the source category-or, if
possible-the source type. See
http://www.theodora.com/sic_index.html or
www.census.gov/epcd/naicscod.txt for listing of
NAICS codes and titles, and www/naics4.html.
Emission Testing Information
Reference
Specific
Identification
Age of Tested
Sample
Code for the reference from which the emissions
data were obtained. Use first three letters of first
author's last name followed by the last two digits of
year the data were published. If same author (or
more than one author with the same three first letters
of last name) published more than once during same
year, add lower-case a, b, etc. to distinguish them.
Specific information about the source sample that
expands on the "source type" entry (such as
composition data, condition or history of the product
from which the sample was taken). If the author's
description differs from the description used in the
Category and Type fields, enter it here.
Time that elapsed between when the source sample
was first put into use and when emission sampling
occurred. If sample was purchased at a store, that
should be noted in the "specific identification" field.
If the reference presents both an empirical model
and tabulated emission factors, enter the tabulated
values and describe the model in the "comment"
field. If an empirical emission model is presented
and measured emission factors are not clearly
tabulated, records should be created for the
following preselected ages, limited to the time period
for -which the model is applicable'. 1 hour, 24 h, 168
h (1 week), 730 h (1 month), and 8760 h (1 year). In
these cases, note that a specific age has been
selected: e.g., enter "24 h (modeled age)."
Pollution Information
Name
CASN
Test Methods/
Conditions
Analytical
Method
Chemical name of the pollutant (or other name, if is
not a single chemical substance).
Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) Number for the
pollutant. For a listing of CAS numbers, see
http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/name-ser.htm.
Enter information such as chamber size, material of
construction, air change rate or flow, temperature
and relative humidity during testing, and air
sampling rate or volume.
Enter the method(s) used to chemically or physically
characterize the pollutant in the air sample.
Name of Field

Description Data Entry Guidelines

Emission Factors
Units
Number of
Measure-
ments, N
Minimum
Median
Mean (SD)
Maximum
Emission factors should be reported in units of
emission rate per unit of source. (Units for emission
rate are general by mass per time', units of source are
area for surface materials, or a single product for
sources like machines or pieces of furniture).
Emission factors for physical or chemical pollutants
should therefore be entered in units of fig/h per m2
for surface materials, or /ug/h per unit of product for
other source types. If other units are used in the
reference, convert to the units and note in the
"comments" field that the conversion has been made.
Units for biological pollutants such as fungi should
be entered as reported; colony-forming units (CPUs)
are often used instead of mass.
The number of measurements that were made to
establish the values entered into the next four fields.
Where N= 1 , the emission factor value should be
entered into the "mean" field. When it is not clear
from the reference how many measurements were
made, enter "?."
Minimum value, where multiple emission
measurements of a single same sample, or set of
similar samples) are reported in the reference.
Median value, where multiple emission
measurements (of a single same sample, or set of
similar samples) are reported in the reference.
Mean and standard deviation values, where reported.
If a single measurement is reported in the reference,
enter it in this field.
Maximum value, where multiple measurements (of a
single sample, or set of similar samples) are reported
in the reference.
Emissions Modeling
Yes/No
Half-Time
Enter Y or N, depending on whether the reference
includes a mathematical model that represents
measurements taken. Note that references dealing
only with purely theoretical models or discussion of
emission models (i.e., references that do not report
new data) are not to be covered in this data base.
Time, in hours, for the emission factor to go from its
maximum value to half the maximum, as estimated
by the model. Also enter standard deviation for the
half-time, if reported.
Comments

Use this field to note special information on the
reference that might be useful to users of the data
base. If emissions modeling was reported, enter the
mathematical form of the model and values for
coefficients; also note range of applicability (e.g., for
time or temperature). Note any adjustments made to
reported data (e.g., change of emission factor units
or conversion of chamber concentration data to
emission factors). If the value entered in the
emission factor field was calculated from the model,
note that in this field. When emission factor data
were not obtained directly from the reference, but
through contact with an author, note by a statement
such as "The value for this emission factor, which is
difficult to estimate from Figure x of the reference,
was obtained directly from the author."
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
Page 3

-------
                                            Table 2. Source categories and types
           Category
  Adhesive s
  Cabinetry
  Caulks &
  Seals
  Cleaning Agents
  (see also pesticides)
  Floor Materials
  Furnishings
  HVAC Systems and
  Components
  (see also space heating and
  cooking equipment)
  Insulation
  Products
  Machines
        Type (Examples)
Carpet adhesive
Flooring adhesive
General adhesive
Kitchen cabinets
Caulk, general
Sealant, general
Detergent
Disinfectant
Misc. cleaning agents
Solvent-based cleaner
Carpet-synthetic fiber
Carpet-wool fiber
Carpet cushion
Carpet system
Cork flooring
Linoleum
Sheet vinyl flooring
Tile vinyl flooring
Wood flooring
Other flooring
Drapery
Drapery lining
Office furniture-metal
Office furniture-upholstered
Office furniture-wood
Residential furniture-metal
Residential furniture-upholstered
Residential furniture-wood
Other furnishings
Air cleaning device
Air moving equipment
Cooling coils
Ductwork
Heating coils
Humidification equipment
Fibrous insulation
Foam insulation
Air cleaner, in-room
Air conditioner, room
Electronic circuit board
Humidifier, in-room
Photocopier, dry-process
Photocopier, wet-process
Printer, laser
Spirit duplicator
Digital duplicator
Vacuum cleaner (see also
occupant activities)
Other machines
          Category
Miscellaneous
Materials
Occupants and
Occupant Activities
                                                                    Paints and Coatings
                                                                    Personal Care Items
                                                                    Pesticides
                                                                    (see also cleaning agents)
Space Heating and Cooking
(See also HVAC systems and
components)
                                    Wall and Ceiling Materials
                                    (other than paints and
                                    coatings)
                                                                    Wood Products
        Type (Examples)
Brick
Ceramic tile
Clothing
Concrete
Glass
Metal
Microbial culture
Misc. stored material
Mortar
Paper-based material
Stone
Animals (pets)
Cleaning
Cooking
Human occupants- bioeffluents
Smoking
Human occupants- other activities
                              Oil-based finish
                              Solvent-based paint
                              Stain
                              Varnish
                              Water-based finish
                              Water-based paint
                              Wax
                              Hair spray
                              Other PCIs
                              Moth repellent
                              Other pesticides
Electric
Gas fueled
Oil fueled
Solid fuel
                              Ceiling tile
                              Gypsum board
                              Plaster
                              Wall paneling
                              Wallpaper/wall covering
                              Other wall and ceiling materials
                              Fiber panel material (e.g.,
                              insulation board, hardboard)
                              Particleboard
                              Plywood
                              Solid natural wood product
                              Veneer
                              Waferboard/chipboard
                              Other wood products
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                                                          Page 4

-------
                                             Table 3. References cited to date
ALE96   Alevantis, L. E. (1996). Califor-
         nia Department of Health Ser-
         vices, Berkeley, California. (3 °)
ALL78   Allen, Wadden, and Ross (1978).
         Am.   Ind.  Hyg.   Assoc.  Jour.
         39(6):466-471. (1°)
ANT97   Anttonen   et   al.    (1997).
         Proceedings of IAQ'97, Healthy
         Buildings  (ASHRAE).     3:
         575-579. (2°)
BAT91   Batterman, Bartoletta, and Burge
         (1991). Presented at 84th Annual
         Meeting of AWMA.  (2°)
BAY90   Bayer   and   Papanicolopoulos
         (1990). Proceedings of Indoor Air
         '90, 3:725-730. (2°)
BER97   Bernheim and Levin (1997). Proc.
         of IAQ '97, Healthy Buildings
         (ASHRAE). 3:599-604.  (2°)
BL A91   Black, Pearson, and Work (1991).
         Proc.  of IAQ'91,  Healthy
         Buildings (ASHRAE). 267-272.
         (2°)
BRO97   Brockmann   et   al.   (1997).
         Engineering Solutions  to  IAQ
         Problems, pp. 403-420 (1 °)
CHA92   Chang and Guo (1992).  Indoor
         Air.  2:146-153. (1°)
CHA94   Chang and Guo (1994).  Indoor
         Air. 4:35-39. (1°)
CHA97   Chang et al. (1997).  Indoor Air.
         7:241-247. (1°)
COL93   Colombo,  De   Bortoli,   and
         Tichenor (1993).  Proceedings of
         Indoor Air '93, 2:573-578. (2°)
DAV91   Davidson   et   al.    (1991).
         Proceedings of IAQ'91, Healthy
         Buildings (ASHRAE). 299-303.
         (2°)
FIS95    Classification of Indoor Climate,
         Construction,  and  Finishing
         Materials.  FiSIAQ Publication
         5E. Finnish Society of Indoor Air
         Quality   and   Climate,  Espoo,
         Finland, 1995.  (2°)
FOR97   Fortmann  et   al.    (1997).
         Engineering Solutions  to  IAQ
         Problems, pp. 117-127. (1°)
FUN97   Punch,  Winther,  and  Larsen
         (1997).  Proc.  IAQ'97,  Healthy
         Buildings (ASHRAE). 3:617-622.
         (2°)
HAN86   Hansen and Anderson  (1986).
         Am.   Ind.  Hyg.   Assoc.  Jour.
         47(10):659-665. (1°)
HAW92  Hawkins et al.  (1992). American
         Industrial Hygiene Association
         Journal.  53(5):275-282.  (1°)
HET95   Hetes, Moore,  and  Northeim
	(1995). EPA/600/R-95-045. (3°)
HOD93  Hodgson,  Wooley,  and  Daisy
         (1993).   Jour, of Air and Waste
         Manag. Assoc.  43:316-324. (1°)
HOR97  Horn, Ullrich, and Seifert (1997).
           Proc.   of  IAQ'97,  Healthy
         Buildings   (ASHRAE).     3:
         533-538. (2°)
HOW97  Howard, McCrillis,  and Krebs
         (1997).  Engineering Solutions to
         IAQ Problems, pp 3-15. (2°)
KER90  Kerr   and   Sauer   (1990).
         Proceedings of Indoor Air  '90,
         3:759-763.  (2°)
LAR97  Larsen   and   Punch   (1997).
         Proceedings of IAQ'97, Healthy
         Buildings   (ASHRAE).
         3:611-616.  (2°)
LEO96  Leovic et al. (1996). Jour, of Air
         and  Waste  Management
         Association. 46:821-829.  (1°)
LEO97  Leovic etal. (1997). Proceedings
         of  IAQ'97,  Healthy  Buildings
         (ASHRAE). 3:623-628. (2°)
LUN97  Lundgren,    Jonsson,   and
         Ek-Olausson  (1997).  IAQ'97,
         Healthy  Bldgs   (ASHRAE).
         1:287-292.  (2°)
MAY96  Mayo,  Figley,  and  Robinson
         (1996). Presented at Clean Air'96,
         Orlando, Florida. (3°)
MOR96  Morrison and Hodgson  (1996).
         Proceedings of Indoor Air  '96,
         3:585-590.  (2°)
MUL94  Muller   and   Black   (1994).
         Presented   at  the  American
         Industrial  Hygiene Conf, May
         1994. (2°)
NAG95  Nagda,  Koontz,  and Kennedy
         (1995).  Indoor Air.  5:189-195.
         (1°)
NEL87  Nelms,  Mason, and  Tichenor
         (1987).  EPA/600/D-87/165. (1°)
NIU97   Niu et al. (1997).  Engineering
         Solutions to IAQ Problems,  pp.
         547-554. (2°)
NOR97  Northeim   et   al.   (1997).
         Engineering  Solutions  to IAQ
         Problems, pp 71-81. (2°)
ROA96  Roache et al. (1996). Proceedings
         of Indoor Air'96,2:657-662. (2°)
SAA92  Saarela  (1992).  Proceedings of
         IAQ <92, Environments for People
         (ASHRAE). 349-354. (2°)
SAA97  Saarela,    Tirkkonen,   and
         Suomi-Lmdberg (1997). IAQ'97,
         Hlthy  Bldgs   (ASHRAE).
	3:545-550.  (2°)	
SEL80   Selway,  Allen,   and  Wadden
         (1980).   Am.  Ind. Hyg. Assoc.
         Journal.  41:455-459. (1°)
SMI90   Smith,  Donovan,  and  Ensor
         (1990). Proceedings of Indoor Air
         '90,3:647-652.  (2°)
STR91   Strobndge  and  Black  (1991).
         Proceedings of IAQ <91, Healthy
         Buildings (ASHRAE). 292-298.
         (2°)
TEP95   Tepper et al. (1995). American
         Industrial Hygiene  Association
         Journal.  56:158-170. (1°)
TIC86   Tichenor and  Mason  (1986).
         EPA/600/D-86/088.  (1°)
TIC88a  Tichenor   et    al.   (1988).
         EPA/600/D-88/086.  (2°)
TIC88b  Tichenor, Sparks,  and Jackson
         (1988). EPA/600/2-88/061.  (1°)
TIC88c  Tichenor and  Mason  (1988).
         Jour.APCA. 38(3):264-268.  (1°)
TIC89   Tichenor (1989).   Environment
         International. 15:389-396. (1°)
TIC91   Tichenor  and   Guo   (1991).
         EPA/600/D-91/155.  (1°)
TUC88  Tucker (1988).   Proceedings of
         Healthy Buildings <88,1:149-157.
         (3°)
VAN90  Van  der Wai,  Steenlage,  and
         Hoogeveen (1990). Proc. Indoor
         Air <90, 3:611-616. (2°)
VAN97  Van der Wai,  Hoogeveen,  and
         Wouda   (1997).    Indoor  Air.
         7:215-221.  (1°)
WAL87  Wallace  (1987).   Atmospheric
         Environment.     21(2):385-393.
         0°)
WOL93  Wolkoff et al. (1993). Indoor Air.
         3:113-123.  (1°)
WOL96  Wolkoff  and  Nielsen  (1995).
         Atmospheric Environment.
          30: (15): 2679-2689. (1°)
WOR94  Worthan  (1994).   Presented  at
         National  Coalition   on  IAQ
         conference, Tampa. (2°)
ZHA97   Zhang etal. (1997). Proceedings of
         IAQ'97,   Healthy   Buildings
	(ASHRAE). 3:521-526. (2°)
      1 ° = primary
      2° = secondary
      3 ° = tertiary
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                                         Page 5

-------
VOLATILE ORGANIC EMISSIONS FROM PRINTED
CIRCUIT BOARD LAMINATES

The printed circuit board is a vital operating component in
many electronic products;  e.g., personal computers (PCs),
telephones, fax machines, and photocopiers. Offgassing from
printed circuit boards is most prominent during the initial use
period when electrical heating occurs in the product. This is
especially true in the case  of PC monitors, where internal
operating temperatures can range from 60 to 70°C.

In this evaluation, IEMB worked cooperatively with Research
Triangle Institute (RTI) to  measure emissions  from printed
circuit board laminates (without circuitry) to determine if an
alternative laminate would be less emitting than conventional
laminates. The complete study can be  found in the  EPA
Report,  Personal   Computer Monitors:  A  Screening
Evaluation  of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing
Printed Circuit Board Laminates  and Potential Pollution
Prevention Alternatives, April 1998 (EPA-600/R-98-034,
NTISPB98-137102).

Methodology
Because laminates used in PC monitors are subjected to high
operating temperatures, they were selected as test laminates
for this project. As shown in the test matrix in Table 4, eight
samples of the following types of base/resin printed circuit
board laminates were evaluated:   Glass/lignin-containing
epoxy (G/L), Glass/epoxy  (G/E),  Paper/phenol (P/P), and
Paper/ reformulated phenolic (P/RP).

The screening evaluation  was conducted to determine if the
glass/lignin-containing epoxy resin and the reformulated phenolic
laminates would be less emitting than conventional laminates
which are made primarily  from paper/phenol.  Glass/epoxy
laminates were included in  the evaluation because they exist
primarily in central processing units (CPUs).

The glass/lignin-containing  epoxy and glass/epoxy laminates
were  acquired from U.S. manufacturers.  The  paper/phenol
laminate was acquired from  an overseas manufacturer because
almost all phenol-based laminates are produced overseas.
The reformulated phenolic laminate is also produced overseas
and has been in use in Europe within the past 5 years.

Participating manufacturers were sent "sampling kits" with
sampling instructions and steel cans. A designated person at
each manufacturing facility was responsible for:
1)  Collecting a laminate sample from the production line;
2)  Cutting the laminate sample size to 0.15  by 0.25 m; and
3)  Immediately sealing the laminate in a labeled, precleaned,
    air-tight, 7.85-L steel can provided.

Each can was shipped overnight to RTI, inspected upon arrival,
and then stored at -10 °C for about 4 months. Immediately prior
to testing, the sealed storage cans containing the laminates were
removed  from the freezer,  and the laminate samples were
transferred to individual clean steel cans for testing. The cans
were the same type as those used for storage. Inside the can, each
laminate sample was placed on its edge, leaning against the side
of the can, in order to maximize the exposed  area. The lid of
each test can was fitted with Teflon inlet and outlet tubes which
were attached to the supply air manifold and  sampling ports.
This allowed continuous regulated air flow through the chambers
during testing.

The test cans were then placed in a temperature-controlled
oven maintained at 65±3 ° C. Oven temperature and RH of the
supply  air   (50±5% RH  at  23 °C)  were  continuously
monitored. As the air was warmed to 65 ° C, the RH in the test
cans dropped to approximately 6%.

Total  air flow to the system was  controlled,  monitored, and
recorded using mass flow controllers. Just prior to placing the
test cans containing the laminate samples in the oven, each can
was purged with clean air to flush the cans of laboratory air.
Collection of air samples from the test cans began within  10
minutes of placing the test samples in the cans.  Flows were
measured and adjusted  immediately after the test cans were
placed in the  oven, during the middle, and again at the end of
testing.The flow rate was  131 mL/minute (approximately 1.02
                               Table 4. Test matrix for circuit board laminate evaluation
Air Samples
Laminate
Air sample type;
vocc
VOC duplicate
Aldehyde/ketone
Number of
sampling intervals
Number of air
samples taken
Background
1

1
1


3

G/L-lAa
1

1
1

9
27

G/L- IB
1

1
1

9
27

G/L-2
1

1
1

9
27

G/E-1
1

1
1

9
27

G/E-2
1

1
1

9
27

P/P
1

1
1

9
27

P/RP-A
1

1
1

9
27

P/RP-B
1

1
1

9
27

 Laminates supplied -without circuitry; copper coated on one side. Sample G/L-2 -was copper coated on both sides.
 A background air sample -was taken from two separate test cans prior to the start of the test.
c Includes phenol and cresols.
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                 Page 6

-------
air changes per hour). Air samples were analyzed for VOCs
(including phenol and cresols) and adehydes/ketones. A list
of target compounds were identified from an initial set of air
samples taken for each laminate sample. Quantitative analysis
of these target compounds was then conducted  for all
subsequent air samples taken for each laminate sample.

Results
The data presented in Figures 1 and 2 summarize the results
of the aldehydes/ ketones and VOCs emitted from each of the
eight printed circuit board laminates, respectively. The data
are expressed in terms of concentration (yWg/m3) and illustrate
the sum  of  measured  concentrations  for  all identified
compounds emitted from each printed circuit board laminate
at t = 0 or 5 hours and t = 336 hours (14 days). Emission
factors over time are presented in the report  referenced on
page 6.

Figure 1 shows that, at time t = 0 hours, the sum of measured
aldehydes/ketones  emitted   from the  paper/reformulated
phenolic and the paper/phenol laminates ranged from 3,900 to
6,400 Aig/m3.  For the same time point, the sum of measured
aldehydes/ketones  emitted from  the glass/lignin laminates
ranged from  200 to 270 jWg/m3, and emissions from the
glass/epoxy laminates ranged from 33 to 200 yWg/m3. After
336 hours, the sum of measured  aldehydes/ketones  emitted
from the paper/reformulated phenolic and the paper/phenol
laminates  ranged  from  650 to  870 jWg/m3. The  sum of
measured  aldehydes/ketones emitted from the  glass/lignin
laminates after 336 hours ranged from 42 to 53 Aig/m3, and
concentrations from the glass/epoxy laminates ranged from
17 to 25 Aig/m3. Other observations from the data in Figure 1
are:
1)  In the first hours of simulated on-time operation at 65 ° C,
    the paper/phenolic resin-based  laminates  emit more
    aldehydes/ketones than  the glass/lignin or glass/epoxy
    laminates.  It  appears  that offgassing of  volatile
    compounds would continue beyond the 336 hours of this
    screening evaluation.
2)  Concentrations for the glass/epoxy sample 2 laminate are
    greater than those for the glass/epoxy  sample  1.  This
    difference  could be due to the fact that the glass/epoxy
    sample 2  laminate is manufactured  by  a different
    company than the glass/epoxy sample 1 laminate.
3)  All three  glass/lignin  laminate  samples and the two
    glass/epoxy laminates show average concentrations 95%
    lower  than the  paper/reformulated phenolic resin-based
    laminates.

Figure 2 shows that, at time t = 0 or 5 hours, the  sum of
measured VOC concentrations (excluding aldehydes/ketones)
from the paper/reformulated phenolic and the paper/phenol
laminates ranged from 9,600to 23,000 Aig/m3. Concentrations
from the glass/lignin laminates ranged from less than 1,3 00 to
1,700  jWg/m3,  and concentrations  from the glass/epoxy
laminates  ranged from less than  1 to  15 jWg/m3. After  336
hours, VOC  concentrations from  the paper/reformulated
phenolic and the paper/phenol laminates ranged from 3,900 to
6,200  Aig/m3.     For  the  same  time  interval,  VOC
concentrations for the glass/lignin and glass/epoxy laminates
ranged from nearly 0 to 100 j
Other observations from the data in Figure 2 are:
1)  As was the case for the aldehydes and ketones, all three
    glass/lignin laminate samples  and the two glass/epoxy
    laminates   show  an   average   sum  of  measured
    concentrations of VOCs  to be  95%  lower than the
    paper/reformulated phenolic resin-based laminates.
2)  VOC concentrations from both glass/epoxy laminates are
    virtually negligible.   This is  a good indication, on a
    screening basis only, that  VOC concentrations from
    glass/epoxy laminates would  probably not contribute
    significantly to indoor air emissions.
3)  VOC  concentrations  at t =5 hours  from the paper/
    reformulated phenolic laminates  are lower than for the
    paper/phenol, whereas aldehyde/ketone concentrations
    from the paper/reformulated phenolic laminates (Figure
    1) were higher than for the paper/phenol.  However, at t
    = 336 hours, VOC  concentrations from the paper/
    reformulated phenolic laminates are higher than for the
    paper/phenol.

Conclusions
Conclusions from this screening evaluation are:

•   Glass/lignin laminates result in lower concentrations of
    volatile compounds than paper/phenolic resin-based
    laminates.  Although this test was conducted on only
    eight laminate samples of four different laminate types,
    the results show that, for the samples tested, glass/lignin-
    containing   epoxy   resin   laminates  emit  lower
    concentrations  of  volatile  compounds   than  the
    paper/phenolic resin-based laminates during simulated PC
    monitor on-time operation at 65 °C.   The data also
    suggest that, if these laminates were used as pollution
    prevention alternatives  for paper/phenol circuit board
    laminates in PC monitors, reductions in VOC emissions
    from PC monitors could be achieved.  Alternatively, an
    initial exposure period at an elevated temperature would
    be a possible control option to  reduce volatile emissions
    prior to operation in an indoor environment.
    Volatile emissions from glass/epoxy laminates  are
    relatively   low   compared  to  glass/lignin  and
    paper/phenol laminates. Although glass/epoxy laminates
    appear to be good substitutes for paper/phenol laminates,
    they are not predominantly used in PC monitors. This is
    because  glass/epoxy laminates are  designed for high-
    speed applications and data processing, whereas PC
    monitors do not perform the  same operating functions or
    experience the same operating  conditions as CPUs.
    In general, concentrations decay over time. The results
    show that a majority of the compounds decayed to low
    levels (-50 jWg/h-m2) after 336 hours at 65 °C. However,
    the data clearly show that some of the compounds would
    likely  have continued to emit from the laminates beyond
    the 336 hours of the test.  (EPA Contact: Kelly Leovic,
    919-541-7717, kleovic@ engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                               Page 7

-------
7,000


6,000


5,000


4,000
                 "ro
                 ~  3,000
                 
-------
FACTORS INFLUENCING  IAQ,  IMMUNITY,  AND
HEALTH

In June 1995, a conference on IAQ, Immunity, and Health
was held at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, NC.
It was cosponsored by the Cornell University Institute for
Comparative and Environmental Toxicology, the Cornell
Center  for the Environment,  and North Carolina  State
University and provided an opportunity   to  examine  a
significant societal inhalation toxicology issue. The program,
which brought together leading national scientists as well as
policy  formulators,   also   included  important  policy
perspectives for discussion of scientific data application. This
article provides an  overview of  the proceedings by the
organizing committee.

Discussions focused on how indoor air pollutants, including
both industrially and naturally derived volatile chemicals and
allergens, as well as cofactors (e.g.,  levels of outside air
pollutants such as ozone), might affect upper respiratory tract
symptoms and  immune response. The need to consider the
entire range of outdoor pollution factors  (e.g., particulates,
pollen, ozone, NO2) as well as indoor chemical emissions and
the entire range of allergens (e.g.,  dust mites, mold spores,
rodent  and  insect   allergens)  was  stressed by several
presenters. In the case of VOC emissions, the relevance of
evaluation methodologies to actual exposure conditions was
emphasized. This was required to avoid potential erroneous
interpretations  of results as they relate to actual risk. For
example,   carpet emissions  were  reported  to  become
significant only at temperatures exceeding 62°C; however,
this was not usually the case  under conditions that actually
occur in typical indoor environments.

Exposure scenarios to measure inhalation responses  were
discussed  by  several  presenters. In  particular, issues
concerned the  exposure  methodologies (e.g., whole  body,
head, nose and  mouth,  nose only,  intratracheal),  dose
response, and the type of endpoints that would be important
for determining health implications.  Endpoints that  were
discussed included sensory irritation, sensitivity to infection,
allergic  challenge   responses  (including  asthmatic-type
responses), cellular and biochemical changes in nasal lavage,
hypersensitivity  pneumonitis,  and  pulmonary   function
endpoints.

An overall consideration of immune effector functions in the
context of inhalation exposure was presented, and several
presenters  described  the   chemical  mediators  and/or
biomarkers associated  with inflammatory  reactions.  In
particular, the codependent relationship of the neurological
and  immunological  systems in controlling  inflammatory
reactions was detailed.

Additional sympathetic nervous system  neurotransmitters
such  as norepinephrine  were discussed  as  regulators of
immune cell activity.  This was  extended beyond model
neuroimmune   interactions  for  a consideration of the
integrative topics of stress, psychology, and altered immune
capacity. Within this discussion, it was shown that specific
stressors can exert targeted effects over certain portions of the
immune system.

Potential individual genetic (allelic) variation in response to
indoor air was considered and was particularly relevant given
the possible  existence of hypersusceptible subpopulations of
humans for certain stimuli-induced symptomologies. In this
case,  the  investigators reported on a rodent model for
hypersensitive pneumonitis.

The symptomology of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS)
was delineated, as well as the approaches to enhanced health
of the patients.  The unclear etiology of both MCS and sick
building syndrome  was discussed, as well as the data and
hypotheses that might link these conditions to immune and/or
inflammatory processes. The potential for psychoneurogenic
associations with  MCS was considered, and additional
presentations described the physiological linkages involving
the nervous  and other (e.g., immune)  systems,  and the
opportunity  to  investigate possible underlying biochemical
involvement in MCS symptomology was enhanced. Therefore,
the determination of  cause-effect  relationships  in MCS
symptomology  should be more readily  approachable in the
future.

The role of  specific biomarkers for detection of differential
sensitization was discussed. Significant progress has  been
made in the  areas of inflammation and  immunomodulation.
This occurred with the development of both functional assays
and biomarkers for the detection of respiratory versus contact
sensitizing  potential  of  environmental  factors. Similar
progress has been made relative to nonspecific inflammatory
processes. This research progress pertains not only to the
direct capacity  of indoor air factors to serve as potential
sensitizers but also to the possibility that such factors could
alter the host  relative to sensitizing potential and/or the
challenge response to allergens. The biomarkers  described
here offer a potentially sensitive and economical method for
screening emissions from indoor products for their sensitizing
and/or host-allergy response potential.

The combined presentations pointto a research and evaluation
direction for indoor air and immunity issues in which cross-
disciplinary  expertise  should contribute  to the effective
resolution of these issues.  Two presentations  crossed the
science-policy boundary to provide specific examples of the
opportunities for effective outreach to the general public. In
these presentations, the benefits of a consolidated effort for
the translation of specific indoor air and health findings into
cost-effective remedial action within communities were also
discussed. (EPA  Contact: Mary Jane  Selgrade,  919-541-
2657, selgrade.maryjane@epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                Page 9

-------
MODELING EMISSIONS FROM WATER-BASED
CLEANING SUPPLIES

Executive Order 12873, issued Oct.20,1993, requires federal
agencies to purchase "environmentally preferable" products.
As a pilot project under this executive order, EPA and the
General Services Administration worked together to develop
guidance for federal  agencies  to select  environmentally
preferable cleaning supplies. These cleaners are biodegradable
degreasers. They are generally diluted with water before use,
and are frequently applied using a hand-held pump spray.
Three types of chemical compounds are of primary concern
in these cleaners: terpenes, butyl cellusolve (2-butoxyethanol),
and ethoxylatednonylphenol surfactants. The largest potential
exposure is to the cleaning staff, but there is also exposure to
building occupants.

EPA encountered difficulty evaluating the risk associated with
indoor air exposures because the method used to compare
risks relied on overly simplified indoor air models. The goal
of this research is to improve upon EPA's indoor emission
models for water-based cleaners.  The first phase of work
focuses on improving models for evaporative emissions from
films  or pools, and  validating them  in the laboratory.
Emissions from the aerosol will be examined later.

Products Tested
Two different water-based cleaners have been selected forthis
work.  The  first (Cleaner A) is a 2-butoxyethanol-based
product with an ethoxylated nonylphenol  surfactant. The
second (Cleaner B) is a terpene-based  cleaner. Both cleaners
will be analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
(GC/MS) to identify and quantify VOCs that may be emitted
during and after use.

Headspace Measurements
Headspace measurements are being made over various cleaner
dilutions to  determine  partition  coefficients,  and  hence
Henry's Law constants.  Headspace measurements will also
be made over various dilutions  of a laboratory formulated
cleaner surrogate, containing only  2-butoxyethanol (at the
same concentration as Cleaner A) and water. The data will be
used to:
    •   Provide input for modeling;
    •   Compare to  Henry's Law  predictions  made  by a
       structure/activity relationship program (HENRYWIN
       v3.00, SRC-HENRY for  Microsoft Windows, 1994-
       1997); and
    •   Compare the partition coefficients  of the  diluted
       cleaner to those of the VOCs and water to see whether
       the surfactants and minor  constituents have any effect
       on partitioning.  If there  is a large effect, it may be
       necessary to do additional work before emissions can
       be successfully modeled and predicted.

Models
In the past, IEMB has developed and verified mass-transfer-
based  models to predict the evaporative  emissions from
solvent-based indoor coating materials based on Raoul's Law.
However, the emissions from aqueous solutions behave in a
diufferent manner which conforms to Henry's Law.

The  proposed models have the  potential  to  predict the
emissions based on the  product formulation.   A series of
chamber tests will be conducted to evaluate these candidate
models.  For  the purposes of modeling the  evaporative
emissions,  the  surfactant  (ethoxylated nonylphenols) is
considered to be non-volatile.

The Pool Evaporation Models-Two mass transfer source
models, called PI and P2, are proposed for estimation of the
VOC emissions from a liquid pool (or bucket). Model P1 was
found in the literature (Little, J.C.,  1992, "Applying the two-
resistance theory to contaminant volatilization in showers,"
Environ. Sci. Technol,  26, 1341-1349). Both models are
based on Henry's Law and the following expression for mass
transfer for evaporative emissions:

       E =  kr (C -  C)

where  E =  emission factor, mg/m2/h;
    kT = the overall gas-phase mass transfer coefficient, m/h;
    Cs = VOC concentration at air/liquid interface,
    calculated based on Henry's Law, mg/m3; and
    C = VOC concentration in the bulk air, mg/m3.

When the VOC concentration at the interface is considered
constant, there  is  an  explicit  solution for  the  indoor
concentration (model PI).   All  the parameters can be
estimated from  the  properties  of  the  source and  the
environment,  and the model is simple enough to be used in a
spreadsheet. Chamber testing will reveal whether  models
using this simplification predict emissions sufficiently well for
water-based cleaners.

However, when the volume of the cleaner liquid is limited, the
pollutant concentration in the liquid may not hold constant.
For instance,  water evaporation may concentrate the solute.
On the  other hand, fast  emission  of the solute (with large
Henry's Law constant) may result in decreased concentration
in the liquid.  These factors could be important for small or
shallow pools, such as those used in small chamber testing.
Therefore, model P2 modifies PI to  include the effects of
changes  in liquid  concentration.  Model P2  should  be
especially useful  in interpreting data from small chamber
tests, where the  solvent pool  is often small and the VOC
concentration in the liquid may change significantly during the
test period.  P2 consists of three differential equations, which
can be solved numerically.

Film Evaporation Models-TEMB is  evaluating three new
source models for predicting the VOC emissions from water-
based cleaners applied to hard surfaces (i.e., emissions from
the thin film). For the convenience of discussion, the models
will be called Fl, F2, and F3, where F stands for "film."
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                              Page 10

-------
Model Fl is a comprehensive mass transfer model that takes
into consideration VOC emissions from both the wet and dry
films. The term "dry film" here means the thin film of organic
liquid left on the surface due to water evaporation. Models F2
and  F3  are derived from Fl with different degrees  of
simplification. Model F3 does not require the Henry's Law
constant and is simple enough  to  be implemented in  a
spreadsheet.

Model Fl  takes  into  consideration three  mass  transfer
processes:

•   The rate of VOC emissions from the wet film, described
    by Henry's Law and gas-phase molecular diffusion;
•   The  rate of  VOC emissions  from  the "dry"  film,
    described by the simplified vapor barrier (VB) model
    (Guo, Z, et al, 1997 "Predicting the  Emissions  of
    Individual  VOCs   from  Petroleum-Based   Indoor
    Coatings," Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 32, No. 2,
    pp. 231-237); and
•   The rate of dry film formation due to water evaporation,
    described by a model similar to the VB model.  This mass
    transfer process affects the VOC  emission rates from
    both the wet and dry films.

Model F2 is a simplified version of model Fl. Since the first-
order decay rate constant, k, is inversely proportional to the
film thickness (Clausen, P. A., 1993, "Emission  of volatile
and semivolatile organic compounds from water-borne paints
- the effect of the film thickness," Indoor Air 3, 269-275) and
the dry  film  is  very thin, k  is  usually very large. The
simplifying assumption is, therefore, that the VOC emission
from the dry film is an instantaneous process.

Model F3 is derived from model F2 by assuming that:
    The  wet emission is insignificant compared  to the dry
    emission; and
•   Water evaporation roughly follows the first-order decay
    pattern.

Information about the product and the environment required
by each  of the  three models  is given in Table  5. All the
parameters are easy to come  by, except the  Henry's Law
constant. There are three  ways to find  the  Henry's Law
constant:
•   Compiled Henry's Law constants in the literature;
    Experimental determination; and
•   Theoretical calculation based on the molecular structure.

Chamber Testing
Three  "bucket" tests will  be  run. In these tests, an open
cylindrical  container of diluted cleaner will be placed in a
small chamber, and emissions measured for about a day. The
purposes of these tests are to:
Table 5. Summary of all parameters included in the three
          film models
Category
Environ-
ment
Pollutant
Test
Product
Parameter
Room volume
Air flow rate
Relative Humidity
Air velocity '
Molecular formula
of VOC
Henry's Law
constant
Vapor pressure 2
Diffusivity in air 3
VOC content in
liquid
Source area
Amount applied
Model
Ff
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Model
F2
X
X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X
Model
F3
X
X
X





X
X
X
    1 used to estimate gas-phase mass transfer coefficients for VOC
     and water.
    2 used to estimate the decay rate constant for dry emissions (k).
    3 used to estimate gas-phase mass transfer coefficient for VOC
•   Determine the overall mass transfer coefficient using
    Cleaner A;
•   Verify  whether  the  PI  and  P2  models  work  for
    butoxyethanol in Cleaner A; and
    Verify the model for other compounds/products, using
    Cleaner B.

Chamber testing will also be conducted to provide  data to
compare to the performance of the film evaporation models.
RH proved difficult to control in initial tests  in the small
chamber, because the control systems and geometry of the
small chamber produced an unrealistically high RH. Because
the  compounds  of interest  are  somewhat  polar and
hydrophillic, humidity  may affect  the emission behavior.
Therefore, this work will  be performed in a large chamber.
(EPA   Contact:    Betsy  Howard,  919-541-7915,
bhoward@engineer.aeerl.  epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                              Page 11

-------
ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTSUSED INHVACSYSTEMS
Biocides or antimicrobial  agents can be used  to manage
biological contamination in HVAC systems as an alternative
to HVAC component replacement. All commercial biocides
and  antimicrobial  products are regulated  and must be
registered  in  compliance   with  the  Federal   Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). IEMB has begun a
study of biocides and antimicrobial agents used in HVAC
systems. The study, which will take place within the next
year, includes:

1)  Determining the efficacy of biocides and antimicrobial
    agents   used  in  HVAC  systems.     This  will be
    accomplished by  surveying commercial biocides and
    antimicrobial products used in HVAC systems; surveying
    the  industry to determine product use and preferences;
    and conducting tests on 10 biocides and antimicrobial
    agents  using cultured  samples  of fungi,  mold, and
    bacteria.
                   2)  Investigating the application effectiveness of biocides
                       and antimicrobial agents used in HVAC systems. This
                       will be accomplished by testing various concentrations
                       (manufacturers' recommended concentration and 50%
                       recommended) of 10 products for 30 and 60 days using
                       dynamic chambers and evaluating the effectiveness on
                       fungi, mold, and bacteria and by testing the impact of
                       organic load to act as a barrier to chemical reaction.
                   3)  Determining the relationship between RHand microbial
                       growth.  The effectiveness of biocides and antimicrobial
                       agents will be tested at RH levels of 60, 85, and 100% of
                       saturation.
                   4)  Determining the  impact of biocides and antimicrobial
                       agents on IAQ.  Microbial emissions will be measured from
                       inoculated  and treated surfaces. (EPA  Contact: Marc
                       Menetrez,   919-541-7981,  mmenetrez@engineer.aeerl.
                       epa.gov
                               SUMMARIES OF RECENT PUBLICA TIONS
This section provides summaries of recent
publications on EPA' s indoor air research.
The source of the publication is listed after
each summary.	
Cost Analysis of Activated Carbon vs.
Photocatalytic Oxidation for Remov-
ing Organic Compounds from Indoor
Air-A  cost  comparison  has  been
conducted of 1 m3/s indoor air cleaners
using granular activated carbon (GAC)
vs. photocatalytic oxidation (PCO) for
treating  a  steady-state  inlet  VOC
concentration  of 0.27  mg/m3.  The
commercial  GAC unit was  costed
assuming  that the inlet VOCs had a
reasonable carbon sorption affinity,
representative of compounds having
four or  more  atoms  (exclusive of
hydrogen). A representative model PCO
unit for  indoor air  application was
designed  and  costed,  using   VOC
oxidation  rate  data  reported in  the
literature for the low inlet concentration
assumed here,  and  using  a typical
illumination  intensity.  The  analysis
shows  that, for the assumptions used
here, the  PCO unit  would  have an
installed  cost more  than  10  times
greater, and an annual cost  almost 7
times greater, than the GAC unit. It
also suggests that PCO costs cannot
likely be reduced by a factor greater
than 2  to 4, solely by improvements in
the PCO  system  configuration and
reductions  in  unit component  costs.
Rather, an improved catalyst having a
higher quantum  efficiency  would be
needed, increasing reaction rates and
reducing  illumination  requirements
relative to the catalysts reported in the
literature. GAC costs  would increase
significantly if the VOCs to be removed
were  lighter and more poorly  sorbed
than assumed in this analysis. Source:
Accepted for publication in J. of the Air
& Waste Management Assoc.  (EPA
Contact: D. Bruce Henschel, 919-541-
4112,  bhenschel@engineer.aeerl.
epa.gov)

Enhanced  Allergic  Responses to
House Dust Mite by Oral Exposure to
Carbaryl   in  J?ate-Epidemiological
studies  have  demonstrated  an
association between use  of carbamate
insecticides, including carbaryl, and
increased incidence of allergic asthma
in farmers.  In this study, the effect of
oral  carbaryl  exposure   on  the
development of allergic  responses to
house   dust   mites   (HDMs)   was
examined  in  female  Brown Norway
rats. Rats were gavaged for two weeks
with  0, 2,  10, or 50 mg/kg/day of
carbaryl. They were sensitized with a
subcutaneous  injection  of HDM in
aluminum hydroxide adjuvant 3 days
afterthe beginning of carbaryl exposure
and challenged with antigen  via  the
trachea one day after the final carbaryl
ingestion.  In 2  days, antigen  specific
cell proliferation in pulmonary lymph
nodes was significantly higher in the 50
mg/kg group than in  controls, while
antigen specific splenocyte proliferation
was decreased in groups dosed with 2,
10, and  50  mg/kg carbaryl. Total
protein and lymphocyte numbers  in
bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid
were  also increased in the  50 mg/kg
group. In 7  days, immune-mediated
pulmonary inflammation (eosinophils),
antigen specific  immunoglobulin (Ig) E
level in serum, and antigen specific IgE
and IgA  levels in  BAL fluid were
significantly elevated in the  50 mg/kg
group.  No  apparent  change  was
observed for lactate dehydrogenase and
eosinophil peroxidase  in  BAL fluid,
while  the number of BAL macrophages
were decreased in groups dosed with 10
and 50 mg/kg carbaryl. This suggests
that   carbaryl   may  cause  systemic
immune suppression, while  enhancing
pulmonary allergic responses to HDM
antigen.   Source:   Toxicological
Sciences; In Press, ToxicolSci. March,
1998  (EPA Contact:  Wumin Dong,
919-541-7808, dong.wumin@epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                                 Page 12

-------
Entrainment by Ligament-Controlled
Effervescent  Atomizer-Produced
Sprays-An innovative spray nozzle for
use with precharged aerosol containers
was developed and evaluated. The new
design allows for the reformulation of
selected  aerosol  consumer  products
using water and air in place of VOC
solvents and hydrocarbon propellents.
This article discusses the entrainmentof
ambient air into  sprays produced by
this effervescent atomizer. Entrainment
data  were  analyzed  using  a model
together with measured momentum rate
data that were collected as part of this
study. The analysis shows that entrain-
ment by sprays produced using  this
type of atomizer is predicted to within
about 35%.  Source: International
Journal of Multiphase Flow, vol. 23,
no.  5,  pp. 865-884,  1997   (EPA
Contact, Kelly W.  Leovic,  919-541-
7717, kleovic@ engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)

Evaluation  of a Test Method  for
Measuring  Indoor Air  Emissions
from Dry-Process  Photocopiers-A.
four-laboratory evaluation of a large
chamber test  method  for measuring
emissions from office equipment was
conducted.  A   single  dry-process
photocopier was shipped to each of the
four laboratories  along with supplies
(i.e.,  toner  and  paper).   Results
demonstrate that the test method was
used  successfully  in the  different
chambers to measure emissions from
the copier.  Differences  in  chamber
design and  construction  appeared to
have had minimal effect on the results
for the VOCs. Percent relative standard
deviation (%RSD) was used to provide
a  simplistic view of interlaboratory
precision. Excluding  problems  with
suspected analytical bias observed from
one of the laboratories, the  precision
was excellent for the VOCs with RSDs
of less than 10% in most cases. Less
precision  was  observed  among  the
laboratories  for  aldehydes/ketones
(RSD of 23.2% for formaldehyde). The
precision  for ozone  emission rates
among three of the  laboratories was
excellent  (RSD  of 7.9%).  Source:
Accepted for Publication by the J. Air
&  Waste Management Association,
May  1998  (EPA Contact:  Kelly W.
Leovic,   919-541-7717,   kleovic@
engineer, aeerl.epa.gov)
Evaluation of Low-Emitting Products
for  Use  in  the Indoor Environ-
ment-lEMB   recently   completed
cooperative research on the application
of pollution prevention techniques to
reduce  indoor  air  emissions  from
aerosol consumer products, engineered
wood products, and office equipment.
For  aerosol consumer products,  one
project  focused  on  developing
measurement methods and models that
can be used by manufacturers to better
understand aerosol behavior so  that
more efficacious and less toxic products
can  be developed. A  second project
resulted  in  the  development  and
evaluation  of an  innovative  spray
nozzle for use with pressurized aerosol
containers. The new design will allow
manufacturers to reformulate selected
aerosol consumer products using water
and  air in place of VOC  solvents and
hydrocarbon propellants.  To evaluate
emissions  from   engineered   wood
products, emissions were screened from
four   common   types   of   finished
engineered wood used indoors.  Acid-
catalyzed alkyd-urea  coatings  and
particleboard  were  subsequently
identified  as  the primary  emission
sources. Laboratory testing identified
three types  of fiber  panels as  low-
emitting  alternative  materials:   fiber
panels made  with  medium density
fiberboard and methylene diisocyanate
resin, wheat straw and methylene diiso-
cynate resin, and corrugated cardboard.
Three types  of lower-emitting coatings
were identified: a two component water-
borne polyurethane, an aliphatic urethane
acrylate, and a water-based acrylic. All
three fiber  panels  and  coatings  are
commercially available. A  fourth project
resulted in the development  of  a test
guidance  method  to  measure  office
equipment emissions. The method  was
evaluated by testing four dry-process
photocopiers in one chamber and then
conducting a round-robin  evaluation of
one  copier. Another component of this
project evaluated emissions from printed
circuit  board  laminates.   Source:
Proceedings of the Annual Air &  Waste
Management Association Meeting, San
Diego, June  1998 (EPA Contact: Kelly
W. Leovic,  919-541-7717, kleovic®
engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
Evaluation of Sink Effects on VOCs
from a Latex Paint-The sink strength
of two common indoor materials, carpet
and gypsum board, was evaluated by
environmental chamber tests with four
VOCs:   propylene  glycol,   ethylene
glycol, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)ethanol, and
Texanol. These oxygenated compounds
represent the major VOCs emitted from
a  latex  paint.  Each  chamber  test
included two phases. Phase 1 was the
dosing/ sorption period during which
sink materials (pieces  of carpet  and
gypsum board samples) were exposed
to the four VOCs. The sink strength of
each material tested was characterized
by the amount of the VOCs adsorbed or
absorbed. Phase 2  was the purging/
desorption period  during  which  the
chambers with the dosed sink materials
were flushed  with  purified air. The
remission rates of the adsorbed VOCs
from the sinks were reflected by the
amount of the VOCs  being  flushed.
Phase 1 results indicated that the sink
strength for the four target compounds
is  more than  1 order-of-magnitude
higher  than  that   for  other VOCs
previously tested by EPA. The  high
sink strength  reflected the unusually
high  sorption capacity of common
indoor materials for the four VOCs.
Phase 2 results showed that remission
was an extremely slow process. If all
the VOCs adsorbed were remittable, it
would take  more  than  a  year  to
completely flush out the VOCs from the
sink  materials  tested.   The   long
remission process can result in chronic
and low level exposure to the VOCs
after painting  the  interior walls  and
surfaces.  Source:  Accepted   for
Publication in the J. of the Air & Waste
Management  Association  (EPA
Contact: John C. S. Chang, 919-541-
3747, jchang@engineer.aeerl.epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                                 Page 13

-------
Increased Immune and Inflammatory
Responses  to Dust Mite Antigen in
Rats Exposed to 5 ppm AY^-Immune
hypersensitivity to RDM is a frequent
cause  of  respiratory  allergy.  The
objective of this study was to determine
whether exposure to NO2,  a common
indoor air pollutant, modulates immune
responses  to  HDM  and  influences
immune-mediated lung disease. Brown
Norway rats were immunized ip with
100   (jg semipurified  antigen  and
Bordetella  pertussis  adjuvant   and
challenged  2  weeks  later with  an
intratracheal  injection  of 50 (jg  of a
crude antigen preparation. Exposure to
5  ppm  NO2  for  3 hours  after  both
immunization and challenge procedures
resulted in significantly higher levels of
antigen-specific serum IgE, local IgA,
IgG, and IgE antibody than air controls,
and increased numbers of inflammatory
cells in the lungs. Lymphocyte respons-
iveness  to  antigen in the  spleen and
MLN was  also significantly higher in
NO2-exposed animals. These data show
that exposure to a common air pollutant
can   upregulate   specific  immune
responses  and  subsequent  immune-
mediated   pulmonary  inflammation.
Source: Fundam. Appl. Toxicol.  31. 65-
70 (EPA  Contact:   Mary  Jane  E.
Selgrade,   919-541-2657,   selgrade.
maryjane@epa.gov)
Indoor Air  Emissions from  Office
Equipment: Test Method Development
and  Pollution  Prevention   Oppor-
tunities-EPA  and  RTI  conducted
cooperative research to identify pollution
prevention   approaches  for  reducing
emissions from office equipment.  The
project included: 1) forming a group of
technical advisors;    2) preparing  a
literature review on the operation of, and
emissions from, office equipment as well
as  pollution  prevention opportunities;
3)   developing  and   evaluating  an
Emissions Testing Guidance Document
for Dry-Process Photocopy Machines;
and 4) identifying and evaluating poll-
ution prevention options.  Because no
standard test method exists to measure
emissions from office equipment (e.g.,
ozone,   VOCs,   aldehydes/  ketones,
inorganic gases,  and particles), it  is
difficult to compare data from different
studies.  Thus, the focus of this project
was the development and evaluation of a
large chamber test method for measuring
emissions from dry-process photocopiers.
The goal is to apply the method to better
understand    emissions  from  office
equipment and to develop lower emitting
machines. The test method was evaluated
in two  phases.   Phase I was a single
laboratory evaluation of  the method at
RTI using  four mid-range dry-process
photocopiers.  Phase I results  indicated
that the test method provided acceptable
performance for characterizing emissions,
adequately   identified  differences  in
emissions between  machines  both in
compounds emitted  and  their  emission
rates, and was capable of measuring both
intra- and  inter-machine variability in
emissions.  Phase II was a four-labor-
atory  round-robin evaluation  of the
method. A single dry-process photocopier
was  shipped to  each  of  the four
laboratories  along  with  supplies (i.e.,
toner and  paper).   Phase II  results
demonstrate that the method was used
successfully in the different chambers to
measure emissions and that differences in
chamber  design   and   construction
appeared to have had minimal effect.
Source: EPA Report, "Indoor Air Emis-
sions  from  Office  Equipment: Test
Method  Development   and   Pollution
Prevention Opportunities," EPA-600/R-
98-080 (EPA Contact: Kelly W. Leovic,
919-541-7717, kleovic@engineer.aeerl.
epa.gov)
Indoor Emissions from Conversion
Varnishes-Conversion varnishes are
two-component,   acid-catalyzed
varnishes that are commonly used to
finish  cabinets. They are valued for
their water-  and stain-resistance,  as
well as their appearance. They  have
been found, however, to  contribute to
indoor  emissions  of   organic
compounds.  For this project,  three
commercially   available   conversion
varnish systems were selected. An EPA
Method 24 analysis was performed to
determine total volatile content, and a
sodium sulfite titration  method was
used to determine uncombined (free)
formaldehyde  content of the varnish
components. The resin component was
also analyzed by GC/MS (EPA Method
311 with an  MS  detector) to identify
individual   organic   compounds.
Dynamic small chamber tests were then
performed  to  identify and quantify
emissions   following application  to
coupons of  typical  kitchen cabinet
wood  substrates,  during  both curing
and   ageing.   Because   conversion
varnishes cure by chemical reaction, the
compounds emitted  during curing and
ageing are not necessarily the same as
those  in the  formulation. Results  of
small chamber tests showed that the
amount of formaldehyde  emitted from
these coatings was 2.3 to  8.1 times the
amount of free formaldehyde applied in
the coatings. A long-term test showed a
formaldehyde  emission  rate  of 0.17
mg/m2/h after  115  days.  Source:
Accepted for Publication in the J. of the
Air & Waste Management Association
(EPA Contact: Elizabeth  M. Howard,
919-541-7915,  bhoward@engineer.
aeerl.epa.gov)
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                                  Page 14

-------
Ligament-Controlled  Effervescent
Atomization-The operating principles
and performance of a new type of spray
nozzle are  presented.  This  nozzle,
termed   a  "ligament-controlled
effervescent atomizer," was developed
to   allow  consumer   product
manufacturers to replace VOC solvents
with water and hydrocarbon propellants
with air,  while meeting the following
criteria: that the spray mean drop size
remain below 70 (jm, that the atomizing
air consumption be less than 0.009, and
that  atomizer  performance   be
uncompromised  by  the  increase in
surface tension   or  by  changes in
viscosity. The current atomizer differs
from  previous  effervescent  designs
through inclusion of a porous  disc
located immediately  upstream of the
nozzle exit orifice. The purpose of this
disc is to  control  the  diameter of
ligaments  formed at  the injector exit
place.  Atomizer  performance  is
reported in terms of the spray Sauter
mean diameter, with drop size data
analyzed using a model developed from
first principles. The model describes the
spray formation process as the breakup
of  individual cylindrical  ligaments
subject to a gas stream.  Ligament
diameter   is    estimated  from
manufacturer supplied pore size data
for the porous disc. The model correctly
predicts the experimentally observed
relationship  between  Sauter  mean
diameter  and air-to-liquid ratio  by
mass, liquid surface tension, and liquid
viscosity.   Source: Atomization  and
Sprays, vol. 7,  pp. 383-406,  1997
(EPA Contact: Kelly W. Leovic, 919-
541-7717,  kleovic@ engineer.aeerl.
epa.gov)
Transfer   of  Allergic   Airway
Responses   with   Serum   and
Lymphocytes from Rats Sensitized to
Dust Mite-HDM antigen is one of the
most common allegens associated with
extrinsic asthma. In a model of allergic
lung disease, Brown Norway rats were
sensitized to RDM  with alum  and
Bordetella  pertusis   adjuvants  to
produce high levels of IgE antibody and
experience  bronchoconstriction,
increased airway hyperresponsiveness
(AHR)   to  acetylcholine   ,   and
pulmonary inflammation after antigen
challenge. The purpose of this study
was  to  determine   whether   these
asthmatic   symptoms  could   be
transferred from sensitized animals to
naive recipients via humoral or cellular
factors.  Syngenetic recipient rats were
injected with either HDM or bovine
serum albumin  from lymph nodes of
sensitized or control rats, respectively.
Other  groups  received  a  tail-vein
injection of serum from either HDM-
sensitized  or  control  rats.  Antigen
challenge in rats injected with sensitized
cells caused increases in pulmonary
inflammation and  in  AHR, but  no
changes  in  immediate   broncho-
constriction as compared with control
recipients. Antigen challenge  in serum
recipients  resulted   in  immediate
bronchoconstriction but had no effect
on  AHR  or on pulmonary inflam-
mation.  These data show that immune-
mediated lung inflammation and AHR
are  promoted   by  antigen-specific
lymphocytes,   whereas  immediate
allergic  responses are caused by serum
factors.  Source: Respir.  Crit.  Care
Med.   1998;   157:000-000.  (EPA
Contact: Daniel L. Costa,  919-541-
2532, costa.daniel@ epa.gov)
           GLOSSARY

AHR - Airway Hyperresponsiveness
BAL - Bronchoalveolar Lavage
CAS - Chemical Abstract Service
CPU - Central Processing Unit
FIFRA - Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
    and Rodenticide Act
GAC - Granular Activated Carbon
GC/MS - Gas Chromatography/Mass
    Spectrometry
G/E - Glass/epoxy
G/L - Glass/lignin
HDM - House Dust Mite
HVAC - Heating, Ventilating, and Air-
    Conditioning
IAQ - Indoor Air Quality
IEMB - Indoor Environment Manage-
    ment Branch
MCS - Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
NAICS - North American  Industrial
    Classification System
NRMRL - National Risk Management
    Research Laboratory
PC - Personal Computer
PCO - Photocatalytic Oxidation
P/P - Paper/Phenol
P/RP - Paper/Reformulated Phenolic
QA - Quality Assurance
RH- Relative Humidity
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
RTI - Research Triangle Institute
TVOC - Total Volatile Organic Com-
    pound
VB - Vapor Barrier
VOC - Volatile Organic Compound
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                                                                Page 15

-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
MD-54
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300

EPA/600/N-98/003, Fall/Winter 1998
   FIRST CLASS MAIL
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
          EPA
    PERMIT No. G-35
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Inside IAQ, Fall/Winter 1998
                  Page 16

-------