EPA/600/P-95/002Fa
August 1997
VOLUME I - GENERAL FACTORS
EXPOSURE FACTORS HANDBOOK
Update to Exposure Factors Handbook
EPA/600/8-89/043 -May 1989
Office of Research and Development
National Center for Environmental Assessment
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
-------
EFH
DISCLAIMER
This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
ii August 1997
-------
EFH
CONTENTS
Page No.
VOLUME I
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1. PURPOSE 1-1
1.2. INTENDED AUDIENCE 1-1
1.3. BACKGROUND 1-1
1.3.1. Selection of Studies forthe Handbook 1-1
1.3.2. Using the Handbook in an Exposure Assessment 1-3
1.3.3. Approach Used to Develop Recommendations for Exposure Factors 1-4
1.3.4. Characterizing Variability 1-5
1.4. GENERAL EQUATION FOR CALCULATING DOSE 1-11
1.5. RESEARCH NEEDS 1-14
1.6. ORGANIZATION 1-15
1.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1 1-16
APPENDIX 1A 1A-1
2. VARIABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY 2-1
2.1. VARIABILITY VERSUS UNCERTAINTY 2-1
2.2. TYPES OF VARIABILITY 2-2
2.3. CONFRONTING VARIABILITY 2-3
2.4. CONCERN ABOUT UNCERTAINTY 2-3
2.5. TYPES OF UNCERTAINTY AND REDUCING UNCERTAINTY 2-4
2.6. ANALYZING VARIABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY 2-4
2.7. PRESENTING RESULTS OF VARIABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS 2-6
2.8. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 2 2-7
3. DRINKING WATER INTAKE 3-1
3.1. BACKGROUND 3-1
3.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES ON DRINKING WATER INTAKE 3-1
3.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES ON DRINKING WATER INTAKE 3-9
3.4. PREGNANT AND LACTATING WOMEN 3-17
3.5. HIGH ACTIVITY LEVELS/HOT CLIMATES 3-20
3.6. RECOMMENDATIONS 3-23
3.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3 3-30
4. SOIL INGESTION AND PICA 4-1
4.1. BACKGROUND 4-1
4.2. KEY STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE AMONG CHILDREN 4-1
4.3. RELEVANT STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE AMONG CHILDREN 4-11
4.4. SOIL INTAKE AMONG ADULTS 4-16
4.5. PREVALENCE OF PICA 4-17
4.6. DELIBERATE SOIL INGESTION AMONG CHILDREN 4-18
4.7. RECOMMENDATIONS 4-20
4.8. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4 4-25
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 HI
-------
EFH
CONTENTS (continued)
Page No.
5. INHALATION ROUTE 5-1
5.1. EXPOSURE EQUATION FOR INHALATION 5-1
5.2. INHALATION RATE 5-1
5.2.1. Background 5-1
5.2.2. Key Inhalation Rate Studies 5-3
5.2.3. Relevant Inhalation Rate Studies 5-16
5.2.4. Recommendations 5-22
5.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5 5-27
APPENDIX 5A 5A-1
6. DERMAL ROUTE 6-1
6.1. EQUATION FOR DERMAL DOSE 6-1
6.2. SURFACE AREA 6-2
6.2.1. Background 6-2
6.2.2. Measurement Techniques 6-2
6.2.3. Key Body Surface Area Studies 6-2
6.2.4. Relevant Surface Area Studies 6-4
6.2.5. Application of Body Surface Area Data 6-4
6.3. SOIL ADHERENCE TO SKIN 6-6
6.3.1. Background 6-6
6.3.2. Key Soil Adherence to Skin Studies 6-6
6.3.3. Relevant Soil Adherence to Skin Studies 6-6
6.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 6-8
6.4.1. Body Surface Area 6-8
6.4.2. Soil Adherence to Skin 6-8
6.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 6 6-10
APPENDIX 6A 6A-1
7. BODY WEIGHT STUDIES 7-1
7.1. KEY BODY WEIGHT STUDY 7-1
7.2. RELEVANT BODY WEIGHT STUDIES 7-4
7.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 7-10
7.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 7 7-11
8. LIFETIME 8-1
8.1. KEY STUD YON LIFETIME 8-1
8.2. RECOMMENDATIONS 8-1
8.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 8 8-1
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
iv August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES
Page No.
VOLUME I
Table 1-1.
Table 1-2.
Table 1-3.
Table 1 A-1.
Table 2-1.
Table 2-2.
Table 2-3.
Table 3-1.
Table 3-2.
Table 3-3.
Table 3-4.
Table 3-5.
Table 3-6.
Table 3-7.
Table 3-8.
Table 3-9.
Table 3-10.
Table 3-11.
Table 3-12.
Table 3-13.
Table 3-14.
Table 3-15.
Table 3-16.
Table 3-17.
Table 3-18.
Table 3-19.
Table 3-20.
Table 3-21.
Table 3-22.
Table 3-23.
Table 3-24.
Table 3-25.
Table 3-26.
Table 3-27.
Considerations Used to Rate Confidence in Recommended Values 1-6
Summary of Exposure Factor Recommendations and Confidence Ratings 1-7
Characterization of Variability in Exposure Factors 1-10
Procedures for Modifying IRIS Risk Values for Non-standard Populations 1A-4
Four Strategies for Confronting Variability 2-3
Three Types of Uncertainty and Associated Sources and Examples 2-5
Approaches to Quantitative Analysis of Uncertainty 2-6
Daily Total Tapwater Intake Distribution for Canadians, by Age Group
(approx. 0.20 L increments, both sexes, combined seasons) 3-2
Average Daily Tapwater Intake of Canadians (expressed as milliliters per kilogram
body weight) 3-3
Average Daily Total Tapwater Intake of Canadians, by Age and Season (L/day) 3-3
Average Daily Total Tapwater Intake of Canadians as a Function of Level of Physical
Activity at Work and in Spare Time (16 years and older, combined seasons, L/day) 3-3
Average Daily Tapwater Intake by Canadians, Apportioned Among Various Beverages
(both sexes, by age, combined seasons, L/day) 3-4
Total Tapwater Intake (mL/day) for Both Sexes Combined 3-5
Total Tapwater Intake (mL/kg-day) for Both Sexes Combined 3-6
Summary of Tapwater Intake by Age 3-7
Total Tapwater Intake (as percent of total water intake) by Broad Age Category 3-7
General Dietary Sources of Tapwater for Both Sexes 3-8
Summary Statistics for Best-Fit Lognormal Distributions for Water Intake Rates 3-9
Estimated Quantiles and Means for Total Tapwater Intake Rates (mL/day) 3-10
Assumed Tapwater Content of Beverages 3-10
Intake of Total Liquid, Total Tapwater, and Various Beverages (L/day) 3-11
Summary of Total Liquid and Total Tapwater Intake for Males and Females (L/day) 3-12
Measured Fluid Intakes (mL/day) 3-13
Intake Rates of Total Fluids and Total Tapwater by Age Group 3-14
Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Beverages and Tapwater by Age 3-14
Average Total Tapwater Intake Rate by Sex, Age, and Geographic Area 3-15
Frequency Distribution of Total Tapwater Intake Rates 3-15
Mean Per Capita Drinking Water Intake Based on USD A, CSFII Data From 1989-91
(mL/day) 3-16
Number of Respondents that Consumed Tapwater at a Specified Daily Frequency 3-18
Number of Respondents that Consumed Juice Reconstituted with Tapwater
at a Specified Daily Frequency 3-19
Total Fluid Intake of Women 15-49 Years Old 3-20
Total Tapwater Intake of Women 15-49 Years Old 3-21
Total Fluid (mL/Day) Derived from Various Dietary Sources by
Women Aged 15-49 Years 3-21
Water Intake at Various Activity Levels (L/hr) 3-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
ix
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 3-28. Planning Factors for Individual Tapwater Consumption 3-23
Table 3-29. Drinking Water Intake Surveys 3-24
Table 3-30. Summary of Recommended Drinking Water Intake Rates 3-26
Table 3-31. Total Tapwater Consumption Rates From Key Studies 3-26
Table 3-32. Daily Tapwater Intake Rates From Relevant Studies 3-26
Table 3-33. Key Study Tapwater Intake Rates for Children 3-27
Table 3-34. Summary of Intake Rates for Children in Relevant Studies 3-27
Table 3-35. Confidence in Tapwater Intake Recommendations 3-29
Table 4-1. Estimated Daily Soil Ingestion Based on Aluminum, Silicon, and Titanium Concentrations . . . 4-2
Table 4-2. Calculated Soil Ingestion by Nursery School Children 4-3
Table 4-3. Calculated Soil Ingestion by Hospitalized, Bedridden Children 4-3
Table 4-4. Mean and Standard Deviation Percentage Recovery of Eight Tracer Elements 4-5
Table 4-5. Soil and Dust Ingestion Estimates for Children Aged 1-4 Years 4-5
Table 4-6. Average Daily Soil Ingestion Values Based on Aluminum, Silicon, and Titanium as
Tracer Elements 4-6
Table 4-7. Geometric Mean (GM) and Standard Deviation (GSD) LTM Values for Children at
Daycare Centers and Campgrounds 4-7
Table 4-8. Estimated Geometric Mean LTM Values of Children Attending Daycare Centers
According to Age, Weather Category, and Sampling Period 4-8
Table 4-9. Distribution of Average (Mean) Daily Soil Ingestion Estimates Per Child for 64
Children (mg/day) 4-9
Table 4-10. Estimated Distribution of Individual Mean Daily Soil Ingestion Based on Data for 64
Subjects Projected Over 365 Days 4-10
Table 4-11. Estimates of Soil Ingestion for Children 4-12
Table 4-12. Estimated Soil Ingestion Rate Summary Statistics and Parameters for Distributions
Using Binder et al. (1986) Data with Actual Fecal Weights 4-13
Table 4-13. Tukey's Multiple Comparison of Mean Log Tracer Recovery in Adults Ingesting Known
Quantities of Soil 4-14
Table 4-14. Positive/Negative Error (bias) in Soil Ingestion Estimates in the Calabrese et al. (1989)
Mass-balance Study: Effect on Mean Soil Ingestion Estimate (mg/day) 4-15
Table4-15. Soil Ingestion Rates for Assessment Purposes 4-16
Table 4-16. Estimates of Soil Ingestion for Adults 4-17
Table 4-17. Adult Daily Soil Ingestion by Week and Tracer Element After Subtracting Food and
Capsule Ingestion, Based on Median Amherst Soil Concentrations: Means and
Medians Over Subjects (mg) 4-18
Table 4-18. Daily Soil Ingestion Estimation in a Soil-Pica Child by Tracer and by Week (mg/day) 4-19
Table 4-19. Ratios of Soil, Dust, and Residual Fecal Samples in the Pica Child 4-19
Table 4-20. Soil Intake Studies 4-22
Table 4-21. Confidence in Soil Intake Recommendation 4-24
Table 4-22. Summary of Estimates of Soil Ingestion By Children 4-25
Table 4-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Soil Ingestion 4-25
Page
x
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 5-1. Calibration and Field Protocols for Self-Monitoring of Activities Grouped by Subject
Panels 5-4
Table 5-2. Subject Panel Inhalation Rates by Mean VR, Upper Percentiles, and Self-Estimated
Breathing Rates 5-5
Table 5-3. Distribution of Predicted IR by Location and Activity Levels for Elementary and
High School Students 5-6
Table 5-4. Average Hours Spent Per Day in a Given Location and Activity Level for Elementary (EL)
and High School (HS) Students 5-6
Table 5-5. Distribution Patterns of Daily Inhalation Rates for Elementary (EL) and High School (HS)
Students Grouped by Activity Level 5-7
Table 5-6. Summary of Average Inhalation Rates (m3/hr) by Age Group and Activity Levels
for Laboratory Protocols 5-8
Table 5-7. Summary of Average Inhalation Rates (m3/hr) by Age Group and Activity Levels
in Field Protocols 5-9
Table 5-8. Distributions of Individual and Group Inhalation/Ventilation Rate for Outdoor Workers .... 5-10
Table 5-9. Individual Mean Inhalation Rate (m3/hr) by Self-Estimated Breathing Rate or Job Activity
Category for Outdoor Workers 5-10
Table 5-10. Comparisons of Estimated Basal Metabolic Rates (BMR) with Average Food-Energy
Intakes for Individuals Sampled in the 1977-78 NFCS 5-12
Table 5-11. Daily Inhalation Rates Calculated from Food-Energy Intakes 5-13
Table 5-12. Daily Inhalation Rates Obtained from the Ratios of Total Energy Expenditure to
Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) 5-14
Table 5-13. Daily Inhalation Rates Based on Time-Activity Survey 5-15
Table 5-14. Inhalation Rates for Short-Term Exposures 5-16
Table 5-15. Daily Inhalation Rates Estimated From Daily Activities 5-17
Table 5-16. Summary of Human Inhalation Rates for Men, Women, and Children by
Activity Level (m3/hour) 5-18
Table 5-17. Activity Pattern Data Aggregated for Three Microenvironments by Activity Level
for all Age Groups 5-18
Table 5-18. Summary of Daily Inhalation Rates Grouped by Age and Activity Level 5-18
Table 5-19. Distribution Pattern of Predicted VR and EVR (equivalent ventilation rate)
for 20 Outdoor Workers 5-20
Table 5-20. Distribution Pattern of Inhalation Rate by Location and Activity Type for 20 Outdoor
Workers 5-21
Table 5-21. Actual Inhalation Rates Measured at Four Ventilation Levels 5-22
Table 5-22. Confidence in Inhalation Rate Recommendations 5-23
Table 5-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Inhalation 5-24
Table 5-24. Summary of Inhalation Rate Studies 5-25
Table 5-25. Summary of Adult Inhalation Rates for Short-Term Exposure Studies 5-26
Table 5-26. Summary of Children's (18 years old or less) Inhalation Rates for Long-Term
Exposure Studies 5-26
Table 5-27. Summary of Children's Inhalation Rates for Short-Term Exposure Studies 5-26
Table 5A-1. Mean Minute Ventilation (VE, L/min) by Group and Activity for Laboratory Protocols 5A-3
Table 5A-2. Mean Minute Ventilation (VE, L/min) by Group and Activity for Field Protocols 5A-3
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xi
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 5A-3. Characteristics of Individual Subjects: Anthropometric Data, Job Categories,
Calibration Results 5A-4
Table 5A-4. Statistics of the Age/Gender Cohorts Used to Develop Regression Equations for
Predicting Basal Metabolic Rates (BMR) 5A-4
Table 5A-5. Selected Ventilation Values During Different Activity Levels Obtained From
Various Literature Sources 5A-5
Table 5A-6. Estimated Minute Ventilation Associated with Activity Level for Average Male Adult 5A-6
Table 5A-7. Minute Ventilation Ranges by Age, Sex, and Activity Level 5A-7
Table 6-1. Summary of Equation Parameters for Calculating Adult Body Surface Area 6-12
Table 6-2. Surface Area of Adult Males in Square Meters 6-13
Table 6-3. Surface Area of Adult Females in Square Meters 6-13
Table 6-4. Surface Area of Body Part for Adults (m2) 6-14
Table 6-5. Percentage of Total Body Surface Area by Part for Adults 6-14
Table 6-6. Total Body Surface Area of Male Children in Square Meters 6-15
Table 6-7. Total Body Surface Area of Female Children in Square Meters 6-15
Table 6-8. Percentage of Total Body Surface Area by Body Part for Children 6-16
Table 6-9. Descriptive Statistics for Surface Area/Body Weight (SA/WB) Ratios (m2/kg) 6-17
Table 6-10. Statistical Results for Total Body Surface Area Distributions (m2) 6-17
Table 6-11. Summary of Field Studies 6-20
Table 6-12. Geometric Mean and Geometric Standard Deviations of Soil Adherence by Activity
and Body Region 6-22
Table 6-13. Summary of Surface Area Studies 6-24
Table 6-14. Summary of Recommended Values for Skin Surface Area 6-25
Table 6-15. Confidence in Body Surface Area Measurement Recommendations 6-25
Table 6-16. Recommendations for Adult Body Surface Area 6-26
Table 6-17. Summary of Soil Adherence Studies 6-26
Table 6-18. Confidence in Soil Adherence to Skin Recommendations 6-27
Table 6-A1. Estimated Parameter Values for Different Age Intervals 6-A5
Table 6-A2. Summary of Surface Area Parameter Values for the DuBois and
DuBois Model 6-A6
Table 7-1. Smoothed Percentiles of Weight (in kg) by Sex and Age: Statistics from NCHS and Data
from Pels Research Institute, Birth to 36 Months 7-1
Table 7-2. Body Weights of Adults (kilograms) 7-4
Table 7-3. Body Weights of Children (kilograms) 7-4
Table 7-4. Weight in Kilograms for Males 18-74 Years of Age—Number Examined, Mean, Standard
Deviation, and Selected Percentiles, by Race and Age: United States, 1976-1980 7-5
Table 7-5. Weight in Kilograms for Females 18-74 Years of Age—Number Examined, Mean, Standard
Deviation, and Selected Percentiles, by Race and Age: United States, 1976-1980 7-6
Table 7-6. Weight in Kilograms for Males 6 Months-19 Years of Age—Number Examined, Mean,
Standard Deviation, and Selected Percentiles, by Sex and Age: United States, 1976-1980 ... 7-7
Table 7-7. Weight in Kilograms for Females 6 Months-19 Years of Age—Number Examined, Mean, Standard
Deviation, and Selected Percentiles, by Sex and Age: United States, 1976-1980 7-8
Page
xii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 7-8. Statistics for Probability Plot Regression Analyses Female's Body Weights 6 Months to
20 Years of Age 7-9
Table 7-9. Statistics for Probability Plot Regression Analyses Male's Body Weights 6 Months to
20 Years of Age 7-10
Table 7-10. Summary of Body Weight Studies 7-11
Table 7-11. Summary of Recommended Values for Body Weight 7-11
Table 7-12. Confidence in Body Weight Recommendations 7-12
Table 8-1. Expectation of Life at Birth, 1970to 1993, and Projections, 1995 to 2010 8-2
Table 8-2. Expectation of Life by Race, Sex, and Age: 1992 8-3
Table 8-3. Confidence in Lifetime Expectancy Recommendations 8-5
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 jci'i'i
-------
EFH
LIST OF FIGURES
Page No.
VOLUME I
Figure 1-1. Schematic of Dose and Exposure: Oral Route 1-13
Figure 1-2. Road Map to Exposure Factor Recommendations 1-17
Figure 6-1. Schematic of Dose and Exposure: Dermal Route 6-12
Figure 6-2. SA/BW Distributions for Infants, Adults, and All Ages Combined 6-18
Figure 6-3. Surface Area Frequency Distribution: Men and Women 6-19
Figure 7-1. Weight by Age Percentiles for Boys Aged Birth-36 Months 7-2
Figure 7-2. Weight by Age Percentiles for Girls Aged Birth-36 Months 7-3
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 xxxi
-------
EPA/600/P-95/002Fa
August 1997
VOLUME II - FOOD INGESTION FACTORS
EXPOSURE FACTORS HANDBOOK
Update to Exposure Factors Handbook
EPA/600/8-89/043 - May 1989
Office of Research and Development
National Center for Environmental Assessment
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
-------
EFH
DISCLAIMER
This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
ii August 1997
-------
EFH
CONTENTS (continued)
Page No.
VOLUME II
9. INTAKE OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES 9-1
9.1. BACKGROUND 9-1
9.2. INTAKE STUDIES 9-2
9.2.1. U. S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide Food Consumption Survey and
Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals 9-2
9.2.2. Key Fruits and Vegetables Intake Study Based on the USDA CSFII 9-2
9.2.3. Relevant Fruits and Vegetables Intake Studies 9-4
9.2.4. Relevant Fruits and Vegetables Serving Size Study Based on the USDA NFCS 9-6
9.2.5. Conversion Between As Consumed and Dry Weight Intake Rates 9-7
9.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 9-7
9.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 9 9-8
APPENDIX 9A 9A-1
APPENDIX 9B 9B-1
10. INTAKE OF FISH AND SHELLFISH 10-1
10.1. BACKGROUND 10-1
10.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES 10-2
10.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES 10-6
10.4. KEY RECREATIONAL (MARINE FISH STUDIES) 10-8
10.5. RELEVANT RECREATIONAL MARINE STUDIES 10-10
10.6. KEY FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL STUDIES 10-12
10.7. RELEVANT FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL STUDIES 10-18
10.8. NATIVE AMERICAN FRESHWATER STUDIES 10-20
10.9. OTHER FACTORS 10-24
10.10. RECOMMENDATIONS 10-25
10.10.1. Recommendations - General Population 10-25
10.10.2. Recommendations - Recreational Marine Anglers 10-26
10.10.3. Recommendations - Recreational Freshwater Anglers 10-26
10.10.4. Recommendations - Native American Subsistence Populations 10-26
10.11. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 10 10-27
APPENDIX 10A 10A-1
APPENDIX 10B 10B-1
APPENDIX IOC 10C-1
11. INTAKE OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS 11-1
11.1. INTAKE STUDIES 11-1
11.1.1. U. S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide Food Consumption Survey and
Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals 11-1
11.1.2. Key Meat and Dairy Products Intake Study Based on the CSFII 11-2
11.1.3. Relevant Meat and Dairy Products Intake Studies 11-3
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 v
-------
EFH
CONTENTS (continued)
Page No.
11.2. FAT CONTENT OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS 11-6
11.3. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE RATES 11-7
11.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 11-7
11.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 11 11-7
APPENDIX 11A 11A-1
12. INTAKE OF GRAINPRODUCTS 12-1
12.1. INTAKE STUDIES 12-1
12.1.1. U. S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide Food Consumption Survey and
Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals 12-1
12.1.2. Key Grain Products Intake Studies Based on the CSFII 12-2
12.1.3. Relevant Grain Products Intake Studies 12-2
12.1.4. Key Gram Products Serving Size Study Based on the USDA NFCS 12-4
12.2. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE RATES 12-4
12.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 12-5
12.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 12 12-5
APPENDIX 12A 12A-1
13. INTAKE RATES FOR VARIOUS HOME PRODUCED FOOD ITEMS 13-1
13.1. BACKGROUND 13-1
13.2. METHODS 13-2
13.3. RESULTS 13-7
13.4. ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS 13-9
13.5. RECOMMENDATIONS 13-10
13.6. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 13 13-10
APPENDIX 13A 13A-1
14. BREAST MILK INTAKE 14-1
14.1. BACKGROUND 14-1
14.2. KEY STUDIES ONBREAST MILK INTAKE 14-1
14.3. RELEVANT STUDIES ONBREAST MILK INTAKE 14-4
14.4. KEY STUDIES ON LIPID CONTENT AND FAT INTAKE FROM BREAST MILK 14-5
14.5. OTHERFACTORS 14-6
14.6. RECOMMENDATIONS 14-7
14.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 14 14-8
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
vi August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
VOLUME II
Table 9-1. Sub-category Codes and Definitions Used in the CSFII 1989-91 Analysis 9-9
Table 9-2. Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations for 1989-91 CSFII Data Used in
Analysis of Food Intake 9-10
Table 9-3. Per Capita Intake of Total Fruits (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-11
Table 9-4. Per Capita Intake of Total Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-12
Table 9-5. Per Capita Intake of Individual Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-13
Table 9-6. Per Capita Intake of USD A Categories of Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) ... 9-19
Table 9-7. Per Capita Intake of Exposed Fruits (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-20
Table 9-8. Per Capita Intake of Protected Fruits (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-21
Table 9-9. Per Capita Intake of Exposed Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-22
Table 9-10. Per Capita Intake of Protected Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-23
Table 9-11. Per Capita Intake of Root Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) 9-24
Table 9-12. Mean Daily Intake of Fruits and Vegetables Per Individual in a Day for USDA 1977-78,
87-88, 89-91, 94, and 95 Surveys 9-25
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All
Sex/Age/Demographic Subgroups 9-26
Table 9-14. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978) 9-33
Table 9-15. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex an Age (1987-1988) 9-33
Table 9-16. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978) 9-34
Table 9-17. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1987-1988) 9-34
Table 9-18. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1994 and 1995) 9-35
Table 9-19. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1994 and 1995) 9-35
Table 9-20. Mean Per Capita Intake of Fats and Oils (g/day as consumed) in a Day by Sex and
Age (1994 and 1995) 9-36
Table 9-21. Mean and Standard Error for the Per Capita Daily Intake of Food Class and Subclass by
Region (g/day as consumed) 9-36
Table 9-22. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Food Subclasses Per Capita by Age
(g/day as consumed) 9-37
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xiii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 9-23. Consumption of Foods (g dry weight/day) for Different Age Groups and Estimated
Lifetime Average Daily Food Intakes for a US Citizen (averaged across sex) Calculated
from the FDA Diet Data 9-37
Table 9-24. Mean Daily Intake of Foods (grams) Based on the Nutrition Canada Dietary Survey 9-38
Table 9-25. Per Capita Consumption of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in 1991 9-38
Table 9-26. Quantity (as consumed) of Fruits and Vegetables Consumed Per Eating Occasion and the
Percentage of Individuals Using These Foods in Three Days 9-39
Table 9-27. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits and Vegetables Expressed as Percentages of
Edible Portions 9-40
Table 9-28. Summary of Fruit and Vegetable Intake Studies 9-43
Table 9-29. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of Fruits and Vegetables 9-44
Table 9-30. Confidence in Fruit and Vegetable Intake Recommendations 9-45
Table 9A-1. Fraction of Grain and Meat Mixture Intake Represented by
Various Food Items/Groups 9A-3
Table 9 B. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data 9 B-3
Table 10-1. Total Fish Consumption by Demographic Variables 10-30
Table 10-2. Mean and 95th Percentile of Fish Consumption (g/day) by Sex and Age 10-31
Table 10-3. Percent Distribution of Total Fish Consumption for Females by Age 10-32
Table 10-4. Percent Distribution of Total Fish Consumption for Males by Age 10-32
Table 10-5. Mean Total Fish Consumption by Species 10-33
Table 10-6. Best Fits of Lognormal Distributions Using the NonLinear Optimization (NLO) Method . . . 10-33
Table 10-7. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (g/day) by Habitat and Fish Type for the
U.S. Population (Uncooked Fish Weight) 10-34
Table 10-8. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) by Habitat
for Consumers Only (Uncooked Fish Weight) 10-35
Table 10-9. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (mg/kg-day) by Habitat and Fish Type for U.S. Population
(Uncooked Fish Weight) 10-36
Table 10-10. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) by Habitat for
Consumers Only (Uncooked Fish Weight) 10-37
Table 10-11. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (g/day) by Habitat and Fish Type for the U.S.
Population (Cooked Fish Weight - As Consumed)) 10-38
Table 10-12. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (g/day) by Habitat for Consumers Only
(Cooked Fish Weight - As Consumed)) 10-39
Table 10-13. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for the
U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-40
Table 10-14. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for the
U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Marine) 10-40
Table 10-15. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for the
U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed (All Fish) 10-41
Table 10-16. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (grams/day) for the
U. S. Population Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed 10-41
Table 10-17. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for the
U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-42
Page
xiv
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 10-18. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for the
U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Marine) 10-42
Table 10-19. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for the
U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed (All Fish) 10-43
Table 10-20. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for the
U. S. Population Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed 10-43
Table 10-21. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-44
Table 10-22. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Marine) 10-44
Table 10-23. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed (All Fish) 10-45
Table 10-24. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed 10-45
Table 10-25. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-46
Table 10-26. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed (Marine) 10-46
Table 10-27. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed (All Fish) 10-47
Table 10-28. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed 10-47
Table 10-29. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-48
Table 10-30. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (Marine) 10-48
Table 10-31. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (All Fish) 10-49
Table 10-32. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
the U.S. Population Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - Uncooked Fish Weight 10-49
Table 10-33. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for the U.S. Population
by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-50
Table 10-34. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (Marine) 10-50
Table 10-35. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (All Fish) 10-51
Table 10-36. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for the U.S. Population
Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat-Uncooked Fish Weight 10-51
Table 10-37. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for Consumers
Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-52
Table 10-38. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (Marine) 10-52
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
JCV
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 10-39. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (All Fish) 10-53
Table 10-40. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) for
Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - Uncooked Fish Weight 10-53
Table 10-41. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for Consumers
Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (Freshwater and Estuarine) 10-54
Table 10-42. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (Marine) 10-54
Table 10-43. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight (All Fish) 10-55
Table 10-44. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) for
Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - Uncooked Fish Weight 10-55
Table 10-45. Distribution of Quantity of Fish Consumed (in grams) Per Eating Occasion, by
Age and Sex 10-56
Table 10-46. Mean Fish Intake in a Day, by Sex and Age 10-56
Table 10-47. Percent of Respondents That Responded Yes, No, or Don't Know to Eating
Seafood in 1 Month (including shellfish, eels, or squid) 10-57
Table 10-48. Number of Respondents Reporting Consumption of a Specified Number of
Servings of Seafood in 1 Month 10-58
Table 10-49. Number of Respondents Reporting Monthly Consumption of Seafood That Was
Purchased or Caught by Someone They Knew 10-59
Table 10-50. Estimated Number of Participants in Marine Recreational Fishing by State
and Subregion 10-60
Table 10-51. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and B1) by Marine Recreational
Fishermen, by Wave and Subregion 10-61
Table 10-52. Average Daily Intake (g/day) of Marine Finfish, by Region and Coastal Status 10-62
Table 10-53. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl) by Marine
Recreational Fishermen by Species Group and Subregion, Atlantic and Gulf 10-62
Table 10-54. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl) by Marine
Recreational Fishermen by Species Group and Subregion, Pacific 10-63
Table 10-55. Median Intake Rates Based on Demographic Data of Sport Fishermen and
Their Family/Living Group 10-63
Table 10-56. Cumulative Distribution of Total Fish/Shellfish Consumption by Surveyed
Sport Fishermen in the Metropolitan Los Angeles Area 10-64
Table 10-57. Catch Information for Primary Fish Species Kept by Sport Fishermen (n=1059) 10-64
Table 10-58. Percent of Fishing Frequency During the Summer and Fall Seasons in Commencement
Bay, Washington 10-64
Table 10-59. Selected Percentile Consumption Estimates (g/day) for the Survey and Total Angler
Populations Based on the Reanalysis of the Puffer et al. (1981) and Pierce et al. (1981)
Data 10-65
Table 10-60. Means and Standard Deviations of Selected Characteristics by Subpopulation
Groups in Everglades, Florida 10-65
Table 10-61. Mean Fish Intake Among Individuals Who Eat Fish and Reside in Households
With Recreational Fish Consumption 10-66
Page
xvi
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 10-62. Comparison of Seven-Day Recall and Estimated Seasonal Frequency for Fish
Consumption 10-66
Table 10-63. Distribution of Usual Fish Intake Among Survey Main Respondents Who
Fished and Consumed Recreationally Caught Fish 10-66
Table 10-64. Estimates of Fish Intake Rates of Licensed Sport Anglers in Maine During the
1989-1990 Ice Fishing or 1990 Open-Water Seasons 10-67
Table 10-65. Analysis of Fish Consumption by Ethnic Groups for "All Waters" (g/day) 10-67
Table 10-66. Total Consumption of Freshwater Fish Caught by All Survey Respondents
During the 1990 Season 10-68
Table 10-67. Mean Sport-Fish Consumption by Demographic Variables, Michigan Sport
Anglers Fish Consumption Study, 1991-1992 10-68
Table 10-68. Distribution of Fish Intake Rates (from all sources and from sport-caught sources)
For 1992 Lake Ontano Anglers 10-69
Table 10-69. Mean Annual Fish Consumption (g/day) for Lake Ontario Anglers, 1992, by
Sociodemographic Characteristics 10-69
Table 10-70. Percentile and Mean Intake Rates for Wisconsin Sport Anglers 10-70
Table 10-71. Sociodemographic Characteristics of Respondents 10-70
Table 10-72. Number of Grams Per Day of Fish Consumed by All Adult Respondents
(Consumers and Non-consumers Combined) - Throughout the Year 10-71
Table 10-73. Fish Intake Throughout the Year by Sex, Age, and Location by All Adult Respondents .... 10-71
Table 10-74. Children's Fish Consumption Rates - Throughout Year 10-72
Table 10-75. Sociodemographic Factors and Recent Fish Consumption 10-72
Table 10-76. Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period for All Respondents .... 10-74
Table 10-77. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period for All
Respondents and Consumers Only 10-74
Table 10-78. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period and
Selected Characteristics for All Respondents (Mohawk, N=97; Control, N=154) 10-75
Table 10-79. Percentage of Individuals Using Various Cooking Methods at Specified Frequencies 10-75
Table 10-80. Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species 10-76
Table 10-81. Recommendations - General Population 10-79
Table 10-82. Recommendations - General Population - Fish Serving Size 10-79
Table 10-83. Recommendations - Recreational Marine Anglers 10-79
Table 10-84. Recommendations - Freshwater Anglers 10-79
Table 10-85. Recommendations - Native American Subsistence Populations 10-80
Table 10-86. Summary of Fish Intake Studies 10-81
Table 10-87. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for General Population 10-85
Table 10-88. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for Recreational Marine Anglers 10-86
Table 10-89. Confidence in Recommendations for Fish Consumption - Recreational Freshwater 10-87
Table 10-90. Confidence in Recommendations for Native American Subsistence Fish Consumption .... 10-88
Table 10B-1. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Residence Size 10B-3
Table 10B-2. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Age 10B-3
Table 10B-3. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Ethnicity 10B-4
Table 10B-4. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Education 10B-4
Table 10B-5. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Income 10B-5
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xvii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 10B-6. Percent of Fish Meals Where Fat was Trimmed or Skin was Removed, by Demographic VarihBRaS
Table 10B-7. Method of Cooking of Most Common Species Kept by Sportfishermen 10B-7
Table 10B-8. Adult Consumption of Fish Parts 10B-7
Table 10C-1. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates of Fish Consumption U.S. Population - Mean
Consumption by Species Within Habitat - As Consumed Fish 10C-3
Table 10C-2. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates of Fish Consumption U.S. Population - Mean
Consumption by Species Within Habitat - Uncooked Fish 10C-4
Table 10C-3. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates of Fish Consumption As Consumed Fish - Mean
Consumption by Species Within Habitat - U.S. Population 10C-5
Table 10C-4. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates of Fish Consumption Uncooked Fish - Mean
Consumption by Species Within Habitat - U.S. Population 10C-6
Table 11-1. Per Capita Intake of Total Meats (g/kg-day as consumed)) 11-9
Table 11-2. Per Capita Intake of Total Dairy Products (g/kg-day as consumed)) 11-10
Table 11-3. Per Capita Intake of Beef (g/kg-day as consumed)) 11-11
Table 11-4. Per Capita Intake of Pork (g/kg-day as consumed) 11-12
Table 11-5. Per Capita Intake of Poultry (g/kg-day as consumed) 11-13
Table 11-6. Per Capita Intake of Game (g/kg-day as consumed)) 11-14
Table 11-7. Per Capita Intake of Eggs (g/kg-day as consumed) 11-15
Table 11-8. Main Daily Intake of Meat and Dairy Products Per Individual in a Day for USDA
1977-78, 87-88, 89-91, 94, and 95 Surveys 11-16
Table 11-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates for Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products (g/kg-day as consumed)
Based on All Sex/Age/Demographic Subgroups 11-17
Table 11-10. Mean Meat Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)
for 1977-1978 11-18
Table 11-11. Mean Meat Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)
for 1987-1988 11-18
Table 11-12. Mean Dairy Product Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as
consumed) for 1977-1978 11-19
Table 11-13. Mean Dairy Product Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)
for 1987-1988 11-19
Table 11-14. Mean Meat Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)
for 1994 and 1995 11-20
Table 11-15. Mean Dairy Product Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age
(g/day as consumed) for 1994 and 1995 11-20
Table 11-16. Mean and Standard Error for the Dietary Intake of Food Sub Classes Per Capita by Age
(g/day as consumed) 11-21
Table 11-17. Mean and Standard Error for the Per Capita Daily Intake of Food Class and
Sub Class by Region (g/day as consumed) 11-21
Table 11-18. Consumption of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products for Different Age Groups (averaged
across sex), and Estimated Lifetime Average Intakes for 70 Kg Adult Citizens
Calculated from the FDA Diet Data 11-22
Page
xviii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 11-19. Per Capita Consumption of Meat and Poultry in 1991 11-22
Table 11-20. Per Capita Consumption of Dairy Products in 1991 11-23
Table 11-21. Adult Mean Daily Intake (as consumed) of Meat and Poultry Grouped by Region and
Gender 11-24
Table 11-22. Amount (as consumed) of Meat Consumed by Adults Grouped by Frequency of Eatings . . . 11-24
Table 11-23. Quantity (as consumed) of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products Consumed Per
Eating Occasion and the Percentage of Individuals Using These Foods in Three Days 11 -25
Table 11-24. Percentage Lipid Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grams of Edible
Portions) of Selected Meat and Dairy Products 11 -26
Table 11-25. Fat Content of Meat Products 11-27
Table 11-26. Fat Intake, Contribution of Various Food Groups to Fat Intake, and Percentage of the
Population in Various Meat Eater Groups of the U.S. Population 11-28
Table 11-27. Mean Total Daily Dietary Fat Intake (g/day) Grouped by Age and Gender 11-28
Table 11-28. Percentage Mean Moisture Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grams of
Edible Portions) 11-29
Table 11-29. Summary of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Intake Studies 11-30
Table 11-30. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of Meat and Dairy
Products and Serving Size 11-31
Table 11-31. Confidence in Meats and Dairy Products Intake Recommendations 11-32
Table 12-1. Per Capita Intake of Total Grains Including Mixtures (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-6
Table 12-2. Per Capita Intake of Breads (g/kg-day as consumed)) 12-7
Table 12-3. Per Capita Intake of Sweets (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-8
Table 12-4. Per Capita Intake of Snacks Containing Grain (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-9
Table 12-5. Per Capita Intake of Breakfast Foods (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-10
Table 12-6. Per Capita Intake of Pasta (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-11
Table 12-7. Per Capita Intake of Cooked Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-12
Table 12-8. Per Capita Intake of Rice (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-13
Table 12-9. Per Capita Intake of Ready-to-Eat Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed)) 12-14
Table 12-10. Per Capita Intake of Baby Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-15
Table 12-11. Mean Daily Intakes of Grains Per Individual in a Day for USDA 1977-78,
87-88, 89-91, 94, and 95 Surveys 12-16
Table 12-12. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates for Grains Based on All Sex/Age/Demographic
Subgroups 12-16
Table 12-13. Mean Grain Intake Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)
for 1977-1978 12-17
Table 12-14. Mean Grain Intakes Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)
for 1987-1988 12-17
Table 12-15. Mean Grain Intakes Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)
for 1994 and 1995 12-18
Table 12-16. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Per Capita Intake of Grains, by Age
(g/day as consumed) 12-18
Table 12-17. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Grains, by Region (g/day as
consumed) 12-19
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xix
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 12-18. Consumption of Grains (g dry weight/day) for Different Age Groups and Estimated
Lifetime Average Daily Food Intakes for a U.S. Citizen (averaged across sex) Calculated
from the FDA Diet Data 12-19
Table 12-19. Per Capita Consumption of Flour and Cereal Products in 1991 12-20
Table 12-20. Quantity (as consumed) of Grain Products Consumed Per Eating Occasion and the
Percentage of Individuals Using These Foods in Three Days 12-20
Table 12-21. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Grains Expressed as Percentages of Edible Portions ... 12-21
Table 12-22. Summary of Grain Intake Studies 12-22
Table 12-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of Grain Products 12-22
Table 12-24. Confidence in Grain Products Intake Recommendation 12-23
Table 12A-1. Food Codes and Definitions Used in the Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII
Grains Data 12A-3
Table 13-1. 1986 Vegetable Gardening by Demographic Factors 13-1
Table 13-2. Percentage of Gardening Households Growing Different Vegetables in 1986 13-1
Table 13-3. Sub-category Codes and Definitions 13-4
Table 13-4. Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations (Individuals) for NFCS Data
Used in Analysis of Food Intake 13-6
Table 13-5. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Meats 13-8
Table 13-6. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Fruits 13-8
Table 13-7. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Vegetables 13-9
Table 13-8. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined 13-12
Table 13-9. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - Northeast 13-13
Table 13-10. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - Midwest 13-13
Table 13-11. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - South 13-14
Table 13-12. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - West 13-14
Table 13-13. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined .... 13-15
Table 13-14. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - Northeast 13-16
Table 13-15. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - Midwest 13-16
Table 13-16. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - South 13-17
Table 13-17. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - West 13-17
Table 13-18. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined 13-18
Table 13-19. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - Northeast 13-19
Table 13-20. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - Midwest 13-19
Table 13-21. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - South 13-20
Table 13-22. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - West 13-20
Table 13-23. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined 13-21
Table 13-24. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - Northeast 13-22
Table 13-25. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - Midwest 13-22
Table 13-26. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - South 13-23
Table 13-27. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - West 13-23
Table 13-28. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - All Regions 13-24
Table 13-29. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - Northeast 13-25
Table 13-30. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - Midwest 13-25
Page
xx
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 13-31. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - South 13-26
Table 13-32. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - West 13-26
Table 13-33. Seasonally Adjusted Consumer Only Homegrown Intake (g/kg-day) 13-27
Table 13-34. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Apples (g/kg-day) 13-28
Table 13-35. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Asparagus (g/kg-day) 13-29
Table 13-36. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Beef (g/kg-day) 13-30
Table 13-37. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Beets (g/kg-day) 13-31
Table 13-38. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Broccoli (g/kg-day) 13-32
Table 13-39. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Cabbage (g/kg-day) 13-33
Table 13-40. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Carrots (g/kg-day) 13-34
Table 13-41. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Com (g/kg-day) 13-35
Table 13-42. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Cucumbers (g/kg-day) 13-36
Table 13-43. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Eggs (g/kg-day) 13-37
Table 13-44. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Game (g/kg-day) 13-38
Table 13-45. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Lettuce (g/kg-day) 13-39
Table 13-46. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Lima Beans (g/kg-day) 13-40
Table 13-47. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Okra (g/kg-day) 13-41
Table 13-48. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Onions (g/kg-day) 13-42
Table 13-49. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Other Berries (g/kg-day) 13-43
Table 13-50. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Peaches (g/kg-day) 13-44
Table 13-51. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Pears (g/kg-day) 13-45
Table 13-52. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Peas (g/kg-day) 13-46
Table 13-53. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Peppers (g/kg-day) 13-47
Table 13-54. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Pork (g/kg-day) 13-48
Table 13-55. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Poultry (g/kg-day) 13-49
Table 13-56. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Pumpkins (g/kg-day) 13-50
Table 13-57. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Snap Beans (g/kg-day) 13-51
Table 13-58. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Strawberries (g/kg-day) 13-52
Table 13-59. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Tomatoes (g/kg-day) 13-53
Table 13-60. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown White Potatoes (g/kg-day) 13-54
Table 13-61. ConsumerOnly Intake of Homegrown Exposed Fruit (g/kg-day) 13-55
Table 13-62. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Protected Fruits (g/kg-day) 13-56
Table 13-63. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Exposed Vegetables (g/kg-day) 13-57
Table 13-64. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Protected Vegetables (g/kg-day) 13-58
Table 13-65. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Root Vegetables (g/kg-day) 13-59
Table 13-66. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Dark Green Vegetables (g/kg-day) 13-60
Table 13-67. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Deep Yellow Vegetables (g/kg-day) 13-61
Table 13-68. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Other Vegetables (g/kg-day) 13-62
Table 13-69. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Citrus (g/kg-day) 13-63
Table 13-70. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Other Fruit (g/kg-day) 13-64
Table 13-71. Fraction of Food Intake that is Home Produced 13-65
Table 13-72. Confidence in Homegrown Food Consumption Recommendations 13-67
Table 13 A-1. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data 13A-3
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xxi
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 14-1. Daily Intakes of Breast Milk 14-2
Table 14-2. Breast Milk Intake for Infants Aged 1 to 6 Months 14-2
Table 14-3. Breast Milk Intake Among Exclusively Breast-fed Infants During the First 4 Months
of Life 14-3
Table 14-4. Breat Milk Intake Dunng a 24-Hour Penod 14-3
Table 14-5. Breast Milk Intake Estimated by the DARLING Study 14-4
Table 14-6. Milk Intake for Bottle- and Breast-fed Infants by Age Group 14-4
Table 14-7. Milk Intake for Boys and Girls 14-4
Table 14-8. Intake of Breast Milk and Formula 14-5
Table 14-9. Lipid Content of Human Milk and Estimated Lipid Intake Among Exclusively Breast-fed InfanM-6
Table 14-10. Predicted Lipid Intakes for Breast-fed Infants Under 12Monthsof Age 14-6
Table 14-11. Number of Meals Per Day 14-7
Table 14-12. Percentage of Mothers Breast-feeding Newborn Infants in the Hospital and Infants
at 5 or 6 Months of Age in the United States in 1989, by Ethnic Background and
Selected Demographic Variables 14-10
Table 14-13. Breast Milk Intake Studies 14-11
Table 14-14. Confidence in Breast Milk Intake Recommendations 14-13
Table 14-15. Breast Milk Intake Rates Derived From Key Studies 14-14
Table 14-16. Summary of Recommended Breast Milk and Lipid Intake Rates 14-15
Page
xxii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF FIGURES
Page No.
VOLUME II
Figure 10-1. Seasonal Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990 10-73
Figure 10-2. Peak Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990 10-73
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 xxxi
-------
EPA/600/P-95-002Fa
August 1997
VOLUME III - ACTIVITY FACTORS
EXPOSURE FACTORS HANDBOOK
Update to Exposure Factors Handbook
EPA/600/8-89/043 - May 1989
Office of Research and Development
National Center for Environmental Assessment
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
-------
EFH
DISCLAIMER
This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
ii August 1997
-------
EFH
CONTENTS (continued)
Page No.
VOLUME III
15. ACTIVITY FACTORS 15-1
15.1. ACTIVITY PATTERNS 15-1
15.1.1. Key Activity Pattern Studies 15-1
15.1.2. Relevant Activity Pattern Studies 15-7
15.2. OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY 15-11
15.2.1. Background 15-11
15.2.2. Key Occupational Mobility Studies 15-11
15.3. POPULATION MOBILITY 15-12
15.3.1. Background 15-12
15.3.2. Key Population Mobility Studies 15-13
15.3.3. Relevant Population Mobility Studies 15-15
15.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 15-15
15.4.1. Recommendations for Activity Patterns 15-15
15.4.2. Recommendations: Occupational Mobility 15-17
15.4.3. Recommendations: Population Mobility 15-17
15.4.4. Summary of Recommended Activity Factors 15-18
15.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 15 15-18
APPENDIX ISA 15A-1
APPENDIX 15B 15B-1
16. CONSUMER PRODUCTS 16-1
16.1. BACKGROUND 16-1
16.2. KEY CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE STUDIES 16-1
16.3. RELEVANT CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE STUDY 16-4
16.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 16-5
16.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 16 16-5
APPENDIX 16A 16A-1
17. RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS 17-1
17.1. INTRODUCTION 17-1
17.2. BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS 17-2
17.2.1. Key Volumes of Residence Studies 17-2
17.2.2. Volumes and Surface Areas of Rooms 17-4
17.2.3. Mechanical System Configurations 17-6
17.2.4. Type of Foundation 17-7
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 VH
-------
EFH
CONTENTS (continued)
Page No.
17.3. TRANSPORT RATES 17-8
17.3.1. Background 17-8
17.3.2. Air Exchange Rates 17-10
17.3.3. Infiltration Models 17-12
17.3.4. Deposition and Filtration 17-14
17.3.5. Interzonal Airflows 17-15
17.3.6. Water Uses 17-15
17.3.7. House Dust and Soil 17-19
17.4. SOURCES 17-20
17.4.1. Source Descriptions for Airborne Contaminants 17-20
17.4.2. Source Descriptions for Waterborne Contaminants 17-22
17.4.3. Soil and House Dust Sources 17-22
17.5. ADVANCED CONCEPTS 17-23
17.5.1. Uniform Mixing Assumption 17-23
17.5.2. Reversible Sinks 17-23
17.6 RECOMMENDATIONS 17-23
17.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 17 17-24
GLOSSARY G-l
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
viii August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
VOLUME III
Table 15-1. Time Use Table Locator Guide 15-20
Table 15-2. Mean Time Spent (minutes) Performing Major Activities Grouped by Age, Sex and
Type of Day 15-21
Table 15-3. Mean Time Spent (minutes) in Major Activities Grouped by Type of Day for Five
Different Age Groups 15-22
Table 15-4. Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Average Shower Duration for 2,550 Households ... 15-23
Table 15-5. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by
Total Sample and Gender for the CARB and National Studies (age 18-64 years) 15-24
Table 15-6. Total Mean Time Spent at Three Major Locations Grouped by Total Sample and
Gender for the CARB and National Study (ages 18-64 years) 15-24
Table 15-7. Mean Time Spent at Three Locations for both CARB and National Studies
(ages 12 years and older) 15-25
Table 15-8. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Various Microenvironments Grouped by Total
Population and Gender (12 years and over) in the National and CARB Data 15-26
Table 15-9. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Various Microenvironments by Type of Day for
the California and National Surveys (sample population ages 12 years and older) 15-27
Table 15-10. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Various Microenvironments by Age Groups
for the National and California Surveys 15-28
Table 15-11. Mean Time (minutes/day) Children Spent in Ten Major Activity Categories for All
Respondents 15-30
Page
xxii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 15-12. Mean Time Children Spent in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by Age
and Gender 15-30
Table 15-13. Mean Time Children Spent in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by Seasons
and Regions 15-31
Table 15-14. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Major Location Categories for All Respondents
(minutes/day) 15-31
Table 15-15. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Location Categories Grouped by Age and Gender 15-32
Table 15-16. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Location Categories Grouped by Season and Region .... 15-32
Table 15-17. Mean Time Children Spent in Proximity to Three Potential Exposures Grouped by
All Respondents, Age, and Gender 15-33
Table 15-18. Range of Recommended Defaults for Dermal Exposure Factors 15-33
Table 15-19. Number of Times Taking a Shower at Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of
Respondents 15-34
Table 15-20. Times (minutes) Spent Taking Showers by the Number of Respondents 15-35
Table 15-21. Number of Minutes Spent Taking a Shower (minutes/shower) 15-36
Table 15-22. Time (minutes) Spent in the Shower Room Immediately After Showering by the
Number of Respondents 15-37
Table 15-23. Number of Minutes Spent in the Shower Room Immediately After Showering
(minutes/shower) 15-38
Table 15-24. Number of Baths Given or Taken in One Day by Number of Respondents 15-39
Table 15-25. Total Time Spent Taking or Giving aBath by the Number of Respondents 15-40
Table 15-26. Number of Minutes Spent Giving and Taking the Bath(s) (minutes/bath) 15-41
Table 15-27. Time Spent in the Bathroom Immediately After the Bath(s) by the Number
of Respondents 15-42
Table 15-28. Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom Immediately After the Bath(s)
(minutes/bath) 15-43
Table 15-29. Total Time Spent Altogether in the Shower or Bathtub by the Number of Respondents .... 15-44
Table 15-30. Total Number of Minutes Spent Altogether in the Shower or Bathtub (minutes/bath) 15-45
Table 15-31. Time Spent in the Bathroom Immediately Following a Shower or Bath by the
Number of Respondents 15-46
Table 15-32. Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom Immediately Following a Shower or
Bath (minutes/bath) 15-47
Table 15-33. Range of Number of Times Washing the Hands at Specified Daily Frequencies by
the Number of Respondents 15-48
Table 15-34. Number of Minutes Spent (at home) Working or Being Near Food While Fried,
Grilled, or Barbequed (minutes/day) 15-49
Table 15-35. Number of Minutes Spent (at home) Working or Being Near Open Flames
Including Barbeque Flames (minutes/day) 15-50
Table 15-36. Number of Minutes Spent Working or Being Near Excessive Dust in the Air
(minutes/day) 15-51
Table 15-37. Range of the Number of Times an Automobile or Motor Vehicle was Started in
a Garage or Carport at Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of Respondents 15-52
Table 15-38. Range of the Number of Times Motor Vehicle Was Started with Garage Door
Closed at Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of Respondents 15-53
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xxiii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 15-39. Number of Minutes Spent at a Gas Station or Auto Repair Shop (minutes/day) 15-54
Table 15-40. Number of Minutes Spent at Home While the Windows Were Left Open
(minutes/day) 15-55
Table 15-41. Number of Minutes the Outside Door Was Left Open While at Home (minutes/day) 15-56
Table 15-42. Number of Times an Outside Door Was Opened in the Home at Specified Daily
Frequencies by the Number of Respondents 15-57
Table 15-43. Number of Minutes Spent Running, Walking, or Standing Alongside a Road with
Heavy Traffic (minutes/day) 15-58
Table 15-44. Number of Minutes Spent in a Car, Van, Truck, or Bus in Heavy Traffic (minutes/day) .... 15-59
Table 15-45. Numberof Minutes Spent in a Parking Garage or Indoor Parking Lot (minutes/day) 15-60
Table 15-46. Number of Minutes Spent Walking Outside to a Car in the Driveway or Outside
Parking Areas (minutes/day) 15-61
Table 15-47. Number of Minutes Spent Running or Walking Outside Other Than to the Car
(minutes/day) 15-62
Table 15-48. Number of Hours Spent Working for Pay (hours/week) 15-63
Table 15-49. Number of Hours Spent Working for Pay Between 6PM and 6AM (hours/week) 15-64
Table 15-50. Number of Hours Worked in a Week That Was Outdoors (hours/week) 15-65
Table 15-51. Number of Times Floors Were Swept or Vacuumed at Specified Frequencies by the
Number of Respondents 15-66
Table 15-52. Number of Days Since the Floor Area in the Home Was Swept or Vacuumed by the
Number of Respondents 15-67
Table 15-53. Number of Loads of Laundry Washed in a Washing Machine at Home by the
Number of Respondents 15-68
Table 15-54. Number of Times Using a Dishwasher at Specified Frequencies by the Number of
Respondents 15-69
Table 15-55. Number of Times Washing Dishes by Hand at Specified Frequencies by the Number
of Respondents 15-70
Table 15-56. Number of Times for Washing Clothes in a Washing Machine at Specified Frequencies
by the Number of Respondents 15-71
Table 15-57. Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Sand or Gravel in a Day by the Number of
Respondents 15-72
Table 15-58. Number of Minutes Spent Playing in Sand or Gravel (minutes/day) 15-73
Table 15-59. Number of Minutes Spent Playing in Outdoors on Sand, Gravel, Dirt, or Grass When
Fill Dirt Was Present by the Number of Respondents 15-74
Table 15-60. Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Sand, Gravel, Dirt, or Grass When Fill Dirt
Was Present (minutes/day) 15-75
Table 15-61. Range of the Time Spent Working in a Garden or Other Circumstances in a Month
by the Number of Respondents 15-76
Table 15-62. Number of Hours Spent Working with Soil in a Garden or Other Circumstances
Working (hours/month) 15-77
Table 15-63. Range of Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Grass in a Day by the Number of
Respondents 15-78
Table 15-64. Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Grass (minutes/day) 15-79
Page
xxiv
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 15-65. Number of Times Swimming in a Month in Freshwater Swimming Pool by the
Number of Respondents 15-80
Table 15-66. Range of the Average Amount of Time Actually Spent in the Water by Swimmers by
the Number of Respondents 15-82
Table 15-67. Number of Minutes Spent Swimming in a Month in Freshwater Swimming Pool
(minutes/month) 15-83
Table 15-68. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Working in a Main Job 15-84
Table 15-69. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Food Preparation 15-85
Table 15-70. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Food Cleanup 15-86
Table 15-71. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Cleaning House 15-87
Table 15-72. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Cleaning 15-88
Table 15-73. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Clothes Care 15-89
Table 15-74. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Car Repair/Maintenance .. 15-90
Table 15-75. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Repairs 15-91
Table 15-76. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Plant Care 15-92
Table 15-77. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Animal Care 15-93
Table 15-78. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Household Work ... 15-94
Table 15-79. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Indoor Playing 15-95
Table 15-80. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Play ing 15-96
Table 15-81. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent for Car Repair Services 15-97
Table 15-82. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Washing, etc 15-98
Table 15-83. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Sleeping/Napping 15-99
Table 15-84. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Attending
Full Time School 15-100
Table 15-85. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Active Sports 15-101
Table 15-86. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Recreation 15-102
Table 15-87. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Exercise 15-103
Table 15-88. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Food Preparation 15-104
Table 15-89. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Doing Dishes/Laundry .... 15-105
Table 15-90. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Housekeeping 15-106
Table 15-91. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Bathing 15-107
Table 15-92. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Yardwork/Maintenance .. 15-108
Table 15-93. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Sports/Exercise 15-109
Table 15-94. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Eating or Drinking 15-110
Table 15-95. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at an
Auto Repair Shop/Gas Station 15-111
Table 15-96. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a
Gym/Health Club 15-112
Table 15-97. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at the
Laundromat 15-113
Table 15-98. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at Work
(non-specific) 15-114
Table 15-99. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at the
Dry Cleaners 15-115
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xxv
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 15-100. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a
Bar/Nightclub/Bowling Alley 15-116
Table 15-101. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a Restaurant 15-117
Table 15-102. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at School 15-118
Table 15-103. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a
Plant/Factory /Warehouse 15-119
Table 15-104. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors on a
Sidewalk, Street, or in the Neighborhood 15-120
Table 15-105. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors in a
Parking Lot 15-121
Table 15-106. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a
Service Station or Gas Station 15-122
Table 15-107. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a
Construction Site 15-123
Table 15-108. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors on School
Grounds/Playground 15-124
Table 15-109. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a
Park/Golf Course 15-125
Table 15-110. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a
Pool/River/Lake 15-126
Table 15-111. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a
Restaurant/Picnic 15-127
Table 15-112. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a Farm 15-128
Table 15-113. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Kitchen 15-129
Table 15-114. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom 15-130
Table 15-115. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Bedroom ... 15-131
Table 15-116. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Garage 15-132
Table 15-117. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in the Basement 15-133
Table 15-118. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the
Utility Room or Laundry Room 15-134
Table 15-119. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Outdoor
Pool or Spa 15-135
Table 15-120. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Yard or
Other Areas Outside the House 15-136
Table 15-121. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling in a Car 15-137
Table 15-122. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling in a Truck
(Pick-up/Van) 15-138
Table 15-123. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a Motorcycle, Moped,
or Scooter 15-139
Table 15-124. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling in Other Trucks . . 15-140
Table 15-125. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a Bus 15-141
Table 15-126. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Walking 15-142
Table 15-127. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a
Bicycle/Skateboard/Rollerskate 15-143
Page
xxvi
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 15-128. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Waiting on a Bus, Train
etc., Stop 15-144
Table 15-129. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a Train/Subway/Rapid
Transit 15-145
Table 15-130. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on an Airplane ... 15-146
Table 15-131. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors in a Residence
(all rooms) 15-147
Table 15-132. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors (outside the
residence) 15-148
Table 15-133. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling Inside
a Vehicle 15-149
Table 15-134. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors Near a Vehicle ... 15-150
Table 15-135. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors Other Than
Near a Residence or Vehicle Such as Parks, Golf Courses, or Farms 15-151
Table 15-136. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in an Office or Factory 15-152
Table 15-137. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Malls, Grocery Stores,
or Other Stores 15-153
Table 15-138. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Schools, Churches,
Hospitals, and Public Buildings 15-154
Table 15-139. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Bars/Nightclubs,
Bowling Alleys, and Restaurants 15-155
Table 15-140. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Outdoors
Such as Auto Repair Shops, Laundromats, Gyms, and at Work (non-specific) 15-156
Table 15-141. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent with Smokers Present 15-157
Table 15-142. Range of Time (minutes) Spent Smoking Based on the Number of Respondents 15-158
Table 15-143. Number of Minutes Spent Smoking (minutes/day) 15-160
Table 15-144. Range of Time Spent Smoking Cigars or Pipe Tobacco by the Number of Respondents . . . 15-161
Table 15-145. Number of Minutes Spent Smoking Cigars or Pipe Tobacco (minutes/day) 15-162
Table 15-146. Range of Numbers of Cigarettes Smoked Based on the Number of Respondents 15-163
Table 15-147. Range of Numbers of Cigarettes Smoked by Other People Based on Number
of Respondents 15-164
Table 15-148. Range of Numbers of Cigarettes Smoked While at Home Based on the
Number of Respondents 15-165
Table 15-149. Differences in Time Use (hours/week) Grouped by Sex, Employment Status,
and Marital Status for the Surveys Conducted in 1965 and 1975 15-166
Table 15-150. Time Use (hours/week) Differences by Age for the Surveys Conducted in 1965
and 1975 15-167
Table 15-151. Time Use (hours/week) Differences by Education for the Surveys Conducted in 1965
and 1975 15-168
Table 15-152. Time Use (hours/week) Differences by Race for the Surveys Conducted in 1965
and 1975 15-169
Table 15-153. Mean Time Spent (hours/week) in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by Regions ... 15-169
Table 15-154. Total Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by
Type of Day 15-170
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xxvii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 15-155. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Ten Major Activity Categories During Four Waves
of Interviews 15-170
Table 15-156. Mean Time Spent (hours/week) in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by Gender ... 15-171
Table 15-157. Percent Responses of Children's "Play" (activities) Locations in Maryvale, Arizona 15-171
Table 15-158. Occupational Tenure of Employed Individuals by Age and Sex 15-172
Table 15-159. Occupational Tenure for Employed Individuals Grouped by Sex and Race 15-172
Table 15-160. Occupational Tenure for Employed Individuals Grouped by Sex and Employment
Status 15-172
Table 15-161. Occupational Tenure of Employed Individuals Grouped by Major Occupational
Groups and Age 15-173
Table 15-162. Voluntary Occupational Mobility Rates for Workers Age 16 Years and Older 15-173
Table 15-163. Values and Their Standard Errors for Average Total Residence Time, T, for
Each Group in Survey 15-174
Table 15-164. Total Residence Time, t (years), Corresponding to Selected Values of R(t) by
Housing Category 15-174
Table 15-165. Residence Time of Owner/Renter Occupied Units 15-175
Table 15-166. Percent of Householders Living in Houses for Specified Ranges of Time 15-175
Table 15-167. Descriptive Statistics for Residential Occupancy Period 15-176
Table 15-168. Descriptive Statistics for Both Genders by Current Age 15-176
Table 15-169. Summary of Residence Time of Recent Home Buyers (1993) 15-177
Table 15-170. Tenure in Previous Home (Percentage Distribution) 15-177
Table 15-171. Number of Miles Moved (Percentage Distribution) 15-177
Table 15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations 15-178
Table 15-173. Confidence in Occupational Mobility Recommendations 15-185
Table 15-174. Recommendations for Population Mobility 15-188
Table 15-175. Confidence in Population Mobility Recommendations 15-188
Table 15-176. Summary of Recommended Values for Activity Factors 15-187
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries 15A-3
Table 15A-2. Differences in Average Time Spent in Different Activities Between California
and National Studies (minutes per day for age 18-64 years) 15A-17
Table 15A-3. Time Spent in Various Microenvironments 15A-19
Table 15A-4. Major Time Use Activity Categories 15A-21
Table 15A-5. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) for 87 Activities Grouped by Day of the Week 15A-22
Table 15A-6. Weighted Mean Hours Per Week by Gender: 87 Activities and 10 Subtotals 15A-24
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure 15A-27
Table 15B-1. Annual Geographical Mobility Rates, by Type of Movement for Selected
1-Year Periods: 1960-1992 (numbers in thousands) 15B-3
Table 15B-2. Mobility of the Resident Population by State: 1980 15B-4
Table 16-1. Consumer Products Found in the Typical U.S. Household 16-7
Table 16-2. Frequency of Use for Household Solvent Products (users-only) 16-10
Table 16-3. Exposure Time of Use for Household Solvent Products (users-only) 16-11
Table 16-4. Amount of Products Used for Household Solvent Products (users-only) 16-12
Table 16-5. Time Exposed After Duration of Use for Household Solvent Products (users-only) 16-13
Table 16-6. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for Adhesive Removers 16-14
Page
xxviii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 16-7. Adhesive Remover Usage by Gender 16-14
Table 16-8. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for Spray Paint 16-15
Table 16-9. Spray Paint Usage by Gender 16-15
Table 16-10. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for Paint Removers/Strippers 16-16
Table 16-11. Paint Stripper Usage by Gender 16-16
Table 16-12. Total Exposure Time of Performing Task and Product Type Used by Task for
Household Cleaning Products 16-17
Table 16-13. Percentile Rankings for Total Exposure Time in Performing Household Tasks 16-19
Table 16-14. Mean Percentile Rankings for Frequency of Performing Household Tasks 16-20
Table 16-15. Mean and Percentile Rankings for Exposure Time Per Event of Performing
Household Tasks 16-21
Table 16-16. Total Exposure Time for Ten Product Groups Most Frequently Used for
Household Cleaning 16-21
Table 16-17. Total Exposure Time of Painting Activity of Interior Painters (hours) 16-22
Table 16-18. Exposure Time of Interior Painting Activity/Occasion (hours) and Frequency of
Occasions Spent Painting Per Year 16-22
Table 16-19. Amount of Paint Used by Interior Painters 16-22
Table 16-20. Number of Respondents Using Cologne, Perfume, Aftershave or Other
Fragrances at Specified Daily Frequencies 16-23
Table 16-21. Number of Respondents Using Any Aerosol Spray Product for Personal Care
Item Such as Deodorant or Hair Spray at Specified Daily Frequencies 16-24
Table 16-22. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Being Near Freshly Applied
Paints (minutes/day) 16-25
Table 16-23. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Household
Cleaning Agents Such as Scouring Powders or Ammonia (minutes/day) 16-26
Table 16-24. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities (at home or elsewhere) Working with
or Near Floorwax, Furniture Wax or Shoe Polish (minutes/day) 16-27
Table 16-25. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Being Near Glue 16-28
Table 16-26. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Solvents, Fumes
or Strong Smelling Chemicals (minutes/day) 16-29
Table 16-27. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Stain or Spot
Removers (minutes/day) 16-30
Table 16-28. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Gasoline or
Diesel-powered Equipment, Besides Automobiles (minutes/day) 16-31
Table 16-29. Number of Minutes Spent Using Any Microwave Oven (minutes/day) 16-32
Table 16-30. Number of Respondents Using a Humidifier at Home 16-33
Table 16-31. Number of Respondents Indicating that Pesticides Were Applied by the Professional at
Home to Eradicate Insects, Rodents, or Other Pests at Specified Frequencies 16-34
Table 16-32. Number of Respondents Reporting Pesticides Applied by the Consumer at Home to
Eradicate Insects, Rodents, or Other Pests at Specified Frequencies 16-35
Table 16-33. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Pesticides, Including
Bug Sprays or Bug Strips (minutes/day) 16-36
Table 16-34. Amount and Frequency of Use of Various Cosmetic and Baby Products 16-37
Table 16-35. Summary of Consumer Products Use Studies 16-40
Table 16A-1. Volumes Included in 1992 Simmons Study 16A-3
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xxix
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 17-1. Summary of Residential Volume Distributions 17-3
Table 17-2. Average Estimated Volumes of U.S. Residences, by Housing Type and Ownership 17-4
Table 17-3. Residential Volumes in Relation to Household Size and Year of Construction 17-4
Table 17-4. Dimensional Quantities for Residential Rooms 17-5
Table 17-5. Examples of Products and Materials Associated with Floor and Wall Surfaces
in Residences 17-6
Table 17-6. Percent of Residences with Basement, by Census Region and EPA Region 17-8
Table 17-7. Percent of Residences with Certain Foundation Types by Census Region 17-9
Table 17-8. States Associated with EPA Regions and Census Regions 17-9
Table 17-9. Summary of Major Projects Providing Air Exchange Measurements in the
PFT Database 17-11
Table 17-10. Summary Statistics for Air Exchange Rates (air changes per hour-ACH), by Region 17-12
Table 17-11. Distributions of Residential Air Exchange Rates by Climate Region and Season 17-13
Table 17-12. Deposition Rates for Indoor Particles 17-15
Table 17-13. Particle Deposition During Normal Activities 17-15
Table 17-14. In-house Water Use Rates (gcd), by Study and Type of Use 17-17
Table 17-15. Summary of Selected HUD and Power Authority Water Use Studies 17-17
Table 17-16. Showering and Bathing Water Use Characteristics 17-18
Table 17-17. Showering Characteristics for Various Types of Shower Heads 17-18
Table 17-18. Toilet Water Use Characteristics 17-18
Table 17-19. Toilet Frequency Use Characteristics 17-18
Table 17-20. Dishwasher Frequency Use Characteristics 17-18
Table 17-21. Dishwasher Water Use Characteristics 17-19
Table 17-22. Clothes Washer Frequency Use Characteristics 17-19
Table 17-23. Clothes Washer Water Use Characteristics 17-19
Table 17-24. Range of Water Uses for Clothes Washers 17-19
Table 17-25. Total Dust Loading for Carpeted Areas 17-19
Table 17-26. Particle Deposition and Resuspension During Normal Activities 17-20
Table 17-27. Dust Mass Loading After One Week Without Vacuum Cleaning 17-20
Table 17-28. Simplified Source Descriptions for Airborne Contaminants 17-21
Table 17-29. Volume of Residence Surveys 17-29
Table 17-30. Air Exchange Rates Surveys 17-29
Table 17-31. Recommendations - Residential Parameters 17-30
Table 17-32. Confidence in House Volume Recommendations 17-30
Table 17-33. Confidence in Air Exchange Rate Recommendations 17-31
Page
xxx
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
LIST OF FIGURES
Page No.
VOLUME III
Figure 15-1. Distribution of Individuals Moving by Type of Move: 1991-92 15-14
Figure 17-1. Elements of Residential Exposure 17-1
Figure 17-2. Cumulative Frequency Distributions for Residential Volumes from the PFT Data
Base and the U.S. DOE's RECs 17-3
Figure 17-3. Configuration for Residential Forced-air Systems 17-7
Figure 17-4. Idealized Patterns of Particle Deposition Indoors 17-14
Figure 17-5. Air Flows for Multiple-zone Systems 17-16
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 xxxi
-------
EFH
PREFACE
The National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) of EPA's Office of Research and
Development (ORE)) has prepared this handbook to address factors commonly used in exposure assessments. This
handbook was first published in 1989 in response to requests from many EPA Program and Regional offices for
additional guidance on how to select values for exposure factors.
Several events sparked the efforts to revise the Exposure Factors Handbook. First, since its
publication in 1989, new data have become available. Second, the Risk Assessment Council issued a memorandum
titled, "Guidance on Risk Characterization for Risk Managers and Risk Assessors," dated February 26, 1992, which
emphasized the use of multiple descriptors of risk (i.e., measures of central tendency such as average or mean, or high
end), and characterization of individual risk, population risk, important subpopulations. A new document was issued
titled "Guidance for Risk Characterization," dated February 1995. This document is an update of the guidance issued
with the 1992 policy. Third, EPA published the revised Guidelines for Exposure Assessment in 1992.
As part of the efforts to revise the handbook, the EPA Risk Assessment Forum sponsored a
two-day peer involvement workshop which was conducted during the summer of 1993. The workshop was attended by
57 scientists from academia, consulting firms, private industry, the States, and other Federal agencies. The purpose of
the workshop was to identify new data sources, to discuss adequacy of the data and the feasibility of developing
statistical distributions and to establish priorities.
As a result of the peer involvement workshop, three new chapters were added to the handbook.
These chapters are: Consumer Product Use, Residential Building Characteristics, and Intake of Grains. This document
also provides a summary of the available data on consumption of drinking water; consumption of fruits, vegetables, beef,
dairy products, grain products, and fish; breast milk intake; soil ingestion; inhalation rates; skin surface area; soil
adherence; lifetime; activity patterns; and body weight.
A new draft handbook that incorporated comments from the 1993 workshop was published for
peer review in June 1995. A peer review workshop was held in July 1995 to discuss comments on the draft handbook.
A new draft of the handbook that addressed comments from the 1995 peer review workshop was submitted to the
Science Advisory Board (SAB) for review in August 1996. An SAB workshop meeting was held December 19-20,
1996, to discuss the comments of the SAB reviewers. Comments from the SAB review have been incorporated into the
current handbook.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
xxxii August 1997
-------
EFH
FOREWORD
The National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) of EPA's Office of Research and Development
(ORE)) has five main functions: (1) providing risk assessment research, methods, and guidelines; (2) performing health
and ecological assessments; (3) developing, maintaining, and transferring risk assessment information and training;
(4) helping ORE) set research priorities; and (5) developing and maintaining resource support systems for NCEA. The
activities under each of these functions are supported by and respond to the needs of the various program offices. In
relation to the first function, NCEA sponsors projects aimed at developing or refining techniques used in exposure
assessments.
This handbook was first published in 1989 to provide statistical data on the various factors used in assessing
exposure. This revised version of the handbook provides the up-to-date data on these exposure factors. The
recommended values are based solely on our interpretations of the available data. In many situations different values
may be appropriate to use in consideration of policy, precedent or other factors.
Michael A. Callahan
Director
National Center for Environmental Assessment
Washington Office
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 xxxiii
-------
EFH
AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS, AND REVIEWERS
The National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), Office of Research and Development was
responsible for the preparation of this handbook. The original document was prepared by Versar Inc. under EPA
Contract No. 68-02-4254, Work Assignment No. 189. John Schaum, of NCEA-Washington Office, served as the EPA
Work Assignment Manager, providing overall direction and coordination of the production effort as well as technical
assistance and guidance. Revisions, updates, and additional preparation were provided by Versar Inc. under Contract
Numbers 68-DO-0101, 68-D3-0013, and 68-D5-0051. Russell Kmerson and Greg Kew have served as EPA Work
Assignment Managers during previous efforts of the update process. Jackie Moya served as Work Assignment Manager
for the current updated version, providing overall direction, technical assistance, and serving as contributing author.
AUTHORS DESKTOP PUBLISHING GRAPHICS
Patricia Wood Susan Perry Kathy Bowles
Linda Phillips Jennifer Baker
Aderonke Adenuga WORD PROCESSING
Mike Koontz
Harry Rector Valerie Schwartz
Charles Wilkes
Maggie Wilson
Exposure Assessment Division
Versar Inc.
Springfield, VA
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
xxxiv August 1997
-------
EFH
CONTRIBUTORS AND REVIEWERS
The following EPA individuals have reviewed and/or have been contributing authors of this document.
Michael Dellarco
Robert McGaughy
Amy Mills
Jacqueline Moya
Susan Perlin
Paul Pinsky
John Schaum
Paul White
Amina Wilkins
Chieh Wu
The following individuals were Science Advisory Board Reviewers:
Members
Dr. Joan Daisey
Lawrence Berkley Laboratory
Berkley, California
Dr. Paul Bailey
Mobil Business Resources Corporation
Paulsboro, New Jersey
Dr. Robert Hazen
State of New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection and Energy
Trenton, New Jersey
Dr. Timothy Larson
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington
Dr. Kai-Shen Liu
California Department of Health Services
Berkeley, California
Dr. Paul Lioy
Environmental Occupational Health
Sciences Institute
Piscataway, New Jersey
Dr. Maria Morandi
University of Texas School of Public Health
Houston, Texas
Dr. Jonathan M. Samet
The Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Maryland
Mr. Ron White
American Lung Association
Washington, D.C.
Dr. Lauren Zeise
California Environmental Protection Agency
Berkeley, California
Federal Experts
Dr. Richard Ellis
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Washington, D.C.
Ms. Alanna J. Moshfegh
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Washington, D.C.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xxxv
-------
EFH
An earlier draft of this document was peer reviewed by a panel of experts at a peer-review workshop held in
1995. Members of the Peer Review Panel were as follows:
Edward Avol
Department of Preventive Medicine
School of Medicine
University of Southern California
James Axley
School of Architecture
Yale University
David Burmaster
Alceon Corporation
Steven Colome
Integrated Environmental Services
Michael DiNovi
Chemistry Review Branch
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
Dennis Druck
Environmental Scientist
Center of Health Promotion & Preventive
Medicine
U.S. Army
J.Mark Fly
Department of Forestry, Wildlife, &
Fisheries
University of Tennessee
Larry Gephart
Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc.
Patricia Guenther
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture
P.J. (Bert) Hakkmen
Paper Product Development & Paper
Technology Divisions
The Proctor & Gamble Company
Mary Hama
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Dennis Jones
Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry
John Kissel
Department of Environmental Health
School of Public Health & Community Medicine
Neil Klepeis
Information Systems & Services, Inc.
Andrew Persily
National Institute of Standards & Technologies
Barbara Petersen
Technical Assessment Systems, Inc.
Thomas Phillips
Research Division
California Air Resources Board
Paul Price
ChemRisk
John Risher
Division of Toxicology
The Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry
John Robinson
University of Maryland
Peter Robinson
The Proctor & Gamble Company
P. Barry Ryan
Department of Environmental & Occupational
Health
Rollins School of Public Health
Emory University
Val Schaeffer
U.S. Consumer Product Safely Commission
Brad Shurdut
DowElanco
John Talbott
Page
xxxvi
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
EFH
U.S. Department of Energy
Frances Vecchio
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture
The following individuals within EPA have reviewed an earlier draft of this document and provided valuable comments:
OFFICE
REVIEWERS/CONTRIBUTORS
Office of Research and Development
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Office of Pollution, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances
Maurice Berry
Jerry Blancato
Elizabeth Bryan
Curtis Dary
Stan Durkee
Manuel Gomez
Wayne Marchant
Sue Perlin
James Quanckenboss
Glen Rice
Lance Wallace
Jim Konz
Pat Kennedy
Cathy Fehrenbacker
Office of Water
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
EPA Regions
Denis Borum
Helen Jacobs
Warren Peters
Steve Ehlers - Reg. VI
Maria Martinez - Reg. VI
Mike Morton - Reg. VI
Jeffrey Yurk - Reg. VI
Youngmoo Kim - Reg. VI
In addition, the National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) of the Office of Research and Development of
EPA made an important contribution to this handbook by conducting additional analyses of the National Human Activity
Pattern Survey (NHAPS) data. EPA input to the NHAPS data analysis came from Karen A. Hammerstrom and
Jacqueline Moya from NCEA-Washington Office; William C. Nelson from NERL-RTF, and Stephen C. Hem, Joseph
V. Behar (retired), and William H. Englemann from NERL-Las Vegas.
The EPA Office of Water made an important contribution by conducting an analysis of the USDA Continuing
Survey of Food Intakes by Individual (CSFII) data. They provided fish intake rates for the general population. The
analysis was conducted under the direction of Helen Jacobs from the Office of Water.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
xxxvii
-------
Errata Sheet
Exposure Factors Handbook, August 1997
EPA/600/P-95/002Fa,b,c
Location
Change
Volume I, Chapter 1
Page 1-7, Table 1-2
Fish intake rate - General population
63. g/day (total fish) should be 53. g/day (total fish)
Recreational freshwater
25 g/day (95th percentile) should be 26 g/day (95th
percentile)
Time Indoors - Residential
16.4 hrs/day should be 16.7 hrs/day
Volume I, Chapter 4
Page 4-6, Equation 4-2
Equation should read as follows:
(((DW( + DWp ) x E( ) + 2Eu ) - (DWm x EH)
M> TJ
ksoil
Volume 11, Chapter 10
Page 10-6, 1st Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-6, 2nd Column, 4th 1
Page 10-7, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-7, 2nd Column, 4th 1
Page 10-9, 1st Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-9, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-9, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-10, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-1 1, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-1 1, 2nd Column, 4th 1
Page 10-12, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Table 10-13 should be Table 10-45
Table 10-14 should be Table 10-46
Table 10-15 should be Table 10-47
Table 10-16 should be Table 10-48
Table 10-17 should be Table 10-49
Table 10-8 should be Table 10-82
Table 10-18 should be Table 10-50
Table 10-19 should be Table 10-51
Table 10-20 should be Table 10-52
Table 10-21 should be Table 10-53
Table 10-22 should be Table 10-54
Table 10-23 should be Table 10-55
Table 10-24 should be Table 10-56
Table 10-25 should be Table 10-57
Table 10-26 should be Table 10-58
Table 10-27 should be Table 10-59
Table 10-28 should be Table 10-60
-------
Location
Page 10-13, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-13, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-14, 1st Column, 3rd & 4th 1
Page 10-15, 1st Column, 3rdl
Page 10-15, 1st Column, 4th 1
Page 10-15, 1st Column, 5th |
Page 10-15, 2nd Column, Istl
Page 10-16, 1st Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-16, 2nd Column, 4th 1
Page 10-17, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-18, 2nd Column, Istl
Page 10-19, 1st Column, 6th |
Page 10-21, 2nd Column, 5th 1
Page 10-22, 1st Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-22, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-23, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-23, 2nd Column, 4th 1
Page 10-24, 2nd Column, 1st 1
Page 10-24, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-24, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-24, 2nd Column, 4th 1
Page 10-25, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-25, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-26, 1st Column, 2nd 1
Change
Table 10-29 should be Table 10-61
Table 10-30 should be Table 10-62
Table 10-31 should be Table 10-63
Chemrisk (1991) should be Chemrisk (1992)
Table 10-32 should be Table 10-64
Table 10-33 should be Table 10-65
Chemrisk (1991) should be Chemrisk (1992)
Table 10-34 should be Table 10-66
Chemrisk (1991) should be Chemrisk (1992)
Chemrisk (1991) should be Chemrisk (1992)
Table 10-35 should be Table 10-67
Table 10-36 should be Table 10-68
Table 10-37 should be Table 10-69
Table 10-38 should be Table 10-70
Table 10-39 should be Table 10-71
Table 10-40 should be Table 10-72
Table 10-41 should be Table 10-73
Table 10-42 should be Table 10-74
Table 10-43 should be Table 10-75
Table 10-44 should be Table 10-76
Table 10-45 should be Table 10-77
Table 10-46 should be Table 10-78
Table 10-47 should be Table 10-79
Table 10-48 should be Table 10-80
Table 10-48 should be Table 10-80
Table 10-48 should be Table 10-80
Table 10-49 should be Table 10-81
6.6 g/day should be 6.0 g/day
13.5 g/day should be 14.1 g/day
Table 10-49 should be Table 10-81
56 g/day should be 53 g/day
-------
Location
Page 10-26, 2nd Column, 1st 1
Page 10-26, 2nd Column, 2nd 1
Page 10-26, 2nd Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-25, 2nd Column, 4th |
Page 10-27, 1st Column, 3rd 1
Page 10-26, 1st Column, References
Page 10-79, Table 10-81
Page 10-79, Table 10-84
Change
Table 10-50 should be Table 10-82
Table 10-51 should be Table 10-83
Table 10-52 should be Table 10-84
25 g/day should be 26 g/day
Table 10-53 should be Table 10-85
Table 10-54 should be Table 10-86
Table 10-55 should be Table 10-87
Table 10-56 should be Table 10-88
Table 10-57 should be Table 10-89
Table 10-58 should be Table 10-90
Chemrisk (1991) . . . should read: Chemrisk (1992)
Consumption of freshwater fish by Maine anglers. A
Technical Report. Portland, ME: Chemrisk, A Division
of McLaren/Hart. Revised July 24, 1994.
63 (value of 42 . . .) should be 53 (value of 42 . . .)
... by 50 percent . . . should be ... by 25 percent . . .
13 (95th percentile) should be 21 (95th percentile)
-------
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. PURPOSE 1
1.2. INTENDED AUDIENCE 1
1.3. BACKGROUND 1
1.3.1. Selection of Studies for the Handbook 1
1.3.2. Using the Handbook in an Exposure Assessment 3
1.3.3. Approach Used to Develop Recommendations for Exposure Factors ... 4
1.3.4. Characterizing Variability 5
1.4. GENERAL EQUATION FOR
CALCULATING DOSE 11
1.5. RESEARCH NEEDS 14
1.6. ORGANIZATION 15
1.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1 16
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. PURPOSE
The purpose of the Exposure Factors Handbook is
to: (1) summarize data on human behaviors and
characteristics which affect exposure to environmental
contaminants, and (2) recommend values to use for these
factors. These recommendations are not legally binding on
any EPA program and should be interpreted as suggestions
which program offices or individual exposure assessors can
consider and modify as needed. Most of these factors are
best quantified on a site or situation-specific basis. The
handbook has strived to include full discussions of the
issues which assessors should consider in deciding how to
use these data and recommendations. The handbook is
intended to serve as a support document to EPA's
Guidelines for Exposure Assessment (U.S. EPA, 1992a).
The Guidelines were developed to promote consistency
among the various exposure assessment activities that are
carried out by the various EPA program offices. This
handbook assists in this goal by providing a consistent set
of exposure factors to calculate dose.
1.2. INTENDED
AUDIENCE
The Exposure Factors
Handbook is addressed to
exposure assessors inside the
Agency as well as outside, who
need to obtain data on standard
factors needed to calculate human
exposure to toxic chemicals.
1.3.
Purpose
• Summarize data on human
behaviors and characteristics
affecting exposure
• Recommend exposure factor
values
BACKGROUND ^^^^^^^™
This handbook is the
update of an earlier version prepared in 1989. Revisions
have been made in the following areas:
• addition of drinking water rates for children;
• changes in soil ingestion rates for children;
• addition of soil ingestion rates for adults;
• addition of tapwater consumption for adults and
children;
• addition of mean daily intake of food class and
subclass by region, age and per capita rates;
• addition of mean moisture content of selected
fruits, vegetables, grains, fish, meat, and dairy
products;
• addition of food intake by class in dry weight
per kg of body weight per day;
• update of homegrown food intake;
• expansion of data in the dermal chapter;
• update of fish intake data;
• expansion of data for time spent at residence;
• update of body weight data;
• addition of body weight data for infants;
• update of population mobility data;
• addition of new data for average time spent in
different locations and various microenviron-
ments;
• addition of data for occupational mobility;
• addition of breast milk ingestion;
• addition of consumer product use; and
• addition of reference residence factors.
Variation Among Studies
This handbook is a compilation of available data
from a variety of different sources. With very few
exceptions, the data presented are the analyses of the
individual study authors. Since the studies included in this
handbook varied in terms of their objectives, design, scope,
presentation of results, etc., the
level of detail, statistics, and
terminology may vary from study
to study and from factor to factor.
For example, some authors used
geometric means to present their
results, while others used
arithmetic means or distributions.
Authors have sometimes used
different terms to describe the
same racial populations. Within
the constraint of presenting the
original material as accurately as
possible, EPA has made an effort to present discussions and
results in a consistent manner. Further, the strengths and
limitations of each study are discussed to provide the reader
with a better understanding of the uncertainties associated
with the values derived from the study.
1.3.1. Selection of Studies for the Handbook
Information in this handbook has been summarized
from studies documented in the scientific literature and
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-1
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
other available sources. Studies were chosen that were seen
as useful and appropriate for estimating exposure factors.
The handbook contains summaries of selected studies
published through August 30, 1997.
General Considerations
Many scientific studies were reviewed for possible
inclusion in this handbook. Studies were selected based on
the following considerations:
• Level of peer review: Studies were selected
predominantly from the peer-reviewed literature
and final government reports. Internal or
interim reports were therefore avoided.
• Accessibility: Studies were preferred that the
user could access in their entirety if needed.
• Reproducibility: Studies were sought that
contained sufficient information so that methods
could be reproduced, or at least so the details of
the author's work could be accessed and
evaluated.
• Focus on exposure factor of interest: Studies
were chosen that directly addressed the
exposure factor of interest, or addressed related
factors that have significance for the factor
under consideration. As an example of the
latter case, a selected study contained useful
ancillary information concerning fat content in
fish, although it did not directly address fish
consumption.
• Data pertinent to the U.S.: Studies were
selected that addressed the U.S. population.
Data from populations outside the U.S. were
sometimes included if behavioral patterns and
other characteristics of exposure were similar.
• Primary data: Studies were deemed preferable
if based on primary data, but studies based on
secondary sources were also included where
they offered an original analysis. For example,
the handbook cites studies of food consumption
based on original data collected by the USDA
National Food Consumption Survey.
Current information: Studies were chosen only
if they were sufficiently recent to represent
current exposure conditions. This is an
important consideration for those factors that
change with time.
Adequacy of data collection period: Because
most users of the handbook are primarily
addressing chronic exposures, studies were
sought that utilized the most appropriate
techniques for collecting data to characterize
long-term behavior.
Validity of approach: Studies utilizing
experimental procedures or approaches that
more likely or closely capture the desired
measurement were selected. In general, direct
exposure data collection techniques, such as
direct observation, personal monitoring devices,
or other known methods were preferred where
available. If studies utilizing direct
measurement were not available, studies were
selected that rely on validated indirect
measurement methods such as surrogate
measures (such as heart rate for inhalation rate),
and use of questionnaires. If questionnaires or
surveys were used, proper design and
procedures include an adequate sample size for
the population under consideration, a response
rate large enough to avoid biases, and
avoidance of bias in the design of the instrument
and interpretation of the results.
Representativeness of the population: Studies
seeking to characterize the national population,
a particular region, or sub-population were
selected, if appropriately representative of that
population. In cases where data were limited,
studies with limitations in this area were
included and limitations were noted in the
handbook.
Variability in the population: Studies were
sought that characterized any variability within
populations.
Minimal for defined) bias in study design:
Studies were sought that were designed with
minimal bias, or at least if biases were
Page
1-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
suspected to be present, the direction of the bias
(i.e., an over or under estimate of the
parameter) was either stated or apparent from
the study design.
Minimal (or defined) uncertainty in the data:
Studies were sought with minimal uncertainty in
the data, which was judged by evaluating all the
considerations listed above. At least, studies
were preferred that identified uncertainties,
such as those due to inherent variability in
environmental and exposure-related parameters
or possible measurement error. Studies that
documented Quality Assurance/Quality Control
measures were preferable.
Key versus relevant studies
Certain studies described
in this handbook are designated
as "key," that is, the most useful
for deriving exposure factors. The
recommended values for most
exposure factors are based on the
results of the key studies. Other
studies are designated "relevant,"
meaning applicable or pertinent,
but not necessarily the most
important. This distinction was made on the strength of the
attributes listed in the "General Considerations." For
example, in Chapter 14 of Volume III, one set of studies is
deemed to best address the attributes listed and is
designated as "key." Other applicable studies, including
foreign data, believed to have value to handbook users, but
having fewer attributes, are designated "relevant."
1.3.2. Using the Handbook in an Exposure
Assessment
Some of the steps for performing an exposure
assessment are (1) determining the pathways of exposure,
(2) identifying the environmental media which transports
the contaminant, (3) determining the contaminant
concentration, (4) determining the exposure time,
frequency, and duration, and (5) identifying the exposed
population. Many of the issues related to characterizing
exposure from selected exposure pathways have been
addressed in a number of existing EPA guidance
documents. These include, but are not limited to the
following:
Key vs. Relevant Studies
• Key studies used to derive
recommendations
• Relevant studies included to provide
Guidelines for Exposure Assessment (U.S. EPA
1992a);
Dermal Exposure Assessment: Principles and
Applications (U.S. EPA 1992b);
Methodology for Assessing Health Risks
Associated with Indirect Exposure to
Combustor Emissions (U.S. EPA, 1990);
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (U.S.
EPA, 1989);
Estimating Exposures to Dioxin-Like
Compounds (U.S. EPA, 1994);
Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual (U.S.
EPA, 1988a);
Selection Criteria for Mathematical Models
Used in Exposure Assessments (U.S. EPA
1988b);
• Selection Criteria for
Mathematical Models
Used in Exposure
Assessments (U.S. EPA
1987);
• Standard Scenarios for
Estimating Exposure to
Chemical Substances
During Use of Consumer
Products (U.S. EPA
1986a);
• Pesticide Assessment Guidelines, Subdivisions K
andU (U.S. EPA, 1984, 1986b); and
• Methods for Assessing Exposure to Chemical
Substances, Volumes 1-13 (U.S. EPA, 1983-1989).
These documents may serve as valuable information
resources to assist in the assessment of exposure. The
reader is encouraged to refer to them for more detailed
discussion.
In addition to the references listed above, this
handbook discusses the recommendations provided by the
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC) - Exposure
Factors Sourcebook (May 1994) for some of the major
exposure factors. The AIHC Sourcebook summarizes and
evaluates statistical data for various exposure factors used
in risk assessments. Probability distributions for
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-3
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
specific exposure factors were derived from the available
scientific literature using @Risk simulation software. Each
factor is described by a specific term, such as lognormal,
normal, cumulative type, or triangular. Other distributions
included Weibull, beta logistic, and gamma. Unlike this
handbook, however, the Sourcebook does not provide a
description and evaluation of every study available on each
exposure factor.
Most of the data presented in this handbook are
derived from studies that targeted (1) the general population
(e.g., USDA food consumptin surveys); and (2) a sample
population from a specific area or group (e.g., Calabrese's
et al. (1989) soil ingestion study using children from the
Amherst, Massachusetts, area). Due to unique activity
patterns, preferences, practices and biological differences,
various segments of the population may experience
exposures that are
different from those of
the general population,
which, in many cases,
may be greater. It is
necessary for risk or
exposure assessors
characterizing a diverse
population, to identify
and enumerate certain
groups within the
general population who
are at risk for greater
contaminant exposures
or exhibit a heightened
sensitivity to particular chemicals. For further guidance on
addressing susceptible populations, it is recommended to
consult the EPA, National Center for Environmental
Assessment document Socio-demographic Data Used for
Identifying Potentially Highly Exposed Subpopulations (to
be released as a final document in the Fall of 1997).
Most users of the handbook will be preparing
estimates of exposure which are to be combined with dose-
response factors to estimate risk. Some of the exposure
factors (e.g., life time, body weight) presented in this
document are also used in generating dose-response
relationships. In order to develop risk estimates properly,
assessors must use dose-response relationships in a manner
consistent with exposure conditions. Although, it is beyond
the scope of this document to explain in detail how
assessors should address this issue, a discussion (see
Appendix A of this chapter) has been included which
describes how dose-response factors can be modified to be
Recommendations and Confidence Ratings
• Recommendations based on data from single or
multiple key studies
• Variability and limitation of the data evaluated
• Recommendations rated as low, medium, and
consistent with the exposure factors for a population of
interest. This should serve as a guide for when this issue is
a concern.
1.3.3. Approach Used to Develop Recommendations
for Exposure Factors
As discussed above, EPA first reviewed all literature
pertaining to a factor and determined relevant and key
studies. The key studies were used to derive
recommendations for the values of each factor. The
recommended values were derived solely from EPA's
interpretation of the available data. Different values may be
appropriate for the user to select in consideration of policy,
precedent, strategy, or other factors such as site-specific
information. EPA's procedure for developing
recommendations was as follows:
1. Key studies were
evaluated in terms
of both quality and
relevance to
specific popula-
tions (general U. S.
population, age
groups, gender,
etc.). The criteria
for assessing the
quality of studies is
described in Section
1.3.1.
2. If only one study was classified as key for a particular
factor, the mean value from that study was selected as
the recommended central value for that population. If
there were multiple key studies, all with reasonably
equal quality, relevance, and study design information
were available, a weighted mean (if appropriate,
considering sample size and other statistical factors) of
the studies were chosen as the recommended mean
value. If the key studies were judged to be unequal in
quality, relevance, or study design, the range of means
were presented and the user of this handbook must
employ judgment in selecting the most appropriate
value for the population of interest. In cases where the
national population was of interest, the mid-point of
the
Page
1-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
range was usually judged to be the most appropriate
value.
3. The variability of the factor across the population was
discussed. If adequate data were available, the
variability was described as either a series of
percentiles or a distribution.
4. Limitations of the data were discussed in terms of data
limitations, the range of circumstances over which the
estimates were (or were not) applicable, possible
biases in the values themselves, a statement about
parameter uncertainties (measurement error, sampling
error) and model or scenario uncertainties if models or
scenarios have been used in the derivation of the
recommended value.
5. Finally, EPA assigned a confidence rating of low,
medium or high to each recommended value. This
rating is not intended to represent an uncertainly
analysis, rather it represents EPA's judgment on the
quality of the underlying data used to derive the
recommendation. This judgment was made using the
guidelines shown in Table 1-1. Table 1-1 is an
adaptation of the General Considerations discussed
earlier in Section 1.3.1. Clearly this is a continuum
from low to high and judgment was used to determine
these ratings. Recommendations given in this
handbook are accompanied by a discussion of the
rationale for their rating.
Table 1-2 summarizes EPA's recommendations and
confidence ratings for the various exposure factors.
It is important to note that the study elements listed
in Table 1 -1 do not have the same weight when arriving at
the overall confidence rating for the various exposure
factors. The relative weight of each of these elements
depend on the exposure factor of interest. Also, the relative
weights given to the elements for the various factors were
subjective and based on the professional judgement of the
authors of this handbook. In general, most studies would
rank high with regard to "level of peer review,"
"accessibility," "focus on the factor of interest," and "data
pertinent to the U. S." These elements are important for the
study to be included in this handbook. However, a high
score of these elements does not necessarily translate into a
high overall score. Other elements in Table 1-1 were also
examined to determine the overall score. For example, the
adequacy of data collection period may be more important
when determining usual intake of foods in a population. On
the other hand, it is not as important for factors where long-
term variability may be small such as tapwater intake. In
the case of tapwater intake, the currency of the data was a
critical element in determining the final rating. In addition,
some exposure factors are more easily measured than
others. For example, soil ingestion by children is estimated
by measuring, in the feces, the levels of certain elements
found in soil. Body weight, however, can be measured
directly and it is, therefore, a more reliable measurement.
This is reflected in the confidence rating given to both of
these factors. In general, the better the methodology used
to measure the exposure factor, the higher the confidence in
the value.
1.3.4. Characterizing Variability
This document attempts to characterize variability of
each of the factors. Variability is characterized in one or
more of three ways: (1) as tables with various percentiles or
ranges of values; (2) as analytical distributions with
specified parameters; and/or (3) as a qualitative discussion.
Analyses to fit standard or parametric distributions (e.g.,
normal, lognormal) to the exposure data have not been
performed by the authors of this handbook, but have been
reproduced in this document wherever they were found in
the literature. Recommendations on the use of these
distributions are made where appropriate based on the
adequacy of the supporting data. The list of exposure
factors and the way that variability has been characterized
(i.e., average, upper percentiles, multiple percentiles, fitted
distribution) are presented in Table 1-3. The term upper
percentile is used throughout this handbook and it is
intended to represent values in the upper tail (i.e., between
90th and 99.9th percentile) of the distribution of values for
a particular exposure factor.
An attempt was made to present percentile values in
the recommendations that are consistent with the exposure
estimators defined in the Exposure Guidelines (i.e., mean,
50th, 90th, 95th, 98th, and 99.9th percentile). This was not,
however, always possible because either the data available
were limited for some factors, or the authors of the study did
not provide such information. It is important to note,
however, that these percentiles were discussed in the
Exposure Guidelines within the context of risk descriptors
and not individual exopusure factors. For example, the
Guidelines stated
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-5
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Table 1-1
CONSIDERATIONS
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection period
Validity of approach
Study sizes
. Considerations Used to Rate Confidence in Recommended Values
HIGH CONFIDENCE
The studies received high level of peer review
(e.g., they appear in peer review journals).
The studies are widely available to the public.
The results can be reproduced or methodology
can be followed and evaluated.
The studies focused on the exposure factor of
interest.
The studies focused on the U.S. population.
The studies analyzed primary data.
The data were published after 1990.
The study design captures the measurement of
interest (e.g., usual consumption patterns of a
population).
The studies used the best methodology
available to capture the measurement of
interest.
The sample size is greater than 100 samples.
LOW CONFIDENCE
The studies received limited peer review.
The studies are difficult to obtain (e.g., draft
reports, unpublished data).
The results cannot be reproduced, the
methodology is hard to follow, and the authors)
cannot be located.
The purpose of the studies was to characterize a
related factor.
The studies focused on populations outside the
U.S.
The studies are based on secondary sources.
The data were published before 1980.
The study design does not very accurately
capture the measurement of interest.
There are serious limitations with the approach
used.
The sample size is less than 20 samples.
The sample size depends on how the target population is defined. As the size of a sample relative to
the total size of the target population increases, estimates are made with greater statistical assurance
that the sample results reflect actual characteristics of the target population.
Representativeness of the population
Variability in the population
Lack of bias in study design
(a high rating is desirable)
Response rates
In-person interviews
Telephone interviews
Mail surveys
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
" Differences include age, sex, race, income,
The study population is the same as population
of interest.
The studies characterized variability in the
population studied.
Potential bias in the studies are stated or can be
determined from the study design.
The response rate is greater than 80 percent.
The response rate is greater than 80 percent.
The respnose rate is greater than 70 percent.
The study design minimizes measurement
errors.
The number of studies is greater than 3.
The results of studies from different researchers
are in agreement.
or other demographic parameters.
The study population is very different from the
population of interest."
The characterization of variability is limited.
The study design introduces biases in the results.
The response rate is less than 40 percent.
The response rate is less than 40 percent.
The response rate is less than 40 percent.
Uncertainties with the data exist due to
measurement error.
The number of studies is 1.
The results of studies from different researchers
are in disagreement.
Page
1-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
Table 1-2. Summary of Exposure Factor Recommendations and Confidence Ratings
EXPOSURE FACTOR
RECOMMENDATION
CONFIDENCE RATING
Drinking water intake rate
Total fruit intake rate
Total vegetable intake rate
Total meat intake rate
Total dairy intake rate
Grain intake
Breast milk intake rate
Fish intake rate
21 ml/kg-day/1.4 L/day (average)
34 ml/kg-day/2.3 L/day (90th percentile)
Percentiles and distribution also included
Means and percentiles also included for pregnant and
lactating women
3.4 g/kg-day (per capita average)
12.4 g/kg-day (per capita 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Means presented for individual fruits
4.3 g/kg-day (per capita average)
10 g/kg-day (per capita 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Means presented for individual vegetables
2.1 g/kg-day (per capita average)
5.1 g/kg-day (per capita 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Percentiles also presented for individual meats
8.0 g/kg-day (per capita average)
29.7 g/kg-day (per capita 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Means presented for individual dairy products
4.1 g/kg-day (per capita average)
10.8 g/kg-day (per capita 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
742 ml/day (average)
1,033 ml/day (upper percentile)
General Population
20.1 g/day (total fish) average
14.1 g/day (marine) average
6.0 g/day (freshwater/estuarine)average
63 g/day (total fish) 95th percentile long-term
Percentiles also included
Serving size
129 g(average)
326 g (95th percentile)
Recreational marine anglers
2-7 g/day (finfish only)
Recreational freshwater
8 g/day (average)
25 g/day (95th percentile)
Native American Subsistence Population
70 g/day (average)
170 g/dav (95th percentile)
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
High
Low in long-term upper percentiles
Medium
Medium
High
High
High
Medium
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-7
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Table 1-2. Summary of Exposure Factor Recommendations and Confidence Ratings (continued)
EXPOSURE FACTOR
RECOMMENDATION
CONFIDENCE RATING
Home produced food intake
Inhalation rate
Surface area
Soil adherence
Soil ingestion rate
Life expectancy
Body weight for adults
Body weights for children
Body weights for infants (birth to 6
months)
Total Fruits
2.7 g/kg-day (consumer only average)
11.1 g/kg-day (consumer only 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Total vegetables
2.1 g/kg-day ( consumer only average)
7.5 g/kg-day (consumer only 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Total meats
2.2 g/kg-day (consumer only average)
6.8 g/kg-day (consumer only 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Total dairy products
14 g/kg-day (consumer only average)
44 g/kg-day (consumer only 95th percentile)
Percentiles also included
Children (<1 year)
4.5 m3/day (average)
Children (1-12 years)
8.7 m3/day (average)
Adult Females
11.3 m3/day (average)
Adult Males
15.2 m3/day (average)
Water contact (bathing and swimming)
Use total body surface area for children in Tables 6-6
through 6-8; for adults use Tables 6-2 through 6-4
(percentiles are included)
Soil contact (outdoor activities)
Use whole body part area based on Table 6-6 through 6-8
for children and 6-2 through 6-4 for adults (percentiles are
included)
Use values presented in Table 6-16 depending on activity
and body part
(central estimates only)
Children
100 mg/day (average)
400 mg/day (upper percentile)
Adults
50 mg/day (average)
Pica child
10 g/day
75 years
71.8kg
Percentiles also presented in tables 7-4 and 7-5
Use values presented in Tables 7-6 and 7-7 (mean and
percentiles)
Use values presented in Table 7-1 (percentiles)
Medium (for means and short-term
distributions)
Low (for long-term distributions)
High
High
High
High
High
High
Low
Medium
Low
Low
High
High
High
High
Page
1-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
Table 1-2.
EXPOSURE FACTOR
Showering/Bathing
Swimming
Time indoors
Time outdoors
Time spent inside vehicle
Occupational tenure
Population mobility
Residence volume
Residential air exchange
Summary of Exposure Factor Recommendations and Confidence Ratin;
RECOMMENDATION
Showering time
10 min/day (average)
35 min/day (95th percentile)
(percentiles are also included)
Bathing time
20 mill/event (median)
45 mill/event (90th percentile)
Bathing/showering frequency
1 shower event/day
Frequency
1 event/month
Duration
60 mm/event (median)
180 min/event (90th percentile)
Children (ages 3- 11)
19 hr/day (weekdays)
17 hr/day (weekends)
Adults (ages 12 and older)
21 hr/day
Residential
16.4 hrs/day
Children (ages 3- 11)
5 hr/day (weekdays)
7 hr/day (weekends)
Adults
1.5 hr/day
Residential
2 hrs/day
Adults
1 hr 20 min/day
6.6 years (16 years old and older)
9 years (average)
30 years (95th percentile)
369 m3 (average)
217 m3 (conservative)
0.45 (median)
0.18 (conservative)
js (continued)
CONFIDENCE RATING
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-9
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Table 1-3. Characterization of Variability in Exposure Factors
Exposure Factors
Average
Upper percentile
Multiple Percentiles
Fitted Distributions
Drinking water intake rate
Total fruits and total vegetables intake rate
Individual fruits and individual vegetables
intake rate
Total meats and dairy products intake rate
Individual meats and dairy products intake
rate
Grains intake
Breast milk intake rate
Fish intake rate for general population,
recreational marine, recreational freshwater,
and native american
Serving size for fish
Homeproduced food intake rates
Soil intake rate
Inhalation rate
Surface area
Soil adherence
Life expectancy
Body weight
Time indoors
Time outdoors
Showering time
Occupational tenure
Population mobility
Residence volume
Residential air exchange
Qualitative discussion for long-
term
Qualitative discussion for long-
term
Qualitative discussion for long-
term
that the assessor may derive a high-end estimate of
exposure by using maximum or near maximum values for
one or more sensitive exposure factors, leaving others at
their mean value.
The use of Monte Carlo or other probabilistic
analysis require a selection of distributions or histograms
for the input parameters. Although this handbook is not
intended to provide a complete guidance on the use of
Monte Carlo and other probabilistic analyses, the following
should be considered when using such techniques:
The exposure assessor should only consider
using probabilistic analysis when there are
credible distribution data (or ranges) for the
factor under consideration. Even if these
distributions are known, it may not be necessary
to apply this technique. For example, if only
average exposure values are needed, these can
often be computed accurately by using average
values for each of the input parameters.
Probabilistic analysis is also not necessary
when conducting assessments for screening
Page
1-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
purposes, i.e., to determine if unimportant pathways can be
eliminated. In this case, bounding estimates can be
calculated using maximum or near maximum values for
each of the input parameters.
• It is important to note that the selection of
distributions can be highly site specific and will
always involve some degree of judgment.
Distributions derived from national data may
not represent local conditions. To the extent
possible, an assessor should use distributions or
frequency histograms derived from local
surveys to assess risks locally. When
distributional data are drawn from national or
other surrogate population, it is important that
the assessor address the extent to which local
conditions may differ from the surrogate data.
In addition to a qualitative statement of
uncertainly, the representativeness assump-tion
should be appropriately addressed as part of a
sensitivity analysis.
• Distribution functions to be used in Monte
Carlo analysis may be derived by fitting an
appropriate function to empirical data. In doing
this, it should be recognized that in the lower
and upper tails of the distribution the data are
scarce, so that several functions, with radically
different shapes in the extreme tails, may be
consistent with the data. To avoid introducing
errors into the analysis by the arbitrary choice of
an inappropriate function, several techniques
can be used. One way is to avoid the problem
by using the empirical data itself rather than an
analytic function. Another is to do separate
analyses with several functions which have
adequate fit but form upper and lower bounds to
the empirical data. A third way is to use
truncated analytical distributions. Judgment
must be used in choosing the appropriate
goodness of fit test. Information on the
theoretical basis for fitting distributions can
be found in a standard statistics text such as
Statistical Methods for Environmental Pollution
Monitoring, Gilbert, R.O., 1987, Van Nostrand
Reinhold; off-the-shelf computer software such
as Best-Fit by Palisade Corporation can be used
to statistically determine the distributions that fit
the data.
• If only a range of values is known for an
exposure factor, the assessor has several
options.
- keep that variable constant at its central
value;
- assume several values within the range of
values for the exposure factor;
- calculate a point estimate(s) instead of using
probabilistic analysis; and
- assume a distribution (The rationale for the
selection of a distribution should be discussed
at length.) There are, however, cases where
assuming a distribution is not recommended.
These include:
— data are missing or very limited for a key
parameter - examples include: soil
ingestion by adults;
— data were collected over a short time
period and may not represent long term
trends (the respondent usual behavior) -
examples include: food consumption
surveys; activity pattern data;
— data are not representative of the
population of interest because sample size
was small or the population studied was
selected from a local area and was
therefore not representative of the area of
interest - examples include: soil ingestion
by children; and
— ranges for a key variable are uncertain
due to experimental error or other
limitations in the study design or
methodology - examples include: soil
ingestion by children.
1.4. GENERAL EQUATION FOR
CALCULATING DOSE
The definition of exposure as used in the Exposure
Guidelines (U.S. EPA, 1992a) is "condition of a
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-11
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
chemical contacting the outer boundary of a human." This
means contact with the visible exterior of a person such as
the skin, and openings such as the mouth, nostrils, and
lesions. The process of a chemical entering the body can be
described in two steps: contact (exposure), followed by
entry (crossing the boundary). The magnitude of exposure
(dose) is the amount of agent available at human exchange
boundaries (skin, lungs, gut) where absorption takes place
during some specified time. An example of exposure and
dose for the oral route as presented in the the EPA
Exposure Guidelines is shown in Figure 1 -1. Starting with
a general integral equation for exposure (U.S. EPA 1992a),
several dose equations can be derived depending upon
boundary assumptions. One of the more useful of these
derived equations is the Average Daily Dose (ADD). The
ADD, which is used for many noncancer effects, averages
exposures or doses over the period of time over which
exposure occurred. The ADD can be calculated by
averaging the potential dose (Dpot) over body weight and an
averaging time.
ADD,
pot
Total Potential Dose
Body Weight x Averaging Time
(Eqn. 1-1)
For cancer effects, where the biological response is
usually described in terms of lifetime probabilities, even
though exposure does not occur over the entire lifetime,
doses are often presented as lifetime average daily doses
(LADDs). The LADD takes the form of the Equation 1 -1
with lifetime replacing averaging time. The LADD is a
very common term used in carcinogen risk assessment
where linear non-threshold models are employed.
The total exposure can be expressed as follows:
Total Potential Dose = C x IR x ED
(Eqn. 1-2)
Where:
C = Contaminant Concentration
IR = Intake Rate
ED = Exposure Duration
Contaminant concentration is the concentration of
the contaminant in the medium (air, food, soil, etc.)
contacting the body and has units of mass/volume or
mass/mass.
The intake rate refers to the rates of inhalation,
ingestion, and dermal contact depending on the route of
exposure. For ingestion, the intake rate is simply the
amount of food containing the contaminant of interest that
an individual ingests during some specific time period (units
of mass/time). Much of this handbook is devoted to rates of
ingestion for some broad classes of food. For inhalation, the
intake rate is the rate at which contaminated air is inhaled.
Factors that affect dermal exposure are the amount of
material that comes into contact with the skin, and the rate
at which the contaminant is absorbed.
The exposure duration is the length of time that
contaminant contact lasts. The time a person lives in an
area, frequency of bathing, time spent indoors versus
outdoors, etc. all affect the exposure duration. The Activity
Factors Chapter (Volume III, Chapter 15) gives some
examples of population behavior patterns, which may be
useful for estimating exposure durations to be used in the
exposure calculations.
When the above parameter values remain constant
over time, they are substituted directly into the exposure
equation. When they change with time, a summation
approach is needed to calculate exposure. In either case,
the exposure duration is the length of time exposure occurs
at the concentration and intake rate specified by the other
parameters in the equation.
Dose can be expressed as a total amount (with units
of mass, e.g., mg) or as a dose rate in terms of mass/time
(e.g., mg/day), or as a rate normalized to body mass (e.g.,
with units of mg of chemical per kg of body weight per day
(mg/kg-day)). The LADD is usually expressed in terms of
mg/kg-day or other mass/mass-time units.
In most cases (inhalation and ingestion exposure) the
dose-response parameters for carcinogen risks have been
adjusted for the difference in absorption across body
barriers between humans and the experimental animals used
to derive such parameters. Therefore, the exposure
assessment in these cases is based on the potential dose
with no explicit correction for the fraction absorbed.
However, the exposure assessor needs to make such an
adjustment when calculating dermal exposure and in other
specific cases when current information indicates that the
human absorption factor
Page
1-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
Biologically
Effective
Dose
Exposure
Chemical
Potential Applied
Dose Dose
Effect
Mouth
Intake
Source: U.S. EPA, 1992a
G.I. Tract
Uptake
Figure 1-1. Schematic of Dose and Exposure: Oral Route
used in the derivation of the dose-response factor is
inappropriate.
The lifetime value used in the LADD version of
Equation 1 -1 is the period of time over which the dose is
averaged. For carcinogens, the derivation of the dose-
response parameters usually assumes no explicit number of
years as the duration of a lifetime, and the nominal value of
75 years is considered a reasonable approximation. For
exposure estimates to be used for assessments other than
carcinogenic risk, various averaging periods have been
used. For acute exposures, the administered doses are
usually averaged over a day or a single event. For
nonchronic noncancer effects, the time period used is the
actual period of exposure. The objective in selecting the
exposure averaging time is to express the exposure in a way
which can be combined with the dose-response relationship
to calculate risk.
The body weight to be used in the exposure Equation
1-1 depends on the units of the exposure data presented in
this handbook. For food ingestion, the body weights of the
surveyed populations were known in the USDA surveys and
they were explicitly factored into the food intake data in
order to calculate the intake as grams per day per kilogram
body weight. In this case, the body weight has already been
included in the "intake rate" term in Equation 1 -2 and the
exposure assessor does not need to explicitly include body
weight.
The units of intake in this handbook for the ingestion
of fish, breast milk, and the inhalation of air are not
normalized to body weight. In this case, the exposure
assessor needs to use (in Equation 1-1) the average weight
of the exposed population during the time when the
exposure actually occurs. If the exposure occurs
continuously throughout an individual's life or only during
the adult ages, using an adult weight of 71.8 kg should
provide sufficient accuracy. If the body weight of the
individuals in the population whose risk is being evaluated
is non-standard in some way, such as for children or for
first-generation immigrants who may be smaller than the
national population, and if reasonable values are not
available in the literature, then a model of intake as a
function of body weight must be used. One such model is
discussed in Appendix 1A of this chapter. Some of the
parameters (primarily concentrations) used in estimating
exposure are exclusively site specific, and therefore default
recommendations could not be used.
The food ingestion rate values provided in this
handbook are generally expressed as "as consumed" since
this is the fashion in which data are reported by survey
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-13
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
respondents. This is of importance because concentration
data to be used in the dose equation are generally measured
in uncooked food samples. In most situations, the only
practical choice is to use the "as consumed" ingestion rate
and the uncooked concentration. However, it should be
recognized that cooking generally results in some reductions
in weight (e.g., loss of moisture), and that if the mass of the
contaminant in the food remains constant, then the
concentration of the contaminant in the cooked food item
will increase. Therefore, if the "as consumed" ingestion rate
and the uncooked concentration are used in the dose
equation, dose may be underestimated. On the other hand,
cooking may cause a reduction in mass of contaminant and
other ingredients such that the overall concentration of
contaminant does not change significantly. In this case,
combining cooked ingestion rates and uncooked
concentration will provide an appropriate estimate of dose.
Ideally, food concentration data should be adjusted to
account for changes after cooking, then the " as consumed"
intake rates are appropriate. In the absence of data, it is
reasonable to assume that no change in contaminant
concentration occurs after cooking. Except for general
population fish consumption and home produced foods,
uncooked intake rate data were not available for presention
in this handbook. Data on the general population fish
consumption have been presented in this handbook (Section
10.2) in both "as consumed" and uncooked basis. It is
important for the assessor to be aware of these issues and
choose intake rate data that best matches the concentration
data that is being used.
The link between the intake rate value and the
exposure duration value is a common source of confusion
in defining exposure scenarios. It is important to define the
duration estimate so that it is consistent with the intake rate:
• The intake rate can be based on an individual
event, such as 129 g of fish eaten per meal
(U.S. EPA, 1996). The duration should be
based on the number of events or, in this case,
meals.
• The intake rate also can be based on a long-
term average, such as 10 g/day. In this case the
duration should be based on the total time
interval over which the exposure occurs.
The objective is to define the terms so that when
multiplied, they give the appropriate estimate of mass of
contaminant contacted. This can be accomplished by
basing the intake rate on either a long-term average (chronic
exposure) or an event (acute exposure) basis, as long as the
duration value is selected appropriately. Consider the case
in which a person eats a 129-g fish meal approximately five
times per month (long-term average is 21.5 g/day) for 30
years; or 21.5 g/day offish every day for 30 years.
(129 g/meal)(5 meals/mo)(mo/30 d)(365 d/yr)(30 yrs) = 235,425 g
(21.5 g/day)(365 d/yr)(30 yrs) = 235,425 g
Thus, a frequency of either 60 meals/year or a duration of
365 days/year could be used as long as it is matched with
the appropriate intake rate.
1.5. RESEARCH NEEDS
In an earlier draft of this handbook, reviewers were
asked to identify factors or areas where further research is
needed. The following list is a compilation of areas for
future research identified by the peer reviewers and authors
of this document:
• The data and information available with respect
to occupational exposures are quite limited.
Efforts need to be directed to identify data or
references on occupational exposure.
• Further research is necessary to refine estimates
of fish consumption, particularly by
subpopulations of subsistence fishermen.
• Research is needed to better estimate soil intake
rates, particularly how to extrapolate short-term
data to chronic exposures. Data on soil intake
rates by adults are very limited. Research in
this area is also recommended. Research is also
needed to refine methods to calculate soil intake
rate (i.e., inconsistencies among tracers and
input/output misalignment errors indicate a
fundamental problem with the methods).
Research is also needed to obtain more data to
better estimate soil adherence.
Page
1-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
EFH
• In cases where several studies of equal quality
and data collection procedures are available for
an exposure factor, procedures need to be
developed to combine the data in order to create
a single distribution of likely values for that
factor.
• Reviewers recommended that the handbook be
made available in CD ROM and that the data
presented be made available in a format that
will allow the users to conduct their own
analysis. The intent is to provide a
comprehensive factors tool with interactive
menu to guide users to areas of interest, word
searching features, and data base files.
• Reviewers recommended that EPA derive
distribution functions using the empirical data
for the various exposure factors to be used in
Monte Carlo or other probabilistic analysis.
• Research is needed to derive a methodology to
extrapolate from short-term data to long-term or
chronic exposures.
• Reviewers recommended that the consumer
products chapter be expanded to include more
products. A comprehensive literature search
needs to be conducted to investigate other
sources of data.
• Breastmilk intake.
• More recent data on tapwater intake.
• SAB recommended analysis of 1994 and 1995
CSFII data.
1.6. ORGANIZATION
The handbook is organized into three volumes as
follows:
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 Provides the overall introduction to
the handbook
evaluate and present the uncertainty
associated with exposure scenario
estimates.
Chapter 3 Provides factors for estimating human
exposure through ingestion of water.
Chapter 4 Provides factors for estimating
exposure through ingestion of soil.
Chapter 5 Provides factors for estimating
exposure as a result of inhalation of
vapors and particulates.
Chapter 6 Presents factors for estimating dermal
exposure to environmental
contaminants that come in contact
with the skin.
Chapter 7 Provides data on body weight.
Chapter 8 Provides data on life expectancy.
Volume II - Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 Provides factors for estimating
exposure through ingestion of fruits
and vegetables.
Chapter 10 Provides factors for estimating
exposure through ingestion of fish.
Chapter 11 Provides factors for estimating
exposure through ingestion of meats
and dairy products.
Chapter 12 Presents data for estimating exposure
through ingestion of grain products.
Chapter 13 Presents factors for estimating
exposure through ingestion of home
produced food.
Chapter 14 Presents data for estimating exposure
through ingestion of breast milk.
Chapter 2 Presents an analysis of uncertainty and
discusses methods that can be used to
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
1-15
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 Presents data on activity factors
(activity patterns, population mobility,
and occupational mobility).
Chapter 16 Presents data on consumer product
use.
Chapter 17 Presents factors used in estimating
residential exposures.
Figure 1-2 provides a roadmap to assist users of this
handbook in locating recommended values and confidence
ratings for the various exposure factors presented in these
chapters. A glossary is provided at the end of Volume III.
1.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1
AIHC. (1994) Exposure factors sourcebook.
Washington, DC: American Industrial Health
Council.
Calabrese, E.J.; Pastides, H.; Barnes, R.; Edwards, C.;
Kostecki, P.T.; et al. (1989) How much soil do
young children ingest: an epidemiologic study. In:
Petroleum Contaminated Soils, Lewis Publishers,
Chelsea, MI. pp. 363-397.
Gilbert, R.O. (1987) Statistical methods for
environmental pollution monitoring. New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
U.S. EPA. (1983-1989) Methods for assessing exposure
to chemical substances. Volumes 1-13. Washington,
DC: Office of Toxic Substances, Exposure
Evaluation Division.
U.S. EPA. (1984) Pesticide assessment guidelines
subdivision K, exposure: reentry protection. Office of
Pesticide Programs, Washington, DC. EPA/540/9-
48/001. Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA; PB-
85-120962.
U.S. EPA. (1986a) Standard scenarios for estimating
exposure to chemical substances during use of
consumer products. Volumes I and II. Washington,
DC: Office of Toxic Substance, Exposure Evaluation
Division.
U.S. EPA. (1986b) Pesticide assessment guidelines
subdivision U, applicator exposure monitoring.
Office of Pesticide Programs, Washington, DC.
EPA/540/9-87/127. Available from NTIS,
Springfield, VA; PB-85-133286.
U.S. EPA. (1987) Selection criteria for mathematical
models used in exposure assessments: surface water
models. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of
Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington,
DC. WPA/600/8-87/042. Available from NTIS,
Springfield, VA; PB-88-139928/AS.
U.S. EPA. (1988a) Superfund exposure assessment
manual. Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, Washington, DC. EPA/540/1-88/001.
Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA; PB-89-
135859.
U.S. EPA. (1988b) Selection criteria for mathematical
models used in exposure assessments: groundwater
models. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of
Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington,
DC. EPA/600/8-88/075. Available from NTIS,
Springfield, VA; PB-88-248752/AS.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Risk assessment guidance for
Superfund. Human health evaluation manual: part
A. Interim Final. Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, Washington, DC. Available
from NTIS, Springfield, VA; PB-90-155581.
U.S. EPA. (1990) Methodology for assessing health risks
associated with indirect exposure to combustor
emissions. EPA 600/6-90/003. Available from
NTIS, Springfield, VA; PB-90-187055/AS.
U.S. EPA. (1992a) Guidelines for exposure assessment.
Washington, DC: Office of Research and
Development, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment. EPA/600/Z-92/001.
U.S. EPA. (1992b) Dermal exposure assessment:
principles and applications. Washington, DC: Office
of Health and Environmental Assessments.
EPA/600/8-9/01 IF.
U.S. EPA. (1994) Estimating exposures to dioxin-like
compounds. (Draft Report). Office of Research and
Development, Washington, DC. EPA/600/6-
88/005Cb.
U.S. EPA. (1996) Daily average per capita fish
consumption estimates based on the combined 1989,
1990, and 1999 continuing survey of food intakes by
individuals (CSFII) 1989-91 data. Volumes I and II.
Preliminary Draft Report. Washington, DC: Office
of Water.
Page
1-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
EXPOSURE ROUTE
/
Ł
/^-^~^
Ingestion *Ł
\\-
\x
NX
\
... x.
Dermal •*=^~__^
(All Routes)
Human Characteristics
(All Routes) ^
Activity Factors ~~
(All Routes)
Consumer Product Use
(AH Routes)
Residential "^Ł^^
~~| |
1 KXPOSliRK FACTOR
/ Drinking Water -^ "~ —
/ Intake Rate ~-<=~-:r__:
/
^- Fruit and Vegetable Intake Rate -^,
— Homegrown Foods
- — — Breast milk Intake Rate
v^
^\ ^
^- Fish and Shellfish Intake Rate -^
X
v\
\ ^ Soil Intake Rate „ — •- """^
N. ^^'"~"— — —
\Grain Intake
. . ...__„* — — -
- Skin Surface Area —
- Bmly Wright -=- '
""• Lifetime — "==ZZT^Z3^
^ ^i liiilj Filli in
^"^
Population Mobility ;
_^ — - Water Use — - — —— ^___
Air Exchange Rates — —
1
POPULATION VOLUME
Adults
^- Children .
-~^__" — — Pregnant Women
- High Activity
~-~-^ Various Demographic Groups — Age,
, — — *" Region, Season, Urbanization, Race II
II
Nursing Infants ||
^^~- General Population ||
•^^— — " Freshwater Recreational ||
^^" Marine Recreational II
"^ — Subsistence ||
____ — Typical Children
Adults
. Pica Children |
— — _ Various Demographic Groups — Age,
Region, Season, Urbanization, Race "
" Adults
1^ Children 1
High Activity
" Adults 1
Children
Adults |
Children
\dults
Children
• — - Children
A .1..I4-. Ill
Adults
Children "'
Arfitlte
III
\dult
^^^^Sr- General Population |l|
CHAPTER
3.
9.
11.
13.
14.
10.
10.
10.
10.
4.
12.
5.
6.
6.
7.
8.
15.
1C
13.
15.
16.
17
RECOMMENDATIONS/
RATINGS TABLE PAGE NOS.
3-23/3-39
9-7/9-45
11-7/11-32
13-10/13-67
14-7/14-13
10-25/10-85
10-26/10-87
10-26/10-86
10-26/10-88
4-20/4-21
12-5/12-23
5-22/5-23
6-8/6-25
6-8/6-27
7-10/7-12
8-1/8-5
15-15/15-164
171
15-17/15-171
15-17/15-172
16-5
17-6/17-30. 17-31
Building Characteristics*
House Volumes
Building Characteristics
1-17
-------
Volume I - General Factors
EFH
Appendix 1A
APPENDIX 1A
RISK CALCULATIONS USING EXPOSURE FACTORS HANDBOOK DATA
AND DOSE-RESPONSE INFORMATION FROM THE
INTEGRATED RISK INFORMATION SYSTEM (IRIS)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 1A-1
-------
-------
Volume I - General Factors -_-^ _-
EFH
Appendix 1A
APPENDIX 1A
RISK CALCULATIONS USING EXPOSURE FACTORS HANDBOOK
DATA AND DOSE-RESPONSE INFORMATION FROM IRIS
1. INTRODUCTION
When calculating risk estimates for a specific population, whether the entire national population or some sub-population,
the exposure information (either from this handbook or from other data) must be combined with dose-response information.
The latter typically comes from the IRIS data base, which summarizes toxicity data for each agent separately. Care must
be taken that the assumptions about population parameters in the dose-response analysis are consistent with the population
parameters used in the exposure analysis. This Appendix discusses procedures for insuring this consistency.
In the IRIS derivation of threshold based dose-response relationships (U.S. EPA, 1996), such as the RfD and the RfCs
based on adverse systemic effects, there has generally been no explicit use of human exposure factors. In these cases the
numerical value of the RfD and RfC comes directly from animal dosing experiments (and occasionally from human studies)
and from the application of uncertainty factors to reflect issues such as the duration of the experiment, the fact that animals
are being used to represent humans and the quality of the study. However in developing cancer dose-response (D-R)
assessments, a standard exposure scenario is assumed in calculating the slope factor (i.e., human cancer risk per unit dose)
on the basis of either animal bioassay data or human data. This standard scenario has traditionally been assumed to be typical
of the U.S. population: 1) body weight = 70 kg; 2) air intake rate = 20 mVday; 3) drinking water intake = 2 liters/day; 4)
lifetime = 70 years. In RfC derivations for cases involving an adverse effect on the respiratory tract, the air intake rate of
20 mVday is assumed. The use of these specific values has depended on whether the slope factor was derived from animal
or human epidemiologic data:
• Animal Data: For dose-resopnse (D-R) studies based on animal data, scale animal doses to human equivalent
doses using a human body weight assumption of 70 kg. No explicit lifetime adjustment is necessary because the
assumption is made that events occurring in the lifetime animal bioassay will occur with equal probability in a
human lifetime, whatever that might happen to be.
• Human Data - In the analysis of human studies (either occupational or general population), the Agency has
usually made no explicit assumption of body weight or human lifetime. For both of these parameters there is an
implicit assumption that the population usually of interest has the same descriptive parameters as the population
analyzed by the Agency. In the rare situation where this assumption is known to be wrong, the Agency has made
appropriate corrections so that the dose-response parameters represent the national average population.
When the population of interest is different than the national average (standard) population, the dose-response parameter
needs to be adjusted. In addition, when the population of interest is different than the population from which the exposure
factors in this handbook were derived, the exposure factor needs to be adjusted. Two generic examples of situations where
these adjustments are needed are as follows:
A) Detailed study of recent data, such as are presented in this handbook, show that EPA's standard assumptions (i.e.,
70 kg body weight, 20 mVday air inhaled, and 2 L/day water intake) are inaccurate for the national population and may be
inappropriate for sub-populations under consideration. The handbook addresses most of these situations by providing
gender- and age-specific values and by normalizing the intake values to body weight when the data are available, but it may
not have covered all possible situations. An example of a sub-population with a different mean body weight would be
females, with an average body weight of 60 kg or children with a body weight dependent on age. Another example of a non-
standard sub-population would be a sedentary hospital population with lower than 20 mVday air intake rates.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 1A-3
-------
EFH
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 1A
B) The population variability of these parameters is of interest and it is desired to estimate percentile limits of the
population variation. Although the detailed methods for estimating percentile limits of exposure and risk in a population
are beyond the scope of this document, one would treat the body weight and the intake rates discussed in Sections 2 to 4 of
this appendix as distributions, rather than constants.
2. CORRECTIONS FOR DOSE-RESPONSE PARAMETERS
The correction factors for the dose-response values tabulated in the IRIS data base for carcinogens are summarized in
Table 1A-1. Use of these correction parameters is necessary to avoid introducing errors into the risk analysis. The second
column of Table 1A-1 shows the dependencies that have been assumed in the typical situation where the human dose-
response factors have been derived from the administered dose in animal studies. This table is applicable in most cases that
will be encountered, but it is not applicable when: a) the effective dose has been derived with a pharmacokinetic model and
b) the dose-response data has been derived from human data. In the former case, the subpopulation parameters need to be
incorporated into the model. In the latter case, the correction factor for the dose-response parameter must be evaluated on
a case-by case basis by examining the specific data and assumptions in the derivation of the parameter.
Table 1 A-1. Procedures for Modifying IRIS Risk Values for Non-standard Populations1'
IRIS Risk Measure
[Units]
IRIS Risk Measure is Proportional to:b Correction Factor (CF) for modifying
IRIS Risk Measures:0
Slope Factor
[per mg/(kg/day)]
Water Unit Risk
[per ug/1]
Air Unit Risk:
A. Particles or aerosols
[per ug/m3], air concentration by
weight
Air Unit Risk:
B. Gases
[per parts per million], air
concentration by volume,
(Ws)1/3 = (70)1'3
Iws/[(Ws)2/3]=2/[(70)2'3]
IA /[(WT ] = 20/[(70)2'3]
No explicit proportionality to body
weight or air intake is assumed.
(Wp/70)1/3
(Iwp)/2 x [70/(WP)]2/3
(I/)/20x[70/(Wp)]2'
1.0
ppm by volume is assumed to be the
effective dose in both animals and
humans.
1 W = Body weight (kg)
Iw = Drinking water intake (liters per day)
IA = Air intake (cubic meters per day)
b Ws, IWS-, IAS denote standard parameters assumed by IRIS
c Modified risk measure = (CF) x IRIS value
Wp, Iwp, IAP denote non-standard parameters of the actual population
As one example of the use of Table 1 A-l, the recommended value for the average consumption of tapwater for adults
in the U. S. population derived in this document (Chapter 3), is 1.4 liters per day. The drinking water unit risk for
dichlorvos, as given in the IRIS information data base is 8.3 x 10"6 per (ig/1, and was calculated from the slope factor
assuming the standard intake, Iws, of 2 liters per day. For the United States population drinking 1.4 liters of tap water per
Page
1A-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors -_-^ _-
EFH
Appendix 1A
day the corrected drinking water unit risk should be 8.3 x 10"6 x (1.4/2) = 5.8 x 106 per ,ug/l. The risk to the average
individual is then estimated by multiplying this by the average concentration in units of ,ug/l.
Another example is when the risk for women drinking water contaminated with dichlorvos is to be estimated. If the
women have an average body weight of 60 kg, the correction factor for the drinking water unit risk is (disregarding the
correction discussed in the above paragraph), from Table 1 A- 1 , is (70/60)2'3 = 1.11. Here the ratio of 70 to 60 is raised to
the power of 2/3. The corrected water unit risk for dichlorvos is 8.3 x 10"6x 1.11 = 9.2 x 10"6per,ug/l. As before, the risk
to the average individual is estimated by multiplying this by the water concentration.
When human data are used to derive the risk measure, there is a large variation in the different data sets encountered
in IRIS, so no generalizations can be made about global corrections. However, the typical default exposure values used for
the air intake of an air pollutant over an occupational lifetime are: air intake is 10 mVday for an 8-hour shift, 240 days per
year with 40 years on the job. If there is continuous exposure to an ambient air pollutant, the lifetime dose is usually
calculated assuming a 70-year lifetime.
3. CORRECTIONS FOR INTAKE DATA
When the body weight, Wp, of the population of interest differs from the body weight, WE, of the population from which
the exposure values in this handbook were derived, the following model furnishes a reasonable basis for estimating the intake
of food and air (and probably water also) in the population of interest. Such a model is needed in the absence of data on the
dependency of intake on body size. This occurs for inhalation data, where the intake data are not normalized to body weight,
whereas the model is not needed for food and tap water intakes if they are given in units of intake per kg body weight.
The model is based on the dependency of metabolic oxygen consumption on body size. Oxygen consumption is directly
related to food (calorie) consumption and air intake and indirectly to water intake. For mammals of a wide range of species
sizes (Prosser and Brown, 1961), and also for individuals of various sizes within a species, the oxygen consumption and
calorie (food) intake varies as the body weight raised to a power between 0.65 and 0.75. A value of 0.667 = 2/3 has been
used in EPA as the default value for adjusting cross-species intakes, and the same factor has been used for intra-species
intake adjustments.
[NOTE: Following discussions by an interagency task force (Federal Register, 1992), the agreement was that a more
accurate and defensible default value would be to choose the power to 3/4 rather than 2/3. A recent article (West et al,
1997) has provided a theoretical basis for the 3/4 power scaling. This will be the standard value to be used in future
assessments, and all equations in this Appendix will be modified in future risk assessments. However, because risk
assessors now use the current IRIS information, this discussion is presented with the previous default assumption of 2/3].
With this model, the relation between the daily air intake in the population of interest, IAP = (mVday)p, and the intake
in the population described in this handbook, IAE = (mVday)E is:
IAP = IAE X (WP/WE)M
4. CALCULATION OF RISKS FOR AIR CONTAMINANTS
The risk is calculated by multiplying the IRIS air unit risk, corrected as described in Table 1A-1, by the air
concentration. But since the correction factor involves the intake in the population of interest (IAP), that quantity must be
included in the equation, as follows:
(Risk)p = (air unit risk)p x (air concentration)
= (air unit risk)3 x (IAP/20) x (70/WP)2'3 x (air concentration)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 1A-5
-------
._. _^ __..—- Volume I - General Factors
EFH
Appendix 1A
= (air unit nsk)s x [(IAE x (Wp/WE)2/3/20)] x (70/WP)2'3 x (air concentration)
= (air unit risk)3 x (IAE/20) x (70/WE)2'3 x (air concentration)
In this equation the air unit risk from the IRIS data base (air unit risk)3, the air intake data in the handbook for the
populations where it is available (IAE) and the body weight of that population (WE) are included along with the standard IRIS
values of the air intake (20 mVday) and body weight (70 kg).
For food ingestion and tap water intake, if body weight-normalized intake values from this handbook are used, the intake
data do not have to be corrected as in Section 3 above. In these cases, corrections to the dose-response parameters in Table
1A-1 are sufficient.
5. REFERENCES
Federal Register. (1992) Cross-species scaling factor for carcinogen risk assessments based on equivalence of (mg/kg-
day)3'4. Draft report. Federal Register, 57(109): 24152-24173, June 5, 1992.
Prosser, C.L.; Brown, F.A. (1961) Comparative Animal physiology, 2nd edition. WB Saunders Co. p. 161.
U.S. EPA. (1996) Background Documentation. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Online. National Center for
Environmental Assessment, Cincinnati, Ohio. Background Documentation available from: Risk Information Hotline,
National Center for Environmental Assessment, U.S. EPA, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr. Cincinnati, OH 45268. (513)
569-7254
West, G.B.; Brown, J.H.; Enquist, B.J. (1997) A general model of the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science
276:122-126.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
1A-6 August 1997
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
2. VARIABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY 1
2.1. VARIABILITY VERSUS UNCERTAINTY 1
2.2. TYPES OF VARIABILITY 2
2.3. CONFRONTING VARIABILITY 3
2.4. CONCERN ABOUT UNCERTAINTY 3
2.5. TYPES OF UNCERTAINTY AND REDUCING UNCERTAINTY 4
2.6. ANALYZING VARIABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY 4
2.7. PRESENTING RESULTS OF VARIABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY
ANALYSIS 6
2.8. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 2 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 2 - Variability and Uncertainty
2. VARIABILITY AND UNCERTAINTY
The chapters that follow will discuss exposure
factors and algorithms for estimating exposure. Exposure
factor values can be used to obtain a range of exposure
estimates such as average, high-end and bounding
estimates. It is instructive here to return to the general
equation for potential Average Daily Dose (ADDpot) that
was introduced in the opening chapter of this handbook:
Contaminant Concentration x Intake Rate x Exposure Duration
Body Weight x Averaging Time
With the exception of the contaminant concentration,
all parameters in the above equation are considered
exposure factors and, thus, are treated in fair detail in other
chapters of this handbook. Each of the exposure factors
involves humans, either in terms of their characteristics
(e.g., body weight) or behaviors (e.g., amount of time spent
in a specific location, which affects exposure duration).
While the topics of variability and uncertainly apply equally
to contaminant concentrations and the rest of the exposure
factors in equation 2-1, the focus of this chapter is on
variability and uncertainty as they relate to exposure factors.
Consequently, examples provided in this chapter relate
primarily to exposure factors, although contaminant
concentrations may be used when they better illustrate the
point under discussion.
This chapter also is intended to acquaint the
exposure assessor with some of the fundamental concepts
and precepts related to variability and uncertainly, together
with methods and considerations for evaluating and
presenting the uncertainly associated with exposure
estimates. Subsequent sections in this chapter are devoted
to the following topics:
• Distinction between variability and
uncertainty;
• Types of variability;
• Methods of confronting variability;
• Types of uncertainly and reducing uncertainly;
• Analysis of variability and uncertainly; and
• Presenting results of variability/uncertainty
analysis.
Fairly extensive treatises on the topic of uncertainty
have been provided, for example, by Morgan and Henrion
(1990), the National Research Council (NRC, 1994) and,
to a lesser extent, the U.S. EPA (1992; 1995). The topic
commonly has been treated as it relates to the overall
process of conducting risk assessments; because exposure
assessment is a component of risk-assessment process, the
general concepts apply equally to the exposure-assessment
component.
2.1. VARIABILITY VERSUS UNCERTAINTY
While some authors have treated variability as a
specific type or component of uncertainly, the U.S.
EPA (1995) has advised the risk assessor (and, by
analogy, the exposure assessor) to distinguish
between variability and uncertainly. Uncertainly
represents a lack of knowledge about factors
affecting exposure or risk, whereas variability arises from
true heterogeneity across people, places or time. In other
words, uncertainly can lead to inaccurate or biased
estimates, whereas variability can affect the precision of the
estimates and the degree to which they can be generalized.
Most of the data presented in this handbook concerns
variability.
Variability and uncertainly can complement or
confound one another. An instructive analogy has been
drawn by the National Research Council (NRC, 1994:
Chapter 10), based on the objective of estimating the
distance between the earth and the moon. Prior to fairly
recent technology developments, it was difficult to make
accurate measurements of this distance, resulting in
measurement uncertainly. Because the moon's orbit is
elliptical, the distance is a variable quantity. If only a few
measurements were to be taken without knowledge of the
elliptical pattern, then either of the following incorrect
conclusions might be reached:
• That the measurements were faulty, thereby
ascribing to uncertainly what was actually
caused by variability; or
• That the moon's orbit was random, thereby not
allowing uncertainly to shed light on seemingly
unexplainable differences that are in fact
variable and predictable.
A more fundamental error in the above situation
would be to incorrectly estimate the true distance, by
assuming that a few observations were sufficient. This
latter pitfall — treating a highly variable quantity as if it
were invariant or only uncertain — is probably the most
relevant to the exposure or risk assessor.
Now consider a situation that relates to exposure,
such as estimating the average daily dose by one exposure
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
2-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 2 - Variability and Uncertainty
route — ingestion of contaminated drinking water. Suppose
that it is possible to measure an individual's daily water
consumption (and concentration of the contaminant)
exactly, thereby eliminating uncertainty in the measured
daily dose. The daily dose still has an inherent day-to-day
variability, however, due to changes in the individual's daily
water intake or the contaminant concentration in water.
It is impractical to measure the individual's dose
every day. For this reason, the exposure assessor may
estimate the average daily dose (ADD) based on a finite
number of measurements, in an attempt to "average out" the
day-to-day variability. The individual has a true (but
unknown) ADD, which has now been estimated based on a
sample of measurements. Because the individual's true
average is unknown, it is uncertain how close the estimate
is to the true value. Thus, the variability across daily doses
has been translated into uncertainty in the ADD. Although
the individual's true ADD has no variability, the estimate of
the ADD has some uncertainty.
The above discussion pertains to the ADD for one
person. Now consider a distribution of ADDs across
individuals in a defined population (e.g., the general U.S.
population). In this case, variability refers to the range and
distribution of ADDs across individuals in the population.
By comparison, uncertainly refers to the exposure assessor's
state of knowledge about that distribution, or about
parameters describing the distribution (e.g., mean, standard
deviation, general shape, various percentiles).
As noted by the National Research Council (NRC,
1994), the realms of variability and uncertainly have
fundamentally different ramifications for science and
judgment. For example, uncertainly may force decision-
makers to judge how probable it is that exposures have
been overestimated or underestimated for every member of
the exposed population, whereas variability forces them to
cope with the certainly that different individuals are subject
to exposures both above and below any of the exposure
levels chosen as a reference point.
2.2. TYPES OF VARIABILITY
Variability in exposure is related to an individual's
location, activity, and behavior or preferences at a particular
point in time, as well as pollutant emission rates and
physical/chemical processes that affect concentrations in
various media (e.g., air, soil, food and water). The
variations in pollutant-specific emissions or processes, and
in individual locations, activities or behaviors, are not
necessarily independent of one another. For example, both
personal activities and pollutant concentrations at a specific
location might vary in response to weather conditions, or
between weekdays and weekends.
At a more fundamental level, three types of
variability can be distinguished:
• Variability across locations (Spatial
Variability);
• Variability overtime (Temporal Variability);
and
• Variability among individuals (Inter-
individual Variability).
Spatial variability can occur both at regional
(macroscale) and local (microscale) levels. For example,
fish intake rates can vary depending on the region of the
country. Higher consumption may occur among
populations located near large bodies of water such as the
Great Lakes or coastal areas. As another example, outdoor
pollutant levels can be affected at the regional level by
industrial activities and at the local level by activities of
individuals. In general, higher exposures tend to be
associated with closer proximity to the pollutant source,
whether it be an industrial plant or related to a personal
activity such as showering or gardening. In the context of
exposure to airborne pollutants, the concept of a
"microenvironment" has been introduced (Duan, 1982) to
denote a specific locality (e.g., a residential lot or a room in
a specific building) where the airborne concentration can be
treated as homogeneous (i.e., invariant) at a particular point
in time.
Temporal variability refers to variations over time,
whether long- or short-term. Seasonal fluctuations in
weather, pesticide applications, use of woodbuming
appliances and fraction of time spent outdoors are examples
of longer-term variability. Examples of shorter-term
variability are differences in industrial or personal activities
on weekdays versus weekends or at different times of the
day.
Inter-individual variability can be either of two
types: (1) human characteristics such as age or body
weight, and (2) human behaviors such as location and
activity patterns. Each of these variabilities, in turn, may be
related to several underlying phenomena that vary. For
example, the natural variability in human weight is due to a
combination of genetic, nutritional, and other lifestyle or
environmental factors. Variability arising from independent
factors that combine multiplicatively generally will lead to
an approximately lognormal distribution across the
population, or across spatial/temporal dimensions.
Page
2-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 2 - Variability and Uncertainty
2.3. CONFRONTING VARIABILITY
According to the National Research Council (NRC
1994), variability can be confronted in four basic ways
(Table 2-1) when dealing with science-policy questions
surrounding issues such as exposure or risk assessment.
The first is to ignore the variability and hope for the best.
This strategy tends to work best when the variability is
relatively small. For example, the assumption that all adults
weigh 70 kg is likely to be correct within ±25% for most
adults.
The second strategy involves disaggregating the
variability in some explicit way, in order to better
understand it or reduce it. Mathematical models are
appropriate in some cases, as in fitting a sine wave to the
annual outdoor concentration cycle for a particular pollutant
and location. In other cases, particularly those involving
human characteristics or behaviors, it is easier to
disaggregate the data by considering all the relevant
subgroups or subpopulations. For example, distributions of
body weight could be developed separately for adults,
adolescents and children, and even for males and females
within each of these subgroups. Temporal and spatial
analogies for this concept involve measurements on
appropriate time scales and choosing appropriate
subregions or microenvironments.
The third strategy is to use the average value of a
quantity that varies. Although this strategy might appear as
tantamount to ignoring variability, it needs to be based
on a decision that the average value can be estimated
reliably in light of the variability (e.g., when the variability
is known to be relatively small, as in the case of adult body
weight).
The fourth strategy involves using the maximum or
minimum value for an exposure factor. In this case, the
variability is characterized by the range between the
extreme values and a measure of central tendency. This is
perhaps the most common method of dealing with
variability in exposure or risk assessment — to focus on one
time period (e.g., the period of peak exposure), one spatial
region (e.g., in close proximity to the pollutant source of
concern), or one subpopulation (e.g., exercising
asthmatics). As noted by the U.S. EPA (1992), when an
exposure assessor develops estimates of high-end individual
exposure and dose, care must be taken not to set all factors
to values that maximize exposure or dose — such an
approach will almost always lead to an overestimate.
2.4. CONCERN ABOUT UNCERTAINTY
Why should the exposure assessor be concerned with
uncertainty? As noted by the U.S. EPA (1992), exposure
assessment can involve a broad array of information sources
and analysis techniques. Even in situations where actual
exposure-related measurements exist, assumptions or
inferences will still be required because data are not likely
to be available for all aspects of the exposure assessment.
Moreover, the data that are available may be of
questionable or unknown quality. Thus, exposure assessors
have a responsibility to present not just numbers, but also
a clear and explicit explanation of the implications and
limitations of their analyses.
Table 2-1. Four Strategies for Confronting Variability
Strategy
Ignore variability
Disaggregate the
variability
Use the average value
Use a maximum or
minimum value
Example
Assume that all adults weigh
70kg
Develop distributions of body
weight for age/gender groups
Use average body weight for
adults
Use a lower-end value from
the weight distribution
Comment
Works best when variability is small
Variability will be smaller in each group
Can the average be estimated reliably given what
known about the variability?
is
Conservative approach — can lead to unrealistically
high exposure estimate if taken for all factors
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
2-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 2 - Variability and Uncertainty
Morgan and Henrion (1990) provide an argument by
analogy. When scientists report quantities that they have
measured, they are expected to routinely report an estimate
of the probable error associated with such measurements.
Because uncertainties inherent in policy analysis (of which
exposure assessment is a part) tend to be even greater than
those in the natural sciences, exposure assessors also should
be expected to report or comment on the uncertainties
associated with their estimates.
Additional reasons for addressing uncertainty in
exposure or risk assessments (U.S. EPA, 1992, Morgan and
Henrion, 1990) include the following:
• Uncertain information from different sources of
different quality often must be combined for the
assessment;
• Decisions need to be made about whether or
how to expend resources to acquire additional
information,;
• Biases may result in so-called "best estimates"
that in actuality are not very accurate; and
• Important factors and potential sources of
disagreement in a problem can be identified.
Addressing uncertainly will increase the likelihood
that results of an assessment or analysis will be used in an
appropriate manner. Problems rarely are solved to
everyone's satisfaction, and decisions rarely are reached on
the basis of a single piece of evidence. Results of prior
analyses can shed light on current assessments, particularly
if they are couched in the context of prevailing uncertainly
at the time of analysis. Exposure assessment tends to be an
iterative process, beginning with a screening-level
assessment that may identify the need for more in-depth
assessment. One of the primary goals of the more detailed
assessment is to reduce uncertainly in estimated exposures.
This objective can be achieved more efficiently if guided by
presentation and discussion of factors thought to be
primarily responsible for uncertainly in prior estimates.
2.5. TYPES OF UNCERTAINTY AND
REDUCING UNCERTAINTY
The problem of uncertainly in exposure or risk
assessment is relatively large, and can quickly become too
complex for facile treatment unless it is divided into smaller
and more manageable topics. One method of division
(Bogen, 1990) involves classifying sources of uncertainly
according to the step in the risk assessment process (hazard
identification, dose-response assessment, exposure
assessment or risk characterization) at which they can
occur. A more abstract and generalized approach preferred
by some scientists is to partition all uncertainties among the
three categories of bias, randomness and true variability.
These ideas are discussed later in some examples.
The U.S. EPA (1992) has classified uncertainty in
exposure assessment into three broad categories:
1. Uncertainly regarding missing or incomplete
information needed to fully define exposure and
dose (Scenario Uncertainly).
2. Uncertainly regarding some parameter
(Parameter Uncertainly).
3. Uncertainly regarding gaps in scientific theory
required to make predictions on the basis of
causal inferences (Model Uncertainty).
Identification of the sources of uncertainty in an exposure
assessment is the first step in determining how to reduce
that uncertainly. The types of uncertainly listed above can
be further defined by examining their principal causes.
Sources and examples for each type of uncertainty are
summarized in Table 2-2.
Because uncertainly in exposure assessments is
fundamentally tied to a lack of knowledge concerning
important exposure factors, strategies for reducing
uncertainly necessarily involve reduction or elimination of
knowledge gaps. Example strategies to reduce uncertainly
include (1) collection of new data using a larger sample
size, an unbiased sample design, a more direct measurement
method or a more appropriate target population, and (2) use
of more sophisticated modeling and analysis tools.
2.6. ANALYZING VARIABILITY AND
UNCERTAINTY
Exposure assessments often are developed in a
phased approach. The initial phase usually screens out the
exposure scenarios or pathways that are not expected to
pose much risk, to eliminate them from more detailed,
resource-intensive review. Screening-level assessments
typically examine exposures that would fall on or beyond
the high end of the expected exposure distribution. Because
screening-level analyses usually are included in the final
exposure assessment, the final document may contain
scenarios that differ quite markedly in
Page
2-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 2 - Variability and Uncertainty
Table 2-2. Three Types of Uncertainty and Associated Sources and Examples
Type of Uncertainty
Scenario Uncertainty
Parameter Uncertainty
Model Uncertainty
Sources
Descriptive errors
Aggregation errors
Judgment errors
Incomplete analysis
Measurement errors
Sampling errors
Variability
Surrogate data
Relationship errors
Modeling errors
Examples
Incorrect or insufficient information
Spatial or temporal approximations
Selection of an incorrect model
Overlooking an important pathway
Imprecise or biased measurements
Small or unrepresentative samples
In time, space or activities
Structurally-related chemicals
Incorrect inference on the basis for correlations
Excluding relevant variables
sophistication, data quality, and amenability to quantitative
expressions of variability or uncertainly.
According to the U.S. EPA (1992), uncertainty
characterization and uncertainly assessment are two ways of
describing uncertainly at different degrees of sophistication.
Uncertainty characterization usually involves a qualitative
discussion of the thought processes used to select or reject
specific data, estimates, scenarios, etc. Uncertainty
assessment is a more quantitative process that may range
from simpler measures (e.g., ranges) and simpler analytical
techniques (e.g., sensitivity analysis) to more complex
measures and techniques. Its goal is to provide decision
makers with information concerning the quality of an
assessment, including the potential variability in the
estimated exposures, major data gaps, and the effect that
these data gaps have on the exposure estimates developed.
A distinction between variability and uncertainly was
made in Section 2.1. Although the quantitative process
mentioned above applies more directly to variability and the
qualitative approach more so to uncertainly, there is some
degree of overlap. In general, either method provides the
assessor or decision-maker with insights to better evaluate
the assessment in the context of available data and
assumptions. The following paragraphs describe some of
the more common procedures for analyzing variability and
uncertainly in exposure assessments. Principles that pertain
to presenting the results of variability/uncertainty analysis
are discussed in the next section.
Several approaches can be used to characterize
uncertainly in parameter values. When uncertainly is high,
the assessor may use order-of-magnitude bounding
estimates of parameter ranges (e.g., from 0.1 to 10 liters for
daily water intake). Another method describes the range for
each parameter including the lower and upper bounds as
well as a "best estimate" (e.g., 1.4 liters per day) determined
by available data or professional judgement.
When sensitivity analysis indicates that a parameter
profoundly influences exposure estimates, the assessor
should develop a probabilistic description of its range. If
there are enough data to support their use, standard
statistical methods are preferred. If the data are inadequate,
expert judgment can be used to generate a subjective
probabilistic representation. Such judgments should be
developed in a consistent, well-documented manner.
Morgan and Henrion (1990) and Rish (1988) descnbe
techniques to solicit expert judgment.
Most approaches to quantitative analysis examine
how variability and uncertainly in values of specific
parameters translate into the overall uncertainly of the
assessment. Details may be found in reviews such as Cox
and Baybutt (1981), Whitmore (1985), Inman and Helton
(1988), Seller (1987), and Rish and Mamicio (1988).
These approaches can generally be described (in order of
increasing complexity and data needs) as: (1) sensitivity
analysis; (2) analytical uncertainly propagation;
(3) probabilistic uncertainly analysis; or (4) classical
statistical methods (U.S. EPA 1992). The four approaches
are summarized in Table 2-3.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
2-5
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 2 - Variability and Uncertainty
Table 2-3. Approaches to Quantitative Analysis of Uncertainty
Approach
Description
Example
Sensitivity Analysis
Analytical Uncertainty Propagation
Probabilistic Uncertainty Analysis
Classical Statistical Methods
Changing one input variable at a time while
leaving others constant, to examine effect on
output
Examining how uncertainty in individual
parameters affects the overall uncertainty of the
exposure assessment
Varying each of the input variables over various
values of their respective probability distributions
Estimating the population exposure distribution
directly, based on measured values from a
representative sample
Fix each input at lower (then upper) bound
while holding others at nominal values (e.g.,
medians)
Analytically or numerically obtain a partial
derivative of the exposure equation with respect
to each input parameter
Assign probability density function to each
parameter; randomly sample values from each
distribution and insert them in the exposure
equation (Monte Carlo)
Compute confidence interval estimates for
various percentiles of the exposure distribution
2.7. PRESENTING RESULTS OF VARIABILITY
AND UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Comprehensive qualitative analysis and rigorous
quantitative analysis are of little value for use in the
decision-making process, if their results are not clearly
presented. In this chapter, variability (the receipt of
different levels of exposure by different individuals) has
been distinguished from uncertainty (the lack of knowledge
about the correct value for a specific exposure measure or
estimate). Most of the data that are presented in this
handbook deal with variability directly, through inclusion of
statistics that pertain to the distributions for various
exposure factors.
Not all approaches historically used to construct
measures or estimates of exposure have attempted to
distinguish between variability and uncertainly. The
assessor is advised to use a variety of exposure descriptors,
and where possible, the full population distribution, when
presenting the results. This information will provide risk
managers with a better understanding of how exposures are
distributed over the population and how variability in
population activities influences this distribution.
Although incomplete analysis is essentially
unquantifiable as a source of uncertainty, it should not be
ignored. At a minimum, the assessor should describe the
rationale for excluding particular exposure scenarios;
characterize the uncertainly in these decisions as high,
medium, or low; and state whether they were based on data,
analogy, or professional judgment. Where uncertainly is
high, a sensitivity analysis can be used to credible upper
limits on exposure by way of a series of "what if questions.
Although assessors have always used descriptors to
communicate the kind of scenario being addressed, the
1992 Exposure Guidelines establish clear quantitative
definitions for these risk descriptors. These definitions
were established to ensure that consistent terminology is
used throughout the Agency. The risk descriptors defined
in the Guidelines include descriptors of individual risk and
population risk. Individual risk descriptors are intended to
address questions dealing with risks borne by individuals
within a population, including not only measures of central
tendency (e.g., average or median), but also those risks at
the high end of the distribution. Population risk descriptors
refer to an assessment of the extent of harm to the
population being addressed. It can be either an estimate of
the number of cases of a particular effect that might occur
in a population (or population segment), or a description of
what fraction of the population receives exposures, doses,
or risks greater than a specified value. The data presented
in the Exposure Factors Handbook is one of the tools
available to exposure assessors to construct the various risk
descriptors.
However, it is not sufficient to merely present the
results using different exposure descriptors. Risk managers
should also be presented with an analysis of the
uncertainties surrounding these descriptors. Uncertainly
may be presented using simple or very sophisticated
techniques, depending on the requirements of the
Page
2-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 2 - Variability and Uncertainty
assessment and the amount of data available. It is beyond
the scope of this handbook to discuss the mechanics of
uncertainty analysis in detail. At a minimum, the assessor
should address uncertainty qualitatively by answering
questions such as:
• What is the basis or rationale for selecting these
assumptions/parameters, such as data,
modeling, scientific judgment, Agency policy,
"what if considerations, etc.?
• What is the range or variability of the key
parameters? How were the parameter values
selected for use in the assessment? Were
average, median, or upper-percentile values
chosen? If other choices had been made, how
would the results have differed?
• What is the assessor's confidence (including
qualitative confidence aspects) in the key
parameters and the overall assessment? What
are the quality and the extent of the data base(s)
supporting the selection of the chosen values?
Any exposure estimate developed by an assessor will
have associated assumptions about the setting, chemical,
population characteristics, and how contact with the
chemical occurs through various exposure routes and
pathways. The exposure assessor will need to examine
many sources of information that bear either directly or
indirectly on these components of the exposure assessment.
In addition, the assessor will be required to make many
decisions regarding the use of existing information in
constructing scenarios and setting up the exposure
equations. In presenting the scenario results, the assessor
should strive for a balanced and impartial treatment of the
evidence bearing on the conclusions with the key
assumptions highlighted. For these key assumptions, one
should cite data sources and explain any adjustments of the
data.
The exposure assessor also should qualitatively
describe the rationale for selection of any conceptual or
mathematical models that may have been used. This
discussion should address their verification and validation
status, how well they represent the situation being assessed
(e.g., average versus high-end estimates), and any plausible
alternatives in terms of their acceptance by the scientific
community.
Table 2-2 summarizes the three types of uncertainly,
associated sources, and examples. Table 2-3 summarizes
four approaches to analyze uncertainly quantitatively.
These are described further in the 1992 Exposure
Guidelines.
2.8. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 2
Bogen, K.T. (1990) Uncertainly in environmental health
risk assessment. Garland Publishing, New York,
NY.
Cox, D.C.; Baybutt, P.C. (1981) Methods for uncertainty
analysis. A comparative survey. Risk Anal.
1(4):251-258.
Duan, N. (1982) Microenvironment types: A model for
human exposure to air pollution. Environ. Intl.
8:305-309.
Inman, R.L.; Helton, J.C. (1988) An investigation of
uncertainly and sensitivity analysis techniques for
computer models. RiskAnal. 8(1):71-91.
Morgan, M.G.; Henrion, M. (1990) Uncertainty: A guide
to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and
policy analysis. Cambridge University Press, New
York, NY.
National Research Council (NRC). (1994) Science and
judgment in risk assessment. National Academy
Press, Washington, DC.
Rish, W.R. (1988) Approach to uncertainty in risk
analysis. Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
ORNL/TM-10746.
Rish, W.R.; Marnicio, R.J. (1988) Review of studies
related to uncertainty in risk analysis. Oak Ridge
National Laboratory. ORNL/TM-10776.
Seller, F.A. (1987) Error propagation for large errors.
RiskAnal. 7(4):509-518.
U.S. EPA (1992) Guidelines for exposure assessment.
Washington, DC: Office of Research and
Development, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment. EPA/600/2-92/001.
U.S. EPA (1995) Guidance for risk characterization.
Science Policy Council, Washington, DC.
Whitmore, R.W. (1985) Methodology for
characterization of uncertainly in exposure
assessments. EPA/600/8-86/009.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
2-7
-------
3. DRINKING WATER INTAKE 1
3.1. BACKGROUND 1
3.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES ON DRINKING WATER INTAKE
1
3.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES ON DRINKING WATER
INTAKE 9
3.4. PREGNANT AND LACTATING WOMEN 17
3.5. HIGH ACTIVITY LEVELS/HOT CLIMATES 20
3.6. RECOMMENDATIONS 23
3.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3 30
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
3. DRINKING WATER INTAKE
3.1. BACKGROUND
Drinking water is a potential source of human
exposure to toxic substances. Contamination of drinking
water may occur by, for example, percolation of toxics
through the soil to ground water that is used as a source of
drinking water; runoff or discharge to surface water that is
used as a source of drinking water; intentional or
unintentional addition of substances to treat water (e.g.,
chlorination); and leaching of materials from plumbing
systems (e.g., lead). Estimating the magnitude of the
potential dose of toxics from drinking water requires
information on the quantity of water consumed. The
purpose of this section is to describe key published studies
that provide information on drinking water consumption
(Section 3.2) and to provide recommendations of
consumption rate values that should be used in exposure
assessments (Section 3.6).
Currently, the U. S. EPA uses the quantity of 2 L per
day for adults and 1 L per day for infants (individuals of 10
kg body mass or less) as default drinking water intake rates
(U.S. EPA, 1980; 1991). These rates include drinking
water consumed in the form of juices and other beverages
containing tapwater (e.g., coffee). The National Academy
of Sciences (NAS, 1977) estimated that daily consumption
of water may vary with levels of physical activity and
fluctuations in temperature and humidity. It is reasonable
to assume that some individuals in physically-demanding
occupations or living in warmer regions may have high
levels of water intake.
Numerous studies cited in this chapter have
generated data on drinking water intake rates. In general,
these sources support EPA's use of 2 L/day for adults and 1
L/day for children as upper-percentile tapwater intake rates.
Many of the studies have reported fluid intake rates for both
total fluids and tapwater. Total fluid intake is defined as
consumption of all types of fluids including tapwater, milk,
soft drinks, alcoholic beverages, and water intrinsic to
purchased foods. Total tapwater is defined as water
consumed directly from the tap as a beverage or used in the
preparation of foods and beverages (i.e., coffee, tea, frozen
juices, soups, etc.). Data for both consumption categories
are presented in the sections that follow. However, for the
purposes of exposure assessments involving source-specific
contaminated drinking water, intake rates based on total
tapwater are more representative of source-specific
tapwater intake. Given the assumption that purchased foods
and beverages are widely distributed and less likely to
contain source-specific water, the use of total fluid intake
rates may overestimate the potential exposure to toxic
substances present only in local water supplies; therefore
tapwater intake, rather than total fluid intake, is emphasized
in this section.
All studies on drinking water intake that are currently
available are based on short-term survey data. Although
short-term data may be suitable for obtaining mean intake
values that are representative of both short- and long-term
consumption patterns, upper-percentile values may be
different for short-term and long-term data because more
variability generally occurs in short-term surveys. It should
also be noted that most drinking water surveys currently
available are based on recall. This may be a source of
uncertainty in the estimated intake rates because of the
subjective nature of this type of survey technique.
The distribution of water intakes is usually, but not
always, lognormal. Instead of presenting only the
lognormal parameters, the actual percentile distributions are
presented in this handbook, usually with a comment on
whether or not it is lognormal. To facilitate comparisons
between studies, the mean and the 90th percentiles are
given for all studies where the distribution data are
available. With these two parameters, along with
information about which distribution is being followed, one
can calculate, using standard formulas, the geometric mean
and geometric standard deviation and hence any desired
percentile of the distribution. Before doing such a
calculation one must be sure that one of these distributions
adequately fits the data.
The available studies on drinking water consumption
are summarized in the following sections. They have been
classified as either key studies or relevant studies based on
the applicability of their survey designs to exposure
assessment of the entire United States population.
Recommended intake rates are based on the results of key
studies, but relevant studies are also presented to provide
the reader with added perspective on the current state-of-
knowledge pertaining to drinking water intake.
3.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES ON
DRINKING WATER INTAKE
Canada Department of Health and Welfare (1981)
- Tapwater Consumption in Canada - In a study conducted
by the Canadian Department of Health and Welfare, 970
individuals from 295 households were surveyed to
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
determine the per capita total tapwater intake rates for
various age/sex groups during winter and summer seasons
(Canadian Ministry of National Health and Welfare, 1981).
Intake rate was also evaluated as a function of physical
activity. The population that was surveyed matched the
Canadian 1976 census with respect to the proportion in
different age, regional, community size and dwelling type
at home and tapwater consumed away from home. The
survey also did not attempt to estimate intake rates for fluids
other than tapwater. Consequently, no intake rates for total
fluids were reported.
Daily consumption distribution patterns for various
age groups are presented in Table 3-1. For adults (over 18
years of age) only, the average total tapwater intake rate was
Table 3-1. Daily Total Tapwater Intake Distribution for Canadians, by Age Group
(approx. 0.20 L increments, both sexes, combined seasons)
Amount Consumed3 5 and under
L/day
0.00-0.21
0.22 - 0.43
0.44-0.65
0.66-0.86
0.87- 1.07
1.08- 1.29
1.30- 1.50
1.51- 1.71
1.72- 1.93
1.94-2.14
2.15-2.36
2.37-2.57
2.58-2.79
2.80-3.00
3.01-3.21
3.22-3.43
3.44-3.64
3.65-3.86
>3.86
TOTAL
%
11.1
17.3
24.8
9.9
11.1
11.1
4.9
6.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
Age Group (years)
6-17
Number
9
14
20
8
9
9
4
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
81
%
2.8
10.0
13.2
13.6
14.4
14.8
9.6
6.8
2.4
1.2
4.0
0.4
2.4
2.4
0.4
-
-
-
1.6
100.0
Number
7
25
33
34
36
37
24
17
6
3
10
1
6
6
1
0
0
0
4
250
18 and over
%
0.5
1.9
5.9
8.5
13.1
14.8
15.3
12.1
6.9
5.6
3.4
3.1
2.7
1.4
1.1
0.9
0.8
-
2.0
100.0
Number
3
12
38
54
84
94
98
77
44
36
22
20
17
9
7
6
5
0
13
639
Includes tapwater and foods and beverages derived from tapwater.
Source: Canadian
Ministry of National Health and
Welfare, 1981.
groups. Participants monitored water intake for a 2-day
period (1 weekday, and 1 weekend day) in both late summer
of 1977 and winter of 1978. All 970 individuals
participated in both the summer and winter surveys. The
amount of tapwater consumed was estimated based on the
respondents' identification of the type and size of beverage
container used, compared to standard sized vessels. The
survey questionnaires included a pictorial guide to help
participants in classifying the sizes of the vessels. For
example, a small glass of water was assumed to be
equivalent to 4.0 ounces of water, and a large glass was
assumed to contain 9.0 ounces of water. The study also
accounted for water derived from ice cubes and popsicles,
and water in soups, infant formula, and juices. The survey
did not attempt to differentiate between tapwater consumed
1.38 L/day, and the 90th percentile rate was 2.41 L/day as
determined by graphical interpolation. These data follow a
lognormal distribution. The intake data for males, females,
and both sexes combined as a function of age and expressed
in the units of milliliters (grams) per kilogram body weight
are presented in Table 3-2. The tapwater survey did not
include body weights of the participants, but the body
weight information was taken from a Canadian health
survey dated 1981; it averaged 65.1 kg for males and 55.6
kg for females. Intake rates for specific age groups and
seasons are presented in Table 3-3. The average daily total
tapwater intake rates for all ages and seasons combined was
1.34 L/day, and the 90th percentile rate was 2.36 L/day.
The summer intake rates are nearly the same as the winter
intake rates. The authors speculate that the reason for the
Page
3-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
small seasonal variation here is that in Canada, even in the
summer, the ambient temperature seldom exceeded 20
degrees C and marked increase in water consumption with
high activity levels has been observed in other studies only
when the ambient temperature has been higher than 20
degrees. Average daily total tapwater intake rates as a
function of the level of physical activity, as estimated
subjectively, are presented in Table 3-4. The amounts of
tapwater consumed that are derived from various foods and
beverages are presented in Table 3-5. Note that the
consumption of direct "raw" tapwater is almost constant
across all age groups from school-age children through the
oldest ages. The increase in total tapwater consumption
beyond school age is due to coffee and tea consumption.
Table 3-2. Average Daily Tapwater Intake of Canadians
(expressed as milliliters per kilogram body weight)
Average Daily Intake (mL/kg)
Age Group (years)
<3
3-5
6-17
18-34
35-54
55+
Total Population
Source: Canadian Ministry
Females
53
49
24
23
25
24
24
of National
Males
35
48
27
19
19
21
21
Both Sexes
45
48
26
21
22
22
22
Health and Welfare, 1981.
Table 3-3. Average Daily Total Tapwater Intake of Canadians, by Age and Season (L/day)a
Age (years)
<3
Average
Summer 0.57
Winter 0.66
Summer/Winter 0.61
90th Percentile
Summer/Winter 1.50
3-5 6-17
0.86 1.14
0.88 1.13
0.87 1.14
1.50 2.21
18-34 35-54 <55
1.33 1.52 1.53
1.42 1.59 1.62
1.38 1.55 1.57
2.57 2.57 2.29
All Ages
1.31
1.37
1.34
2.36
a Includes tapwater and foods and beverages derived from tapwater.
Source: Canadian Ministry of National Health and Welfare, 1981.
Table 3-4. Average Daily Total Tapwater Intake of Canadians as a Function of
Level of Physical Activity at Work and in Spare Time
(16 years and older, combined seasons, L/day)
Work Spare Time
Activity Consumption11 Number of Respondents Consumption1" Number of Respondents
Level" L/day L/day
Extremely Active 1.72
Very Active 1.47
Somewhat Active 1.47
Not Very Active 1.27
Not At All Active 1.30
Did Not State 1.30
TOTAL
99 1.57
244 1.51
217 1.44
67 1.52
16 1.35
.45 1.31
688
" The levels of physical activity listed here were not defined any further by the survey report, and categorization of activity
participants is assumed to be subjective.
b Includes tapwater and foods and beverages derived from tapwater.
Source: Canadian Ministry of National Health and Welfare, 1981.
52
151
302
131
26
26
688
level by survey
Table 3-5. Average Daily Tapwater Intake by Canadians, Apportioned Among Various Beverages
(both sexes, by age, combined seasons, L/day)a
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Age Group (years)
Total Number in Group 34
Water
Ice/Mix
Tea
Coffee
"Other Type of Drink"
Reconstituted Milk
Soup
Homemade Beer/Wine
Homemade Popsicles
Baby Formula, etc.
TOTAL
Under 3
47
0.14
0.01
*
0.01
0.21
0.10
0.04
*
0.01
0.09
0.61
3-5
250
0.31
0.01
0.01
*
0.34
0.08
0.08
*
0.03
*
0.86
6-17
232
0.42
0.02
0.05
0.06
0.34
0.12
0.07
0.02
0.03
*
1.14
18-34
254
0.39
0.04
0.21
0.37
0.20
0.05
0.06
0.04
0.01
*
1.38
35-54
153
0.38
0.03
0.31
0.50
0.14
0.04
0.08
0.07
*
*
1.55
55 and Over
0.38
0.02
0.42
0.42
0.11
0.08
0.11
0.03
*
*
1.57
Includes tapwater and foods and beverages derived from tapwater.
* Less than 0.0 1 L/day
Source: Canadian Ministry
of National Health and Welfare,
1981.
Data concerning the source of tapwater (municipal,
well, or lake) was presented in one table of the study. This
categorization is not appropriate for making conclusions
about consumption of ground versus surface water.
This survey may be more representative of total
tapwater consumption than some other less comprehensive
surveys because it included data for some tapwater-
containing items not covered by other studies (i.e., ice
cubes, popsicles, and infant formula). One potential source
of error in the study is that estimated intake rates were
based on identification of standard vessel sizes; the accuracy
of this type of survey data is not known. The cooler climate
of Canada may have reduced the importance of large
tapwater intakes resulting from high activity levels,
therefore making the study less applicable to the United
States. The authors were not able to explain the
surprisingly large variations between regional tapwater
intakes; the largest regional difference was between Ontario
(1.18 liters/day) and Quebec (1.55 liters/day).
Ershow and Cantor (1989) - Total Water and
Tapwater Intake in the United States: Population-Based
Estimates of Quantities and Sources - Ershow and Cantor
(1989) estimated water intake rates based on data collected
by the USDA 1977-1978 Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey (NFCS). Daily intake rates for tapwater and total
water were calculated for various age groups for males,
females, and both sexes combined. Tapwater was defined
as "all water from the household tap consumed directly as
a beverage or used to prepare foods and beverages." Total
water was defined as tapwater plus "water intrinsic to foods
and beverages" (i.e., water contained in purchased food and
beverages). The authors showed that the age, sex, and
racial distribution of the surveyed population closely
matched the estimated 1977 U. S. population.
Daily total tapwater intake rates, expressed as mL
(grams) per day by age group are presented in Table 3-6.
These data follow a lognormal distribution. The same data,
expressed as mL (grams) per kg body weight per day are
presented in Table 3-7. A summary of these tables,
showing the mean, the 10th and 90th percentile intakes,
expressed as both mL/day and mL/kg-day as a function of
age, is presented in Table 3-8. This shows that the mean
and 90th percentile intake rates for adults (ages 20 to 65+)
are approximately 1,410 mL/day and 2,280 mL/day and for
all ages the mean and 90th percentile intake rates are 1,190
mL/day and 2,090 mL/day. Note that older adults have
greater intakes than do adults between age 20 and
Page
3-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 3-6. Total Tapvtater Intake (mL/day) for Both Sexes Combined
Number of
Age (years) Observations Mean
<0.5 182
0.5-0.9 221
1 - 3 1498
4 - 6 1702
7 - 10 2405
11-14 2803
15-19 2998
20-44 7171
45 - 64 4560
65 - 74 1663
75+ 878
Infants (ages <1) 403
Children (ages 1-10) 5605
Teens (ages 11-19) 5801
Adults (ages 20-64) 11731
Adults (ages 65+) 2541
All 26081
272
328
646
742
787
925
999
1255
1546
1500
1381
302
736
965
1366
1459
1193
SD
247
265
390
406
417
521
593
709
723
660
600
258
410
562
728
643
702
S.E. of
Mean
18
18
10
10
9
10
11
8
11
16
20
13
5
7
7
13
4
Percentile Distribution
1
*
*
33
68
68
76
55
105
335
301
279
0
56
67
148
299
80
5
0
0
169
204
241
244
239
337
591
611
568
0
192
240
416
598
286
10
0
0
240
303
318
360
348
483
745
766
728
0
286
353
559
751
423
25
80
117
374
459
484
561
587
766
1057
1044
961
113
442
574
870
1019
690
50
240
268
567
660
731
838
897
1144
1439
1394
1302
240
665
867
1252
1367
1081
a Total tapwater is defined as "all water from the household tap consumed directly as a beverage or used to prepare foods and bevera
* Value not reported due to insufficient number of observations.
Source: Ershow and Cantor,
1989.
75
332
480
820
972
1016
1196
1294
1610
1898
1873
1706
424
960
1246
1737
1806
1561
yes."
90
640
688
1162
1302
1338
1621
1763
2121
2451
2333
2170
649
1294
1701
2268
2287
2092
95 99
800 *
764 *
1419 1899
1520 1932
1556 1998
1924 2503
2134 2871
2559 3634
2870 3994
2693 3479
2476 3087
775 1102
1516 1954
2026 2748
2707 3780
2636 3338
2477 3415
ft
Q
b
3.
I
S3 *
x! ft
a 51.
-------
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Number of
Observations
Age (years) Actual Wei^ted
Count Count
<0.5 182 201.2
0.5-0.9 221 243.2
1 - 3 1498 1687.7
4-6 1702 1923.9
7 - 10 2405 2742.4
11-14 2803 3146.9
15-19 2998 3677.9
20-44 7171 13444.5
45 - 64 4560 8300.4
65 - 74 1663 2740.2
75+ 878 1401.8
Infants (ages <1) 403 444.3
Children (ages 1-10) 5605 6354.1
Teens (ages 11-19) 5801 6824.9
Adults (ages 20-64) 11731 21744.9
Adults (ages 65+) 2541 4142.0
All 26081 39510.2
Table 3-7.
Mean
52.4
36.2
46.8
37.9
26.9
20.2
16.4
18.6
22.0
21.9
21.6
43.5
35.5
18.2
19.9
21.8
22.6
Total Tapwater Intake (mL/kg-day) for Both Sexes Combined
SD
53.2
29.2
28.1
21.8
15.3
11.6
9.6
10.7
10.8
9.9
9.5
42.5
22.9
10.8
10.8
9.8
15.4
S.E. of
Mean
3.9
2.0
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
2.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
Total tapwater is defined as "all water from the household tap consumed directly
* Value not reported due to insufficient number of observations.
Source: Ershow and Cantor, 1989.
1
*
*
2.7
3.4
2.2
1.5
1.0
1.6
4.4
4.6
3.8
0.0
2.7
1.2
2.2
4.5
1.7
as
5
0.0
0.0
11.8
10.3
7.4
4.9
3.9
4.9
8.0
8.7
8.8
0.0
8.3
4.3
5.9
8.7
5.8
10
0.0
0.0
17.8
14.9
10.3
7.5
5.7
7.1
10.3
10.9
10.7
0.0
12.5
6.5
8.0
10.9
8.2
25
14.8
15.3
27.2
21.9
16.0
11.9
9.6
11.2
14.7
15.1
15.0
15.3
19.6
10.6
12.4
15.0
13.0
50
37.8
32.2
41.4
33.3
24.0
18.1
14.8
16.8
20.2
20.2
20.5
35.3
30.5
16.3
18.2
20.3
19.4
75
66.1
48.1
60.4
48.7
35.5
26.2
21.5
23.7
27.2
27.2
27.1
54.7
46.0
23.6
25.3
27.1
28.0
90
128.3
69.4
82.1
69.3
47.3
35.7
29.0
32.2
35.5
35.2
33.9
101.8
64.4
32.3
33.7
34.7
39.8
95 99
155.6 *
102.9 *
101.6 140.6
81.1 103.4
55.2 70.5
41.9 55.0
35.0 46.3
38.4 53.4
42.1 57.8
40.6 51.6
38.6 47.2
126.5 220.5
79.4 113.9
38.9 52.6
40.0 54.8
40.0 51.3
50.0 79.8
a beverage or used to prepare foods and beverages."
Q
I
b
3.
'
I
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Age Group
Infants (<1 year)
Children (1-10 years)
Teens (11-19 years)
Adults (20 -64 years)
Adults (65+ years)
All ages
Mean
302
736
965
1,366
1,459
1,193
Table 3-8. Summary of Tapwater Intake by
Intake (mL/day)
10th-90th Percentiles
0-649
286-1,294
353-1,701
559-2,268
751-2,287
423-2,092
Age
Mean
43.5
35.5
18.2
19.9
21.8
22.6
Intake (mL/kg-day)
10th-90th Percentiles
0- 100
12.5-64.4
6.5-32.3
8.0-33.7
10.9-34.7
8.2-39.8
Source: Ershow and Cantor (1989)
65, an observation bearing on the interpretation of the
Cantor, et al. (1987) study which surveyed a population that
was older than the national average (see Section 3.3).
Ershow and Cantor (1989) also measured total water
intake for the same age groups and concluded that it
averaged 2,070 mL/day for all groups combined and that
tapwater intake (1,190 mL/day) is 55 percent of the total
water intake. (The detailed intake data for various age
groups are presented in Table 3-9). Ershow and Cantor
(1989) also concluded that, for all age groups combined,
the proportion of tapwater consumed as drinking water,
foods, and beverages is 54 percent, 10 percent and 36
percent, respectively. (The detailed data on proportion of
tapwater consumed for various age groups are presented in
Table 3-10). Ershow and Cantor (1989) also observed that
males of all age groups had higher total water and tapwater
consumption rates than
females; the variation of each from the combined-sexes
mean was about 8 percent.
Ershow and Cantor (1989) also presented data on
total water intake and tapwater intake for children of various
ages. They found, for infants and children between the ages
of 6 months and 15 years, that the total water intake per unit
body weight increased smoothly and sharply from 30
mL/kg-day above age 15 years to 190 mL/kg-day for ages
less than 6 months. This probably represents metabolic
requirements for water as a dietary constituent. However,
they found that the intake of tapwater alone went up only
slightly with decreasing age (from 20 to 45 mL/kg-day as
age decreases from 11 years to less than 6 months). Ershow
and Cantor (1989) attributed this small effect of age on
tapwater intake to the large number of alternative water
sources (besides tapwater) used for the younger age groups.
Table 3-9. Total Tapwater Intake (as percent of total water intake) by Broad Age Category*
Age (years)
1-10
11-19
20-64
65+
Mean
26
45
47
59
65
1
0
6
6
12
25
5
0
19
18
27
41
10
0
24
24
35
47
Percentile Distribution
25 50 75
12
34
35
49
58
22
45
47
61
67
37
57
59
72
74
90
55
67
69
79
81
95
62
72
74
83
84
a Does not include pregnant women, lactating women, or breast-fed children.
Total tapwater is defined as "all water from the household tap consumed directly as a beverage or used to prepare foods and beveraj
0 = Less than 0.5 percent.
Source: Ershow and Cantor, 1989.
99
82
81
83
90
90
;es."
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-10. General Dietary Sources of Tapwater for Both Sexes*
Age
(years)
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
corresponding z-scores (Roseberry and Burmaster, 1992).
Least squares techniques were used to estimate the best fit
straight lines for the transformed data. Summary statistics
for the best-fit lognormal distribution are presented in Table
3-11. In this table, the simulated balanced population
represents an adjustment to account for the different age
distribution of the United States population in 1988 from
the age distribution in 1978 when Ershow and Cantor
(1989) collected their data. Table 3-12 summarizes the
quantiles and means of tapwater intake as estimated from
the best-fit distributions. The mean total tapwater intake
rates for the two adult populations (age 20 to 65 years, and
65+ years) were estimated to be 1.27 and 1.34 L/day.
Table 3-11. Summary Statistics for Best-Fit Lognormal
Distributions for Water Intake Rates3
Group
(age in years)
In Total Fluid
Intake Rate
0< age <1 6.979
l
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-12. Estimated Quantiles and Means for Total Tapwater Intake Rates (mL/day)a
Age Group
(years)
0
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 3-14. Intake of Total Liquid, Total Tapv/ater, and Various Beverages (L/day)
Beverage
Total Liquid
Total Liquid
Home
Total Liquid
Away
Total Tapv/ater
Total Tapv/ater
Home
Total Tapv/ater
Av/ay
Tea
Coffee
Other Hot
Water Drinks
Cold Water
Fruit Drinks
Non Tapv/ater
Home-brew
Bought
Alcoholic
Beverages
Mean
Intake
1.589
1.104
0.484
0.955
0.754
0.201
0.584
0.190
0.011
0.103
0.057
0.427
0.010
0.206
" Consumers only is defined as only
Source : Hopkin and Ellis, 1 980
Approx. Std.
Error of Mean
0.0203
0.0143
0.0152
0.0129
0.0116
0.0056
0.0122
0.0059
0.0015
0.0049
0.0027
0.0058
0.0017
0.0123
All Individuals
Approx. 95%
Confidence
Interval for
Mean
1.547-1.629
1.075-1.133
0.454-0.514
0.929-0.981
0.731-0.777
0.190-0.212
0.560-0.608
0.178-0.202
0.008-0.014
0.093-0.113
0.052-0.062
0.415-0.439
0.007-0.013
0.181-0.231
10 and 90
Percentiles
0.77-2.57
0.49-1.79
0.00-1.15
0.39-1.57
0.26-1.31
0.00-0.49
0.01-1.19
0.00-0.56
0.00-0.00
0.00-0.31
0.00-0.19
0.20-0.70
0.00-0.00
0.00-0.68
land 99
Percentiles
0.34-4.50
0.23-3.10
0.00-2.89
0.10-2.60
0.02-2.30
0.00-0.96
0.00-2.03
0.00-1.27
0.00-0.25
0.00-0.85
0.00-0.49
0.06-1.27
0.00-0.20
0.00-2.33
Consumers Only
Percentage of
Total Number
of Individuals
100.0
100.0
89.9
99.8
99.4
79.6
90.9
63.0
9.2
51.0
46.2
99.8
7.0
43.5
Mean
Intake
1.589
1.104
0.539
0.958
0.759
0.253
0.643
0.302
0.120
0.203
0.123
0.428
0.138
0.474
Approx.
Std. Error
of Mean
0.0203
0.0143
0.0163
0.0129
0.0116
0.0063
0.0125
0.0105
0.0133
0.0083
0.0049
0.0058
0.0209
0.0250
Approx. 95%
Confidence
Interval for
Mean
1.547-1.629
1.075-1.133
0.506-0.572
0.932-0.984
0.736-0.782
0.240-0.266
0.618-0.668
0.281-0.323
0.093-0.147
0.186-0.220
0.113-0.133
0.416-0.440
0.096-0.180
0.424-0.524
those individuals who reported consuming the beverage during the survey period.
i Ore
Q
b
3.
I
ft
S3 *
x! ft
a 51.
-------
CTQ
I
Beverage
Total Liquid
Intake
Total Tapwater
Intake
Age
Group
(years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-30
31-54
55+
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-30
31-54
55+
Source: Hopkin and Ellis,
Table 3-15
Number
Male
88
249
180
333
512
396
88
249
180
333
512
396
1980.
Female
75
201
169
350
551
454
75
201
169
350
551
454
Summary of Total Liquid and Total Tapwater Intake for Males and Females (L/day)
Mean Intake
Male
0.853
0.986
1.401
2.184
2.112
1.830
0.477
0.550
0.805
1.006
1.201
1.133
Female
0.888
0.902
1.198
1.547
1.601
1.482
0.464
0.533
0.725
0.991
1.091
1.027
Approx. Std. Error of
Mean
Male
0.0557
0.0296
0.0619
0.0691
0.0526
0.0498
0.0403
0.0223
0.0372
0.0363
0.0309
0.0347
Female
0.0660
0.0306
0.0429
0.0392
0.0215
0.0356
0.0453
0.0239
0.0328
0.0304
0.0240
0.0273
Approx 95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Male
0.742-0.964
0.917-1.045
1.277-1.525
2.046-2.322
2.007-2.217
1.730-1.930
0.396-0.558
0.505-0.595
0.731-0.8790
0.933-1.079
1.139-1.263
1.064-1.202
Female
0.756-1.020
0.841-0.963
1.112-1.284
1.469-1.625
1.558-1.694
1.411-1.553
0.373-0.555
0.485-0.581
0.659-0.791
0.930-1.052
1.043-1.139
0.972-1.082
10 and 90 Percentiles
Male
0.38-1.51
0.54-1.48
0.75-2.27
1.12-3.49
1.15-3.27
1.03-2.77
0.17-0.85
0.22-0.90
0.29-1.35
0.45-1.62
0.64-1.88
0.62-1.72
Female
0.39-1.48
0.51-1.39
0.65-1.74
0.93-2.30
0.95-2.36
0.84-2.17
0.15-0.89
0.22-0.93
0.31-1.16
0.50-1.55
0.62-1.68
0.54-1.57
Q
I
b
3.
'
ft
I
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-16. Measured Fluid Intakes (mL/day)
Subject
Adults ("normal" conditions)11
Adults (high environmental
temperature to 32 °C)
Adults (moderately active)
Children (5-1 4 yr)
Total Fluids Milk
1000-2400 120-450
2840-3410
3256 ±
SD = 900
3700
1000-1200 330-500
1310-1670 540-650
Water-Based
Tapwater Drinks"
45-730 320-1450
ca. 200 ca. 380
540-790
" Includes tea, coffee, soft drinks, beer, cider, wine, etc.
b "Normal" conditions refer to typical environmental temperature and activity levels.
Source: ICRP, 1981.
Gillies and Paul in (1983) - Variability of Mineral
Intakes from Drinking Water - Gillies and Paulin (1983)
conducted a study to evaluate variability of mineral intake
from drinking water. A study population of 109 adults (75
females; 34 males) ranging in age from 16 to 80 years
(mean age = 44 years) in New Zealand was asked to collect
duplicate samples of water consumed directly from the tap
or used in beverage preparation during a 24-hour period.
Participants were asked to collect the samples on a day
when all of the water consumed would be from their own
home. Individuals were selected based on their willingness
to participate and their ability to comprehend the collection
procedures. The mean total tapwater intake rate for this
population was 1.25 (±0.39) L/day, and the 90th percentile
rate was 1.90 L/day. The median total tapwater intake rate
(1.26 L/day) was very similar to the mean intake rate
(Gillies and Paulin, 1983). The reported range was 0.26 to
2.80 L/day.
The advantage of these data are that they were
generated using duplicate sampling techniques. Because
this approach is more objective than recall methods, it may
result in more accurate response. However, these data are
based on a short-term survey that may not be representative
of long-term behavior, the population surveyed is small and
the procedures for selecting the survey population were not
designed to be representative of the New Zealand
population, and the results may not be applicable to the
United States. For these reasons the study is not regarded
as a key study in this document.
Pennington (1983) - Revision of the Total Diet
Study Food List and Diets - Based on data from the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Total Diet Study,
Pennington (1983) reported average intake rates for various
foods and beverages for five age groups of the population.
The Total Diet Study is conducted annually to monitor the
nutrient and contaminant content of the U.S. food supply
and to evaluate trends in consumption. Representative diets
were developed based on 24-hour recall and 2-day diary
data from the 1977-1978 U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS)
and 24-hour recall data from the Second National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II). The
number of participants in NFCS and NHANES II was
approximately 30,000 and 20,000, respectively. The diets
were developed to " approximate 90 percent or more of the
weight of the foods usually consumed" (Pennington, 1983).
The source of water (bottled water as distinguished from
tapwater) was not stated in the Pennington study. For the
purposes of this report, the consumption rates for the food
categories defined by Pennington (1983) were used to
calculate total fluid and total water intake rates for five age
groups. Total water includes water, tea, coffee, soft drinks,
and soups and frozen juices that are reconstituted with
water. Reconstituted soups were assumed to be composed
of 50 percent water, and juices were assumed to contain 75
percent water. Total fluids include total water in addition to
milk, ready-to-use infant formula, milk-based soups,
carbonated soft drinks, alcoholic beverages, and canned
fruit juices. These intake rates are presented in Table 3-17.
Based on the average intake rates for total water for the two
adult age groups, 1.04 and 1.26 L/day, the average adult
intake rate is about 1.15 L/day. These rates should be more
representative of the amount of source-specific water
consumed than are total fluid intake rates. Because this
study was designed to measure food intake, and it used both
USDA 1978 data and NHANES II data, there was not
necessarily a systematic attempt to define tapwater intake
per se, as distinguished from bottled
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-13
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
water. For this reason, it is not considered a key tapwater
study in this document.
Table 3-17. Intake Rates of Total Fluids and Total Tapwater by
Age Group
Average Daily Consumption Rate (L/day)
Age Group Total Fluids' Total Tapwaterb
6-11 months
2 years
14-16 years
25-30 years
60-65 years
0.80
0.99
1.47
1.76
1.63
0.20
0.50
0.72
1.04
1.26
" Includes milk, "ready-to-use" formula, milk-based soup,
carbonated soda, alcoholic beverages, canned juices, water,
coffee, tea, reconstituted juices, and reconstituted soups. Does
not include reconstituted infant formula.
b Includes water, coffee, tea, reconstituted juices, and
reconstituted soups.
Source: Derived from Pennington. 1983.
U.S. EPA (1984) - An Estimation of the Daily
Average Food Intake by Age and Sex for Use in Assessing
the Radionuclide Intake of the General Population - Using
data collected by USDA in the 1977-78 NFCS, U.S. EPA
(1984) determined daily food and beverage intake levels by
age to be used in assessing radionuclide intake through food
consumption. Tapwater, water-based drinks, and soups
were identified subcategories of the total beverage category.
Daily intake rates for tapwater, water-based drinks, soup,
and total beverage are presented in Table 3-18. As seen in
Table 3-18, mean tapwater
intake for different adult age groups (age 20 years and
older) ranged from 0.62 to 0.76 L/day, water-based drinks
intake ranged from 0.34 to 0.69 L/day, soup intake ranged
from 0.03 to 0.06 L/day, and mean total beverage intake
levels ranged from 1.48 to 1.73 L/day. Total tapwater
intake rates were estimated by combining the average daily
intakes of tapwater, water-based drinks, and soups for each
age group. For adults (ages 20 years and older), mean total
tapwater intake rates range from 1.04 to 1.47 L/day, and for
children (ages <1 to 19 years), mean intake rates range from
0.19 to 0.90 L/day. These intake rates do not include
reconstituted infant formula. The total tapwater intake
rates, derived by combining data on tapwater, water-based
drinks, and soup should be more representative of source-
specific drinking water intake than the total beverage intake
rates reported in this study. These intake rates are based on
the same USDA NFCS data used in Ershow and Cantor
(1989). Therefore, the data limitations discussed previously
also apply to this study.
Cantor et al. (1987) - Bladder Cancer, Drinknig
Water Source, and Tapwater Consumption - The National
Cancer Institute (NCI), in a population-based, case control
study investigating the possible relationship between
bladder cancer and drinking water, interviewed
approximately 8,000 adult white individuals, 21 to 84 years
of age (2,805 cases and 5,258 controls) in their homes,
using a standardized questionnaire (Cantor et al., 1987).
The cases and controls resided in one of five metropolitan
areas (Atlanta, Detroit, New Orleans, San
Table 3-18. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Beverages and Tapwater by Age
Age (years)
Tapwater Intake
(mL)
Water-Based Drinks
(mL)'
Soups
(mL)
Total Beverage Intakeb
(mL)
All ages
Under 1
Ito4
5 to 9
10 to 14
15 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40 to 59
60 and over
662.5 ±9.9
170.7 ±64.5
434.6 ±31.4
521.0 ±26.4
620.2 ±24.7
664.7 ±26.0
656.4 ±33.9
619.8 ±34.6
636.5 ±27.2
735.3 ±21.1
762.5 ±23.7
457.1 ±6.7
8.3 ±43.7
97.9 ±21.5
116.5 ± 18.0
140.0 ± 16.9
201.5 ± 17.7
343.1 ±23.1
441.6 ±23.6
601.0± 18.6
686.5 ± 14.4
561.1 ± 16.2
45.9 ± 1.2
10.1 ±7.9
43.8 ±3.9
36.6 ±3.2
35.4±3.0
34.8 ±3.2
38.9 ±4.2
41.3 ±4.2
40.6 ±3.3
51.6 ±2.6
59.4 ±2.9
1434.0 ± 13.7
307.0 ±89.2
743.0 ±43.5
861.0 ±36.5
1025.0 ±34.2
1241.0 ±35.9
1484.0 ±46.9
1531.0 ±48.0
1642.0 ±37.7
1732.0 ±29.3
1547.0 ±32.8
Includes water-based drinks such as coffee, etc. Reconstituted infant formula does not appear to be included in this group.
Includes tapwater and water-based drinks such as coffee, tea, soups, and other drinks such as soft drinks, fruitades, and alcoholic drinks.
Source:
U.S. EPA, 1984.
Page
3-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Francisco, and Seattle) and five States (Connecticut, Iowa,
New Jersey, New Mexico, and Utah). The individuals
interviewed were asked to recall the level of intake of
tapwater and other beverages in a typical week during the
winter prior to the interview. Total beverage intake was
divided into the following two components: 1) beverages
derived from tapwater; and 2) beverages from other
sources. Tapwater used in cooking foods and in ice cubes
was apparently not considered. Participants also supplied
information on the primary source of the water consumed
(i.e., private well, community supply, bottled water, etc.).
The control population was randomly selected from the
general population and frequency matched to the bladder
cancer case population in terms of age, sex, and geographic
location of residence. The case population consisted of
Whites only, had no people under the age of 21 years and
57 percent were over the age of 65 years. The fluid intake
rates for the bladder cancer cases were not used because
their participation in the study was based on selection
factors that could bias the intake estimates for the general
population. Based on responses from 5,258 White controls
(3,892 males; 1,366 females), average tapwater intake rates
for a "typical" week were compiled by sex, age group, and
geographic region. These rates are listed in Table 3-19.
The average total fluid intake rate was 2.01 L/day for men
of which 70 percent (1.4 L/day) was derived from tapwater,
and 1.72 L/day for women of which 79 percent (1.35 L/day)
was derived from tapwater. Frequency distribution data for
the 5,081 controls, for which the authors had information on
both tapwater consumption and cigarette smoking habits,
are presented in Table 3-20. These data follow a lognormal
distribution having an average value of 1.30 L/day and an
upper 90th percentile value of approximately 2.40 L/day.
These values were determined by graphically interpolating
the data of Table 3-20 after plotting it on log probability
graph paper. These values represent the usual level of
intake for this population of adults in the winter.
A limitation associated with this data set is that the
population surveyed was older than the general population
and consisted exclusively of Whites. Also, the intake data
are based on recall of behavior from the winter previous to
the interview. Extrapolation to other seasons and intake
durations is difficult.
The authors presented data on person-years of
residence with various types of water supply sources
(municipal versus private, chlorinated versus
nonchlorinated, and surface versus well water).
Unfortunately, these data can not be used to draw
conclusions about the National average apportionment of
surface versus groundwater since a large fraction (24
percent) of municipal water intake in this survey could not
be specifically attributed to either ground or surface water.
Table 3-19. Average Total Tapwater Intake Rate by Sex
Age, and Geographic Area
Group/Subgroup
Number of
Respondents
Average Total
Tapwater Intake,3-11
L/day
Total group
Sex
Males
Females
Age, years
21-44
45-64
65-84
Geographic area
Atlanta
Connecticut
Detroit
Iowa
New Jersey
New Mexico
New Orleans
San Francisco
Seattle
Utah
5,258
3,892
1,366
291
1,991
2,976
207
844
429
743
1,542
165
112
621
316
279
1.39
1.40
1.35
1.30
1.48
1.33
1.39
1.37
1.33
1.61
1.27
1.49
1.61
1.36
1.44
1.35
Standard deviations not reported in Cantor et al. (1987).
Total tapwater defined as all water and beverages derived from
tapwater.
Source: Cantor etal.. 1987.
Table 3-20. Frequency Distribution of Total
Tapwater Intake Rates"
Consumption
Rate (L/day)
Frequency1" (%)
Cumulative
Frequency1" (%
<0.80
0.81-1.12
1.13-1.44
1.45-1.95
>1.96
20.6
21.3
20.5
19.5
18.1
20.6
41.9
62.4
81.9
100.0
" Represents consumption of tapwater and beverages derived from
tapwater in a "typical" winter week.
b Extracted from Table 3 in Cantor et al. (1987).
Source: Cantor, etal., 1987.
AIHC (1994) - Exposure Factors Handbook - The
Exposure Factors Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) presented
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-15
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
drinking water intake rate recommendations for adults.
Although AIHC (1994) provided little information on the
studies used to derive mean and upper percentile recom-
mendations, the references indicate that several of the
studies used were the same as ones categorized as relevant
studies in this handbook. The mean adult drinking water
recommendations in AIHC (1994) and this handbook are in
agreement. However, the upper percentile value
recommended by AIHC (1994) (2.0 L/day) is slightly lower
than that recommended by this handbook (2.4 L/day).
Based on data provided by Ershow and Cantor (1989), 2.0
L/day corresponds to only approximately the 84th percentile
of the drinking water intake rate distribution. Thus, a
slightly higher value is appropriate for representing the
upper percentile (i.e., 90 to 95th percentile) of the
distribution. AIHC (1994) also presents simulated
distributions of drinking water intake based on Roseberry
and Burmaster (1992). These distributions are also
described in detail in Section 3.2 of this handbook. AIHC
(1994) has been classified as a relevant rather than a key
study because it is not the primary source for the data used
to make recommendations for this document.
USDA (1995) - Food and Nutrient Intakes by
Individuals in the United States, 1 Day, 1989-91. -USDA
(1995) collected data on the quantity of "plain drinking
water" and various other beverages consumed by
individuals in 1 day during 1989 through 1991. The data
were collected as part of USDA's Continuing Survey of
Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). The data used to
estimate mean per capita intake rates combined one-day
dietary recall data from 3 survey years: 1989, 1990, and
1991 during which 15,128 individuals supplied one-day
intake data. Individuals from all income levels in the 48
conterminous states and Washington D.C. were included in
the sample. A complex three-stage sampling design was
employed and the overall response rate for the study was 58
percent. To minimize the biasing effects of the low
response rate and adjust for the seasonality, a series of
weighting factors was incorporated into the data analysis.
The intake rates based on this study are presented in Table
3-21. Table 3-21 includes data for: a) "plain drinking
water", which might be assumed to mean tapwater directly
Table 3-21 Mean Per Capita Drinking Water Intake Based on USDA, CSFII Data From 1989-91 (mL/day)
Sex and Age
(years)
Plain Drinking
Water
Coffee
Tea
Fruit Drinks
and Ades"
Total
Males and Females:
Under 1
1-2
3-5
5 & Under
Males:
6-11
12-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80 and over
20 and over
Females:
6-11
12-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80 and over
20 and over
All individuals
194
333
409
359
537
725
842
793
745
755
946
824
747
809
476
604
739
732
781
819
829
772
856
774
711
0
<0.5
2
1
2
12
168
407
534
551
506
430
326
408
1
21
154
317
412
438
429
324
275
327
260
<0.5
9
26
17
44
95
136
136
149
168
115
115
165
139
40
87
120
136
174
137
124
161
149
141
114
17
85
100
86
114
104
101
50
53
51
34
45
57
60
86
87
61
59
36
37
36
34
28
46
65
211.5
427.5
537
463
697
936
1,247
1,386
1,481
1,525
1,601
1,414
1,295
1,416
603
799
1,074
1,244
1,403
1,431
1,418
1,291
1,308
1,288
1.150
" Includes regular and low calorie fruit drinks, punches, and ades, including those made from powdered mix and frozen concentrate. Excludes
fruit juices and carbonated drinks.
Source: USDA. 1995.
Page
3-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
consumed rather than bottled water; b) coffee and tea,
which might be assumed to be constituted from tapwater;
and 3) fruit drinks and ades, which might be assumed to be
reconstituted from tapwater rather than canned products;
and 4) the total of the three sources. With these
assumptions, the mean per capita total intake of water is
estimated to be 1,416 mL/day for adult males (i.e., 20 years
of age and older), 1,288 mL/day for adult females (i.e., 20
years of age and older) and 1,150 mL/day for all ages and
both sexes combined. Although these assumptions appear
reasonable, a close reading of the definitions used by USDA
(1995) reveals that the word "tapwater" does not occur, and
this uncertainly prevents the use of this study as a key study
of tapwater intake.
The advantages of using these data are that; 1) the
survey had a large sample size; 2) the authors attempted to
represent the general United States population by
oversampling low-income groups and by weighting the data
to compensate for low response rates; and 3) it reflects
more recent intake data than the key studies. The
disadvantages are that: 1) the response rate was low; 2) the
word "tapwater" was not defined and the assumptions that
must be used in order to compare the data with the other
tapwater studies might not be valid; 3) the data collection
period reflects only a one-day intake period, and may not
reflect long-term drinking water intake patterns; and 4) data
on the percentiles of the distribution of intakes were not
given.
Tsang and Klepeis (1996) - National Human Activity
Pattern Survey (NHAPS) - The U.S. EPA collected
information on the number of glasses of drinking water and
juice reconstituted with tapwater consumed by the general
population as part of the National Human Activity Pattern
Survey (Tsang and Klepeis, 1996). NHAPS was conducted
between October 1992 and September 1994. Over 9,000
individuals in the 48 contiguous United States provided data
on the duration and frequency of selected activities and the
time spent in selected microenvironments via 24-hour
diaries. Over 4,000 NHAPS respondents also provided
information of the number of 8-ounce glasses of water and
the number of 8-ounce glasses of juice reconstituted with
water than they drank during the 24-hour survey period
(Tables 3-22 and 3-23). The median number of glasses of
tapwater consumed was 1-2 and the median number of
glasses of juice with tapwater consumed was 1-2.
For both individuals who drank tapwater and
individuals who drank juices reconstituted with tapwater,
the number of glasses ranged from 1 to 20. The highest
percentage of the population (37.1 percent) who drank
tapwater consumed 3-5 glasses and the highest percentage
of the population (51.5 percent) who consumed juice
reconstituted with tapwater drank 1 -2 glasses. Based on the
assumption that each glass contained 8 ounces of water
(226.4 mL), the total volume of tapwater and juice with
tapwater consumed would range from 0.23 L/day (1 glass)
to 4.5 L/day (20 glasses) for respondents who drank
tapwater. Using the same assumption, the volume of
tapwater consumed for the population who consumed 3-5
glasses would be 0.68 L/day to 1.13 L/day and the volume
of juice with tapwater consumed for the population who
consumed 1-2 glasses would be 0.23 L/day to 0.46 L/day.
Assuming that the average individual consumes 3-5 glasses
of tapwater plus 1-2 glasses of juice with tapwater, the
range of total tapwater intake for this individual would
range from 0.9 L/day to 1.64 L/day. These values are
consistent with the average intake rates observed in other
studies.
The advantages of NHAPS is that the data were
collected for a large number of individuals and that the data
are representative of the U.S. population. However,
evaluation of drinking water intake rates was not the
primary purpose of the study and the data do not reflect the
total volume of tapwater consumed. However, using the
assumptions described above, the estimated drinking water
intake rates from this study are within the same ranges
observed for other drinking water studies.
3.4. PREGNANT AND LACTATING WOMEN
Ershow et al. (1991) - Intake of Tapwater and
Total Water by Pregnant and Lactating Women - Ershow
et al. (1991) used data from the 1977-78 USDA NFCS to
estimate total fluid and total tapwater intake among
pregnant and lactating women (ages 15-49 years). Data for
188 pregnant women, 77 lactating women, and 6,201 non-
pregnant, non-lactating control women were evaluated. The
participants were interviewed based on 24 hour recall, and
then asked to record a food diary for the next 2 days.
"Tapwater" included tapwater consumed directly as a
beverage and tapwater used to prepare food and tapwater-
based beverages. "Total water" was defined as all water
from tapwater and non-tapwater sources, including water
contained in food. Estimated total fluid and total tapwater
intake rates for the three groups are
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-17
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-22. Number of Respondents that Consumed Tapwater at a Specified Dail>
Population Group
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full-time
Part-time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
NOTE: "•" = Missing Data
"DK" = Don't know
N = sample size
Frequency
Number of Glasses in a Day
Total N
4,663
2,163
2,498
2
263
348
326
2,972
670
3,774
463
77
96
193
60
4,244
347
26
46
2,017
379
1,309
32
399
1,253
895
650
445
1,048
1,036
1,601
978
3,156
1,507
1,264
1,181
1,275
943
4,287
341
35
4,500
125
38
4,424
203
36
None
1,334
604
728
2
114
90
86
908
117
1,048
147
25
36
63
15
1,202
116
5
11
637
90
313
6
89
364
258
195
127
351
243
450
290
864
470
398
337
352
247
1,232
96
6
1,308
18
8
1,280
48
6
1-2
1,225
582
643
•
96
127
109
751
127
1,024
113
18
18
42
10
1,134
80
6
5
525
94
275
4
95
315
197
157
109
262
285
437
241
840
385
321
282
323
299
1,137
83
5
1,195
25
5
1,161
55
9
3-5
1,253
569
684
•
40
86
88
769
243
1,026
129
23
22
40
13
1,162
73
7
11
497
120
413
11
118
330
275
181
113
266
308
408
271
862
391
336
339
344
234
1,155
91
7
1,206
40
7
1,189
58
6
6-9
500
216
284
•
7
15
22
334
112
416
38
6
6
28
6
451
41
4
4
218
50
188
1
51
132
118
82
62
95
127
165
113
334
166
128
127
155
90
459
40
1
470
27
3
474
24
2
10-19
151
87
64
•
1
7
7
115
20
123
9
1
7
10
1
129
18
3
1
72
13
49
2
14
52
31
19
16
32
26
62
31
96
55
45
33
41
32
134
16
1
143
6
2
142
9
.
20+
31
25
6
•
0
2
.
26
2
25
1
.
2
2
1
26
4
•
1
18
7
3
1
2
13
5
4
3
7
9
11
4
27
4
5
10
9
7
29
1
1
29
1
1
29
1
1
DK
138
65
73
•
5
20
11
54
42
92
21
4
5
7
9
116
13
1
8
40
5
54
4
28
37
9
6
12
28
33
57
20
106
32
26
40
40
32
115
13
10
123
6
9
124
5
9
Refused = respondent refused to answer
Source: Tsang and Kleipeis,
1996
Page
3-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-23. Number of Respondents that Consumed Juice Reconstituted with Tapwater at a Specified Daily Frequency
Population Group
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full-time
Part-time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
NOTE: "•" = Missing Data
"DK" = Don't know
N = sample size
Total N
4,663
2,163
2,498
2
263
348
326
2,972
670
3,774
463
77
96
193
60
4,244
347
26
46
2,017
379
1,309
32
399
1,253
895
650
445
1,048
1,036
1,601
978
3,156
1,507
1,264
1,181
1,275
943
4,287
341
35
4,500
125
38
4,424
203
36
Number of Glasses in a Day
None
1,877
897
980
.
126
123
112
1,277
206
1,479
200
33
46
95
24
1,681
165
11
20
871
156
479
15
146
520
367
274
182
440
396
593
448
1,261
616
529
473
490
385
1,734
130
13
1,834
31
12
1,782
84
11
1-2
1,418
590
826
2
71
140
118
817
252
1,168
142
27
19
51
11
1,318
87
6
7
559
102
426
4
131
355
253
201
130
297
337
516
268
969
449
382
382
389
265
1,313
102
3
1,362
53
3
1,361
53
4
3-5
933
451
482
.
48
58
63
614
133
774
83
15
24
30
7
863
61
5
4
412
88
265
4
82
254
192
125
92
220
200
332
181
616
307
245
215
263
210
853
74
6
900
25
8
882
44
7
6-9
241
124
117
.
11
12
18
155
43
216
15
1
2
5
2
226
14
•
1
103
19
75
2
25
68
47
31
26
51
63
84
43
162
79
66
54
68
53
216
25
.
231
7
3
230
10
1
10-19
73
35
38
.
4
2
7
46
12
57
9
.
1
5
1
64
7
1
1
32
7
20
1
7
21
18
7
5
13
17
26
17
51
22
23
19
18
13
69
3
1
67
5
1
65
6
2
20+
21
17
4
.
1
1
1
16
2
16
1
.
3
1
•
17
4
•
.
9
2
7
•
2
7
5
1
3
4
4
10
3
11
10
4
8
6
3
20
1
.
20
1
.
21
•
•
DK
66
33
33
.
2
11
4
30
14
44
7
0
1
5
9
49
7
3
7
20
5
21
3
4
17
11
5
4
15
14
28
9
46
20
10
17
28
11
55
5
6
59
1
6
57
3
6
Refused = Respondent refused to answer
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-19
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
presented in Tables 3-24 and 3-25, respectively. Lactating
women had the highest mean total fluid intake rate (2.24
L/day) compared with both pregnant women (2.08 L/day)
and control women (1.94 L/day). Lactating women also had
a higher mean total tapwater intake rate (1.31 L/day) than
pregnant women (1.19 L/day) and control women (1.16
L/day). The tapwater distributions are neither normal nor
lognormal, but lactating women had a higher mean tapwater
intake than controls and pregnant women. Ershow et al.
(1991) also reported that rural women (n=l ,885) consumed
more total water (1.99 L/day) and tapwater (1.24 L/day)
than urban/suburban women (n=4,581, 1.93 and 1.13
L/day, respectively). Total water and tapwater intake rates
were lowest in the northeastern region of the United States
(1.82 and 1.03 L/day) and highest in the western region of
the United States (2.06 L/day and 1.21 L/day). Mean intake
per unit body weight was highest among lactating women
for both total fluid and total tapwater intake. Total tapwater
intake accounted for over 50 percent of mean total fluid in
all
these data sets (Section 3.2). A further advantage of this
study is that it provides information on estimates of total
waterand tapwater intake rates for pregnant and lactating
women. This topic has rarely been addressed in the
literature.
3.5. HIGH ACTIVITY LEVELS/HOT CLIMATES
McNall and Schlegel (1968) - Practical Thermal
Environmental Limits for Young Adult Males Working in
Hot, Humid Environments - McNall and Schlegel (1968)
conducted a study that evaluated the physiological tolerance
of adult males working under varying degrees of physical
activity. Subjects were required to pedal pedal-driven
propeller fans for 8-hour work cycles under varying
environmental conditions. The activity pattern for each
individual was: cycled at 15 minute pedalling and 15 miute
rest for each 8-hour period. Two groups of eight subjects
each were used. Work rates were divided into three
categories as follows: high activity level [0.15 horsepower
(hp) per person], medium activity level (0.1
Table 3-24. Total Fluid Intake of Women 15-49 Years Old
Percentile Distribution
Reproductive
Status"
mL/dav
Control
Pregnant
Lactating
mL/kg/dav
Control
Pregnant
Lactating
Mean
1940
2076
2242
32.3
32.1
37.0
Standard
Deviation
686
743
658
12.3
11.8
11.6
5
995
1085
1185
15.8
16.4
19.6
" Number of observations: nonpregnant, nonlactating controls (n
Source: Ershow et al., 1991.
10
1172
1236
1434
18.5
17.8
21.8
25
1467
1553
1833
23.8
17.8
21.8
= 6,201); pregnant (n = 18
50
1835
1928
2164
30.5
30.5
35.1
8); lactatinj
75
2305
2444
2658
38.7
40.4
45.0
(n = 77).
90
2831
3028
3169
48.4
48.9
53.7
95
3186
3475
3353
55.4
53.5
59.2
three groups of women (Table 3-25). Drinking water
accounted for the largest single proportion of the total fluid
intake for control (30 percent), pregnant (34 percent), and
lactating women (30 percent) (Table 3-26). All other
beverages combined accounted for approximately 46
percent, 43 percent, and 45 percent of the total water intake
for control, pregnant, and lactating women, respectively.
Food accounted for the remaining portion of total water
intake.
The same advantages and limitations associated with
the Ershow and Cantor (1989) data also apply to
hp per person), and low activity level (0.05 hp per person).
Evidence of physical stress (i.e., increased body
temperature, blood pressure, etc.) was recorded, and
individuals were eliminated from further testing if certain
stress criteria were met. The amount of water consumed by
the test subjects during the work cycles was also recorded.
Water was provided to the individuals on request. The
water intake rates obtained at the three different activity
levels and the various environmental temperatures are
presented in Table 3-27. The data
Page
3-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-25. Total Tapwater Intake of Women 15-49 Years Old
Percentile Distribution
Reproductive Status3
mL/dav
Control
Pregnant
Lactating
mL/kg/dav
Control
Pregnant
Lactating
Mean
1157
1189
1310
19.1
18.3
21.4
Standard
Deviation
635
699
591
10.8
10.4
9.8
5
310
274
430
5.2
4.9
7.4
10
453
419
612
7.5
5.9
9.8
25
709
713
855
11.7
10.7
14.8
50
1065
1063
1330
17.3
16.4
20.5
75
1503
1501
1693
24.4
23.8
26.8
90
1983
2191
1945
33.1
34.5
35.1
95
2310
2424
2191
39.1
39.6
37.4
Fraction of dailv fluid intake that is tapwater (%)
Control
Pregnant
Lactating
57.2
54.1
57.0
18.0
18.2
15.8
24.6
21.2
27.4
a Number of observations: nonpregnant, nonlactating controls (n
Source: Ershow et al., 1991.
32.2
27.9
38.0
45.9
42.9
49.5
= 6,201); pregnant (n = 1
59.0
54.8
58.1
88); lactatinj
70.7
67.6
65.9
(n = 77).
79.0
76.6
76.4
83.2
83.2
80.5
Table 3-26. Total Fluid (mL/Day) Derived from Various Dietary Sources by Women Aged 15-49 Years3
Control Women
Percentile
Sources
Drinking Water
Milk and Milk Drinks
Other Dairy Products
Meats, Poultry, Fish, Eggs
Legumes, Nuts, and Seeds
Grains and Grain Products
Citrus and Noncitrus Fruit Juices
Fruits, Potatoes, Vegetables, Tomatoes
Fats, Oils, Dressings, Sugars, Sweets
Tea
Coffee and Coffee Substitutes
Carbonated Soft Drinksc
Noncarbonated Soft Drinks0
Beer
Wine Spirits, Liqueurs, Mixed Drinks
All Sources
a Number of observations: nonpregnant,
Meanb
583
162
23
126
13
90
57
198
9
148
291
174
38
17
10
1940
nonlactating controls (n =
50
480
107
8
114
0
65
0
171
3
0
159
110
0
0
0
NA
95
1440
523
93
263
77
257
234
459
41
630
1045
590
222
110
66
NA
6,201): pregnant (n =
Meanb
695
308
24
121
18
98
69
212
9
132
197
130
48
7
5
2076
Pregnant Women
Percentile
50
640
273
9
104
0
69
0
185
3
0
0
73
0
0
0
NA
95
1760
749
93
252
88
246
280
486
40
617
955
464
257
0
25
NA
Meanb
677
306
36
133
15
119
64
245
10
253
205
117
38
17
6
2242
Lactating Women
Percentile
50
560
285
27
117
0
82
0
197
6
77
80
57
0
0
0
NA
95
1600
820
113
256
72
387
219
582
50
848
955
440
222
147
59
NA
188);lactating(n = 77).
b Individual means may not add to all-sources total due to rounding.
c Includes regular, low-calorie, and noncalorie soft drinks.
NA: Not appropriate to sum the columns for the 50th and 95th percentiles of
Source: Ershow et al., 1991.
ntake.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-21
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-27. Water Intake at Various Activity Levels (L/hr)"
Room
Temperature11 (°F)
Activity Level
High(0.15hp/manY Medium (0. 10 hp/manY
No."
100
95 18
90 7
85 7
80 16
Intake No. Intake
0.540 12 0.345
(0.31) (0.59)
0.286 7 0.385
(0.26) (0.26)
0.218 16 0.213
(0.36) (0.20)
0.222
(0.14)
Low (0.05 hp/man)°
No. Intake
15 0.653
(0.75)
6 0.50
(0.31)
16 0.23
(0.20)
__
__
" Data expressed as mean intake with standard deviation in parentheses.
b Humidity = 80 percent; air velocity = 60 ft/min.
0 The symbol "hp" refers to horsepower.
11 Number of subjects with continuous data.
Source: McNall and Schlegel, 1968.
presented are for test subjects with continuous data only
(i.e., those test subjects who were not eliminated at any
stage of the study as a result of stress conditions). Water
intake was the highest at all activity levels when
environmental temperatures were increased. The highest
intake rate was observed at the low activity level at 100°F
(0.65 L/hour) however, there were no data for higher
activity levels at 100°F. It should be noted that this study
estimated intake on an hourly basis during various levels of
physical activity. These hourly intake rates cannot be
converted to daily intake rates by multiplying by 24
hours/day because they are only representative of intake
during the specified activity levels and the intake rates for
the rest of the day are not known. Therefore, comparison of
intake rate values from this study cannot be made with
values from the previously described studies on drinking
water intake.
United States Army (1983) - Water Consumption
Planning Factors Study - The U.S. Army has developed
water consumption planning factors to enable them to
transport an adequate amount of water to soldiers in the
field under various conditions (U.S. Army, 1983). Both
climate and activity levels were used to determine the
appropriate water consumption needs. Consumption factors
have been established for the following uses: 1) drinking,
2) heat treatment, 3) personal hygiene, 4) centralized
hygiene, 5) food preparation, 6) laundry, 7) medical
treatment, 8) vehicle and aircraft maintenance, 9) graves
registration, and 10) construction. Only personal drinking
water consumption factors are described here.
Drinking water consumption planning factors are
based on the estimated amount of water needed to replace
fluids lost by urination, perspiration, and respiration. It
assumes that water lost to urinary output averages one
quart/day (0.9 L/day) and perspiration losses range from
almost nothing in a controlled environment to 1.5 quarts/day
(1.4 L/day) in a very hot climate where individuals are
performing strenuous work. Water losses to respiration are
typically very low except in extreme cold where water
losses can range from 1 to 3 quarts/day (0.9 to 2.8 L/day).
This occurs when the humidity of inhaled air is near zero,
but expired air is 98 percent saturated at body temperature
(U.S. Army, 1983). Drinking water is defined by the U.S.
Army (1983)
Page
3-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
as "all fluids consumed by individuals to satisfy body needs
for internal water." This includes soups, hot and cold
drinks, and tapwater. Planning factors have been
established for hot, temperate, and cold climates based on
the following mixture of activities among the work force:
15 percent of the force performing light work, 65 percent of
the force performing medium work, and 20 percent of the
force performing heavy work. Hot climates are defined as
tropical and arid areas where the temperature is greater than
80°F. Temperate climates are defined as areas where the
mean daily temperature ranges from 32°F to 80°F. Cold
regions are areas where the mean daily temperature is less
than 32°F. Drinking water consumption factors for these
three climates are presented in Table 3-28. These factors
are based on research on individuals and small unit training
exercises. The estimates are assumed to be conservative
because they are rounded up to account for the subjective
nature of the activity mix and minor water losses that are not
considered (U.S. Army, 1983). The advantage of using
these data is that they provide a conservative estimate of
drinking water intake among individuals performing at
various levels of physical activity in hot, temperate, and
cold climates. However, the planning factors described
here are based on assumptions about water loss from
urination, perspiration, and respiration, and are not based on
survey data or actual measurements.
3.6. RECOMMENDATIONS
The key studies described in this section were used in
selecting recommended drinking water (tapwater)
consumption rates for adults and children. The studies on
other subpopulations were not classified as key versus
relevant. Although different survey designs and populations
were utilized by key and relevant studies described in this
report, the mean and upper-percentile estimates reported in
these studies are reasonably similar. The general design of
both key and relevant studies and their limitations are
summarized in Table 3-29. It should be noted that studies
that surveyed large representative samples of the population
provide more reliable estimates of intake rates for the
general population. Most of the surveys described here are
based on short-term recall which may be biased toward
excess intake rates. However, Cantor et al. (1987) noted
that retrospective dietary assessments generally produce
moderate correlations with "reference data from the past."
A summary of the recommended values for drinking water
intake rates is presented in Table 3-30.
Adults - The total tapwater consumption rates for
adults (older than 18 or 20 years) that have been reported in
the key surveys can be summarized in Table 3-31. For
comparison, values for daily tapwater intake for the
relevant studies are shown in Table 3-32.
Note that both Ershow and Cantor (1989) and
Pennington (1983) found that adults above 60 years of age
had larger intakes than younger adults. This is difficult to
reconcile with the Cantor et al. (1987) study because the
latter, older population had a smaller average intake.
Because of these results, combined with the fact that the
Cantor et al. (1987) study was not intended to be
representative of the U. S. population, it is not included here
in the determination of the recommended value. The
Table 3-28. Planning Factors for Individual Tapwater Consumption
Environmental Condition
Recommended Planning Factor (gal/day)'
Recommended Planning Factor (L/day)*'b
Hot
Temperate
Cold
3.0C
1.5"
2.0'
11.4
5.7
7.6
" Based on a mix of activities among the work force as follows: 15% light work; 65% medium work; 20% heavy work. These factors apply to
the conventional battlefield where no nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons are used.
b Converted from gal/day to IVday.
0 This assumes 1 quart/12-hour rest period/man for perspiration losses and 1 quart/day/man for urination plus 6 quarts/12-hours light work/man,
9 quarts/12-hours moderate work/man, and 12 quarts/12-hours heavy work/man.
11 This assumes 1 quart/12-hour rest period/man for perspiration losses and 1 quart/day/man for urination plus 1 quart/12-hours light work/man, 3
quarts/12-hours moderate work/man, and 6 quarts/12-hours heavy work/man.
' This assumes 1 quart/12-hour rest period/man for perspiration losses, 1 quart/day/man for urination, and 2 quarts/day/man for respiration losses
plus 1 quart/12-hours light work/man, 3 quarts/12-hours moderate work/man, and 6 quarts/6-hours heavy work/man.
Source: U.S. Army, 1983.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
3-23
-------
I
Table 3-29. Drinking Water Intake Surveys
Study
KEY
Canadian Ministry of
National Health and
Welfare, 1981
Ershow and Cantor,
1989
Rosenberry and
Burmaster, 1992
RELEVANT
Cantor etal., 1987
Gillies and Paulm, 1983
Hopkm and Ellis, 1980
ICRP, 1981
NAS, 1977
Number of Individuals
970
Based on data from
NFCS; approximately
30,000 individuals
Based on data from
Ershow and Cantor,
1989
5,258
109
3,564
Based on data from
several sources
Calculated average
based on several sources
Type of Water Consumed
Total tapwater
consumption
Total tapwater; total fluid
consumption
Total tapwater; total fluid
consumption
Total tapwater; total fluid
consumption
Total tapwater
consumption
Total tapwater, total liquid
consumption
Water and water -based
drinks; milk; total fluids
Average per capita "liquid"
consumption
Time Period/ Survey Type
Weekday and weekend day
in both summer and winter;
estimation based on sizes
and types of containers used
3-day recall, diaries
3-day recall, diaries
1 week/usual intake in
winter based on recall
24 hours; duplicate water
samples collected
1 week period, diaries
NAa
NAa
Population Surveyed
All ages; Canada
All ages; large sample
representative of U.S.
population
All ages; large sample
representative of US
population
Adults only; weighted toward
older adults; U.S. population
Adults only; New Zealand
All ages; Great Britain
NAa
NAa
Comments
Seasonal data; includes many tapwater- containing
items not commonly surveyed; possible bias
because identification of vessel size used as
survey techniques; short-term study
Short-term recall data; seasonally balanced data
Short-term recall data; seasonally balanced;
suitable for Monte Carlo simulations
Based on recall of behavior from previous
winter; short-term data; population not
representative of general U.S. population
Based on short-term data
Short-term diary data
Survey design and intake categories not clearly
defined
Total tapwater not reported; population and
survey desian not reported
Q
I
b
3.
ft
'
§=
I
-------
a »
* I
VO <*
i
1=
I
i?
>QTQ
<•»! ft
Table 3-29. Drinking Water Intake Surveys (continued)
Study
Pennington, 1983
USDA, 1995
U.S. EPA, 1984
U.S. EPA, 1995
McNall and
Schlegel, 1968
U.S. Army, 1983
Number of Individuals
Based on NFCS and
NHANES II; approximately
30,000 and 20,000
participants, respectively
Based on 89-91 CSF11;
approximately 15,000
individuals
Based on NFCS;
approximately 30,000
individuals
Over 4,000 participants of
NHAPS
Based on 2 groups of 8
subjects each
NA
Type of Water Consumed Time Period/ Survey
Type
Total tapwater; total fluid NFCS:24-hour recall on
consumption 2-day dairy; NHANES
II:24-hour recall
Plain drinking water, coffee, 1-day recall
tea, fruit drinks and ades
Tapwater; water based foods 3-day recall, diaries
and beverages; soups;
beverage consumption
Number of glasses of 24-hour diaries
drinking water and juice with
tapwater
Tapwater 8-hour work cycle
All fluids consumed to NA
satisfy body needs for
internal water; includes
soups, hot and cold drinks
and tapwater
Population Surveyed
NFCS : 1 month to 97 years;
NHANES 11:6 months to 74
years; representative samples of
U.S. population
All ages, large sample
representative of U.S. population
All ages; large sample
representative of U.S. population
All ages, large representative
sample of U.S. population
Males between 17-25 years of
age; small sample; high activity
levels/hot climates
High activity levels/hot climates
Comments
Based on short-term recall data
Short-term recall data; seasonally adjusted
Short-term recall data; seasonally balanced
Does not provide data on the volume of
tapwater consumed
Based on short-term data
Study designed to provide water
consumption planning factors for various
activities and field conditions; based on
estimated amount of water required to
account for losses from urination,
perspiration, and respiration
a Not applicable.
Q
b
3.
I
s a
XJ ft
a :*
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-30, Summary of Recommended Drinking Water Intake Sates
.•/... • ' • • Pereentiles
Age Group/ , , • • .
Population , , Mean 50th
90th
. ' .' '95th
: Multiple
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Ershow and Cantor (1989) study (Tables 3-7 and 3-8)
expressed as mL/kg-day are recommended in preference to
the liters/day units. For adults, the mean and 90th percentile
values are 21 mL/kg-day and 34.2 mL/kg/day, respectively.
In the absence of actual data on chronic intake, the
values in the previous paragraph are recommended as
chronic values, although the chronic 90th upper percentile
may very well be larger than 2.35 L/day. If a mathematical
description of the intake distribution is needed, the
parameters of lognormal fit to the Ershow and Cantor
(1989) data (Tables 3-11 and 3-12) generated by Roseberry
and Burmaster (1992) may be used. The simulated
balanced population distribution of intakes generated by
Roseberry and Burmaster is not recommended for use in the
post-1997 time frame, since it corrects the 1978 data only
for the differences in the age structure of the U. S.
population between 1978 and 1988. These
recommended values are different than the 2 liters/day
commonly assumed in EPA risk assessments. Assessors are
encouraged to use values which most accurately reflect the
exposed population. When using values other than 2
liters/day, however, the assessors should consider if the
dose estimate will be used to estimate risk by combining
with a dose-response relationship which was derived
assuming a tap water intake of 2 liters/day. If such an
inconsistency exists, the assessor should adjust the dose-
response relationship as described in Appendix 1 of
Chapter 1. IRIS does not use a tap water intake assumption
in the derivation of RfCs and RfDs, but does make the 2
liter/day assumption in the derivation of cancer slope factors
and unit risks.
Children - The tapwater intake rates for children
reported in the key studies are summarized in Table 3-33.
The intake rates, as expressed as liters per day,
generally increase with age, and the data are consistent
across ages for the two key studies except for the Canadian
Ministry of Health and Welfare (1981) data for ages 6 to 17
years; it is recommended that any of the liters/day values
that match the age range of interest except the Canada data
for ages 6 to 17 years be used. The mL/kg-day intake
values show a consistent downward trend with increasing
ages; using the Ershow and Cantor (1989) data in
preference to the Canadian Ministry of National Health and
Welfare (1981) data is recommended where the age ranges
overlap.
The intakes for children as reported in the relevant
studies are shown in Table 3-34.
Table 3-33. Key
Age
(years)
<1
<3
3-5
1-10
6-17
11-19
Mean
(L/day)
0.30
0.61
0.87
0.74
1.14
0.97
Study Tapwater Intake Rates for Children
90th
Percentile
(L/day)
0.65
1.50
1.50
1.29
2.21
1.70
Reference
Ershow and Cantor, 1989
Canadian Ministry of
National Health and
Welfare, 1981
Canadian Ministry of
National Health and
Welfare, 1981
Ershow and Cantor, 1989
Canadian Ministry of
National Health and
Welfare, 1981
Ershow and Cantor, 1989
Table 3-34. Summary of Intake Rates for
Age
6-11 months
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
women are presented in Table 3-25. The recommended
intake values are presented in Table 3-30.
High Activity/Hot Climates - Data on intake rates for
individuals performing strenuous activities under various
environmental conditions are limited. None of these is
classed as a key study because the populations in these
studies are not representative of the general U.S.
population. However, the data presented by McNall and
Schlegel (1968) and U.S. Army (1983) provide bounding
intake values for these individuals. According to McNall
and Schlegel (1968), hourly intake can range from 0.21 to
0.65 L/hour depending on the temperature and activity
level. Intake among physically active individuals can range
from 6 L/day in temperate climates to 11 L/day in hot
climates (U.S. Army, 1983).
A characterization of the overall confidence in the
accuracy and appropriateness of the recommendations for
drinking water is presented in Table 3-35. Although the
study of Ershow and Cantor (1989) is of high quality and
consistent with the other surveys, the low currency of the
information (1978 data collection), in the presence of
anecdotal information (not presented here) that the
consumption of bottled water and beverages has increased
since 1980 was the main reason for lowering the confidence
score of the overall recommendations from high to medium.
Page
3-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
Table 3-35. Confidence in Tapwater Intake Recommendations
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection
period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
The study of Ershow and Cantor (1989) had athorough expert panel
review. Review procedures were not reported in the Canadian study;
it was a government report. Other reports presented are published in
scientific journals.
The two monographs are available from the sponsoring agencies; the
others are library-accessible.
Methods are well-described.
The studies are directly relevant to tapwater.
See "representativeness" below.
The two monographs used recent primary data (less than one week)
on recall of intake.
Data were all collected in the 1978 era. Tapwater use may have
changed since that time period.
These are one- to three-day intake data. However, long term
variability may be small. Their use as a chronic intake measure can
be assumed.
The approach was competently executed.
This study was the largest monograph that had data for 1 1,000
individuals.
The Ershow and Cantor (1989) and Canadian surveys were
validated as demographically representative.
The full distributions were given in the main studies.
Bias was not apparent.
No physical measurements were taken. The method relied on recent
recall of standardized volumes of drinking water containers, and was
not validated.
There were two key studies for the adult and child recommendations.
There were six other studies for adults, one study for pregnant and
lactating women, and two studies for high activity/hot climates.
This agreement was good.
The data are excellent, but are not current.
Rating
High
High
High
High
NA
High
Low
Medium
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
High for adult and
children.
Low for the other
recommended
subpopulation values.
High
Medium
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
3-29
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 3 - Drinking Water Intake
3.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington, DC.
Bourne, G.H.; Kidder, G.W., eds. (1953) Biochemistry
and physiology of nutrition. Vol.1. New York, NY:
Academic Press.
Canadian Ministry of National Health and Welfare
(1981) Tapwater consumption in Canada. Document
number 82-EHD-80. Public Affairs Directorate,
Department of National Health and Welfare, Ottawa,
Canada.
Cantor, K.P.; Hoover, R.; Hartge, P.; Mason, T.J.;
Silverman, D.T.;etal. (1987) Bladder cancer,
drinking water source, and tapwater consumption: A
case-control study. J. Natl. Cancer Inst.
79(6):1269-1279.
Ershow, A.G.; Brown, L.M.; Cantor, K.P. (1991) Intake
of tapwater and total water by pregnant and lactating
women. American Journal of Public Health. 81:328-
334.
Ershow, A.G.; Cantor, K.P. (1989) Total water and
tapwater intake in the United States: population-based
estimates of quantities and sources. Life Sciences
Research Office, Federation of American Societies for
Experimental Biology.
Evans, C.L., ed. (1941) Starling's principles of human
physiology, 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger.
Gilhes, M.E.;Paulm,H.V. (1983) Variability of mineral
intakes from drinking water: A possible explanation for
the controversy over the relationship of water quality to
cardiovascular disease. Int. J. Epid. 12(1):45-50.
Guyton, A.C. (1968) Textbook of medical physiology,
3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Co.
Hopkins, S.M.; Ellis, J.C. (1980) Drinking water
consumption in Great Britain: a survey of drinking
habits with special reference to tap-water-based
beverages. Technical Report 137, Water Research
Centre, Wiltshire Great Britain.
ICRP. (1981) International Commission on Radiological
Protection. Report of the task group on reference man.
New York: Pergammon Press.
McNall, P.E.; Schlegel, J.C. (1968) Practical thermal
environmental limits for young adult males working in
hot, humid environments. American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE) Transactions 74:225-235.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS). (1974)
Recommended dietary allowances, 8th ed.
Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences-
National Research Council.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS). (1977) Drinking
water and health. Vol. 1. Washington, DC: National
Academy of Sciences-National Research Council.
Pennington, J.A.T. (1983) Revision of the total diet
study food list and diets. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
82:166-173.
Pike, R.L.; Brown, M. (1975) Minerals and water in
nutrition—an integrated approach, 2nd ed. New York,
NY: John Wiley.
Randall, H.T. (1973) Water, electrolytes and acid base
balance. In: Goodhart RS, Shils ME, eds. Modern
nutrition in health and disease. Philadelphia, PA: Lea
and Febiger.
Roseberry, A.M.; Burmaster, D.E. (1992) Lognormal
distribution for water intake by children and adults.
Risk Analysis 12:99-104.
Tsang, A.M.; Klepeis, N.E. (1996) Results tables from a
detailed analysis of the National Human Activity
Pattern Survey (NHAPS) responses. Draft Report
prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
by Lockheed Martin, Contract No. 68-W6-001,
Delivery Order No. 13.
U.S. Army. (1983) Water Consumption Planning
Factors Study. Directorate of Combat Developments,
United States Army Quartermaster School, Fort Lee,
Virginia.
USDA. (1995) Food and nutrient intakes by individuals
in the United States, 1 day, 1989-91. United States
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service. NFS Report No. 91-2.
U.S. EPA. (1980) U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Water quality criteria documents; availability.
Federal Register, (November 28)
45(231):79318-79379.
U.S. EPA. (1984) An estimation of the daily average
food intake by age and sex for use in assessing the
radionuclide intake of individuals in the general
population. EPA-520/1-84-021.
U.S. EPA. (1991) U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. National Primary Drinking Water Regulation;
Final Rule. Federal Register 56(20):3526-3597.
January 30, 1991.
Walker, B.S.; Boyd, W.C.; Asimov, I. (1957)
Biochemistry and human metabolism, 2nd ed.
Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkms Co.
Wolf, A. V (1958) Body water. Sci. Am. 99:125.
Page
3-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
4. SOIL INGESTION AND PICA 1
4.1 BACKGROUND 1
4.2. KEY STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE AMONG CHILDREN 1
4.3. RELEVANT STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE AMONG CHILDREN 11
4.4. SOIL INTAKE AMONG ADULTS 16
4.5. PREVALENCE OF PICA 17
4.6. DELIBERATE SOIL INGESTION AMONG CHILDREN 18
4.7. RECOMMENDATIONS 20
4.8. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4 25
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
4. SOIL INGESTION AND PICA
4.1. BACKGROUND
The ingestion of soil is a potential source of human
exposure to toxicants. The potential for exposure to
contaminants via this source is greater for children because
they are more likely to ingest more soil than adults as a
result of behavioral patterns present during childhood.
Inadvertent soil ingestion among children may occur
through the mouthing of objects or hands. Mouthing
behavior is considered to be a normal phase of childhood
development. Adults may also ingest soil or dust particles
that adhere to food, cigarettes, or their hands. Deliberate
soil ingestion is defined as pica and is considered to be
relatively uncommon. Because normal, inadvertent soil
ingestion is more prevalent and data for individuals with
pica behavior are limited, this section focuses primarily on
normal soil ingestion that occurs as a result of mouthing or
unintentional hand-to-mouth activity.
Several studies have been conducted to estimate the
amount of soil ingested by children. Most of the early
studies attempted to estimate the amount of soil ingested by
measuring the amount of dirt present on children's hands
and making generalizations based on behavior. More
recently, soil intake studies have been conducted using a
methodology that measures trace elements in feces and soil
that are believed to be poorly absorbed in the gut. These
measurements are used to estimate the amount of soil
ingested over a specified time period. The available studies
on soil intake are summarized in the following sections.
Studies on soil intake among children have been classified
as either key studies or relevant studies based on their
applicability to exposure assessment needs. Recommended
intake rates are based on the results of key studies, but
relevant studies are also presented to provide the reader
with added perspective on the current state-of-knowledge
pertaining to soil intake. Information on soil ingestion
among adults is presented based on available data from a
limited number of studies. This is an area where more data
and more research are needed. Relevant information on the
prevalence of pica and intake among individuals exhibiting
pica behavior is also presented.
4.2. KEY STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE AMONG
CHILDREN
Binder et al. (1986) - Estimating Soil Ingestion:
Use of Tracer Elements in Estimating the Amount of Soil
Ingested by Young Children - Binder et al. (1986) studied
the ingestion of soil among children 1 to 3 years of age who
wore diapers using a tracer technique modified from a
method previously used to measure soil ingestion among
grazing animals. The children were studied during the
summer of 1984 as part of a larger study of residents living
near a lead smelter in East Helena, Montana. Soiled diapers
were collected over a 3-day period from 65 children (42
males and 23 females), and composited samples of soil
were obtained from the children's yards. Both excreta and
soil samples were analyzed for aluminum, silicon, and
titanium. These elements were found in soil, but were
thought to be poorly absorbed in the gut and to have been
present in the diet only in limited quantities. This made
them useful tracers for estimating soil intake. Excreta
measurements were obtained for 59 of the children. Soil
ingestion by each child was estimated based on each of the
three tracer elements using a standard assumed fecal dry
weight of 15 g/day, and the following equation:
4 * Fj
s.
(Eqn. 4-1)
where:
estimated soil ingestion for child i based on element e
(g/day);
concentration of element e in fecal sample of child i
(mg/g);
fecal dry weight (g/day); and
concentration of element e in child i's yard soil (mg/g).
The analysis conducted by Binder et al. (1986)
assumed that: (1) the tracer elements were neither lost nor
introduced during sample processing; (2) the soil ingested
by children originates primarily from their own yards; and
(3) that absorption of the tracer elements by children
occurred in only small amounts. The study did not
distinguish between ingestion of soil and housedust nor did
it account for the presence of the tracer elements in ingested
foods or medicines.
The arithmetic mean quantity of soil ingested by the
children in the Binder et al. (1986) study was estimated to
be 181 mg/day (range 25 to 1,324) based on the aluminum
tracer; 184 mg/day (range 31 to 799) based on the silicon
tracer; and 1,834 mg/day (range 4 to 17,076) based on the
titanium tracer (Table 4-1). The
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-1. Estimated Daily Soil Ingestion Based on Aluminum, Silicon, and Titanium Concentrations
Estimation
Method
Aluminum
Silicon
Titanium
Minimum
Source: Binder etal
Mean
(mg/day)
181
184
1,834
108
, 1986.
Median
(mg/day)
121
136
618
88
Standard
Deviation
(mg/day)
203
175
3,091
121
Range
(mg/day)
25-1,324
31-799
4-17,076
4-708
95th Percentile
(mg/day)
584
5,78
9,590
386
Geometric
Mean
(mg/day)
128
130
401
65
overall mean soil ingestion estimate based on the minimum
of the three individual tracer estimates for each child was
108 mg/day (range 4 to 708). The 95th percentile values
for aluminum, silicon, and titanium were 584 mg/day, 578
mg/day, and 9,590 mg/day, respectively. The 95th
percentile value based on the minimum of the three
individual tracer estimates for each child was 386 mg/day.
The authors were not able to explain the difference
between the results for titanium and for the other two
elements, but speculated that unrecognized sources of
titanium in the diet or in the laboratory processing of stool
samples may have accounted for the increased levels. The
frequency distribution graph of soil ingestion estimates
based on titanium shows that a group of 21 children had
particularly high titanium values (i.e., > 1,000 mg/day). The
remainder of the children showed titanium ingestion
estimates at lower levels, with a distribution more
comparable to that of the other elements.
The advantages of this study are that a relatively
large number of children were studied and tracer elements
were used to estimate soil ingestion. However, the children
studied may not be representative of the U.S. population
and the study did not account for tracers ingested via foods
or medicines. Also, the use of an assumed fecal weight
instead of actual fecal weights may have biased the results
of this study. Finally, because of the short-term nature of
the survey, soil intake estimates may not be entirely
representative of long-term behavior, especially at the
upper-end of the distribution of intake.
Clausing et al. (1987) -A Method for Estimating
Soil Ingestion by Children - Clausing et al. (1987)
conducted a soil ingestion study with Dutch children using
a tracer element methodology similar to that of Binder et al.
(1986). Aluminum, titanium, and acid-insoluble residue
(AIR) contents were determined for fecal samples from
children, aged 2 to 4 years, attending a nursery school, and
for samples of playground dirt at that school. Twenty-seven
daily fecal samples were obtained over a 5-day period for
the 18 children examined. Using the average soil
concentrations present at the school, and assuming a
standard fecal dry weight of 10 g/day, Clausing et al. (1987)
estimated soil ingestion for each tracer. Clausing et al.
(1987) also collected eight daily fecal samples from six
hospitalized, bedridden children. These children served as
a control group, representing children who had very limited
access to soil.
The average quantity of soil ingested by the school
children in this study was as follows: 230 mg/day (range 23
to 979 mg/day) for aluminum; 129 mg/day (range 48 to 362
mg/day) for AIR; and 1,430 mg/day (range 64 to 11,620
mg/day) for titanium (Table 4-2). As in the Binder et al.
(1986) study, a fraction of the children (6/19) showed
titanium values well above 1,000 mg/day, with most of the
remaining children showing substantially lower values.
Based on the Limiting Tracer Method (LTM), mean soil
intake was estimated to be 105 mg/day with a population
standard deviation of 67 mg/day (range 23 to 362 mg/day).
Use of the LTM assumed that "the maximum amount of soil
ingested corresponded with the lowest estimate from the
three tracers" (Clausing et al., 1987). Geometric mean soil
intake was estimated to be 90 mg/day. This assumes that
the maximum amount of soil ingested cannot be higher than
the lowest estimate for the individual tracers.
Mean soil intake for the hospitalized children was
estimated to be 56 mg/day based on aluminum (Table 4-3).
For titanium, three of the children had estimates well in
excess of 1,000 mg/day, with the remaining three children
in the range of 28 to 58 mg/day. Using the LTM
Page
4-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-2. Calculated Soil Ingestion by Nursery School Children
Child
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Arithmetic Mean
Sample
Number
L3
L14
L25
L5
L13
L27
L2
L17
L4
Lll
L8
L21
L12
L16
L18
L22
LI
L6
L7
L9
L10
L15
L19
L20
L23
L24
L26
Source: Adapted from Clausing et al.
Soil Ingestion as
Calculated from Ti
(mg/dav)
103
154
130
131
184
142
124
670
246
2,990
293
313
1,110
176
11,620
11,320
3,060
624
600
133
354
2,400
124
269
1,130
64
184
1,431
1987.
Soil Ingestion as
Calculated from Al
(mg/dav)
300
211
23
_
103
81
42
566
62
65
_
-
693
-
_
77
82
979
200
_
195
_
71
212
51
566
56
232
Soil Ingestion as
Calculated from AIR
(mg/dav)
107
172
-
71
82
84
84
174
145
139
108
152
362
145
120
-
96
111
124
95
106
48
93
274
84
_
-
129
Limiting Tracer
(mg/dav)
103
154
23
71
82
81
42
174
62
65
108
152
362
145
120
77
82
111
124
95
106
48
71
212
51
64
56
105
Table 4-3. Calculated Soil Ingestion by Hospitalized, Bedridden Children
Child Sample
1
2
3
4
5
6
Arithmetic Mean
Source: Adapted from Clausing et al
G5
G6
Gl
G2
G8
G3
G4
G7
1987.
Soil Ingestion as Calculated
from Ti
(mg/dav)
3,290
4,790
28
6,570
2,480
28
1,100
58
2,293
Soil Ingestion as Calculated
from Al
(mg/dav)
57
71
26
94
57
77
30
38
56
Limiting Tracer
(mg/dav)
57
71
26
84
57
28
30
38
49
method, the mean soil ingestion rate was estimated to be 49
mg/day with a population standard deviation of 22 mg/day
(range 26 to 84 mg/day). The geometric mean soil intake
rate was 45 mg/day. The data on hospitalized children
suggest a major nonsoil source of titanium for some
children, and may suggest a background nonsoil source of
aluminum. However, conditions specific to hospitalization
(e.g., medications) were not considered. AIR
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
measurements were not reported for the hospitalized
children. Assuming that the tracer-based soil ingestion
rates observed in hospitalized children actually represent
background tracer intake from dietary and other nonsoil
sources, mean soil ingestion by nursery school children was
estimated to be 56 mg/day, based on the LTM (i.e., 105
mg/day for nursery school children minus 49 mg/day for
hospitalized children) (Clausing et al. 1987).
The advantages of this study are that Clausing et al.
(1987) evaluated soil ingestion among two populations of
children that had differences in access to soil, and corrected
soil intake rates based on background estimates derived
from the hospitalized group. However, a smaller number of
children were used in this study than in the Binder et al.
(1986) study and these children may not be representative
of the U.S. population. Tracer elements in foods or
medicines were not evaluated. Also, intake rates derived
from this study may not be representative of soil intake over
the long-term because of the short-term nature of the study.
In addition, one of the factors that could affect soil intake
rates is hygiene (e.g., hand washing frequency). Hygienic
practices can vary across countries and cultures and may be
more stringently emphasized in a more structured
environment such as child care centers in The Netherlands
and other European countries than in child care centers in
the United States.
Calabrese et al. (1989) - How Much Soil do Young
Children Ingest: An Epidemiologic Study - Calabrese et al.
(1989) studied soil ingestion among children using the basic
tracer design developed by Binder et al. (1986). However,
in contrast to the Binder et al. (1986) study, eight tracer
elements (i.e., aluminum, barium, manganese, silicon,
titanium, vanadium, yttrium, and zirconium) were analyzed
instead of only three (i.e., aluminum, silicon, and titanium).
A total of 64 children between the ages of 1 and 4 years old
were included in the study. These children were all selected
from the greater Amherst, Massachusetts area and were
predominantly from two-parent households where the
parents were highly educated. The Calabrese et al. (1989)
study was conducted over eight days during a two week
period and included the use of a mass-balance methodology
in which duplicate samples of food, medicines, vitamins,
and others were collected and analyzed on a daily basis, in
addition to soil and dust samples collected from the child's
home and play area. Fecal and urine samples were also
collected and analyzed for tracer elements. Toothpaste, low
in tracer content, was provided to all participants.
In order to validate the mass-balance methodology
used to estimate soil ingestion rates among children and to
determine which tracer elements provided the most reliable
data on soil ingestion, known amounts of soil (i.e., 300 mg
over three days and 1,500 mg over three days) containing
eight tracers were administered to six adult volunteers (i.e.,
three males and three females). Soil samples and feces
samples from these adults and duplicate food samples were
analyzed for tracer elements to calculate recovery rates of
tracer elements in soil. Based on the adult validation study,
Calabrese et al. (1989) confirmed that the tracer
methodology could adequately detect tracer elements in
feces at levels expected to correspond with soil intake rates
in children. Calabrese et al. (1989) also found that
aluminum, silicon, and yttrium were the most reliable of the
eight tracer elements analyzed. The standard deviation of
recovery of these three tracers was the lowest and the
percentage of recovery was closest to 100 percent
(Calabrese, et al., 1989). The recovery of these three
tracers ranged from 120 to 153 percent when 300 mg of soil
had been ingested over a three-day period and from 88 to 94
percent when 1,500 mg soil had been ingested over a three-
day period (Table 4-4).
Using the three most reliable tracer elements, the
mean soil intake rate for children, adjusted to account for
the amount of tracer found in food and medicines, was
estimated to be 153 mg/day based on aluminum, 154
mg/day based on silicon, and 85 mg/day based on yttrium
(Table 4-5). Median intake rates were somewhat lower (29
mg/day for aluminum, 40 mg/day for silicon, and 9 mg/day
foryttrium). Upper-percentile (i.e., 95th) values were 223
mg/day for aluminum, 276 mg/day for silicon, and 106
mg/day for yttrium. Similar results were observed when
soil and dust ingestion was combined (Table 4-5). Intake
of soil and dust was estimated using a weighted average of
tracer concentration in dust composite samples and in soil
composite samples based on the timechildren spent at home
and away from home, and indoors and outdoors. Calabrese
et al. (1989) suggested that the use of titanium as a tracer in
earlier studies that lacked food ingestion data may have
significantly overestimated soil intake because of the high
levels of titanium in food. Using the median values of
aluminum and silicon, Calabrese et al. (1989) estimated the
quantity of soil ingested daily to be 29 mg/day and
40 mg/day, respectively. It should be noted that soil
Page
4-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-4. Mean and Standard Deviation Percentage Recovery of Eight Tracer Elements
300 mg Soil I
Tracer Element Mean
Al
Ba
Mn
Si
Ti
V
Y
Zr
Source: Adapted
152.8
2304.3
1177.2
139.3
251.5
345.0
120.5
80.6
from Calabrese et al., 1989.
igested
SD
107.5
4533.0
1341.0
149.6
316.0
247.0
42.4
43.7
1 500 mg Soiling
Mean
93.5
149.8
248.3
91.8
286.3
147.6
87.5
54.6
jested
SD
15.5
69.5
183.6
16.6
380.0
66.8
12.6
33.4
Table 4-5. Soil and Dust Ingestion Estimates for Children Aged 1-4 Years
Tracer Element
Aluminum
soil
dust
soil/dust combined
Silicon
soil
dust
soil/dust combined
Yttrium
soil
dust
soil/dust combined
Titanium
soil
dust
soil/dust combined
a Corrected for Tracer Concentrations
Intake (mg/day)a
N
64
64
64
64
64
64
62
64
62
64
64
64
in Foods
Mean
153
317
154
154
964
483
85
62
65
218
163
170
Median
29
31
30
40
49
49
9
15
11
55
28
30
SD
852
1,272
629
693
6,848
3,105
890
687
717
1,150
659
691
95th Percentile
223
506
478
276
692
653
106
169
159
1,432
1,266
1.059
Maximum
6,837
8,462
4,929
5,549
54,870
24,900
6,736
5,096
5,269
6,707
3,354
3,597
Source: Adapted from Calabrese et al., 1989.
ingestion for one child in the study ranged from
approximately 10 to 14 grams/day during the second week
of observation. Average soil ingestion for this child was 5
to 7 mg/day, based on the entire study period.
The advantages of this study are that intake rates
were corrected for tracer concentrations in foods and
medicines and that the methodology was validated using
adults. Also, intake was observed over a longer time period
in this study than in earlier studies and the number of tracers
used was larger than for other studies. A relatively large
population was studied, but they may not be entirely
representative of the U.S. population because they were
selected from a single location.
Davis et al. (1990) - Quantitative Estimates of Soil
Ingestion in Normal Children Between the ages of 2 and
7 years: Population-Based Estimates Using Aluminum,
Silicon, and Titanium as Soil Tracer Elements - Davis et
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-5
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
al. (1990) also used a mass-balance/tracer technique to
estimate soil ingestion among children. In this study, 104
children between the ages of 2 and 7 years were randomly
selected from a three-city area in southeastern Washington
State. The study was conducted over a seven day period,
primarily during the summer. Daily soil ingestion was
evaluated by collecting and analyzing soil and house dust
samples, feces, urine, and duplicate food samples for
aluminum, silicon, and titanium. In addition, information on
dietary habits and demographics was collected in an attempt
to identify behavioral and demographic characteristics that
influence soil intake rates among children. The amount of
soil ingested on a daily basis was estimated using the
following equation:
(DWf
DWp)
where:
Sj e = soil ingested for child i based on tracer e (g);
DWf = feces dry weight (g);
DWp = feces dry weight on toilet paper (g);
Ef = tracer amount in feces (//g/g);
Eu = tracer amount in urine (//g/g);
DWfd = food dry weight (g);
Efd = tracer amount in food (//g/g); and
ESoii = tracer concentration in soil (/^g/g).
The soil intake rates were corrected by adding the amount
of tracer in vitamins and medications to the amount of tracer
in food, and adjusting the food quantities, feces dry weights,
and tracer concentrations in urine to account for missing
samples.
Soil ingestion rates were highly variable, especially
those based on titanium. Mean daily soil ingestion
estimates were 38.9 mg/day for aluminum, 82.4 mg/day for
silicon and 245.5 mg/day for titanium (Table 4-6). Median
values were 25 mg/day for aluminum, 59 mg/day for silicon,
and 81 mg/day for titanium. Davis et al. (1990) also
evaluated the extent to which differences in tracer
concentrations in house dust and yard soil impacted
estimated soil ingestion rates. The value used in the
denominator of the mass balance equation was recalculated
to represent a weighted average of the tracer
concentration in yard soil and house dust
based on the proportion of time the child
spent indoors and outdoors. The adjusted
mean soil/dust intake rates were 64.5
mg/day for aluminum, 160.0 mg/day for
silicon, and 268.4 mg/day for titanium.
Adjusted median soil/dust intake rates were:
51.8 mg/day for aluminum, 112.4 mg/day
for silicon, and 116.6 mg/day for titanium.
Davis et al. (1990) also observed that the
following demographic characteristics were
associated with high soil intake rates: male
sex, non-white racial group, low income,
operator/laborer as the principal
(Eqn. 4-2)
Table 4-6. Average Daily Soil Ingestion Values Based on Aluminum, Silicon, and Titanium as Tracer Elements3
Element
Aluminum
Silicon
Titanium
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
(mg/d)
38.9
82.4
245.5
38.9
245.5
Standard Error of the
Median Mean
(mg/d) (mg/d)
25.3
59.4
81.3
25.3
81.3
14.4
12.2
119.7
12.2
119.7
Range
(mg/d)b
279.0 to 904.5
-404.0 to 534.6
-5,820.8 to 6,182.2
-5,820.8
6,182.2
Excludes three children who did not provide any samples (N=101).
Negative values occurred as a result of correction for nonsoil sources of the tracer elements.
Source: Adapted from Davis et al., 1990.
occupation of the parent, and city of residence. However,
none of these factors were predictive of soil intake rates
when tested using multiple linear regression.
The advantages of the Davis et al. (1990) study are
that soil intake rates were corrected based on the tracer
content of foods and medicines and that a relatively large
Page
4-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
number of children were sampled. Also, demographic and
behavioral information was collected for the survey group.
However, although a relatively large sample population was
surveyed, these children were all from a single area of the
U.S. and may not be representative of the U.S. population
as a whole. The study was conducted over a one-week
period during the summer and may not be representative of
long-term (i.e., annual) patterns of intake.
Van Wijnen et al. (1990) - Estimated Soil Ingestion
by Children - In a study by Van Wijnen et al. (1990), soil
ingestion among Dutch children ranging in age from 1 to 5
years was evaluated using a tracer element methodology
similarto that used by Clausing et al. (1987). Van Wijnen
et al. (1990) measured three tracers (i.e., titanium,
aluminum, and AIR) in soil and feces and estimated soil
ingestion based on the LTM. An average daily feces weight
of 15 g dry weight was assumed. A total of 292 children
attending daycare centers were sampled during the first of
two sampling periods and 187 children were sampled in the
second sampling period; 162
of these children were sampled during both periods (i.e., at
the beginning and near the end of the summer of 1986). A
total of 78 children were sampled at campgrounds, and 15
hospitalized children were sampled. The mean values for
these groups were: 162 mg/day for children in daycare
centers, 213 mg/day for campers and 93 mg/day for
hospitalized children. Van Wijnen et al. (1990) also
reported geometric mean LTM values because soil intake
rates were found to be skewed and the log transformed data
were approximately normally distributed. Geometric mean
LTM values were estimated to be 111 mg/day for children
in daycare centers, 174 mg/day for children vacationing at
campgrounds (Table 4-7) and 74 mg/day for hospitalized
children (70-120 mg/day based on the 95 percent
confidence limits of the mean). AIR was the limiting tracer
in about 80 percent of the samples. Among children
attending daycare centers, soil intake was also found to be
higher when the weather was good (i.e., <2 days/week
precipitation) than when the weather was bad (i.e., >4
days/week precipitation (Table 4-8). Van Wijnen et al.
(1990) suggest that the mean LTM value for hospitalized
infants represents background intake of tracers and should
be used to correct the soil intake rates based on LTM values
for other sampling groups. Using mean values, corrected
soil intake rates were 69 mg/day (162 mg/day minus 93
mg/day) for daycare children and 120 mg/day (213 mg/day
minus 93 mg/day) for campers.
Table 4-7. Geometric Mean (GM) and Standard Deviation (GSD) LTM Values
for Children at Daycare Centers and Campgrounds
Daycare Centers
Age (yrs)
<1
l-<2
2-<3
3-4
4-<5
All girls
All boys
Total
Sex
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
n
3
1
20
17
34
17
26
29
1
4
86
72
162'
GMLTM
(mg/day)
81
75
124
114
118
96
111
110
180
99
117
104
111
GSD LTM
(mg/day)
1.09
-
1.87
1.47
1.74
1.53
1.57
1.32
-
1.62
1.70
1.46
1.60
n
_
-
3
5
4
8
6
8
19
18
36
42
78"
Campgrounds
GMLTM
(mg/day)
_
-
207
312
367
232
164
148
164
136
179
169
174
GSD LTM
(mg/day)
_
-
1.99
2.58
2.44
2.15
1.27
1.42
1.48
1.30
1.67
1.79
1.73
" Age and/or sex not registered for eight children.
b Age not registered for seven children.
Source: Adapted from Van Wijnen et a
., 1990.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-8. Estimated Geometric Mean LTM Values of Children Attending Daycare Centers
According to Age, Weather Category, and Sampling Period
First Sampling Period
Weather Category
Bad
(>4 days/week precipitation)
Reasonable
(2-3 days/week precipitation)
Good
(<2 days/week precipitation)
Age (years)
<1
l-<2
2-<3
4-<5
<1
l-<2
2-<3
3-<4
4-<5
<1
l-<2
2-<3
3-<4
4-<5
Second Sampling Period
Estimated Geometric Mean Estimated Geometric Mean
LTM Value LTM Value
n
3
18
33
5
4
42
65
67
10
(mg/dav)
94
103
109
124
102
229
166
138
132
n
3
33
48
6
1
10
13
19
1
(mg/dav)
67
80
91
109
61
96
99
94
61
Source: Van Wiinen et al., 1990.
Corrected geometric mean soil intake was estimated to
range from 0 to 90 mg/day with a 90th percentile value of
190 mg/day for the various age categories within the
daycare group and 30 to 200 mg/day with a 90th percentile
value of 300 mg/day for the various age categories within
the camping group.
The advantage of this study is that soil intake was
estimated for three different populations of children; one
expected to have high intake, one expected to have "typical"
intake, and one expected to have low or background-level
intake. Van Wijnen et al. (1990) used the background
tracer measurements to correct soil intake rates for the other
two populations. Tracer concentrations in food and
medicine were not evaluated. Also, the population of
children studied was relatively large, but may not be
representative of the U.S. population. This study was
conducted over a relatively short time period. Thus,
estimated intake rates may not reflect long-term patterns,
especially at the high-end of the distribution. Another
limitation of this study is that values were not reported
element-by-element which would be the preferred way of
reporting. In addition, one of the factors that could affect
soil intake rates is hygiene (e.g., hand washing frequency).
Hygienic practices can vary across countries and cultures
and may be more stringently emphasized in a more
structured environment such as child care centers in The
Netherlands and other European countries than in child care
centers in the United States.
StanekandCalabrese (1995a) - Daily Estimates of
Soil Ingestion in Children - Stanek and Calabrese (1995a)
presented a methodology which links the physical passage
of food and fecal samples to construct daily soil ingestion
estimates from daily food and fecal trace-element
concentrations. Soil ingestion data for children obtained
from the Amherst study (Calabrese et al., 1989) were
reanalyzed by Stanek and Calabrese (1995a). In the
Amherst study, soil ingestion measurements were made
over a period of 2 weeks for a non-random sample of sixty-
four children (ages of 1-4 years old) living adjacent to an
academic area in western Massachusetts. During each
week, duplicate food samples were collected for 3
consecutive days and fecal samples were collected for 4
consecutive days for each subject. The total amount of each
of eight trace elements present in the food and fecal samples
were measured. The eight trace elements are aluminum,
barium, manganese, silicon, titanium, vanadium, yttrium,
and zirconium. The authors expressed the amount of trace
element in food input or fecal output as a "soil equivalent,"
which was defined as the amount of the element in average
daily food intake (or average daily fecal output) divided by
Page
4-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
the concentration of the element in soil. A lag period of 28
hours between food intake and fecal output was assumed for
all respondents. Day 1 for the food sample corresponded
to the 24 hour period from midnight on Sunday to midnight
on Monday of a study week; day 1 of the fecal sample
corresponded to the 24 hour period from noon on Monday
to noon on Tuesday (Stanek and Calabrese, 1995a). Based
on these definitions, the food soil equivalent was subtracted
from the fecal soil equivalent to obtain an estimate of soil
ingestion for a trace element. A daily "overall" ingestion
estimate was constructed for each child as the median of
trace element values remaining after tracers falling outside
of a defined range around the overall median were excluded.
Additionally, estimates of the distribution of soil ingestion
projected over a period of 365 days were derived by fitting
log-normal distributions to the "overall" daily soil ingestion
estimates.
Table 4-9 presents the estimates of mean daily soil
ingestion intake per child (mg/day) for the 64 study
participants. (The authors also presented estimates of the
median values of daily intake for each child. For most risk
assessment purposes the child mean values, which are
proportional to the cumulative soil intake by the child, are
needed instead of the median values.) The approach
adopted in this paper led to changes in ingestion estimates
from those presented in Calabrese et al. (1989).
Specifically, among elements that may be more useful for
estimation of ingestion, the mean estimates decreased for Al
(153 mg/d to 122 mg/d) and Si ( 154 mg/d to 139 mg/d),
but increased for Ti (218 mg/d to 271 mg/d) and Y (85
mg/d to 165 mg/d). The "overall" mean estimate from this
reanalysis was 179 mg/d. Table 4-9 presents the empirical
distribution of the the "overall" mean daily soil ingestion
estimates for the 8-day study period (not based on
lognormal modeling). The estimated intake based on the
"overall" estimates is 45 mg/day or less for 50 percent of
the children and 208 mg/day or less for 95 percent of the
children. The upper percentile values for most of the
individual trace elements are somewhat higher. Next,
estimates of the respondents soil intake averaged over a
period of 365 days were presented based upon the
lognormal models fit to the daily ingestion estimates (Table
4-10). The estimated median value of the 64 respondents'
daily soil ingestion averaged over a year is 75 mg/day, while
the 95th percentile is 1,751 mg/day.
A strength of this study is that it attempts to make
full use of the collected data through estimation of daily
ingestion rates for children. The data are then screened to
remove less consistent tracer estimates and the remaining
values are aggregated. Individual daily estimates of
ingestion will be subject to larger errors than are weekly
average values, particularly since the assumption of a
constant lag time between food intake and fecal output may
be not be correct for many subject days. The aggregation
approach used to arrive at the "overall" ingestion estimates
rests on the assumption that the mean
Table 4-9. Distribution of Average (Mean) Daily Soil Ingestion Estimates Per Child for 64 Children3 (mg/day)
Type of Estimate
Number of Samples
Overall Al
(64) (64)
(33)
Mn
(19)
Si
(63)
Ti
(56)
V
(52)
Y
(61)
Zr
(62)
Mean
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
95th Percentile
Maximum
179
10
45
88
186
208
7,703
122
10
19
73
131
254
4,692
655
28
65
260
470
518
17,991
1,053
35
121
319
478
17,374
17,374
139
5
32
94
206
224
4,975
271
8
31
93
154
279
12,055
112
8
47
177
340
398
845
165
0
15
47
105
144
8,976
23
0
15
41
87
117
208
For each child, estimates of soil ingestion were formed on days 4-8 and the mean of these estimates was then evaluated for each child. The values
in the column "overall" correspond to percentiles of the distribution of these means over the 64 children. When specific trace elements were not
excluded via the relative standard deviation criteria, estimates of soil ingestion based on the specific trace element were formed for 108 days for
each subject. The mean soil ingestion estimate was again evaluated. The distribution of these means for specific trace elements is shown.
Source: Stanek and Calabrese, 1995a.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-9
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
ingestion estimates across acceptable tracers provides the
most reliable ingestion estimates. The validity of this
assumption depends on the particular set of tracers used in
the study, and is not fully assessed.
Table 4-10. Estimated Distribution of Individual Mean Daily Soil
Ingestion Based on Data for 64 Subjects
Projected Over 365 Days'
Range
50th Percentile (median)
90th Percentile
95th Percentile
1 - 2,268 mg/db
75 mg/d
l,190mg/d
1.751 mg/d
" Based on fitting a log-normal distribution to model daily soil
ingestion values.
b Subject with pica excluded.
Source: Stanek and Calabrese. 1995a.
In developing the 365 day soil ingestion estimates,
data that were obtained over a short period of time (as is the
case with all available soil ingestion studies) were
extrapolated over a year. The 2-week study period may not
reflect variability in tracer element ingestion over a year.
While Stanek and Calabrese (1995a) attempt to address this
through lognormal modeling of the long term intake, new
uncertainties are introduced through the parametric
modeling of the limited subject day data. Also, the sample
population size of the original study was small and site
limited, and, therefore, is not representative of the U.S.
population. Study mean estimates of soil ingestion, such as
the study mean estimates presented in Table 4-9, are
substantially more reliable than any available distributional
estimates.
Stanek and Calabrese (1995b) - Soil Ingestion
Estimates for Use in Site Evaluations Based on the Best
Tracer Method - Stanek and Calabrese (1995b)
recalculated ingestion rates that were estimated in three
previous mass-balance studies (Calabrese et al, 1989 and
Davis et al., 1990 for children's soil ingestion, and
Calabrese et al., 1990 for adult soil ingestion) using the
Best Tracer Method (BTM). This method allows for the
selection of the most recoverable tracer for a particular
subject or group of subjects. The selection process involves
ordering trace elements for each subject based on food/soil
(F/S) ratios. These ratios are estimated by dividing the total
amount of the tracer in food by the tracer concentration in
soil. The F/S ratio is small when the tracer concentration in
food is almost zero when compared to the tracer
concentration in soil. A small F/S ratio is desirable because
it lessens the impact of transit time error (the error that
occurs when fecal output does not reflect food ingestion,
due to fluctuation in gastrointestinal transit time) in the soil
ingestion calculation. Because the recoverability of tracers
can vary within any group of individuals, the BTM uses a
ranking scheme of F/S ratios to determine the best tracers
for use in the ingestion rate calculation. To reduce biases
that may occur as a result of sources of fecal tracers other
than food or soil, the median of soil ingestion estimates
based on the four lowest F/S ratios was used to represent
soil ingestion among individuals.
For adults, Stanek and Calabrese (1995b) used data
for 8 tracers from the Calabrese et al. (1990) study to
estimate soil ingestion by the BTM. The lowest F/S ratios
were Zr and Al and the element with the highest F/S ratio
was Mn. For soil ingestion estimates based on the median
of the lowest four F/S ratios, the tracers contributing most
often to the soil ingestion estimates were Al, Si, Ti, Y, V,
and Zr. Using the median of the soil ingestion rates based
on the best four tracer elements, the average adult soil
ingestion rate was estimated to be 64 mg/day with a median
of 87 mg/day. The 90th percentile soil ingestion estimate
was 142 mg/day. These estimates are based on 18 subject
weeks for the six adult volunteers described in Calabrese et
al. (1990).
For children, Stanek and Calabrese (1995b) used
data on 8 tracers from Calabrese et al., 1989 and data on 3
tracers from Davis et al. (1990) to estimate soil ingestion
rates. The median of the soil ingestion estimates from the
lowest four F/S ratios from the Calabrese et al. (1989) study
most often included Al, Si, Ti, Y, and Zr. Based on the
median of soil ingestion estimates from the best four tracers,
the mean soil ingestion rate was 132 mg/day and the median
was 33 mg/day. The 95th percentile value was 154 mg/day.
These estimates are based on data for 128 subject weeks for
the 64 children in the Calabrese et al. (1989) study. For the
101 children in the Davis et al. (1990) study, the mean soil
ingestion rate was 69 mg/day and the median soil ingestion
rate was 44 mg/day. The 95th percentile estimate was 246
mg/day. These data are based on the three tracers (i.e., Al,
Si, and Ti) from the Davis et al. (1990) study. When the
Calabrese et al. (1989) and Davis et al. (1990) studies were
combined, soil ingestion was estimated to be 113 mg/day
(mean); 37 mg/day (median); and 217 mg/day (95th
percentile), using the BTM.
This study provides a reevaluation of previous
studies. Its advantages are that it combines data from 2
studies for children, one from California and one from
Massachusetts, which increases the number of observations.
It also corrects for biases associated with the differences in
tracer metabolism. The limitations associated with the data
Page
4-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
used in this study are the same as the limitations described
in the summaries of the Calabrese et al. (1989), Davis et al.
(1990) and Calabrese et al. (1990) studies.
4.3. RELEVANT STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE
AMONG CHILDREN
Lepow et al. (1975) - Investigations Into Sources of
Lead in the Environment of Urban Children - Lepow et al.
(1975) used data from a previous study (Lepow et al., 1974)
to estimate daily soil ingestion rates of children. Lepow et
al. (1974) estimated ingestion of airborne lead fallout
among urban children by: (1) analyzing surface dirt and
dust samples from locations where children played; (2)
measuring hand dirt by applying preweighed adhesive
labels to the hands and weighing the amount of dirt that was
removed; and (3) observing "mouthing" behavior over 3 to
6 hours of normal play. Twenty-two children from an urban
area of Connecticut were included in the study. Lepow et
al. (1975) used data from the 1974 study and found that the
mean weight of soil/dust on the hands was 11 mg.
Assuming that a child would put fingers or other "dirty"
objects into his mouth about 10 times a day ingesting 11 mg
of dirt each time, Lepow et al. (1975) estimated that the
daily soil ingestion rate would be about 100 mg/day.
According to Lepow et al. (1975), the amount of hand dirt
measured with this technique is probably an underestimate
because dirt trapped in skin folds and creases was probably
not removed by the adhesive label. Consequently, mean
soil ingestion rates may be somewhat higher than the values
estimated in this study.
Day et al. (1975) - Lead in Urban Street Dust - Day
et al. (1975) evaluated the contribution of incidental
ingestion of lead-contaminated street dust and soil to
children's total daily intake of lead by measuring the amount
of lead in street dust and soil and estimating the amount of
dirt ingested by children. The amount of soil that might be
ingested was estimated by measuring the amount of dirt that
was transferred to a "sticky sweet" during 30 minutes of
play and assuming that a child might eat from 2 to 20 such
sweets per day. Based on "a small number of direct
measurements," Day et al. (1975) found that 5 to 50 mg of
dirt from a child's hands may be transferred to a "sticky
sweet" during 30 minutes of "normal playground activity.
Assuming that all of the dirt is ingested with the 2 to 20
"sticky sweets," Day et al. (1975) estimated that intake of
soil among children could range from 10 to 1000 mg/day.
Duggan and Williams (1977) - Lead in Dust in City
Streets - Duggan and Williams (1977) assessed the risks
associated with lead in street dust by analyzing street dust
from areas in and around London for lead, and estimating
the amount of hand dirt that a child might ingest. Duggan
and Williams (1977) estimated the amount of dust that
would be retained on the forefinger and thumb by removing
a small amount of dust from a weighed amount, rubbing the
forefinger and thumb together, and reweighing to determine
the amount retained on the finger and thumb. The results of
"a number of tests with several different people" indicated
that the mean amount of dust retained on the finger and
thumb was approximately 4 mg with a range of 2 to 7 mg
(Duggan and Williams, 1977). Assuming that a child
would suck his/her finger or thumb 10 times a day and that
all of the dirt is removed each time and replaced with new
dirt prior to subsequent mouthing behavior, Duggan and
Williams (1977) estimated that 20 mg of dust would be
ingested per day.
Hawley et al. (1985) - Assessment of Health Risk
from Exposure to Contaminated Soil - Using existing
literature, Hawley (1985) developed scenarios for
estimating exposure of young children, older children, and
adults to contaminated soil. Annual soil ingestion rates
were estimated based on assumed intake rates of soil and
housedust for indoor and outdoor activities and assumptions
about the duration and frequency of the activities. These
soil ingestion rates were based on the assumption that the
contaminated area is in a region having a winter season.
Housedust was assumed to be comprised of 80 percent soil.
Outdoor exposure to contaminated soil among young
children (i.e., 2.5 years old) was assumed to occur 5 days
per week during only 6 months of the year (i.e., mid-April
through mid-October). Children were assumed to ingest
250 mg soil/day while playing outdoors based on data
presented in Lepow et al. (1974; 1975) and Roels et al.
(1980). Indoor exposures among this population were
based on the assumption that young children ingest 100 mg
of housedust per day while spending all of their time
indoors during the winter months, and 50 mg of housedust
per day during the warmer months when only a portion of
their time is spent indoors. Based on these assumptions,
Hawley (1985) estimated that the annual average soil intake
rate foryoung children is 150 mg/day (Table 4-11). Older
children (i.e., 6 year olds) were assumed to ingest 50 mg of
soil per day from an area equal to the area of the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-11
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Scenarios
Young Child (2.5 Years Old)
Outdoor Activities (Summer)
Indoor Activities (Summer)
Indoor Activities (Winter
TOTAL SOIL INTAKE
Older Child (6 Years Old)
Outdoor Activities (Summer)
Indoor Activities (Year-Round)
TOTAL SOIL INTAKE
Table 4-11.
Media
Soil
Dust
Dust
Soil
Dust
Estimates of Soil Ingestion for Children
Exposure
(mg/day)
250
50
100
50
3
Days/Year Fraction Soil
Activity Content
130 1
182 0.8
182 0.8
152 1
365 0.8
Annual Average Soil
Intake
(mg/day)
90
20
40
150
21
2.4
23.4
Source: Hawley, 1985.
fingers on one hand while playing outdoors. This
assumption was based on data from Lepow et al. (1975).
Outdoor activities were assumed to occur each day over 5
months of the year (i.e., during May through October).
These children were also assumed to ingest 3 mg/day of
housedust from the indoor surfaces of the hands during
indoor activities occurring over the entire year. Using these
data, Hawley (1985) estimated the annual average soil
intake rate for older children to be 23.4 mg/day (Table 4-
11).
Thompson and Burmaster (1991) - Parametric
Distributions for Soil Ingestion by Children - Thompson
and Burmaster (1991) developed parameterized
distributions of soil ingestion rates for children based on a
reanalysis of the data collected by Binder et al. (1986). In
the original Binder et al. (1986) study, an assumed fecal
weight of 15 g/day was used. Thompson and Burmaster
reestimated the soil ingestion rates from the Binder et al.
(1986) study using the actual stool weights of the study
participants instead of the assumed stool weights. Because
the actual stool weights averaged only 7.5 g/day, the soil
ingestion estimates presented by Thompson and Burmaster
(1991) are approximately one-half of those reported by
Binder et al. (1986). Table 4-12 presents the distribution
of estimated soil ingestion rates calculated by Thompson
and Burmaster (1991) based on the three tracers elements
(i.e., aluminum, silicon, and titanium), and on the arithmetic
average of soil ingestion based on aluminum and silicon.
The mean soil intake rates were 97 mg/day for aluminum,
85 mg/day for silicon, and 1,004 mg/day for titanium. The
90th percentile estimates were 197 mg/day for aluminum,
166 mg/day for silicon, and 2,105 mg/day for titanium.
Based on the arithmetic average of aluminum and silicon for
each child, mean soil intake was estimated to be 91 mg/day
and 90th percentile intake was estimated to be 143 mg/day.
Thompson and Burmaster (1991) tested the
hypothesis that soil ingestion rates based on the adjusted
Binder et al. (1986) data for aluminum, silicon and the
average of these two tracers were lognormally distributed.
The distribution of soil intake based on titanium was not
tested for lognormality because titanium may be present in
food in high concentrations and the Binder et al. (1986)
study did not correct for food sources of titanium
(Thompson and Burmaster, 1991). Although visual
inspection of the distributions for aluminum, silicon, and the
average of these tracers all indicated that they may be
lognormally distributed, statistical tests indicated that only
silicon and the average of the silicon and aluminum tracers
were lognormally distributed. Soil intake rates based on
aluminum were not lognormally distributed. Table 4-12
also presents the lognormal distribution parameters and
underlying normal distribution parameters (i.e., the natural
logarithms of the data) for aluminum, silicon, and the
average of these two tracers. According to the authors, "the
parameters estimated from the underlying normal
distribution are much more reliable and robust" (Thompson
and Burmaster, 1991).
The advantages of this study are that it provides
percentile data and defines the shape of soil intake
distributions. However, the number of data points used to
fit the distribution was limited. In addition, the study did
not generate "new" data. Instead, it provided a reanalysis of
previously-reported data using actual fecal weights. No
corrections were made for tracer intake from food or
Page
4-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-12. Estimated Soil Ingestion Rate Summary Statistics and Parameters for Distributions
Using Binder et al. (1986) Data with Actual Fecal Weights
Soil Intake (mg/day)
Trace Element Basis
Mean
Min
10th
20th
30th
40th
Med
60th
70th
80th
90th
Max
Al
97
11
21
33
39
43
45
55
73
104
197
1,201
Si
85
10
19
23
36
52
60
65
79
106
166
642
Ti
1,004
1
3
22
47
172
293
475
724
1,071
2,105
14,061
MEAN3
91
13
22
34
43
49
59
69
92
100
143
921
Lognormal Distribution Parameters
Median
Standard Deviation
Arithmetic Mean
45
169
97
60
95
85
__
—
-
59
126
91
Underlying Normal Distribution Parameters
Mean
Standard Deviation
a MEAN = arithmetic average of soil ing
Source: Thompson and Burmaster, 1991
4.06
0.88
4.07
0.85
__
—
4.13
0.80
estion based on aluminum and silicon.
medicine and the results may not be representative of long-
term intake rates because the data were derived from a
short-term study.
Sedman and Mahmood (1994) - Soil Ingestion by
Children and Adults Reconsidered Using the Results of
Recent Tracer Studies - Sedman and Mahmood (1994)
used the results of two recent children's (Calabrese et al.
1989; Davis et al. 1990) tracer studies to determine
estimates of average daily soil ingestion in young children
and for over a lifetime. In the two studies, the intake and
excretion of a variety of tracers were monitored, and
concentrations of tracers in soil adjacent to the children's
dwellings were determined (Sedman and Mahmood, 1994).
From a mass balance approach, estimates of soil ingestion
in these children were determined by dividing the excess
tracer intake (i.e., quantity of tracer recovered in the feces
in excess of the measured intake) by the average
concentration of tracer in soil samples from each child's
dwelling. Sedman and Mahmood (1994) adjusted the mean
estimates of soil ingestion in children for each tracer (Y)
from both studies to reflect that of a 2-year old child using
the following equation:
Y = x
(Eqn. 4-3)
where:
Y; = adjusted mean soil ingestion (mg/day)
x = a constant
yr = average age (2 years)
In addition to the study in young children, a study
(Calabrese et al., 1989) in adults was conducted to evaluate
the tracer methodology. In the adult studies, percent
recoveries of tracers were determined in six adults who
ingested known quantities of tracers in 1.5 or 0.3 grams of
soil. The distribution of tracer recoveries from adults was
evaluated using data analysis techniques involving
visualization and exploratory data analysis (Sedman and
Mahmood, 1994). From the results obtained in these
studies, the distribution of tracer recoveries from adults
were determined. In addition, an analysis of variance
(ANOVA) and Tukey's multiple comparison methodologies
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-13
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
were employed to identify differences in the recoveries of
the various tracers (Sedman and Mahmood, 1994).
From the adult studies, the ANOVA of the natural
logarithm of the recoveries of tracers from 0.3 or 1.5 g of
ingested soil showed a significant difference (°= =0.05)
among the estimates of recovery of the tracers regardless of
whether the recoveries were combined or analyzed
separately (Sedman and Mahmood, 1994). Sedman and
Mahmood (1994) also reported that barium, manganese,
and zirconium yielded significantly different estimates of
soil ingestion than the other tracers (aluminum, silicon,
yttrium, titanium, and vanadium). Table 4-13 presents the
Tukey's multiple comparison of mean log tracer recovery in
adults ingesting known quantities of soil.
The average ages of children in the two recent
studies were 2.4 years in Calabrese, et al. (1989) and 4.7
years in Davis et al. (1990). The mean of the adjusted
levels of soil ingestion for a two year old child was 220
mg/kgforthe Calabrese et al. (1989) study and 170 mg/kg
for the Davis et al. (1990) study (Sedman and Mahmood,
1994). From the adjusted soil ingestion estimates, based on
a normal distribution of means, the mean estimate for a 2-
year old child was 195 mg/day and the overall mean of soil
ingestion and the standard error of the mean was 53 mg/day
(Sedman and Mahmood, 1994). Based on uncertainties
associated with the method employed, Sedman and
Mahmood (1994) recommended a conservative estimate of
soil ingestion in young children of 250 mg/day. Based on
the 250 mg/day ingestion rate
in a 2-year old child, an average daily soil ingestion over a
lifetime was estimated to be 70 mg/day. The lifetime
estimates were derived using the equation presented above
that describes changes in soil ingestion with age (Sedman
and Mahmood, 1994).
AIHC Exposure Factors Sourcebook (1994) - The
Exposure Factors Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) uses data from
the Calabrese et al. (1990) study to derive soil ingestion
rates using zirconium as the tracer. More recent papers
indicate that zirconium is not a good tracer. Therefore, the
values recommended in the AIHC Sourcebook are not
appropriate. Furthermore, because individuals were only
studied for a short period of time, deriving a distribution of
usual intake is not possible and is inappropriate.
Calabrese and Stanek (1995) - Resolving
Intertracer Inconsistencies in Soil Ingestion Estimation -
Calabrese and Stanek (1995) explored sources and
magnitude of positive and negative errors in soil ingestion
estimates for children on a subject-week and trace element
basis. Calabrese and Stanek (1995) identified possible
sources of positive errors to be the following:
• Ingestion of high levels of tracers before the
study starts and low ingestion during study
period may result in over estimation of soil
ingestion; and
• Ingestion of element tracers from a non-food or
non-soil source during the study period.
Table 4-13. Tukey's Multiple Comparison of Mean Log Tracer Recovery in Adults Ingesting Known Quantities of Soil
Tracer
Aluminum
Silicon
Titanium
Vanadium
Yttrium
Aluminum
Silicon
Titanium
Reported Mean
(mg/day)
Calabrese et al., 1989 Study
153
154
218
459
85
Davis etal., 1990 Study
39
81
246
Age Adjusted Mean
(mg/day)
160
161
228
480
89
53
111
333
a Age adjusted mean estimates of soil ingestion in young children. Mean estimates of soil ingestion for each tracer in each study were
adjusted using the following equation:
Y = x e*"0112 tyr), where Y = adjusted mean soil ingestion (mg/day), x = a constant, and yr = age in years.
Source: Sedman and Mahmood, 1994.
Page
4-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Possible sources of negative bias identified by Calabrese
and Stanek (1995) are the following:
• Ingestion of tracers in food, but the tracers are
not captured in the fecal sample either due to
slow lag time or not having a fecal sample
available on the final study day; and
• Sample measurement errors which result in
diminished detection of fecal tracers, but not in
soil tracer levels.
The authors developed an approach which attempted to
reduce the magnitude of error in the individual trace
element ingestion estimates. Results from a previous study
conducted by Calabrese et al. (1989) were used to quantify
these errors based on the following criteria: (1) a lag period
of 28 hours was assumed for the passage of tracers ingested
in food to the feces (this value was applied to all subject-day
estimates); (2) daily soil ingestion rate was estimated for
each tracer for each 24-hr day a fecal sample was obtained;
(3) the median tracer-based soil ingestion rate for each
subject-day was determined. Also, upper and lower bound
estimates were determined based on criteria formed using
an assumption of the magnitude of the relative standard
deviation (RSD) presented in another study conducted by
Stanek and Calabrese (1995a). Daily soil ingestion rates
for tracers that fell beyond the upper and lower ranges were
excluded from subsequent calculations, and the median soil
ingestion rates of the remaining tracer elements were
considered the best estimate for that particular day. The
magnitude of positive or negative error for a specific tracer
per day was derived by determining the difference between
the value for the tracer and the median value; (4) negative
errors due to missing fecal samples at the end of the study
period were also determined (Calabrese and Stanek, 1995).
Table 4-14 presents the estimated magnitude of
positive and negative error for six tracer elements in the
children's study (i.e., conducted by Calabrese et al., 1989).
The original mean soil ingestion rates ranged from a low of
21 mg/day based on zirconium to a high of 459 mg/day
based on titanium (Table 4-14). The adjusted mean soil
ingestion rate after correcting for negative and positive
errors ranged from 97 mg/day based on yttrium to 208
mg/day based on titanium (Table 4-14). Calabrese and
Stanek (1995) concluded that correcting for errors at the
individual level for each tracer element provides more
reliable estimates of soil ingestion.
This report is valuable in providing additional
understanding of the nature of potential errors in trace
element specific estimates of soil ingestion. However, the
operational definition used for estimating the error in a trace
element estimate was the observed difference of that tracer
from a median tracer value. Specific identification of
sources of error, or direct evidence that individual tracers
were indeed in error was not developed. Corrections to
individual tracer means were then made according to how
different values for that tracer were from the median values.
This approach is based on the hypothesis that the median
tracer value is the most
Table 4-14. Positive/Negative Error (bias) in Soil Ingestion Estimates in the Calabrese et al. (1989) Mass-balance Study:
Effect on Mean Soil Ingestion Estimate (mg/day)'
Negative Error
Aluminum
Silicon
Titanium
Vanadium
Yttrium
Zirconium
Lack of Fecal
Sample on Final
Study Day
14
15
82
66
8
6
Other Causes6
11
6
187
55
26
91
Total Negative
Error
25
21
269
121
34
97
Total Positive
Error
43
41
282
432
22
5
Net Error
+18
+20
+13
+311
-12
-92
Original Mean
153
154
218
459
85
21
Adjusted
Mean
136
133
208
148
97
113
" How to read table: for example, aluminum as a soil tracer displayed both negative and positive error. The cumulative total negative error is
estimated to bias the mean estimate by 25 mg/day downward. However, aluminum has positive error biasing the original mean upward by 43
mg/day. The net bias in the original mean was 18 mg/day positive bias. Thus, the original 156 mg/day mean for aluminum should be
corrected downward to 136 mg/day.
b Values indicate impact on mean of 128-subject-weeks in milligrams of soil ingested per day.
Source: Calabrese and Stanek. 1995.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-15
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
accurate estimate of soil ingestion, and the validity of this
assumption depends on the specific set of tracers used in the
study and need not be correct. The approach used for the
estimation of daily tracer intake is the same as in Stanek and
Calabrese (1995a), and some limitations of that approach
are mentioned in the review of that study.
Sheppard (1995) - Parameter Values to Model the
Soil Ingestion Pathway - Sheppard (1995) summarized the
available literature on soil ingestion to estimate the amount
of soil ingestion in humans for the purposes of risk
assessment. Sheppard (1995) categorized the available soil
ingestion studies into two general approaches: (1) those
that measured the soil intake rate with the use of tracers in
the soil, and (2) those that estimated soil ingestion based on
activity (e.g., hand-to-mouth) and exposure duration.
Sheppard (1995) provided estimates of soil intake based on
previously published tracer studies. The data from these
studies were assumed to be lognormally distributed due to
the broad range, the concept that soil ingestion is never
zero, and the possibility of very high values. In order to
account for skewness in the data, geometric means rather
than arithmetic means, were calculated by age, excluding
pica and geophagy values. The geometric mean for soil
ingestion rate for children under six was estimated to be
100 mg/day. For children over six and adults, the geometric
mean intake rate was estimated to be 20 mg/day. Sheppard
(1995) also provided soil ingestion estimates for indoor and
outdoor activities based on data from Hawley (1985) and
assumptions regarding duration of exposure (Table 4-15).
Sheppard's (1995) estimates, based on activity and
exposure duration, are quite similar to the mean values from
intake rate estimates described in previous sections. The
advantages of this study are that the model can be used to
calculate the ingestion rate from non-food sources with
variability in exposure ingestion rates and exposure
durations. The limitation of this study is that it does not
introduce new data; previous data are re-evaluated. In
addition, because the model is based on previous data, the
same advantages and limitations of those studies apply.
4.4. SOIL INTAKE AMONG ADULTS
Hawley 1985 - Assessment of Health Risk from
Exposure to Contaminated Soil - Information on soil
ingestion among adults is very limited. Hawley (1985)
estimated soil ingestion among adults based on assumptions
regarding activity patterns and corresponding ingestion
amounts. Hawley (1985) assumed that adults ingest
outdoor soil at a rate of 480 mg/day while engaged in
yardwork or other physical activity. These outdoor
exposures were assumed to occur 2 days/week during 5
months of the year (i.e., May through October). The
ingestion estimate was based on the assumption that a 50
^m/thick layer of soil is ingested from the inside surfaces of
the thumb and fingers of one hand. Ingestion of indoor
housedust was assumed to occur from typical living space
activities such as eating and smoking, and work in attics or
other uncleaned areas of the house. Hawley (1985)
assumed that adults ingest an average of 0.56 mg
housedust/day during typical living space activities and 110
mg housedust/day while working in attics. Attic work
Table 4-15. Soil Ingestion Rates for Assessment Purposes
Receptor Age
Setting
Soil Load on
Hands
(mg/cm2)
Soil Exposure Ingestion
Rate
(mg/hr)
Suggested Exposure
Durations
(hr/yr)
Average Daily Soil
Ingestion
(mg/day)
Pica Child
2.5yrs
6yrs
Adult
Outdoor
Indoor
Outdoor
Indoor
Gardening
Indoor
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.04
1.0
0.04
1,000
20
3
10
0.15
20
0.03
200
1,000
Remaining3
700
5,000
300
5,000
500
50
60
20
2
20
0.4
Hawley (1985) assumed the child spent all the time at home, so that the indoor time was 8,760 hours/year minus the outdoor time.
Source: Sheppard, 1995
was assumed to occur 12 days/year. Hawley (1985) also
assumed that soil comprises 80 percent of household dust.
Based on these assumptions about soil intake and the
frequency of indoor and outdoor activities, Hawley (1985)
Page
4-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
estimated the annual average soil intake rate for adults to be
60.5 mg/day (Table 4-16).
The soil intake value estimated by Hawley (1985) is
consistent with adult soil intake rates suggested by other
researchers. Calabrese et al. (1987) suggested that soil
intake among adults ranges from 1 to 100 mg/day.
during each of the 3 weeks. In addition, all medications and
vitamins ingested by the adults were collected. Total
excretory output were collected from Monday noon through
Friday midnight over 3 consecutive weeks. Table 4-17
provides the mean and median values of soil ingestion for
each element by week. Data obtained from the first week,
Table 4-16. Estimates of Soil Ingestion for Adults
Scenarios
Adult
Work in attic (year-round)
Living Space (year-round)
Outdoor Work (summer)
TOTAL SOIL INTAKE
Exposure
Media (mg/day)
Dust 110
Dust 0.56
Soil 480
Days/Year
Activity
12
365
43
Fraction Soil
Content
0.8
0.8
1
Annual Average Soil
Intake
(mg/day)
3
0.5
57
60.5
Source: Hawley, 1985.
According to Calabrese et al. (1987), these values "are
conjectural and based on fractional estimates" of earlier
Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimates. In an
evaluation of the scientific literature concerning soil
ingestion rates for children and adults (Krablin, 1989), Arco
Coal Company suggested that 10 mg/day may be an
appropriate value for adult soil ingestion. This value is
based on "extrapolation from urine arsenic epidemiological
studies and information on mouthing behavior and time
activity patterns" (Krablin, 1989).
Calabrese et al. (1990) - Preliminary Adult Soil
Ingestion Estimates: Results of a Pilot Study- Calabrese et
al. (1990) studied six adults to evaluate the extent to which
they ingest soil. This adult study was originally part of the
children soil ingestion study conducted by Calabrese and
was used to validate part of the analytical methodology used
in the children study. The participants were six healthy
adults, three males and three females, 25-41 years old.
Each volunteer ingested one empty gelatin capsule at
breakfast and one at dinner Monday, Tuesday, and
Wednesday during the first week of the study. During the
second week, they ingested 50 mg of sterilized soil within
a gelatin capsule at breakfast and at dinner (a total of 100
mg of sterilized soil per day) for 3 days. For the third week,
the participants ingested 250 mg of sterilized soil in a
gelatin capsule at breakfast and at dinner (a total of 500 mg
of soil per day) during the three days. Duplicate meal
samples (food and beverage) were collected from the six
adults. The sample included all foods ingested from
breakfast Monday, through the evening meal Wednesday
when empty gelatin capsules were ingested, may be used to
derive an estimate of soil intake by adults. The mean intake
rates for the eight tracers are: Al, 110 mg; Ba, -232 mg;
Mn, 330 mg; Si, 30 mg; Ti, 71 mg; V, 1,288 mg; Y, 63 mg;
andZr, 134mg.
The advantage of this study is that it provides
quantitative estimates of soil ingestion for adults. The study
also corrected for tracer concentrations in foods and
medicines. However, a limitation of this study is that a
limited number of subjects were studied. In addition, the
subjects were only studied for one week before soil capsules
were ingested.
4.5. PREVALENCE OF PICA
The scientific literature define pica as "the repeated
eating of non-nutritive substances" (Feldman, 1986). For
the purposes of this handbook, pica is defined as an
deliberately high soil ingestion rate. Numerous articles
have been published that report on the incidence of pica
among various populations. However, most of these papers
describe pica for substances other than soil including sand,
clay, paint, plaster, hair, string, cloth, glass, matches, paper,
feces, and various other items. These papers indicate that
the pica occurs in approximately half of all children
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-17
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-17. Adult Daily Soil Ingestion Estimates by Week and Tracer Element After Subtracting Food and Capsule Ingestion,
Based on Median Amherst Soil Concentrations: Means and Medians Over Subjects (mg)a
Week
Means
1
2
3
Medians
1
2
3
Al
110
98
28
60
85
66
Ba
-232
12,265
201
-71
597
386
Mn
330
1,306
790
388
1,368
831
Si
30
14
-23
31
15
-27
Ti
71
25
896
102
112
156
V
1,288
43
532
1,192
150
047
Y
63
21
67
44
35
60
Zr
134
58
-74
124
65
-144
Data were converted to milligrams
Negative values occur because of correction for food and capsule ingestion.
Source: Calabrese et al., 1990
between the ages of 1 and 3 years (Sayetta, 1986). The
incidence of deliberate ingestion behavior in children has
been shown to differ for different subpopulations. The
incidence rate appears to be higher for black children than
for white children. Approximately 30 percent of black
children aged 1 to 6 years are reported to have deliberate
ingestion behavior, compared with 10 to 18 percent of
white children in the same age group (Danford, 1982).
There does not appear to be any sex differences in the
incidence rates for males or females (Kaplan and Sadock,
1985). Lourie et al. (1963) states that the incidence of pica
is higher among children in lower socioeconomic groups
(i.e., 50 to 60 percent) than in higher income families (i.e.,
about 30 percent). Deliberate soil ingestion behavior
appears to be more common in rural areas (Vermeer and
Frate, 1979). A higher rate of pica has also been reported
for pregnant women and individuals with poor nutritional
status (Danford, 1982). In general, deliberate ingestion
behavior is more frequent and more severe in mentally
retarded children than in children in the general population
(Behrman and Vaughan 1983, Danford 1982, Forfar and
Arneil 1984, Illmgworth 1983, Sayetta 1986).
It should be noted that the pica statistics cited above
apply to the incidence of general pica and not soil pica.
Information on the incidence of soil pica is limited, but it
appears that soil pica is less common. A study by Vermeer
and Frate (1979) showed that the incidence of geophagia
(i.e., earth-eating) was about 16 percent among children
from a rural black community in Mississippi. However,
geophagia was described as a cultural practice among the
community surveyed and may not be representative of the
general population. Average daily consumption of soil was
estimated to be 50 g/day. Bruhn and Pangborn (1971)
reported the incidence of pica for "dirt" to be 19 percent in
children, 14 percent in pregnant women, and 3 percent in
nonpregnant women. However, "dirt" was not clearly
defined. The Bruhn and Pangbom (1971) study was
conducted among 91 non-black, low income families of
migrant agricultural workers in California. Based on the
data from the five key tracer studies (Binder et al., 1986;
Clausing et al., 1987; Van Wijnen et al., 1990; Davis et al.,
1990; and Calabrese et al., 1989) only one child out of the
more than 600 children involved in all of these studies
ingested an amount of soil significantly greater than the
range for other children. Although these studies did not
include data for all populations and were representative of
short-term ingestions only, it can be assumed that the
incidence rate of deliberate soil ingestion behavior in the
general population is low. However, it is incumbent upon
the user to use the appropriate value for their specific study
population.
4.6. DELIBERATE SOIL INGESTION AMONG
CHILDREN
Information on the amount of soil ingested by
children with abnormal soil ingestion behavior is limited.
However, some evidence suggests that a rate on the order of
10 g/day may not be unreasonable.
Calabrese et al. (1991) - Evidence of Soil Pica
Behavior and Quantification of Soil Ingestion - Calabrese
et al. (1991) estimated that upper range soil ingestion
values may range from approximately 5-7 grams/day. This
estimate was based on observations of one pica child among
the 64 children who participated in the study. In the study,
a 3.5-year old female exhibited extremely high soil
ingestion behavior during one of the two weeks of
observation. Intake ranged from 74 mg/day to 2.2 g/day
during the first week of observation and 10.1 to 13.6 g/day
during the second week of observation (Table 4-18). These
results are based on mass-balance analyses for seven (i.e.,
Page
4-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
aluminum, barium, manganese, silicon, titanium, vanadium,
and yttrium) of the eight tracer elements used. Intake rates
based on zirconium was significantly lower but Calabrese
et al. (1991) indicated that this may have "resulted from a
limitation in the analytical protocol."
Table 4-18. Daily Soil Ingestion Estimation in a Soil-Pica Child by
Tracer and by Week (mg/day)
Tracer
Al
Ba
Mn
Si
Ti
V
Y
Zr
Source:
Weekl
Estimated Soil Ingestion
74
458
2,221
142
1,543
1,269
147
86
Calabrese et al., 1991
Week 2
Estimated Soil Ingestion
13,600
12,088
12,341
10,955
11,870
10,071
13,325
2,695
Calabrese and Stanek (1992) - Distinguishing
Outdoor Soil Ingestion from Indoor Dust Ingestion in a
Soil Pica Child - Calabrese and Stanek (1992)
quantitatively distinguished the amount of outdoor soil
ingestion from indoor dust ingestion in a soil pica child.
This study was based on a previous mass-balance study
(conducted in 1991) in which a 3-1/2 year old child
ingested 10-13 grams of soil per day over the second week
of a 2-week soil ingestion study. Also, the previous study
utilized a soil tracer methodology with eight different tracers
(Al, Ba, Mn, Si, Ti, V, Y, Zr). The reader is referred to
Calabrese et al. (1989) for a detailed description and results
of the soil ingestion study. Calabrese and Stanek (1992)
distinguished indoor dust from outdoor soil in ingested soil
based on a methodology which compared differential
element ratios.
Table 4-19 presents tracer ratios of soil, dust, and
residual fecal samples in the soil pica child. Calabrese and
Stanek (1992) reported that there was a maximum total of
28 pairs of tracer ratios based on eight tracers. However,
only 19 pairs of tracer ratios were available for quantitative
evaluation as shown in Table 4-19. Of these 19 pairs, 9
fecal tracer ratios fell within the boundaries for soil and dust
(Table 4-19). For these 9 tracer soils, an interpolation was
performed to estimate the relative contribution of soil and
dust to the residual fecal tracer ratio. The other 10 fecal
tracer ratios that fell outside the soil and dust boundaries
were concluded to be 100 percent of the fecal tracer ratios
from soil origin (Calabrese and Stanek, 1992). Also, the 9
residual fecal samples within the boundaries revealed that
a high percentage (71-99 percent) of the residual fecal
tracers were estimated to be of soil origin. Therefore,
Calabrese and Stanek (1992) concluded that the
predominant proportion of the fecal tracers was from
outdoor soil and not from indoor dust origin.
Table 4-19. Ratios of Soil, Dust, and Residual Fecal Samples in the Soil Pica Child
Estimated % of Residual Fecal Tracers of Soil
Tracer Ratio Pairs
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Source
Mn/Ti
Ba/Ti
Si/Ti
V/Ti
Ai/Ti
Y/Ti
Mn/Y
Ba/Y
Si/Y
V/Y
Al/Y
Mn/Al
Ba/Al
Si/Al
V/A1
Si/V
Mn/Si
Ba/Si
Mn/Ba
: Calabrese and Stanek,
Soil
208.368
187.448
148.117
14.603
18.410
8.577
24.293
21.854
17.268
1.702
2.146
11.318
10.182
8.045
0.793
10.143
1.407
1.266
1.112
1992.
Fecal
215.241
206.191
136.662
10.261
21.087
9.621
22.373
21.432
14.205
1.067
2.192
10.207
9.778
6.481
0.487
13.318
1.575
1.509
1.044
Dust Origin as Predicted by Specific Tracer Ratios
260.126
115.837
7.490
17.887
13.326
5.669
45.882
20.432
1.321
3.155
2.351
19.520
8.692
0.562
1.342
0.419
34.732
15.466
2.246
87
100
92
100
100
100
100
71
81
100
88
100
73
81
100
100
99
83
100
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
4-19
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
In conducting a risk assessment for TCDD, U. S. EPA
(1984) used 5 g/day to represent the soil intake rate for pica
children. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) also
investigated the potential for exposure to TCDD through the
soil ingestion route. CDC used a value of 10 g/day to
represent the amount of soil that a child with deliberate soil
ingestion behavior might ingest (Kimbrough et al, 1984).
These values are consistent with those observed by
Calabrese et al. (1991).
4.7. RECOMMENDATIONS
The key studies described in this section were used to
recommend values for soil intake among children. The key
and relevant studies used different survey designs and study
populations. These studies are summarized in Table 4-20.
For example, some of the studies considered food and
nonfood sources of trace elements, while others did not. In
other studies, soil ingestion estimates were adjusted to
account for the contribution of house dust to this estimate.
Despite these differences, the mean and upper-percentile
estimates reported for these studies are relatively consistent.
The confidence rating for soil intake recommendations is
presented in Table 4-21.
It is important, however, to understand the various
uncertainties associated with these values. First, individuals
were not studied for sufficient periods of time to get a good
estimate of the usual intake. Therefore, the values
presented in this section may not be representative of long
term exposures. Second, the experimental error in
measuring soil ingestion values for individual children is
also a source of uncertainly. For example, incomplete
sample collection of both input (i.e., food and nonfood
sources) and output (i.e., urine and feces) is a limitation for
some of the studies conducted. In addition, an individual's
soil ingestion value may be artificially high or low
depending on the extent to which a mismatch between input
and output occurs due to individual variation in the
gastrointestinal transit time. Third, the degree to which the
tracer elements used in these studies are absorbed in the
human body is uncertain. Accuracy of the soil ingestion
estimates depends on how good this assumption
is. Fourth, there is uncertainly with regard to the
homogeneity of soil samples and the accuracy of parent's
knowledge about their child's playing areas. Fifth, all the
soil ingestion studies presented in this section with the
exception of Calabrese et al. (1989) were conducted during
the summer when soil contact is more likely.
Although the recommendations presented below are
derived from studies which were mostly conducted in the
summer, exposure during the winter months when the
ground is frozen or snow covered should not be considered
as zero. Exposure during these months, although lower
than in the summer months, would not be zero because
some portion of the house dust comes from outdoor soil.
5*0/7 Ingestion Among Children - Estimates of the
amount of soil ingested by children are summarized in
Table 4-22. The mean values ranged from 39 mg/day to
271 mg/day with an average of 146 mg/day for soil
ingestion and 191 mg/day for soil and dust ingestion.
Results obtained using titanium as a tracer in the Binder et
al. (1986) and Clausing et al. (1987) studies were not
considered in the derivation of this recommendation
because these studies did not take into consideration other
sources of the element in the diet which for titanium seems
to be significant. Therefore, these values may overestimate
the soil intake. One can note that this group of mean values
is consistent with the 200 mg/day value that EPA programs
have used as a conservative mean estimate. Taking into
consideration that the highest values were seen with
titanium, which may exhibit greater variability than the
other tracers, and the fact that the Calabrese et al. (1989)
study included a pica child, 100 mg/day is the best estimate
of the mean for children under 6 years of age. However,
since the children were studied for short periods of time and
the prevalence of pica behavior is not known, excluding the
pica child from the calculations may underestimate soil
intake rates. It is plausible that many children may exhibit
some pica behavior if studied for longer periods of time.
Over the period of study, upper percentile values ranged
from 106 mg/day to 1,432 mg/day with an average of 383
mg/day for soil ingestion and 587 mg/day for soil and dust
ingestion. Rounding to one significant figure, the
recommended upper percentile soil ingestion rate for
children is 400 mg/day. However, since the period of study
was short, these values are not estimates of usual intake.
The recommended values for soil ingestion among children
and adults are summarized in Table 4-23.
Data on soil ingestion rates for children who
deliberately ingest soil are also limited. An ingestion rate
of 10 g/day is a reasonable value for use in acute exposure
assessments, based on the available information. It should
be noted, however, that this value is based on only one pica
child observed in the Calabrese et al. (1989) study.
5*0/7 Ingestion Among Adults - Only three studies
have attempted to estimate adult soil ingestion. Hawley
(1985) suggested a value of 480 mg/day for adults engaged
in outdoor activities and a range of 0.56 to 110 mg/day of
house dust during indoor activities. These estimates were
Page
4-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
derived from assumptions about soil/dust levels on hands
and mouthing behavior; no supporting measurements were
made. Making further assumptions about frequencies of
indoor and outdoor activities, Hawley (1985) derived an
annual average of 60.5 mg/day. Given the lack of
supporting measurements, these estimates must be
considered conjectural. Krablin (1989) used arsenic levels
in urine (n=26) combined with information on mouthing
behavior and activity patterns to suggest an estimate for
adult soil ingestion of 10 mg/day. The study protocols are
not well described and has not been formally published.
Finally, Calabrese et al. (1990) conducted a tracer study on
6 adults and found a range of 30 to 100 mg/day. This study
is probably the most reliable of the three, but still has two
significant uncertainties: (1)
representativeness of the general population is unknown
due to the small study size (n=6); and (2) representativeness
of long-term behavior is unknown since the study was
conducted over only 2 weeks. In the past, many EPA risk
assessments have assumed an adult soil ingestion rate of 50
mg/day for industrial settings and 100 mg/day for residential
and agricultural scenarios. These values are within the
range of estimates from the studies discussed above. Thus,
50 mg/day still represents a reasonable central estimate of
adult soil ingestion and is the recommended value in this
handbook. This recommendation is clearly highly
uncertain; however, and as indicated in Table 4-21, is given
a low confidence rating. Considering the uncertainties in
the central estimate, a recommendation for an upper
percentile value would be inappropriate. Table 4-23
summarizes soil ingestion recommendations for adults.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-21
-------
Table 4-20. Soil Intake Studies
Study
Study Type
Number of
Observations Age
Population Studied
Comments
CHILDREN KEY STUDIES:
Binder etal., 1986
Calabrese et al., 1 989
Clausing et al., 1987
Davis et al., 1990
Tracer study using aluminum, silicon, and
titanium
Tracer study using aluminum, acid insoluble
residue, and titanium
Tracer - mass balance study using aluminum
silicon and titanium
Stanek and Calabrese, 1995a Adjusted soil intake estimates
i
H
i ^*
59 children
Tracer - mass balance study using aluminum, 64 Children
barium, manganese, silicon, titanium,
vanadium, ytrium, and zirconium
18 nursery school
children; 6
hospitalized
children
104 children
64 children
Stanek and Calabrese, 1995b Recalculated intake rates based on three 164 children
previous mass-balance studies using the Best 6 adults
Tracer Method
Van Wijnen et al., 1990 Tracer study using aluminum, acid insoluble 292 day care
residue, and titanium children; 78
campers; 15
hospitalized
children
CHILDREN RELEVANT STUDIES
AIHC, 1994 Reanalysis of data from Calabrese et al., 1990 6 adults
Calabrese and Stanek, 1995 Evaluated errors in soil ingestion estimates 64 children
1-3 years
1 -4 years
2-7 years
1-4 years
1 -7 years
25-41 years
1-5 years
21-41 years
1-4 years
Children living near lead
smelter in Montana
Children from greater
Amherst area of
Massachusetts; highly-
educated parents
Dutch children
Children from 3-city area in
Washington State
Same children as in
Calabrese et al., 1989
Children from three mass-
balance studies
Dutch children
Health adults
Study population of
Calabrese et al.. 1989
Did not account for tracer in food and
medicine; used assumed fecal weight of
15 g/day; short-term study conducted
over 3 days
Corrected for tracer in food and
medicine; study conducted over two-
week period; used adults to validate
methods; one pica child in study group.
Did not account for tracer in food and
medicines; used tracer-based intake rates
for hospitalized children as background
values; short-term study conducted over
5 days
Corrected for tracer in food and
medicine; short-term study conducted
over seven-day period; collected
information on demographic
characteristics affecting soil intake.
Based on data from Calabrese et al.,
1989
Based on studies of Calabrese et al.,
1989; Davis et al., 1990; and Calabrese
etal., 1990.
Did not account for tracer in food and
medicines; used tracer-based intake for
hospitalized children as background
values; evaluated population (campers)
with greater access to soil; evaluated
differences in soil intake due to weather
conditions.
Used data from Calabrese et al. (1990)
study to derive soil ingestion rates using
zirconium as a tracer; recent studies
indicate that zirconium is not a good
tracer
Based on Calabrese et al., 1989 data.
D
a
a
A.
ri
a
2
I
-------
Q
Table 4-20. Soil Intake Studies (continued)
Study
Study Type
Number of Observations
Ase
Population Studied
Comments
CHILDREN RELEVANT STUDIESfcontinuecn:
Day etal, 1977
Duggan and Williams, 1977
Hawley, 1985
Lepowetal., 1974; 1975
Sedman and Mahmood, 1994
Sheppard, 1995
Thompson and Burmaster, 1991
ADULT SOIL INTAKE STUDIES
Hawley, 1985
Calabrese et al., 1990
PICA STUDIES:
Calabrese et al., 1991
Calabrese and Stanek, 1992
Measured dirt on sticky sweets and
assumed number of sweets eaten per
day
Measured soil on fingers and observed
mouthing behavior
Assumed soil intake rates based on
nature and duration of activities
Measured soil on hands and observed
mouthing behavior
Adjusted data from earlier tracer-mass
balance studies to generate mean soil
intake rates for a 2-year old child
Provides estimates based on the current
literature on soil ingestion from tracer
methods and recommends values for
use in assessments
Re-evaluation of Binder et al., 1986
data
Assumed soil intake rates based on
nature and duration of activities
Measured excretory output after
ingestion of capsules with sterilized
soil
Tracer - mass balance
Reanalysis of data from Calabrese et
al., 1991
Not specified
Not specified
Not specified
22 children
64 children from
Calabrese et al., 1989
study and 1 04 children
from Davis et al., 1990
study
Not specified
59 children
Not specified
6 adults
1 pica child
1 pica child
Not specified
Not specified
Young children,
older children,
adults
2-6 years
Adjusted to 2-year
old child
1 year-adults (age
not specified)
1 -3 years
Young children,
older children,
adults
21-41 years
3.5 years
3.5 years
Not specified
Areas around London
Not specified
Urban children from
Connecticut
Same children as in
Calabrese et al., 1989
and Davis etal., 1990
study
Various
Children living near lead
smelter in Montana
Not specified
Healthy adult volunteers
1 pica child from greater
Amherst area of
Massachusetts
1 pica child from greater
Amherst area of
Massachusetts
Based on observations and crude
measurements.
Based on observations and crude
measurements.
No data on soil intake collected; estimates
based on assumptions regarding data from
previous studies.
Based on observations over 3-6 hours of
play and crude measurement techniques.
Based on data from Calabrese et al., 1989
and Davis etal., 1990.
Presents mean estimates for children and
adults; provides ingestion estimates for
indoor and outdoor activities based on
Hawley, 1985.
Re-calculated soil intake rates from
Binder et al., 1986 data using actual fecal
weights instead of assumed weights.
No data on soil intake collected; estimates
based on assumptions regarding data from
previous studies.
Data used to validate the analytical
methodology used in the children's study
(Calabrese, 1989).
Child was observed as part of the
Calabrese et al., 1989 study.
Distinguished between outdoor soil
ingestion and indoor dust ingestion in a
soil pica child.
I
I
A,
5!
ri
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-21. Confidence in Soil Intake Recommendation
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
All key studies are from peer review literature.
Papers are widely available from peer review journals.
Methodology used was presented, but results are difficult to
reproduce.
The focus of the studies was on estimating soil intake rate by
children; studies did not focus on intake rate by adults.
Two of the key studies focused on Dutch children; other studies used
children from specific areas of the U.S.
All the studies were based on primary data.
Studies were conducted after 1980.
Children were not studied long enough to fully characterize day to
day variability.
The basic approach is the only practical way to study soil intake, but
refinements are needed in tracer selection and matching input with
outputs. The more recent studies corrected the data for sources of
the tracers in food. There are, however, some concerns about
absorption of the tracers into the body and lag time between input
and output.
The sample sizes used in the key studies were adequate for children.
However, only few adults have been studied.
The study population may not be representative of the U.S. in terms
of race, socio-economics, and geographical location; Studies focused
on specific areas; two of the studies used Dutch children.
Day-to-day variability was not very well characterized.
The selection of the population studied may introduce some bias in
the results (i.e., children near a smelter site, volunteers in nursery
school, Dutch children).
Errors may result due to problems with absorption of the tracers in
the body and mismatching inputs and outputs.
There are 7 key studies.
Despite the variability, there is general agreement among researchers
on central estimates of daily intake for children.
Studies were well designed; results were fairly consistent; sample
size was adequate for children and very small for adults; accuracy of
methodology is uncertain; variability cannot be characterized due to
limitations in data collection period. Insufficient data to recommend
upper percentile estimates for both children and adults.
High
High
Medium
High (for children)
Low (for adults)
Medium
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium (for children)
Low (for adults)
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
Medium (for children -
long-term central
estimate)
Low (for adults)
Low (for upper
percentile)
Page
4-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Table 4-22. Summary of Estimates of Soil Ingestion by Children
Al
181
230
39
64.5"
153
154"
122
133C
69-120"
Average
AIR =
Mean (me/day)
Si AIR' Ti Y
184
129
82 245.5
160" 268.4"
154 218 85
483" 170" 65"
139 - 271 165
146 mg/day soil
191 mg/day soil and dust
combined
Acid Insoluble Residue
Upper Percentile (me/day)
Al
584
223
478"
254
217C
Si Ti Y
578
276 1,432 106
653" 1,059" 159"
224 279 144
References
Binder etal. 1986
Clausing et al. 1987
Davis et al. 1990
Calabrese et al. 1989
Stanek and Calabrese, 1995a
Stanek and Calabrese, 1995b
Van Wijnen et al. 1990
383 mg/day soil
587 mg/day soil and dust combined
b Soil and dust combined
BTM
" LTM;
corrected value
Table 4-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Soil Ingestion
Population
Children
Adults
Pica child
Mean
100 mg/daya
50 mg/day
10 e/day
Upper Percentile
400 mg/dayb
200 mg/day may be used as a conservative estimate of the mean (see text).
Study period was short; therefore, these values are not estimates of usual intake.
To be used in acute exposure assessments. Based on only one pica child (Calabrese et al., 1989).
4.8. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
Binder, S.; Sokal, D.; Maughan, D. (1986) Estimating
soil ingestion: the use of tracer elements in
estimating the amount of soil ingested by young
children. Arch. Environ. Health. 41(6):341-345.
Behrman,L.E.; Vaughan, V.C., III. (1983) Textbook of
Pediatrics. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders
Company.
Bruhn, C.M.; Pangborn, R.M. (1971) Reported
incidence of pica among migrant families. J. of the
Am. Diet. Assoc. 58:417-420.
Calabrese, E.J.; Kostecki, P.T.; Gilbert, C.E. (1987)
How much soil do children eat? An emerging
consideration for environmental health risk
assessment. In press (Comments in Toxicology).
Calabrese, E.J.; Pastides, H.; Barnes, R.; Edwards, C.;
Kostecki, P.T.; et al. (1989) How much soil do
young children ingest: an epidemiologic study. In:
Petroleum Contaminated Soils, Lewis Publishers,
Chelsea, MI. pp. 363-397.
Calabrese, E.J.; Stanek, E.J.; Gilbert, C.E.; Barnes, R.M.
(1990) Preliminary adult soil ingestion estimates;
results of a pilot study. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
12:88-95.
Calabrese, E.J.; Stanek, E.J.; Gilbert, C.E. (1991)
Evidence of soil-pica behavior and quantification of
soil ingested. Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 10:245-249.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
4-25
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 4 - Soil Ingestion and Pica
Calabrese, E.J.; Stanek, E.J. (1992) Distinguishing
outdoor soil ingestion from indoor dust ingestion in a
soil pica child. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 15:83-
85.
Calabrese, E.J.; Stanek, E.J. (1995) Resolving intertracer
inconsistencies in soil ingestion estimation. Environ.
Health Perspect. 103(5):454-456.
Clausing, P.; Brunekreef, B.; Van Wijnen, J.H. (1987)
A method for estimating soil ingestion by children.
Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health (W. Germany)
59(l):73-82.
Danford, D.C. (1982) Pica and nutrition. Annual
Review of Nutrition. 2:303-322.
Davis, S.; Waller, P.; Buschbon, R.; Ballou, I; White, P.
(1990) Quantitative estimates of soil ingestion in
normal children between the ages of 2 and 7 years:
population based estimates using aluminum, silicon,
and titanium as soil tracer elements. Arch. Environ.
Hlth. 45:112-122.
Day, IP.; Hart, M; Robinson, M.S. (1975) Lead in
urban street dust. Nature 253:343-345.
Duggan, M.J.; Williams, S. (1977) Lead in dust in city
streets. Sci. Total Environ. 7:91-97.
Feldman, M.D. (1986) Pica: current perspectives.
Psychosomatics (USA) 27(7): 519-523.
Forfar, J.O.;Ameil, G.C., eds. (1984) Textbook of
Paediatrics. 3rd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone.
Hawley, J.K. (1985) Assessment of health risk from
exposure to contaminated soil. Risk Anal. 5:289-
302.
Illmgworth,R.S. (1983) The normal child. New York:
Churchill Livingstone.
Kaplan, H.I.; Sadock, B.J. (1985) Comprehensive
textbook of psychiatryt\ V. Baltimore, MD: Williams
and Wilkins.
Kimbrough, R.; Falk, H.; Stemr, P.; Fries, G. (1984)
Health implications of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-
p-dioxin (TCDD) contamination of residential soil.
J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 14:47-93.
Krablin, R. (1989) [Letter to Jonathan Z. Cannon
concerning soil ingestion rates.] Denver, CO: Arco
Coal Co.; October 13, 1989.
Lepow, M.L.; Bruckman, L.; Robino, R.A.; Markowitz,
S.; Gillette, M.; et al. (1974) Role of airborne lead
in increased body burden of lead in Hartford
children. Environ. Health Perspect. 6:99-101.
Lepow, M.L.; Buckman, L.; Gillette, M.; Markowitz, S.;
Robino, R.; et al. (1975) Investigations into sources
of lead in the environment of urban children.
Environ. Res. 10:415-426.
Loune,RS.; Layman, E.M.; Milhcan, F.K. (1963) Why
children eat things that are not food. Children
10:143-146.
Roels, H.; Buchet, IP.; Lauwerys, R.R. (1980) Exposure
to lead by the oral and pulminary route of children
living in the vicinity of a primary lead smelter.
Environ. Res. 22:81-94.
Sayetta, R.B. (1986) Pica: An overview. American
Family Physician 33(5):181-185.
Sedman, R.;Mahmood, R.S. (1994) Soil ingestion by
children and adults reconsidered using the results of
recent tracer studies. Air and Waste, 44:141-144.
Sheppard, S.C. (1995) Parameter values to model the
soil ingestion pathway. Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment 34:27-44.
Stanek, E.J.; Calabrese, E.J. (1995a) Daily estimates of
soil ingestion in children. Environ. Health Perspect.
103(3):276-285.
Stanek, E.J.; Calabrese, E.J. (1995b) Soil ingestion
estimates for use in site evaluations based on the best
tracer method. Human and Ecological Risk
Assessment. 1:133-156.
Thompson, K.M.; Burmaster, D.E. (1991) Parametric
distributions for soil ingestion by children. Risk
Analysis. 11:339-342.
U.S. EPA. (1984) Risk analysis of TCDD contaminated
soil. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment. EPA 600/8-84-031.
Van Wijnen, J.H.; Clausing, P.; Brunekreff, B. (1990)
Estimated soil ingestion by children. Environ. Res.
51:147-162.
Vermeer, D.E.; Frate, D.A. (1979) Geophagia in rural
Mississippi: environmental and cultural contexts and
nutritional implications. Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
32:2129-2135.
Page
4-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
5. INHALATION ROUTE 1
5.1. EXPOSURE EQUATION FOR INHALATION 1
5.2. INHALATION RATE 1
5.2.1. Background 1
5.2.2. Key Inhalation Rate Studies 3
5.2.3. Relevant Inhalation Rate Studies 16
5.2.4. Recommendations 22
5.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5 27
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
5. INHALATION ROUTE
This chapter presents data and recommendations for
inhalation rates that can be used to assess exposure to
contaminants in air. The studies discussed in this chapter
have been classified as key or relevant. Key studies are
used as the basis for deriving recommendations and the
relevant studies are included to provide additional
background and perspective. The recommended inhalation
rates are summarized in Section 5.2.4 and cover adults,
children, and outdoor workers/athletes.
Inclusion of this chapter in the Exposure Factors
Handbook does not imply that assessors will always need to
select and use inhalation rates when evaluating exposure to
air contaminants. In fact, it is unnecessary to calculate
inhaled dose when using dose-response factors from
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) (U.S. EPA,
1994). This is due to the fact that IRIS methodology
accounts for inhalation rates in the development of "dose-
response" relationships. When using IRIS for inhalation
risk assessments, "dose-response" relationships require
only an average air concentration to evaluate health
concerns:
• For non-carcinogens, IRIS uses Reference
Concentrations (RfC) which are expressed in
concentration units. Hazard is evaluated by
comparing the inspired air concentration to the
RfC.
• For carcinogens, IRIS uses unit risk values
which are expressed in inverse concentration
units. Risk is evaluated by multiplying the unit
risk by the inspired air concentration.
Detailed descriptions of the IRIS methodology for
derivation of inhalation reference concentrations can be
found in two methods manuals produced by the Agency
(U.S. EPA, 1992; 1994).
IRIS employs a default inhalation rate of 20 mVday.
This is greater than the recommendated value in this
chapter. When using IRIS, adjustments of dose-response
relationships using inhalation rates other than the default, 20
mVday, are not currently recommended. There are
instances where the inhalation rate data presented in this
chapter may be used for estimating average daily dose. For
example, the inhalatino average daily dose is often
estimated in cases where a compative pathway analysis is
desired or to determine a total dose by adding across
pathways in cases where RfCs and unit risk factors are not
available.
5.1. EXPOSURE EQUATION FOR INHALATION
For those cases where the average daily dose (ADD)
needs to be estimated, the general equation is:
ADD = [[C x IR x ED] / [BW x AT]]
where:
(Eqn. 5-1)
ADD = average daily dose (mg/kg-day);
C = contaminant concentration in inhaled air (,ug/m3);
IR = inhalation rate (nrVday);
ED = exposure duration (days);
BW = body weight (kg); and
AT = averaging time (days), for non-carcinogenic effects AT
= ED, for carcinogenic or chronic effects AT = 70
years or 25,550 days (lifetime).
The average daily dose is the dose rate averaged over
a pathway-specific period of exposure expressed as a daily
dose on a per-unit-body-weight basis. The ADD is used for
exposure to chemicals with non-carcinogenic non-chronic
effects. For compounds with carcinogenic or chronic
effects, the lifetime average daily dose (LADD) is used.
The LADD is the dose rate averaged over a lifetime. The
contaminant concentration refers to the concentration of the
contaminant in inhaled air. Exposure duration refers to the
total time an individual is exposed to an air pollutant.
5.2. INHALATION RATE
5.2.1. Background
The Agency defines exposure as the chemical
concentration at the boundary of the body (U.S. EPA,
1992). In the case of inhalation, the situation is complicated
by the fact that oxygen exchange with carbon dioxide takes
place in the distal portion of the lung. The anatomy and
physiology of the respiratory system diminishes the
pollutant concentration in inspired air (potential dose) such
that the amount of a pollutant that actually enters the body
through the lung (internal dose) is less than that measured
at the boundary of the body (Figure 5-1). When
constructing risk assessments that concern the inhalation
route of exposure, one must be aware if any adjustments
have been employed in the estimation of the pollutant
concentration to account for this reduction in potential dose.
The respiratory system is comprised of three regions:
nasopharyngeal, tracheobronchial, and pulmonary. The
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Exposure
Chemical
Biologically
Effective
Dose
Potential Applied
Dose Dose
Internal
Dose
Effect
Mouth / Nose
Intake
Uptake
Figure 5-1. Schematic of Dose and Exposure: Respiratory Route
Source: U.S. EPA, 1992.
nasopharyngeal region extends from the nose to the larynx.
The tracheobronchial region forms the conducting airways
between nasopharynx and alveoli where gas exchange
occurs. It consists of the trachea, bronchi, and bronchioles.
The pulmonary regions consists of the acinus which is the
site where gas exchange occurs; it is comprised of
respiratory bronchioles, alveolar ducts and sacs, and alveoli.
A detailed discussion of pulmonary anatomy and physiology
can be found in: Benjamin (1988) and U.S. EPA (1989 and
1994).
Each region in the respiratory system can be
involved with removing pollutants from inspired air. The
nasopharyngeal region filters out large inhaled particles,
moderates the temperature, and increases the humidity of
the air. The surface of the tracheobronchial region is
covered with ciliated mucous secreting cells which forms a
mucociliary escalator that moves particles from deep
regions of the lung to the oral cavity where they may be
swallowed and then excreted. The branching pattern and
physical dimensions of the these airways determine the
pattern of deposition of airborne particles and absorption of
gases by the respiratory tract. They decrease in diameter as
they divide into a bifurcated branching network dilutes
gases by axial diffusion of gases along the streamline of
airways and radial diffusion of gases due to an increase in
cross sectional area of the lungs. The velocity of the
airstream in this decreasing branching network creates a
turbulent force such that airborne particles can be deposited
along the walls of these airways by impaction, interception,
sedimentation, or diffusion depending on their size. The
pulmonary region contains macrophages which engulf
particles and pathogens that enter this portion of the lung.
Notwithstanding these removal mechanisms, both
gaseous and particulate pollutants can deposit in various
regions of the lung. Both the physiology of the lung and the
chemistry of the pollutant influences where the pollutant
tends to deposit.
Gaseous pollutants are evenly dispersed in the air
stream. They come into contact with a large portion of the
lung. Generally, their solubility and reactivity determines
where they deposit in the lung. Water soluble and
chemically reactive gases tend to deposit in the upper
respiratory tract. Lipid soluble or non-reactive gases
usually are not removed in the upper airways and tend to
deposit in the distal portions of the lung. Gases can be
absorbed into the blood stream or react with lung tissue.
Gases can be removed from the lung by reaction with
tissues or by expiration. The amount of gas retained in the
lung or other parts of the body is mainly due to their
solubility in blood.
Page
5-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Chemically, particles are quite heterogenous. They
range from aqueous soluble particles to solid insoluble
particles. Their size, chemical composition, and the physical
forces of breathing dictate where they tend to deposit in the
lung. Large particles, those with a diameter of greater than
0.5 micrometers (um), not filtered out in the nasopharynx,
tend to deposit in the upper respiratory tract at airway
branching points due to impaction. The momentum of these
particles in the air stream is such that they tend to collide
with the airway wall at branching points in the
tracheobronchial region of the lung. Those particles not
removed from the airstream by impaction will likely be
deposited in small bronchi and bronchioles by
sedimentation, a process where by particles settle out of the
airstream due to the decrease in airstream velocity and the
gravitational force on the particles. Small particles, less
than 0.2 um, acquire a random motion due to bombardment
by air molecules. This movement can cause particles to be
deposited on the wall of an air way throughout the lungs.
A special case exists for fibers. Fibers can deposit
along the wall of an airway by a process known as
interception. This occurs when a fiber makes contact with
an airway wall. The likelihood of interception increases as
airway diminish in diameter. Fiber shape influences
deposition too. Long, thin, straight fibers tend to deposit in
the deep region of the lung compared to thick or curved
fibers.
The health risk associated with human exposure to
airborne toxics is a function of concentration of air
pollutants, chemical species, duration of exposure, and
inhalation rate. The dose delivered to target organs
(including the lungs) , the biologically effective dose, is
dependent on the potentail dose, the applied dose and the
internal dose (Figure 5-1) A detailed discussion of this
concept can be found in Guidelines for Exposure
Assessment (U.S. EPA, 1992).
The estimation of applied dose for a given air
pollutant is dependent on inhalation rate, commonly
described as ventilation rate (VR) or breathing rate. VR is
usually measured as minute volume, the volume in liters of
air exhaled per minute(VE). V, is the product of the
number of respiratory cycles in a minute and the volume of
air respired during each respiratory cycle, the tidal volume(
VT).
When interested in calculating internal dose,
assessors must consider the alveolar ventilation rate. This
is the amount of air available for exchange with alveoli per
unit time. It is equivalent to the tidal volume( VT) minus the
anatomic dead space of the lungs (the space containing air
that does not come into contact with the alveoli). Alveolar
ventilation is approximately 70 percent of total ventilation;
tidal volume is approximately 500 milliliters (ml) and the
amount of anatomic dead space in the lungs is
approximately 150 ml, approximately 30% of the amount of
air inhaled (Menzel and Amdur, 1986).
Breathing rates are affected by numerous individual
characteristics, including age, gender, weight, health status,
and levels of activity (running, walking, jogging, etc.). VRs
are either measured directly using a spirometer and a
collection system or indirectly from heart rate (HR)
measurements. In many of the studies described in the
following sections, HR measurements are usually correlated
with VR in simple and multiple regression analysis.
The available studies on inhalation rates are
summarized in the following sections. Inhalation rates are
reported for adults and children (including infants)
performing various activities and outdoor workers/ athletes.
The activity levels have been categorized as resting,
sedentary, light, moderate, and heavy. In most studies, the
sample population kept diaries to record their physical
activities, locations, and breathing rates. Ventilation rates
were either measured, self-estimated or predicted from
equations derived using VR-HR calibration relationships.
5.2.2. Key Inhalation Rate Studies
Linn et al. (1992) - Documentation of Activity
Patterns in "High-Risk" Groups Exposed to Ozone in the
Los Angeles Area - Linn et al. (1992) conducted a study
that estimated the inhalation rates for "high-risk"
subpopulation groups exposed to ozone (O3) in their daily
activities in the Los Angeles area. The population surveyed
consisted of seven subject panels: Panel 1: 20 healthy
outdoor workers (15 males, 5 females, ages 19-50 years);
Panel 2: 17 healthy elementary school students (5 males, 12
females, ages 10-12 years); Panel 3: 19 healthy high school
students (7 males, 12 females, ages 13-17 years); Panel 4:
49 asthmatic adults (clinically mild, moderate, and severe,
15 males, 34 females, ages 18-50 years); Panel 5: 24
asthmatic adults from 2 neighborhoods of contrasting O3 air
quality (10 males, 14 females, ages 19-46 years); Panel 6:
13 young asthmatics (7 males, 6 females, ages ll-16years);
Panel 7: construction workers (7 males, ages 26-34 years).
Initially, a calibration test was conducted, followed
by a training session. Finally, a field study was conducted
which involved subjects' collecting their own heart rate and
diary data. During the calibration tests, VR and HR were
measured simultaneously at each exercise level. From the
calibration data an equation was developed using linear
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
regression analysis to predict VR from measured HR (Linn
etal, 1992).
In the field study, each subject (except construction
workers) recorded in diaries: their daily activities, change
in locations (indoors, outdoors, or in a vehicle), self-
estimated breathing rates during each activity/location, and
time spent at each activity/location. Healthy subjects
recorded their HR once every 60 seconds, Asthmatic
subjects recorded their diary information once every hour
using a Heart Watch. Construction workers dictated their
diary information to a technician accompanying them on the
job. Subjective breathing rates were defined as slow
(walking at their normal pace); medium (faster than normal
walking); and fast (running or similarly strenuous
exercise). Table 5-1 presents the calibration and field
protocols for self-monitoring of activities for each subject
panel.
Table 5-2 presents the mean VR, the 99th percentile
VR, and the mean VR at each subjective activity level
(slow, medium, fast). The mean VR and 99th percentile
VR were derived from all HR recordings (that appeared to
be valid) without considering the diary data. Each of the
three activity levels was determined from both the
concurrent diary data and HR recordings by direct
calculation orregression (Linn et al., 1992). The mean VR
for healthy adults was 0.78 m3/hr while the mean VR for
asthmatic adults was 1.02 m3/hr (Table 5-2). The
preliminary data for construction workers indicated that
during a 10-hr work shift, their mean VR (1.50 m3/hr)
exceeded the VRs of all other subject panels (Table 5-2).
Linn et al. (1992) reported that the diary data showed that
most individuals except construction workers spent most of
their time (in a typical day) indoors at slow activity level.
During slow activity, asthmatic subjects had higher VRs
than healthy subjects, except construction workers
(Table 5-2). Also, Linn et al. (1992) reported that in every
panel, the predicted VR correlated significantly with the
subjective estimates of activity levels.
Table 5-1. Calibration and Field Protocols for Self-Monitoring of Activities Grouped by Subject Panels
Panel
Panel 1 - Healthy Outdoor Workers - 15
female, 5 male, age 19-50
Panel 2 - Healthy Elementary School
Students - 5 male, 12 female, age 10-12
Panel 3 - Healthy High School Students
- 7 male, 12 female, age 13-17
Panel 4 - Adult Asthmatics, clinically
mild, moderate, and severe - 15 male, 34
female, age 18-50
Panel 5 - Adult Asthmatics from 2
neighborhoods of contrasting O3 air
quality - 10 male, 14 female, age 19-46
Panel 6 - Young Asthmatics - 7 male, 6
female, age 11-16
Panel 7 - Construction Workers - 7
male, age 26-34
Calibration Protocol
Laboratory treadmill exercise tests, indoor
hallway walking tests at different self-chosen
speeds, 2 outdoor tests consisted of 1-hour
cycles each of rest, walking, and jogging.
Outdoor exercises each consisted of 20 minute
rest, slow walking, jogging and fast walking
Outdoor exercises each consisted of 20 minute
rest, slow walking, jogging and fast walking
Treadmill and hallway exercise tests
Treadmill and hallway exercise tests
Laboratory exercise tests on bicycles and
treadmills
Performed similar exercises as Panel 2 and 3,
and also performed job-related tests including
lifting and carrying a 9-kg pipe.
Field Protocol
3 days in 1 typical summer week (included most
active workday and most active day off); HR
recordings and activity diary during waking
hours.
Saturday, Sunday and Monday (school day) in
early autumn; HR recordings and activity diary
during waking hours and during sleep.
Same as Panel 2, however, no HR recordings
during sleep for most subjects.
1 typical summer week, 1 typical winter week;
hourly activity/health diary during waking hours;
lung function tests 3 times daily; HR recordings
during waking hours on at least 3 days (including
most active work day and day off).
Similar to Panel 4, personal NO2 and acid
exposure monitoring included. (Panels 4 and 5
were studied in different years, and had 10
subjects in common).
Similar to Panel 4, summer monitoring for 2
successive weeks, including 2 controlled exposure
studies with few or no observable respiratory
effects.
HR recordings and diary information during 1
typical summer work day.
Source: Linn etal., 1992
Page
5-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-2. Subject Panel Inhalation Rates by Mean VR, Upper Percentiles, and Self-Estimated Breathing Rates
Inhalation Rates (nrYhr)
Panel
Healthy
1 - Adults
2 - Elementary School Students
3 - High School Students
7 - Construction Workers0
Asthmatics
4 - Adults
5 - Adults"
6 - Elementary and High School Students
N' Mean VR 99th Percentile
(W/hr) VR
20
17
19
7
49
24
13
0.78
0.90
0.84
1.50
1.02
1.20
1.20
2.46
1.98
2.22
4.26
1.92
2.40
2.40
" Number of individuals in each survey panel.
b Some subjects did not report medium and/or fast activity. Group means were calculated from
each individual who recorded any time at the indicated activity level).
0 Construction workers recorded only on 1 day, mostly during work, while others recorded on >
d Excluding subjects also in Panel 4.
Source: Linn etal., 1992.
Mean VR at Activity
(m3/hr)b
Slow
0.72
0.84
0.78
1.26
1.02
1.20
1.20
Medium0
1.02
0.96
1.14
1.50
1.68
2.04
1.20
Levels
Fast0
3.06
1.14
1.62
1.68
2.46
4.02
1.50
individual means (i.e., give equal weight to
1 work or school day and > 1 day off.
A limitation of this study is that calibration data may
overestimate the predictive power of HR during actual field
monitoring. The wide variety of exercises in everyday
activities may result in greater variation of the VR-HR
relationship than calibrated. Another limitation of this study
is the small sample size of each subpopulation surveyed.
An advantage of this study is that diary data can provide
rough estimates of ventilation patterns which are useful in
exposure assessments. Another advantage is that inhalation
rates were presented for various subpopulations (i.e.,
healthy outdoor adult workers, healthy children, asthmatics,
and construction workers).
Spier et al. (1992) - Activity Patterns in Elementary
and High School Students Exposed To Oxidant Pollution -
Spier et al. (1992) investigated activity patterns of 17
elementary school students (10-12 years old) and 19 high
school students (13-17 years old) in suburban Los Angeles
from late September to October
(oxidant pollution season). Calibration tests were
conducted in supervised outdoor exercise sessions. The
exercise sessions consisted of 5 minutes for each: rest, slow
walking, jogging, and fast walking. HR and VR were
measured during the last 2 minutes of each exercise.
Individual VR and HR relationships for each individual
were determined by fitting a regression line to HR values
and log VR values. Each subject recorded their daily
activities, change in location, and breathing rates in diaries
for 3 consecutive days. Self-estimated breathing rates were
recorded as slow (slow walking), medium (walking faster
than normal), and fast (running). HR was recorded during
the 3 days once per minute by wearing a Heart Watch. VR
values for each self-estimated breathing rate and activity
type were estimated from the HR recordings by employing
the VR and HR equation obtained from the calibration tests.
The data presented in Table 5-3 represent HR
distribution patterns and corresponding predicted VR for
each age group during hours spent awake. At the same self-
reported activity levels for both age groups, inhalation rates
were higher for outdoor activities than for indoor activities.
The total hours spent indoors by high school students
(21.2 hours) were higher than for elementary school
students (19.6 hours). The converse was true for outdoor
activities; 2.7 hours for high school students, and 4.4 hours
for elementary school students (Table 5-4). Based on the
data presented in Tables 5-3 and 5-4, the average activity-
specific inhalation rates for elementary (10-12 years) and
high school (13-17 years) students were calculated in Table
5-5. For elementary school students, the average daily
inhalation rates (based on indoor and outdoor locations) are
15.8 mVday for light activities, 4.62 ni /day for moderate
activities, and 0.98 mVday for heavy activities. For high
school students the daily inhalation rates for light, moderate,
and heavy activities are estimated to be 16.4 mVday, 3.1
mVday, and 0.54 mVday, respectively (Table 5-5).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-5
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-3. Distribution of Predicted IR by Location and Activity Levels for Elementary and High School Students
Inhalation Rates (nrVhr)
Age
(yrs) Student Location
10-12 ELC Indoors
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-5. Distribution Patterns of Daily Inhalation Rates for Elementary (EL) and High School (HS) Students Grouped by
Age
Students (yrs)
EL(nc=17) 10-12
EL
HS(n=19) 13-17
HS
Location Activity type"
Indoor Light
Moderate
Heavy
Outdoor Light
Moderate
Heavy
Indoor Light
Moderate
Heavy
Outdoor Light
Moderate
Heavv
Mean IRb
(nrVday)
13.7
2.8
0.4
2.1
1.84
0.57
15.2
1.4
0.25
1.15
1.64
0.29
Activity Level
Percentile Rankings
1st 50th 99.9th
2.93
0.70
0.096
0.79
0.41
0.24
5.85
0.63
0.11
0.50
0.62
0.096
12.71
2.44
0.34
1.72
1.63
0.48
14.04
1.26
0.22
1.08
1.40
0.20
38.14
7.48
1.37
9.50
5.71
1.80
63.18
6.03
1.37
6.34
7.41
1.19
" For this report, activity type presented in Table 5-2 was redefined as light activity for slow, moderate activity for medium, and heavy
activity for fast.
b Daily inhalation rate was calculated by multiplying the hours spent at each activity level (Table 5-4) by the corresponding inhalation rate
(Table 5-3).
0 Number of elementary (EL) and high school students (HS).
Source: Adapted from Spier et al., 1992 (Generated using data from Tables 5-3 and 5-4).
A limitation of this study is the small sample size.
The results may not be representative of all children in these
age groups. Another limitation is that the accuracy of the
self-estimated breathing rates reported by younger age
groups is uncertain. This may affect the validity of the data
set generated. An advantage of this study is that inhalation
rates were determined for children and adolescents. These
data are useful in estimating exposure for the younger
population.
Adams (1993) - Measurement of Breathing Rate
and Volume in Routinely Performed Daily Activities -
Adams (1993) conducted research to accomplish two main
objectives: (1) identification of mean and ranges of
inhalation rates for various age/gender cohorts and specific
activities; and (2) derivation of simple linear and multiple
regression equations used to predict inhalation rates through
other measured variables: heart rate (HR), breathing
frequency (fB), and oxygen consumption (V02). A total of
160 subjects participated in the primary study. There were
four age dependent groups: (1) children 6 to 12.9 years old,
(2) adolescents between 13 and 18.9 years old, (3) adults
between 19 and 59.9 years old, and (4) seniors >60 years
old (Adams, 1993). An additional 40 children from 6 to 12
years old and 12 young children from 3 to 5 years old were
identified as subjects for pilot testing purposes in this age
group (Adams, 1993).
Resting protocols conducted in the laboratory for all
age groups consisted of three phases (25 minutes each) of
lying, sitting, and standing. They were categorized as
resting and sedentary activities. Two active protocols,
moderate (walking) and heavy (jogging/ running) phases,
were performed on a treadmill over a progressive
continuum of intensities made up of 6 minute intervals, at 3
speeds, ranging from slow to moderately fast. All protocols
involved measuring VR, HR, fB (breathing frequency), and
V02 (oxygen consumption). Measurements were taken in
the last 5 minutes of each phase of the resting protocol, and
the last 3 minutes of the 6 minute intervals at each speed
designated in the active protocols.
In the field, all children completed spontaneous play
protocols, while the older adolescent population (16-18
years) completed car driving and riding, car maintenance
(males), and housework (females) protocols. All adult
females (19-60 years) and most of the senior (60-77 years)
females completed housework, yardwork, and car driving
and riding protocols. Adult and senior males completed car
driving and riding, yardwork, and mowing protocols. HR,
VR, and fB were measured during each protocol. Most
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
protocols were conducted for 30 minutes. All the active
field protocols were conducted twice.
During all activities in either the laboratory or field
protocols, IR for the children's group revealed no significant
gender differences, but those for the adult groups
demonstrated gender differences. Therefore, IR data
presented in Appendix Tables 5A-1 and 5A-2 were
categorized as young children, children (no gender),and for
adult female, and adult male by activity levels (resting,
sedentary, light, moderate, and heavy). These categorized
data from the Appendix tables are summarized as IR in
m3/hr in Tables 5-6 and 5-7. The laboratory protocols are
shown in Table 5-6. Table 5-7 presents the mean inhalation
rates by group and activity levels (light, sedentary, and
moderate) in field protocols. A comparison of the data
shown in Tables 5-6 and 5-7 suggest that during light and
sedentary activities in laboratory and field protocols, similar
inhalation rates were obtained for adult females and adult
males. Accurate predictions of IR across all population
groups and activity types were obtained by including body
surface area (BSA), HR, and fB in multiple regression
analysis (Adams, 1993). Adams (1993) calculated BSA
from measured height and weight using the equation:
BSA = Height'0725' x Weight'0425' x 71.84.
(Eqn. 5-2)
A limitation associated with this study is that the
population does not represent the general U.S. population.
Also, the classification of activity types (i.e., laboratory and
field protocols) into activity levels may bias the inhalation
rates obtained for various age/gender cohorts. The estimated
rates were based on short-term data and may not reflect
long-term patterns. An advantage of this study is that it
provides inhalation data for all age groups.
Linn et al. (1993) - Activity patterns in Ozone
Exposed Construction Workers - Linn et al. (1993)
estimated the inhalation rates of 19 construction workers
who perform heavy outdoor labor before and during a
typical work shift. The workers (laborers, iron workers,
and carpenters) were employed at a site on a hospital
campus in suburban Los Angeles. The construction site
included a new hospital building and a separate medical
office complex. The study was conducted between mid-July
and early November, 1991. During this period, ozone (O3)
levels were typically high. Initially, each subject was
calibrated with a 25-minute exercise test that included slow
walking, fast walking, jogging, lifting, and carrying. All
calibration tests were conducted in the mornings. VR
Table 5-6. Summary of Average Inhalation Rates (m3/hr) by Age Group and Activity Levels for Laboratory Protocols
Age Group Resting3 Sedentary* Light0
Young Children5 0.37 0.40 0.65
Children11 0.45 0.47 0.95
Adult Females' 0.43 0.48 1.33
Adult Malesk 0.54 0.60 1.45
Moderate4
DNPg
1.74
2.76
1.93
Heavy6
DNP
2.23
2.96s
3.63
a Resting defined as lying (see Appendix Table 5A-1 for original data).
b Sedentary defined as sitting and standing (see Appendix Table 5 A- 1 for original data).
c Light defined as walking at speed level 1.5 - 3.0 mph (see Appendix Table 5A-1 for original data).
d Moderate defined as fast walking (3.3 - 4.0 mph) and slow running (3.5 - 4.0 mph) (see Appendix Table 5A-1 for original data).
e Heavy defined as fast running (4.5 - 6.0 mph) (see Appendix Table 5A-1 for original data).
f Young children (both genders) 3 - 5.9 yrs old.
8 DNP. Group did not perform this protocol or N was too small for appropriate mean comparisons. All young children did not run.
h Children (both genders) 6 - 12.9 yrs old.
1 Adult females defined as adolescent, young to middle aged, and older adult females.
1 Older adults not included in mean value since they did not perform running protocols at particular speeds.
k Adult males defined as adolescent, young to middle aged, and older adult males.
Source: Adapted from Adams, 1993.
Table 5-7. Summary of Average Inhalation Rates (irrVhr) by Age
Group and Activity Levels in Field Protocols
Age Group
Light8 Sedentarvb Moderate0
Page
5-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Young Children
Children5
Adult Females8
Adult Males1
DNP
DNP
1.10h
1.40
DNP
DNP
0.51
0.62
0.68
1.07
DNP
1.78s
" Light activity was defined as car maintenance (males),
housework (females), and yard work (females) (see Appendix
Table 5A-2 for original data).
b Sedentary activity was defined as car driving and riding (both
genders) (see Appendix Table 5A-2 for original data).
0 Moderate activity was defined as mowing (males); wood
working (males); yard work (males); and play (children) (see
Appendix Table 5A-2 for original data).
11 Young children (both genders) = 3-5.9 yrs old.
" DNP. Group did not perform this protocol or N was too small
for appropriate mean comparisons.
f Children (both genders) = 6 - 12.9 yrs old.
8 Adult females defined as adolescent, young to middle aged, and
older adult females.
h Older adults not included in mean value since they did not
perform this activity.
1 Adult males defined as adolescent, young to middle aged, and
older adult males.
' Adolescents not included in mean value since they did not
perform this activity.
Source: Adams, 1993.
and HR were measured simultaneously during the test. The
data were analyzed using least squares regression to derive
an equation for predicting VR at a given HR. Following the
calibration tests, each subject recorded the type of activities
to be performed during their work shift (i.e.,
sitting/standing, walking, lifting/carrying, and "working at
trade" - defined as tasks specific to the individual's job
classification). Location, and self-estimated breathing rates
("slow" similar to slow walking, "medium" similar to fast
walking, and "fast" similar to running) were also recorded
in the diary. During work, an investigator recorded the
diary information dictated by the subjects. HR was
recorded minute by minute for each subject before work and
during the entire work shift. Thus, VR ranges for each
breathing rate and activity category were estimated from the
HR recordings by employing the relationship between VR
and HR obtained from the calibration tests.
A total of 182 hours of HR recordings were obtained
during the survey from the 19 volunteers; 144 hours
reflected actual working time according to the diary records.
The lowest actual working hours recorded was 6.6 hours
and the highest recorded for a complete work shift was 11.6
hours (Linn et al, 1993). Summary statistics for predicted
VR distributions for all subjects, and for job or site defined
subgroups are presented in Table 5-8. The data reflect all
recordings before and during work, and at break times. For
all subjects, the mean IR was 1.68 m3/hr with a standard
deviation of ±0.72 (Table 5-8). Also, for most subjects, the
1st and 99th percentiles of HR were outside of the
calibration range (calibration ranges are presented in
Appendix Table 5A-3). Therefore, corresponding IR
percentiles were extrapolated using the calibration data
(Lmnetal, 1993).
The data presented in Table 5-9 represent
distribution patterns of IR for each subject, total subjects,
and job or site defined subgroups by self-estimated
breathing rates (slow, medium, fast) or by type of job
activity. All data include working and non-working hours.
The mean inhalation rates for most individuals showed
statistically significant increases with higher self-estimated
breathing rates or with increasingly strenuous job activity
(Linn et al., 1993). Inhalation rates were higher in hospital
site workers when compared with office site workers (Table
5-9). In spite of their higher predicted VR workers at the
hospital site reported a higher percentage of slow breathing
time (31 percent) than workers at the office site (20
percent), and a lower percentage of fast breathing time, 3
percent and 5 percent, respectively (Linn et al., 1993).
Therefore, individuals whose work was objectively heavier
than average (from VR predictions) tended to describe their
work as lighter than average (Linn et al., 1993). Linn et
al. (1993) also concluded that during an O3 pollution
episode, construction workers should experience similar
microenvironmental O3 exposure concentrations as other
healthy outdoor workers, but with approximately twice as
high a VR. Therefore, the inhaled dose of O3 should be
almost two times higher for typical heavy-construction
workers than for typical healthy adults performing less
strenuous outdoor jobs.
A limitation associated with this study is the small
sample size. Another limitation of this study is that
calibration data were not obtained at extreme conditions.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-9
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-8. Distributions of Individual and Group Inhalation/Ventilation Rate for Outdoor Workers
Ventilation Rate (VR) (nrVhr)
Population Group and Subgroup"
All Subjects (nb = 19)
Job
GCWVLaborers (n=5)
Iron Workers (n=3)
Carpenters (n=l 1)
Site
Medical Office Site (n=7)
Hospital Site (n=12)
Mean ± SD 1
1.68 ±0.72 0.66
1.44 ±0.66 0.48
1.62 ±0.66 0.60
1.86 ±0.78 0.78
1.38 ±0.66 0.60
1.86 ±0.78 0.72
Percentile
50 99
1.62 3.90
1.32 3.66
1.56 3.24
1.74 4.14
1.20 3.72
1.80 3.96
a Each group or subgroup mean was calculated from individual means, not from pooled data.
n = number of individuals performing specific jobs or number of individuals at survey sites.
c GCW - general construction worker.
Source: Linnet al., 1993.
Table 5-9. Individual Mean Inhalation Rate (m3/hr) by Self-Estimated Breathing Rate or Job Activity Category for Outdoor Workers
Population Group and Subgroup
All Subjects (n=19)
Job
Site
GCWVLaborers (n=5)
Iron Workers (n=3)
Carpenters (n=l 1)
Office Site (n=7)
Hospital Site (n=12)
Self-Estimated Job Activity Category (m3/hr)
Breathing Rate (nrVhr)
Slow Med Fast Sit/Std Walk Carry Trade6
1.44
1.20
1.38
1.62
1.14
1.62
" GCW - general construction worker
b Trade - "Working at Trade" (i.e., tasks specific to the
Source: Linnet al., 1993
1.86
1.56
1.86
2.04
1.44
2.16
individual's job
2.04 1.56 1.80
1.68 1.26 1.44
2.10 1.62 1.74
2.28 1.62 1.92
1.62 1.14 1.38
2.40 1.80 2.04
classification)
2.10 1.92
1.74 1.56
1.98 1.92
2.28 2.04
1.68 1.44
2.34 2.16
Therefore, it was necessary to predict IR values that were self-estimated breathing rates may be another source of
outside the calibration range. This may introduce an uncertainty in the inhalation rates estimated. An advantage
unknown amount of uncertainty to the data set. Subjective is that this study provides empirical data useful in exposure
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
5-10 August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
assessments for a subpopulation thought to be the most
highly exposed common occupational group (outdoor
workers).
Layton (1993) - Metabolically Consistent Breathing
Rates for Use in Dose Assessments - Layton (1993)
presented a new method for estimating metabolically
consistent inhalation rates for use in quantitative dose
assessments of airborne radionuclides. Generally, the
approach for estimating the breathing rate for a specified
time frame was to calculate a time-weighted-average of
ventilation rates associated with physical activities of
varying durations (Layton, 1993). However, in this study,
breathing rates were calculated based on oxygen
consumption associated with energy expenditures for short
(hours) and long (weeks and months) periods of time, using
the following general equation to calculate energy-
dependent inhalation rates:
VE = E x H x VQ
(Eqn. 5-3)
where:
VE
E
ventilation rate (L/min or m3/hr);
energy expenditure rate; [kilojoules/minute (KJ/min)
or megajoules/hour (MJ/hr)];
H = volume of oxygen [at standard temperature and
pressure, dry air (STPD) consumed in the production
of 1 kilojoule (KJ) of energy expended (L/KJ or
nrVMJ)]; and
VQ = ventilatory equivalent (ratio of minute volume
(L/min) to oxygen uptake (L/min)) unitless.
Three alternative approaches were used to estimate
daily chronic (long term) inhalation rates for different
age/gender cohorts of the U.S. population using this
methodology.
First Approach
Inhalation rates were estimated by multiplying
average daily food energy intakes for different age/gender
cohorts, volume of oxygen (H), and ventilatory equivalent
(VQ), as shown in the equation above. The average food
energy intake data (Table 5-10) are based on approximately
30,000 individuals and were obtained from the USDA
1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (USDA-
NFCS). The food energy intakes were adjusted upwards by
a constant factor of 1.2 for all individuals 9 years and older
(Layton, 1993). This factor compensated for a consistent
bias in USDA-NFCS attributed to under reporting of the
foods consumed or the methods used to ascertain dietary
intakes. Layton (1993) used a weighted average oxygen
uptake of 0.05 L O2/KJ which was determined from data
reported in the 1977-78 USDA-NFCS and the second
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
(NHANES II). The survey sample for NHANES II was
approximately 20,000 participants. The ventilatory
equivalent (VQ) of 27 used was calculated as the geometric
mean of VQ data that were obtained from several studies by
Layton (1993).
The inhalation rate estimation techniques are shown
in footnote (a) of Table 5-11. Table 5-11 presents the daily
inhalation rate for each age/gender cohort. The highest
daily inhalation rates were reported for children between the
ages of 6-8 years (10 mVday), for males between 15-18
years (17 mVday), and females between 9-11 years (13
mVday). Estimated average lifetime inhalation rates for
males and females are 14 mVday and 103 m /day,
respectively (Table 5-11). Inhalation rates were also
calculated for active and inactive periods for the various
age/gender cohorts.
The inhalation rate for inactive periods was
estimated by multiplying the basal metabolic rate (BMR)
times the oxygen uptake (H) times the VQ. BMR was
defined as "the minimum amount of energy required to
support basic cellular respiration while at rest and not
actively digesting food"(Layton, 1993). The inhalation rate
for active periods was calculated by multiplying the inactive
inhalation rate by the ratio of the rate of energy expenditure
during active hours to the estimated BMR. This ratio is
presented as F in Table 5-11. These data for active and
inactive inhalation rates are also presented in Table 5-11.
For children, inactive and active inhalation rates ranged
between 2.35 and 5.95 mVday and 6.35 to 13.09 nf /day,
respectively. For adult males (19-64 years old), the average
inactive and active inhalation rates were approximately 10
and 19 mVday, respectively. Also, the average inactive and
active inhalation rates for adult females (19-64 years old)
were approximately 8 and 12 mVday, respectively.
Second Approach
Inhalation rates were calculated by multiplying the
BMR of the population cohorts times A (ratio of total daily
energy expenditure to daily BMR) times H times VQ. The
BMR data obtained from literature were statistically
analyzed and regression equations were developed to
predict BMR from body weights of various age/gender
cohorts (Layton, 1993). The statistical data used to develop
the regression equations are presented in Appendix Table
5A-4. The data obtained from the second
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-11
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-10. Comparisons of Estimated Basal Metabolic Rates (BMR) with Average Food- Energy Intakes for
Individuals Sampled in the 1977-78 NFCS
Cohort/ Aj.
(years)
Children
Under 1
Ito2
3 to 5
6 to 8
Males
9 to 11
12 to 14
15 to 18
19 to 22
23 to 34
35 to 50
51 to 64
65 to 74
75 +
Females
9 to 11
12 to 14
15 to 18
19 to 22
23 to 34
35 to 50
51 to 64
65 to 74
75 +
;e Body Weight
kg
7.6
13
18
26
36
50
66
74
79
82
80
76
71
36
49
56
59
62
66
67
66
62
a Calculated from the appropriate a
b MJd"1 - mega joules/day
c kcal d"1 - kilo calories/day
Source: Layton, 1993.
MJ d'lb
1.74
3.08
3.69
4.41
5.42
6.45
7.64
7.56
7.87
7.59
7.49
6.18
5.94
4.91
5.64
6.03
5.69
5.88
5.78
5.82
5.26
5.11
BMRa
kcal d'lc
416
734
881
1053
1293
1540
1823
1804
1879
1811
1788
1476
1417
1173
1347
1440
1359
1403
1380
1388
1256
1220
Energy
MJd'1
3.32
5.07
6.14
7.43
8.55
9.54
10.8
10.0
10.1
9.51
9.04
8.02
7.82
7.75
7.72
7.32
6.71
6.72
6.34
6.40
5.99
5.94
je and gender-based BMR equations given in Appendix Table
Intake (EFD)
kcal d'1
793
1209
1466
1774
2040
2276
2568
2395
2418
2270
2158
1913
1866
1849
1842
1748
1601
1603
1514
1528
1430
1417
5A-4.
Ratio
EFD/BMR
1.90
1.65
1.66
1.68
1.58
1.48
1.41
1.33
1.29
1.25
1.21
1.30
1.32
1.58
1.37
1.21
1.18
1.14
1.10
1.10
1.14
1.16
Page
5-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-11. Daily Inhalation Rates Calculated from Food-Energy Intakes
Daily Inhalation
Rate'
Sleep
MET" Value
Inhalation Rates
Inactive0 Active0
Cohort/Age (years')
fmVdavl
(tO
Ff
fmVdav')
CmVdavl
Children
1 -2
3-5
6-8
Males
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51 -64
65-74
75+
Lifetime average s
1
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
11
16
14
10
1
4.5
6.8
8.3
10
14
15
17
16
16
15
15
13
13
14
11
11
10
10
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
2.7
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.1
9
2.35
4.16
4.98
5.95
7.32
8.71
10.31
10.21
10.62
10.25
10.11
8.34
8.02
6.35
9.15
10.96
13.09
18.3
19.16
21.65
19.4
19.12
18.45
17.19
15.01
15.24
Females
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51 -64
65-74
75+
Lifetime averaae s
3
3
4
4
11
16
14
10
1
13
12
12
11
11
10
10
9.7
Ł6
10
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
.9
.6
5
.4
.4
.3
.3
.4
.4
2.5
2.0
.7
.6
.6
5
5
5
.6
6.63
7.61
8.14
7.68
7.94
7.80
7.86
7.10
6.90
16.58
15.20
13.84
12.29
12.7
11.7
11.8
10.65
11.04
a Daily inhalation rate was calculated by multiplying the EFD values (see Table 5-10) by Hx VQ x (m3 1,000 I/1) for subjects under 9 years of age and by 1.2 xHx
VQ x (m3 1,000 L"1) (for subjects 9 years of age and older (see text for explanation).
Where:
EFD = Food energy intake (Kcal/day) or (MJ/day)
H = Oxygen uptake = 0.05 LO2/KJ or 0.21 LO2/Kcal
VQ = Ventilation equivalent = 27 = geometric mean of VQs (unitless)
MET = Metabolic equivalent
c Inhalation rate for inactive periods was calculated as BMR x H x VQ x (d 1,440 min"1) and for active periods by multiplying inactive inhalation rate by F (See
footnote f); BMR values are from Table 5-10.
Where:
BMR = Basal metabolic rate (MJ/day) or (kg/hr)
L is the number of years for each age cohort.
e For individuals 9 years of age and older, A was calculated by multiplying the ratio for EFD/BMR (unitless) (Table 5-10) by the factor 1.2 (see text for
explanation).
F = (24A - S)/(24 - S) (unitless), ratio of the rate of energy expenditure during active hours to the estimated BMR (unitless)
Where:
S = Number of hours spent sleeping each day (hrs)
8 Lifetime average was calculated by multiplying individual inhalation rate by corresponding L values summing the products across cohorts and dividing the result
by 75, the total of the cohort age spans.
Source: Lavton. 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
5-13
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
approach are presented in Table 5-12. Inhalation rates for
children (6 months - 10 years) ranged from 7.3-9.3 mVday
for male and 5.6 to 8.6 mVday for female children and (10-
18 years) was 15 mVday for males and 12 fa /day for
females. Adult females (18 years and older) ranged from
9.9-11 mVday and adult males (18 years and older) ranged
from 13-17 mVday. These rates are similar to the daily
inhalation rates obtained using the first approach. Also, the
inactive inhalation rates obtained from the first approach are
lower than the inhalation rates obtained using the second
approach. This may be attributed to the BMR multiplier
employed in the equation of the second approach to
calculate inhalation rates.
Third Approach
Inhalation rates were calculated by multiplying
estimated energy expenditures associated with different
levels of physical activity engaged in over the course of an
average day by VQ and H for each age/gender cohort. The
energy expenditure associated with each level of activity
was estimated by multiplying BMRs of each activity level
by the metabolic equivalent (MET) and by the time spent
per day performing each activity for each age/gender
population. The time-activity data used in this approach
were obtained from a survey conducted by Sallis et al.
(1985) (Layton, 1993). In that survey, the physical-activity
categories and associated MET values used were
sleep, MET=1; light-activity, MET=1.5; moderate activity,
MET=4; hard activity, MET=6; and very hard activity,
MET=10. The physical activities were based on recall by
the test subject (Layton, 1993). The survey sample was
2,126 individuals (1,120 women and 1,006 men) ages 20-
74 years that were randomly selected from four
communities in California. The BMRs were estimated
using the metabolic equations presented in Appendix Table
5A-4. The body weights were obtained from a study
conducted by Najjar and Rowland (1987) which randomly
sampled individuals from the U.S. population (Layton,
1993). Table 5-13 presents the inhalation rates (VE) in
mVday and m3/hr for adult males and females aged 20-74
years at five physical activity levels. The total daily
inhalation rates ranged from 13-17 mVday for adult males
and 11-15 mVday for adult females.
The rates for adult females were higher when
compared with the other two approaches. Layton (1993)
reported that the estimated inhalation rates obtained from
the third approach were particularly sensitive to the MET
value that represented the energy expenditures for light
activities. Layton (1993) stated further that in the original
time-activity survey (i.e., conducted by Sallis et al., 1985),
time spent performing light activities was not presented.
Therefore, the time spent at light activities was estimated
Male
0.5 - <3
3-<10
10-<18
18-<30
30 - <60
60+
Female
Table 5-12. Daily Inhalation Rates Obtained from the Ratios
of Total Energy Expenditure to Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR)
Gender/Age
(yrs)
Body Weight'
(kg)
BMRb
(MJ/day)
VQ
Ac
H
(m302/MJ)
Inhalation Rate, VE
(nrVday)"
14
23
53
76
80
75
3.4
4.3
6.7
7.7
7.5
6.1
27
27
27
27
27
27
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.59
1.59
1.59
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
7.3
9.3
15
17
16
13
0.5 - <3
3-<10
10-<18
18-<30
30 - <60
60+
11
23
50
62
68
67
2.6
4.0
5.7
5.9
5.8
5.3
27
27
27
27
27
27
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.38
1.38
1.38
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
5.6
8.6
12
11
11
9.9
" Body weight was based on the average weights for age/gender cohorts in the U.S. population.
b The BMRs (basal metabolic rate) are calculated using the respective body weights and BMR equations (see Appendix Table 5A-4).
0 The values of the BMR multiplier (EFD/BMR) for those 18 years and older were derived from the Basiotis et al. (1989) study: Male = 1.59,
Female = 1.38. For males and females under 10 years old, the mean BMR multiplier used was 1.6. For males and females aged 10 to < 18
years, the mean values for A given in Table 5-11 for 12-14 years and 15-18 years, age brackets for males and females were used: male = 1.7
and female = 1.5.
11 Inhalation rate = BMR x A x H x VQ; VQ = ventilation equivalent and H = oxygen uptake.
Source: Lavton. 1993.
Page
5-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Table 5-13. Daily Inhalation Rates Based on Time-Activity
Age (yrs)
and Activity
20-34
Sleep
Light
Moderate
Hard
Very Hard
Totals
35-49
Sleep
Light
Moderate
Hard
Very Hard
Totals
50-64
Sleep
Light
Moderate
Hard
Very Hard
Totals
65-74
Sleep
Light
Moderate
Hard
Very Hard
Totals
MET
1
1.5
4
6
10
1
1.5
4
6
10
1
1.5
4
6
10
1
1.5
4
6
10
Body
Weight3 BMRb
(kg) (KJ/hr)
76 320
76 320
76 320
76 320
76 320
81 314
81 314
81 314
81 314
81 314
80 312
80 312
80 312
80 312
80 312
75 256
75 256
75 256
75 256
75 256
Males
Duration0 E
(hr/day) (MJ/day)
7.2 2.3
14.5 7.0
1.2 1.5
0.64 1.2
0.23 0.74
24 17
7.1 2.2
14.6 6.9
1.4 1.8
0.59 1.1
0.29 0.91
24 13
7.3 2.3
14.9 7.0
1.1 1.4
0.50 0.94
0.14 0.44
24 12
7.3 1.9
14.9 5.7
1.1 1.1
0.5 0.8
0.14 0.36
24 9.8
VEe
(nrVday)
3.1
9.4
2.1
1.7
1.0
17
3.0
9.3
2.4
1.5
1.2
17
3.1
9.4
1.9
1.3
0.6
16
2.5
7.7
1.5
1.0
0.48
13
VEf
(nrVhr)
0.4
0.7
1.7
2.6
4.3
0.4
0.6
1.7
2.5
4.2
0.4
0.6
1.7
2.5
4.2
0.3
0.5
1.4
2.1
3.5
Body
Weight3
(kg)
62
62
62
62
62
67
67
67
67
67
68
68
68
68
68
67
67
67
67
67
Survey
BMRb
(KJ/hr)
283
283
283
283
283
242
242
242
242
242
244
244
244
244
244
221
221
221
221
221
3 Body weights were obtained from Najjar and Rowland (1987)
The basal metabolic rates (BMRs) for the age/gender cohorts were calculated using the respective body weights and the
c Duration of activities were obtained from Sallis et al. (1985)
d Energy expenditure rate (E) was calculated by multiplying BMR (KJ/hr) x (MJ/1000 KJ) x duration (hr/day) x MET
e V E (inhalation rate) was calculated by multiplying E (MJ/day) by H(0.05 m? oxygen/MJ) by VQ (27)
f V E (m ?hr) was calculated by multiplying BMR (KJ/hr) x (MJ/1000 KJ) x MET x H (0.05 m3 oxygen/MJ) x VQ (27)
Source:
Layton, 1993.
Duration
(hr/day)
7.2
14.5
1.2
0.64
0.23
24
7.1
14.6
1.4
0.59
0.29
24
7.3
14.9
1.1
0.5
0.14
24
7.3
14.9
1.1
0.5
0.14
24
Females
Ed
(MJ/day)
2.0
6.2
1.4
1.1
0.65
11
1.7
5.3
1.4
0.9
0.70
9.9
1.8
5.4
1.1
0.7
0.34
9.4
1.6
4.9
1.0
0.7
0.31
8.5
(nrVday)
2.8
8.3
1.8
1.5
0.88
15
2.3
7.2
1.8
1.2
0.95
13
2.4
7.4
1.4
1.0
0.46
13
2.2
6.7
1.3
0.9
0.42
11
VEf
(nrVhr)
0.4
0.6
1.5
2.3
3.8
0.3
0.5
1.3
2.0
3.2
0.3
0.5
1.3
2.0
3.3
0.3
0.4
1.2
1.8
3.0
BMR equations (Appendix Table 5A-4)
Q
I
i Ore
ft
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
by subtracting the total time spent at sleep, moderate, heavy,
and very heavy activities from 24 hours (Layton, 1993).
The range of inhalation rates for adult females were 9.6 to
11 mVday, 9.9 to 11 mVday, and 11 to 15 iri /day, for the
first, second, and third approach, respectively. The
inhalation rates for adult males ranged from 13 to 16 mVday
for the first approach, and 13 to 17 mVday for the second
and third approaches.
Inhalation rates were also obtained for short-term
exposures for various age/gender cohorts and five energy-
expenditure categories (rest, sedentary, light, moderate, and
heavy). BMRs were multiplied by the product of MET, H,
and VQ. The data obtained for short term exposures are
presented in Table 5-14.
The major strengths of the Layton (1993) study are
that it obtains similar results using three different
approaches to estimate inhalation rates in different age
groups and that the populations are large, consisting of men,
women, and children. Explanations for differences in
results due to metabolic measurements, reported diet, or
activity patterns are supported by observations reported by
other investigators in other studies. Major limitations of
this study are that activity pattern levels estimated in
this study are somewhat subjective, the explanation that
activity pattern differences is responsible for the lower level
obtained with the metabolic approach (25 percent)
compared to the activity pattern approach is not well
supported by the data, and different populations were used
in each approach which may introduce error.
5.2.3. Relevant Inhalation Rate Studies
International Commission on Radiological Protection
(ICRP) (1981) - Report of the Task Group on Reference
Man - The International Commission of Radiological
Protection (ICRP) estimated daily inhalation rates for
reference adult males, adult females, children (10 years
old), infant (1 year old), and newborn babies by using a
time-activity-ventilation approach. This approach for
estimating inhalation rate over a specified period of time
was based on calculating a time weighted average of
inhalation rates associated with physical activities of
varying durations. ICRP (1981) compiled reference values
(Appendix Table 5A-5) of minute volume/inhalation rates
from various literature sources. ICRP (1981) assumed that
the daily activities of a reference man and woman, and child
(10 yrs) consisted of
Table 5-14. Inhalation Rates for Short- Term Exposures
Gender/Age (yrs) Weight BMRb
(kg)' (MJ/day)
Activity Type
Rest Sedentary Light Moderate
MET (BMR Multiplier)
1 1.2 2C 4d
Heavy
10e
Inhalation Rate fm3/hrf'8
Male
0.5 - <3
3-<10
10-<18
18-<30
30 - <60
60+
Female
0.5 - <3
3-<10
10-<18
18-<30
30 - <60
60+
14
23
53
76
80
75
11
23
50
62
68
67
3.40
4.30
6.70
7.70
7.50
6.10
2.60
4.00
5.70
5.90
5.80
5.30
0.19
0.24
0.38
0.43
0.42
0.34
0.14
0.23
0.32
0.33
0.32
0.30
0.23
0.29
0.45
0.52
0.50
0.41
0.17
0.27
0.38
0.40
0.39
0.36
0.38
0.49
0.78
0.84
0.84
0.66
0.29
0.45
0.66
0.66
0.66
0.59
0.78
0.96
1.50
1.74
1.68
1.38
0.60
0.90
1.26
1.32
1.32
1.20
1.92
2.40
3.78
4.32
4.20
3.42
1.44
2.28
3.18
3.30
3.24
3.00
Body weights were based on average weights for age/gender cohorts of the U.S. population
The BMRs for the age/gender cohorts were calculated using the respective body weights and the BMR equations (Appendix Table 5A-4).
0 Range of 1.5-2.5.
d Range of 3 -5.
' Range of >5 - 20.
f The inhalation rate was calculated by multiplying BMR (MJ/day) x H (0.05 L/KJ) x MET x VQ (27) x (d/1,440 mm)
8 Original data were presented in L/min. Conversion to m3/hr was obtained as follows:
60 min m 3 L
Source: Lavton. 1993.
hr
1000L
min
Page
5-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
8 hours of rest and 16 hours of light activities. It was also
assumed that 16 hours were divided evenly between
occupational and nonoccupational activities. It was
assumed that a day consisted of 14 hours resting and 10
hours light activity for an infant (1 yr). A newbom's daily
activities consisted of 23 hours resting and 1 hour light
activity. Table 5-15 presents the daily inhalation rates
obtained for all ages/genders. The estimated inhalation
rates were 22.8 mVday for adult males, 21.1 iri /day for
adult females, 14.8 mVday for children (age 10 years), 3.76
mVday for infants (age 1 year), and O.'/S m /day for
newborns.
Table 5-15. Daily Inhalation Rates Estimated From Daily Activities'
Inhalation Rate (TR)
Subj ect Resting Light
Activity
(m3/hr)
Resting
(m3/hr)
Daily Inhalation
Rate (DIR)b
(mVday)
Adult Man
Adult Woman
Child (lOyrs)
Infant (1 yr)
Newborn
0.45
0.36
0.29
0.09
0.03
1.2
1.14
0.78
0.25
0.09
22.8
21.1
14.8
3.76
0.78
a Assumptions made were based on 8 hours resting and 16 hours light activity
for adults and children (10 yrs); 14 hours resting and 10 hours light activity
for infants (1 yr); 23 hours resting and 1 hour light activity for newborns.
b
1 K
DIR = — Y IRt.
T tr "
IRj = Corresponding inhalation rate at 1th activity
tj = Hours spent during the 1th activity
k = Number of activity periods
T = Total time of the exposure period (i.e., a day)
Source: ICRP, 1981
A limitation associated with this study is that the
validity and accuracy of the inhalation rates data used in the
compilation were not specified. This may introduce some
degree of uncertainty in the results obtained. Also, the
approach used involved assuming hours spent by various
age/gender cohorts in specific activities. These assumptions
may over/under-estimate the inhalation rates obtained.
U.S. EPA (1985) - Development of Statistical
Distributions or Ranges of Standard Factors Used in
Exposure Assessments - Due to a paucity of information in
the literature regarding equations used to develop statistical
distributions of minute ventilation/ventilation rate at all
activity levels for male and female children and adults, the
U.S. EPA (1985) compiled measured values of minute
ventilation for various age/gender cohorts from early
studies. In more recent investigations, minute ventilations
have been measured more as background information than
as research objective itself and the available studies have
been for specific subpopulations such as obese, asthmatics,
or marathon runners. The data compiled by the U.S. EPA
(1985) for each age/gender cohorts were obtained at various
activity levels. These levels were categorized as light,
moderate, or heavy according to the criteria developed by
the EPA Office of Environmental Criteria and Assessment
for the Ozone Criteria Document. These criteria were
developed for a reference male adult with a body weight of
70 kg (U.S. EPA, 1985). The minute ventilation rates for
adult males based on these activity level categories are
detailed in Appendix Table 5A-6.
Table 5-16 presents a summary of inhalation rates by
age, gender, and activity level (detailed data are presented
in Appendix Table 5A-7). A description of activities
included in each activity level is also presented in Table 5-
16. Table 5-16 indicates that at rest, the average adult
inhalation rate is 0.5 m3/hr. The mean inhalation rate for
children at rest, ages 6 and 10 years, is 0.4 m3/hr. Table 5-
17 presents activity pattern data aggregated for three
microenvironments by activity level for all age groups. The
total average hours spent indoors was 20.4, outdoors was
1.77, and in transportation vehicle was 1.77. Based on the
data presented in Tables 5-16 and 5-17, a daily inhalation
rate was calculated for adults and children by using a time-
activity-ventilation approach. These data are presented in
Table 5-18. The calculated average daily inhalation rate is
16 mVday for adults. The average daily inhalation rate for
children (6 and 10 yrs) is 18.9 mVday ([16.74 + 21.02J/2).
A limitation associated with this study is that many
of the values used in the data compilation were from early
studies. The accuracy and/or validity of the values used and
data collection method were not presented in U.S. EPA
(1985). This introduces uncertainly in the results obtained.
An advantage of this study is that the data are actual
measurement data for a large number of subjects and the
data are presented for both adults and children.
Shamoo et al. (1990) - Improved Quantitation of
Air Pollution Dose Rates by Improved Estimation of
Ventilation Rate- Shamoo et al. (1990) conducted this
study to develop and validate new methods to accurately
estimate ventilation rates for typical individuals during their
normal activities. Two practical approaches were tested for
estimating ventilation rates indirectly: (1) volunteers were
trained to estimate their own VR at
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-17
-------
1 Volume I - General Factors
Ł^HB Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-16. Summary of Human Inhalation Rates for Men, Women, and Children by Activity Level (m3/hour)a
nb Resting0 n Lightd n Moderate6 n Heavyf
Adult male 454 0.7 102 0.8 102 2.5 267 4.8
Adultfemale 595 0.3 786 0.5 106 1.6 211 2.9
Average adultg 0.5 0.6 2.1 3.9
Child, age 6 years 8 0.4 16 0.8 4 2.0 5 2.3
Child, age 10 years 10 0.4 40 1.0 29 3.2 43 3.9
a Values of inhalation rates for males, females, and children (male and female) presented in this table represent the mean of values reported for each activity level
in 1985. (See Appendix Table 5A-7 for a detailed listing of the data from U.S. EPA, 1985.)
b n = number of observations at each activity level.
c Includes watching television, reading, and sleeping.
d Includes most domestic work, attending to personal needs and care, hobbies, and conducting minor indoor repairs and home improvements.
e Includes heavy indoor cleanup, performance of major indoor repairs and alterations, and climbing stairs.
f Includes vigorous physical exercise and climbing stairs carrying a load.
g Derived by taking the mean of the adult male and adult female values for each activity level.
Source: Adapted from U.S. EPA, 1985.
Table 5-17. Activity Pattern Data Aggregated for Three
Microenvironments by Activity Level for all Age Groups
Average Hours Per Day in
Microenvironment Activity Each Microenvironment at
Level Each Activity Level
Indoors Resting 9.82
Light 9.82
Moderate 0.71
Heavy 0.098
TOTAL 20.4
Outdoors Resting 0.505
Light 0.505
Moderate 0.65
Heavy 0.12
TOTAL 1.77
In Transportation Resting 0.86
Vehicle Light 0.86
Moderate 0.05
Heavy 0.0012
TOTAL 1.77
Source: Adapted from U.S. EPA, 1985.
Table 5-18. Summary of Daily Inhalation Rates Grouped by
Age and Activity level
Daily Inhalation Rate (mVday)a Total
Daily IRb
Subject Resting Light Moderate Heavy fmVdav")
AdultMale 7.83 8.95 3.53 1.05 21.4
Adult 3.35 5.59 2.26 0.64 11.8
Female
Adult 5.60 6.71 2.96 0.85 16
Average0
Child 4.47 8.95 2.82 0.50 16.74
(age 6)
Child 4.47 11.19 4.51 0.85 21.02
faee 1 0)
Daily inhalation rate was calculated using the following equation:
l K
T i=i "
IR, = inhalation rate at 1th activity (Table 5-1 8)
tj = hours spent per day during i activity (Table 5-19)
k = number of activity periods
Total daily inhalation rate was calculated by summing the specific activity
(resting, light, moderate, heavy) daily inhalation rate.
Source: Generated using the data from U.S. EPA (1985) as shown in
Tables 5-16 and 5-17.
various controlled levels of exercise; and (2) individual VR
and HR relationships were determined in another set of
volunteers during supervised exercise sessions (Shamoo et
al., 1990). In the first approach, the training session
involved 9 volunteers (3 females and 6 males) from 21 to
37 years old. Initially the subjects were trained on a
Page
5-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
treadmill with regularly increasing speeds. VR
measurements were recorded during the last minute of the
3-minute interval at each speed. VR was reported to the
subjects as low (1.4 m3/hr), medium (1.5-2.3 m3/hr), heavy
(2.4-3.8 mVhr), and very heavy (3.83m/hr or higher)
(Shamoo et al., 1990).
Following the initial test, treadmill training sessions
were conducted on a different day in which 7 different
speeds were presented, each for 3 minutes in arbitrary
order. VR was measured and the subjects were given
feedback with the four ventilation ranges provided
previously. After resting, a treadmill testing session was
conducted in which seven speeds were presented in
different arbitrary order from the training session. VR was
measured and each subject estimated their own ventilation
level at each speed. The correct level was then revealed to
each subject after his/her own estimate. Subsequently, two
3-hour outdoor supervised exercise sessions were
conducted in the summer on two consecutive days. Each
hour consisted of 15 minutes each of rest, slow walking,
jogging, and fast walking. The subjects' ventilation level
and VR were recorded; however, no feedback was given to
the subjects. Electrocardiograms were recorded via direct
connection or telemetry and HR was measured concurrently
with ventilation measurement for all treadmill sessions.
The second approach consisted of two protocol
phases (indoor/outdoor exercise sessions and field testing).
Twenty outdoor adult workers between 19-50 years old
were recruited. Indoor and outdoor supervised exercises
similar to the protocols in the first approach were
conducted; however, there were no feedbacks. Also, in this
approach, electrocardiograms were recorded and HR was
measured concurrently with VR. During the field testing
phase, subjects were trained to record their activities during
three different 24-hour periods during one week. These
periods included their most active working and non-
working days. HR was measured quasi-continuously during
the 24-hour periods that activities were recorded. The
subjects recorded in a diary all changes in physical activity,
location, and exercise levels during waking hours. Self-
estimated activities in supervised exercises and field studies
were categorized as slow (resting, slow walking or
equivalent), medium (fast walking or equivalent), and fast
(jogging or equivalent).
Inhalation rates were not presented in this study. In
the first approach, about 68 percent of all self-estimates
were correct for the 9 subjects sampled (Shamoo et al.,
1990). Inaccurate self-estimates occurred in the younger
male population who were highly physically fit and were
competitive aerobic trainers. This subset of sample
population tended to underestimate their own physical
activity levels at higher VR ranges. Shamoo et al. (1990)
attributed this to a "macho effect." In the second approach,
a regression analysis was conducted that related the
logarithm of VR to HR. The logarithm of VR correlated
better with HR than VR itself (Shamoo et al., 1990).
A limitation associated with this study is that the
population sampled is not representative of the general U.S.
population. Also, ventilation rates were not presented.
Training individuals to estimate their VR may contribute to
uncertainly in the results because the estimates are
subjective. Another limitation is that calibration data were
not obtained at extreme conditions; therefore, the VR/HR
relationship obtained may be biased. An additional
limitation is that training subjects may be too labor-
intensive for widespread use in exposure assessment
studies. An advantage of this study is that HR recordings
are useful in predicting ventilation rates which in turn are
useful in estimating exposure.
Shamoo et al. (1991) - Activity Patterns in a Panel
of Outdoor Workers Exposed to Oxidant Pollution -
Shamoo et al. (1991) investigated summer activity patterns
in 20 adult volunteers with potentially high exposure to
ambient oxidant pollution. The selected volunteer subjects
were 15 men and 5 women ages 19-50 years from the Los
Angeles area. All volunteers worked outdoors at least 10
hours per week. The experimental approach involved two
stages: (1) indirect objective estimation of VR from HR
measurements; and (2) self estimation of
inhalation/ventilation rates recorded by subjects in diaries
during their normal activities.
The approach consisted of calibrating the
relationship between VR and HR for each test subject in
controlled exercise; monitoring by subjects of their own
normal activities with diaries and electronic HR recorders;
and then relating VR with the activities described in the
diaries (Shamoo et al., 1991). Calibration tests were
conducted for indoor and outdoor supervised exercises to
determine individual relationships between VR and HR.
Indoors, each subject was tested on a treadmill at rest and
at increasing speeds. HR and VR were measured at the
third minute at each 3-minute interval speed. In addition,
subjects were tested while walking a 90-meter course in a
corridor at 3 self-selected speeds (normal, slower than
normal, and faster than normal) for 3 minutes.
Two outdoor testing sessions (one hour each) were
conducted for each subject, 7 days apart. Subjects
exercised on a 260-meter asphalt course. A session
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-19
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
involved 15 minutes each of rest, slow walking, jogging,
and fast walking during the first hour. The sequence was
also repeated during the second hour. HR and VR
measurements were recorded starting at the 8th minute of
each 15-minute segment. Following the calibration tests, a
field study was conducted in which subject's self-monitored
their activities by filling out activity diary booklets, self-
estimated their breathing rates, and their HR. Breathing
rates were defined as sleep, slow (slow or normal walking);
medium (fast walking); and fast (running) (Shamoo et al,
1991). Changes in location, activity, or breathing rates
during three 24-hr periods within a week were recorded.
These periods included their most active working and non-
working days. Each
subject wore Heart Watches which recorded their HR once
per minute during the field study. Ventilation rates were
estimated for the following categories: sleep, slow, medium,
and fast.
Calibration data were fit to the equation log (VR) =
intercept + (slope x HR), each individual's intercept and
slope were determined separately to provide a specific
equation that predicts each subject's VR from measured HR
(Shamoo et al., 1991). The average measured VRs were
0.48, 0.9, 1.68, and 4.02 mVhr for rest, slow walking or
normal walking, fast walking and jogging, respectively
(Shamoo et al., 1991). Collectively, the diary recordings
showed that sleep occupied about 33 percent of the subject's
time; slow activity 59 percent; medium activity 7 percent;
and fast activity 1 percent. The diary data covered an
average of 69 hours per subject (Shamoo et al., 1991).
Table 5-19 presents the distribution pattern of predicted
ventilation rates and equivalent ventilation rates (EVR)
obtained at the four activity levels. EVR was defined as the
VR per square meter of body surface area, and also as a
percentage of the subjects average VR over the entire field
monitoring period (Shamoo et al., 1991).
Table 5-19. Distribution Pattern of Predicted VR and EVR (equivalent ventilation rate) for 20 Outdoor Workers
VR (nrVhr)'
Self-Reported Arithmetic Geometric
Activity Level Nc Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
Sleep
Slow
Medium
Fast
18,597 0.42 ±0.16
41,745 0.71 ±0.4
3,898 0.84 ±0.47
572 2.63 ±2. 16
0.39 ±0.08
0.65 ±0.09
0.76 ±0.09
1.87±0.14
EVRb (nrVhr/m2 body surface)
Arithmetic Geometric
Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
0.23 ±0.08
0.38 ±0.20
0.48 ±0.24
1.42 ± 1.20
0.22 ±0.08
0.35 ±0.09
0.44 ±0.09
1.00 ±0.14
Percentile Rankings, VR
Sleep
Slow
Medium
Fast
1 5
0.18 0.18
0.30 0.36
0.36 0.42
0.42 0.54
10
0.24
0.36
0.48
0.60
50
0.36
0.66
0.72
1.74
90
0.66
1.08
1.32
5.70
95
0.72
1.32
1.68
6.84
99
0.90
1.98
2.64
9.18
99.9
1.20
4.38
3.84
10.26
Percentile Rankings, EVR
Sleep
Slow
Medium
Fast
1 5
0.12 0.12
0.18 0.18
0.18 0.24
0.24 0.30
10
0.12
0.24
0.30
0.36
50
0.24
0.36
0.42
0.90
90
0.36
0.54
0.72
3.24
95
0.36
0.66
0.90
3.72
99
0.48
1.08
1.38
4.86
99.9
0.60
2.40
2.28
5.52
" Data presented by Shamoo et al. (1991) in liters/minute were converted to m3/hr.
b EVR = VR per square meter of body surface area.
0 Number of minutes with valid appearing heart rate records and corresponding daily records of breathing rate.
Source: Shamoo etal, 1991
Page
5-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
The overall mean predicted VR was 0.42 m3/hr for sleep;
0.71 rrrVhr for slow activity; 0.84 m3/hr for medium activity;
and 2.63 m3/hr for fast activity.
The mean predicted VR and standard deviation, and the
percentage of time spent in each combination of VR,
activity type (essential and non-essential), and location
(indoor and outdoor) are presented in Table 5-20. Essential
activities include income-related work, household chores,
child care, study and other school activities, personal care
and destination-oriented travel. Non-essential activities
include sports and active leisure, passive leisure, some
travel, and social or civic activities (Shamoo et al, 1991).
Table 5-20 shows that inhalation rates were higher outdoors
than indoors at slow, medium, and fast activity levels. Also,
inhalation rates were higher for outdoor non-essential
activities than for indoor non-essential activity levels at
slow, medium, and fast self-reported breathing rates (Table
5-20).
An advantage of this study is that subjective activity
diary data can provide exposure modelers with useful rough
estimates of VR for groups of generally healthy people. A
limitation of this study is that the results obtained show high
within-person and between-person variability in VR at each
diary-recorded level, indicating that VR estimates from
diary reports could potentially be
substantially misleading in individual cases. Another
limitation of this study is that elevated HR data of slow
activity at the second hour of the exercise session reflect
persistent effects of exercise and/or heat stress. Therefore,
predictions of VR from the VR/HR relationship may be
biased.
Shamoo et al. (1992) - Effectiveness of Training
Subjects to Estimate Their Level of Ventilation - Shamoo
et al. (1992) conducted a study where nine non-sedentary
subjects in good health were trained on a treadmill to
estimate their own ventilation rates at four activity levels:
low, medium, heavy, and very heavy. The purpose of the
study was to train the subjects self-estimation of ventilation
in the field and assess the effectiveness of the training
(Shamoo et al., 1992). The subjects included 3 females and
6 males between 21 to 37 years of age. The tests were
conducted in four stages. First, an initial treadmill pretest
was conducted indoors at various speeds until the four
ventilation levels were experienced by each subject; VR
was measured and feedback was given to the subjects.
Second, two treadmill training sessions which involved
seven 3-minute segments of varying speeds based on initial
tests were conducted; VR was measured and feedback was
given to the subjects. Another similar session was
conducted; however, the subjects estimated
Table 5-20. Distribution Pattern of Inhalation Rate by Location and Activity Type for 20 Outdoor Workers
Location
Indoor
Outdoor
Activity Typea
Non-essential
Essential
Self-reported
Activity Level
% of Time
Inhalation rate (m3/hr)b
±SD
Slow
Medium
Fast
Slow
Medium
Fast
20.4
0.9
0.2
11.3
1.8
0
0.66 ±0.36
0.78 ±0.30
1.86 ±0.96
0.78 ±0.36
0.84 ±0.54
0
%of Avg.c
Indoor Essential
Sleep
Slow
Medium
Fast
28.7
29.5
2.4
0
0.42 ±0.12
0.72 ±0.36
0.72 ±0.30
0
69 ± 15
106 ± 43
129 ±38
0
98 ±36
120 ±50
278± 124
117 ±42
130 ±56
0
Outdoor
Non-essential
Slow
Medium
Fast
3.2
0.8
0.7
0.90 ±0.66
1.26 ±0.60
2.82 ±2.28
136 ±90
213±91
362 ± 275
a Essential activities include income-related, work, household chores, child care, study and other school activities, personal care, and destination-
oriented travel; Non-essential activities include sports and active leisure, passive leisure, some travel, and social or civic activities.
Data presented by Shamoo et al. (1991) in liters/mintue were converted to nrYhr.
c Statistic was calculated by converting each VR for a given subject to a percentage of her/his overall average.
Source: Adapted from Shamoo et al.. (1991).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-21
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
their own ventilation level during the last 20 seconds of
each segment and VR was measured during the last minute
of each segment. Immediate feedback was given to the
subject's estimate; and the third and fourth stages involved
2 outdoor sessions of 3 hours each. Each hour comprised
15 minutes each of rest, slow walking, jogging, and fast
walking. The subjects estimated their own ventilation level
at the middle of each segment. The subject's estimate was
verified by a respirometer which measured VR in the
middle of each 15-minute activity. No feedback was given
to the subject. The overall percent correct score obtained
for all ventilation levels was 68 percent (Shamoo et al,
1992). Therefore, Shamoo et al. (1992) concluded that this
training protocol was effective in training subjects to
correctly estimate their minute ventilation levels.
For this handbook, inhalation rates were analyzed
from the raw data provided by Shamoo et al. (1992). Table
5-21 presents the mean inhalation rates obtained from this
analysis at four ventilation levels in two microenvironments
(i.e., indoors and outdoors) for all subjects. The mean
inhalation rates for all subjects were 0.93, 1.92, 3.01, 4.80
m3/hr for low, medium, heavy, and very heavy activities,
respectively.
Table 5-21. Actual Inhalation Rates Measured at
Four Ventilation Levels
Mean Inhalation Rate" (nrVhr)"
Subject Location
Low Medium
Very
Heavy Heavy
All Indoor 1.23 1.83 3.13 4.13
subjects (Treadmill
post)
Outdoor 0.88 1.96 2.93 4.90
Total 0.93 1.92 3.01 4.80
Original data were presented in L/min. Conversion to nrVhr was
obtained as follows:
60
1000L mm
Source: Adapted from Shamoo et al., 1992
The population sample size used in this study was
small and was not selected to represent the general U.S.
population. The training approach employed may not be
cost effective because it was labor intensive; therefore, this
approach may not be viable in field studies especially for
field studies within large sample sizes.
AIHC (1994) - The Exposure Factors Sourcebook -
AIHC (1994) recommends an average adult inhalation rate
of 18 mVday and presents values for children of various
ages. These recommendations were derived from data
presented in U.S. EPA (1989). The newer study by Layton
(1993) was not considered. In addition, the Sourcebook
presents probability distributions derived by Brorby and
Finley (1993). For each distribution, the @Risk formula is
provided for direct use in the @Risk simulation software
(Palisade, 1992). The organization of this document makes
it very convenient to use in support of Monte Carlo analysis.
The reviews of the supporting studies are very brief with
little analysis of their strengths and weaknesses. The
Sourcebook has been classified as a relevant rather than key
study because it is not the primary source for the data used
to make recommendations in this document. The
Sourcebook is very similar to this document in the sense
that it summarizes exposure factor data and recommends
values. As such, it is clearly relevant as an alternative
information source on inhalation rates as well as other
exposure factors.
5.2.4. Recommendations
In the Ozone Criteria Document prepared by the
U.S. EPA Office of Environmental Criteria and
Assessment, the EPA identified the collapsed range of
activities and its corresponding VR as follows: light
exercise (VE < 23 L/min or 1.4 m3/hr); moderate/ medium
exercise (VE= 24-43 L/min or 1.4-2.6 rnVhr); heavy
exercise (VE= 43-63 L/min or 2.6-3.8 mVhr); and very
heavy exercise (VE> 64 L/min or 3.8 m3/hr), (Adams,
1993).
Recent peer reviewed scientific papers and an EPA
report comprise the studies that were evaluated in this
Chapter. These studies were conducted in the United States
among both men and women of different age groups. All
are widely available. The confidence ratings in the
inhalation rate recommendations are shown in Table 5-22.
Each study focused on ventilation rates and factors
that may affect them. Studies were conducted among
randomly selected volunteers. Efforts were made to include
men, women, different age groups, and different kinds of
activities. Measurement methods are indirect, but
reproducible. Methods are well described (except for
questionnaires) and experimental error is well
Page
5-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table
Considerations
Study Elements
• Peer Review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
5-22. Confidence in Inhalation Rate Recommendations
Rationale
Studies are from peer reviewed journal articles and an EPA peer reviewed
report.
Studies in journals have wide circulation.
EPA reports are available from the National Technical Information Service.
Information on questionnaires and interviews were not provided.
Studies focused on ventilation rates and factors influencing them.
Studies conducted in the U.S.
Both data collection and re-analysis of existing data occurred.
Recent studies were evaluated.
Effort was made to collect data over time.
Measurements were made by indirect methods.
An effort has been made to consider age and gender, but not systematically.
An effort has been made to address age and gender, but not systematically.
Subjects were selected randomly from volunteers and measured in the same
way.
Measurement error is well documented by statistics, but procedures measure
factor indirectly.
Five key studies and six relevant studies were evaluated.
There is general agreement among researchers using different experimental
methods.
Several studies exist that attempt to estimate inhalation rates according to
age, gender and activity.
Rating
High
High
Medium
High
High
Medium
High
High
Medium
Medium
High
High
Medium
High
High
documented. There is general agreement with these
estimates among researchers.
The recommended inhalation rates for adults,
children, and outdoor workers/athletes are based on the key
studies described in this chapter (Table 5-23). Different
survey designs and populations were utilized in the studies
described in this Chapter. A summary of these designs, data
generated, and their limitations/advantages are presented in
Table 5-24. Excluding the study by Layton (1993), the
population surveyed in all of the key studies described in
this report were limited to the Los Angeles area. This
regional population may not represent the general U.S.
population and may result in biases. However, based on
other aspects of the study design, these studies were
selected as the basis for recommended inhalation rates.
The selection of inhalation rates to be used for
exposure assessments depends on the age of the exposed
population and the specific activity levels of this population
during various exposure scenarios. The recommended
values for adults, children (including infants), and outdoor
workers/athletes for use in various exposure scenarios are
discussed below. These rates were calculated by averaging
the inhalation rates for each activity level from the various
key studies (see Table 5-25).
Adults (19-65+ yrs) - Adults in this
recommendation include young to middle age adults (19-64
yrs), and older adults (65+ yrs). The daily average
inhalation rates for long term exposure for adults are: 11.3
irrYday for women and 15.2 mVday for men. These values
are averages of the inhalation rates provided for males and
females in each of the three approaches of Layton (1993)
(Tables 5-11 through 5-14). An upper percentile is not
recommended. Additional research and analysis of activity
pattern data and dietary data in the future is necessary to
attempt to calculate upper percentiles.
The recommended value for the general population
average inhalation rate, 11.3 mVday for women and 15.2
mVday for men, is different than the 20 ni /day which has
commonly been assumed in past EPA risk assessments.
In addition, recommendations are presented for various ages
and special populations (athletes, outdoor workers) which
also differ from 20 irrYday. Assessors are encouraged to use
values which most accurately reflect the exposed
population.
For exposure scenarios where the distribution of
activity patterns is known, the following results, calculated
from the studies referenced are shown in Table 5-25. Based
on these key studies, the following recommendations are
made: for short term exposures in
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-23
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-23, Summary of Recommended Values for Inhalation
Population
Long-term Exposures
• Infants
. . <1 year
Children
• • 1-2 years
3-5 years
6-8 '.years
' • 9-llyears
males •
females
12- 14 years
, -males
females
15-18 years
males
females
Adults (19-65+ yrs) .
females •
males
Short-term Exposures
' Adults.
Rest
Sedentary Activities
Light Activities
Moderate Activities
• Heavy Activities
Children,
.. Rest
Sedentary Activities
Light Activities
Moderate Activities
Heavy Activities
Outdoor Workers
Hourly Average
' Slow Activities
Moderate Activities
Heavy Activities
Note: See Tables 5-25, 5-24
Mean
4,5 mVday
6.8m3/day
. 8,3m3/day
lOmVday
14m3/day
13 m'/day
• -ISnf/day
12ma/day
17m'/day '
12m3/day'
11.3m3/day
' 15,2nrYday
Q.4ms/hr
. 0.5 m3/hr
1.0 nf/hr
1.6 nf/hr
3 ,2" nf/hr .
0,3 nf/hr
.' 0,4 nf/hr
l.Onf/hr
. ' 1,2 nf/hr
1,9 nf/hr .
1.3ttf/hr
l.Lnf/hr
1.5m3/hr .
2.5 nf/hr
Upper Pereentile
— • .
—
, •
•
, •
'
—
—
:
— •
.
...
... •
—
. — •
,
—
. •. ---
• ' • —
'— . '•
••3,3 nf/hr
and 5-27 for reference studies. •
which distribution of activity patterns are specified, the
recommended average rates are 0.4 m3/hr during rest; 0.5
m3/hr for sedentary activities; 1.0 m3/hr for light activities;
1.6 m3/hr for moderate activities; and 3.2 m3 /hr for heavy
activities.
Children (18 yrs old or less including infants) - For
the purpose of this recommendation, children are defined as
males and females between the ages of 1-18 years old,
while infants are individuals less than 1 year old. The
inhalation rates for children are presented below according
to different exposure scenarios. The daily inhalation rates
for long-term dose assessments, are based on the first
approach of Layton (1993) (Table 5-11) and are
summarized in Table 5-26.
Based on the key study results (i.e., Layton, 1993),
the recommended daily inhalation rate for infants (children
less than 1 yr), during long-term dose assessments is
4.5 mVday. For children 1-2 years old, 3-5 years old, and
6-8 years old, the recommended daily inhalation rates are
6.8 mVday, 8.3 m/day, and 10 m/day, respectively.
Recommended values for children aged 9-11 years are 14
mVday for males and 13 m3 /day for females. For children
aged 12-14 years and 15-18 years, the recommended values
are shown in Table 5-23.
For short-term exposures for children aged 18 years
and under, in which activity patterns are known, the data are
summarized in Table 5-27. For short term exposures, the
recommended average hourly inhalation rates are based on
these key studies. They are averaged over each activity held
as follows: 0.3 m3/hr during rest; 0.4 rri /hr for sedentary
activities; 1.0 mVhr for light activities; 1.23 m/hr for
moderate activities; and 1.9 m3/hr for heavy activities. The
recommended short-term exposure data also include infants
(less than 1 yr). These values represent averages of the
activity level data from key studies (Table 5-27).
Outdoor Worker - Inhalation rate data for outdoor
workers/athlete are limited. However, based on the key
studies (Linn et al., 1992 and 1993), the recommended
average hourly inhalation rate for outdoor workers is
1.3 m3/hr and the upper-percentile rate is 3.3 ni /hr (see
Tables 5-5 and 5-8). This is calculated as the weighted
mean of the 99th percentile values reported for the
individuals on Panels 1 and 7 in Tables 5-5 and the 19
subjects in Table 5-8. The recommended average
inhalation rates for outdoor workers based on the activity
levels categorized as slow (light activities), medium
(moderate activities), and fast (heavy activities) are 1.1
mVhr, 1.5 m3/hr, and 2.5 m3/hr, respectively. These values
are based on the data from Linn et al. (1992 and 1993) and
are the weighted mean of the values for the individuals on
Panels 1 and 7 in Table 5-5 and the 19 outdoor workers in
Table 5-9. Inhalation rates may be higher among outdoor
workers/athletes because levels of activity outdoors may be
higher. Therefore, this subpopulation group may be more
susceptible to air pollutants and are considered a "high-risk"
subgroup (Shamoo et al., 1991; Linn et al., 1992).
Page
5-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Q
Table 5-24. Summary of Inhalation Rate Studies
Study
Population Surveyed
Survey Time Period
Data Generated
Limitations /A dvantaaes
KEY INHALATION RATE STUDIES
Adams, 1993
Layton, 1993
Linnet al., 1992
Linnetal., 1993
Spier etal., 1992
n=160, ages 6-77; n = 40, ages 3-12.
NFCS survey: n«30,000; NHANES survey:
n«20,000
Time Activity survey: rp2,126
Panel 1-20 healthy outdoor workers, ages 19-
50; Panel 2-17 healthy elementary school
students, ages 10-12; Panel 3-19 healthy high
school students, ages 13-17; Panel 4-49 adult
asthmatics, ages 18-50; Panel 5-24 adult
asthmatics, ages 19-46; Panel 6-13 young
asthmatics, ages 11-16; Panel 7-7 construction
workers, ages 26-34.
n=19 construction workers.
n=36 students, ages 10-17.
Three 25 min phases of resting
protocol in the lab 6 mins of active
protocols in the lab. 30 min phases of
field protocols repeated once.
Late spring and early autumn. 3 diary
days. Construction workers' diary day.
(Mid- July-early November, 1991)
Diary recordings before work, during
work and break times
(Late September - October) Involved 3
consecutive days of diary recording
Mean values of IR for adult males
and females and children by their
activity levels.
Daily IRs; IRs at 5 activity levels;
and IR for short-term exposures at 5
activity levels.
Mean and upper estimates of IR;
Mean IR at 3 activity levels.
Distribution patterns of hourly IRby
activity level.
Distribution patterns of hourly IRby
activity levels and location
HR correlated poorly with IR.
Reported food biases in the dietary
surveys employed; time activity survey
was based on recall.
Small sample size; Calibration data not
obtained over full HR range; activities
based on short-term diary data.
Small sample population size; breathing
rates subjective in nature; activities
based on short-term diary data.
Activities based on short-term diary data;
self- estimated breathing rate by younger
population was biased; small sample
population size.
RELEVANT INHALATION RATE STUDIES
ICRP, 1974
Shamooetal., 1990
Shamooetal., 1991
Shamooetal., 1992
U.S. EPA, 1985
Note: IR = inhal
Based on data from other references
n=9 volunteer workers ages 21-37, n=20 outdoor
workers, 19-50 years old.
n=20 outdoor workers, ages 19-50
n=9 non-sedentary subjects, ages 21-37.
Based on data from several literature sources
-
Involved 3-min indoor session/two 3-
hr outdoor session at 4 activity levels
Diary recordings of three 24-hr.
periods within a week.
3-min. intervals of indoor
exercises/two 3-hr outdoor exercise
sessions at 4 activity levels.
-
Reference daily IR for adult females,
adult males, children (1 0 yrs), and
infant (1 yr)
No IR data presented.
Distribution patterns of IR and EVR
by activity levels and location.
Actual measured ventilation rates
presented.
Estimated IR for adult males, adult
females and children (ages 6 and 10)
by various activity levels.
Validity and accuracy of data set
employed not defined; IR was estimated
not measured.
No useful data were presented for dose
assessments studies.
Small sample size; short-term diary data.
Small sample size; training approach
may not be cost-effective; VR obtained
for outdoor workers which are sensitive
subpopulation.
Validity and accuracy of data set
employed not defined; IR was estimated
not measured.
ition rate: HR = heart rate: EVR = equivalent ventilation rate.
I
<~t ft
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
Table 5-25
. Summary of Adult Inhalation Rates for Short-Term Exposure Studies
Arithmetic Mean (rrrVhr)
Activity Level
Rest Sedentary
0.5 0.5
0.6
0.4 0.4
0.4
-
Light
1.4
1.2
0.7
0.6
1.0
Moderate
2.4
1.8
1.4
1.5
1.6
High
3.3
-
3.6
3.0
3.0
Reference
Adams, 1993 (Lab protocols)
Adams, 1993 (Field protocols)
Layton, 1993 (Short-term exposure)
Layton, 1993 (3rd approach)
Linn et al., 1992
Table 5-26. Summary
of Children's (18 years old or less) Inhalation Rates for LonŁ
j-Term Exposure Studies1
Arithmetic Mean (rrrVday)
Age
less than 1 yr
1-2 years
3-5 years
6-8 years
9-11 years
12- 14 years
15- 18 years
Males Females
-
-
-
-
14 13
15 12
17 12
Males and
Females
4.5
6.8
8.3
10
-
-
-
Reference
Layton, 1993
Layton, 1993
Layton, 1993
Layton, 1993
Layton, 1993
Layton, 1993
Layton, 1993
1 Layton, 1993 1st approach.
Table 5-27. Summary of Children's Inhalation Rates for Short-Term Exposure Studies
Arithmetic Mean (rrrVhr)
Activity Level
Rest Sedentary Light
0.4 0.4 0.8
-
0.2 0.3 0.5
1.8
0.8
Moderate
-
0.9
1.0
2.0
1.0
High
-
-
2.5
2 2
11
Reference
Adams, 1993 (Lab protocols)
Adams, 1993 (Field protocols)
Layton, 1993 (Short-term data)
Spier etal., 1992 (10-12 yrs)
Linnetal., 1992 (10-12 yrs)
Page
5-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 5 - Inhalation
5.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5
Adams, W.C. (1993) Measurement of breathing rate and
volume in routinely performed daily activities, Final
Report. California Air Resources Board (GARB)
Contract No. A033-205. June 1993. 185 pgs.
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
Basiotis, P.P.; Thomas, R.G.; Kelsay, J.L.; Mertz, W.
(1989) Sources of variation in energy intake by men
and women as determined from one year's daily
dietary records. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 50:448-453.
Benjamin, G.S. (1988) "The lungs." In: Fundamentals
of Industrial Hygiene, Third Edition, Plog, B.A., ed.
Chicago, IL: National Safety Council, p. 31-45.
Brorby, G.;Fmley,B. (1993) Standard probability
density functions for routine use in environmental
health risk assessment. Presented at the Society of
Risk Analysis Meeting, December 1993, Savannah,
GA.
ICRP. (1981) International Commission on Radiological
Protection. Report of the task group on reference
man. New York: Pergammon Press.
Layton, D.W. (1993) Metabolically consistent breathing
rates for use in dose assessments. Health Physics
64(l):23-36.
Linn, W.S.; Shamoo, D.A.; Hackney, J.D. (1992)
Documentation of activity patterns in "high-risk"
groups exposed to ozone in the Los Angeles area. In:
Proceedings of the Second EPA/AWMA Conference
on Tropospheric Ozone, Atlanta, Nov. 1991. pp. 701-
712. Air and Waste Management Assoc., Pittsburgh,
PA.
Linn, W.S.; Spier, C.E.; Hackney, J.D. (1993) Activity
patterns in ozone-exposed construction workers. J.
Occ. Med. Tox. 2(1): 1-14.
Menzel, D.B.; Amdur, M.O. (1986) Toxic responses of
the respiratory system. In: Klaassen, C.; Amdur,
M.O.; Doull, J., eds. Toxicology, The Basic Science
of Poisons. 3rd edition. New York: MacMillan
Publishing Company.
Najjar, M.F.; Rowland, M. (1987) Anthropometric
reference data and prevalence of overweight: United
States. 1976-80. Hyattsville, MD: National Center
for Health Statistics. U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services: DHHS Publication No. (PHS)87-
1688.
Palisade. (1992) @Risk User Guide. Newfield, NY:
Palisade Corporation.
Salhs, J.F.; Haskell, W.L.; Wood, P.O.; Fortmann, S.P.;
Rogers, T.; Blair, S.N.; Paffenbarger, Jr., R.S. (1985)
Physical activity assessment methodology in the Five-
City project. Am. J. Epidemiol. 121:91-106.
Shamoo, D.A.; Tnm, S.C.; Little, D.E.; Linn, W.S.;
Hackney, J.D. (1990) Improved quantitation of air
pollution dose rates by improved estimation of
ventilation rate. In: Total Exposure Assessment
Methodology: A New Horizon, pp. 553-564. Air and
Waste Management Assoc., Pittsburgh, PA.
Shamoo, D.A.; Johnson, T.R.; Tnm, S.C.; Little, D.E.;
Linn, W.S.; Hackney, J.D. (1991) Activity patterns in
a panel of outdoor workers exposed to oxidant
pollution. J. Expos. Anal. Environ. Epidem. 1(4):423-
438.
Shamoo, D.A.; Trim, S.C.; Little, D.E.; Whynot, J.D.;
Linn, W.S. (1992) Effectiveness of training subjects
to estimate their level of ventilation. J. Occ. Med. Tox.
l(l):55-62.
Spier, C.E.; Little, D.E.; Trim, S.C.; Johnson, T.R.; Linn,
W.S.; Hackney, J.D. (1992) Activity patterns in
elementary and high school students exposed to
oxidant pollution. J. Exp. Anal. Environ. Epid.
2(3):277-293.
U. S. EPA. (1985) Development of statistical
distributions or ranges of standard factors used in
exposure assessments. Washington, DC: Office of
Health and Environmental Assessment; EPA report
No. EPA 600/8-85-010. Available from: NTIS,
Springfield, VA; PB85-242667.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Exposure factors handbook.
Washington, DC: Office of Research and
Development, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment. EPA/600/18-89/043.
U.S. EPA. (1992) Guidelines for exposure assessment.
Washington, DC: Office of Research and
Development, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessments. EPA/600/Z-92/001.
U.S. EPA. (1994) Methods for derivation of inhalation
reference concentrations and application of inhalation
dosimetry. Washington, DC: Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment. EPA/600/8-90/066F.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5-27
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 5A
APPENDIX 5A
VENTILATION DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 5A-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 5A
Table 5A-1. Mean Minute Ventilation (VE, L/min) by Group and Activity for Laboratory Protocols
Activity
Young Children3
Children
Adult Females
Adult Males
Lying
Sitting
Standing
Walking
1.5 mph
1.875mph
2.0 mph
2.25 mph
2.5 mph
3.0 mph
3.3 mph
4.0 mph
6.19
6.48
6.76
10.25
10.53
DNP
11.68
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
7.51
7.28
8.49
DNP
DNP
14.13
DNP
15.58
17.79
DNP
DNP
7.12
7.72
8.36
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
20.32
24.20
DNP
DNP
8.93
9.30
10.65
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
24.13
DNP
27.90
36.53
Running
3.5 mph
4.0 mph
4.5 mph
5.0 mph
6.0 mph
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
26.77
31.35
37.22
DNP
DNP
DNP
46.03b
47.86b
50.78b
DNP
DNP
DNP
57.30
58.45
65.66b
Young Children, male and female 3-5.9 yr olds; Children, male and female 6-12.9 yr olds; Adult Females, adolescent, young
to middle-aged, and older adult females; Adult Males, adolescent, young to middle-aged, and older adult males; DNP, group
did not perform this protocol or N was too small for appropriate mean comparisons
Older adults not included in the mean value since they did not perform running protocol at particular speeds.
Source: Adams, 1993.
Table 5A-2. Mean Minute Ventilation (VE, L/min) by Group and Activity for Field Protocols
Activity
Young Children3
Children
Adult Females
Adult Males
Play
Car Driving
Car Riding
Yardwork
Housework
Car Maintenance
Mowing
Woodworking
11.31
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
17.89
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
8.95
8.19
19.23e
17.38
DNP
DNP
DNP
DNP
10.79
9.83
26.07b/31.89c
DNP
23.21d
36.55e
24.42e
Young Children, male and female 3-5.9 yr olds; Children, male and female 6-12.9 yr olds; Adult Females, adolescent,
young to middle-aged, and older adult females; Adult Males, adolescent, young to middle-aged, and older adult males; DNP,
group did not perform this protocol or N was too small for appropriate mean comparisons;
Mean value for young to middle-aged adults only
Mean value for older adults only
Older adults not included in the mean value since they did not perform this activity.
Adolescents not included in mean value since they did not perform this activity
Source: Adams, 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5A-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 5A
Table 5A-3. Characteristics of Individual Subjects: Anthropometric Data, Job Categories, Calibration Results
Subj. # Age (years)
1761 26
1763 29
1764 32
1765 30
1766 31
1767 34
1768 32
1769 32
1770 26
1771 39
1772 32
1773 39
1774 23
1775 42
1776 29
1778 35
1779 40
1780 37
1781 38
Mean 33
SD 5
Ht. (in.)
71
63
71
73
67
74
69
77
70
66
71
69
68
67
70
76
70
75
65
70
4
" Abbreviations are interpreted as follows.
White
b Job: Car = carpenter, GCW
Wt. (Ib.)
180
135
165
145
170
220
155
230
180
150
260
170
150
150
180
220
175
242
165
181
36
Ethnic Group: Asn
Ethnic Group"
Wht
Asn
Blk
Wht
His
Wht
Blk
Wht
Wht
Wht
Wht
Wht
His
Wht
His
Ind
Wht
His
His
= Asian-Pacific, Blk
= general construction worker, Irn = ironworker, Lab
0 Site: Hosp = hospital buidling, Ofc = medical office complex
Calibration data
Job"
GCW
GCW
Car
GCW
Car
Car
GCW
Car
Car
Car
Car
Irn
Car
Irn
Car
Car
Car
Irn
Lab
= Black, His
= laborer
Site0
Ofc
Ofc
Ofc
Ofc
Ofc
Ofc
Ofc
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
Hosp
= Hispanic,
Calibration
HR Range11
69-108
80-112
56-87
66-126
75-112
59-114
62-152
69-132
63-106
88-118
83-130
77-128
68-139
76-118
68-152
70-129
72-140
68-120
66-121
70-123
8-16
r2'
.91
.95
.95
.97
.89
.98
.95
.99
.89
.91
.97
.95
.98
.88
.99
.94
.99
.98
.89
.94
.04
Ind = American Indian, Wht =
11 HR range = range of heart rates in calibration study
' r2 = coefficient of determination (proportion of ventilation rate variability explainable by heart rate variability under calibration-study
conditions, using quadratic prediction equation).
Source: Linnetal., 1993.
Table 5A-4. Statistics of the Age/Gender Cohorts Used to Develop Regression Equations for Predicting Basal Metabolic Rates (BMR)
Gender/Age BMR
(y)
MJd'1
±SD
C\
ra
Body Weight
(kg)
Nb
BMR Equation0
rd
Males
Under 3
3 to < 10
10to< 18
18 to < 30
30 to < 60
60 +
1.51
4.14
5.86
6.87
6.75
5.59
0.918
0.498
1.171
0.843
0.872
0.928
0.61
0
12
0.20
0
0
0
12
13
17
6.6
21
42
63
64
62
162
338
734
2879
646
50
0.249 bw -
0.095 bw +
0.074 bw +
0.063 bw +
0.048 bw +
0.049 bw +
0
2
2
2
3
2
127
110
754
896
653
459
0.95
0.83
0.93
0.65
0.6
0.71
Females
Under 3
3 to < 10
10to< 18
18 to < 30
30 to < 60
60 +
1.54
3.85
5.04
5.33
5.62
4.85
0.915
0.493
0.780
0.721
0.630
0.605
0
0
0
0
0
0
59
13
15
14
11
12
6.9
21
38
53
61
56
137
413
575
829
372
38
0.244 bw -
0.085 bw +
0.056 bw +
0.062 bw +
0.034 bw +
0.038 bw +
0
2
2
2
3
2
130
033
898
036
538
755
0.96
0.81
0.8
0.73
0.68
0.68
a Coefficient of variation (SD/mean)
b N = number of subjects
c Body weight (bw) in kg
d coefficient of correlation
Source: Lavton, 1993.
Page
5A-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
•
"I
a
i
I
Table SA-5.
Col. I
Line Subject
Adult
1 Man
2 1.7m2SA
3 30y;170cmL
4 20-33 y
5 Woman
6 30 y; 160 cm L
7 20-25 y; 165.8 cm L
8 Pregnant (8th mo)
Adolescent
9 male, 14-16 y
10 male, 14-15 y
11 female, 14-16 y
12 female, 14-15 y; 164.9 cm L
Children
13 10 y; 140 cm L
14 males, 10-11 y
15 males, 10-1 1 y; 140.6 cm L
16 females, 4-6 y
17 females, 4-6 y; 1 11 .6 cm L
18 Infant, 1 y
19 Newborn
20 20hrs-13wk
21 9.6 hrs
22 6.6 days
Selected Ventilation Values During Different Activity Levels Obtained From Various Literature Sources
2
W(kg)
68.5
70.4
54
60.3
59.4
56
36.5
32.5
20.8
18.4
2.5
2.5-5.3
3.6
3.7
W = body weights referable to the dimension quoted
cm L = length/height; y = years of age;
a Calculated from V* = f x VT.
b Crying.
Source- ICRP, 1981.
wk = week
f
12
12
15
12
15
16
16
15
16
30
34
25
29
3
Resting
VT
750
500
500
340
400
650
330
300
300
48
15
21
21
in column 1 ; f =
4
Light Activity
V* f VT
7.4 17 1670
6
7.5 16 1250
4.5 19 860
6 20 940
10
5.2
4.5
4.8 24 600
1.4"
0.5
0.5
0.6
frequency (breaths/min); VT =
5 6
Heavy Work Maximal Work During
Exercise
V* f VT V* f W
29 21 2030 43
20
40 3050
16 30 880 25
19
46 2100
53 2520
52 1870
14
58 1330
61 1050
70 600
66 520
68b SI1*
V*
III
90
113
88
71
61
40
34
3.5"
tidal volume (ml); V* = minute volume (1/min); SA = surface area;
.
r
I
-------
.
QTQ
I
Table 5A-5.
Col 1
Line Subject
Adult
1 Man
2 1.7m2SA
3 30y; 170 cm L
4 20-33 y
5 Woman
6 30 y; 160 cm L
7 20-25 y; 165.8 cm L
8 Pregnant (8th mo)
Adolescent
9 male, 14-16 y
10 male, 14-15 y
11 female, 14-16 y
12 female, 14-15 y; 164.9 cm L
Children
13 10 y; 140 cm L
14 males, 10-11 y
15 males, 10-11 y; 140.6 cm L
16 females, 4-6 y
17 females, 4-6 y; 11 1.6 cm L
18 Infant, 1 y
19 Newborn
20 20hrs-13wk
21 9.6 hrs
22 6.6 days
Selected Ventilation Values During Different
2
W(kg)
68.5
70.4
54
60.3
59.4
56
36.5
32.5
20.8
18.4
2.5
2.5-5.3
3.6
3.7
f
12
12
15
12
15
16
16
15
16
30
34
25
29
W = body weights referable to the dimension quoted in column
length/height; y = years of age; wk = week.
Calculated from V* = f x VT.
b Crying.
Source: ICRP, 1981.
3
Resting
VT V* f
750 7.4 17
500 6
500 7.5 16
340 4.5 19
400 6 20
650 10
330 5.2
300 4.5
300 4.8 24
48 1.4'
15 0.5
21 0.5
21 0.6
1 ; f = frequency (breaths
Activity Levels Obtained From Various Literature Sources
456
Light Activity Heavy Work Maximal Work During
Exercise
VT V* f VT V* f VT
1670 29 21 2030 43
1250 20
40 3050
860 16 30 880 25
940 19
46 2100
53 2520
52 1870
600 14
58 1330
61 1050
70 600
66 520
68" 51'-b
V*
111
90
113
88
71
61
40
34
3.5"
min); VT = tidal volume (ml); V* = minute volume (1/min); SA = surface area; cm L =
R« a^
S' <5.
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 5A
Table 5A-6. Estimated Minute Ventilation Associated with Activity Level for Average Male Adult
Level of work L/min
Light
Light
Light
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Heavy
Heavy
Very heavy
Very heavy
Severe
1 Avera§
Source:
13
19
25
30
35
40
55
63
72
85
100+
;e adult assumed to
Adapted from U.S
Representative activities
Level walking at 2 mph; washing clothes
Level walking at 3 mph; bowling; scrubbing floors
Dancing; pushing wheelbarrow with 15-kg load; simple construction; stacking firewood
Easy cycling; pushing wheelbarrow with 75-kg load; using sledgehammer
Climbing stairs; playing tennis; digging with spade
Cycling at 13 mph; walking on snow; digging trenches
Cross-country skiing; rock climbing; stair climbing
with load; playing squash or handball; chopping
with axe
Level running at 10 mph; competitive cycling
Competitive long distance running; cross-country skiing
weigh 70 kg.
EPA, 1985
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
5A-7
-------
ft
I
& .
*$ K
s 5
Kil
Table 5A-7. Minute Ventilation Ranges by Age, Sex, and Activity Level
Ventilation ranges
(liters/minute)
Age
(years)
Infants
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Adults
Adults
Sex
n
M/F 316
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
8
10
54
56
5
16
53
77
1
8
50
50
12
595
454
Resting
Range
0.25 - 2.09
—
5.0-7.0
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
5.2-8.3
—
—
4.1 -16.1
7.2-16.3
7.2-15.4
.1 -15.4
.1 -15.6
.1 -27.8
...
.1 -26.8
—
—
—
5.8-9.0
—
—
4.2-11.66
2.3-18.8
Mean
0.84
6.5
7.1
15.4
15.4
9.9
8.9
14.9
14.2
6.2
11.1
15.2
15.6
7.3
5.7
12.2
Light
n Range Mean n
...
—
16 5.0-32.0 13.9 4
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
20 5.2-35.0 17.2 9
—
20 — 20.3 20
4
6
5
30 3.1-24.9 16.4 29
3
24
1
7
—
—
—
12
—
—
786 4.2-29.4 8.1 106
102 2.3-27.6 13.8 102
Moderate
Range
-
-
28.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
41.0
-
.
19.6
18.5
18.5
14.4
21.6
24.7
.
27.8
.
.
.
40.0
.
.
20.7
14.4
-
-
-43.0
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
-68.0
-
__
-46.3
-46.3
-46.3
-48.4
-37.1
-55.0
..
-46.3
-
-
-
-63.0
-
-
-34.2
-78.0
Mean
33.3
53.4
33.1
26.5
34.1
30.3
32.8
28.1
39.7
26.8
39.3
48.6
26.5
40.9
Heavy
n Range
2 32.0-
4 39.3 -
31.0-
30.9 -
35.9-
35.5-
48.2-
44.1 -
51.2-
59.3-
27 55.8-
7 59.5 -
21 46.2-
6 63.9-
7 49.7 -
9 47.6 -
31 65.5-
9 58.1 -
7 67.6 -
38 27.8-
5 80.7-
16 42.2-
6 68.4-
6 48.4-
8 73.6 -
3 79.6 -
2 91.9-
3 89.4-
...
9 99.7-
211 23.4-
267 34.6 -
32.5
43.3
35.0
42.6
38.9
43.5
51.4
55.8
67.6
62.2
63.4
75.2
71.1
74.6
80.9
77.5
79.9
84.7
102.6
105.0
100.7
121.0
97.1
140.3
119.1
132.2
95.3
139.3
143.0
114.8
183.4
Mean
32.3
41.2
32.8
37.5
37.4
40.3
49.6
50.0
57.6
60.7
50.9
65.7
60.4
70.5
63.5
65.5
71.8
67.7
87.7
57.9
88.9
86.9
87.1
110.5
93.9
102.5
93.6
107.7
120.9
47.9
80.0
n = number of observations
Note:
Values in liters/minute can be converted to units of m/hour5 by multiplying by the conversion factofiO minutes/hour
lOOOliters/m
Source:
Adapted from U.S.
EPA, 1985.
I
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 5A
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 5A-9
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
6. DERMAL ROUTE 1
6.1. EQUATION FOR DERMAL DOSE 1
6.2. SURFACE AREA 2
6.2.1. Background 2
6.2.2. Measurement Techniques 2
6.2.3. Key Body Surface Area Studies 2
6.2.4. Relevant Surface Area Studies 4
6.2.5. Application of Body Surface Area Data 4
6.3. SOIL ADHERENCE TO SKIN 6
6.3.1. Background 6
6.3.2. Key Soil Adherence to Skin Studies 6
6.3.3. Relevant Soil Adherence to Skin Studies 6
6.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 8
6.4.1. Body Surface Area 8
6.4.2. Soil Adherence to Skin 8
6.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 6 10
APPENDIX 6A
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
6. DERMAL ROUTE
Dermal exposure can occur during a variety of
activities in different environmental media and
microenvironments (U.S. EPA, 1992). These include:
• Water (e.g., bathing, washing, swimming);
• Soil (e.g., outdoor recreation, gardening,
construction);
• Sediment (e.g., wading, fishing);
• Liquids (e.g., use of commercial products);
• Vapors/fumes (e.g., use of commercial
products); and
• Indoors (e.g., carpets, floors, countertops).
The major factors that must be considered when estimating
dermal exposure are: the chemical concentration in contact
with the skin, the potential dose, the extent of skin surface
area exposed, the duration of exposure, the absorption of
the chemical through the skin, the internal dose, and the
amount of chemical that can be delivered to a target organ
(i.e., biologically effective dose) (see Figure 6-1). A
detailed discussion of these factors can be found in
Guidelines for Exposure Assessment (U.S. EPA, 1992a).
This chapter focuses on measurements of body
surface areas and various factors needed to estimate dermal
exposure to chemicals in water and soil. Information
concerning dermal exposure to pollutants in indoor
environments is limited. Useful information concerning
estimates of body surface area can be found in
"Development of Statistical Distributions or Ranges of
Standard Factors Used in Exposure Assessments" (U.S.
EPA, 1985). "Dermal Exposure Assessment: Principles
and Applications (U.S. EPA, 1992b), provides detailed
information concerning dermal exposure using a stepwise
guide in the exposure assessment process.
The available studies have been classified as either
key or relevant based on their applicability to exposure
assessment needs and are summarized in this chapter.
Recommended values are based on the results of the key
studies. Relevant studies are presented to provide an added
perspective on the state-of-knowledge pertaining to dermal
exposure factors. All tables and figures presenting data
from these studies are shown at the end of this chapter.
6.1. EQUATION FOR DERMAL DOSE
The average daily dose (ADD) is the dose rate
averaged over a pathway-specific period of exposure
expressed as a daily dose on a per-unit-body-weight basis.
The ADD is used for exposure to chemicals with non-
carcinogenic non-chronic effects. For compounds with
carcinogenic or chronic effects, the lifetime average daily
dose (LADD) is used. The LADD is the dose rate averaged
over a lifetime.
For dermal contact with chemicals in soil or water,
dermally absorbed average daily dose can be estimated by
(U.S. EPA, 1992b):
ADD =
DA
. x EV x ED x EF x SA
BW x AT
(Eqn. 6-1)
where:
ADD
EV
ED
EF
SA
BW
AT
average daily dose (mg/kg-day);
absorbed dose per event (mg/cm2-event);
event frequency (events/day);
exposure duration (years);
exposure frequency (days/year);
skin surface area available for contact (cm2);
body weight (kg); and
averaging time (days) for noncarcinogenic
effects, AT = ED and for carcinogenic effects,
AT = 70 years or 25,550 days.
This method is to be used to calculate the absorbed dose of
a chemical. Total body surface area (SA) is assumed to be
exposed for a period of time (ED).
For dermal contact with water, the DAevent is
estimated with consideration for the permeability coefficient
from water, the chemical concentration in water, and the
event duration. The approach to estimate DAevent is different
for inorganic and organic compounds. The nonsteady-state
approach to estimate the dermally absorbed dose from water
is recommended as the preferred approach for organics
which exhibit octanol-water partitioning (U.S. EPA,
1992b). First, this approach more accurately reflects
normal human exposure conditions since the short contact
times associated with bathing and swimming generally
mean that steady state will not occur. Second, the approach
accounts for uptake that can occur after the actual exposure
event due to absorption of residual chemical trapped in skin
tissue. Use of the nonsteady-state model for organics has
implications for selecting permeability coefficient (Kp)
values (U.S. EPA, 1992b). It is recommended that the
traditional steady-state approach be applied to inorganics
(U.S. EPA, 1992b). Detailed information concerning how
to estimate absorbed dose per event (DAevent) and Kp
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
values can be found in Section 5.3.1 of "Dermal Exposure
Assessment: Principles and Applications" (U.S. EPA,
1992b).
For dermal contact with contaminated soil,
estimation of the DAevent is different from the estimation for
dermal contact with chemicals in water. It is based on the
concentration of the chemical in soil, the adherence factor
of soil to skin, and the absorption fraction. Information for
DAevent estimation from soil contact can be found in U.S.
EPA (1992b), Section 6.4.
The apparent simplicity of the absorption fraction
(percent absorbed) makes this approach appealing.
However, it is not practical to apply it to water contact
scenarios, such as swimming, because of the difficulty in
estimating the total material contacted (U.S. EPA, 1992b).
It is assumed that there is essentially an infinite amount of
material available, and that the chemical will be replaced
continuously, thereby increasing the amount of material
(containing the chemical) available by some large unknown
amount. Therefore, the permeability coefficient
-based approach is recommended over the absorption
fraction approach for determining the dermally absorbed
dose of chemicals in aqueous media.
Before the absorption fraction approach can be used
in soil contact scenarios, the contaminant concentration in
soil must be established. Not all of the chemical in a layer
of dirt applied to skin may be bioavailable, nor is it assumed
to be an internal dose. Because of the lack of Kp data for
compounds bound to soil, and reduced uncertainty in
defining an applied dose, the absorption fraction-based
approach is suggested for determining the internal dose of
chemicals in soil. More detailed explanation of the
equations, assumptions, and approaches can be found in
"Dermal Exposure Assessment: Principles and
Applications" (U.S. EPA. 1992b).
6.2. SURFACE AREA
6.2.1. Background
The total surface area of skin exposed to a
contaminant must be determined using measurement or
estimation techniques before conducting a dermal exposure
assessment. Depending on the exposure scenario,
estimation of the surface area for the total body or a specific
body part can be used to calculate the contact rate for the
pollutant. This section presents estimates for total body
surface area and for body parts and presents information on
the application of body surface area data.
6.2.2. Measurement Techniques
Coating, triangulation, and surface integration are
direct measurement techniques that have been used to
measure total body surface area and the surface area of
specific body parts. Consideration has been given for
differences due to age, gender, and race. The results of the
various techniques have been summarized in "Development
of Statistical Distributions or Ranges of Standard Factors
Used in Exposure Assessments" (U.S. EPA, 1985). The
coating method consists of coating either the whole body or
specific body regions with a substance of known or
measured area. Triangulation consists of marking the area
of the body into geometric figures, then calculating the
figure areas from their linear dimensions. Surface
integration is performed by using a planimeter and adding
the areas.
The triangulation measurement technique developed
by Boyd (1935) has been found to be highly reliable. It
estimates the surface area of the body using geometric
approximations that assume parts of the body resemble
geometric solids (Boyd, 1935). More recently, Popendorf
and Leffingwell (1976), and Haycock et al. (1978) have
developed similar geometric methods that assume body
parts correspond to geometric solids, such as the sphere and
cylinder. A linear method proposed by DuBois and DuBois
(1916) is based on the principle that the surface areas of the
parts of the body are proportional, rather than equal to the
surface area of the solids they resemble.
In addition to direct measurement techniques, several
formulae have been proposed to estimate body surface area
from measurements of other major body dimensions (i.e.,
height and weight) (U.S. EPA, 1985). Generally, the
formulae are based on the principles that body density and
shape are roughly the same and that the relationship of
surface area to any dimension may be represented by the
curve of central tendency of their plotted values or by the
algebraic expression for the curve. A discussion and
comparison of formulae to determine total body surface area
are presented in Appendix 6A.
6.2.3. Key Body Surface Area Studies
U.S. EPA (1985) - Development of Statistical
Distributions or Ranges of Standard Factors Used in
Exposure Assessments - U.S. EPA (1985) analyzed the
direct surface area measurement data of Gehan and George
(1970) using the Statistical Processing System (SPS)
software package of Buhyoff et al. (1982). Gehan and
George (1970) selected 401 measurements made by
Page
6-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Boyd (1935) that were complete for surface area, height,
weight, and age for their analysis. Boyd (1935) had
reported surface area estimates for 1,114 individuals using
coating, triangulation, or surface integration methods (U.S.
EPA, 1985).
U.S. EPA (1985) used SPS to generate equations to
calculate surface area as a function of height and weight.
These equations were then used to calculate body surface
area distributions of the U.S. population using the height
and weight data obtained from the National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) II and the
computer program QNTLS of Rochon and Kalsbeek
(1983).
The equation proposed by Gehan and George (1970)
was determined by U.S. EPA (1985) to be the best choice
for estimating total body surface area. However, the paper
by Gehan and George (1970) gave insufficient information
to estimate the standard error about the regression.
Therefore, U.S. EPA (1985) used the 401 direct
measurements of children and adults and reanalyzed the
data using the formula of Dubois and Dubois (1916) and
SPS to obtain the standard error (U.S. EPA, 1985).
Regression equations were developed for specific
body parts using the Dubois and Dubois (1916) formula
and using the surface area of various body parts provided by
Boyd (1935) and Van Graan (1969) in conjunction with
SPS. Regression equations for adults were developed for
the head, trunk (including the neck), upper extremities
(arms and hands, upper arms, and forearms) and lower
extremities (legs and feet, thighs, and lower legs) (U.S.
EPA, 1985). Table 6-1 presents a summary of the equation
parameters developed by U.S. EPA (1985) for calculating
surface area of adult body parts. Equations to estimate the
body part surface area of children were not developed
because of insufficient data.
Percentile estimates of total surface area and surface
area of body parts developed by U.S. EPA (1985) using the
regression equations and NHANES II height and weight
data are presented in Tables 6-2 and 6-3 for adult males and
adult females, respectively. The calculated mean surface
areas of body parts for men and women are presented in
Table 6-4. The standard deviation, the minimum value, and
the maximum value for each body part are included. The
median total body surface area for men and women and the
corresponding standard errors about the regressions are also
given. It has been assumed that errors associated with
height and weight are negligible (U.S. EPA, 1985). The
data in Table 6-5
present the percentage of total body surface by body part for
men and women.
Percentile estimates for total surface area of male and
female children presented in Tables 6-6 and 6-7 were
calculated using the total surface area regression equation,
NHANES II height and weight data, and using QNTLS.
Estimates are not included for children younger than 2 years
old because NHANES height data are not available for this
age group. For children, the error associated with height
and weight cannot be assumed to be zero because of their
relatively small sizes. Therefore, the standard errors of the
percentile estimates cannot be estimated, since it cannot be
assumed that the errors associated with the exogenous
variables (height and weight) are independent of that
associated with the model; there are insufficient data to
determine the relationship between these errors.
Measurements of the surface area of children's body
parts are summarized as a percentage of total surface area
in Table 6-8. Because of the small sample size, the data
cannot be assumed to represent the average percentage of
surface area by body part for all children. Note that the
percent of total body surface area contributed by the head
decreases from childhood to adult, while the percent
contributed by the leg increases.
Phillips et al. (1993) - Distributions of Total Skin
Surface Area to Body Weight Ratios - Phillips et al. (1993)
observed a strong correlation (0.986) between body surface
area and body weight and studied the effect of using these
factors as independent variables in the LADD equation.
Phillips et al. (1993) concluded that, because of the
correlation between these two variables, the use of body
surface area to body weight (SA/BW) ratios in human
exposure assessments is more appropriate than treating
these factors as independent variables. Direct measurement
(coating, triangulation, and surface integration) data from
the scientific literature were used to calculate body surface
area to body weight (SA/BW) ratios for three age groups
(infants aged 0 to 2 years, children aged 2.1 to 17.9 years,
and adults 18 years and older). These ratios were calculated
by dividing body surface areas by corresponding body
weights for the 401 individuals analyzed by Gehan and
George (1970) and summarized by U.S. EPA (1985).
Distributions of SA/BW ratios were developed and
summary statistics were calculated for each of the three age
groups and the combined data set. Summary statistics for
these populations are presented in Table 6-9. The shapes
of these SA/BW distributions were determined using
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
D'Agostino's test. The results indicate that the SA/BW
ratios for infants are lognormally distributed and the
SA/BW ratios for adults and all ages combined are normally
distributed (Figure 6-2). SA/BW ratios for children were
neither normally nor lognormally distributed. According to
Phillips et al. (1993), SA/BW ratios should be used to
calculate LADDs by replacing the body surface area factor
in the numerator of the LADD equation with the SA/BW
ratio and eliminating the body weight factor in the
denominator of the LADD equation.
The effect of gender and age on SA/BW distribution
was also analyzed by classifying the 401 observations by
gender and age. Statistical analyses indicated no significant
differences between SA/BW ratios for males and females.
SA/BW ratios were found to decrease with increasing age.
6.2.4. Relevant Surface Area Studies
Murray and Burmaster (1992) - Estimated
Distributions for Total Body Surface Area of Men and
Women in the United States - In this study, distributions of
total body surface area for men and women ages 18 to 74
years were estimated using Monte Carlo simulations based
on height and weight distribution data. Four different
formulae for estimating body surface area as a function of
height and weight were employed: Dubois and Dubois
(1916); Boyd (1935); U.S. EPA (1985); and Costeff
(1966). The formulae of Dubois and Dubois (1916); Boyd
(1935); and U.S. EPA (1985) are based on height and
weight. They are discussed in Appendix 6A. The formula
developed by Costeff (1966) is based on 220 observations
that estimate body surface area based on weight only. This
formula is:
SA= 4W+7/W+90
where:
(Eqn. 6-2)
SA = Surface Area (m2); and
W = Weight (kg).
Formulae were compared and the effect of the correlation
between height and weight on the body surface area
distribution was analyzed.
Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to estimate
body surface area distributions. They were based on the
bivariate distributions estimated by Brainard and Burmaster
(1992) for height and natural logarithm of
weight and the formulae described above. A total of 5,000
random samples each for men and women were selected
from the two correlated bivariate distributions. Body
surface area calculations were made for each sample, and
for each formula, resulting in body surface area
distributions. Murray and Burmaster (1992), found that the
body surface area frequency distributions were similar for
the four models (Table 6-10). Using the U.S. EPA (1985)
formula, the median surface area values were calculated to
be 1.96 m2 for men and 1.69 nf for women. The median
value for women is identical to that generated by U.S. EPA
(1985) but differs for men by approximately 1 percent.
Body surface area was found to have lognormal
distributions for both men and women (Figure 6-3). It was
also found that assuming correlation between height and
weight influences the final distribution by less than 1
percent.
AIHC (1994) - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
Exposure Factors Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) provides
similar body surface area data as presented here. Consistent
with this document, average and percentile values are
presented on the basis of age and gender. In addition, the
Sourcebook presents point estimates of exposed skin
surface areas for various scenarios on the basis of several
published studies. Finally, the Sourcebook presents
probability distributions based on U.S. EPA (1989) and as
derived by Thompson and Burmaster (1991); Versar
(1991); and Brorby and Fmley (1993). For each
distribution, the @Risk formula is provided for direct use in
the @Risk simulation software (Palisade, 1992). The
organization of this document, makes it very convenient to
use in support of Monte Carlo analysis. The reviews of the
supporting studies are very brief with little analysis of their
strengths and weaknesses. The Sourcebook has been
classified as a relevant rather than key study because it is
not the primary source for the data used to make
recommendations in this document. The Sourcebook is
very similar to this document in the sense that it summarizes
exposure factor data and recommends values. As such, it is
clearly relevant as an alternative information source on body
surface area as well as other exposure factors.
6.2.5. Application of Body Surface Area Data
In many settings, it is likely that only certain parts of
the body are exposed. All body parts that come in contact
with a chemical must be considered to estimate the total
surface area of the body exposed. The data in Table 6-4
may be used to estimate the total surface area of
Page
6-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
the particular body part(s). For example, to assess exposure
to a chemical in a cleaning product for which only the hands
are exposed, surface area values for hands from Table 6-4
can be used. For exposure to both hands and arms, mean
surface areas for these parts from Table 6-4 may be
summed to estimate the total surface area exposed. The
mean surface area of these body parts for men and women
is as follows:
Arms (includes upper arms and forearms)
Hands
Total area
Surface Area (m2)
Men Women
0.228 0.210
0.084 0.075
0.312 0.285
Therefore, the total body part surface area that may be in
contact with the chemical in the cleaning product in this
example is 0.312 m2 formen and 0.285 m2 for women.
A common assumption is that clothing prevents
dermal contact and subsequent absorption of contaminants.
This assumption may be false in cases where the chemical
may be able to penetrate clothing, such as in a fine dust or
liquid suspension. Studies using personal patch monitors
placed beneath clothing of pesticide workers exposed to
fine mists and vapors show that a significant proportion of
dermal exposure may occur at anatomical sites covered by
clothing (U.S. EPA, 1992b). In addition, it has been
demonstrated that a "pumping" effect can occur which
causes material to move under loose clothing (U.S. EPA,
1992b). Furthermore, studies have demonstrated that hands
cannot be considered to be protected from exposure even if
waterproof gloves are worn (U.S. EPA, 1992b). This may
be due to contamination to the interior surface of the gloves
when donning or removing them during work activities
(U.S. EPA, 1992b). Depending on the task, pesticide
workers have been shown to experience 12 percent to 43
percent of their total exposure through their hands,
approximately 20 percent to 23 percent through their heads
and necks, and 36 percent to 64 percent through their torsos
and arms, despite the use of protective gloves and clothing
(U.S. EPA, 1992b).
For swimming and bathing scenarios, past exposure
assessments have assumed that 75 percent to 100 percent of
the skin surface is exposed (U.S. EPA, 1992b). As shown
in Table 6-4, total adult body surface areas can vary from
about 17,000 cm2 to 23,000 cm2. The mean is reported as
approximately 20,000 cm2.
For default purposes, adult body surface areas of
20,000 cm2 (central estimate) to 23,000 cm (upper
percentile) are recommended in U.S. EPA (1992b). Tables
6-2 and 6-3 can also be used when the default values are not
preferred. Central and upper-percentile values for children
should be derived from Table 6-6 or 6-7.
Unlike exposure to liquids, clothing may or may not
be effective in limiting the extent of exposure to soil. The
1989 Exposure Factors Handbook presented two adult
clothing scenarios for outdoor activities (U.S. EPA, 1989):
Central tendency mid range: Individual wears
long sleeve shirt, pants, and shoes. The exposed
skin surface is limited to the head and hands (2,000
cm2).
Upper percentile: Individual wears a short sleeve
shirt, shorts, and shoes. The exposed skin surface is
limited to the head, hands, forearms, and lower legs
(5,300 cm2).
The clothing scenarios presented above, suggest that
roughly 10 percent to 25 percent of the skin area may be
exposed to soil. Since some studies have suggested that
exposure can occur under clothing, the upper end of this
range was selected in Dermal Exposure Assessment:
Principles and Applications (U.S. EPA, 1992b) for
deriving defaults. Thus, taking 25 percent of the total body
surface area results in defaults for adults of 5,000 cm2 to
5,800 cm2. These values were obtained from the body
surface areas in Table 6-2 after rounding to 20,000 cm2 and
23,000 cm2, respectively. The range of defaults for children
can be derived by multiplying the 50th and 95th percentiles
by 0.25 for the ages of interest.
When addressing soil contact exposures, assessors
may want to refine estimates of surface area exposed on the
basis of seasonal conditions. For example, in moderate
climates, it may be reasonable to assume that 5 percent of
the skin is exposed during the winter, 10 percent during the
spring and fall, and 25 percent during the summer.
The previous discussion, has presented information
about the area of skin exposed to soil. These estimates of
exposed skin area should be useful to assessors using the
traditional approach of multiplying the soil adherence factor
by exposed skin area to estimate the total amount of soil on
skin. The next section presents soil adherence data specific
to activity and body part and is designed to be
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-5
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
combined with the total surface area of that body part. No
reduction of body part area is made for clothing coverage
using this approach. Thus, assessors who adopt this
approach, should not use the defaults presented above for
soil exposed skin area. Rather, they should use Table 6-4
to obtain total surface areas of specific body parts. See
detailed discussion below.
6.3. SOIL ADHERENCE TO SKIN
6.3.1. Background
Soil adherence to the surface of the skin is a required
parameter to calculate dermal dose when the exposure
scenario involves dermal contact with a chemical in soil. A
number of studies have attempted to determine the
magnitude of dermal soil adherence. These studies are
described in detail in U.S. EPA (1992b). This section
summarizes recent studies that estimate soil adherence to
skin for use as exposure factors.
6.3.2. Key Soil Adherence to Skin Studies
Kissel et al. (1996a) - Factors Affecting Soil
Adherence to Skin in Hand-Press Trials: Investigation of
Soil Contact and Skin Coverage - Kissel et al. (1996a)
conducted soil adherence experiments using five soil types
(descriptor) obtained locally in the Seattle, Washington,
area: sand (211), loamy sand (CP), loamy sand (85), sandy
loam (228), and silt loam (72). All soils were analyzed by
hydrometer (settling velocity) to determine composition.
Clay contents ranged from 0.5 to 7.0 percent. Organic
carbon content, determined by combustion, ranged from 0.7
to 4.6 percent. Soils were dry sieved to obtain particle size
ranges of <150,150-250, and >250 //m. For each soil type,
the amount of soil adhering to an adult female hand, using
both sieved and unsieved soils, was determined by
measuring the difference in soil sample weight before and
after the hand was pressed into a pan containing the test
soil. Loadings were estimated by dividing the recovered
soil mass by total hand area, although loading occurred
primarily on only one side of the hand. Results showed that
generally, soil adherence to hands could be directly
correlated with moisture content, inversely correlated with
particle size, and independent of clay content or organic
carbon content.
Kissel et al. (1996b) - Field Measurement of
Dermal Soil Loading Attributable to Various Activities:
Implications for Exposure Assessment - Further
experiments were conducted by Kissel et al. (1996b) to
estimate soil adherence associated with various indoor and
outdoor activities: greenhouse gardening, tae kwon do
karate, soccer, rugby, reed gathering, irrigation installation,
truck farming, and playing in mud. A summary of field
studies by activity, gender, age, field conditions, and
clothing worn is presented in Table 6-11. Subjects' body
surfaces (forearms, hands, lower legs in all cases, faces,
and/or feet; pairs in some cases) were washed before and
after monitored activities. Paired samples were pooled into
single ones. Mass recovered was converted to loading
using allometric models of surface area. These data are
presented in Table 6-12. Results presented are based on
direct measurement of soil loading on the surfaces of skin
before and after occupational and recreational activities that
may be expected to have soil contact (Kissel et al., 1996b).
6.3.3. Relevant Soil Adherence to Skin Studies
Lepow et al. (1975) - Investigations into Sources of
Lead in the Environment of Urban Children - This study
was conducted to identify the behavioral and environmental
factors contributing to elevated lead levels in ten preschool
children. The study was performed over 6 to 25 months.
Samples of dirt from the hands of subjects were collected
during the course of play around the areas where they lived.
Preweighed self-adhesive labels were used to sample a
standard area on the palm of the hands of 16 male and
female children. The labels were pressed on a single area,
often pressed several times, to obtain an adequate sample.
In the laboratory, labels were equilibrated in a desiccant
cabinet for 24 hours (comparable to the preweighed
desiccation), then the total weight was recorded. The mean
weight of dirt from the 22 hand sample labels was 11 mg.
This corresponds to 0.51 mg/cm2. Lepow et al. (1975)
reported that this amount (11 mg) represented only a small
fraction (percent not specified) of the total amount of
surface dirt present on the hands, because much of the dirt
may be trapped in skin folds and creases or there may be a
patchy distribution of dirt on hands.
Roels et al. (1980) - Exposure to Lead by the Oral
and the Pulmonary Routes of Children Living in the
Vicinity of a Primary Lead Smelter - Roels et al. (1980)
examined blood lead levels among 661 children, 9 to 14
years old, who lived in the vicinity of a large lead smelter in
Brussels, Belgium. During five different study periods, lead
levels were assessed by rinsing the childrens' hands in 500
mL dilute nitric acid. The amount of lead on the hands was
divided by the concentration of lead in soil to
Page
6-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
estimate the amount of soil adhering to the hands. The
mean soil amount adhering to the hands was 0.159 grams.
Que Hee et al. (1985) - Evolution of Efficient
Methods to Sample Lead Sources, Such as House Dust
andHandDust, in the Homes of Children - Que Hee et al.
(1985) used soil having particle sizes ranging from < 44 to
833 (im diameters, fractionated into six size ranges, to
estimate the amount that adhered to the palm of the hand
that are assumed to be approximately 160 cm2 (test subject
with an average total body surface area of 16,000 cm2 and
a total hand surface area of 400 cm2). The amount of soil
that adhered to skin was determined by applying
approximately 5 g of soil for each size fraction, removing
excess soil by shaking the hands, and then measuring the
difference in weight before and after application. Several
assumptions were made to apply these results to other soil
types and exposure scenarios: (a) the soil is composed of
particles of the indicated diameters; (b) all soil types and
particle sizes adhere to the skin to the degree observed in
this study; and an equivalent weight of particles of any
diameter adhere to the same surface area of skin. On
average, 31.2 mg of soil adhered to the palm of the hand.
Driver et al. (1989) - Soil Adherence to Human Skin
- Driver et al. (1989) conducted soil adherence experiments
using various soil types collected from sites in Virginia. A
total of five soil types were collected: Hyde, Chapanoke,
Panorama, lackland, and Montalto. Both top soils and
subsoils were collected for each soil type. The soils were
also characterized by cation exchange capacity, organic
content, clay mineralogy, and particle size distribution. The
soils were dry sieved to obtain particle sizes of <250 (im
and <150 (jm. For each soil type, the amount of soil
adhering to adult male hands, using both sieved and
unsieved soils, was determined gravimetrically (i.e.,
measuring the difference in soil sample weight before and
after soil application to the hands).
An attempt was made to measure only the minimal
or "monolayer" of soil adhering to the hands. This was done
by mixing a pre-weighed amount of soil over the entire
surface area of the hands for a period of approximately 30
seconds, followed by removal of excess soil by gently
rubbing the hands together after contact with the soil.
Excess soil that was removed from the hands was collected,
weighed, and compared to the original soil sample weight.
The authors measured average adherence of 1.40 mg/cm2
for particle sizes less than 150 (jm, 0.95 mg/cm2 for particle
sizes less than 250
(mi, and 0.58 mg/cm2 for unsieved soils. Analysis of
variance statistics showed that the most important factor
affecting adherence variability was particle size (p < 0.001).
The next most important factor is soil type and subtype (p
< 0.001). The interaction of soil type and particle size was
also significant, but at a lower significance level (p < 0.01).
Driver et al. (1989) found statistically significant
increases in soil adherence with decreasing particle size;
whereas, Que Hee et al. (1985) found relatively small
changes with changes in particle size. The amount of soil
adherence found by Driver et al. (1989) was greater than
that reported by Que Hee et al. (1985).
Sedman (1989) - The Development of Applied
Action Levels for Soil Contact: A Scenario for the
Exposure of Humans to Soil in a Residential Setting -
Sedman (1989) used the estimate from Roels et al. (1980),
0.159 g, and the average surface area of the hand of an 11
year old, 307 cm2 to estimate the amount of soil adhering
per unit area of skin to be 0.9 mg/cm2. This assumed that
approximately 60 percent (185 cm2) of the lead on the
hands was recovered by the method employed by Roels et
al. (1980).
Sedman (1989) used estimates from Lepow et al.
(1975), Roels et al. (1980), and Que Hee et al. (1985) to
develop a maximum soil load that could occur on the skin.
A rounded arithmetic mean of 0.5 mg/cm2 was calculated
from these three studies. According to Sedman (1989), this
was near the maximum load of soil that could occur on the
skin but it is unlikely that most skin surfaces would be
covered with this amount of soil (Sedman, 1989).
Yang et al. (1989) - In vitro and In vivo
Percutaneous Absorption of Benzo[a]pyrene from
Petroleum Crude - Fortified Soil in the Rat - Yang et al.
(1989) evaluated the percutaneous absorption of
benzo[a]pyrene (BAP) in petroleum crude oil sorbed on soil
using a modified in vitro technique. This method was used
in preliminary experiments to determine the minimum
amount of soil adhering to the skin of rats. Based on these
results, percutaneous absorption experiments with the
crude-sorbed soil were conducted with soil particles of
<150 //m only. This particle size was intended to represent
the composition of the soil adhering to the skin surface.
Approximately 9 mg/cm2 of soil was found to be the
minimum amount required for a "monolayer" coverage of
the skin surface in both in vitro and in vivo experiments.
This value is larger than reports for human skin in the
studies of Kissel et al., 1996a,b; Lepow et al., 1975; Roels
et al., 1980; and Que Hee et al.,
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
1985. Differences between the rat and human soil adhesion
findings may be the result of differences in rat and human
skin texture, the types of soils used, soil moisture content or
possibly the methods of measuring soil adhesion (Yang et
al, 1989).
6.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
6.4.1. Body Surface Area
Body surface area estimates are based on direct
measurements. Re-analysis of data collected by Boyd
(1935) by several investigators (Gehan and George, 1970;
U.S. EPA, 1985; Murray and Burmaster, 1992; Phillips et
al., 1993) constitutes much of this literature. Methods are
highly reproducible and the results are widely accepted.
The representativeness of these data to the general
population is somewhat limited since variability due to race
or gender have not been systematically addressed.
Individual body surface area studies are summarized
in Table 6-13 and the recommendations for body surface
area are summarized in Table 6-14. Table 6-15 presents
the confidence ratings for various aspects of the
recommendations for body surface area. The U.S. EPA
(1985) study is based on generally accepted measurements
that enjoy widespread usage, summarizes and compares
previous reports in the literature, provides statistical
distributions for adults, and provides data for total body
surface area and body parts by gender for adults and
children. However, the results are based on 401 selected
measurements from the original 1,114 made by Boyd
(1935). More than half of the measurements are from
children. Therefore, these estimates may be subject to
selection bias and may not be representative of the general
population nor specific ethnic groups. Phillips et al. (1993)
analyses are based on direct measurement data that provide
distributions of body surface area to calculate LADD. The
results are consistent with previous efforts to estimate body
surface area. Analyses are based on 401 measurements
selected from the original 1,114 measurements made by
Boyd (1935) and data were not analyzed for specific body
parts. The study by Murray and Burmaster (1992) provides
frequency distributions for body surface area for men and
women and produces results that are similar to those
obtained by the U.S. EPA (1985), but do not provide data
for body parts nor can results be applied to children.
For most dermal exposure scenarios concerning
adults, it is recommended that the body surface areas
presented in Table 6-4 be used after determining which
body parts will be exposed. Table 6-4 was selected
because these data are straightforward determinations for
most scenarios. However, for others, additional
considerations may need to be addressed. For example, (1)
the type of clothing worn could have a significant effect on
the surface area exposed, and (2) climatic conditions will
also affect the type of clothing worn and, thus, the skin
surface area exposed.
Frequency, event, and exposure duration for water
activities and soil contact are presented in Activity Patterns,
Volume III, Chapter 15 of this report. For each parameter,
recommended values were derived for average and upper
percentile values. Each of these considerations are also
discussed in more detail in U.S. EPA (1992b). Data in
Tables 6-2 and 6-3 can be used when surface area
distributions are preferred. A range of recommended values
for estimates of the skin surface area of children may be
taken from Tables 6-6 and 6-7 using the 50th and 95th
percentile values for age(s) of concern. The recommended
50th and 95th percentile values for adult skin surface area
provided in U.S. EPA (1992b) are presented in Table 6-16.
6.4.2. Soil Adherence to Skin
Table 6-17 summarizes the relevant and key studies
addressing soil adherence to skin. Both Lepow et al. (1975)
and Roels et al. (1980) monitored typical exposures in
children. They attempted to estimate typical exposure by
recovery of accumulated soil from hands at specific time
intervals. The efficiency of their sample collection methods
is not known and may be subject to error. Only children
were studied which may limit generalizing these results to
adults. Later studies (Que Hee et al., 1985 and Driver et al.,
1989) attempted to characterize both soil properties and
sample collection efficiency to estimate adherence of soil to
skin. However, the experimental conditions used to expose
skin to soil may not reflect typical dermal exposure
situations. This provides useful information about the
influence of soil characteristics on skin adherence, but the
intimate contact of skin with soil required under the
controlled experimental conditions in the studies by Driver
et al. (1989) and Que Hee et al. (1985) may have
exaggerated the amount of adherence over what typically
occurs.
More recently, Kissel et al. (1996a; 1996b) have
related dermal adherence to soil characteristics and to
specific activities. In all cases, experimental design and
measurement methods are straightforward and reproducible,
but application of results is limited. Both controlled
experiments and field studies are based on a
Page
6-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
limited number of measurements. Specific situations have
been selected to assess soil adherence to skin.
Consequently, variation due to individuals, protective
clothing, temporal, or seasonal factors remain to be studied
in more detail. Therefore, caution is required in
interpretation and application of these results for exposure
assessments.
These studies are based on limited data, but suggest:
• Soil properties influence adherence. Adherence
increases with moisture content, decreases with
particle size, but is relatively unaffected by clay or
organic carbon content.
• Adherence levels vary considerably across
different parts of the body. The highest levels were
found on common contact points such as hands,
knees, and elbows; the least was detected on the
face.
• Adherence levels vary with activity. In general,
the highest levels of soil adherence were seen in
outdoor workers such as farmers and irrigation
system installers, followed by outdoor recreation,
and gardening activities. Very high adherence
levels were seen in individuals contacting wet
soils such as might occur during wading or other
shore area recreational activities.
In consideration, of these general observations and
the recent data from Kissel et al. (1996a, 1996b), changes
are needed from past EPA recommendations which used
one adherence value to represent all soils, body parts, and
activities. One approach would be to select the activity
from Table 6-11 which best represents the exposure
scenario of concern and use the corresponding adherence
value from Table 6-12. Although this approach represents
an improvement, it still has shortcomings. For example, it
is difficult to decide which activity in Table 6-12 is most
representative of a typical residential setting involving a
variety of activities. It may be useful to combine these
activities into general classes of low, moderate, and high
contact. In the future, it may be possible to combine
activity-specific soil adherence estimates with survey-
specific soil adherence estimates with survey-derived data
on activity frequency and duration to develop overall
average soil contact rates.
EPA is sponsoring research to develop such an approach.
As this information becomes availble, updated
recommendations will be issued.
Table 6-12 provides the best estimates available on
activity-specific adherence values, but are based on limited
data. Therefore, they have a high degree of uncertainty such
that considerable judgment must be used when selecting
them for an assessment. The confidence ratings for various
aspects of this recommendation are summarized in Table 6-
18. Insufficient data are available to develop a distribution
or a probability function for soil loadings.
Past EPA guidance has recommended assuming that
soil exposure occurs primarily to exposed body surfaces and
used typical clothing scenarios to derive estimates of
exposed skin area. The approach recommended above for
estimating soil adherence addresses this issue in a different
manner. This change was motivated by two developments.
First, increased acceptance that soil and dust particles can
get under clothing and be deposited on skin. Second, recent
studies of soil adherence have measured soil on entire body
parts (whether or not they were covered by clothing) and
averaged the amount of soil adhering to skin over the area
of entire body part. The soil adherence levels resulting from
these new studies must be combined with the surface area
of the entire body part (not merely unclothed surface area)
to estimate the amount of contaminant on skin. An
important caveat, however, is that this approach assumes
that clothing in the exposure scenario of interest matches
the clothing in the studies used to derive these adherence
levels such that the same degree of protection provided by
clothing can be assumed in both cases. If clothing differs
significantly between the studies reported here and the
exposure scenarios under investigation, considerable
judgment is needed to adjust either the adherence level or
surface area assumption.
The dermal adherence value represents the amount
of soil on the skin at the time of measurement. Assuming
that the amount measured on the skin represents its
accumulation between washings and that people wash at
least once per day, these adherence values can be
interpreted as daily contact rates (U.S. EPA, 1992b).
However, this is not recommended because the residence
time of soils on skin has not been studied. Instead, it is
recommended that these adherence values be interpreted on
an event basis (U.S. EPA, 1992b).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-9
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
6.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 6
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. Washington, DC:
AIHC.
Boyd, E. (1935) The growth of the surface area of the
human body. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University
of Minnesota Press.
Bramard, J.B.; Burmaster, D.E. (1992) Bivanate
distributions for height and weight, men and
women in the United States. Risk Anal.
12(2):267-275.
Brorby, G.; Fmley B. (1993) Standard probability
density functions for routine use in environmental
health risk assessment. Presented at the Society of
Risk Analysis Annual Meeting, December 1993,
Savannah, GA.
Buhyoff, G.J.; Rauscher, H.M.; Hull, R.B.; Killeen, K.;
Kirk,R.C. (1982) User's Manual for Statistical
Processing System (version 3C. 1). Southeast
Technical Associates, Inc.
Costeff, H. (1966) A simple empirical formula for
calculating approximate surface area in children.
Arch. Dis. Childh. 41:681-683.
Driver, J.H.; Konz, J.J.; Whitmyre, G.K. (1989) Soil
adherence to human skin. Bull. Environ. Contain.
Toxicol. 43:814-820.
Dubois, D.; Dubois, E.F. (1916) A formula to estimate
the approximate surface area if height and weight
be known. Arch, of Intern. Med. 17:863-871.
Gehan, E.; George, G.L. (1970) Estimation of human
body surface area from height and weight. Cancer
Chemother. Rep. 54(4):225-235.
Geigy Scientific Tables (1981) Nomograms for
determination of body surface area from height and
mass. Lentner, C. (ed.). CIBA-Geigy
Corporation, West Caldwell, NJ. pp. 226-227.
George, S.L.; Gehan, E.A.; Haycock, G.B.; Schwartz,
G.J. (1979) Letters to the editor. J. Fed.
94(2):342.
Haycock, G.B.; Schwartz, G.J.; Wisotsky, D.H. (1978)
Geometric method for measuring body surface
area: A height-weight formula validated in infants,
children, and adults. J. Fed. 93(l):62-66.
Holmes, K.K.; Kissel, J.C.; Richter,K.Y. (1996)
Investigation of the influence of oil on soil
adherence to skin. J. Soil Contam. 5(4):301-308.
Kissel, I; Richter, K.; Duff, R.; Fenske, R. (1996a)
Factors Affecting Soil Adherence to Skin in Hand-
Press Trials. Bull. Environ. Contamin. Toxicol.
56:722-728.
Kissel, I; Richter, K.; Fenske, R. (1996b) Field
measurements of dermal soil loading attributable to
various activities: Implications for exposure
assessment. Risk Anal. 16(1): 116-125.
Lepow, M.L.; Bruckman, L.; Gillette, M.; Markowitz, S.;
Rubino, R.; Kapish, J. (1975) Investigations into
sources of lead in the environment of urban children.
Environ. Res. 10:415-426.
Murray, D.M.; Burmaster, D.E. (1992) Estimated
distributions for total surface area of men and women
in the United States. J. Expos. Anal. Environ.
Epidemiol. 3(4):451-462.
Palisade. (1992) @Risk users guide. Palisade
Corporation, Newfield, NY.
Phillips, L.J.; Fares, R.J.; Schweer, L.G. (1993)
Distributions of total skin surface area to body
weight ratios for use in dermal exposure
assessments. J. Expos. Anal. Environ. Epidemiol.
3(3):331-338.
Popendorf, W.J.; Leffingwell, IT. (1976) Regulating
OP pesticide residues for farmworker protection. In:
Residue Review 82. New York, NY: Springer-
Verlag New York, Inc., 1982. pp. 125-201.
QueHee, S.S.; Peace, B.; Clark, C.S.; Boyle, J.R.;
Bornschem, R.L.; Hammond, P.B. (1985)
Evolution of efficient methods to sample lead
sources, such as house dust and hand dust, in the
homes of children. Environ. Res. 38: 77-95.
Rochon, J.; Kalsbeek, W.D. (1983) Variance estimation
from multi-stage sample survey data: the jackknife
repeated replicate approach. Presented at 1983 SAS
Users Group Conference, New Orleans, Louisiania,
January 1983.
Roels, H.A.; Buchet, J.P.; Lauwenys, R.R.; Branx, P.;
Claeys-Thoreau, F.; Lafontaine, A.; Verduyn, G.
(1980) Exposure to lead by oral and pulmonary
routes of children living in the vicinity of a primary
lead smelter. Environ. Res. 22:81-94.
Sedman, R.M. (1989) The development of applied
action levels for soil contact: a scenario for the
exposure of humans to soil in a residential setting.
Environ. Health Perspect. 79:291-313.
Sendroy, J.; Cecchini, L.P. (1954) Determination of
human body surface area from height and weight. J.
Appl. Physiol. 7(1):3-12.
Page
6-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Thompson, K.M.; Burmaster, D.E. (1991) Parametric
distributions for soil ingestion by children. Risk .
Anal. ll(2):339-342.
U. S. EPA. (1985) Development of statistical
distributions or ranges of standard factors used in
exposure assessments. Washington, DC: Office
of Research and Development, Office of Health
and Environmental Assessment. EPA
600/8-85-010. Available from: NTIS,
Springfield, VA. PB85-242667.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Exposure factors handbook.
Washington, DC: Office of Research and
Development, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment. EPA/600/18-89/043.
U.S. EPA. (1992a) Guidelines for exposure assessment.
Federal Register. FR 57:104:22888-22938. May
29, 1992.
U.S. EPA. (1992b) Dermal exposure assessment:
principles and applications. Washington, DC:
Office of Research and Development, Office of
Health and Environmental Assessment/OHEA. U.S.
EPA/600/8-9-91.
Van Graan, C.H. (1969) The determination of body
surface area. Supplement to the South African J. of
Lab. and Clm. Med. 8-2-69.
Versar, Inc. (1991) Analysis of the impact of exposure
assumptions on risk assessment of chemicals in the
environment, phase II: uncertainly analyses of
existing exposure assessment methods. Draft
Report. Prepared for Exposure Assessment Task
Group, Chemical Manufacturers Association,
Washington, DC.
Yang, J.J.; Roy, T.A.; Krueger, A.I; Neil, W.; Mackerer,
C.R. (1989) In vitro and in vivo percutaneous
absorption of benzo[a]pyrene from petroleum crude-
fortified soil in the rat. Bull. Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 43: 207-214.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-11
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Biologically
Effective
Exposure >
^^x^
,-11 : i
Dose
Internal
Potential Applied ^
Dose ^^- Dose ^^^ .S^ 1
1^^^ ^^
^ nfn
Metabolism
Skin
Uptake
r
an ^- Effect
Figure 6-1. Schematic of Dose and Exposure: Dermal Route
Source: U.S. EPA, 1992a.
Table 6-1. Summary of Equation Parameters for Calculating Adult Body Surface Area
Body Part
Head
Female
Male
Trunk
Female
Male
Upper Extremities
Female
Male
Arms
Female
Male
Upper Arms
Male
Forearms
Male
Hands
Female
Male
Lower Extremities0
Legs
Thighs
Lower legs
Feet
a SA = a0 Wal H32
Equation for surface areas (m2)
N ao W'1 H12
57 0.0256 0.124 0.189
32 0.0492 0.339 -0.0950
57 0.188 0.647 -0.304
32 0.0240 0.808 -0.0131
57 0.0288 0.341 0.175
48 0.00329 0.466 0.524
13 0.00223 0.201 0.748
32 0.00111 0.616 0.561
6 8.70 0.741 -1.40
6 0.326 0.858 -0.895
12" 0.0131 0.412 0.0274
32 0.0257 0.573 -0.218
105 0.00286 0.458 0.696
45 0.00240 0.542 0.626
45 0.00352 0.629 0.379
45 0.000276 0.416 0.973
45 0.000618 0.372 0.725
P R2 S.E.
0.01 0.302 0.00678
0.01 0.222 0.0202
0.001 0.877 0.00567
0.001 0.894 0.0118
0.001 0.526 0.00833
0.001 0.821 0.0101
0.01 0.731 0.00996
0.001 0.892 0.0177
0.25 0.576 0.0387
0.05 0.897 0.0207
0.1 0.447 0.0172
0.001 0.575 0.0187
0.001 0.802 0.00633
0.001 0.780 0.0130
0.001 0.739 0.0149
0.001 0.727 0.0149
0.001 0.651 0.0147
W = Weight in kilograms; H = Height in centimeters; P = Level of significance; R2 = Coefficient of determination;
SA = Surface Area
S.E. = Standard error; N = Number of observations
One observation for a female whose body weight exceeded the 95 percentile was not used.
c Although two separate regressions were marginally indicated by the F test, pooling was done for consistency with individual components of
lower extremities.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1985.
Page
6-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-2. Surface Area of Adult Males in Square
Meters
Percentile
Bodv part
Total
Head
Trunk"
Upper extremities
Arms
Forearms
Hands
Lower extremities
Legs
Thighs
Lower legs
Feet
5
1.66
0.119
0.591
0.321
0.241
0.106
0.085
0.653
0.539
0.318
0.218
0.114
10
1.72
0.121
0.622
0.332
0.252
0.111
0.088
0.676
0.561
0.331
0.226
0.118
15
1.76
0.123
0.643
0.340
0.259
0.115
0.090
0.692
0.576
0.341
0.232
0.120
25
1.82
0.124
0.674
0.350
0.270
0.121
0.093
0.715
0.597
0.354
0.240
0.124
50
1.94
0.130
0.739
0.372
0.291
0.131
0.099
0.761
0.640
0.382
0.256
0.131
75
2.07
0.135
0.807
0.395
0.314C
0.144C
0.105
0.810
0.686C
0.411C
0.272
0.138
85
2.14
0.138
0.851
0.408
0.328C
0.151°
0.109
0.838
0.714C
0.429C
0.282
0.142
90
2.20
0.140
0.883
0.418
0.339C
0.157C
0.112
0.858
0.734C
0.443C
0.288
0.145
95
2.28
0.143
0.935C
0.432C
0.354C
0.166C
0.117
0.888C
0.762C
0.463C
0.299
0.149
S.E.a
0.00374
0.0202
0.0118
0.00101
0.00387
0.0207
0.0187
0.00633
0.0130
0.0149
0.0149
0.0147
" Standard error for the 5-95 percentile of each body part.
b Trunk includes neck.
0 Percentile estimates exceed the maximum measured values upon which the equations are based.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1985.
Table 6-3. Surface Area of Adult Females in Square Meters
Percentile
Body part
Total
Head
Trunk"
Upper extremities
Arms
Hands
Lower extremities
Legs
Thighs
Lower legs
Feet
5
1.45
0.106
0.490
0.260
0.210
0.0730
0.564
0.460
0.271
0.186
0.100
10
1.49
0.107
0.507
0.265
0.214
0.0746
0.582
0.477
0.281
0.192
0.103
15
1.53
0.108
0.518
0.269
0.217
0.0757
0.595
0.488
0.289
0.197
0.105
25
1.58
0.109
0.538
0.274
0.221
0.0777
0.615
0.507
0.300
0.204
0.108
50
1.69°
0.111
0.579
0.287
0.230
0.0817
0.657
0.546
0.326
0.218
0.114
75
1.82
0.113
0.636
0.301
0.238C
0.0868C
0.704
0.592
0.357
0.233
0.121
85
1.91
0.114
0.677
0.311
0.243C
0.0903°
0.736
0.623
0.379
0.243
0.126
90
1.98
0.115
0.704
0.318
0.247C
0.0927C
0.757
0.645
0.394
0.249
0.129
95
2.09
0.117
0.752
0.329
0.253°
0.0966C
0.796
0.683C
0.421°
0.261
0.134
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S.E.'
00374
00678
00567
00833
00996
0172
00633
0.0130
0
0
0
0149
0149
0147
" Standard error for the 5-95 percentile of each body part.
b Trunk includes neck.
0 Percentile estimates exceed the maximum measured values upon which the equations are based.
Source: U.S. EPA,
1985.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-13
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-4. Surface Area by Body Part for Adults (m2)
Men
Body part
Head
Trunk
(Incl. Neck)
Upper extremities
Arms
Upper arms
Forearms
Hands
Lower extremities
Legs
Thighs
Lower legs
Feet
TOTAL
N-
32
32
48
32
6
6
32
48
32
32
32
32
Mean
0.118
0.569
0.319
0.228
0.143
0.114
0.084
0.636
0.505
0.198
0.207
0.112
1.94C
(sd)b
(0.0160)
(0.104)
(0.0461)
(0.0374)
(0.0143)
(0.0127)
(0.0127)
(0.0994)
(0.0885)
(0.1470)
(0.0379)
(0.0177)
(0.00374)"
Min.
0.090
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
306
169
109
122
0945 -
0596 -
283
221
128
0.093
0
1
0611 -
66
Max.
0.161
0.893
0.429
0.292
0.156
0.136
0.113
0.868
0.656
0.403
0.296
0.156
2.28e
N
57
57
57
13
-
-
12
57
13
13
13
13
Mean
0.110
0.542
0.276
0.210
-
-
0.0746
0.626
0.488
0.258
0.194
0.0975
1.69C
Women
(sd)
(0.00625)
(0.0712)
(0.0241)
(0.0129)
-
-
(0.00510)
(0.0675)
(0.0515)
(0.0333)
(0.0240)
(0.00903)
(0.00374)"
Min.
0.0953
0.437
0.215
0.193
-
-
0.0639
0.492
0.423
0.258
0.165
0.0834
1.45
Max.
0.127
0.867
0.333
0.235
-
-
0.0824
0.809
0.585
0.360
0.229
0.115
2.09e
" number of observations.
b standard deviation.
0 median (see Table 6-2).
" standard error.
e percentiles (5th - 95th).
Source: Adapted from U.S.
EPA, 1985
Table 6-5. Percentage of Total Body Surface Area by Part for Adults
Men
Body part
Head
Trunk
Upper extremities
Arms
Upper arms
Forearms
Hands
Lower extremities
Legs
Thighs
Lower legs
Feet
N'
32
32
48
32
6
6
32
48
32
32
32
32
Mean
7.8
35.9
18.8
14.1
7.4
5.9
5.2
37.5
31.2
18.4
12.8
7.0
(s.d.)b
(1.0)
(2.1)
(1.1)
(0.9)
(0.5)
(0.3)
(0.5)
(1.9)
(1.6)
(1.2)
(1.0)
(0.5)
Min.
6.1
30.5
16.4
12.5
6.7
5.4
4.6
33.3
26.1
15.2
11.0
6.0
Max.
10.6
41.4
21.0
15.5
8.1
6.3
7.0
41.2
33.4
20.2
15.8
7.9
N
57
57
57
13
-
-
12
57
13
13
13
13
Mean
7.1
34.8
17.9
14.0
-
-
5.1
40.3
32.4
19.5
12.8
6.5
Women
(s.d.)
(0.6)
(1.9)
(0.9)
(0.6)
-
-
(0.3)
(1.6)
(1.6)
(1.1)
(1.0)
(0.3)
Min.
5.6
32.8
15.6
12.4
-
-
4.4
36.0
29.8
18.0
11.4
6.0
Max.
8.1
41.7
19.9
14.8
-
-
5.4
43.2
35.3
21.7
14.9
7.0
" Number of observations.
b Standard deviation.
Source: Adapted from U.S
EPA, 1985.
Page
6-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-6. Tot
Age (yr)b 5
2 < 3 0.527
3<4 0.585
4<5 0.633
5 < 6 0.692
6 < 7 0.757
7 < 8 0.794
8<9 0.836
9<10 0.932
10<11 1.01
IK 12 1.00
12<13 1.11
13<14 1.20
14<15 1.33
15<16 1.45
16<17 1.55
17<18 1.54
3<6 0.616
6 < 9 0.787
9<12 0.972
12<15 1.19
15<18 1.50
10
0.544
0.606
0.658
0.721
0.788
0.832
0.897
0.966
1.04
1.06
1.13
1.24
1.39
1.49
1.59
1.56
0.636
0.814
1.00
1.24
1.55
15
0.552
0.620
0.673
0.732
0.809
0.848
0.914
0.988
1.06
1.12
1.20
1.27
1.45
1.52
1.61
1.62
0.649
0.834
1.02
1.27
1.59
d Body Surface Area of Male Children in Square Metersa
25
0.569
0.636
0.689
0.746
0.821
0.877
0.932
1.00
1.10
1.16
1.25
1.30
1.51
1.60
1.66
1.69
0.673
0.866
1.07
1.32
1.65
a Lack of height measurements for children <2 years in NHANES II precluded c
Estimated values calcul
Source: U.S. EPA. 1985.
ited using NHANES II
data.
Percentile
50
0.603
0.664
0.731
0.793
0.866
0.936
1.00
1.07
1.18
1.23
1.34
1.47
1.61
1.70
1.76
1.80
0.728
0.931
1.16
1.49
1.75
75 85
90 95
0.629 0.643 0.661 0.682
0.700 0.719 0.729 0.764
0.771 0,796 0.809 0.845
0.840 0.864 0.895 0.918
0.915 0.957
0.993
1.06
1.13
1.28
1.40
1.47
1.62
1.73
1.79
1.87
1.91
0.785 0
1.01
1.28
1.64
1.86
.01
.12
.16
.35
.47
.52
.67
.78
.84
.01 .06
.06 .11
.17 .24
.25 .29
.40 .48
.53 .60
.62 .76
.75 .81
.84 .91
.90 2.02
.98 2.03 2.16
.96 2.03 2.09
817 0.842 0.876
.05
.36
.73
.09 1.14
.42 1.52
.77 1.85
.94 2.01 2.11
dculation of surface areas for this age group.
Table 6-7. Total Body Surface Area of Female Children in Square Metersa
Percentile
Age (yr)b
2<3
3<4
4<5
5<6
6<7
7<8
8<9
9<10
10<11
11 <12
12<13
13<14
14<15
15<16
16<17
17<18
3<6
6<9
9<12
12<15
15<18
5
0.516
0.555
0.627
0.675
0.723
0.792
0.863
0.897
0.981
.06
.13
.21
.31
.38
.40
.42
0.585
0.754
0.957
1.21
1.40
10
0.532
0.570
0.639
0.700
0.748
0.808
0.888
0.948
1.01
1.09
1.19
1.28
1.34
1.49
1.46
1.49
0.610
0.790
0.990
1.27
1.44
15 25
0.544 0.557
0.589 0.607
0.649 0.666
0.714 0.735
0.770 0.791
0.819 0.854
0.913 0.932
0.969
1.05
1.12
1.24
1.32
1.39
1.43
1.48
1.51
0.630
0.804
1.03
1.30
1.47
.01
.10
.16
.27
.38
.45
.47
.53
.56
1654
1845
.06
.37
.51
a Lack of height measurements for children <2 years in NHANES II precluded c
Estimated v
alues calculated using NHANES II
data.
50 75 85
0.579 0.610 0.623
0.649 0.688 0.707
0.706 0.758 0.777
0.779 0.830 0.870
0.843 0.914 0.961
0.917 0.977
1.00
1.06
1.17
1.30
1.40
1.48
1.55
1.57
1.60
1.63
0.711
0.919
1.16
1.48
1.60
.05
.14
.29
.40
.51
.59
.66
.67
.69
.73
1770
.00
.31
.61
.70
.02
.08
22
.34
.50
.62
.67
.74
.72
.79
.80
1808
.04
.38
.68
.76
dculation of surface areas for this age group.
90
0.637
0.721
0.794
0.902
0.989
1.06
1.11
1.31
1.37
1.56
1.64
1.75
1.76
1.76
1.84
1.84
0.831
1.07
1.43
1.74
1.82
95
0.653
0.737
0.820
0.952
1.03
1.13
1.18
1.41
1.43
1.62
1.70
1.86
1.88
1.83
1.91
1.94
0.879
1.13
1.56
1.82
1.92
Source: U.S. EPA. 1985.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-15
-------
I
Table 6-8. Percentage of Total Body Surface Area by Body Part for Children
N
Age M:F
(yr)
<1 2:0
1<2 1:1
2<3 1:0
3<4 0:5
4<5 1:3
5<6
6<7 1:0
7<8
8<9
9<10 0:2
IK 12
12<13 1:0
13<14 1:0
14< 15
15<16
16<17 1:0
17<18 1:0
Head Trunk
Mean Min-Max Mean Min-Max
18.2 18.2-18.3 35.7 34.8-36.6
16.5 16.5-16.5 35.5 34.5-36.6
14.2 38.5
13.6 13.3-14.0 31.9 29.9-32.8
13.8 12.1-15.3 31.5 30.5-32.4
13.1 35.1
12.0 11.6-12.5 34.2 33.4-34.9
8.74 34.7
9.97 32.7
7.96 32.7
7.58 31.7
Percent of Total
Arms Hands Legs Feet
Mean Min-Max Mean Min-Max Mean Min-Max Mean Min-Max
13.7 12.4-15.1 5.3 5.21-5.39 20.6 18.2-22.9 6.54 6.49-6.59
13.0 12.8-13.1 5.68 5.57-5.78 23.1 22.1-24.0 6.27 5.84-6.70
11.8 5.30 23.2 7.07
14.4 14.2-14.7 6.07 5.83-6.32 26.8 26.0-28.6 7.21 6.80-7.88
14.0 13.0-15.5 5.70 5.15-6.62 27.8 26.0-29.3 7.29 6.91-8.10
13.1 4.71 27.1 6.90
12.3 11.7-12.8 5.30 5.15-5.44 28.7 28.5-28.8 7.58 7.38-7.77
13.7 5.39 30.5 7.03
12.1 5.11 32.0 8.02
13.1 5.68 33.6 6.93
17.5 5.13 30.8 7.28
N: Number of subjects, male to female ratios.
Source: U.S.
EPA 1985.
Q
b
§
I
i
'"•N
I
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
A2e (vrs.'l
0-2
2.1 -17.9
> 18
All aees
" Stand
Mean
0.0641
0.0423
0.0284
0.0489
ard deviation.
Table 6-9.
Range
Min-Max
0.0421-0.1142
0.0268-0.0670
0.0200-0.0351
0.0200-0.1142
Descriptive Statistics for Surface Area/
SD"
0.0114
0.0076
0.0028
0.0187
SEb
7.84e-4
1.05e-3
7.68e-6
9.33e-4
5
0.0470
0.0291
0.0238
0.0253
Body Weight (SA/BW) Ratios (mz/kg)
10
0.0507
0.0328
0.0244
0.0272
25
0.0563
0.0376
0.0270
0.0299
Percentiles
50
0.0617
0.0422
0.0286
0.0495
75
0.0719
0.0454
0.0302
0.0631
90
0.0784
0.0501
0.0316
0.0740
95
0.0846
0.0594
0.0329
0.0788
b Standard error of the mean.
Source:
Phillies et al..
1993.
Table 6-10. Statistical Results for Total Body Surface Area Distributions (m2)
Mean
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mean
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Skewness
Kurtosis
Source: Murr
U.S. EPA
1.97
1.96
1.96
0.19
0.27
3.08
U.S. EPA
1.73
1.69
1.68
0.21
0.92
4.30
w and Burmaster. 1992
Bovd
1.95
1.94
1.91
0.18
0.26
3.06
Bovd
1.71
1.68
1.62
0.20
0.88
4.21
Men
DuBois and DuBois
1.94
1.94
1.90
0.17
0.23
3.02
Women
DuBois and DuBois
1.69
1.67
1.60
0.18
0.77
4.01
Costeff
1.89
1.89
1.90
0.16
0.04
2.92
Costeff
1.71
1.68
1.66
0.21
0.69
3.52
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
6-17
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
0.2S
Infant SA/BW Ratios: Lognorm<0.0641,0.0114)
Expected Value •
6.410E-02
13
0.2S *
I
0,2 -
0.05 r
Ages SA/BW Ratios: NomwKO.0489.0.0187)
Expected Value >
4.890E-OZ
1«
Adult SA/BW Ratios: Normal(0.0284,0.002S)
Expected Value •
2.840I-Q2
17
12
17
22
27 32
Value* in 10"-3
42
Figure 6-2. SA/BW Distributions for Infants, Adults, and All Ages Combined
Source: Phillips et ah, 1993.
Page
6-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
.OB
.00 J—t
1.00
1.00
Surface Area: Men
Frequency Distribution
1.50
2.00
ZSO
Area in m2, n=5.0QO, LHS
Surface Area: Women
Frequency Distribution
1.50
2.00
2.50
424
318
IB
J3
C
IB
3
O
3.00
3.00
Area in m^, n=5.QQO. LHS
Figure 6-3. Frequency Distributions for the Surface Area of Men and Women
Source: Murray and Burmaster, 1992.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
6-19
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-11. Summary of Field Studies
Activity
Indoor
Tae Kwon Do
Greenhouse Workers
Indoor Kids No. 1
Indoor Kids No. 2
Outdoor
Daycare Kids No. la
Daycare Kids No. Ib
Daycare Kids No.2c
Daycare Kids No. 3
Soccer No. 1
Soccer No. 2
Soccer No. 3
Groundskeepers No. 1
Groundskeepers No. 2
Groundskeepers No. 3
Groundskeepers No. 4
Groundskeepers No. 5
Landscape/Rockery
Irrigationlnstallers
Gardeners No. 1
Month
Feb.
Mar.
Jan.
Feb.
Aug.
Aug.
Sept.
Nov.
Nov.
Mar.
Nov.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Aug.
Aug.
June
Oct.
Aug.
Event"
(hrs)
1.5
5.25
2
2
Nb
7
2
4
6
Indoor Totals
3.5 6
4
8
8
0.67
1.5
1.5
1.5
4.25
8
4.25
8
9
3
4
6
5
4
8
8
7
2
5
7
7
8
4
6
8
M
6
1
3
4
19
5
5
4
3
8
0
0
1
3
5
4
6
3
6
1
F
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
0
8
7
1
2
2
3
2
1
0
7
Age
8-42
37-39
6-13
3-13
14 5
1-6.5
1-6.5
1-4
1-4.5
13-15
24-34
24-34
29-52
22-37
30-62
22-38
19-64
27-43
23-41
16-35
Conditions
Carpeted floor
Plant watering,spraying, soil
blending, sterilization
Playing on carpeted floor
Playing on carpeted floor
Indoors: linoleum surface;
outdoors: grass, bare earth, barked
area
Indoors: linoleum surface;
outdoors: grass, bare earth, barked
area
Indoors, low napped carpeting,
linoleum surfaces
Indoors: linoleum surface, outside:
grass, bare earth, barked area
Half grass-half bare earth
All-weather field (sand-ground
tires)
All-weather field (sand-ground
tires)
Campus grounds, urban
horticulture center, arboretum
Campus grounds,urban horticulture
center, arboretum
Campus grounds,urban horticulture
center, arboretum
Campus grounds,urban horticulture
center, arboretum
Campus grounds,urban horticulture
center, arboretum
Digging (manual andmechanical),
rock moving
Landscaping,surface restoration
Weeding, pruning,digging a trench
Clothing
All in longsleeve-long pants martial
arts uniform, sleeves rolled back,
barefoot
Long pants, elbow length short sleeve
shirt, no gloves
3 of 4 short pants, 2 of 4 short sleeves,
socks, no shoes
5of 6 long pants, 5 of 6 long sleeves,
socks, no shoes
4 of 6 in long pants, 4 of 6 short
sleeves, shoes
4 of 6 in long pants, 4 of 6 short
sleeves, no shoes
4 of 5 long pants, 3of 5 long sleeves,
all barefoot for part of the day
All long pants, 3 of 4 long sleeves,
socks and shoes
6 of 8 long sleeves, 4 of 8 long pants, 3
of 4 short pants and shin guards
All in short sleeve shirts, shorts, knee
socks, shin guards
All in short sleeve shirts, shorts, knee
socks, shin guards
All in long pants, intermittent use of
gloves
All in long pants, intermittent use of
gloves
All in long pants, intermittent use of
gloves
5 of 7 in short sleeve shirts, intermittent
use of gloves
5 of 8 in short sleeve shirts, intermittent
use of gloves
All long pants, 2 long sleeves, all socks
and boots
All in long pants, 3 of 6 short sleeve or
sleeveless shirts
6 of 8 long pants, 7 of 8 short sleeves,
1 sleeveless, socks, shoes, intermittent
use of gloves
Page
6-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-11. Summary of Field Studies (continued)
Activity
Gardeners No. 2
Rugby No. 1
Rugby No. 2
Rugby No. 3
Archeologists
Construction Workers
Utility Workers No. 1
Utility Workers No. 2
Equip. Operators No.l
Equip. Operators No. 2
Farmers No. 1
Farmers No. 2
Reed Gatherers
Kids-in-mud No. 1
Kids-in-mud No. 2
Month
Aug.
Mar.
July
Sept.
July
Sept.
July
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
May
July
Aug.
Sept.
Sept.
Event"
(hrs)
4
1.75
2
2.75
11.5
8
9.5
9.5
8
8
2
2
2
0.17
0.33
Nb
7
8
8
7
7
8
5
6
4
4
4
6
4
6
6
Outdoor Totals
M
2
8
8
7
3
8
5
6
4
4
2
4
0
5
5
181
F
5
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
4
1
1
i2
a Event duration
b Number of subject
c Activities were confined to the house
Sources: Kissel et al., 1996b; Holmes et al., 1996 (submitted for
Age
26-52
20-22
23-33
24-30
16-35
21-30
24-45
23-44
21-54
21-54
39-44
18-43
42-67
9-14
9-14
5 56
Conditions
Weeding, pruning, digging a
trench, picking fruit, cleaning
Mixed grass-barewet field
Grass field (80% oftime) and all-
weather field (mix of gravel, sand,
and clay) (20% oftime)
Compacted mixedgrass and bare
earth field
Digging withtrowel, screening dirt,
sorting
Mixed bare earth and concrete
surfaces, dust and debris
Cleaning, fixing mains, excavation
(backhoe and shovel)
Cleaning, fixing mains, excavation
(backhoe and shovel)
Earth scraping withheavy
machinery, dusty conditions
Earth scraping withheavy
machinery, dusty conditions
Manual weeding,mechanical
cultivation
Manual weeding,mechanical
cultivation
Tidal flats
Lake shoreline
Lake shoreline
Clothing
3 of 7 long pants, 5of 7 short sleeves,
sleeveless, socks, shoes, no gloves
All in short sleeve shirts, shorts,
variable sock lengths
All in shorts, 7 of 8 in short sleeve
shirts, 6 of 8 in low socks
1
All short pants, 7 of 8 short or rolled up
sleeves, socks, shoes
6 of 7 short pants,all short sleeves, 3 no
shoes or socks, 2 sandals
5 of 8 pants,? of 8 short sleeves, all
socks and shoes
All long pants,short sleeves, socks,
boots, gloves sometimes
All long pants, 5 of 6 short sleeves,
socks, boots, gloves sometimes
All long pants, 3 of 4 short sleeves,
socks, boots, 2 of 4 gloves
All long pants, 3 of 4 short sleeves,
socks, boots, 1 gloves
All in long pants, heavy shoes, short
sleeve shirts, no gloves
2 of 6 short, 4 of 61ong pants, 1 of 6
long sleeve shirt, no gloves
2 of 4 shortsleeve shirts/knee length
pants, all wore shoes
All in short sleeve T-shirts, shorts,
barefoot
All in short sleeve T-shirts, shorts,
barefoot
publication).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-21
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-12. Geometric Mean and Geometric Standard Deviations of
Soil Adherence by Activity and Body Region
Post-activity Dermal Soil Loadings (mg/cm2)
Activity
Indoor
Tae Kwon Do
GreenhouseWorkers
Indoor Kids No. 1
Indoor Kids No. 2
Daycare Kids No. la
Daycare Kids No. Ib
Daycare Kids No. 2
Daycare Kids No. 3
Outdoor
Soccer No. 1
Soccer No. 2
Soccer No. 3
GroundskeepersNo. 1
Groundskeepers No. 2
GroundskeepersNo. 3
Groundskeepers No. 4
GroundskeepersNo. 5
Landscape/Rockery
Irrigation Installers
Gardeners No. 1
N*
7
2
4
6
6
6
5
4
8
8
7
2
5
7
7
8
4
6
8
Hands
0.0063
1.9
0.043
0.0073
1.9
0.014
1.5
0.11
1.9
0.15
2.1
0.073
1.6
0.036
1.3
0.11
1.8
0.035
3.9
0.019
1.5
0.15
0.098
2.1
0.030
2.3
0.045
1.9
0.032
1.7
0.072
2.1
0.19
1.6
0.20
1.9
Arms
0.0019
4.1
0.0064
0.0042
1.9
0.0041
2.0
0.026
1.9
0.031
1.8
0.023
1.4
0.012
1.2
0.011
2.0
0.0043
2.2
0.0029
2 2
0.005
0.0021
2.6
0.0022
1.9
0.014
1.8
0.022
2.8
0.030
2.1
0.018
3.2
0.050
2.1
Legs
0.0020
2.0
0.0015
0.0041
2.3
0.0031
1.5
0.030
1.7
0.023
1.2
0.011
1.4
0.014
3.0
0.031
3.8
0.014
5.3
0.0081
1.6
0.0010
1.5
0.0009
1.8
0.0008
1.9
0.0010
1.4
0.0054
1.8
0.072
Faces
0.0050
0.012
1.5
0.016
1.5
0.012
1.6
0.0021
0.010
2.0
0.0044
2.6
0.0026
1.6
0.0039
2.1
0.0057
1.9
0.0063
1.3
0.058
1.6
Feet
0.0022
2.1
0.012
1.4
0.0091
1.7
0.079
2.4
0.13
1.4
0.044
1.3
0.0053
5.1
0.018
0.0040
0.018
0.17
Page
6-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-12. Geometric Mean and Geometric Standard Deviations of
Soil Adherence by Activity and Body Region (continued)
Post-activity Dermal Soil Loadings (mg/cm2)
Activity
Gardeners No. 2
Rugby No. 1
Rugby No. 2
Rugby No. 3
Archeologists
Construction Workers
Utility Workers No. 1
Utility Workers No. 2
Equip. Operators No. 1
Equip. Operators No. 2
Farmers No. 1
Farmers No. 2
Reed Gatherers
Kids-in-mud No. 1
Kids-in-mud No. 2
* Number of subjects.
Sources: Kissel et al., 1996b;
N*
7
8
8
7
7
8
5
6
4
4
4
6
4
6
6
Holmes et a
Hands
0.18
3.4
0.40
1.7
0.14
1.4
0.049
1.7
0.14
1.3
0.24
1.5
0.32
1.7
0.27
2.1
0.26
2.5
0.32
1.6
0.41
1.6
0.47
1.4
0.66
1.8
35
2.3
58
2.3
Arms
0.054
2.9
0.27
1.6
0.11
1.6
0.031
1.3
0.041
1.9
0.098
1.5
0.20
2.7
0.30
1.8
0.089
1.6
0.27
1.4
0.059
3.2
0.13
2 2
0.036
2.1
11
6.1
11
3.8
Legs
0.022
2.0
0.36
1.7
0.15
1.6
0.057
1.2
0.028
4.1
0.066
1.4
0.0058
2.7
0.037
3.9
0.16
9.2
36
2.0
9.5
2.3
Faces
0.047
1.6
0.059
2.7
0.046
1.4
0.020
1.5
0.050
1.8
0.029
1.6
0.10
1.5
0.10
1.5
0.10
1.4
0.23
1.7
0.018
1.4
0.041
3.0
Feet
0.26
-
0.24
1.4
0.63
7.1
24
3.6
6.7
12.4
., 1996 (submitted for publication).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
6-23
-------
I
H
Table 6-13. Summary of Surface Area Studies
Surface Area
Study
No. of Individuals
Type of Surface Area
Measurement
Recommended
Formulae Used
Population
Surveyed
Comments
KEY STUDIES
Phillips etal. (1993)
U.S. EPA (1985)
RELEVANT STUDIES
AICH(1994)
Murray and Burmaster
(1992)
Based on data from U.S. NA
EPA (1985): 401
individuals
calculated surface area to body
weight ratios
401 individuals
Based on Gehan and George SA=0.0239*W0517*Ff"
(1970)
Based on data from U.S. @Risk simulation software
EPA (1989); Brainardet
al. (1991); Brorby and
Finley (1993)
Various
Based on data from U.S.
EPA (1985): N = 401;
Dubois and Dubois
(1976): N= 9;
Boyd (1935): N = 231;
Costeff (1966): N= 220
Calculated based on
regression equation using
the data of U.S. EPA (1985)
Various
Children Developed distributions of
Adults SA/BW and calculated summary
statistics for 3 age groups and the
combined data set
Children Provides statistical distribution
Adults data for total SA and SA of body
parts
Adults Distribution data for: adult men
Children and women and both sexes
combined; total skin area,
children 8-18 years; exposed skin
area (hands and forearms); head;
upper body
Children Analysis of and comparision of
Adults four models developed by
Dubois & Dubois (1916), Boyd
(1935), U.S. EPA (1985), and
Costeff (1966). Presents
frequency distribtions
Q
2
&
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-14. Summary of Recommended Values for Skin Surface Area
Surface Area
Adults
Whole body and body
parts
Bathing/swimming
Outdoor soil contact
Children
Whole body
Body parts
Central Tendency
see Tables 6-4 and 6-5
20,000 cm2
5,000cm1 '
Upper Percentile
see Tables 6-2 and 6-3
• 23,000cm2
5,800cm2 •. .
see Tables 6-6 and 6-7
, , see Table 6-8
Multiple Percentiles
see Tables 6-2 and 6-3
see Tables 6-6 and 6-7
see Table 6-8
Table 6-15. Confidence in Body Surface Area Measurement Recommendations
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of Peer Review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection
period
• Validity of approach
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement among researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
Studies were from peer reviewed journal articles.
EPA report was peer reviewed before distribution.
The journals used have wide circulation.
EPA report available from National Technical Information
Service.
Experimental methods are well-described.
Experiments measured skin area directly.
Experiments conducted in the U.S.
Re-analysis of primary data in more detail by two different
investigators .
Neither rapidly changing nor controversial area; estimates
made in 1935 deemed to be accurate and subsequently used
by others.
Not relevant to exposure factor; parameter not time
dependent.
Approach used by other investigators; not challenged in other
studies.
Not statistically representative of U.S. population.
Individual variability due to age, race, or gender not studied.
Objective subject selection and measurement methods used;
results reproduced by others with different methods.
Measurement variations are low; adequately described by
normal statistics.
1 experiment; two independent re-analyses of this data set.
Consistent results obtained with different analyses; but from
a single set of measurements.
This factor can be directly measured. It is not subject to
dispute. Influence of age, race, or gender have not been
detailed adequately in these studies.
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
Low
Low
NA
High
Medium
Low
High
Low/Medium
Medium
Medium
High
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-25
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-16. Recommendations for Adult Body Surface Area
Bathing and Swimming
Outdoor Activities
Water Contact . .
50th •. • '. 9Sth . '
. 20,000 cma 23,000 cm2 ' - '•'
.• . • Soil Contact ; • . • '
..' •' 50th ' . ' 95th ' ••
.'••.' . 5,000cm5 5,800cm2
, , . , , , , ^
Source: U.S. EPA, 1992. .'.'•"•..• '.'.'.' • . • ' ..
'.-,••• • ' •
Table 6-17. Summary of Soil Adherence Studies
Study
KEY STUDIES
Kissel etal., 1995a
Kissell et al., 1996b
RELEVANT STUDIES
Driver et al., 1989
Lepowetal., 1975
QueHeeetal., 1985
Roels et al., 1980
Sedman, 1989
Yang etal., 1989
Size Fraction Soil
Gum) Adherence
(mg/cm2)
<150, 150- Various
200, >250
Various
<150 1.40
<250 0.95
unsieved 0.58
0.5
1.5
0.9-1.5
0.9; 0.5
<150 9
Population
Surveyed
28 adults
24 children
12 children
89 adults
Adults
Adults
Adults
10 children
1 adult
661 children
Children
Rats
Comments
Data presented for soil loadings by body
part. See Table 6-11.
Data presented by activity and body
part.
Used 5 soil types and 2-3 soil horizons
(top soils and subsoils); placed soil over
entire hand of test subject, excess
removed by shaking the hands.
Dirt from hands collected during play.
Represents only fraction of total present,
some dirt may be trapped in skin folds.
Assumed exposed area = 20 cm2. Test
subject was 14 years old.
Subjects lived near smelter in Brussels,
Belgium. Mean amount adhering to
soil was 0.159 g.
Used estimate of Roels et al. (1980) and
average surface of hand of an 11 year
old; used estimates of Lepow et al.
(1975), Roels etal. (1980), and Que
Hee et al. (1985) to develop mean of
0.5 mg/cm2.
Rat skin "monolayer" (i.e., minimal
amount of soil covering the skin); in
vitro and in vivo experiments.
Page
6-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 6 - Dermal
Table 6-18.
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of Peer Review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection
period
• Validity of approach
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement among researchers
Overall Rating
Confidence in Soil Adherence to Skin Recommendations
Rationale
Studies were from peer reviewed journal articles.
Articles were published in widely circulated journals.
Reports clearly describe experimental method.
The goal of the studies was to determine soil adherence to
skin.
Experiments were conducted in the U.S.
Experiments were directly measure soil adherence to skin;
exposure and dose of chemicals in soil were measured
indirectly or estimated from soil contact.
New studies were presented.
Seasonal factors may be important, but have not been studied
adequately.
Skin rinsing technique is a widely employed procedure.
Studies were limited to the State of Washington and may not
be representative of other locales.
Variability in soil adherence is affected by many factors
including soil properties, activity and individual behavior
patterns.
The studies attempted to measure soil adherence in selected
activities and conditions to identify important activities and
groups.
The experimental error is low and well controlled, but
application of results to other similar activities may be subject
to variation.
The experiments were controlled as they were conducted by
a few laboratories; activity patterns were studied by only one
laboratory.
Results from key study were consistent with earlier estimates
from relevant studies and assumptions, but are limited to
hand data.
Data are limited, therefore it is difficult to extrapolate from
experiments and field observations to general conditions .
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
High
Low
Low
High
Low/High
Medium
Medium
Low
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
6-27
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 6A
APPENDIX 6A
FORMULAE FOR TOTAL BODY SURFACE AREA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 6A-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 6A
APPENDIX 6A
FORMULAE FOR TOTAL BODY SURFACE AREA
Most formulae for estimating surface area (SA), relate height to weight to surface area. The following formula was
proposed by Gehan and George (1970):
SA = KWM (Eqn. 6A-1)
where:
SA = surface area in square meters;
W = weight in kg; and
K = constant.
While the above equation has been criticized because human bodies have different specific gravities and because
the surface area per unit volume differs for individuals with different body builds, it gives a reasonably good estimate of
surface area.
A formula published in 1916 that still finds wide acceptance and use is that of DuBois andDuBois. Their model
can be written:
SA = a0 H ' W 2 (Eqn. 6A-2)
where:
SA = surface area in square meters;
H = height in centimeters; and
W = weight in kg.
The values of a,, (0.007182), al (0.725), and a2 (0.425) were estimated from a sample of only nine individuals for
whom surface area was directly measured. Boyd (1935) stated that the Dubois formula was considered a reasonably
adequate substitute for measuring surface area. Nomograms for determining surface area from height and mass presented
in Volume I of the Geigy Scientific Tables (1981) are based on the DuBois and DuBois formula. In addition, a computerized
literature search conducted for this report identified several articles written in the last 10 years in which the DuBois and
DuBois formula was used to estimate body surface area.
Boyd (1935) developed new constants for the DuBois and DuBois model based on 231 direct measurements of
body surface area found in the literature. These data were limited to measurements of surface area by coating methods (122
cases), surface integration (93 cases), and triangulation (16 cases). The subjects were Caucasians of normal body build for
whom data on weight, height, and age (except for exact age of adults) were complete. Resulting values for the constants in
the DuBois and DuBois model were a0 = 0.01787, a\ = 0.500, and aj = 0.4838. Boyd also developed a formula based
exclusively on weight, which was inferior to the DuBois and DuBois formula based on height and weight.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 6A-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 6A
Gehan and George (1970) proposed another set of constants for the DuBois and DuBois model. The constants were
based on a total of 401 direct measurements of surface area, height, and weight of all postnatal subjects listed in Boyd
(1935). The methods used to measure these subjects were coating (163 cases), surface integration (222 cases), and
triangulation (16 cases).
Gehan and George (1970) used a least-squares method to identify the values of the constants. The values of the
constants chosen are those that minimize the sum of the squared percentage errors of the predicted values of surface area.
This approach was used because the importance of an error of 0.1 square meter depends on the surface area of the individual.
Gehan and George (1970) used the 401 observations summarized in Boyd (1935) in the least-squares method. The
following estimates of the constants were obtained: a0 = 0.02350, a\ = 0.42246, and a2 = 0.51456. Hence, their equation
for predicting surface area (SA) is:
SA = 0.02350 H0-42246 W0-51456 (Eqn. 6A-3)
or in logarithmic form:
In SA= -3.75080 + 0.42246 In H + 0.51456 In W (Eqn. 6A-4)
where:
SA = surface area in square meters;
H = height in centimeters; and
W = weight in kg.
This prediction explains more than 99 percent of the variations in surface area among the 401 individuals measured
(Gehan and George, 1970).
The equation proposed by Gehan and George (1970) was determined by the U.S. EPA (1985) as the best choice
for estimating total body surface area. However, the paper by Gehan and George gave insufficient information to estimate
the standard error about the regression. Therefore, the 401 direct measurements of children and adults (i.e., Boyd, 1935)
were reanalyzed in U.S. EPA (1985) using the formula of Dubois and Dubois (1916) and the Statistical Processing System
(SPS) software package to obtain the standard error.
The Dubois and Dubois (1916) formula uses weight and height as independent variables to predict total body
surface area (SA), and can be written as:
SA, = a0 H,31 W^2 e; (Eqn. 6A-5)
or in logarithmic form:
In (SA); = In a0 + % In H, + a2 In Wt + In et (Eqn. 6A-6)
where:
Sai = surface area of the i-th individual (m2);
Hi = height of the i-th individual (cm);
Wi = weight of the i-th individual (kg);
a0, at, and a2 = parameters to be estimated; and
a = a random error term with mean zero and constant variance.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
6A-4 August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 6A
Using the least squares procedure for the 401 observations, the following parameter estimates and their standard errors
were obtained:
The model is then:
or in logarithmic form:
=-3.73 (0.18), al = 0.417 (0.054), a2 = 0.517 (0.022)
= 0.0239H°-417W°-5
In SA = -3.73 + 0.417 In H + 0.517 In W
(Eqn. 6A-7)
(Eqn.
with a standard error about the regression of 0.00374. This model explains more than 99 percent of the total variation in
surface area among the observations, and is identical to two significant figures with the model developed by Gehan and
George (1970).
When natural logarithms of the measured surface areas are plotted against natural logarithms of the surface
predicted by the equation, the observed surface areas are symmetrically distributed around a line of perfect fit, with only a
few large percentage deviations. Only five subjects differed from the measured value by 25 percent or more. Because each
of the five subjects weighed less than 13 pounds, the amount of difference was small. Eighteen estimates differed from
measurements by 15 to 24 percent. Of these, 12 weighed less than 15 pounds each, 1 was overweight (5 feet 7 inches, 172
pounds), 1 was very thin (4 feet 11 inches, 78 pounds), and 4 were of average build. Since the same observer measured
surface area for these 4 subjects, the possibility of some bias in measured values cannot be discounted (Gehan and George
1970).
Gehan and George (1970) also considered separate constants for different age groups: less than 5 years old, 5 years
old to less than 20 years old, and greater than 20 years old. The different values for the constants are presented below:
Table 6A-1. Estimated Parameter Values for Different Age Intervals
Age
group
All ages
<5 years old
> 5 - <20 years old
> 20 years oldl
Number
of persons
401
229
42
30
a0
0.02350
0.02667
0.03050
0.01545
*i
0.42246
0.38217
0.35129
0.54468
a2
0.51456
0.53937
0.54375
0.46336
The surface areas estimated using the parameter values for all ages were compared to surface areas estimated by
the values for each age group for subjects at the 3rd, 50th, and 97th percentiles of weight and height. Nearly all differences
in surface area estimates were less than 0.01 square meter, and the largest difference was 0.03 m2 for an 18-year-old at the
97th percentile. The authors concluded that there is no advantage in using separate values of a0, als and a2 by age interval.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
6A-5
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 6A
Haycock et al. (1978) without knowledge of the work by Gehan and George (1970), developed values for the
parameters a,,, als and a2 for the DuBois and DuBois model. Their interest in making the DuBois and DuBois model more
accurate resulted from their work in pediatrics and the fact that DuBois and DuBois (1916) included only one child in their
study group, a severely undernourished girl who weighed only 13.8 pounds at age 21 months. Haycock et al. (1978) used
their own geometric method for estimating surface area from 34 body measurements for 81 subjects. Their study included
newborn infants (10 cases), infants (12 cases), children (40 cases), and adult members of the medical and secretarial staffs
of 2 hospitals (19 cases). The subj ects all had grossly normal body structure, but the sample included subj ects of widely
varying physique ranging from thin to obese. Black, Hispanic, and white children were included in their sample. The values
of the model parameters were solved for the relationship between surface area and height and weight by multiple regression
analysis. The least squares best fit for this equation yielded the following values for the three coefficients: a0 = 0.024265,
al = 0.3964, and a2 = 0.5378. The result was the following equation for estimating surface area:
SA = 0.024265 H03964 W05378 (Eqn. 6A-9)
expressed logarithmically as:
In SA = In 0.024265 + 0.3964 In H + 0.5378 In W (Eqn. 6A-10)
The coefficients for this equation agree remarkably with those obtained by Gehan and George (1970) for 401
measurements.
George et al. (1979) agree that a model more complex than the model of DuBois and DuBois for estimating surface
area is unnecessary. Based on samples of direct measurements by Boyd (1935) and Gehan and George (1970), and samples
of geometric estimates by Haycock et al. (1978), these authors have obtained parameters for the DuBois and DuBois model
that are different than those originally postulated in 1916. The DuBois and DuBois model can be written logarithmically
as:
In SA = In a0 + al In H + a2 In W (Eqn. 6A-11)
The values for a0, a^ and a2 obtained by the various authors discussed in this section are presented to follow:
Table 6A-2. Summary of Surface Area Parameter Values for the DuBois and DuBois Model
Author
(year)
DuBois and DuBois (1916)
Boyd (1935)
Gehan and George (1970)
Hay cock et al. (1978)
Number
of persons
9
231
401
81
a0
0.007184
0.01787
0.02350
0.024265
&i
0.725
0.500
0.42246
0.3964
a2
0.425
0.4838
0.51456
0.5378
The agreement between the model parameters estimated by Gehan and George (1970) and Haycock et al. (1978)
is remarkable in view of the fact that Hay cock et al. (1978) were unaware of the previous work. Hay cock et al. (1978) used
an entirely different set of subjects, and used geometric estimates of surface area rather than direct measurements. It has been
determined that the Gehan and George model is the formula of choice for estimating total surface area of the body since it
is based on the largest number of direct measurements.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
6A-6 August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Appendix 6A
Nomo grams
Sendroy and Cecchini (1954) proposed a graphical method whereby surface area could be read from a diagram
relating height and weight to surface area. However, they do not give an explicit model for calculating surface area. The
graph was developed empirically based on 252 cases, 127 of which were from the 401 direct measurements reported by
Boyd(1935). In the other 125 cases the surface area was estimated using the linear method of DuBois andDuBois (1916).
Because the Sendroy and Cecchini method is graphical, it is inherently less precise and less accurate than the formulae of
other authors discussed above.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 6A-7
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
7. BODY WEIGHT STUDIES 1
7.1. KEY BODY WEIGHT STUDY 1
7.2. RELEVANT BODY WEIGHT STUDIES 4
7.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 10
7.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 7 11
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7 - Body Weight Studies
1. BODY WEIGHT STUDIES
There are several physiological factors needed to
calculate potential exposures. These include skin surface
area (see Volume I, Section 6), inhalation rate (see Volume
I, Section 5) life expectancy (see Volume I, Section 8), and
body weight. The average daily dose is typically normalized
to the average body weight of the exposed population. If
exposure occurs only during childhood years, the average
child body weight during the exposure period should be
used to estimate risk (U.S. EPA, 1989). Conversely, if
adult exposures are being evaluated, an adult body weight
value should be used.
The purpose of this section is to describe published
studies on body weight for the general U. S. population. The
studies have been classified as either key or relevant studies,
based on the criteria described in Volume I, Section 1.3.1.
Recommended values are based on the results of key
studies, but relevant studies are also presented to provide
the reader with added perspective on the current state of
knowledge pertaining to body weight.
7.1. KEY BODY WEIGHT STUDY
Hamill et al. (1979) - Physical Growth: National
Center for Health Statistics Percentiles - A National
Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Task Force that
included academic investigators and representatives from
CDC Nutrition Surveillance Program selected, collated,
integrated, and defined appropriate data sets to generate
growth curves for the age interval: birth to 36 months
developed (Hamill et al., 1979). The percentile curves
were for assessing the physical growth of children in the
U.S. They are based on accurate measurements made on
large nationally representative samples of children (Hamill
et al., 1979). Smoothed percentile curves were derived for
body weight by age (Hamill et al., 1979). Curves were
developed for boys and for girls. The data used to construct
the curves were provided by the Pels Research Institute,
Yellow Springs, Ohio. These data were from an ongoing
longitudinal study where anthromopetric data from direct
measurements are collected regularly from participants
(-1,000) in various areas of the U.S. The NCHS used
advanced statistical and computer technology to generate
the growth curves. Table 7-1 presents the percentiles of
weight by sex and age. Figures 7-1 and 7-2 present weight
by age percentiles for boys and for girls aged birth to 36
months, respectively. Limitations of this study are that
mean body weight values were not reported and the data are
more
Table 7-1. Smoothed Percentiles of Weight (in kg) by Sex and Age:
Statistics from NCHS and Data from Pels Research Institute, Birth to 36 Months
Sex and Age
Male
Birth
1 Month
3 Months
6 Months
9 Months
12 Months
18 Months
24 Months
30 Months
36 Months
Female
Birth
1 Month
3 Months
6 Months
9 Months
12 Months
18 Months
24 Months
30 Months
36 Months
" Smoothed by
5th
2.54
3.16
4.43
6.20
7.52
8.43
9.59
10.54
11.44
12.26
2.36
2.97
4.18
5.79
7.00
7.84
8.92
9.87
10.78
11.60
cubic-spline approximation.
10th
2.78
3.43
4.78
6.61
7.95
8.84
9.92
10.85
11.80
12.69
2.58
3.22
4.47
6.12
7.34
8.19
9.30
10.26
11.21
12.07
25th
3.00
3.82
5.32
7.20
8.56
9.49
10.67
11.65
12.63
13.58
2.93
3.59
4.88
6.60
7.89
8.81
10.04
11.10
12.11
12.99
Smoothed" Percentile
50th
Weight in Kilograms
3.27
4.29
5.98
7.85
9.18
10.15
11.47
12.59
13.67
14.69
3.23
3.98
5.40
7.21
8.56
9.53
10.82
11.90
12.93
13.93
75th
3.64
4.75
6.56
8.49
9.88
10.91
12.31
13.44
14.51
15.59
3.52
4.36
5.90
7.83
9.24
10.23
11.55
12.74
13.93
15.03
90th
3.82
5.14
7.14
9.10
10.49
11.54
13.05
14.29
15.47
16.66
3.64
4.65
6.39
8.38
9.83
10.87
12.30
13.57
14.81
15.97
95th
4.15
5.38
7.37
9.46
10.93
11.99
13.44
14.70
15.97
17.28
3.81
4.92
6.74
8.73
10.17
11.24
12.76
14.08
15.35
16.54
Source: Hamill etal., 1979.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
7-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7 - Body Weight Studies
(5
01
.OOTH
• TSTH
•SCTH
5OTH
03 6 9 12 IS IS Ł1 24 27 30 33 36
AGEWMCNTHS
Figure 1-1. Weight by Age Percentiles for Boys Aged Birth-36 Months
Source: Hamilletal., 1979.
tn
m
to
Page
7-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7- Body Weight Studies
LU
X
S5TH
flprtH
^ 7gTH
•a
-4
• x>
-J
tri
• ^
en
CO
•B
SHtL
csni
•ICHH
ŁTH
to
o
to
to
»
Ki
%
tn
_ 2
en
"•*•
w
fo
»
to
CTl
s>
*.
4St
F»
IV
12 IS 18 Ł1 24 27 30 33 36
AGi N MONTHS
Figure 7-2. Weight by Age Percentiles for Girls Aged Birth-36 Months
Source: Hamilletal., 1979
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
7-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7 - Body Weight Studies
that 15 years old. However, this study does provide body
weight data for infants less than 6 months old.
NCHS(1987) - AnthropometricReference Data and
Prevalence of Overweight, United States, 1976-80 -
Statistics on anthropometric measurements, including body
weight, for the U.S. population were collected by NCHS
through the second National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey (NHANES II). NHANES II was
conducted on a nationwide probability sample of
approximately 28,000 persons, aged 6 months to 74 years,
from the civilian, non-institutionalized population of the
United States. Of the 28,000 persons, 20,322 were
interviewed and examined, resulting in a response rate of
73.1 percent. The survey began in February 1976 and was
completed in February 1980. The sample was selected so
that certain subgroups thought to be at high risk of
malnutrition (persons with low incomes, preschool children,
and the elderly) were oversampled. The estimates were
weighted to reflect national population estimates. The
weighting was accomplished by inflating examination
results for each subject by the reciprocal of selection
probabilities adjusted to account for those who were not
examined, and post stratifying by race, age, and sex (NCHS,
1987).
The NHANES II collected standard body
measurements of sample subjects, including height and
weight, that were made at various times of the day and in
different seasons of the year. This technique was used
because one's weight may vary between winter and summer
and may fluctuate with recency of food and water intake and
other daily activities (NCHS, 1987). Mean body weights of
adults, by age, and their standard deviations are presented
in Table 7-2 for men, women, and both sexes combined.
Mean body weights and standard deviations for children,
ages 6 months to 19 years, are presented in Table 7-3 for
boys, girls, and boys and girls combined. Percentile
distributions of the body weights of adults by age and race
for males are presented in Table 7-4, and for females in
Table 7-5. Data for children by age are presented in Table
7-6 for males, and for females in Table 7-7.
Results shown in Tables 7-4 and 7-5 indicate that the
mean weight for adult males is 78.1 kg and for adult
females, 65.4 kg. It also shows that the mean weight for
White males (78.5 kg) is greater than for Black males (77.9
kg). Additionally, mean weights are greater for Black
females (71.2 kg) than for White females (64.8 kg). From
Table 7-3, the mean body weights for girls and boys are
approximately the same from ages 6 months to 14 years.
Starting at years 15-19, the difference in mean body weight
ranges from 6 to 11 kg.
Table 7-2. Body Weights of Adults' (kilograms)
Men
Women
Men and
Women
Age (years)
Mean
(kg)
Std.
Dev.
Mean
(kg)
Std.
Dev.
Mean (kg)
73.8
78.7
80.9
80.9
78.8
74.8
78.1
12.7
13.7
13.4
13.6
12.8
12.8
13.5
60.6
64.2
67.1
68.0
67.9
66.6
65.4
67.2
71.5
74.0
74.5
73.4
70.7
71.8
Note: 1 kg = 2.2046 pounds.
a Includes clothing weight, estimated as ranging from 0.09 to 0.28 kilogram.
Source: Adapted from National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), 1987.
Table 7-3. Body
Weights of Children51 (kilograms)
Boys
Age
6-11 months
1 year
2 years
3 years
4 years
5 years
6 years
7 years
8 years
9 years
1 0 years
1 1 years
1 2 years
1 3 years
14 years
1 5 years
1 6 years
1 7 years
1 8 years
1 9 years
Note: 1 kg =
Mean
(kg)
9.4
11.8
13.6
15.7
17.8
19.8
23.0
25.1
28.2
31.1
36.4
40.3
44.2
49.9
57.1
61.0
67.1
66.7
71.1
71.7
2.2046 pounds.
Std.
Dev.
1.3
1.9
1.7
2.0
2.5
3.0
4.0
3.9
6.2
6.3
7.7
10.1
10.1
12.3
11.0
11.0
12.4
11.5
12.7
11.6
a Includes clothing weight, estimated as r
Source: Adapted from Nation
Girls
Mean
(kg)
8.8
10.8
13.0
14.9
17.0
19.6
22.1
24.7
27.9
31.9
36.1
41.8
46.4
50.9
54.8
55.1
58.1
59.6
59.0
60.2
Std.
Dev.
1.2
1.4
1.5
2.1
2.4
3.3
4.0
5.0
5.7
8.4
8.0
10.9
10.1
11.8
11.1
9.8
10.1
11.4
11.1
11.0
mging from 0.09 to C
Boys and
Girls
Mean
(kg)
9.1
11.3
13.3
15.3
17.4
19.7
22.6
24.9
28.1
31.5
36.3
41.1
45.3
50.4
56.0
58.1
62.6
63.2
65.1
66.0
.28 kilogram.
il Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). 1987.
7.2. RELEVANT BODY WEIGHT STUDIES
Brainard and Burmaster (1992) - Bivariate
Distributions for Height and Weight of Men and Women
in the United States - Brainard and Burmaster (1992)
examined data on the height and weight of adults published
by the U.S. Public Health Service and fit bivariate
distributions to the tabulated values for men and women,
separately.
Page
7-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
«t
I!
S*
VTW KW
° aj
^
3
Ł
5
1=
§
&
^
-------
>• Ł
«N<Ł
ft
I?
"S
s
3
^
actors Handbook
August 1997
Table 7-5. Weight in Kilograms for Females 18-74 Years of Age— Number Examined, Mean, Standard
Deviation, and Selected Percentiles, by Race and Age: United States, 1976-19808
Percentile
Number of
Persons Mean Standard
Race and Age Examined (kg) Deviation 5th 10th 15th 25th 50th 75th 85th 90th 95th
18-74 years 6,588 65.4 14.6 47.7 50.3 52.2 55.4 62.4 72.1 79.2 84.4 93.1
18-24 years 1,066 60.6 11.9 46.6 49.1 50.6 53.2 58.0 65.0 70.4 75.3 82.9
25-34 years 1,170 64.2 15.0 47.4 49.6 51.4 54.3 60.9 69.6 78.4 84.1 93.5
35-44 years 844 67.1 15.2 49.2 52.0 53.3 56.9 63.4 73.9 81.7 87.5 98.9
45-54 years 763 68.0 15.3 48.5 51.3 53.3 57.3 65.5 75.7 82.1 87.6 96.0
55-64 years 1,329 67.9 14.7 48.6 51.3 54.1 57.3 65.2 75.3 82.3 87.5 95.1
65-74 years 1,416 66.6 13.8 47.1 50.8 53.2 57.4 64.8 73.8 79.8 84.4 91.3
White
18-74 years 5,686 64.8 14.1 47.7 50.3 52.2 55.2 62.1 71.1 77.9 83.3 91.5
18-24 years 892 60.4 11.6 47.3 49.5 50.8 53.3 57.9 64.8 69.7 74.3 82.4
25-34 years 1,000 63.6 14.5 47.3 49.5 51.3 54.0 60.6 68.9 76.3 81.5 89.7
35-44 years 726 66.1 14.5 49.3 51.8 52.9 56.3 62.4 71.9 79.7 85.8 94.9
45-54 years 647 67.3 14.4 48.6 51.3 53.4 57.0 65.0 74.8 81.1 85.6 94.5
55-64 years 1,176 67.2 14.4 48.5 50.7 53.7 57.1 64.7 74.5 81.8 86.2 92.8
65-74 years 1,245 66.2 13.7 47.2 50.7 52.9 57.2 64.3 72.9 79.2 84.3 91.2
Black
18-74 years 782 71.2 17.3 48.8 51.6 55.1 59.1 67.8 80.6 87.4 94.9 105.1
18-24 years 147 63.1 13.9 46.2 49.0 50.6 53.8 60.4 70.0 75.8 79.1 89.3
25-34 years 145 69.3 16.7 48.3 50.8 53.1 57.8 65.3 80.2 87.1 91.5 102.7
35-44 years 103 75.3 18.4 50.7 55.2 57.2 63.0 70.2 85.2 95.3 103.5 113.1
45-54 years 100 77.7 18.8 55.1 60.3 60.8 64.5 74.3 83.6 94.5 98.2 117.5
55-64 years 135 75.8 16.4 54.2 55.2 57.6 65.4 74.6 83.4 91.9 95.5 108.5
65-74 years 152 72.4 13.6 52.9 56.4 60.3 64.0 70.0 82.2 84.4 86.5 98.1
Note: 1 kg = 2.2046 pounds.
* Includes clothing weight, estimated as ranging from 0.09 to 0.28 kilogram.
b Includes all other races not shown as separate categories.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, 1987.
Infi
S
S*
S
I ^
s Ł
x! a
KM ^
Ł ^
!> 1
General Factors
fy Weight Studies
-------
Exposure Factors
August 199 7
&
a
&
1
,1
X) (%
Table 7-6. Weight in Kilograms for Males 6 Months-19 Years of Age— Number Examined, Mean, Standard
Deviation, and Selected Percentiles, by Sex and Age: United States, 1976-198Cf
Percentile
Number of
Persons Mean Standard
Age Examined (kg) Deviation 5th 10th 15th 25th 50th 75th 85th 90th 95th
6-11 months 179 9.4 1.3 7.5 7.6 8.2 8.6 9.4 10.1 10.7 10.9 11.4
1 years 370 118 19 96 100 103 108 117 126 131 136 144
2years 375 13.6 1.7 11.1 11.6 11.8 12.6 13.5 14.5 15.2 15.8 16.5
3 years 418 157 20 129 135 139 144 154 168 174 179 191
4 years 404 17.8 2.5 14.1 15.0 15.3 16.0 17.6 19.0 19.9 20.9 22.2
5 years 397 198 30 160 168 171 177 194 213 229 237 254
6 years 133 23.0 4.0 18.6 19.2 19.8 20.3 22.0 24.1 26.4 28.3 30.1
7 years 148 251 39 197 208 212 222 248 269 282 296 339
8 years 147 28.2 6.2 20.4 22.7 23.6 24.6 27.5 29.9 33.0 35.5 39.1
9 years 145 311 63 240 256 260 271 302 330 354 386 431
10 years 157 36.4 7.7 27.2 28.2 29.6 31.4 34.8 39.2 43.5 46.3 53.4
11 years 155 403 101 268 288 318 335 373 464 520 570 610
12 years 145 44.2 10.1 30.7 32.5 35.4 37.8 42.5 48.8 52.6 58.9 67.5
13 years 173 499 123 354 370 383 401 484 563 598 642 699
14 years 186 57.1 11.0 41.0 44.5 46.4 49.8 56.4 63.3 66.1 68.9 77.0
15 years 184 610 110 462 491 506 542 601 649 687 728 813
16 years 178 67.1 12.4 51.4 54.3 56.1 57.6 64.4 73.6 78.1 82.2 91.2
17 years 173 667 115 507 534 548 588 658 720 768 823 889
18 years 164 71.1 12.7 54.1 56.6 60.3 61.9 70.4 76.6 80.0 83.5 95.3
19 years 148 717 116 559 579 605 638 695 779 843 868 921
Note: 1 kg = 2.2046 pounds.
Includes clothing weight, estimated as ranging from 0.09 to 0.28 kilogram.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, 1987.
Volume I - Generi
Chapter 7 - Body
^ 5i'
f. ^
/a a
S" ci
** S-
1 3
8s
8
i\
nn
-------
"<§
p*1
"«
5
1
I |
^O ^
^O ^
\^ ?T*
Table 7-7. Weight in Kilograms for Females 6 Months-19 Years of Age-Number Examined, Mean, Standard
Deviation, and Selected Percentiles, by Sex and Age: United States, 1976-198Cf
Percentile
Number of
Persons Mean Standard
Age Examined (kg) Deviation 5th 10th 15th 25th 50th 75th 85th 90th 95th
6-11 months 177 8.8 1.2 6.6 13 7.5 7.9 8.9 9.4 10.1 10.4 10.9
1 years 336 10.8 1.4 8.8 9.1 9.4 9.9 10.7 11.7 12.4 12.7 13.4
2 years 336 13.0 1.5 10.8 11.2 11.6 12.0 12.7 13.8 14.5 14.9 15.9
3 years 366 14.9 2.1 11.7 12.3 12.9 13.4 14.7 16.1 17.0 17.4 18.4
4 years 396 17.0 2.4 13.7 14.3 14.5 15.2 16.7 18.4 19.3 20.2 21.1
5 years 364 19.6 3.3 15.3 16.1 16.7 17.2 19.0 21.2 22.8 24.7 26.6
6 years 135 22.1 4.0 17.0 17.8 18.6 19.3 21.3 23.8 26.6 28.9 29.6
7 years 157 24.7 5.0 19.2 19.5 19.8 21.4 23.8 27.1 28.7 30.3 34.0
8 years 123 27.9 5.7 21.4 22.3 23.3 24.4 27.5 30.2 31.3 33.2 36.5
9 years 149 31.9 8.4 22.9 25.0 25.8 27.0 29.7 33.6 39.3 43.3 48.4
10 years 136 36.1 8.0 25.7 27.5 29.0 31.0 34.5 39.5 44.2 45.8 49.6
11 years 140 41.8 10.9 29.8 30.3 31.3 33.9 40.3 45.8 51.0 56.6 60.0
12 years 147 46.4 10.1 32.3 35.0 36.7 39.1 45.4 52.6 58.0 60.5 64.3
13 years 162 50.9 11.8 35.4 39.0 40.3 44.1 49.0 55.2 60.9 66.4 76.3
14 years 178 54.8 11.1 40.3 42.8 43.7 47.4 53.1 60.3 65.7 67.6 75.2
15 years 145 55.1 9.8 44.0 45.1 46.5 48.2 53.3 59.6 62.2 65.5 76.6
16 years 170 58.1 10.1 44.1 47.3 48.9 51.3 55.6 62.5 68.9 73.3 76.8
17years 134 59.6 11.4 44.5 48.9 50.5 52.2 58.4 63.4 68.4 71.6 81.8
ISyears 170 59.0 11.1 45.3 49.5 50.8 52.8 56.4 63.0 66.0 70.1 78.0
19years 158 60.2 11.0 48.5 49.7 51.7 53.9 57.1 64.4 70.7 74.8 78.1
Note: 1 kg = 2.2046 pounds.
a Includes clothing weight, estimated as ranging from 0.09 to 0.28 kilogram.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, 1987.
§
*f
y. •*?
§ Ł
X! ?
tM ^
I - General Factors
'ody Weight Studies
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7 - Body Weight Studies
Height and weight of 5,916 men and 6,588 women
in the age range of 18 to 74 years were taken from the
NHANESII study and statistically adjusted to represent the
U.S. population aged 18 to 74 years with regard to age
structure, sex, and race. Estimation techniques were used
to fit normal distributions to the cumulative marginal data
and goodness-of-fit tests were used to test the hypothesis
that height and lognormal weight follow a normal
distribution for each sex. It was found that the marginal
distributions of height and lognormal weight for both men
and women are Gaussian (normal) in form. This conclusion
was reached by visual observation and the high R2 values
for best-fit lines obtained using linear regression. The R2
values for men's height and lognormal weight are reported
to be 0.999. The R2 values for women's height and
lognormal weight are 0.999 and 0.985, respectively.
Brainard and Burmaster (1992) fit bivariate
distributions to estimated numbers of men and women aged
18 to 74 years in cells representing 1 inch height intervals
and 10 pound weight intervals. Adjusted height and
lognormal weight data for men were fit to a single bivariate
normal distribution with an estimated mean height of 1.75
meters (69.2 inches) and an estimated mean weight of 78.6
kg (173.2 pounds). For women, height and lognormal
weight data were fit to a pair of superimposed bivariate
normal distributions (Brainard and Burmaster, 1992). The
average height and weight for women were estimated from
the combined bivariate analyses. Mean height for women
was estimated to be 1.62 meters (63.8 inches) and mean
weight was estimated to be 65.8 kg (145.0 pounds). For
women, a calculation using a single bivarite normal
distribution gave poor results (Brainard and Burmaster,
1992). According to Brainard and Burmaster, the
distributions are suitable for use in Monte Carlo simulation.
Burmaster et al. (1994) (Submitted 2/19/94 to Risk
Analysis for Publication) - Lognormal Distributions of
Body Weight as a Function of Age for Female and Male
Children in the United States - Burmaster et al. (1994),
performed data analysis to fit normal and lognormal
distributions to the body weights of female and male
children at age 6 months to 20 years (Burmaster et al.,
1994).
Data used in this analysis were from the second
survey of the National Center for Health Statistics,
NHANES II, which included responses from 4,079
females and 4,379 males 6 months to 20 years of age in the
U.S. (Burmaster et al., 1994). The NHANES II data had
been statistically adjusted for non-response and probability
of selection, and stratified by age, sex, and race to reflect the
entire U.S. population prior to reporting (Burmaster et al.,
1994). Burmaster et al. (1994) conducted exploratory and
quantitative data analyses, and fit normal and lognormal
distributions to percentiles of body weight for children.
Cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) were plotted for
female and male body weights on both linear and
logarithmic scales.
Two models were used to assess the probability
density functions (PDFs) of children's body weight. Linear
and quadratic regression lines were fitted to the data. A
number of goodness-of-fit measures were conducted on data
generated by the two models. Burmaster et al. (1994) found
that lognormal distributions give strong fits to the body
weights of children, ages 6 months to 20 years. Statistics
for the lognormal probability plots are presented in Tables
7-8 and 7-9. These data can be used for further analyses of
body weight distribution (i.e., application of Monte Carlo
analysis).
Table 7-8 . Statistics for Probability Plot Regression Analyses
Female's Body Weights 6 Months to 20 Years of Age
Age
Lognormal Probability Plots
Linear Curve
M/ °/
6 months to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 to 5 years
5 to 6 years
6 to 7 years
7 to 8 years
8 to 9 years
9 to 10 years
10 to 11 years
11 to 1 2 years
1 2 to 1 3 years
13 to 14 years
14 to 15 years
1 5 to 1 6 years
1 6 to 1 7 years
17 to 18 years
18 to 19 years
19 to 20 years
2.16
2.38
2.56
2.69
2.83
2.98
.10
.19
.31
.46
.57
.71
.82
.92
.99
4.00
4.06
4.08
4.07
4.10
a ^2> °2 - correspond to the mean and standard deviation, respectively
lognormal distribution of body
Source: Burmaster et al.. 1994.
weight (kg).
0.145
0.128
0.112
0.137
0.133
0.163
0.174
0.174
0.156
0.214
0.199
0.226
0.213
0.216
0.187
0.156
0.167
0.165
0.147
0.149
of the
Table 7-9. Statistics for Probability Plot Regression Analyses
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
7-9
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7 - Body Weight Studies
Age
Lognormal Probability Plots
Linear Curve
a,'
6 months to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 to 5 years
5 to 6 years
6 to 7 years
7 to 8 years
8 to 9 years
9 to 10 years
10 to 11 years
11 to 12 years
12 to 13 years
13 to 14 years
14 to 15 years
15 to 16 years
16 to 17 years
17 to 18 years
18 to 19 years
19 to 20 years
2.23
2.46
2.60
2.75
2.87
2.99
3.13
3.21
3.33
3.43
3.59
3.69
3.78
3.88
4.02
4.09
4.20
4.19
4.25
4.26
0.132
0.119
0.120
0.114
0.133
0.138
0.145
0.151
0.181
0.165
0.195
0.252
0.224
0.215
0.181
0.159
0.168
0.167
0.159
0.154
" //2, O2 - correspond to the mean and standard deviation,
respectively, of the lognormal distribution of body weight (kg).
Source: Burmaster et al.. 1994.
AIHC - Exposure Factors Source book - The Exposure
Factors Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) provides similar body
weight data as presented here. Consistent with this
document, an average adult body weight of 72 kg is
recommended on the basis of the NHANES II data (NCHS,
1987). These data are also used to derive probability
distributions for adults and children. In addition, the
Sourcebook presents probability distributions derived by
Brainard and Burmaster (1992), Versar(1991) andBrorby
and Finley (1993). For each distribution, the @Risk
formula is provided for direct use in the @Risk simulation
software (Palisade, 1992). The organization of this
document, makes it very convenient to use in support of
Monte Carlo analysis. The reviews of the supporting
studies are very brief with little analysis of their strengths
and weaknesses. The Sourcebook has been classified as a
relevant rather than key study because it is not the primary
source for the data used to make recommendations in this
document. The Sourcebook is very similar to this document
in the sense that it summarizes exposure factor data and
recommends values. As such, it is clearly relevant as an
alternative information source on body weights as well as
other exposure factors.
7.3. RECOMMENDATIONS
The key studies described in this section was used in
selecting recommended values for body weight. The
general description of both the key and relevant studies are
summarized in Table 7-10. The recommendations for body
weight are summarized in Table 7-11. Table 7-12 presents
the confidence ratings for body weight recommendations.
The mean body weight for all adults (male and female, all
age groups) combined is 71.8 kg as shown in Table 7-2.
The mean values for each age group in Table 7-2 were
derived by adding the body weights for men and women and
dividing by 2. If age and sex distribution of the exposed
population is known, the mean body weight values in Table
7-2 can be used. If percentile data are needed or if race is a
factor, Tables 7-4 and 7-5 can be used to select the
appropriate data for percentiles or mean values.
For infants (birth to 6 months), appropriate values
for body weight may be selected from Table 7-1. These
data (percentile only) are presented for male and female
infants.
For children, appropriate mean values for weights
may be selected from Table 7-3. If percentile values are
needed, these data are presented in Table 7-6 for male
children and in Table 7-7 for female children.
Body weight is a function of age, gender, and race
and populations of many geographic regions may vary from
the general population across geographic regions.
Therefore, the user should make appropriate adjustments
when applying the percentiles to other geographic regions.
The mean recommended value for adults (71.8 kg)
is different than the 70 kg commonly assumed in EPA risk
assessments. Assessors are encouraged to use values which
most accurately reflect the exposed population. When using
values other than 70 kg, however, the assessors should
consider if the dose estimate will be used to estimate risk by
combining with a dose-response relationship which was
derived assuming a body weight of 70 kg. If such an
inconsistency exists, the assessor should adjust the dose-
response relationship as described in the appendix to
Chapter 1. The Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
does not use a 70 kg body weight assumption in the
derivation of RfCs and RfDs, but does make this
assumption in the derivation of cancer slope factors and unit
risks.
Table 7-10. Summary of Body Weight Studies
Page
7-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7 - Body Weight Studies
Study
Number of Subjects
Population
Comments
KEY STUDIES
Hamilletal. (1979)
NCHS, 1987
(NHANES II)
RELEVANT STUDIES
-1,000
20,322
U.S. general
population
U.S. general
population
Brainard and Burmaster, 1992 12,501 (5,916 men and 6,588 U.S. general
women) population
Burmaster et al., 1994 8,458 (4,079 females and 4,379 U.S. general
males) population
Authors noted that data are accurate measurements from a
large nationally representative sample of children.
Based on civilian non-institutionalized population aged 6
months to 74 years. Response rate was 73.1 percent.
Used data from NHANES II to fit bivarite distributions to
women and men age 18 to 74 years.
Used data from NHANES II to develop fitted distributions
for children aged 6 to 20 years old. Adjusted for non-
response by age, gender, and race.
Table 7-11, Summary
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 7 - Body Weight Studies
Table 7-12. Confidence in Body Weight Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection
period
• Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the
population
Characterization of
variability
Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
NHANES II was the major source of data for NCHS (1987). This is a
published study which received a high level of peer review. The Hamill et
al. (1979) is a peer reviewed journal publication.
Both studies are available to the public.
Results can be reproduced by analyzing NHANES II data and the Pels
Research Institute data.
The studies focused on body weight, the exposure factor of interest.
The data represent the U.S. population.
The primary data were generated from NHANES II data and Eels studies,
thus these data are secondary.
The data were collected between 1976-1980.
The NHANES II study included data collected over a period of 4 years.
Body weight measurements were taken at various times of the day and at
different seasons of the year.
Direct body weights were measured for both studies. For NHANES II,
subgroups at risk for malnutrition were over-sampled. Weighting was
accomplished by inflating examination results for those not examined and
were stratified by race, age, and sex. The Fels data are from an ongoing
longitudinal study where the data are collected regularly.
The sample size consisted of 28,000 persons for NHANES II. Author noted
in Hamill et al. (1979) that the data set was large.
Data collected focused on the U.S. population for both studies.
Both studies characterized variability regarding age and sex. Additionally
NHANES II characterized race (for Blacks, Whites and total populations)
and sampled persons with low income.
There are no apparent biases in the study designs for NHANES II. The
study design for collecting the Fels data was not provided.
For NHANES II, measurement error should be low since body weights were
performed in a mobile examination center using standardized procedures and
equipment. Also, measurements were taken at various times of the day to
account for weight fluctuations as a result of recent food or water intake.
The authors of Hamill et al. (1979) report that study data are based on
accurate direct measurements from an ongoing longitudinal study.
There are two studies.
There is consistency among the two studies.
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
Low
High
High
High
High
High
Medium-
High
High
Low
High
High
Page
7-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
LIFETIME 1
8.1. KEY STUDY ON LIFETIME 1
8.2. RECOMMENDATIONS 1
8.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 8 1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 8 - Lifetime
8. LIFETIME
The length of an individual's life is an important
factor to consider when evaluating cancer risk because the
dose estimate is averaged over an individual's lifetime.
Since the averaging time is found in the denominator of the
dose equation, a shorter lifetime would result in a higher
potential risk estimate, and conversely, a longer life
expectancy would produce a lower potential risk estimate.
8.1. KEY STUDY ON LIFETIME
Statistical data on life expectancy are published
annually by the U.S. Department of Commerce in the
publication: "Statistical Abstract of the United States." The
latest year for which statistics are available is 1993.
Available data on life expectancies for various
subpopulations bom in the years 1970 to 1993 are
presented in Table 8-1. Data for 1993 show that the life
expectancy for an average person bom in the United States
in 1993 is 75.5 years (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1995).
The table shows that the overall life expectancy has
averaged approximately 75 years since 1982. The average
life expectancy for males in 1993 was 72.1 years, and 78.9
years for females. The data consistently show an
approximate 7 years difference in life expectancy for males
and females from 1970 to present. Table 8-1 also indicates
that life expectancy for white males (73.0 years) is
consistently longer than for Black males (64.7 years).
Additionally, it indicates that life expectancy for White
females (79.5 years) is longer than for Black females (73.7),
a difference of almost 6 years. Table 8-2 presents data for
expectation of life for persons who were at a specific age in
year 1990. These data are available by age, gender, and
race and may be useful for deriving exposure estimates
based on the age of a specific subpopulation. The data
show that expectation of life is longer for females and for
Whites.
8.2. RECOMMENDATIONS
Current data suggest that 75 years would be an
appropriate value to reflect the average life expectancy of
the general population and is the recommended value. If
gender is a factor considered in the assessment, note that the
average life expectancy value for females is higher than for
males. It is recommended that the assessor use the
appropriate value of 72.1 years for males or 78.9 years for
females. If race is a consideration in assessing exposure for
male individuals, note that the life expectancy is about 8
years longer for Whites than for Blacks. It is recommended
that the assessor use the values of 73 years and 64.7 years
for White males and Black males, respectively. Table 8-3
presents the confidence rating for life expectancy
recommendations.
This recommended value is different than the 70
years commonly assumed for the general population in EPA
risk assessments. Assessors are encouraged to use values
which most accurately reflect the exposed population.
When using values other than 70 years, however, the
assessors should consider if the dose estimate will be used
to estimate risk by combining with a dose-response
relationship which was derived assuming a lifetime of 70
years. If such an inconsistency exists, the assessor should
adjust the dose-response relationship by multiplying by
(lifetime/70). The Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) does not use a 70 year lifetime assumption in the
derivation of RfCs and RfDs, but does make this
assumption in the derivation of some cancer slope factors or
unit risks.
8.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 8
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1995) Statistical abstracts of
the United States.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
8-1
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 8 - Lifetime
Table 8-1. Expectation of Life at Birth, 1970 to 1993, and Projections, 1995 to 2010 (years)3
YEAR
1970
1975
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
TOTAL
Total Male
70.8 67.1
72.6 68.8
73.7 70.0
74.1 70.4
74.5 70.8
74.6 71.0
74.7 71.1
74.7 71.1
74.7 71.2
74.9 71.4
74.9 71.4
75.1 71.7
75.4 71.8
75.5 71.0
75.8 72.3
75.5 72.1
Projections0 1995 76.3 72.8
a
b
c
Source:
2000 76.7 73.2
2005 77.3 73.8
2010 77.9 74.5
Female
74.7
76.6
77.4
77.8
78.1
78.1
78.2
78.2
78.2
78.3
78.3
78.5
78.8
78.9
79.1
78.9
79.7
80.2
80.7
81.3
Total
71.7
73.4
74.4
74.8
75.1
75.2
75.3
75.3
75.4
75.6
75.6
75.9
76.1
76.3
76.5
76.3
77.0
77.6
78.2
78.8
WHITE
Male
68.0
69.5
70.7
71.1
71.5
71.6
71.8
71.8
71.9
72.1
72.2
72.5
72.7
72.9
73.2
73.0
73.7
74.3
74.9
75.6
Female
75.6
77.3
78.1
78.4
78.7
78.7
78.7
78.7
78.8
78.9
78.9
79.2
79.4
79.6
79.8
79.5
80.3
80.9
81.4
81.0
BLACK AND OTHERb
Total Male Female
65.3
68.0
69.5
70.3
70.9
70.9
71.1
71.0
70.9
71.0
70.8
70.9
71.2
71.5
71.8
71.5
72.5
72.9
73.6
74.3
61.3
63.7
65.3
66.2
66.8
67.0
67.2
67.0
66.8
66.9
66.7
66.7
67.0
67.3
67.7
67.4
68.2
68.3
69.1
69.9
69.4
72.4
73.6
74.4
74.9
74.7
74.9
74.8
74.9
75.0
74.8
74.9
75.2
75.5
75.7
75.5
76.8
77.5
78.1
78.7
Total
64.1
66.8
68.1
68.9
69.4
69.4
69.5
69.3
69.1
69.1
68.9
68.8
69.1
69.3
69.6
69.3
70.3
70.2
70.7
71.3
BLACK
Male Female
60.0
62.4
63.8
64.5
65.1
65.2
65.3
65.0
64.8
64.7
64.4
64.3
64.5
64.6
65.0
64.7
65.8
65.3
65.9
66.5
Excludes deaths of nonresidents of the United States.
Racial descriptions were not provided in the data source.
Based on middle mortality assumptions; for details, see U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-25, No.
Bureau of the Census, 1995.
68.3
71.3
72.5
73.2
73.6
73.5
73.6
73.4
73.4
73.4
73.2
73.3
73.6
73.8
73.9
73.7
74.8
75.1
75.5
76.0
1104.
Page
8-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 8 - Lifetime
Table 8-2. Expectation of Life by
Race, Sex, and Age: 1992
Expectation of Life in Years
Age in 1990
(years)
At birth
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Total
75.8
75.4
74.5
73.5
72.5
71.6
70.6
69.6
68.6
67.6
66.6
65.6
64.6
63.7
62.7
61.7
60.7
59.8
58.8
57.9
56.9
56.0
55.1
54.1
53.2
52.2
51.3
50.4
49.4
48.5
47.5
46.6
45.7
44.7
43.8
42.9
42.0
41.0
40.1
39.2
38.3
37.4
36.5
35.6
34.7
33.8
32.9
32.0
31.1
30.2
Table
White
Male
73.2
72.8
71.8
70.9
69.9
68.9
67.9
66.9
65.9
65.0
64.0
63.0
62.0
61.0
60.0
59.1
58.1
57.2
56.2
55.3
54.3
53.4
52.5
51.6
50.6
49.7
48.8
47.8
46.9
46.0
45.1
44.1
43.2
42.3
41.4
40.5
39.6
38.7
37.8
36.9
36.0
35.1
34.2
33.3
32.4
31.5
30.6
29.7
28.8
28.0
8-2. Expectation of Life by Race,
Female
79.8
79.3
78.3
77.3
76.3
75.4
74.4
73.4
72.4
71.4
70.4
69.4
68.4
67.4
66.5
65.5
64.5
63.5
62.5
61.6
60.6
59.6
58.7
57.7
56.7
55.7
54.8
53.8
52.8
51.8
50.9
49.9
48.9
48.0
47.0
46.0
45.1
44.1
43.2
42.2
41.2
40.3
39.3
38.4
37.5
36.5
35.6
34.7
33.7
32.8
Sex, and Age: 1992 (c
Male
65.0
65.2
64.3
63.4
62.4
61.4
60.5
59.5
58.5
57.5
56.5
55.5
54.6
53.6
52.6
51.7
50.7
49.8
48.9
48.1
47.2
46.3
45.5
44.6
43.8
42.9
42.1
41.2
40.4
39.5
38.7
37.8
37.0
36.2
35.3
34.5
33.7
32.9
32.1
31.3
30.5
29.7
28.9
28.2
27.4
26.7
25.9
25.2
24.4
23.7
ontinued)
Black
Female
73.9
74.1
73.1
72.2
71.2
70.3
69.3
68.3
67.3
66.3
65.4
64.4
63.4
62.4
61.4
60.4
59.5
58.5
57.5
56.6
55.6
54.6
53.7
52.7
51.8
50.8
49.9
48.9
48.0
47.1
46.1
45.2
44.3
43.4
42.4
41.5
40.6
39.7
38.8
37.9
37.1
36.2
35.3
34.4
33.6
32.7
31.9
31.0
30.2
29.3
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
8-3
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 8 - Lifetime
Expectation of Life in Years
White
Age in 1990
(years)
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
70
75
80
85 and over
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census,
Total
29.3
28.5
27.6
26.8
25.9
25.1
24.3
23.5
22.7
21.9
21.1
20.4
19.7
18.9
18.2
17.5
14.2
11.2
8.5
6.2
1995.
Male
27.1
26.3
25.4
24.6
23.7
22.9
22.1
21.3
20.6
19.8
19.1
18.3
17.6
16.9
16.2
15.5
12.4
9.6
7.2
5.3
Female
31.9
31.0
30.1
29.2
28.3
27.5
26.6
25.7
24.9
24.1
23.2
22.4
21.6
20.8
20.0
19.3
15.6
12.2
9.2
6.6
Black
Male
23.0
22.3
21.5
20.8
20.1
19.5
18.8
18.2
17.6
16.9
16.3
15.8
15.2
14.6
14.1
13.5
11.0
8.9
6.8
5.1
Female
28.5
27.7
26.8
26.0
25.3
24.5
23.7
23.0
22.2
21.5
20.8
20.1
19.4
18.7
18.0
17.4
14.3
11.4
8.6
6.3
Page
8-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume I - General Factors
Chapter 8 - Lifetime
Table 8-3. Confidence in Lifetime Expectancy Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design (High rating is
desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Data are published and have received extensive peer review. High
The study was widely available to the public (Census data). High
Results can be reproduced by analyzing Census data. High
Statistical data on life expectancy were published in this study. High
The study focused on the U.S. population. High
Primary data were analyzed. High
The study was published in 1995 and discusses life expectancy trends from High
1970 to 1993. The study has also made projections for 1995 until the year
2010.
The data analyzed were collected over a period of years. High
Census data is collected and analyzed over a period of years. High
This study was based on U.S. Census data, thus the population study size is High
expected to be greater than 100.
The data are representative of the U.S. population. High
Data were averaged by gender and race but only for Blacks and Whites; no Medium
other nationalities were represented within the section.
There are no apparent biases. High
Measurement error may be attributed to portions of the population that Medium
avoid or provide misleading information on census surveys.
Data presented in the section are from the U.S. Bureau of the Census Low
publication.
Recommendation was based on only one study, but it is widely accepted. High
HIGH
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
8-5
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
9. INTAKE OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES 1
9.1. BACKGROUND 1
9.2. INTAKE STUDIES 2
9.2.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
and Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals 2
9.2.2. Key Fruits and Vegetables Intake Study Based on the USDA CSFII 2
9.2.3. Relevant Fruits and Vegetables Intake Studies 4
9.2.4. Relevant Fruits and Vegetables Serving Size Study Based on the USDA
NFCS 6
9.2.5. Conversion Between As Consumed and Dry Weight Intake Rates 7
9.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 7
9.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 9 8
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
9. INTAKE OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
9.1. BACKGROUND
Ingestion of contaminated fruits and vegetables is a
potential pathway of human exposure to toxic chemicals.
Fruits and vegetables may become contaminated with toxic
chemicals by several different pathways. Ambient
pollutants from the air may be deposited on or absorbed by
the plants, or dissolved in rainfall or irrigation waters that
contact the plants. Pollutants may also be absorbed through
plant roots from contaminated soil and ground water. The
addition of pesticides, soil additives, and fertilizers may also
result in food contamination.
The primary source of information on consumption
rates of fruits and vegetables among the United States
population is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) and the
USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals
(CSFII). Data from the NFCS have been used in various
studies to generate consumer-only and per capita intake
rates for both individual fruits and vegetables and total fruits
and total vegetables. CSFII data from the 1989-1991
survey have been analyzed by EPA to generate per capita
intake rates for various food items and food groups.
Consumer-only intake is defined as the quantity of
fruits and vegetables consumed by individuals who ate these
food items during the survey period. Per capita intake rates
are generated by averaging consumer-only intakes over the
entire population of users and non-users. In general, per
capita intake rates are appropriate for use in exposure
assessment for which average dose estimates for the general
population are of interest because they represent both
individuals who ate the foods during the survey period and
individuals who may eat the food items at some time, but
did not consume them during the survey period. Total fruit
intake refers to the sum of all fruits consumed in a day
including canned, dried, frozen, and fresh fruits. Likewise,
total vegetable intake refers to the sum of all vegetables
consumed in a day including canned, dried, frozen, and
fresh vegetables. For the purposes of this handbook, the
distinctions between fruits and vegetables are those
commonly used, not the botanical definitions. For example,
in this report, tomatoes are considered vegetables, although
technically they are fruits.
Intake rates may be presented on either an as
consumed or dry weight basis. As consumed intake rates
(g/day) are based on the weight of the food in the form that
it is consumed. In contrast, dry weight intake rates are
based on the weight of the food consumed after the moisture
content has been removed. In calculating exposures based
on ingestion, the unit of weight used to measure intake
should be consistent with those used in measuring the
contaminant concentration in the produce. Intake data from
the individual component of the NFCS and CSFII are based
on "as eaten" (i.e., cooked or prepared) forms of the food
items/groups. Thus, corrections to account for changes in
portion sizes from cooking losses are not required.
Estimating source-specific exposures to toxic
chemicals in fruits and vegetables may also require
information on the amount of fruits and vegetables that are
exposed to or protected from contamination as a result of
cultivation practices or the physical nature of the food
product itself (i.e., those having protective coverings that
are removed before eating would be considered protected),
or the amount grown beneath the soil (i.e., most root crops
such as potatoes). The percentages of foods grown above
and below ground will be useful when the concentrations of
contaminants in foods are estimated from concentrations in
soil, water, and air. For example, vegetables grown below
ground may be more likely to be contaminated by soil
pollutants, but leafy above ground vegetables may be more
likely to be contaminated by deposition of air pollutants on
plant surfaces.
The purpose of this section is to provide: (1) intake
data for individual fruits and vegetables, and total fruits and
total vegetables; (2) guidance for converting between as
consumed and dry weight intake rates; and (3) intake data
for exposed and protected fruits and vegetables and those
grown below ground. Recommendations are based on
average and upper-percentile intake among the general
population of the U. S. Available data have been classified
as being either a key or a relevant study based on the
considerations discussed in Volume I, Section 1.3.1 of the
Introduction. Recommendations are based on data from the
CSFII 1989-1991 survey, which was considered the only
key intake study for fruits and vegetables. Other relevant
studies are also presented to provide the reader with added
perspective on this topic. It should be noted that many of
the relevant studies are based on data from USDA's NFCS
and CSFII. The USDA NFCS and CSFII are described
below.
9.2. INTAKE STUDIES
9.2.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide
Food Consumption Survey and Continuing
Survey of Food Intake by Individuals
USDA conducts the NFCS approximately every 10
years. The three most recent NFCSs were conducted in
1965-66, 1977-78, and 1987-88. The purpose of these
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
surveys was to "analyze the food consumption behavior and
dietary status of Americans" (USDA, 1992a). The survey
uses a statistical sampling technique designed to ensure that
all seasons, geographic regions of the U.S., and
demographic and socioeconomic groups are represented.
There are two components of the NFCS. The household
component collects information on the socioeconomic and
demographic characteristics of households, and the types,
value, and sources of foods consumed over a 7-day period.
The individual component collects information on food
intakes of individuals within each household over a 3-day
period (USDA, 1992b).
The same basic survey design was used for the three
most recent NFCSs, but the sample sizes and statistical
classifications used were somewhat different (USDA,
1992a). In 1965-66, 10,000 households were surveyed
(USDA, 1972). The sample size increased to 15,000
households (over 36,000 individuals) in 1977-78, but
decreased to 4,500 households in 1987-88 because of
budgetary constraints and a low response rate (37 percent).
Data from the 1977-78 NFCS are presented in this
handbook because the data have been published by USDA
in various publications and reanalyzed by various EPA
offices according to the food items/groups commonly used
to assess exposure. Published 1-day data from the 1987-88
NFCS data are also presented.
USDA also conducts the Continuing Survey of Food
Intake by Individuals. The purpose of the survey is to
"assess food consumption behavior and nutritional content
of diets for policy implications relating to food production
and marketing, food safely, food assistance, and nutrition
education" (USDA, 1995). An EPA analysis of the 1989-
91 CSFII data set is presented in this handbook. During
1989 through 1991, over 15,000 individuals participated in
the CSFII (USDA, 1995). Using a stratified sampling
technique, individuals of all ages living in selected
households in the 48 conterminous states and Washington,
D.C. were surveyed. Individuals provided 3 consecutive
days of data, including a personal interview on the first day
followed by 2-day dietary records. The 3-day response rate
for the 1989-91 CSFII was approximately 45 percent.
Published 1-day data from the 1994 and 1995 CSFII are
also presented. The 1994 and 1995 CSFII included data for
2 non-consecutive survey days (although 2 days of data
have been collected, only data for the first survey day have
been analyzed and published by USDA). Over 5,500
individuals participated in these surveys (USDA, 1996a;
1996b).
Individual average daily intake rates calculated from
NFCS and CSFII data are based on averages of reported
individual intakes over one day or three consecutive days.
Such short term data are suitable for estimating mean
average daily intake rates representative of both short-term
and long-term consumption. However, the distribution of
average daily intake rates generated using short term data
(e.g., 3 day) do not necessarily reflect the long-term
distribution of average daily intake rates. The distributions
generated from short term and long term data will differ to
the extent that each individual's intake varies from day to
day; the distributions will be similar to the extent that
individuals' intakes are constant from day to day.
Day to day variation in intake among individuals will be
great for food item/groups that are highly seasonal and for
items/groups that are eaten year around but that are not
typically eaten every day. For these foods, the intake
distribution generated from short term data will not be a
good reflection of the long term distribution. On the other
hand, for broad categories of foods (e.g., vegetables) which
are eaten on a daily basis throughout the year with minimal
seasonality, the short term distribution may be a reasonable
approximation of the true long term distribution, although
it will show somewhat more variability. In this and the
following section, distributions are shown only for the
following broad categories of foods: fruits, vegetables,
meats and dairy. Because of the increased variability of the
short-term distribution, the short-term upper percentiles
shown here will overestimate somewhat the corresponding
percentiles of the long-term distribution.
9.2.2. Key Fruits and Vegetables Intake Study Based
on the USDA CSFII
U.S. EPA Analysis of USDA 1989-91 CSFII Data -
EPA analyzed three years of data from USDA's CSFII to
generate distributions of intake rates for various fruit and
vegetable items/groups. Data from the 1989, 1990, and
1991 CFSII were combined into a single data set to increase
the number of observations available for analysis.
Approximately 15,000 individuals provided intake data
over the three survey years. The fruit and vegetable
items/groups selected for this analysis included total fruits
and total vegetables; individual fruits such as: apples,
peaches, pears, strawberries, and other berries; individual
vegetables such as: asparagus, beets, broccoli, cabbage,
carrots, com, cucumbers, lettuce, lima beans, okra, onions,
peas, peppers, pumpkin, snap beans, tomatoes, and white
potatoes; fruits and vegetables categorized as exposed,
protected and roots; and various USDA categories (i.e.,
Page
9-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
citrus and other fruits, and dark green, deep yellow, and
other vegetables). These fruit and vegetable categories
were selected to be consistent with those evaluated in the
homegrown food analysis presented in Chapter 13. Intake
rates of total vegetables, tomatoes, and white potatoes were
adjusted to account for the amount of these food items eaten
as meat and grain mixtures as described in Appendix 9A.
Food items/groups were identified in the CSFII data base
according to USDA-defined food codes. Appendix 9B
presents the codes used to determine the various food
groups. Intake rates for these food items/groups represent
intake of all forms of the product (i.e., home produced and
commercially produced).
Individual identifiers in the database were used
throughout the analysis to categorize populations according
to demographics. These identifiers included identification
number, region, urbanization, age, sex, race, body weight,
weighting factor, season, and number of days that data were
reported. Distributions of intake were determined for
individuals who provided data for all three days of the
survey. Individuals who did not provide information on
body weight, or for which identifying information was
unavailable, were excluded from the analysis. Three-day
average intake rates were calculated for all individuals in
the database for each of the food items/groups. These
average daily intake rates were divided by each individual's
reported body weight to generate intake rates in units of
g/kg-day. The data were also weighted according to the
three-day weights provided in the 1991 CSFII. USDA
sample weights are calculated to account for inherent biases
in the sample selection process, and to adjust the sample
population to reflect the national population. Summary
statistics for individual intake rates were generated on a per
capita basis. That is, both users and non-users of the food
item were included in the analysis. Mean consumer only
intake rates may be calculated by dividing the mean per
capita intake rate by the percent of the population
consuming the food item of interest. Summary statistics
included are: number of weighted and unweighted
observations, percentage of the population using the food
item/group being analyzed, mean intake rate, standard error,
and percentiles of the intake rate distribution (i.e., 0, 1,5,
10, 25, 50, 75, 90, 95, 99, and 100th percentile). Data
were provided for the total population using the food item
being evaluated and for several demographic groups
including: various age groups (i.e., <1, 1-2, 3-5, 6-11, 12-
19, 20-39, 40-69, and 70+years); regions (i.e., Midwest,
Northeast, South, and West); urbanizations (i.e., Central
City, Nonmetropolitan, and Suburban; seasons (i.e., winter,
spring, summer, and fall); and races (i.e., White, Black,
Asian, Native American, and other). Table 9-1 provides the
codes, definitions, and a description of the data in these
categories. The total numbers of individuals in the data set,
by demographic group are presented in Table 9-2. The
food analysis was accomplished using the SAS statistical
programming system (SAS, 1990).
The results of this analysis are presented in Tables 9-
3 and 9-4 for total fruits and total vegetables, Table 9-5 for
individual fruits and vegetables, and Table 9-6 for the
various USDA categories. The data for exposed/protected
and root food items are presented in Tables 9-7 through 9-
11. These tables are presented at the end of this Chapter.
The results are presented in units of g/kg-day. Thus, use of
these data in calculating potential dose does not require the
body weight factor to be included in the denominator of the
average daily dose (ADD) equation. It should be noted that
converting these intake rates into units of g/day by
multiplying by a single average body weight is
inappropriate, because individual intake rates were indexed
to the reported body weights of the survey respondents.
However, if there is a need to compare the intake data
presented here to intake data in units of g/day, a body
weight less than 70 kg (i.e., approximately 60 kg; calculated
based on the number of respondents in each age category
and the average body weights for these age groups, as
presented in Chapter 7 of Volume I) should be used
because the total survey population included children as
well as adults.
The advantages of using the 1989-91 CSFII data set
are that the data are expected to be generally representative
of the U.S. population and that it includes data on a wide
variety of food types. However, it should be noted that the
survey covers only the 48 coterminous U.S. States; Hawaii,
Alaska, and U.S. Territories are not included. The data set
was the most recent of a series of publicly available USDA
data sets (i.e., NFCS 1977-78; NFCS 1987-88; CSFII
1989-91) at the time that EPA conducted the analysis for
this handbook, and should reflect recent eating patterns in
the United States. The data set includes three years of
intake data combined. However, the 1989-91 CSFII data
are based on a three day survey period. Short-term dietary
data may not accurately reflect long-term eating patterns.
This is particularly true for the tails (extremes) of the
distribution of food intake. In addition, the adjustment for
including mixtures adds uncertainty to the intake rate
distributions. The calculation for including mixtures
assumes that intake of any mixture includes all of the foods
identified in Appendix Table 9A-1 in the proportions
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
specified in that table. This may under- or over-estimate
intake of certain foods among some individuals.
The data presented in this handbook for the USDA
1989-91 CSFII is not the most up-to-date information on
food intake. USDA has recently made available the data
from its 1994 and 1995 CSFII. Over 5,500 people
nationwide participated in both of these surveys, providing
recalled food intake information for 2 separate days.
Although the 2-day data analysis has not been conducted,
USDA published the results for the respondents' intakes on
the first day surveyed (USDA, 1996a; 1996b). USDA
1996 survey data will be made available later in 1997. As
soon as 1996 data are available, EPA will take steps to get
the 3-year data (1994, 1995, and 1996) analyzed and the
food ingestion factors updated. Meanwhile, Table 9-12
presents a comparison of the mean daily intakes per
individual in a day for fruits and vegetables from the USDA
survey data from years 1977-78, 19887-88, 1989-91, 1994,
and 1995. This table shows that food consumption patterns
have changed for fruits when comparing 1977 and 1995
data. Consumption of fruits increased by 72 percent, but
vegetable intake remained relatively constant, when
comparing data from 1977 and 1995. However, only an 11
percent increase was observed when comparing fruit intake
values from 1989-91 with the most recent data from 1994
and 1995. This indicates that the 1989-91 CSFII data are
probably adequate for assessing ingestion exposure for
current populations.
9.2.3. Relevant Fruits and Vegetables Intake Studies
The U.S. EPA's Dietary Risk Evaluation System
(ORES) - USEPA, Office of Pesticide Programs - The U.S.
EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) uses the Dietary
Risk Evaluation System (formerly the Tolerance
Assessment System) to assess the dietary risk of pesticide
use as part of the pesticide registration process. OPP sets
tolerances for specific pesticides on raw agricultural
commodities based on estimates of dietary risk. These
estimates are calculated using pesticide residue data for the
food item of concern and relevant consumption data. Intake
rates are based primarily on the USDA 1977-78 NFCS
although intake rates for some food items are based on
estimations from production volumes or other data (i.e.,
some items were assigned an arbitrary value of 0.000001
g/kg-day) (Kariya, 1992). OPP has calculated per capita
intake rates of individual fruits and vegetables for 22
subgroups (age, regional, and seasonal) of the population by
determining the composition of NFCS food items and
disaggregating complex food dishes into their component
raw agricultural commodities (RACs) (White et al, 1983).
The ORES per capita, as consumed intake rates for
all age/sex/demographic groups combined are presented in
Table 9-13. These data are based on both consumers and
non consumers of these food items. Data for specific
subgroups of the population are not presented here, but are
available through OPP via direct request. The data in Table
9-13 may be useful for estimating the risks of exposure
associated with the consumption of individual fruits and
vegetables. It should be noted that these data are indexed to
the reported body weights of the survey respondents and are
expressed in units of grams of food consumed per kg
bodyweight per day. Consequently, use of these data in
calculating potential dose does not require the body weight
factor in the denominator of the ADD equation. It should
also be noted that conversion of these intake rates into units
of g/day by multiplying by a single average body weight is
not appropriate because the ORES data base did not rely on
a single body weight for all individuals. Instead, ORES
used the body weights reported by each individual surveyed
to estimate consumption in units of g/kg-day.
The advantages of using these data are that complex
food dishes have been disaggregated to provide intake rates
for a very large number of fruits and vegetables. These data
are also based on the individual body weights of the
respondents. Therefore, the use of these data in calculating
exposure to toxic chemicals may provide more
representative estimates of potential dose per unit body
weight. However, because the data are based on NFCS
short-term dietary recall the same limitations discussed
previously for other NFCS data sets also apply here. In
addition, consumption patterns may have changed since the
data were collected in 1977-78. OPP is in the process of
translating consumption information from the USDA CSFII
1989-91 survey to be used in ORES.
Food and Nutrient Intakes of Individuals in One
Day in the U.S., USDA (1980, 1992b, 1996a, 1996b) -
USDA calculated mean intake rates for total fruits and total
vegetables using NFCS data from 1977-78 and 1987-88
(USDA, 1980; USDA, 1992b) and CSFII data from 1994
and 1995 (USDA, 1996a; 1996b). The mean per capita
total intake rates are presented in Tables 9-14 and 9-15 for
fruits and Tables 9-16 and 9-17 for vegetables. These
values are based on intake data for one day from the 1977-
78 and 1987-88 USDA NFCSs, respectively. Data from
both surveys are presented here to demonstrate that
although the 1987-88 survey had fewer respondents, the
mean per capita intake rates for all individuals are in good
Page
9-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
agreement with the earlier survey. Also, slightly different
age classifications were used in the two surveys providing
a wider range of age categories from which exposure
assessors may select appropriate intake rates. Tables 9-18
and 9-19 present similar data from the 1994 and 1995
CSFII. The age groups used in this data set are the same as
those used in the 1987-88 NFCS. Tables 9-14 through 9-
19 include both per capita intake rates and intake rates for
consumers-only for various ages of individuals. Intake rates
for consumers-only were calculated by dividing the per
capita consumption rate by the fraction of the population
using vegetables or fruits in a day. The average per capita
vegetable intake rate is 201 g/day based on the 1977-78
data (USDA, 1980), 182 g/day based on the 1987-88 data
(USDA, 1992b), 186 g/day based on the 1994 data, and
188 g/day based on the 1995 data. For fruits the average
per capita intake rate is 142 g/day based on the two most
recent USDA NFCSs (USDA, 1980; USDA, 1992b), and
171 g/day and 173 g/day based on the 1994 and 1995
CSFII, respectively (USDA, 1996a, 1996b). One-day per
capita intake data for fats or oils from the 1994 and 1995
CSFII surveys are presented in Table 9-20. This total fats
and oils food category includes table and cooking fats,
vegetable oils, salad dressings, nondairy cream substitutes,
and sauces such as tartar sauce that are mainly fat or oil
(USDA, 1996a). It does not include oils or fats that were
ingredients in food mixtures.
The advantages of using these data are that they
provide intake estimates for all fruits, all vegetables, or all
fats combined. Again, these estimates are based on one-day
dietary data which may not reflect usual consumption
patterns.
U.S. EPA - Office of Radiation Programs - The U.S.
EPA Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) has also used the
USDA 1977-78 NFCS to estimate daily food intake (U.S.
EPA, 1984a; 1984b). ORP uses food consumption data to
assess human intake of radionuclides in foods. The 1977-
78 NFCS data have been reorganized by ORP, and food
items have been classified according to the characteristics
of radionuclide transport. Data for selected agricultural
products are presented in Table 9-21 and Table 9-22.
These data represent per capita, as consumed intake rates
for total, leafy, exposed, and protected produce. Exposed
produce refers to products (e.g., apples, pears, berries, etc.)
that can intercept atmospherically deposited materials. The
term protected refers to products (e.g., citrus fruit, carrots,
corn, etc.) that are protected from deposition from the
atmosphere. Although the fruit and vegetable classifications
used in the study are somewhat limited in number, they
provide alternative food categories that may be useful to
exposure assessors. Because this study was based on the
USDA NFCS, the limitations discussed previously
regarding short-term dietary recall data also apply to the
intake rates reported here. Also, consumption patterns may
have changed since the data were collected in 1977-78.
U.S. EPA - Office of Science and Technology - The
U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology (OST) within
the Office of Water (formerly the Office of Water
Regulations and Standards) used data from the FDA
revision of the Total Diet Study Food Lists and Diets
(Pennington, 1983) to calculate food intake rates (U.S.
EPA, 1989). OST uses these consumption data in its risk
assessment model for land application of municipal sludge.
The FDA data used are based on the combined results of the
USDA 1977-78, NFCS and the second National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II), 1976-80
(U.S. EPA, 1989). Because food items are listed as
prepared complex foods in the FDA Total Diet Study, each
item was broken down into its component parts so that the
amount of raw commodities consumed could be determined.
Table 9-23 presents intake rates of various fruit and
vegetable categories for various age groups and estimated
lifetime ingestion rates that have been derived by U. S. EPA.
Note that these are per capita intake rates tabulated as
grams dry weight/day. Therefore, these rates differ from
those in the previous tables because U.S. EPA (1984a,
1984b) report intake rates on an as consumed basis.
The EPA-OST analysis provides intake rates for
additional food categories and estimates of lifetime average
daily intake on a per capita basis. In contrast to the other
analyses of USDA NFCS data, this study reports the data in
terms of dry weight intake rates. Thus, conversion is not
required when contaminants are to be estimated on a dry
weight basis. These data, however, may not reflect current
consumption patterns because they are based on data from
1977-78.
Canadian Department of National Health and
Welfare Nutrition Canada Survey - The Nutrition Canada
Survey was conducted between 1970 and 1972 to "(a)
examine the mean consumption of selected food groups and
their contribution to nutrient intakes of Canadians, (b)
examine patterns of food consumption and nutrient intake
at various times of the day, and provide information on the
changes in eating habits during pregnancy." (Canadian
Department of National Health and Welfare, n.d.). The
method used for collecting dietary intake data was 24-hour
recall. The recall method relied on interview techniques in
which the interviewee was asked to recall all foods and
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
beverages consumed during the day preceding the
interview. Intake rates were reported for various age/sex
groups of the population and for pregnant women (Table 9-
24). The report does not specify whether the values
represent per capita or consumer-only intake rates.
However, they appear to be consistent with the as consumed
intake rates for consumers-only reported by USDA (1980,
1992b). It should be noted that these data are also based on
short-term dietary recall and are based on the Canadian
population.
USDA (1993) - Food Consumption, Prices, and
Expenditures, 1970-92 - The USDA's Economic Research
Service (ERS) calculates the amount of food available for
human consumption in the United States on an annual basis
(USDA, 1993). Supply and utilization balance sheets are
generated, based on the flow of food items from production
to end uses for the years 1970 to 1992. Total available
supply is estimated as the sum of production and imports
(USDA, 1993). The availability of food for human use
commonly termed as "food disappearance" is determined by
subtracting exported foods from the total available supply
(USDA, 1993). USDA (1993) calculates the per capita
food consumption by dividing the total food disappearance
by the total U.S. population. USDA (1993) estimated per
capita consumption data for various fruit and vegetable
products from 1970-1992 (1992 data are published). In
this section, the 1991 values, which are the most recent
published final data, are presented. Retail weight per capita
data are presented in Table 9-25. These data have been
derived from the annual per capita values in units of pounds
peryear, presented by USDA (1993), by converting to units
of g/day.
One of the limitations of this study is that
disappearance data do not account for losses from the food
supply from waste or spoilage. As a result, intake rates
based on these data may overestimate daily consumption
because they are based on the total quantity of marketable
commodity utilized. Thus, these data represent bounding
estimates of intake rates only. It should also be noted that
per capita estimates based on food disappearance are not a
direct measure of actual consumption or quantity ingested,
instead the data are used as indicators of changes in usage
overtime (USDA, 1993). An advantage of this study is that
it provides per capita consumption rates for fruits and
vegetables that are representative of long-term intake
because disappearance data are generated annually.
AIHC, 1994 - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
AIHC Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) uses the data presented in
the 1989 version of the Exposure Factors Handbook which
reported data from the USDA 1977-78 NFCS.
Distributions are provided in the @Risk format and the
@Risk formula is also provided. In this handbook, new
analyses of more recent data from the USDA 1989-91
CSFII are presented. Numbers, however, cannot be directly
compared with previous values since the results from the
new analysis are presented on a body weight basis.
The Sourcebook was classified as a relevant study
because it was not the primary source for the data to make
recommendations in this document. However, it can be
used as an alternative source of information.
The advantage of using the CSFII and USDA NFCS
data sets are that they are the largest publicly available data
source on food intake patterns in the United States. Data
are available for a wide variety of fruit and vegetable
products and are intended to be representative of the U.S.
population.
9.2.4. Relevant Fruits and Vegetables Serving Size
Study Based on the USDA NFCS
Pao et al. (1982) - Foods Commonly Eaten by
Individuals - Using data gathered in the 1977-78 USDA
NFCS, Pao et al. (1982) calculated distributions for the
quantities of individual fruit and vegetables consumed per
eating occasion by members of the U.S. population (i.e.,
serving sizes), over a 3-day period. The data were collected
during NFCS home interviews of 37,874 respondents, who
were asked to recall food intake for the day preceding the
interview, and record food intake the day of the interview
and the day after the interview.
Serving size data are presented on an as consumed
(g/day) basis. The data presented in Table 9-26 are for all
ages of the population, combined. If age-specific intake
data are needed, refer to Pao et al. (1982). Although
serving size data only are presented in this handbook,
percentiles for the average quantities of individual fruits and
vegetables consumed by members of the U.S. population
who had consumed these fruits and vegetables over a 3-day
period can be found in Pao et al. (1982).
The advantages of using these data are that they were
derived from the USDA NFCS and are representative of the
U.S. population. This data set provides serving size
distributions for a number of commonly eaten fruits and
vegetables, but the list of foods is limited and does not
account for fruits and vegetables included in complex food
dishes. Also, these data represent the quantity of fruits and
vegetables consumed per eating occasion. Although these
estimates are based on USDA NFCS 1977-78 data, serving
size data have been collected but not published for the more
Page
9-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
recent USDA surveys. These estimates may be useful for
assessing acute exposures to contaminants in specific foods,
or other assessments where the amount consumed per
eating occasion is necessary. However, it should be noted
that serving sizes may have changed since the data were
collected in 1977-78.
9.2.5. Conversion Between As Consumed and Dry
Weight Intake Rates
As noted previously, intake rates may be reported in
terms of units as consumed or units of dry weight. It is
essential that exposure assessors be aware of this difference
so that they may ensure consistency between the units used
for intake rates and those used for concentration data (i.e.,
if the unit of food consumption is grams dry weight/day,
then the unit for the amount of pollutant in the food should
be grams dry weight).
If necessary, as consumed intake rates may be
converted to dry weight intake rates using the moisture
content percentages presented in Table 9-27 and the
following equation:
iRdw = IRac*[(100-W)/100]
(Eqn. 9-1)
"Dry weight" intake rates may be converted to "as
consumed" rates by using:
iRac = iRdw/[(100-W)/100]
where:
(Eqn. 9-2)
IRdw = dry weight intake rate;
IRac = as consumed intake rate; and
W = percent water content.
9.3. RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1989-91 CSFII data described in this section
were used in selecting recommended fruit and vegetable
intake rates for the general population and various
subgroups of the United States population. The general
design of both key and relevant studies are summarized in
Table 9-28. Table 9-29 presents a summary of the
recommended values for fruit and vegetable intake and
Table 9-30 presents the confidence ratings for the fruit and
vegetable intake recommendations. Based on the CSFII
1989-91, the recommended per capita fruit intake rate for
the general population is 3.4 g/kg-day and the
recommended per capita vegetable intake rate for the
general population is 4.3 g/kg-day. Per capita intake rates
for specific food items, on a g/kg-day basis, may be
obtained from Table 9-5. Percentiles of the per capita
intake rate distribution in the general population for total
fruits and total vegetables are presented in Tables 9-3 and
9-4. From these tables, the 95th percentile intake rates for
fruits and vegetables are 12 g/kg-day and 10 g/kg-day,
respectively. It is important to note that the distributions
presented in Tables 9-3 through 9-4 are based on data
collected over a 3-day period and may not necessarily
reflect the long-term distribution of average daily intake
rates. However, for these broad categories of food (i.e.,
total fruits and total vegetables), because they are eaten on
a daily basis throughout the year with minimal seasonality,
the short term distribution may be a reasonable
approximation of the long-term distribution, although it will
display somewhat increased variability. This implies that
the upper percentiles shown here will tend to overestimate
the corresponding percentiles of the true long-term
distribution. Intake rates for the home-produced form of
these fruit and vegetable products are presented in Volume
II, Chapter 13. It should be noted that because these
recommendations are based on 1989-91 CSFII data, they
may not reflect the most recent changes that may have
occurred in consumption patterns. However, as indicated
in Table 9-12, intake has remained fairly constant between
1989-91 and 1995. Thus, the 1989-91 CSFII data are
believed to be appropriate for assessing ingestion exposure
for current populations.
9.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 9
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
Canadian Department of National Health and Welfare,
Bureau of National Sciences, Health Protection
Branch (n.d.). Food Consumption, Patterns Report:
A report from Nutrition Canada.
Kariya, J. (1992) Written communication to L. Phillips,
Versar, Inc., March 4, 1992.
Pao, E.M.; Fleming, K.H.; Guenther, P.M.; Mickle, S.J.
(1982) Foods commonly eaten by individuals:
amount per day and per eating occasion. U.S.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Department of Agriculture. Home Economics
Report No. 44.
Pennington, J.A.T. (1983) Revision of the total diet
study food list and diets. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
82:166-173.
SAS Institute, Inc. (1990) SAS Procedures Guide,
Version 6, Third Edition, Gary, NC: SAS Institute,
Inc., 1990,705pp.
USDA. (1972) Food consumption: households in the
United States, Seasons and year 1965-1966. U.S.
Department of Agriculture.
USDA. (1979-1986) Agricultural Handbook No. 8.
United States Department of Agriculture.
USDA. (1980) Food and nutrient intakes of individuals
in one day in the United States, Spring 1977.
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1977-1978.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Preliminary Report
No. 2.
USDA. (1992a) Changes in food consumption and
expenditures in American households during the
1980s. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Washington, D.C. Statistical Bulletin No. 849.
USDA. (1992b) Food and nutrient intakes by
individuals in the United States, 1 day, 1987-88:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition
Information Service. Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey 1987-88, NFCS Rpt. No. 87-1-1.
USDA. (1993) Food consumption prices and
expenditures (1970-1992) U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Statistical
Bulletin, No. 867.
USDA. (1995) Food and nutrient intakes by individuals
in the United States, 1 day, 1989-91. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service. NFS Report No. 91-2.
USDA. (1996a) Data tables: results from USDA's 1994
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals
and 1994 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
USDA. (1996b) Data tables: results from USDA's 1995
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals
and 1995 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
U.S. EPA. (1984a) An estimation of the daily average
food intake by age and sex for use in assessing the
radionuclide intake of individuals in the general
population. EPA-520/1-84-021.
U.S. EPA. (1984b) An estimation of the daily food
intake based on data from the 1977-1978 USDA
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey.
Washington, DC: Office of Radiation Programs.
EPA-520/1-84-015.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Development of risk assessment
methodologies for land application and distribution
and marketing of municipal sludge. Washington,
DC: Office of Science and Technology. EPA 6007-
89/001.
White, S.B.; Peterson, B.; Clayton, C.A.; Duncan, D.P.
(1983) Interim Report Number 1: The construction
of a raw agricultural commodity consumption data
base. Prepared by Research Triangle Institute for
EPA Office of Pesticide Programs.
Page
9-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-1. Sub-category Codes and Definitions Used in the CSFI]
Code Definition
Description
1989-91 Analysis
Region"
1 Northeast
2 Midwest
3 South
4 West
Includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, and Vermont
Includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South
Dakota, and Wisconsin
Includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West
Virginia
Includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington,
and Wyoming
Urbanization
1 Central City
2 Suburban
3 Nonmetropolitan
Cities with populations of 50,000 or more that is the main city within the metropolitan statistical area (MSA).
An area that is generally within the boundaries of an MSA, but is not within the legal limit of the central city.
An area that is not within an MSA.
Season
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
April, May, June
July, August, September
October, November, December
January, February, March
Race
1
2
3
4
5, 8, 9 Other/NA
White (Caucasian)
Black
Asian and Pacific Islander
Native American, Aleuts, and Eskimos
Don't know, no answer, some other race
" Alaska and Hawaii were not included.
Source: CSFII 1989-91.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-2. Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations for
1989-91 CSFII Data Used in Analysis of Food Intake
Demographic Factor
Total
Age
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70+
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weighted
242,707,000
7,394,000
7,827,000
11,795,000
21,830,000
26,046,000
78,680,000
71,899,000
17,236,000
60,633,000
60,689,000
60,683,000
60,702,000
73,410,000
53,993,000
115,304,000
2,871,000
29,721,000
2,102,000
7,556,000
200,457,000
59,285,000
50,099,000
83,741,000
49,582,000
Unweighted
11,912
424
450
603
1,147
1,250
3,555
3,380
1,103
3,117
3,077
2,856
2,862
3,607
3,119
5,186
149
1,632
171
350
9,610
3,007
2,180
4,203
2,522
Page
9-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Table 9-3. Per Capita Intake of Total Fruits (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
69.0%
67.9%
76.7%
80.8%
79.2%
62.6%
58.8%
71.0%
83.3%
68.9%
68.3%
70.4%
68.4%
68.8%
67.4%
70.1%
77.2%
63.7%
61.4%
64.9%
70.1%
69.9%
73.9%
62.0%
75.4%
Mean
3.381
14.898
11.836
8.422
5.047
2.183
1.875
2.119
2.982
3.579
3.249
3.381
3.314
3.288
3.107
3.567
5.839
3.279
3.319
4.027
3.337
3.236
3.665
3.017
3.880
SE
0.068
1.285
0.582
0.364
0.160
0.095
0.056
0.051
0.087
0.169
0.116
0.131
0.119
0.114
0.113
0.113
0.632
0.188
0.490
0.465
0.075
0.120
0.143
0.105
0.187
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
2.80
2.22
1.30
0
0
0
0.89
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.24
0
0
0
0
0
0.07
0
0.17
P50
1.68
8.80
9.76
6.37
3.86
1.36
1.06
1.36
2.42
1.66
1.73
1.80
1.52
1.66
1.51
1.80
4.20
1.51
1.58
1.77
1.66
1.58
1.84
1.42
2.08
P75
4.16
21.90
17.99
12.53
7.17
3.38
2.82
3.24
4.28
3.94
4.14
4.29
4.27
4.00
3.94
4.40
6.76
4.25
4.31
5.10
4.06
4.07
4.70
3.80
4.45
P90
7.98
35.98
25.70
19.29
11.79
5.66
5.08
5.20
6.77
8.20
7.43
7.87
8.33
7.82
7.52
8.43
17.30
7.70
7.57
10.92
7.87
7.87
8.37
7.39
9.18
P95
12.44
42.77
30.69
22.78
14.49
7.24
6.43
6.73
8.31
13.41
12.22
12.26
12.17
11.94
12.25
13.19
20.65
12.34
16.02
14.96
12.21
11.30
12.75
11.67
14.61
P99 PI 00
26.54 210.72
88.42 210.72
52.27 80.19
32.83 52.87
21.53 30.37
11.80 16.86
10.26 41.58
10.52 23.07
11.89 15.00
32.62 204.28
23.71 88.42
23.11 210.72
26.54 75.52
23.73 210.72
26.04 84.34
28.13 204.28
29.61 38.95
26.54 210.72
22.66 29.24
47.78 53.89
26.48 204.28
28.64 84.34
31.67 88.42
24.67 210.72
25.49 204.28
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on
EPA's analyses of the
1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
s
ri
i Ore
-------
QTQ
I
& .
>Q I.
s 5
Kil
Table 9-4. Per Capita Intake of Total Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
NOTE: SE =
Percent
Consuming
97.2%
74.8%
95.6%
97.2%
97.6%
98.1%
98.2%
98.3%
98.3%
97.8%
96.9%
97.0%
97.0%
97.4%
96.3%
97.6%
93.3%
96.1%
87.1%
96.6%
97.6%
97.0%
97.2%
97.4%
96.9%
Standard error
Mean
4.259
6.802
7.952
7.125
5.549
3.807
3.529
3.741
4.068
4.366
4.095
4.181
4.394
4.059
4.450
4.296
4.913
4.228
4.880
4.762
4.229
4.123
4.494
4.268
4.168
SE
0.029
0.375
0.228
0.200
0.109
0.070
0.037
0.039
0.071
0.063
0.055
0.059
0.056
0.053
0.060
0.044
0.330
0.093
0.277
0.183
0.031
0.061
0.073
0.047
0.060
PI P5
0 0.75
0 0
0 1.33
0 1.11
0 1.03
0 0.85
0 0.75
0 0.85
0 0.96
0 0.86
0 0.72
0 0.58
0 0.86
0 0.67
0 0.86
0 0.82
0 0
0 0.36
0 0
0 0
0 0.86
0 0.75
0 0.69
0 0.86
0 0.60
P10
1.29
0
2.32
2.15
1.72
1.30
1.22
1.34
1.47
1.31
1.20
1.16
1.40
1.22
1.41
1.31
1.53
0.85
0.58
1.11
1.37
1.20
1.29
1.39
1.22
P25
2.26
0
4.65
3.79
3.09
2.16
2.06
2.19
2.47
2.28
2.19
2.21
2.36
2.08
2.44
2.30
2.06
1.99
2.40
2.46
2.30
2.09
2.37
2.31
2.25
P50 P75
3.60 5.37
5.52 10.41
7.28 10.26
5.83 9.64
4.82 7.31
3.49 4.71
3.16 4.54
3.43 4.94
3.67 5.35
3.56 5.28
3.45 5.19
3.54 5.34
3.78 5.67
3.34 5.17
3.72 5.66
3.64 5.38
3.66 7.52
3.19 5.46
4.22 6.85
4.24 6.20
3.60 5.32
3.35 5.16
3.77 5.70
3.66 5.32
3.57 5.38
P90
7.93
15.27
14.77
13.87
10.06
6.80
6.36
6.56
6.89
8.33
7.67
7.73
8.03
7.74
8.28
7.86
10.32
8.80
8.87
9.33
7.74
8.03
8.42
7.76
7.78
P95
10.00
19.29
16.32
15.43
11.74
8.52
7.63
7.78
8.17
10.52
9.85
9.54
9.69
9.51
10.08
10.17
14.84
11.35
11.37
11.93
9.75
9.87
11.00
9.80
9.53
P99
15.65
29.61
21.24
25.09
18.39
12.26
10.69
10.91
11.96
17.95
15.33
15.14
15.23
16.04
16.27
15.39
15.43
18.39
13.89
15.02
15.31
16.90
15.86
15.31
15.28
P100
44.99
44.99
32.10
35.56
31.30
27.84
17.07
24.51
18.92
35.56
44.99
41.68
29.69
44.99
35.56
41.68
16.76
32.10
21.77
22.14
44.99
35.56
41.68
44.99
35.56
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91
CSFII
Q
I
•*•
a
I
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
Q
I
Table 9-5. Per Capita Intake of Individual Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
28.4%
41.7%
42.9%
44.1%
41.6%
23.0%
21.3%
26.0%
30.8%
33.7%
25.9%
23.2%
30.4%
27.4%
26.8%
29.9%
38.3%
22.7%
20.5%
24.9%
29.4%
29.1%
31.5%
23.6%
32.7%
Apples
Mean
0.854
5.042
4.085
3.004
1.501
0.394
0.337
0.356
0.435
1.094
0.667
0.751
0.905
0.749
0.759
0.965
0.871
0.688
0.407
0.964
0.879
0.782
0.953
0.828
0.885
SE
0.052
0.823
0.508
0.312
0.123
0.062
0.033
0.027
0.052
0.116
0.078
0.122
0.095
0.081
0.104
0.083
0.327
0.159
0.273
0.256
0.057
0.082
0.116
0.099
0.121
Asparagus
Percent
Consuming Mean
1.5%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.3%
1.1%
2.5%
3.5%
0.8%
2.7%
1.1%
1.3%
1.1%
1.3%
1.8%
2.7%
0.3%
0.0%
0.6%
1.7%
1.8%
1.6%
1.0%
1.8%
0.012
0
0.003
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.008
0.025
0.026
0.005
0.023
0.006
0.015
0.013
0.011
0.013
0.067
0.003
0
0.001
0.013
0.015
0.015
0.010
0.012
SE
0.008
0
0.041
0.038
0.019
0.033
0.012
0.016
0.028
0.013
0.017
0.014
0.018
0.018
0.015
0.012
0.123
0.019
0
0.009
0.009
0.016
0.022
0.014
0.015
Bananas
Percent
Consuming Mean
20.9%
24.3%
23.3%
20.1%
16.2%
13.3%
14.4%
26.0%
37.4%
19.3%
21.3%
20.5%
22.6%
19.6%
20.5%
21.9%
33.6%
14.4%
17.5%
20.6%
21.8%
18.8%
23.0%
19.3%
24.0%
0.27
1.33
0.86
0.46
0.29
0.16
0.13
0.22
0.36
0.25
0.27
0.23
0.31
0.25
0.24
0.29
0.54
0.19
0.36
0.33
0.27
0.25
0.26
0.28
0.27
SE
0.02
0.27
0.17
0.09
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.20
0.04
0.16
0.15
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.03
Percent
Consuming
1.8%
1.2%
0.7%
0.5%
0.9%
0.6%
1.3%
2.4%
5.2%
1.2%
2.0%
1.7%
2.3%
1.3%
1.8%
2.0%
0.7%
1.1%
1.2%
0.9%
1.9%
0.8%
2.3%
1.8%
2.4%
Beets
Mean
0.009
0.045
0.006
0.006
0.008
0.001
0.004
0.009
0.029
0.009
0.009
0.005
0.011
0.008
0.010
0.008
0.040
0.007
0.003
0.015
0.008
0.010
0.008
0.009
0.008
SE
0.010
0.296
0.055
0.056
0.040
0.010
0.007
0.009
0.022
0.040
0.012
0.008
0.013
0.031
0.013
0.009
0.320
0.024
0.028
0.101
0.010
0.049
0.012
0.011
0.009
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
s
i Ore
ft
-------
I
5 .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 9-5. Per Capita Intake of Individual Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) (continued)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropoli
tan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native
American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
10.9%
4.2%
7.6%
10.1%
6.8%
8.2%
11.4%
13.8%
11.8%
10.8%
11.7%
8.8%
12.3%
10.6%
9.0%
12.2%
15.4%
8.3%
5.3%
10.3%
11.4%
8.4%
13.5%
9.8%
13.4%
Broccoli
Mean
0.107
0.142
0.234
0.307
0.098
0.065
0.081
0.102
0.115
0.089
0.122
0.120
0.098
0.119
0.067
0.119
0.209
0.154
0.021
0.180
0.097
0.077
0.113
0.109
0.135
SE
0.012
0.224
0.134
0.118
0.052
0.028
0.015
0.016
0.028
0.024
0.022
0.032
0.020
0.024
0.017
0.019
0.166
0.047
0.045
0.100
0.012
0.025
0.026
0.022
0.025
Percent
Consuming
12.2%
2.4%
5.1%
7.5%
7.5%
8.5%
10.6%
17.1%
21.1%
12.3%
12.4%
12.3%
11.9%
10.8%
13.7%
12.4%
27.5%
13.9%
4.7%
6.0%
12.1%
10.1%
11.6%
14.4%
11.8%
Cabbage
Mean
0.088
0.023
0.086
0.107
0.049
0.065
0.070
0.115
0.151
0.092
0.086
0.097
0.076
0.073
0.102
0.091
0.400
0.129
0.037
0.041
0.080
0.065
0.083
0.106
0.088
SE
0.009
0.078
0.089
0.081
0.027
0.028
0.015
0.015
0.025
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.014
0.015
0.016
0.014
0.100
0.029
0.068
0.044
0.009
0.016
0.022
0.015
0.016
Percent
Consuming
16.9%
13.4%
13.3%
15.1%
17.1%
11.8%
15.2%
20.1%
21.3%
17.7%
16.5%
13.9%
19.2%
15.5%
14.4%
19.2%
28.2%
7.0%
11.1%
12.9%
18.6%
16.2%
19.0%
12.4%
23.3%
Carrots
Mean
0.115
0.379
0.214
0.148
0.154
0.056
0.076
0.120
0.132
0.100
0.117
0.083
0.160
0.111
0.095
0.127
0.177
0.066
0.097
0.104
0.122
0.100
0.151
0.074
0.166
SE
0.010
0.165
0.085
0.052
0.037
0.018
0.013
0.016
0.022
0.017
0.022
0.017
0.022
0.019
0.017
0.015
0.101
0.036
0.075
0.063
0.011
0.018
0.027
0.015
0.021
Percent
Consuming
24.1%
17.5%
32.9%
31.5%
35.8%
24.0%
23.8%
20.4%
19.0%
23.6%
24.7%
24.8%
23.2%
22.4%
27.6%
23.1%
14.1%
24.6%
30.4%
16.9%
24.3%
26.8%
23.3%
24.9%
20.1%
Corn
Mean
0.206
0.356
0.587
0.490
0.367
0.173
0.154
0.138
0.140
0.171
0.204
0.244
0.205
0.182
0.255
0.198
0.134
0.226
0.373
0.160
0.204
0.242
0.208
0.219
0.138
SE
0.010
0.128
0.091
0.070
0.032
0.024
0.013
0.013
0.027
0.018
0.019
0.022
0.020
0.017
0.020
0.015
0.080
0.028
0.099
0.065
0.011
0.020
0.026
0.016
0.018
Q
I
•*•
a
I
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
Q
Table 9-5. Per Capita Intake of Individual Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) (continued)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Cucumbers
Percent
Consuming Mean
15.8%
2.4%
7.3%
12.1%
14.9%
12.6%
17.0%
19.8%
14.8%
14.3%
15.8%
19.0%
14.3%
15.1%
15.1%
16.7%
16.1%
7.8%
6.4%
10.9%
17.5%
15.1%
18.9%
13.8%
17.2%
0.063
0.021
0.062
0.083
0.086
0.050
0.057
0.070
0.055
0.056
0.060
0.092
0.044
0.061
0.071
0.060
0.065
0.040
0.037
0.038
0.067
0.074
0.097
0.042
0.050
SE
0.006
0.107
0.069
0.046
0.032
0.017
0.009
0.008
0.016
0.014
0.009
0.014
0.010
0.011
0.013
0.008
0.036
0.021
0.042
0.029
0.007
0.014
0.018
0.007
0.011
Lettuce
Percent
Consuming Mean
41.3%
6.8%
18.2%
29.4%
36.3%
40.4%
44.4%
51.0%
37.4%
38.1%
43.5%
42.3%
41.5%
37.9%
39.9%
44.6%
40.3%
27.1%
42.7%
41.1%
43.7%
36.1%
43.9%
39.3%
48.7%
0.224
0.025
0.116
0.191
0.247
0.187
0.231
0.264
0.203
0.175
0.259
0.218
0.243
0.196
0.221
0.242
0.231
0.134
0.146
0.186
0.239
0.191
0.246
0.210
0.263
SE
0.006
0.026
0.039
0.031
0.027
0.014
0.010
0.010
0.017
0.010
0.011
0.012
0.013
0.009
0.012
0.009
0.050
0.014
0.034
0.027
0.007
0.012
0.014
0.009
0.013
Lima Beans
Percent
Consuming Mean
0.9%
0.5%
0.4%
0.0%
0.3%
0.5%
0.7%
1.5%
1.9%
0.8%
1.0%
0.9%
1.0%
0.5%
1.5%
0.9%
0.0%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0.4%
0.5%
1.8%
0.5%
0.006
0.005
0.006
0
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.010
0.008
0.004
0.008
0.006
0.007
0.004
0.015
0.004
0
0.006
0
0
0.006
0.005
0.003
0.011
0.002
SE
0.007
0.055
0.069
0
0.017
0.019
0.012
0.013
0.019
0.010
0.015
0.014
0.013
0.011
0.018
0.007
0
0.021
0
0
0.007
0.019
0.013
0.011
0.009
Percent
Consuming
1.3%
0.5%
0.2%
0.7%
0.3%
1.4%
1.0%
1.8%
2.7%
0.9%
0.8%
2.2%
1.3%
1.0%
1.8%
1.2%
4.7%
2.1%
0.0%
1.7%
1.1%
0.2%
0.6%
3.2%
0.2%
Okra
Mean
0.009
0.003
0.004
0.013
0.005
0.011
0.008
0.008
0.015
0.004
0.009
0.016
0.006
0.004
0.013
0.010
0.084
0.024
0
0.004
0.006
0
0.009
0.016
0.005
SE
0.007
0.040
0.068
0.046
0.028
0.027
0.016
0.010
0.021
0.009
0.020
0.015
0.012
0.008
0.015
0.012
0.074
0.029
0
0.023
0.007
0.004
0.031
0.010
0.022
I
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
s
i Ore
ft
-------
I
I
&!
Table 9-5. Per Capita Intake of Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) (continued)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
17.4%
1.9%
6.4%
8.0%
9.7%
12.2%
20.5%
24.0%
16.5%
16.3%
19.7%
18.7%
14.8%
16.4%
15.7%
19.1%
20.8%
9.6%
5.3%
15.1%
19.0%
13.8%
20.6%
17.2%
19.2%
Onions
Mean
0.040
0.004
0.012
0.023
0.033
0.030
0.040
0.054
0.043
0.045
0.040
0.040
0.033
0.043
0.033
0.041
0.090
0.034
0.018
0.057
0.039
0.033
0.057
0.034
0.039
SE
0.003
0.022
0.017
0.016
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.005
0.012
0.007
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.004
0.042
0.014
0.022
0.022
0.003
0.006
0.009
0.004
0.006
Other Berries
Percent
Consuming Mean
2.5%
0.9%
1.3%
2.2%
1.4%
0.8%
2.3%
3.2%
5.1%
2.6%
1.9%
3.4%
2.0%
2.9%
1.6%
2.7%
2.7%
0.9%
2.3%
0.9%
2.8%
2.3%
3.2%
1.7%
3.3%
0.029
0.092
0.053
0.039
0.014
0.011
0.024
0.031
0.049
0.024
0.019
0.032
0.042
0.033
0.016
0.033
0.014
0.008
0.072
0.015
0.033
0.022
0.023
0.030
0.043
SE
0.017
0.369
0.248
0.073
0.056
0.029
0.030
0.023
0.040
0.023
0.024
0.027
0.058
0.030
0.019
0.028
0.057
0.034
0.165
0.069
0.019
0.020
0.024
0.037
0.045
Percent
Consuming
8.6%
14.2%
8.9%
10.0%
13.8%
6.9%
4.2%
8.7%
16.1%
6.4%
8.4%
12.5%
7.4%
7.3%
9.8%
8.8%
6.7%
5.6%
9.9%
4.3%
9.3%
9.6%
9.0%
7.9%
8.3%
Peaches
Mean
0.131
0.855
0.286
0.283
0.250
0.084
0.037
0.090
0.161
0.113
0.107
0.166
0.136
0.121
0.156
0.125
0.202
0.111
0.192
0.118
0.132
0.155
0.132
0.113
0.131
SE
0.019
0.268
0.158
0.121
0.063
0.037
0.019
0.021
0.033
0.043
0.037
0.033
0.041
0.035
0.034
0.029
0.235
0.053
0.158
0.145
0.021
0.040
0.048
0.027
0.042
Percent
Consuming
4.8%
12.3%
2.7%
4.5%
7.8%
3.4%
2.4%
5.2%
7.8%
5.5%
4.3%
4.2%
5.1%
4.5%
5.4%
4.6%
2.7%
2.9%
1.2%
5.1%
5.2%
6.0%
5.7%
3.6%
4.5%
Pears
Mean
0.098
1.286
0.105
0.144
0.147
0.025
0.026
0.062
0.087
0.159
0.071
0.076
0.088
0.120
0.083
0.092
0.053
0.066
0.003
0.063
0.106
0.121
0.108
0.051
0.142
SE
0.036
0.598
0.243
0.141
0.057
0.027
0.019
0.022
0.037
0.107
0.041
0.066
0.039
0.091
0.033
0.050
0.151
0.056
0.053
0.089
0.042
0.054
0.064
0.023
0.142
Q
I
1=
•*•
a
I
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
a ^
a g
Ł a
vo ^
1
1=
I
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
12.8%
13.7%
13.6%
12.9%
13.2%
8.4%
10.9%
14.8%
16.4%
13.2%
12.6%
11.2%
14.1%
11.7%
14.5%
12.5%
8.1%
17.0%
2.9%
6.9%
12.5%
10.9%
12.5%
16.2%
9.5%
Table 9-5
Peas
Mean
0.095
0.294
0.174
0.199
0.120
0.053
0.067
0.084
0.117
0.120
0.077
0.074
0.111
0.085
0.113
0.094
0.047
0.143
0.007
0.037
0.092
0.071
0.101
0.126
0.067
Per Capita Intake of Individual Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) (continued)
SE
0.009
0.142
0.083
0.077
0.029
0.021
0.013
0.011
0.024
0.023
0.015
0.019
0.017
0.018
0.020
0.014
0.071
0.032
0.035
0.058
0.010
0.014
0.026
0.017
0.018
Percent
Consuming
6.5%
0.7%
2.4%
3.0%
4.7%
5.3%
7.9%
8.6%
4.7%
6.0%
7.3%
7.9%
4.7%
6.5%
6.0%
6.8%
8.1%
3.6%
5.3%
11.1%
6.8%
4.7%
9.0%
5.8%
7.6%
Peppers
Mean
0.022
0.003
0.011
0.014
0.019
0.017
0.026
0.027
0.010
0.023
0.021
0.023
0.019
0.023
0.017
0.023
0.102
0.005
0.015
0.037
0.022
0.016
0.036
0.015
0.025
SE
0.005
0.025
0.031
0.032
0.016
0.014
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.009
0.009
0.009
0.010
0.009
0.006
0.007
0.112
0.007
0.031
0.024
0.005
0.011
0.012
0.006
0.010
Percent
Consuming
1.0%
5.2%
0.4%
0.7%
0.4%
0.2%
0.6%
1.2%
1.7%
1.9%
0.6%
0.4%
1.0%
1.1%
0.5%
1.3%
0.7%
0.3%
0.0%
0.9%
1.2%
1.2%
1.4%
0.5%
1.3%
Pumpkins
Mean
0.026
0.497
0.030
0.018
0.012
0
0.007
0.011
0.034
0.043
0.034
0.012
0.015
0.035
0.015
0.025
0.005
0.037
0
0.024
0.025
0.027
0.061
0.002
0.030
SE
0.032
0.363
0.253
0.148
0.118
0.007
0.026
0.018
0.053
0.056
0.105
0.064
0.037
0.068
0.068
0.041
0.057
0.238
0
0.208
0.030
0.050
0.106
0.026
0.060
Snap Beans
Percent
Consuming Mean
21.5%
16.7%
24.9%
25.0%
25.6%
18.3%
19.0%
22.3%
25.5%
21.5%
18.9%
22.3%
23.7%
20.2%
22.3%
22.0%
13.4%
24.1%
21.1%
15.1%
21.5%
22.4%
19.7%
24.3%
17.5%
0.146
0.439
0.383
0.274
0.183
0.112
0.096
0.124
0.149
0.164
0.109
0.147
0.163
0.133
0.141
0.156
0.059
0.188
0.119
0.168
0.140
0.146
0.131
0.177
0.107
SE
0.008
0.154
0.070
0.048
0.024
0.018
0.010
0.011
0.019
0.018
0.013
0.016
0.017
0.015
0.013
0.013
0.050
0.022
0.048
0.073
0.009
0.014
0.020
0.014
0.019
Q
I
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
Ł
i QTQ
ft
-------
QTQ
I
& .
>Q I.
s 5
Kil
Table 9-5. Per Capita Intake of Individual Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed) (continued)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
3.4%
0.7%
1.6%
3.2%
3.3%
2.3%
2.7%
4.5%
5.8%
1.3%
7.7%
2.2%
2.5%
2.8%
3.8%
3.6%
3.4%
1.5%
1.8%
1.4%
3.9%
4.8%
3.3%
2.6%
3.3%
Strawberries
Mean
0.039
0.018
0.155
0.045
0.052
0.016
0.028
0.042
0.050
0.008
0.105
0.030
0.013
0.028
0.052
0.040
0.395
0.031
0.023
0.007
0.037
0.051
0.059
0.025
0.028
SE
0.019
0.154
0.598
0.080
0.058
0.028
0.020
0.020
0.040
0.017
0.045
0.032
0.015
0.020
0.029
0.035
1.152
0.056
0.120
0.042
0.013
0.025
0.079
0.019
0.025
Percent
Consuming
91.8%
64.2%
93.8%
94.9%
95.2%
95.5%
94.7%
90.6%
87.2%
92.5%
90.6%
92.4%
91.9%
91.5%
90.7%
92.8%
90.6%
87.4%
84.2%
91.4%
92.8%
92.2%
93.0%
90.7%
92.3%
Tomatoes
Mean
0.876
1.116
1.838
1.700
1.160
0.852
0.791
0.673
0.689
0.907
0.808
0.946
0.844
0.827
0.827
0.931
1.147
0.713
0.890
1.004
0.892
0.814
0.988
0.831
0.914
White Potatoes
SE
0.010
0.094
0.103
0.072
0.032
0.022
0.013
0.013
0.027
0.021
0.018
0.019
0.018
0.017
0.018
0.015
0.110
0.027
0.073
0.049
0.011
0.019
0.024
0.016
0.021
Percent
Consuming
87.6%
59.9%
84.2%
88.1%
90.5%
90.1%
88.6%
88.1%
88.9%
88.9%
86.3%
86.5%
88.7%
84.7%
89.4%
88.5%
77.2%
83.3%
85.4%
77.1%
88.9%
89.2%
86.6%
88.5%
85.1%
Mean
1.093
1.102
2.228
1.817
1.702
1.238
0.897
0.882
0.865
1.169
1.036
1.001
1.167
1.017
1.211
1.087
0.446
1.202
1.735
1.036
1.082
1.246
1.090
1.074
0.946
SE
0.013
0.128
0.113
0.086
0.058
0.042
0.018
0.018
0.031
0.027
0.024
0.029
0.024
0.025
0.027
0.019
0.062
0.047
0.134
0.080
0.014
0.029
0.030
0.021
0.026
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
•*•
a
I
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
Table 9-6. Per Capita Intake of USDA Categories of Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day as consumed)
Dark Green Vegetables
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
19.1%
7.5%
12.4%
14.8%
13.3%
14.3%
18.8%
24.4%
24.6%
19.6%
21.0%
15.4%
20.0%
20.5%
16.0%
19.9%
30.9%
25.9%
9.4%
15.1%
18.1%
12.6%
21.1%
20.5%
22.6%
Mean SE
0.180 0.012
0.180 0.177
0.364 0.137
0.390 0.119
0.150 0.044
0.112 0.030
0.137 0.016
0.187 0.016
0.255 0.034
0.169 0.023
0.187 0.020
0.182 0.029
0.180 0.024
0.197 0.021
0.133 0.020
0.190 0.019
0.327 0.127
0.318 0.039
0.126 0.092
0.224 0.087
0.156 0.012
0.125 0.026
0.185 0.026
0.206 0.021
0.195 0.022
Deep Yel
Percent
Consuming
20.0%
10.1%
14.4%
16.3%
19.1%
14.0%
17.5%
24.8%
29.4%
22.7%
19.7%
15.6%
21.9%
18.6%
18.4%
22.0%
29.5%
12.5%
10.5%
13.4%
21.6%
18.7%
22 1%
16.8%
9^ 9o/
ow Vegetables
Mean SE
0.147 0.010
0.178 0.157
0.281 0.109
0.177 0.063
0.185 0.043
0.080 0.020
0.100 0.015
0.164 0.017
0.245 0.028
0.156 0.020
0.144 0.023
0.094 0.017
0.192 0.023
0.133 0.019
0.138 0.021
0.160 0.016
0.221 0.118
0.104 0.029
0.081 0.060
0.106 0.071
0.154 0.011
0.128 0.020
0.175 0.026
0.119 0.018
0.187 0.021
Citrus Fruits
Percent
Consuming
38.0%
24.8%
43.6%
41.0%
40.5%
37.0%
33.4%
39.9%
46.8%
38.3%
38.4%
33.8%
41.3%
39.8%
34.2%
39.1%
51.0%
40.1%
33.3%
40.3%
37.4%
35.5%
45.6%
33.5%
41.8%
Mean
1.236
1.929
4.237
2.596
1.805
1.130
0.903
0.864
1.155
1.211
1.225
1.136
1.371
1.187
1.153
1.306
2.479
1.474
0.945
1.439
1.178
1.099
1.430
1.090
1.449
SE
0.039
0.586
0.459
0.267
0.138
0.085
0.049
0.045
0.069
0.074
0.072
0.093
0.073
0.072
0.074
0.058
0.453
0.135
0.219
0.229
0.041
0.077
0.079
0.067
0.092
Other Fruits
Percent
Consuming
57.7%
61.6%
66.4%
70.0%
70.1%
47.3%
44.9%
60.9%
76.1%
57.6%
56.4%
60.8%
56.0%
55.3%
57.8%
59.2%
69.8%
46.2%
50.9%
52.0%
59.8%
59.8%
60.5%
50.3%
65.0%
Mean
2.141
12.855
7.599
5.826
3.242
1.053
0.972
1.255
1.827
2.354
2.024
2.245
1.943
2.090
1.954
2.262
3.360
1.806
2.375
2.589
2.154
2.137
2.235
1.927
2.414
SE
0.063
1.284
0.498
0.348
0.126
0.070
0.042
0.038
0.067
0.171
0.102
0.112
0.106
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.547
0.156
0.431
0.452
0.071
0.108
0.132
0.095
0.182
Other Vegetables
Percent
Consuming
83.1%
41.7%
73.6%
78.9%
83.2%
81.0%
84.1%
88.3%
87.7%
82.5%
83.3%
83.1%
83.4%
81.4%
83.2%
84.1%
85.2%
78.1%
75.4%
76.3%
84.2%
81.2%
84.5%
83.2%
83.8%
Mean
1.316
1.346
2.077
1.979
1.534
0.950
1.081
1.374
1.615
1.276
1.297
1.332
1.361
1.245
1.407
1.319
2.228
1.232
1.077
1.116
1.326
1.186
1.445
1.346
1.293
SE
0.016
0.200
0.136
0.102
0.062
0.035
0.022
0.026
0.046
0.032
0.030
0.032
0.031
0.027
0.033
0.023
0.205
0.044
0.107
0.104
0.017
0.029
0.040
0.026
0.033
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
s
i Ore
ft
-------
I
5 .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 9-7. Per Capita Intake of Exposed Fruits (Wka-dav as consumed")
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
44.1%
54.7%
55.3%
56.9%
58.8%
36.4%
32.7%
44.3%
57.7%
45.5%
42.6%
45.3%
43.0%
42.4%
44.0%
45.3%
52.3%
34.6%
35.7%
34.0%
46.1%
47.3%
47.3%
36.9%
49.4%
Mean
1.435
9.224
5.682
4.324
2.316
0.682
0.596
0.716
1.032
1.753
1.184
1.44
1.362
1.322
1.335
1.553
2.118
1.132
0.939
1.614
1.468
1.422
1.518
1.271
1.643
SE
0.062
1.247
0.486
0.344
0.12
0.065
0.038
0.031
0.058
0.179
0.078
0.113
0.097
0.088
0.097
0.112
0.541
0.149
0.316
0.408
0.07
0.091
0.118
0.092
0.198
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
2.897
2.897
2.305
1.379
0
0
0
0.534
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.654
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
1.402
12.336
8.598
5.766
3.32
0.871
0.754
1.102
1.452
1.521
1.283
1.389
1.441
1.328
1.445
1.442
1.674
1.045
0.922
1.659
1.441
1.645
1.49
1.177
1.443
P90
3.496
26.98
15.187
11.65
5.879
2.158
1.984
2.139
2.894
3.64
3.208
3.451
3.54
3.481
3.32
3.686
4.299
2.888
2.271
4.084
3.593
3.501
3.898
3.104
3.774
P95
6.075
33.216
19.107
19.049
8.585
3.214
2.858
3.048
4.042
7.537
5.505
6.313
5.703
6.075
5.505
6.614
8.678
4.618
4.157
8.529
6.104
6.114
6.834
5.695
7.009
P99 P100
17.823 204.28
75.353 204.28
33.353 80.189
24.123 48.728
15.318 25.367
6.703 10.766
5.911 28.486
5.127 13.206
6.983 10.631
25.206 204.28
14.872 84.336
17.427 98.133
18.752 59.848
15.927 80.189
16.057 84.336
20.444 204.28
25.206 27.337
17.351 80.189
15.635 17.684
35.073 36.71
17.427 204.28
16.438 84.336
19.393 75.353
19.91 80.189
15.947 204.28
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on
EPA's analyses of the
1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
•*•
a
I
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
^. flj
aLJ
kŁ*
>0 ^
a g
05 J2
"t- S
^
^^
1
&
&
1=
I
ST-
Table 9-8. Per Capita Intake of Protected Fruits Ca/ka-dav as consumed")
Population
Grourj
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
52.9%
38.9%
56.7%
57.0%
56.2%
47.7%
45.4%
57.3%
67.5%
50.2%
53.9%
54.1%
53.7%
53.3%
49.4%
54.7%
69.8%
49.6%
46.8%
51.7%
53.4%
49.5%
59.4%
47.6%
60.1%
Mean
1.692
3.097
5.518
3.443
2.339
1.401
1.188
1.284
1.78
1.539
1.75
1.754
1.727
1.632
1.55
1.797
3.279
1.861
2.019
2.014
1.629
1.501
1.887
1.56
1.947
SE
0.037
0.528
0.455
0.235
0.125
0.081
0.047
0.043
0.072
0.071
0.072
0.082
0.071
0.069
0.069
0.056
0.429
0.126
0.33
0.263
0.039
0.072
0.08
0.064
0.084
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0.598
0
2.618
1.948
1.079
0.598
0.108
0.583
1.236
0.269
0.688
0.672
0.621
0.625
0.334
0.667
2.052
0.621
0.851
0.845
0.574
0.265
0.838
0.465
0.854
P75
2.316
4.353
9.049
5.606
3.727
2.234
1.694
2.009
2.706
2.04
2.407
2.471
2.423
2.276
2.115
2.472
4.382
2.695
2.701
2.472
2.238
2.07
2.675
2.147
2.613
P90
4.687
9.963
15.677
9.826
6.92
4.341
3.645
3.541
4.363
4.323
4.681
4.732
4.941
4.497
4.368
4.897
6.981
5.64
5.995
5.759
4.527
4.353
5.371
4.443
4.88
P95
6.717
15.242
20.912
13.018
8.688
5.761
4.844
4.596
5.779
6.509
6.787
6.571
6.905
6.099
6.961
6.826
17.729
7.241
10.354
8.88
6.425
6.099
7.268
6.39
7.836
P99 P100
13.019 136.69
23.624 136.69
27.432 49.904
17.729 35.141
12.807 27.945
7.894 15.503
8.205 29.275
7.719 21.372
8.611 15.003
13.595 26.751
13.032 44.68
15.503 136.69
12.166 30.692
11.535 136.69
12.076 29.275
14.399 44.68
17.729 18.792
13.572 136.69
11.554 15.244
14.279 44.68
12.53 49.904
12.53 49.904
13.018 42.347
12.076 136.69
16.064 44.68
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA
's analyses of the
1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
S
ri
-------
QTQ
I
& .
>Q I.
s 5
Kil
Table 9-9. Per Capita Intake of Exposed Vegetables (Wka-dav as consumed")
Population Percent
Grourj Consuming
Total 84.9%
Age (years)
<01 42.7%
01-02 78.0%
03-05 83.6%
06-11 84.7%
12-19 83.6%
20-39 86.3%
40-69 89.9%
70 + 86.4%
Season
Fall 82.8%
Spring 85.0%
Summer 87.1%
Winter 84.9%
Urbanization
Central City 83.6%
Nonmetropolitan 85.8%
Suburban 85.2%
Race
Asian 83.2%
Black 81.8%
Native American 75.4%
Other/NA 85.4%
White 85.6%
Region
Midwest 80.9%
Northeast 84.7%
South 86.7%
West 86.6%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
Mean
1.49
1.208
2.268
2.245
1.606
1.181
1.3
1.568
1.603
1.383
1.475
1.634
1.468
1.413
1.55
1.511
2.133
1.472
1.501
1.682
1.476
1.215
1.561
1.609
1.546
SE
0.016
0.17
0.145
0.119
0.059
0.04
0.025
0.026
0.044
0.033
0.031
0.033
0.033
0.029
0.031
0.025
0.195
0.051
0.141
0.092
0.017
0.029
0.041
0.027
0.035
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0.367
0
0.299
0.329
0.293
0.253
0.331
0.557
0.672
0.29
0.383
0.432
0.367
0.302
0.471
0.356
0.606
0.308
0.168
0.338
0.371
0.239
0.378
0.434
0.424
P50
1.043
0
1.132
1.411
1.062
0.804
0.923
1.22
1.326
0.951
1.028
1.272
0.999
0.957
1.185
1.055
1.537
0.908
1.018
1.287
1.045
0.824
1.051
1.208
1.127
P75
2.067
1.55
3.616
3.061
2.222
1.696
1.87
2.177
2.214
1.824
2.075
2.289
2.09
1.952
2.146
2.098
3.135
1.88
2.423
2.748
2.067
1.683
2.126
2.254
2.158
P90
3.403
3.834
5.855
5.433
3.769
2.756
2.968
3.42
3.344
3.151
3.406
3.68
3.109
3.278
3.499
3.464
4.746
3.217
3.445
3.644
3.376
2.843
3.564
3.575
3.524
P95
4.515
6.451
7.404
7.664
5.118
3.84
3.692
4.443
4.206
4.283
4.562
4.765
4.464
4.331
4.59
4.683
6.883
4.989
4.155
4.697
4.464
3.834
4.994
4.562
4.7
P99
1.121
11.524
12.808
12.493
9.161
5.699
6.327
6.274
5.928
8.783
7.403
7.399
7.664
8.17
7.283
7.664
10.325
9.219
6.424
6.933
7.359
6.35
8.243
7.404
7.664
P100
20.492
18.592
20.492
17.872
15.741
12.139
14.837
13.624
12.814
18.592
20.492
18.283
16.152
20.492
17.872
16.152
11.841
16.141
8.189
8.368
20.492
20.492
18.283
14.568
16.152
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the
1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
•*•
a
I
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
^. flj
aLJ
kŁ*
>0 ^
a g
05 J2
"t- S
^
^^
1
&
&
1=
I
ST-
Population Percent
Grourj Consuming
Total 34.0%
Age (years)
<01 30.9%
01-02 41.6%
03-05 39.8%
06-11 44.3%
12-19 30.1%
20-39 31.6%
40-69 32.4%
70 + 34.6%
Season
Fall 34.1%
Spring 34.8%
Summer 32.5%
Winter 34.4%
Urbanization
Central City 31.7%
Nonmetropolitan 37.9%
Suburban 33.1%
Race
Asian 16.1%
Black 37.3%
Native American 32.7%
Other/NA 22.9%
White 34.1%
Region
Midwest 35.8%
Northeast 32.4%
South 36.8%
West 28.4%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Table 9- 10
Mean
0.332
1.144
0.794
0.703
0.5
0.229
0.233
0.239
0.303
0.336
0.32
0.334
0.337
0.303
0.396
0.32
0.166
0.411
0.38
0.221
0.326
0.344
0.369
0.358
0.236
. Per Cam'ta Intake of Protected Vegetables (Vka-dav as consumed")
SE
0.012
0.192
0.104
0.081
0.035
0.025
0.015
0.014
0.028
0.025
0.024
0.024
0.022
0.022
0.024
0.018
0.081
0.038
0.095
0.074
0.013
0.022
0.036
0.019
0.022
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0.414
1.435
1.201
1.205
0.848
0.332
0.323
0.362
0.427
0.394
0.421
0.411
0.42
0.354
0.514
0.39
0
0.502
0.446
0
0.413
0.46
0.376
0.48
0.178
P90
1.038
4.584
2.232
2.443
1.439
0.824
0.78
0.772
1.015
1.064
0.96
1.116
1.109
0.971
1.22
1.029
0.636
1.29
1.062
0.644
1.014
1.127
1.102
1.093
0.791
P95
1.637
6.25
3.766
3.053
2.058
1.339
1.161
1.164
1.491
1.725
1.435
1.7
1.724
1.619
1.725
1.591
1.201
2.014
1.826
1.369
1.587
1.674
1.835
1.726
1.257
P99
3.394
8.752
6.488
4.811
3.32
2.138
2.427
2.033
2.291
3.674
3.493
3.492
2.945
3.098
3.826
3.32
1.506
4.579
2.85
2.767
3.317
3.013
5.022
3.484
2.688
P100
14.4
14.4
9.74
11.3
8.6
4.94
5.6
6.25
5.34
11.3
14.4
10.4
8.68
14.4
11.3
14.1
3.17
9.07
4.64
5.6
14.4
11.3
14.1
14.4
6.25
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
S
ri
-------
I
5 .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 9-11. Per Capita Intake of Root Vegetables (Vka-dav as consumed")
Population
Grourj
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
80.7%
52.4%
76.2%
77.9%
84.4%
81.4%
81.6%
82.8%
80.6%
80.6%
80.5%
80.3%
81.5%
77.6%
82.3%
81.9%
55.0%
73.8%
78.9%
65.4%
82.9%
82.2%
80.2%
81.2%
78.5%
Mean
1.245
1.857
2.398
1.914
1.85
1.29
0.988
1.059
1.109
1.324
1.204
1.102
1.348
1.167
1.33
1.254
0.743
1.309
1.791
1.239
1.237
1.361
1.304
1.183
1.15
SE
0.015
0.204
0.129
0.096
0.065
0.045
0.02
0.021
0.04
0.032
0.029
0.031
0.029
0.029
0.03
0.023
0.146
0.052
0.137
0.11
0.016
0.033
0.037
0.024
0.032
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0.226
0
0.52
0.203
0.381
0.279
0.182
0.244
0.312
0.213
0.228
0.152
0.339
0.176
0.311
0.21
0
0.134
0.655
0
0.25
0.29
0.21
0.25
0.146
P50
0.832
0.184
1.879
1.344
1.23
0.909
0.717
0.807
0.821
0.893
0.858
0.655
0.97
0.755
0.893
0.861
0.274
0.761
1.47
0.635
0.858
0.889
0.912
0.796
0.786
P75
1.675
2.66
3.542
2.998
2.638
1.739
1.37
1.488
1.549
1.756
1.557
1.452
1.953
1.545
1.795
1.708
0.814
1.627
2.762
1.75
1.673
1.844
1.781
1.591
1.56
P90
2.974
5.337
5.695
4.596
4.449
3.051
2.385
2.454
2.535
3.238
2.752
2.669
3.1
2.826
3.256
2.972
1.764
3.337
3.858
3.38
2.887
3.238
3.212
2.82
2.673
P95
4.029
8.233
7.084
6.14
6.018
4.177
3.096
3.087
3.203
4.402
3.889
3.858
4.137
3.903
4.422
4.017
3.546
5.358
4.705
4.861
3.942
4.386
4.246
3.906
3.683
P99 P100
7.074 30.609
12.5 30.609
10.449 16.27
7.505 17.416
8.165 17.107
5.74 24.949
5.025 8.002
4.983 9.043
5.636 10.723
7.484 15.625
6.644 30.609
7.751 24.949
5.989 17.416
7.505 30.609
6.946 19.449
7.079 17.416
7.269 10.702
7.968 17.534
7.067 13.578
8.253 10.415
6.651 30.609
7.968 19.449
7.022 24.949
6.926 30.609
7.269 13.578
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA
's analyses of the
1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
•*•
a
I
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-12. Mean Daily Intake of Fruits and Vegetables Per Individual in a Day for USDA 1977-78, 87-88, 89-91, 94, and 95 Surveys
Food Product
Fruits
Vegetables
Source: USDA, 1980;
77-78 Data
(g/day)
142
201
1992; 1996a; 1996b.
87-88 Data
(g/day)
142
182
89-91 Data
(g/day)
156
179
94 Data
(g/day)
171
186
95 Data
(g/day)
173
188
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 9-25
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Alfalfa Sprouts
Apples-Dried
Apples-Fresh
Apples-Juice
Apricots-Dried
Apricots-Fresh
Artichokes-Globe
Artichokes- Jerusalem
Asparagus
Avocados
Bamboo Shoots
Bananas-Dried
Bananas-Fresh
Bananas-Unspecified
Beans-Dry-Blackeye Peas (cowpeas)
Beans-Dry-Broad Beans (Mature Seed)
Beans-Dry-Garbanzo (Chick Pea)
Beans-Dry-Great Northern
Beans-Dry-Hyacinth (Mature Seeds)
Beans-Dry-Kidney
Beans-Dry-Lima
Beans-Dry-Navy (Pea)
Beans-Dry-Other
Beans-Dry-Pigeon Beans
Beans-Dry-Pinto
Beans-Succulent-Broad Beans (Immature
Seed)
Beans-Succulent-Green
Beans-Succulent-Hyacinth (Young Pods)
Beans-Succulent-Lima
Beans-Succulent-Other
Beans-Succulent-Yellow, Wax
Beans-Unspecified
consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/Aj
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0001393
0.0002064
0.4567290
0.2216490
0.0004040
0.0336893
0.0032120
0.0000010
0.0131098
0.0125370
0.0001464
0.0004489
0.2240382
0.0032970
0.0024735
0.0000000
0.0005258
0.0000010
0.0000000
0.0136313
0.0079892
0.0374073
0.0398251
0.0000357
0.0363498
0.0000000
0.2000500
0.0000000
0.0256648
0.0263838
0.0054634
0.0052345
;e/Demographic Subgroups
Standard Error
0.0000319
0.0000566
0.0142203
0.0142069
0.0001457
0.0022029
0.0007696
*
0.0010290
0.0020182
0.0000505
0.0001232
0.0088206
0.0004938
0.0005469
*
0.0001590
*
*
0.0045628
0.0016493
0.0023595
0.0023773
0.0000357
0.0048479
*
0.0062554
*
0.0021327
0.0042782
0.0009518
0.0012082
Page
9-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups (continued)
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Beets-Roots
Beets-Tops (Greens)
Bitter Melon
Blackberries
Blueberries
Boysenberries
Bread Nuts
Bread Fruit
Broccoli
Brussel Sprouts
Cabbage-Chinese/Celery, Inc. Bok Choy
Cabbage-Green and Red
Cactus Pads
Cantaloupes
Carambola
Carob
Carrots
Casabas
Cassava (Yuca Blanca)
Cauliflower
Celery
Cherimoya
Cherries-Dried
Cherries-Fresh
Cherries- Juice
Chicory (French or Belgian Endive)
Chili Peppers
Chives
Citrus Citron
Coconut-Copra
Coconut-Fresh
Coconut-Water
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0216142
0.0008287
0.0000232
0.0064268
0.0090474
0.0007313
0.0000010
0.0000737
0.0491295
0.0068480
0.0045632
0.0936402
0.0000010
0.0444220
0.0000010
0.0000913
0.1734794
0.0007703
0.0002095
0.0158368
0.0609611
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0321754
0.0034080
0.0006707
0.0000000
0.0000193
0.0001573
0.0012860
0.0001927
0.0000005
Standard Error
0.0014187
0.0003755
0.0000233
0.0007316
0.0008951
0.0006284
*
0.0000590
0.0032966
0.0009061
0.0020966
0.0039046
*
0.0029515
*
0.0000474
0.0041640
0.0003057
0.00001574
0.0011522
0.0014495
*
*
0.0024966
0.0009078
0.0001465
*
0.0000070
0.0000324
0.0000927
0.0000684
0.0000005
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-27
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups (continued)
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Collards
Corn, Pop
Com, Sweet
Crabapples
Cranberries
Cranberries-Juice
Crenshaws
Cress, Upland
Cress, Garden, Field
Cucumbers
Currants
Dandelion
Dates
Dewberries
Eggplant
Elderberries
Endive, Curley and Escarole
Fennel
Figs
Garlic
Genip (Spanish Lime)
Ginkgo Nuts
Gooseberries
Grapefruit- Juice
Grapefruit- Pulp
Grapes-Fresh
Grapes-Juice
Grapes-Leaves
Grapes-Raisins
Groundcherries (Poha or Cape-
Gooseberries)
Guava
Honevdew Melons
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0188966
0.0067714
0.2367071
0.0003740
0.0150137
0.0170794
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0000000
0.0720821
0.0005462
0.0005039
0.0006662
0.0023430
0.0061858
0.0001364
0.0011851
0.0000000
0.0027847
0.0007621
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0003953
0.0773585
0.0684644
0.0437931
0.0900960
0.0000119
0.0169730
0.0000000
0.0000945
0.0183628
Standard Error
0.0032628
0.0003348
0.0062226
*
0.0006153
0.0022223
*
*
*
0.0034389
0.0000892
0.0002225
0.0001498
*
0.0007645
0.0001365
0.0001929
*
0.0005254
0.0000230
*
*
0.0001341
0.0053846
0.0032321
0.0023071
0.0058627
0.0000887
0.0009221
*
0.0000558
0.0042879
Page
9-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups (continued)
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Huckleberries (Gaylussacia)
Juneberry
Kale
Kiwi
Kohlrabi
Kumquats
Lambsquarter
Leafy Oriental Vegetables
Leeks
Lemons-Juice
Lemons-Peel
Lemons-Pulp
Lemons-Unspecified
Lentiles-Split
Lentiles-Whole
Lettuce-Head Varieties
Lettuce-Leafy Varieties
Lettuce-Unspecified
Limes-Juice
Limes-Pulp
Limes-Unspecified
Loganberries
Logan Fruit
Loquats
Lychee-Dried
Lychees (Litchi)
Maney (Mammee Apple)
Mangoes
Mulberries
Mung Beans (Sprouts)
Mushrooms
Mustard Greens
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0015036
0.0000191
0.0002357
0.0000798
0.0000481
0.0000010
0.0000388
0.0189564
0.0002570
0.0002149
0.0020695
0.0000079
0.0012022
0.2122803
0.0044328
0.0092008
0.0032895
0.0000941
0.0000010
0.0002040
0.0000010
0.0000000
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0005539
0.0000010
0.0066521
0.0213881
0.0145284
Standard Error
*
*
0.0006070
0.0000191
0.0001028
0.0000574
0.0000481
*
0.0000221
0.0009004
0.0001082
0.0000378
0.0003048
0.0000064
0.0002351
0.0059226
0.0003840
0.0004328
0.0005473
0.0000344
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.0002121
*
0.0006462
0.0009651
0.0024053
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-29
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups (continued)
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Nectarines
Okra
Olives
Onions-Dehydrated or Dried
Onions-Dry-Bulb (Cipollini)
Onions-Green
Oranges-Juice
Oranges-Peel
Oranges-Pulp
Papayas-Dried
Papayas-Fresh
Papayas-Juice
Parsley Roots
Parsley
Parsnips
Passion Fruit (Granadilla)
Pawpaws
Peaches-Dried
Peaches-Fresh
Pears-Dried
Pears-Fresh
Peas (Garden)-Green Immature
Peas (Garden)-Mature Seeds, Dry
Peppers, Sweet, Garden
Peppers-Other
Persimmons
Persian Melons
Pimentos
Pineapple-Dried
Pineapple-Fresh, Pulp
Pineapple-Fresh, Juice
Pitanga (Surinam Cherry)
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0129663
0.0146352
0.0031757
0.0001192
0.1060612
0.0019556
1.0947265
0.0001358
0.1503524
0.0009598
0.0013389
0.0030536
0.0000010
0.0036679
0.0006974
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0000496
0.2153916
0.0000475
0.1224735
0.1719997
0.0017502
0.0215525
0.0043594
0.0004008
0.0000010
0.0019485
0.0000248
0.0308283
0.0371824
0.0000010
Standard Error
0.0013460
0.0017782
0.0002457
0.0000456
0.0021564
0.0001848
0.0283937
0.0000085
0.0092049
0.0000520
0.0005055
0.0012795
*
0.0001459
0.0001746
*
*
0.0000152
0.0078691
0.0000279
0.0050442
0.0067868
0.0002004
0.0010091
0.0004748
0.0002236
*
0.0001482
0.0000195
0.0017136
0.0026438
*
Page
9-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups (continued)
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Plantains
Plums, Prune-Juice
Plums (Damsons)-Fresh
Plums-Prunes (Dried)
Poke Greens
Pomegranates
Potatoes (White)- Whole
Potatoes (White)-Unspecified
Potatoes (White)-Peeled
Potatoes (White)-Dry
Potatoes (White )-Peel Only
Pumpkin
Quinces
Radishes-Roots
Radishes-Tops
Raspberries
Rhubarb
Rutabagas-Roots
Rutabagas-Tops
Salsify (Oyster Plant)
Shallots
Soursop (Annona Muricata)
Soybeans-Sprouted Seeds
Spinach
Squash-Summer
Squash- Winter
Strawberries
Sugar Apples (Sweetsop)
Sweetpotatoes (including Yams)
Swiss Chard
Tangelos
Tangerine-Juice
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0016370
0.0137548
0.0248626
0.0058071
0.0002957
0.0000820
0.3400582
0.0000822
0.7842573
0.0012994
0.0000217
0.0044182
0.0001870
0.0015558
0.0000000
0.0028661
0.0037685
0.0027949
0.0000000
0.0000028
0.0000000
0.0000010
0.0000000
0.0435310
0.0316479
0.0324417
0.0347089
0.0000010
0.0388326
0.0016915
0.0025555
0.0000839
Standard Error
0.0007074
0.0017904
0.0020953
0.0005890
0.0001475
0.0000478
0.0102200
0.0000093
0.0184579
0.0001896
0.0000133
0.0004354
*
0.0001505
*
0.0005845
0.0006588
0.0009720
*
0.0000028
*
*
*
0.0030656
0.0022956
0.0026580
0.0020514
*
0.0035926
0.0004642
0.0006668
0.0000567
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-31
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-13. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups (continued)
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Tangerines
Tapioca
Taro-Greens
Taro-Root
Tomatoes-Catsup
Tomatoes-Juice
Tomatoes-Paste
Tomatoes-Puree
Tomatoes- Whole
Towelgourd
Turnips-Roots
Turnips-Tops
Water Chestnuts
Watercress
Watermelon
Yambean, Tuber
Yautia, Tannier
Youngberries
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0088441
0.0012199
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0420320
0.0551351
0.0394767
0.17012311
0.4920164
0.0000010
0.0082392
0.0147111
0.0004060
0.0003553
0.0765054
0.0000422
0.0000856
0.0003570
Standard Error
0.0010948
0.0000951
*
*
0.0015878
0.0029515
0.0012512
0.0054679
0.0080927
*
0.0014045
0.0025845
0.0000682
0.0001564
0.0068930
0.0000402
0.0000571
*
* Not reported
" Consumed in any raw or prepared form
Source: DRES data base (based on 1977-78 MFCS data).
Page
9-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-14. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978)'
Age (yr)
Per Capita Intake
(g/dav)
Percent of Population Using Fruit
in a Dav
Intake (g/day) for Users Onlyb
Males and Females
1 and under
1-2
3-5
6-8
Males
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and over
Females
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and over
Males and Females
All ages
169
146
134
152
133
120
147
107
141
115
171
174
186
148
120
126
133
122
133
171
179
189
142
86.8
62.9
56.1
60.1
50.5
51.2
47.0
39.4
46.4
44.0
62.4
62.2
62.6
59.7
48.7
49.9
48.0
47.7
52.8
66.7
69.3
64.7
54.2
196
231
239
253
263
236
313
271
305
262
275
281
197
247
247
251
278
255
252
256
259
292
263
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1977-1978) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using fruit in a day.
Source: USDA, 1980.
Table 9-15. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1987-1988)'
Age (vr)
Per Capita Intake (g/dav)
Percent of Population Using Fruit
in 1 Dav
Intake (g/day) for Users Only"
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Males and Females
All Ages
157
182
158
133
154
131
140
142
59.2
58.3
47.1
52.7
51.4
265
285
320
286
264
278
266
276
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1987-1988) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using fruits in a day.
Source: USDA. 1992b.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-33
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-16. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978)"
Age (yr)
Per Capita Intake
(g/day)
Percent of Population Using
Vegetables in a Day
Intake (g/day) for Users Onlyb
Males and Females
1 and under
1-2
3-5
6-8
Males
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and over
Females
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 & over
Males and Females
All Ages
76
91
100
136
138
184
216
226
248
261
285
265
264
139
154
178
184
187
187
229
221
198
201
62.7
78.0
79.3
84.3
83.5
84.5
85.9
84.7
88.5
86.8
90.3
88.5
93.6
83.7
84.6
83.8
81.1
84.7
84.6
89.8
87.2
88.1
85.6
121
116
126
161
165
217
251
267
280
300
316
300
281
166
183
212
227
221
221
255
253
226
235
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1977-1978) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using vegetables in a day.
Source: USDA. 1980.
Table 9-17. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1987-1988)'
Age (vr) Per Capita Intake (g/dav)
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Males and Females
All Ages
81
129
173
232
129
129
183
182
Percent of Population Using
Vegetables in a Dav Intake (g/dav) for Users Onlvb
74.0
86.8
85.2
85.0
80.6
75.8
82.9
82.6
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1987-1988) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using ve;
Source: USDA, 1992b.
109
149
203
273
160
170
221
220
jetables in a day.
Page
9-34
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-18. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1994 and 1995)'
Age (vr)
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Males and Females
All Ages
Per Capita Intake (g/dav)
1994
230
176
169
175
174
148
157
171
1995
221
219
210
170
172
167
155
173
Percent of Population Using Fruit
in 1 Dav
1994
70.6
59.8
44.0
50.2
59.3
47.1
55.1
54.1
1995
72.6
62.2
47.1
49.6
63.6
44.4
54.4
54.2
Intake (g/dav) for Users Onlvb
1994
326
294
384
349
293
314
285
316
1995
304
352
446
342
270
376
285
319
Based on USDA CSFII (1994 and 1995) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using fruits in a day.
Source: USDA. 1996a; 1996b.
Table 9-19. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1994 and
Age (vr)
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Males and Females
All Ages
Per Capita Intake (g/dav)
1994
80
118
154
242
115
132
190
186
1995
83
111
202
241
108
144
189
188
1995)'
Percent of Population Using
Vegetables in 1 Dav Intake (g/dav) for Users Onlvb
1994
75.2
82.4
74.9
85.9
82.9
78.5
84.7
83.2
1995
75.0
80.6
79.0
86.4
79.1
76.0
83.2
82.6
Based on USDA CSFII (1994 and 1995) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population usin
Source: USDA, 1996a; 1996b.
1994
106
143
206
282
139
168
224
223
1995
111
138
256
278
137
189
111
228
j vegetables in a day.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-35
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-20. Mean Per Capita Intake of Fats and Oils (g/day as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1994 and 1995)1
Total Fats and Oilsb
1994
Males and Females
5 and under 4
Males
6-11 8
12-19 11
20 and over 19
Females
6-11 7
12-19 9
20 and over 16
Males and Females
All Ages 14
1995
3
7
14
18
8
9
14
14
Table Fatsc
1994
2
3
2
5
3
2
4
4
1995
2
3
5
5
3
3
5
4
Salad Dressings'1
1994
2
5
8
11
4
6
10
9
Based on USDA CSFII 1994 and 1995 data for one day.
b Table fats, cooking fats, vegetable oils, salad dressings, nondairy cream substitutes, sauces that are mainly
c Butter, margarines, blends of butter with margarines or vegetable oils, and butter replacements.
d Regular and reduced- and low-calorie dressings and mayonnaise.
Source: USDA, 1996a; 1996b.
1995
1
4
10
10
4
6
7
8
fat and oil.
Table 9-21. Mean and Standard Error for the Per Capita Daily Intake of Food Class and Subclass by Region (g/day as consumed)
US population
Northeast
North Central
South
West
Total Produce
Leafy-
Exposed11
Protected0
Other
282.6 ±3.5
39.2 ±0.8
86.0 ± 1.5
150.4 ±2.3
7.0 ±0.3
270.6 ±6.9
38.1 ± 1.5
88.5 ±3.0
137.2 ±4.5
6.9 ±0.6
282.4 ±6.7
37.1 ± 1.5
87.8 ±2.9
150.1 ±4.3
7.3 ±0.5
280.7 ±5.6
38.4± 1.2
76.9 ±2.4
160.1 ±3.6
5.4 ±0.4
303.1 ±8.2
45.3 ± 1.8
95.5 ±3.6
152.5 ±5.3
9.8 ±0.7
" Produce belonging to this category include: cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, celery, lettuce, and spinach.
b Produce belonging to this category include: apples, pears, berries, cucumber, squash, grapes, peaches, apricots, plums, prunes, string beans,
pea pods, and tomatoes.
0 Produce belonging to this category include: carrots, beets, turnips, parsnips, citrus fruits, sweet corn, legumes (peas, beans, etc.), melons,
onion, and potatoes.
NOTE: Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New lersey, and Pennsylvania.
North Central = Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
and Kansas.
South = Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma.
West = Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1984b (based on 1977-78 NFCS data).
Page
9-36
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-22. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Food Subclasses Per Capita by Age (g/day as consumed)
Age (years)
All Ages
<1
1-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-39
40-59
> 60
Leafy produce"
39.2 ±0.8
3.2 ±4.9
9.1 ±2.4
20.1 ±2.0
26. 1± 1.9
31.4±2.0
35.3 ±2.6
41.4±2.7
44.4 ±2.1
51.3 ± 1.6
45.4± 1.8
Exposed produce11
86.0 ± 1.5
75.5 ±9.8
55.6 ±4.8
69.2 ±4.8
76.8 ±3.8
71. 9 ±4.0
65.6 ±5.2
73.4 ±5.3
77.1 ±4.2
94.7 ±3.3
114.2 ±3. 6
Protected produce0
150.4 ±2.3
50.8 ± 14.7
94.5 ±7.2
128.9 ±6.1
151.7±5.7
156.6 ±6.0
144.5 ±7.8
149.8 ±8.0
150.5 ±6.3
162.9 ±4.9
163.9 ±5. 5
" Produce belonging to this category include: cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, celery, lettuce, and spinach.
b Produce belonging to this category include: apples, pears, berries, cucumber, squash, grapes, peaches, apricots, plums, prunes,
pods, and tomatoes.
0 Produce belonging to this category include: carrots, beets, turnips, parsnips, citrus fruits, sweet corn, legumes (peas, beans, etc
and potatoes.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1984a (based on 1977-78 NFCS data).
Other produce
7.0 ±0.3
25.5 ± 1.8
5.1 ±0.9
4.3 ±0.8
8.1 ±0.7
6.2 ±0.7
5.0 ± 1.0
7.0 ± 1.0
6.1 ±0.8
6.9 ±0.6
7.6 ±0.7
string beans, pea
), melons, onion,
Table 9-23. Consumption of Foods (g dry weight/day) for Different Age Groups and
Estimated Lifetime Average Daily Food Intakes for a US Citizen
(averaged across sex) Calculated from the FDA Diet Data
Age (in years)
(0-1) (1-5) (6-13)
Potatoes 5.67 10.03 14.72
Leafy Veg. 0.84 0.49 0.85
Legume Veg. 3.81 4.56 6.51
Root Veg. 3.04 0.67 1.20
Garden fruits 0.66 1.67 2.57
Peanuts 0.34 2.21 2.56
Mushrooms 0.00 0.01 0.03
Veg. Oils 27.62 17.69 27.54
(14-19)
19.40
1.22
8.45
1.73
3.47
2.91
0.04
37.04
" The estimated lifetime dietary intakes were estimated by:
Estimated lifetime = IR(O-l) + 5vrs * IR (1-5) + 8 vrs * IR (6-13) + 6 vrs *
where IR = the intake rate for a specific age group.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1989 (based on 1977-78 NFCS and NHANES
70 years
II data).
(20-44)
17.28
2.16
9.81
1.77
4.75
2.43
0.14
37.20
IR (14-19) ±25 vrs
(45-70)
14.79
2.65
9.50
1.64
4.86
1.91
0.06
27.84
* IR (20-44) + 25 vrs *
stimated Lifetime
Intake"
15.60
1.97
8.75
1.60
4.15
2.25
0.08
31.24
IR (45-70)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-37
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-24. Mean Daily Intake of Foods (grams) Based on the Nutrition Canada Dietary Survey"
Fruit and Vegetables Not
Age (yrs) Sample Size Fruit Products Including Potatoes Potatoes
Nuts and
Legumes
Males and Females
1-4
5-11
1031
1995
258
312
56
83
75
110
6
13
Males
12-19
20-39
40-64
65+
1070
999
1222
881
237
244
194
165
94
155
134
118
185
189
131
124
20
15
15
8
Females
12-19
20-39
40-64
65+
Pregnant Females
1162
1347
1500
818
769
237
204
239
208
301
97
134
136
103
156
" Report does not specify whether means were calculated per capita or for consumers only.
consumed intake rates for consumers only reported by USDA (1980).
Source: Canadian Department of National Health and Welfare, n.d.
115
99
79
80
114
15
8
10
5
15
The reported values are consistent with the as
Table 9-25. Per Capita Consumption of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in 1991"
Fresh Fruits
Food Item
Citrus
Oranges (includes Temple oranges)
Tangerines and Tangelos
Lemons
Limes
Grapefruit
Total Fresh Citrus
Noncitrus
Apples
Apricots
Avocados
Bananas
Cherries
Cranberries
Grapes
Kiwi Fruit
Mangoes
Peaches & Nectarines
Pears
Pineapple
Papayas
Plums and Prunes
Strawberries
Total Fresh Noncitrus
Total Fresh Fruits
Per Capita Consumption
(e/dav)b
10.2
1.6
3.1
0.9
7.1
22.9
21.8
0.1
1.7
31.2
0.5
0.4
8.2
0.5
1.0
7.6
3.7
2.2
0.3
1.7
4.1
85.0
107.7
Fresh Vegetables
Food Item
Artichokes
Asparagus
Snap Beans
Broccoli
Brussel Sprouts
Cabbage
Carrots
Cauliflower
Celery
Sweet Corn
Cucumber
Eggplant
Escarole/Endive
Garlic
Head Lettuce
Onions
Bell Peppers
Radishes
Spinach
Tomatoes
Total Fresh Vegetables
Per Capita Consumption
(e/dav)b
0.62
0.75
1.4
3.5
0.4
9.5
9.0
2.2
7.8
6.6
5.2
0.5
0.3
1.6
30.2
18.4
5.8
0.6
0.9
16.3
126.1
" Based on retail-weight equivalent. Includes imports; excludes exports and foods grown in home gardens. Data for 1991 used.
b Original data were presented in Ibs/yr; data were converted to g/day by multiplying by a factor of 454 g/lb and dividing by 365 days/yr.
Source: USDA, 1993.
Page
9-38
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Table 9-26. Quantity (as consumed) of Fruits and Vegetables Consumed Per Eating Occasion and the Percentage of Individuals Using These Foods in Three Days
Food category
Raw vegetables
White potatoes
Cabbage and coleslaw
Carrots
Cucumbers
Lettuce and tossed salad
Mature onions
Tomatoes
Cooked vegetables
Broccoli
Cabbage
Carrots
Corn, whole kernel
Lima beans
Mixed vegetables
Cowpeas, field peas, black-eyed
peas
Green peas
Spinach
String beans
Summer squash
Sweet potatoes
Tomato juice
Cucumber pickles
Fruits
Grapefruit
Grapefruit juice
Oranges
Orange juice
Apples
Applesauce, cooked apples
Apple juice
Cantaloupe
Raw peaches
Raw pears
Raw strawberries
% Indiv. using Quantity consumed per eating
food in 3 days
74.4
9.7
5
5.6
50.7
8.5
27.8
6.2
4.7
9.8
23.9
2.8
3.4
2.9
18.3
4.5
27.3
2.8
4.1
3.9
9.2
4.7
3.6
9
35.5
18.2
9.8
3.8
3.3
4.5
3.1
2.1
a Percentiles are cumulative; for example, 50 percent of people e
Source: Pao et al.. 1982 ("based on
1 977-78 NFCS data).
occasion (g)
Average Standard
Deviation
125
68
43
80
65
31
81
112
128
70
95
110
117
131
90
121
86
145
136
91
45
159
202
146
190
141
134
191
171
160
163
100
it 105 g white pot
90
45
40
76
59
33
55
68
83
59
56
75
69
88
57
70
54
98
87
122
45
58
99
57
84
49
86
101
91
75
69
58
itoes per day or less.
5
29
15
4
8
10
3
30
30
28
19
21
21
28
22
20
24
18
27
38
91
7
106
95
73
95
69
28
63
61
76
82
37
Consumers-only
Quantity consumed per eating occasion at specified percentiles (g)
25
63
40
13
24
20
17
45
78
75
46
65
67
91
88
43
78
67
105
86
122
16
134
125
145
125
138
64
124
136
152
164
75
50
105
60
31
70
55
18
62
90
145
75
83
88
94
88
85
103
70
108
114
182
30
134
186
145
187
138
128
186
136
152
164
75
75
170
90
55
110
93
36
113
155
150
92
123
170
182
175
85
185
135
215
185
243
65
165
247
145
249
138
130
248
272
152
164
149
90
235
120
100
158
140
57
123
185
225
150
170
175
187
196
170
205
140
215
225
243
90
268
250
180
249
212
255
248
272
304
164
149
95
280
120
122
220
186
72
182
190
300
155
170
219
187
350
170
205
140
352
238
363
130
268
375
228
311
212
155
372
272
304
328
180
99
426
240
183
316
270
180
246
350
450
276
330
350
374
350
330
380
280
430
450
486
222
330
500
360
498
276
488
496
529
456
328
298
Q
I
I,
•*•
a-
I
I
s
ft
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-27. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits and Vegetables Expressed as Percentages of Edible Portions
Food
Moisture Content (Percent)
Comments
Raw Cooked
Fruit
Apples - dried
Apples 83.93*
Apples - juice
Applesauce
Apricots
Apricots - dried
Bananas
Blackberries
Blueberries
Boysenberries
Cantaloupes - unspecified
Casabas
Cherries - sweet
Crabapples
Cranberries
Cranberries - juice cocktail
Currants (red and white)
Elderberries
Grapefruit
Grapefruit - juice
Grapefruit - unspecified
Grapes - fresh
Grapes - juice
Grapes - raisins
Honeydew melons
Kiwi fruit
Kumquats
Lemons - juice
Lemons - peel
Lemons - pulp
Limes - juice
Limes - unspecified
Loganberries
Mulberries
Nectarines
Oranges - unspecified
Peaches
Pears - dried
Pears - fresh
Pineapple
Pineapple - juice
Plums
Quinces
Raspberries
Strawberries
Tangerine - juice
Tangerines
Watermelon
Vegetables
Alfalfa sprouts
Artichokes - globe & French
Artichokes - Jerusalem
31.76
84.46**
86.35
31.09
74.26
85.64
84.61
85.90
89.78
91.00
80.76
78.94
86.54
85.00
83.95
79.80
90.89
90.00
90.89
81.30
84.12
15.42
89.66
83.05
81.70
90.73
81.60
88.98
90.21
88.26
84.61
87.68
86.28
86.75
87.66
26.69
83.81
86.50
83.80
86.57
91.57
88.90
87.60
91.51
91.14
84.38
78.01
84.13*
*with skin;
87.93
88.35*
86.62*
85.56*
86.59*
84.95*
90.10*
92.46*
92.52*
87.49*
64.44*
86.47*
83.51*
85.53
85.20
89.97*
87.00*
89.51*
86.50
sulfured; *without added sugar
** without skin
canned or bottled
*unsweetened
*canned juice pack with skin
sulfured; *without added sugar
*frozen unsweetened
frozen unsweetened
*canned, juice pack
bottled
* canned unsweetened
pink, red, white
American type (slip skin)
canned or bottled
seedless
* canned or bottled
* canned or bottled
all varieties
* canned juice pack
sulfured; *without added sugar
* canned juice pack
* canned juice pack
canned
*frozen unsweetened
* canned sweetened
* canned juice pack
boiled, drained
Page
9-40
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-27. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits and Vegetables Expressed as Percentages of Edible Portions (continued)
Food
Asparagus
Bamboo shoots
Beans - dry
Beans - dry - blackeye peas (cowpeas)
Beans - dry - hyacinth (mature seeds)
Beans - dry - navy (pea)
Beans - dry - pinto
Beans - lima
Beans - snap - Italian - green - yellow
Beets
Beets - tops (greens)
Broccoli
Brussel sprouts
Cabbage - Chinese/celery,
including bok choy
Cabbage - red
Cabbage - savoy
Carrots
Cassava (yucca blanca)
Cauliflower
Celeriac
Celery
Chili peppers
Chives
Cole slaw
Collards
Corn - sweet
Cress - garden - field
Cress - garden
Cucumbers
Dandelion - greens
Eggplant
Endive
Garlic
Kale
Kohlrabi
Lambsquarter
Leeks
Lentils - whole
Lettuce - iceberg
Lettuce - romaine
Mung beans (sprouts)
Mushrooms
Mustard greens
Okra
Onions
Onions - dehydrated or dried
Parsley
Parsley roots
Parsnips
Peas (garden) - mature seeds - dry
Peppers - sweet - garden
Potatoes (white) - peeled
Moisture Content (Percent)
Raw
92.25
91.00
66.80
87.87
79.15
81.30
70.24
90.27
87.32
92.15
90.69
86.00
95.32
91.55
91.00
87.79
68.51
92.26
88.00
94.70
87.74
92.00
81.50
93.90
75.96
89.40
89.40
96.05
85.60
91.93
93.79
58.58
84.46
91.00
84.30
83.00
67.34
95.89
94.91
90.40
91.81
90.80
89.58
90.82
3.93
88.31
88.31
79.53
88.89
92.77
78.96
Cooked
92.04
95.92
71.80
86.90
76.02
93.39
67.17
89.22
90.90
89.13
90.20
87.32
95.55
93.60
92.00
87.38
92.50
92.30
95.00
92.50*
95.72
69.57
92.50
92.50
89.80
91.77
91.20
90.30
88.90
90.80
68.70
93.39
91.08
94.46
89.91
92.24
77.72
88.91
94.70
75.42
Comments
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
* canned solids & liquid
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
stir-fried
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
baked
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-41
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-27. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits and Vegetables Expressed as Percentages of Edible Portions (continued)
Food
Potatoes (white) - whole
Pumpkin
Radishes - roots
Rhubarb
Rutabagas - unspecified
Salsify (oyster plant)
Shallots
Soybeans - sprouted seeds
Spinach
Squash - summer
Squash - winter
Sweetpotatoes (including yams)
Swiss chard
Tapioca - pearl
Taro - greens
Taro - root
Tomatoes - juice
Tomatoes - paste
Tomatoes - puree
Tomatoes - raw
Tomatoes - whole
Towelgourd
Turnips - roots
Turnips - tops
Water chestnuts
Yambean - tuber
Moisture Content (Percent)
Raw
83.29
91.60
94.84
93.61
89.66
77.00
79.80
69.05
91.58
93.68
88.71
72.84
92.66
10.99
85.66
70.64
93.95
93.95
93.85
91.87
91.07
73.46
89.15
Cooked
71.20
93.69
67.79
90.10
81.00
79.45
91.21
93.70
89.01
71.85
92.65
92.15
63.80
93.90
74.06
87.26
92.40
84.29
93.60
93.20
87.93
Comments
baked
boiled, drained
frozen, cooked with added sugar
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
steamed
boiled, drained
all varieties; boiled, drained
all varieties; baked
baked in skin
boiled, drained
dry
steamed
canned
canned
canned
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
Source: USDA, 1979-1986.
Page
9-42
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
aLJ
N^
a g
s Handbooi
fr
^
Table 9-28. Summary of Fruit and Vegetable Intake Studies
Survey Population Used in
Study Calculating Intake Types of Data Used Units Food Items
KEY STUDIES
EPA Analysis of 1989-91 Per capita data; consumer 1989-91 CSFII data; g/kg-day; as consumed Major food groups; individual food
USDA CSFII data only data can be calculated Based on 3-day average individual intake items; exposed and protected fruits and
rate vegetables; USDA food categories
RELEVANT STUDIES
AIHC, 1994 Per Capita Based on the 1977-78 USDA NFCS data g/day Distributions for vegetables using
provided in the 1989 version of the @Risk software.
Exposure Factors Handbook.
Canadian Department of Not known if per capita or 1970-72 survey based on 24-hour dietary g/day; not known if as Fruit and fruit products, vegetables not
National Health and consumers only recall consumed including potatoes and nuts and
Welfare, n.d. legumes
EP As ORES Per capita (i.e., consumers 1977-78 NFCS g/kg-day; as consumed Intake for a wide variety of fruits and
and nonconsumers) 3-day individual intake data vegetables presented; complex food
groups were disaggregated
Pao et al., 1982 Consumers only serving size 1977-78 NFCS g; as consumed Serving sizes for only a limited
data provided 3 -day individual intake data number of products
USDA, 1980; 1992b; Per capita and consumer 1977-78 and 1987-88 NFCS, and 1994 g/day; as consumed Total fruits and total vegetables
1996a; 1996b only and 1995 CSFII
1-day individual intake data
USDA, 1993 Per capita consumption Based on food supply and utilization data g/day; as consumed Various food groups
based on "food provided by the National Agricultural
disappearance" Statistics Service (NASS), Customs
Service Reports, and trade associations
U.S. EPA/ORP, 1984a; Per capita 1977-78 NFCS g/day; as consumed Exposed, protected, and leafy produce
1984b Individual intake data
U.S. EPA/OST, 1989 Estimated lifetime dietary Based on FDA Total Diet Study Food g/day; dry weight Various food groups; complex foods
intake List which used 1977-78 NFCS data, disaggregated
and NHANES II data
Q ^
t |
(^ ™
^ fci
1 §
1 1
?
-------
IB
Volume II
Chapter 9 - Intake
- Food Ingestion Factors
of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-29. Summary of Recommended
Mean 95th Percentile
Total Fruit Intake
3.4g/kg-day ' • 12g/kg-day-
Total Vegetable Intake
4.3g/fcg-day , , ,• • lOg/kg-day
Individual Fruit and Vegetables Intake
see Table 9-5 • ' . —
Values for Per Capita Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Multiple Pereentiles
see Table 9-3
see Table 9-4 ' .
. Study
EPA Analysis of CSFH
1989-91 Data
EPA Analysis of CSFH
1989-91 Data
.. EPA Analysis of CSFH
1989-91 Data
Page
9-44
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-30. Confidence in Fruit and Vegetable Intake Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection
period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
USDA CSFII survey receives high level of peer
review. EPA analysis of these data has been peer
reviewed outside the Agency.
CSFII data are publicly available.
Enough information is included to reproduce
results.
Analysis is specifically designed to address food
intake.
Data focuses on the U.S. population.
This is new analysis of primary data.
Were the most current data publicly available at the
time the analysis was conducted for the Handbook.
Survey is designed to collect short-term data.
Survey methodology was adequate.
Study size was very large and therefore adequate.
The population studied was the U.S. population.
Survey was not designed to capture long term day-
to-day variability. Short term distributions are
provided.
Response rate was adequate.
1; CSFII 1989-91 was the most recent data set
publicly available at the time the analysis was
conducted for the Handbook. Therefore, it was the
only study classified as key study.
Although the CSFII was the only study classified as
key study, the results are in good agreement with
earlier data.
The survey is representative of U.S. population.
Although there was only one study considered key,
these data are the most recent and are in agreement
with earlier data. The approach used to analyzed
the data was adequate. However, due to the
limitations of the survey design estimation of long-
term percentile values (especially the upper
percentiles) is uncertain.
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium confidence for average values;
Low confidence for long term percentile
distribution
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
No measurements were taken. The study relied on N/A
survey data.
Low
High
High confidence in the average;
Low confidence in the long-term upper
percentiles
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9-45
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9A
APPENDIX 9A
CALCULATIONS USED IN THE 1989-91 CSFII ANALYSIS TO CORRECT FOR MIXTURES
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
9A-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
APPENDIX 9A
Calculations Used in the 1989-91 CSFII Analysis to Correct for Mixtures
Distributions of intake for various food groups were generated for the food/items groups using the USDA 1989-91
CSFII data set as described in Sections 9.2.2. and 11.1.2. However, several of the food categories used did not include
meats, dairy products, and vegetables that were eaten as mixtures with other foods. Thus, adjusted intake rates were
calculated for food items that were identified by USDA (1995) as comprising a significant portion of grain and meat
mixtures. To account for the amount of these foods consumed as mixtures, the mean fractions of total meat or grain
mixtures represented by these food items were calculated (Table 9A-1) using Appendix C of USDA (1995). Mean
values for all individuals were used to calculate these fractions. These fractions were multiplied by each individual's
intake rate for total meat mixtures or grain mixtures to calculate the amount of the individual's food mixture intake that
can be categorized into one of the selected food groups. These amounts were then added to the total intakes rates for
meats, grains, total vegetables, tomatoes, and white potatoes to calculate an individual's total intake of these food groups,
as shown in the example for meats below.
IR ~~
meat-adjusted
^ gr mixtures
* Fr , ) -
meatlgr'
t- (IR
^ mf mixtures
* Fr , ) + (IR )
meatlmv v meat'
where:
IRmeat-adjusted = adjusted individual intake rate for total meat;
IRgr mixtures = individual intake rate for grain mixtures;
IRmtmixtffl-es = individual intake rate for meat mixtures;
IRjneat = individual intake rate for meats;
Frmeafgr = fraction of grain mixture that is meat; and
Frmeat/mt = fraction of meat mixture that is meat.
Population distributions for mixture-adjusted intakes were based on adjusted intake rates for the population of interest.
Table 9A-1.
Grain Mixtures
total vegetables
tomatoes
white potatoes
total meats
beef
pork
poultry
dairy
total grains
Meat Mixtures
total vegetables
tomatoes
white potatoes
total meats
beef
pork
poultry
dairy
total grains
Fraction of Grain and Meat Mixture Intake Represented by Various Food Items/Groups
0.2360
0.1685
0.0000
0.0787
0.0449
0.0112
0.0112
0.1348
0.3146
0.2778
0.1111
0.0333
0.3556
0.2000
0.0222
0.0778
0.0556
0.1333
APPENDIX 9B
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 9B-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
FOOD CODES AND DEFINITIONS USED IN
ANALYSIS OF THE 1989-91 USDA CSFII DATA
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
9B-2 August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data
Food
Product
Food Codes
MAJOR FOOD GROUPS
Total Fruits
Fruits
citrus fruits and juices
dried fruits
other fruits
fruits/juices & nectar
fruit/juices baby food
(includes baby foods)
Total
Vegetables
7- Vegetables (all forms)
white potatoes & PR starchy
dark green vegetables
deep yellow vegetables
tomatoes and torn, mixtures
other vegetables
veg. and mixtures/baby food
veg. with meat mixtures
411- Beans/legumes
412- Beans/legumes
413- Beans/legumes
(includes baby foods; mixtures, mostly vegetables; does not
include nuts and seeds)
Total Meats
20- Meat, type not specified
21- Beef
22- Pork
23- Lamb, veal, game, carcass meat
24- Poultry
25- Organ meats, sausages, lunchmeats, meat spreads
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby foods)
Total Dairy
1- Milk and Milk Products
milk and milk drinks
cream and cream substitutes
milk desserts, sauces, and gravies
cheeses
(includes regular fluid milk, human milk, imitation milk products,
yogurt, milk-based meal replacements, and infant formulas)
INDIVIDUAL FOODS
White
Potatoes
71- White Potatoes and PR Starchy Veg.
baked, boiled, chips, sticks, creamed, scalloped, au gratin,
fried, mashed, stuffed, puffs, salad, recipes, soups, Puerto
Rican starchy vegetables
(does not include vegetables soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Peppers
7512100 Pepper, hot chili, raw
7512200 Pepper, raw
7512210 Pepper, sweet green, raw
7512220 Pepper, sweet red, raw
7522600 Pepper, green, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522601 Pepper, green, cooked, fat not added
7522602 Pepper, green, cooked, fat added
7522604 Pepper, red, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522605 Pepper, red, cooked, fat not added
7522606 Pepper, red, cooked, fat added
7522609 Pepper, hot, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522610 Pepper, hot, cooked, fat not added
7522611 Pepper, hot, cooked, fat added
7551101 Peppers, hot, sauce
7551102 Peppers, pickled
7551105 Peppers, hot pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Onions
7510950 Chives, raw
7511150 Garlic, raw
7511250 Leek, raw
7511701 Onions, young green, raw
7511702 Onions, mature
7521550 Chives, dried
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7521840 Leek, cooked
7522100 Onions, mature cooked, NS as to fat added
7522101 Onions, mature cooked, fat not added
7522102 Onions, mature cooked, fat added
7522103 Onions, pearl cooked
7522104 Onions, young green cooked, NS as to fat
7522105 Onions, young green cooked, fat not added
7522106 Onions, young green cooked, fat added
7522110 Onion, dehydrated
7541501 Onions, creamed
7541502 Onion rings
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Page
9B-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data (continued)
Food Food
Product
Corn 75 10960 Corn, raw
7521600 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/fat added
7521601 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/fat not added
7521602 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/fat added
7521605 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/cream style
7521607 Corn, cooked, dried
7521610 Corn, cooked, yellow/NS as to fat added
7521611 Corn, cooked, yellow/fat not added
7521612 Corn, cooked, yellow/fat added
7521615 Corn, yellow, cream style
7521616 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./NS as to fat
7521617 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./fatnot added
7521618 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./fat added
7521619 Corn, yellow, cream style, fat added
7521620 Corn, cooked, white/NS as to fat added
Apples 6210110 Apples, dried, uncooked
6210115 Apples, dried, uncooked, low sodium
6210120 Apples, dried, cooked, NS as to sweetener
6210122 Apples, dried, cooked, unsweetened
6210123 Apples, dried, cooked, with sugar
6210130 Apple chips
6310100 Apples, raw
63 10 1 1 1 Applesauce, NS as to sweetener
63 101 12 Applesauce, unsweetened
6310113 Applesauce with sugar
63 101 14 Applesauce with low calorie sweetener
6310121 Apples, cooked or canned with syrup
63 1013 1 Apple, baked NS as to sweetener
6310132 Apple, baked, unsweetened
6310133 Apple, baked with sugar
Codes
7521621 Corn, cooked, white/fat not added
7521622 Corn, cooked, white/fat added
7521625 Corn, white, cream style
7521630 Corn, yellow, canned, low sodium, NS fat
752163 1 Corn, yell., canned, low sod., fat not add
7521632 Corn, yell., canned, low sod., fat added
7521749 Hominy, cooked
752175- Hominy, cooked
7541101 Corn scalloped or pudding
7541102 Corn fritter
7541 103 Corn with cream sauce
7550101 Corn relish
76405- Corn, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby food)
6310141 Apple rings, fried
6310142 Apple, pickled
6310150 Apple, fried
6340101 Apple, salad
6340106 Apple, candied
6410101 Apple cider
6410401 Applejuice
6410405 Applejuice with vitamin C
6410409 Applejuice with calcium
6710200 Applesauce baby fd., NS as to str. or jr.
6710201 Applesauce baby food, strained
6710202 Applesauce baby food, junior
6720200 Applejuice, baby food
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Tomatoes 74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures
raw, cooked, juices, sauces, mixtures, soups, sandwiches
Snap Beans 7510180 Beans, string, green, raw
7520498 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/fat added
7520499 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/no fat
7520500 Beans, string, cooked, NS color & fat
7520501 Beans, string, cooked, green/NS fat
7520502 Beans, string, cooked, green/no fat
7520503 Beans, string, cooked, green/fat
7520511 Beans, str., canned, low sod., green/NS fat
7520512 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/no fat
7520513 Beans, str., canned, low sod., green/fat
7520600 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/NS fat
7520601 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/no fat
Beef 21- Beef
beef, nfs
beef steak
beef oxtails, neckbones, ribs
roasts, stew meat, corned, brisket, sandwich steaks
ground beef, patties, meatballs
other beef items
beef babv food
7520602 Beans, siring, cooked, yellow/fat
7540301 Beans, siring, green, creamed
7540302 Beans, string, green, w/mushroom sauce
7540401 Beans, siring, yellow, creamed
7550011 Beans, string, green, pickled
7640100 Beans, green, string, baby
7640101 Beans, green, string, baby, sir.
7640102 Beans, green, string, baby, junior
7640103 Beans, green, siring, baby, creamed
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods)
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
9B-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used
Food
Product
Pork
Game
Poultry
Eggs
Broccoli
Carrots
Pumpkin
Asparagus
Lima Beans
Cabbage
in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data (continued)
Food Codes
22- Pork
pork, nfs; ground dehydrated
chops
steaks, cutlets
ham
roasts
Canadian bacon
bacon, salt pork
other pork items
pork baby food
233- Game
24- Poultry
chicken
turkey
duck
other poultry
poultry baby food
3- Eggs
eggs
egg mixtures
egg substitutes
eggs baby food
froz. meals with egg as main ingred.
722- Broccoli (all forms)
73 10- Carrots (all forms)
73 1 1 140 Carrots in Sauce
7311200 Carrot Chips
76201- Carrots, baby
732- Pumpkin (all forms)
733- Winter squash (all forms)
76205- Squash, baby
7510080 Asparagus, raw
75202- Asparagus, cooked
7540101 Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
75 10200 Lima Beans, raw
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
752041- Lima Beans, canned
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
7510300 Cabbage, raw
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw
7510500 Cabbage, red, raw
7514100 Cabbage salad or coleslaw
7514130 Cabbage, Chinese, salad
75210- Chinese Cabbage, cooked
75211- Green Cabbase. cooked
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks)
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
(includes baby foods)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures, or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; does not include succotash)
75212- Red Cabbage, cooked
752130- Savoy Cabbage, cooked
75230- Sauerkraut, cooked
7540701 Cabbage, creamed
755025- Cabbage, pickled or in relish
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vesetable with meat mixtures)
Page
9B-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used
Food
Product
Lettuce
Okra
Peas
Cucumbers
Beets
Strawberries
Other Berries
Peaches
Pears
in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data (continued)
Food Codes
75113-
75143-
7514410
7522005
7522000
7522001
7522002
7522010
7512000
7512775
75223-
75224-
75225-
75231-
7541650
7511100
75142-
752167-
7550301
7550302
7550303
7550304
7510250
752080-
752081-
7540501
6322-
6413250
6320-
6321-
6341101
62116-
63135-
6412203
6420501
62119-
63137-
6341201
6421501
Lettuce, raw
Lettuce salad with other veg.
Lettuce, wilted, with bacon dressing
Lettuce, cooked
Okra, cooked, NS as to fat
Okra, cooked, fat not added
Okra, cooked, fat added
Lufta, cooked (Chinese Okra)
Peas, green, raw
Snowpeas, raw
Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye, cooked
Peas, green, cooked
Peas, pigeon, cooked
Snowpeas, cooked
Pea salad
Cucumbers, raw
Cucumber salads
Cucumbers, cooked
Cucumber pickles, dill
Cucumber pickles, relish
Cucumber pickles, sour
Cucumber pickles, sweet
Beets, raw
Beets, cooked
Beets, canned
Beets, harvard
Strawberries
Strawberry Juice
Other Berries
Other Berries
Cranberry salad
Dried Peaches
Peaches
Peach Juice
Peach Nectar
Dried Pears
Pears
Pear salad
Pear Nectar
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
7541450 Okra, fried
7550700 Okra, pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
7541660 Pea salad with cheese
75417- Peas, with sauce or creamed
76409- Peas, baby
76411- Peas, creamed, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
7550305 Cucumber pickles, fresh
7550307 Cucumber, Kim Chee
75503 1 1 Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
7550314 Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
7550021 Beets, pickled
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
6410460 Blackberry Juice
64105- Cranberry Juice
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
67108- Peaches ,baby
6711450 Peaches, dry, baby
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
67109- Pears, baby
6711455 Pears, dry, baby
6721200 Pear juice, baby
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
9B-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used
Food
Product
in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data (continued)
Food Codes
EXPOSED/PROTECTED FRUITS/VEGETABLES, ROOT VEGETABLES
Exposed
Fruits
Protected
Fruits
621011-
621012-
6210130
62104-
62108-
62110-
62116-
62119-
62121-
62122-
62125-
63101-
63102-
63103-
63111-
63112-
63113-
63115-
63117-
63123-
6312601
63131-
63135-
63137-
63139-
61-
62107-
62113-
62114-
62120-
62126-
63105-
63107-
63109-
63110-
63119-
63121-
63125-
6312650
6312651
6312660
63127-
63129-
63133-
63134-
63141-
Apple, dried
Apple, dried
Apple chips
Apricot, dried
Currants, dried
Date, dried
Peaches, dried
Pears, dried
Plum, dried
Prune, dried
Raisins
Apples/applesauce
Wi-apple
Apricots
Cherries, maraschino
Acerola
Cherries, sour
Cherries, sweet
Currants, raw
Grapes
Juneberry
Nectarine
Peach
Pear
Persimmons
Citrus Fr., Juices (incl. cit. juice mixtures)
Bananas, dried
Figs, dried
Lychees/Papayas, dried
Pineapple, dried
Tamarind, dried
Avocado, raw
Bananas
Cantaloupe, Carambola
Cassaba Melon
Figs
Genip
Guava/Jackfruit, raw
Kiwi
Lychee, raw
Lychee, cooked
Honeydew
Mango
Papaya
Passion Fruit
Pineannle
63143-
63146-
63147-
632-
64101-
64104-
6410409
64105-
64116-
64122-
64132-
6420101
64205-
64215-
67102-
67108-
67109-
6711450
6711455
67202-
6720380
67212-
Plum
Quince
Rhubarb/Sapodillo
Berries
Apple Cider
Apple Juice
Apple juice with calcium
Cranberry Juice
Grape Juice
Peach Juice
Prune/Strawberry Juice
Apricot Nectar
Peach Nectar
Pear Nectar
Applesauce, baby
Peaches, baby
Pears, baby
Peaches, baby, dry
Pears, baby, dry
Apple Juice, baby
White Grape Juice, baby
Pear Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures;
excludes
fruit mixtures)
63145-
63148-
63149-
64120-
64121-
64124-
64125-
64133-
6420150
64202-
64203-
64204-
64210-
64213-
64221-
6710503
6711500
6720500
6721300
Pomegranate
Sweetsop, Soursop, Tamarind
Watermelon
Papaya Juice
Passion Fruit Juice
Pineapple Juice
Pineapple juice
Watermelon Juice
Banana Nectar
Cantaloupe Nectar
Guava Nectar
Mango Nectar
Papaya Nectar
Passion Fruit Nectar
Soursop Nectar
Bananas, baby
Bananas, baby, dry
Orange Juice, baby
Pineapple Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures; excludes fruit
mixtures}
Page
9B-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data (continued)
Food
Product
Food Codes
Exposed
Veg.
721- Dark Green Leafy Veg.
722- Dark Green Nonleafy Veg.
74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures
7510050 Alfalfa Sprouts
7510075 Artichoke, Jerusalem, raw
7510080 Asparagus, raw
75101- Beans, sprouts and green, raw
7510260 Broccoflower, raw
7510275 Brussel Sprouts, raw
7510280 Buckwheat Sprouts, raw
7510300 Cabbage, raw
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw
7510500 Cabbage, Red, raw
7510700 Cauliflower, raw
7510900 Celery, raw
7510950 Chives, raw
7511100 Cucumber, raw
7511120 Eggplant, raw
7511200 Kohlrabi, raw
75113- Lettuce, raw
7511500 Mushrooms, raw
7511900 Parsley
7512100 Pepper, hot chili
75122- Peppers, raw
7512750 Seaweed, raw
7512775 Snowpeas, raw
75128- Summer Squash, raw
7513210 Celery Juice
7514100 Cabbage or cole slaw
7514130 Chinese Cabbage Salad
7514150 Celery with cheese
75142- Cucumber salads
75143- Lettuce salads
7514410 Lettuce, wilted with bacon dressing
7514600 Greek salad
7514700 Spinach salad
7520060 Algae, dried
75201- Artichoke, cooked
75202- Asparagus, cooked
75203- Bamboo shoots, cooked
752049- Beans, string, cooked
75205- Beans, green, cooked/canned
75206- Beans, yellow, cooked/canned
75207- Bean Sprouts, cooked
752085- Breadfruit
752087- Broccoflower, cooked
752090- Brussel Sprouts, cooked
75210- Cabbage, Chinese, cooked
75211- Cabbage, green, cooked
75212- Cabbage, red, cooked
752130- Cabbage, savoy, cooked
75214- Cauliflower
75215- Celery, Chives, Christophine (chayote)
752167- Cucumber, cooked
752170- Eggplant, cooked
752171- Fern shoots
752172- Fern shoots
752173- Flowers of sesbania, squash or lily
7521801 Kohlrabi, cooked
75219- Mushrooms, cooked
75220- Okra/lettuce, cooked
7522116 Palm Hearts, cooked
7522121 Parsley, cooked
75226- Peppers, pimento, cooked
75230- Sauerkraut, cooked/canned
75231- Snowpeas, cooked
75232- Seaweed
75233- Summer Squash
7540050 Artichokes, stuffed
7540101 Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
75403- Beans, green with sauce
75404- Beans, yellow with sauce
7540601 Brussel Sprouts, creamed
7540701 Cabbage, creamed
75409- Cauliflower, creamed
75410- Celery/Chiles, creamed
75412- Eggplant, fried, with sauce, etc.
75413- Kohlrabi, creamed
75414- Mushrooms, Okra, fried, stuffed, creamed
754180- Squash, baked, fried, creamed, etc.
7541822 Christophine, creamed
7550011 Beans, pickled
7550051 Celery, pickled
7550201 Cauliflower, pickled
755025- Cabbage, pickled
7550301 Cucumber pickles, dill
7550302 Cucumber pickles, relish
7550303 Cucumber pickles, sour
7550304 Cucumber pickles, sweet
7550305 Cucumber pickles, fresh
7550307 Cucumber, Kim Chee
7550308 Eggplant, pickled
7550311 Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
7550314 Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
7550500 Mushrooms, pickled
7550700 Okra, pickled
75510- Olives
7551101 Peppers, hot
7551102 Peppers,pickled
7551104 Peppers, hot pickled
7551301 Seaweed, pickled
7553500 Zucchini, pickled
76102- Dark Green Veg., baby
76401- Beans, baby (excl. most soups & mixtures)
411- Beans/legumes
412- Beans/legumes
413- Beans/legumes
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
9B-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used
Food
Product
Protected
Veg.
Root
Vegetables
in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data (continued)
Food Codes
732- Pumpkin
733- Winter Squash
75 10200 Lima Beans, raw
7510550 Cactus, raw
7510960 Corn, raw
7512000 Peas, raw
7520070 Aloe vera juice
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
752041- Lima Beans, canned
7520829 Bitter Melon
752083- Bitter Melon, cooked
7520950 Burdock
752131- Cactus
752160- Corn, cooked
752161- Corn, yellow, cooked
752162- Corn, white, cooked
752163- Corn, canned
7521749 Hominy
71- White Potatoes and Puerto Rican St. Veg.
7310- Carrots
73 1 1 140 Carrots in sauce
7311200 Carrot chips
734- Sweetpotatoes
7510250 Beets, raw
7511150 Garlic, raw
7511180 Jicama (yambean), raw
7511250 Leeks, raw
75 1 17- Onions, raw
7512500 Radish, raw
7512700 Rutabaga, raw
7512900 Turnip, raw
752080- Beets, cooked
752081- Beets, canned
7521362 Cassava
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7521771 Horseradish
7521840 Leek, cooked
7521850 Lotus root
752210- Onions, cooked
752175- Hominy
75223- Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye, cooked
75224- Peas, green, cooked
75225- Peas, pigeon, cooked
75301- Succotash
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
75411- Corn, scalloped, fritter, with cream
7541650 Pea salad
7541660 Pea salad with cheese
75417- Peas, with sauce or creamed
7550101 Corn relish
76205- Squash, yellow, baby
76405- Corn, baby
76409- Peas, baby
76411- Peas, creamed, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
7522110 Onions, dehydrated
752220- Parsnips, cooked
75227- Radishes, cooked
75228- Rutabaga, cooked
75229- Salsify, cooked
75234- Turnip, cooked
75235- Water Chestnut
7540501 Beets, harvard
75415- Onions, creamed, fried
7541601 Parsnips, creamed
7541810 Turnips, creamed
7550021 Beets, pickled
7550309 Horseradish
7551201 Radishes, pickled
7553403 Turnip, pickled
76201- Carrots, baby
76209- Sweetpotatoes, baby
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
USDA SUBCATEGORIES
Dark Green
Vegetables
Deep Yellow
Vegetables
Other
Vegetables
Citrus Fruits
72- Dark Green Vegetables
all forms
leafy, nonleafy, dk. gr. veg. soups
73- Deep Yellow Vegetables
all forms
carrots, pumpkin, squash, sweetpotatoes, dp. yell
soups
75- Other Vegetables
all forms
61- Citrus Fruits and Juices
6720500 Orange Juice, baby food
6720600 Orange- Apricot Juice, baby food
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used
veg.
6720700 Orange-Pineapple Juice, baby food
6721 100 Orange- Apple-Banana Juice, baby food
(excludes dried fruits)
in Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data (continued)
Page
9B-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 9B
Food
Product
Other Fruits
Food
62- Dried Fruits
63- Other Fruits
64- Fruit Juices and Nectars Excluding Citrus
671- Fruits, baby
67202- Apple Juice, baby
67203- Baby Juices
Codes
67204- Baby Juices
67212- Baby Juices
67213- Baby Juices
6725- Baby Juice
673- Baby Fruits
674- Baby Fruits
MIXTURES
Meat
Mixtures
Grain
Mixtures
27-
28-
58-
Vleat Mixtures
Grain Mixtures
(includes frozen plate meals and soups)
(includes frozen plate meals and soups)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
9B-11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
10. INTAKE OF FISH AND SHELLFISH 1
10.1. BACKGROUND 1
10.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES 2
10.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION
STUDIES 6
10.4. KEY RECREATIONAL (MARINE FISH STUDIES) 8
10.5. RELEVANT RECREATIONAL MARINE
STUDIES 10
10.6. KEY FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL STUDIES 12
10.7. RELEVANT FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL STUDIES 18
10.8. NATIVE AMERICAN FRESHWATER
STUDIES 20
10.9. OTHER FACTORS 24
10.10. RECOMMENDATIONS 25
10.10.1. Recommendations - General Population 25
10.10.2. Recommendations - Recreational Marine
Anglers 26
10.10.3. Recommendations - Recreational
Freshwater Anglers 26
10.10.4. Recommendations - Native American
Subsistence Populations 26
10.11. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 10 27
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
10. INTAKE OF FISH AND SHELLFISH
10.1. BACKGROUND
Contaminated finfish and shellfish are potential
sources of human exposure to toxic chemicals. Pollutants
are carried in the surface waters, but also may be stored and
accumulated in the sediments as a result of complex
physical and chemical processes. Consequently, finfish and
shellfish are exposed to these pollutants and may become
sources of contaminated food.
Accurately estimating exposure to a toxic chemical
among a population that consumes fish from a polluted
water body requires an estimation of intake rates of the
caught fish by both fishermen and their families.
Commercially caught fish are marketed widely, making the
prediction of an individual's consumption from a particular
commercial source difficult. Since the catch of recreational
and subsistence fishermen is not "diluted" in this way, these
individuals and their families represent the population that
is most vulnerable to exposure by intake of contaminated
fish from a specific location.
This section focuses on intake rates of fish. Note that
in this section the term fish refers to both finfish and
shellfish. The following subsections address intake rates for
the general population, and recreational and subsistence
fishermen. Data are presented for intake rates for both
marine and freshwater fish, when available. The available
studies have been classified as either key or relevant based
on the guidelines given in Volume I, Section 1.3.
Recommended intake rates are based on the results of key
studies, but other relevant studies are also presented to
provide the reader with added perspective on the current
state-of-knowledge pertaining to fish intake.
Survey data on fish consumption have been collected
using a number of different approaches which need to be
considered in interpreting the survey results. Generally,
surveys are either "creel" studies in which fishermen are
interviewed while fishing, or broader population surveys
using either mailed questionnaires or phone interviews.
Both types of data can be useful for exposure assessment
purposes, but somewhat different applications and
interpretations are needed. In fact, results from creel studies
have often been misinterpreted, due to inadequate
knowledge of survey principles. Below, some basic facts
about survey design are presented, followed by an analysis
of the differences between creel and population based
studies.
The typical survey seeks to draw inferences about a
larger population from a smaller sample of that population.
This larger population, from which the survey
sample is to be taken and to which the results of the survey
are to be generalized, is denoted the target population of the
survey. In order to generalize from the sample to the target
population, the probability of being sampled must be known
for each member of the target population. This probability
is reflected in weights assigned to each survey respondent,
with weights being inversely proportional to sampling
probability. When all members of the target population
have the same probability of being sampled, all weights can
be set to one and essentially ignored.
In a mail or phone study of licensed anglers, the
target population is generally all licensed anglers in a
particular area, and in the studies presented, the sampling
probability is essentially equal for all target population
members. In a creel study, the target population is anyone
who fishes at the locations being studied; generally, in a
creel study, the probability of being sampled is not the same
for all members of the target population. For instance, if the
survey is conducted for one day at a site, then it will include
all persons who fish there daily but only about 1/7 of the
people who fish there weekly, l/30th of the people who fish
there monthly, etc. In this example, the probability of being
sampled (or inverse weight) is seen to be proportional to the
frequency of fishing. However, if the survey involves
interviewers revisiting the same site on multiple days, and
persons are only interviewed once for the survey, then the
probability of being in the survey is not proportional to
frequency; in fact, it increases less than proportionally with
frequency. At the extreme of surveying the same site every
day over the survey period with no re-interviewing, all
members of the target population would have the same
probability of being sampled regardless of fishing
frequency, implying that the survey weights should all equal
one.
On the other hand, if the survey protocol calls for
individuals to be interviewed each time an interviewer
encounters them (i.e., without regard to whether they were
previously interviewed), then the inverse weights will again
be proportional to fishing frequency, no matter how many
times interviewers revisit the same site. Note that when
individuals can be interviewed multiple times, the results of
each interview are included as separate records in the data
base and the survey weights should be inversely
proportional to the expected number of times that an
individual's interviews are included in the data base.
In the published analyses of most creel studies, there
is no mention of sampling weights; by default all
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
weights are set to 1, implying equal probability of sampling.
However, since the sampling probabilities in a creel study,
even with repeated interviewing at a site, are highly
dependent on fishing frequency, the fish intake distributions
reported for these surveys are not reflective of the
corresponding target populations. Instead, those individuals
with high fishing frequencies are given too big a weight
and the distribution is skewed to the right, i.e., it
overestimates the target population distribution.
Price et al. (1994) explained this problem and set out
to rectify it by adding weights to creel survey data; he used
data from two creel studies (Puffer et al., 1981 and Pierce
et al., 1981) as examples. Price et al. (1994) used inverse
fishing frequency as survey weights and produced revised
estimates of median and 95th percentile intake for the above
two studies. These revised estimates were dramatically
lower than the original estimates. The approach of Price et
al. (1994) is discussed in more detail in Section 10.5 where
the Puffer et al. (1981) and Pierce et al. (1981) studies are
summarized.
When the correct weights are applied to survey data,
the resulting percentiles reflect, on average, the distribution
in the target population; thus, for example, an estimated 90
percent of the target population will have intake levels
below the 90th percentile of the survey fish intake
distribution. There is another way, however, of
characterizing distributions in addition to the standard
percentile approach; this approach is reflected in statements
of the form "50 percent of the income is received by, for
example, the top 10 percent of the population, which
consists of individuals making more than $100,000", for
example. Note that the 50th percentile (median) of the
income distribution is well below $100,000. Here the
$100,000 level can be thought of as, not the 50th percentile
of the population income distribution, but as the 50th
percentile of the "resource utilization distribution" (see
Appendix 10A for technical discussion of this distribution).
Other percentiles of the resource utilization distribution
have similar interpreta-tions; e.g., the 90th percentile of the
resource utilization distribution (for income) would be that
level of income such that 90 percent of total income is
received by individuals with incomes below this level and
10 percent by individuals with income above this level. This
alternative approach to characterizing distributions is of
particular interest when a relatively small fraction of
individuals consumes a relatively large fraction of a
resource, which is the case with regards to recreational fish
consumption. In the studies of recreational anglers,
this alternative approach, based on resource utilization, will
be presented, where possible, in addition to the primary
approach of presenting the standard percentiles of the fish
intake distribution.
It has been determined that the resource utilization
approach to characterizing distributions has relevance to the
interpretation of creel survey data. As mentioned above,
most published analyses of creel surveys do not employ
weights reflective of sampling probability, but instead give
each respondent equal weight. For mathematical reasons
that are explained in Appendix 10A, when creel analyses
are performed in this (equal weighting) manner, the
calculated percentiles of the fish intake distribution do not
reflect the percentiles of the target population fish intake
distribution but instead reflect (approximately) the
percentiles of the "resource utilization distribution". Thus,
one would not expect 50 percent of the target population to
be consuming above the median intake level as reported
from such a creel survey, but instead would expect that 50
percent of the total recreational fish consumption would be
individuals consuming above this level. As with the
example above, and in accordance with the statement above
that creel surveys analyzed in this manner overestimate
intake distributions, the actual median level of intake in the
target population will be less (probably considerably so)
than this level and, accordingly, (considerably) less than 50
percent of the target population will be consuming at or
above this level. These considerations are discussed when
the results of individual creel surveys are presented in later
sections and should be kept in mind whenever estimates
based on creel survey data are utilized.
The U.S. EPA has prepared a review of and an
evaluation of five different survey methods used for
obtaining fish consumption data. They are:
• Recall-Telephone Survey;
• Recall-Mail Survey;
• Recall-Personal Interview;
• Diary; and
• Creel Census.
The reader is referred to U.S. EPA 1992-Consumption
Surveys for Fish and Shellfish for more detail on these
survey methods and their advantages and limitations.
10.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES
Tuna Research Institute Survey - The Tuna
Research Institute (TRI) funded a study of fish
Page
10-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
consumption which was performed by the National
Purchase Diary (NPD) during the period of September,
1973 to August, 1974. The data tapes from this survey were
obtained by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
which later, along with the FDA, USDA and TRI,
conducted an intensive effort to identify and correct errors
in the data base. Javitz (1980) summarized the TRI survey
methodology and used the corrected tape to generate fish
intake distributions for various sub-populations.
The TRI survey sample included 6,980 families who
were currently participating in a syndicated national
purchase diary panel, 2,400 additional families where the
head of household was female and under 35 years old; and
210 additional black families (Javitz, 1980). Of the 9,590
families in the total sample, 7,662 families (25,162
individuals) completed the questionnaire, a response rate of
80 percent. The survey was weighted to represent the U.S.
population based on a number of census-defined controls
(i.e., census region, household size, income, presence of
children, race and age). The calculations of means,
percentiles, etc. were performed on a weighted basis with
each person contributing in proportion to his/her assigned
survey weight.
The survey population was divided into 12 different
sample segments and, for each of the 12 survey months,
data were collected from a different segment. Each survey
household was given a diary in which they recorded, over a
one month period, the date of any fish meals consumed and
the following accompanying information: the species offish
consumed, whether the fish was commercially or
recreationally caught, the way the fish was packaged
(canned, frozen fresh, dried, smoked), the amount of fish
prepared and consumed, and the number of servings
consumed by household members and guests. Both meals
eaten at home and away from home were recorded. The
amount offish prepared was determined as follows (Javitz,
1980): "For fresh fish, the weight was recorded in ounces
and may have included the weight of the head and tail. For
frozen fish, the weight was recorded in packaged ounces,
and it was noted whether the fish was breaded or combined
with other ingredients (e.g., TV dinners). For canned fish,
the weight was recorded in packaged ounces and it was
noted whether the fish was canned in water, oil, or with
other ingredients (e.g., soups)".
Javitz (1980) reported that the corrected survey
tapes contained data on 24,652 individuals who consumed
fish in the survey month and that tabulations performed by
NPD indicated that these fish consumers represented 94
percent of the U. S. population. For this population of "fish
consumers", Javitz (1980) calculated means and
percentiles of fish consumption by demographic variables
(age, sex, race, census region and community type) and
overall (Tables 10-1 through 10-4). The overall mean fish
intake rate among fish consumers was calculated at 14.3
g/day and the 95th percentile at 41.7 g/day.
As seen in Table 10-1, the mean and 95th percentile
of fish consumption were higher for Asian-Americans as
compared to the other racial groups. Other differences in
intake rates are those between gender and age groups.
While males (15.6 g/d) eat slightly more fish than females
(13.2 g/d), and adults eat more fish than children, the
corresponding differences in body weight would probably
compensate for the different intake rates in exposure
calculations (Javitz, 1980). There appeared to be no large
differences in regional intake rates, although higher rates
are shown in the New England and Middle Atlantic census
regions.
The mean and 95th percentile intake rates by age-
gender groups are presented in Table 10-2. Tables 10-3
and 10-4 present the distribution of fish consumption for
females and males, respectively, by age; these tables give
the percentages of females/males in a given age bracket
with intake rates within various ranges. Table 10-5
presents mean total fish consumption by fish species.
The TRI survey data were also utilized by Rupp et al.
(1980) to generate fish intake distributions for three age
groups (<11, 12-18, and 19+ years) within each of the 9
census regions and for the entire United States. Separate
distributions were derived for freshwater finfish, saltwater
fmfish and shellfish; thus, a total of 90 (3*3*10) different
distributions were derived, each corresponding to intake of
a specific category of fish for a given age group within a
given region. The analysis of Rupp et al. (1980) included
only those respondents with known age. This amounted to
23,213 respondents.
Ruffle et al. (1994) used the percentiles data of Rupp
et al. (1980) to estimate the best fitting lognormal
parameters for each distribution. Three methods (non-linear
optimization, first probability plot and second probability
plot) were used to estimate optimal parameters. Ruffle et
al. (1994) determined that, of the three methods, the non-
linear optimization method (NLO) generally gave the best
results. For some of the distributions fitted by the NLO
method, however, it was determined that the lognormal
model did not adequately fit the empirical fish intake
distribution. Ruffle et al.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
(1994) used a criterion of minimum sum of squares (min
SS) less than 30 to identify which distributions provided
adequate fits. Of the 90 distributions studied, 77 were seen
to have min SS < 30; for these, Ruffle et al. (1994)
concluded that the NLO modeled lognormal distributions
are "well suited for risk assessment". Of the remaining 13
distributions, 12 had min SS > 30; for these Ruffle et al.
(1994) concluded that modeled lognormal distributions
"may also be appropriate for use when exercised with due
care and with sensitivity analyses". One distribution, that of
freshwater finfish intake for children < 11 years of age in
New England, could not be modeled due to the absence of
any reported consumption.
Table 10-6 presents the optimal lognormal
parameters, the mean (u), standard deviation (s), and min
SS, for all 89 modeled distributions. These parameters can
be used to determine percentiles of the corresponding
distribution of average daily fish consumption rates through
the relation DFC(p)=exp[u+ z(p)s] where DFC(p) is the
pth percentile of the distribution of average daily fish
consumption rates and z(p) is the z-score associated with
the pth percentile (e.g., z(50)=0 ). The mean average daily
fish consumption rate is given by exp[u + 0.5s2].
The analyses of Javitz (1980) and Ruffle et al.
(1994) were based on consumers only, who are estimated
to represent 94.0 percent of the U. S. population. U. S. EPA
estimated the mean intake in the general population by
multiplying the fraction consuming, 0.94, by the mean
among consumers reported by Javitz (1980) of 14.3 g/day;
the resulting estimate is 13.4 g/day. The 95th percentile
estimate of Javitz (1980) of 41.7 g/day among consumers
would be essentially unchanged when applied to the general
population; 41.7 g/day would represent the 95.3 percentile
(i.e., 100*[0.95*0.94-K).06]) among the general population.
Advantages of the TRI data survey are that it was a
large, nationally representative survey with a high response
rate (80 percent) and was conducted over an entire year. In
addition, consumption was recorded in a daily diary over a
one month period; this format should be more reliable than
one based on one-month recall. The upper percentiles
presented are derived from one month of data, and are likely
to overestimate the corresponding upper percentiles of the
long-term (i.e., one year or more) average daily fish intake
distribution. Similarly, the standard deviation of the fitted
lognormal distribution probably overestimates the standard
deviation of the long-term distribution. However, the
period of this survey (one month) is considerably longer
than those of many
other consumption studies, including the USDA National
Food Consumption Surveys, which report consumption over
a 3 day to one week period.
Another obvious limitation of this data base is that it
is now over twenty years out of date. Ruffle et al. (1994)
considered this shortcoming and suggested that one may
wish to shift the distribution upward to account for the
recent increase in fish consumption. Adding ln(l +X/100) to
the log mean // will shift the distribution upward by x
percent (e.g., adding 0.22 = ln(1.25) increases the
distribution by 25 percent). Although the TRI survey
distinguished between recreationally and commercially
caught fish, Javitz (1980), Rupp et al. (1980), and Ruffle et
al. (1994) (which was based on Rupp et al., 1980) did not
present analyses by this variable.
U.S. EPA (1996a) - Daily Average Per Capita Fish
Consumption Estimates Based on the Combined USDA
1989, 1990, and 1991 Continuing Survey of Food Intakes
by Individuals (CSFII) — The USDA conducts the CSFII
on an ongoing basis. U.S. EPA used the 1989, 1990, and
1991 CSFII data to generate fish intake estimates.
Participants in the CSFII provided 3 consecutive days of
dietary data. For the first day's data, participants supplied
dietary recall information to an in-home interviewer.
Second and third day dietary intakes were recorded by
participants. Data collection for the CSFII started in April
of the given year and was completed in March of the
following year.
The CSFII contains 469 fish-related food codes;
survey respondents reported consumption across 284 of
these codes. Respondents estimated the weight of each food
that they consumed. The fish component (by weight) of
these foods was calculated using data from the recipe file
for release 7 of the USDA's Nutrient Data Base for
Individual Food Intake Surveys. The amount of fish
consumed by each individual was then calculated by
summing, over all fish containing foods, the product of the
weight of food consumed and the fish component (i.e., the
percentage fish by weight) of the food.
The recipe file also contains cooking loss factors
associated with each food. These were utilized to convert,
for each fish containing food, the as-eaten fish weight
consumed into an uncooked equivalent weight of fish.
Analyses offish intake were performed on both an as-eaten
and uncooked basis.
Each (fish-related) food code was assigned by EPA
a habitat type of either freshwater/estuarine or marine.
Food codes were also designated as finfish or shellfish.
Average daily individual consumption (g/day) for a given
Page
10-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
fish type-by-habitat category (e.g., marine finfish) was
calculated by summing the amount of fish consumed by the
individual across the three reporting days for all fish-related
food codes in the given fish-by-habitat category and then
dividing by 3. Individual consumption per day consuming
fish (g/day) was calculated similarly except that total fish
consumption was divided by the specific number of survey
days the individual reported consuming fish; this was
calculated for fish consumers only (i.e., those consuming
fish on at least one of the three survey days). The reported
body-weight of the individual was used to convert
consumption in g/day to consumption in g/kg-day.
There were a total of 11,912 respondents in the
combined data set who had three-day dietary intake data.
Survey weights were assigned to this data set to make it
representative of the U.S. population with respect to various
demographic characteristics related to food intake.
U.S. EPA (1996a) reported means, medians, upper
percentiles, and 90-percent interval estimates for the 90th,
95th, and 99th percentiles. The 90-percent interval
estimates are nonparametric estimates from bootstrap
techniques. The bootstrap estimates result from the
percentile method which estimates the lower and upper
bounds for the interval estimate by the 1 OOa percentile and
100 (1-os) percentile estimates from the non-parametric
distribution of the given point estimate (U.S. EPA, 1996a).
Analyses of fish intake were performed on an as-
eaten as well as on an uncooked equivalent basis and on a
g/day and g/kg-day basis. Table 10-7 gives the mean and
various percentiles of the distribution of per-capita fish
intake rates (g/day) based on uncooked equivalent weight
by habitat and fish type, for the general population. The
mean per capita intake rate of finfish and shellfish from all
habitats was 20.1 g/day. Per-capita consumption estimates
by species are shown in Appendix IOC. Table 10-8
displays the mean and various percentiles of the distribution
of total fish intake per day consuming fish, by habitat for
consumers only. Also displayed is the percentage of the
population consuming fish of the specified habitat during
the three day survey period. Tables 10-9 and 10-10 present
similar results as above but on a mg/kg-day basis; Tables
10-11 and 10-12 present results in the same format for fish
intake (g/day) on an as-eaten (cooked) basis.
Tables 10-13 through 10-44 present data for daily
average per capita fish consumption by age and gender.
These data are presented by selected age grouping (4 and
under, 15-44, 45 and older, all ages) and gender. Tables
10-13 through 10-20 present fish intake data (g/day and
mg/kg-day) on an as consumed basis for the general
population and Tables 10-21 through 10-28 for consumers
only. Tables 10-29 through 10-44 provide intake data
(g/day and mg/kg-day) on an uncooked equivalent basis for
the same population groups described above.
The advantages of this study are its large size, its
relative currency and its representativeness. In addition,
through use of the USDA recipe files, the analysis identified
all fish-related food codes and estimated the percent fish
content of each of these codes. By contrast, some analyses
of the USDA National Food Consumption Surveys
(NFCSs) which reported per capita fish intake rates ( e.g.,
Pao et al, 1982; USDA, 1992a), excluded certain fish
containing foods (e.g., fish mixtures, frozen plate meals) in
their calculations.
Results from the 1977-1978 NFCS survey (Pao et
al., 1982) showed that only a small percentage of
consumers ate fish on more than one occasion per day. This
implies that the distribution presented for fish intake per day
consuming fish can be used as a surrogate for the
distribution offish intake per (fish) eating occasion (Table
10-8).
Also, it should be noted that the 1989-91 CSFII data
are not the most recent intake survey data. USDA has
recently made available data from its 1994 and 1995 CSFII.
Over 5,500 people nationwide participated in both of these
surveys, providing recalled food intake information for two
separate days. Although the 2-day data analysis has not
been conducted, USDA published results for the
respondents' intakes on the first day surveyed (USDA,
1996a; USDA, 1996b). USDA 1996 survey data will be
made available later in 1997. As soon as 1996 data are
available, EPA will take steps to get the 3-year data (1994,
1995, 1996) analyzed and the food ingestion factors
updated. Meanwhile, comparisons between the mean daily
fish intake per individual in a day from the USDA survey
data from years 1977-78, 1987-88, 1989-91, 1994, and
1995 indicate that fish intake has been relatively constant
over time. The 1-day fish intake rates were 11 g/day, 11
g/day, 13 g/day, 9 g/day, and 11 g/day for survey years
1977-78,1987-88,1989-91, 1994, and 1995, respectively.
This indicates that the 1989-91 CSFII data presented in this
handbook are probably adequate for assessing fish ingestion
exposure for current populations.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
10.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION
STUDIES
Pao et al. (1982) - Foods Commonly Eaten by
Individuals: Amount Per Day and Per Eating Occasion -
The USDA 1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey (NFCS) was described in Chapter 9. The survey
consisted of a household and individual component. For the
individual component, all members of surveyed households
were asked to provide 3 consecutive days of dietary data.
For the first day's data, participants supplied dietary recall
information to an in-home interviewer. Second and third
day dietary intakes were recorded by participants. A total
of 15,000 households were included in the 1977-78 NFCS
and about 38,000 individuals completed the 3-day diet
records. Fish intake was estimated based on consumption
offish products identified in the NFCS data base according
to NFCS-defined food codes. These products included
fresh, breaded, floured, canned, raw and dried fish, but not
fish mixtures or frozen plate meals.
Pao et al. (1982) used the 1977-78 NFCS to
examine the quantity of fish consumed per eating occasion.
For each individual consuming fish in the 3 day survey
period, the quantity of fish consumed per eating occasion
was derived by dividing the total reported fish intake over
the 3 day period by the number of occasions the individual
reported eating fish. The distributions, by age and sex, for
the quantity of fish consumed per eating occasion are
displayed in Table 10-13 (Pao et al., 1982). For the general
population, the average quantity of fish consumed per fish
meal was 117 g, with a 95th percentile of 284 g. Males in
the age groups 19-34, 35-64 and 65-74 years had the
highest average and 95th percentile quantities among the
age-sex groups presented.
Pao et al. (1982) also used the data from this survey
set to calculate per capita fish intake rates. However,
because these data are now almost 20 years out of date, this
analysis is not considered key with respect to assessing per
capita intake (the average quantity of fish consumed per
fish meal should be less subject to change over time than is
per capita intake). In addition, fish mixtures and frozen
plate meals were not included in the calculation of fish
intake. The per capita fish intake rate reported by Pao et al.
(1982) was 11.8 g/day. The 1977-1978 NFCS was a large
and well designed survey and the data are representative of
the U.S. population.
USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
1987-88 - The USDA 1987-88 Nationwide Food
Consumption Survey (NFCS) was described in Chapter 9.
Briefly, the survey consisted of a household and individual
component. The household component asked about
household food consumption over the past one week period.
For the individual component, each member of a surveyed
household was interviewed (in person) and asked to recall
all foods eaten the previous day; the information from this
interview made up the "one day data" for the survey. In
addition, members were instructed to fill out a detailed
dietary record for the day of the interview and the following
day. The data for this entire 3-day period made up the "3-
day diet records". A statistical sampling design was used to
ensure that all seasons, geographic regions of the U.S.,
demographic, and socioeconomic groups were represented.
Sampling weights were used to match the population
distribution of 13 demographic characteristics related to
food intake (USDA, 1992a).
Total fish intake was estimated based on
consumption offish products identified in the NFCS data
base according to NFCS-defined food codes. These
products included fresh, breaded, floured, canned, raw and
dried fish, but not fish mixtures or frozen plate meals.
A total of 4,500 households participated in the 1987-
88 survey; the household response rate was 38 percent.
One day data were obtained for 10,172 (81 percent) of the
12,522 individuals in participating households; 8,468 (68
percent) individuals completed 3-day diet records.
USDA (1992b) used the one day data to derive per
capita fish intake rate and intake rates for consumers of total
fish. These rates, calculated by sex and age group, are
shown in Table 10-14. Intake rates for consumers-only
were calculated by dividing the per capita intake rates by
the fractions of the population consuming fish in one day.
The 1987-1988 NFCS was also utilized to estimate
consumption of home produced fish (as well as home
produced fruits, vegetables, meats and dairy products) in the
general U.S. population. The methodology for estimating
home-produced intake rates was rather complex and
involved combining the household and individual
components of the NFCS; the methodology, as well as the
estimated intake rates, are described in detail in Chapter 12.
However, since much of the rest of this chapter is concerned
with estimating consumption of recreationally caught, i.e.,
home produced fish, the methods and results of Chapter 12,
as they pertain to fish consumption, are summarized briefly
here.
Page
10-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
A total of 2.1 percent of the survey population
reported home produced fish consumption during the survey
week. Among consumers, the mean intake rate was 2.07
g/kg-day and the 95th percentile was 7.83 g/kg-day; the
per-capita intake rate was 0.04 g/kg-day. Note that intake
rates for home-produced foods were indexed to the weight
of the survey respondent and reported in g/kg-day.
It is possible to compare the estimates of home-
produced fish consumption derived in this analyses with
estimates derived from studies of recreational anglers
(described in Sections 10.4-10.8); however, the intake rates
must be put into a similar context. The home-produced
intake rates described refer to average daily intake rates
among individuals consuming home-produced fish in a
week; results from recreational angler studies, however,
usually report average daily rates for those eating home-
produced fish (or for those who recreationally fish) at least
some time during the year. Since many of these latter
individuals eat home-produced fish at a frequency of less
than once per week, the average daily intake in this group
would be expected to be less than that reported.
The NFCS household component contains the
question "Does anyone in your household fish?". For the
population answering yes to this question (21 percent of
households), the NFCS data show that 9 percent consumed
home-produced fish in the week of the survey; the mean
intake rate for these consumers from fishing households was
2.2 g/kg-day. (Note that 91 percent of individuals reporting
home grown fish consumption for the week of the survey
indicated that a household member fishes; the overall mean
intake rate among home-produced fish consumers,
regardless of fishing status, was the above reported 2.07
g/kg-day). The per capita intake rate among those living in
a fishing household is then calculated as 0.2 g/kg-day (2.2
* 0.09). Using the estimated average weight of survey
participants of 59 kg, this translates into 11.8 g/day.
Among members of fishing households, home-produced
fish consumption accounted for 32.5 percent of total fish
consumption.
As discussed in Chapter 12 of this volume, intake
rates for home-produced foods, including fish, are based on
the results of the household survey, and as such, reflect the
weight of fish taken into the household. In most of the
recreational fish surveys discussed later in this section, the
weight of the fish catch (which generally corresponds to the
weight taken into the household) is multiplied by an edible
fraction to convert to an uncooked equivalent of the amount
consumed. This fraction may be species specific,
but some studies used an average value; these average
values ranged from 0.3 to 0.5. Using a factor of 0.5 would
convert the above 11.8 g/day rate to 5.9 g/day. This
estimate, 5.9 g/day, of the per-capita fish intake rate among
members of fishing households is within the range of the
per-capita intake rates among recreational anglers
addressed in sections to follow.
An advantage of analyses based on the 1987-1988
USDA NFCS is that the data set is a large, geographically
and seasonally balanced survey of a representative sample
of the U.S. population. The survey response rate, however,
was low and an expert panel concluded that it was not
possible to establish the presence or absence of non-
response bias (USDA, 1992b). Limitations of the home-
produced analysis are given in Chapter 12 of this volume.
Tsang and Klepeis (1996) - National Human
Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) - The U.S. EPA collected
information for the general population on the duration and
frequency of time spent in selected activities and time spent
in selected microenvironments via 24-hour diaries. Over
9,000 individuals from 48 contiguous states participated in
NHAPS. Approximately 4,700 participants also provided
information on seafood consumption. The survey was
conducted between October 1992 and September 1994.
Data were collected on the (1) number of people that ate
seafood in the last month, (2) the number of servings of
seafood consumed, and (3) whether the seafood consumed
was caught or purchased (Tsang and Klepeis, 1996). The
participant responses were weighted according to selected
demographics such as age, gender, and race to ensure that
results were representative of the U. S. population. Of those
4,700 respondents, 2,980 (59.6 percent) ate seafood
(including shellfish, eels, or squid) in the last month (Table
10-15). The number of servings per month were
categorized in ranges of 1-2, 3-5, 6-10, 11-19, and 20+
servings per month (Table 10-16). The highest percentage
(35 percent) of respondent population had an intake of 3-5
servings per month. Most (92 percent) of the respondents
purchased the seafood they ate (Table 10-17).
Intake data were not provided in the survey.
However, intake of fish can be estimated using the
information on the number of servings of fish eaten from
this study and serving size data from other studies. The
recommended mean value in this handbook for fish serving
size is 129 g/serving (Table 10-8). Using this mean value
for serving size and assuming that the average
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
individual eats 3-5 servings per month, the amount of
seafood eaten per month would range from 387 to 645
grams/month or 12.9 to 21.5 g/day for the highest
percentage of the population. These values are within the
range of mean intake values for total fish (20.1 g/day)
calculated in the U.S. EPA analysis of the USDA CSFII
data. It should be noted that an all inclusive description for
seafood was not presented in Tsang and Klepeis (1996). It
is not known if processed or canned seafood and seafood
mixtures are included in the seafood category.
The advantages of NHAPS is that the data were
collected for a large number of individuals and are
representative of the U.S. general population. However,
evaluation of seafood intake was not the primary purpose of
the study and the data do not reflect the actual amount of
seafood that was eaten. However, using the assumption
described above, the estimated seafood intake from this
study are comparable to those observed in the EPA CSFII
analysis.
10.4. KEY RECREATIONAL (MARINE FISH
STUDIES)
National Marine Fisheries Service (1986a, b, c;
1993) - The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
conducts systematic surveys, on a continuing basis, of
marine recreational fishing. These surveys are designed to
estimate the size of the recreational marine finfish catch by
location, species and fishing mode. In addition, the surveys
provide estimates for the total number of participants in
marine recreational finfishing and the total number of
fishing trips. The surveys are not designed to estimate
individual consumption of fish from marine recreational
sources, primarily because they do not attempt to estimate
the number of individuals consuming the recreational catch.
Intake rates for marine recreational anglers can be
estimated, however, by employing assumptions derived
from other data sources about the number of consumers.
The NMFS surveys involve two components,
telephone surveys and direct interviewing of fishermen in
the field. The telephone survey randomly samples residents
of coastal regions, defined generally as counties within 25
miles of the nearest seacoast, and inquires about
participation in marine recreational fishing in the resident's
home state in the past year, and more specifically, in the
past two months. This component of the survey is used to
estimate, for each coastal state, the total number of coastal
region residents who participate
in marine recreational fishing (for finfish) within the state,
as well as the total number of (within state) fishing trips
these residents take. To estimate the total number of
participants and fishing trips in the state, by coastal
residents and others, a ratio approach, based on the field
interview data, was used. Thus, if the field survey data
found that there was a 4:1 ratio of fishing trips taken by
coastal residents as compared to trips taken by non-coastal
and out of state residents, then an additional 25 percent
would be added to the number of trips taken by coastal
residents to generate an estimate of the total number of
within state trips.
The field intercept survey is essentially a creel type
survey. The survey utilizes a national site register which
details marine fishing locations in each state. Sites for field
interviews are chosen in proportion to fishing frequency at
the site. Anglers fishing on shore, private boat, and
charter/party boat modes who had completed their fishing
were interviewed. The field survey included questions
about frequency of fishing, area of fishing, age, and place
of residence. The fish catch was classified by the
interviewer as either type A, type B1 or type B2 catch. The
type A catch denoted fish that were taken whole from the
fishing site and were available for inspection. The type Bl
and B2 catch were not available for inspection; the former
consisted of fish used as bait, filleted, or discarded dead
while the latter was fish released alive. The type A catch
was identified by species and weighed, with the weight
reflecting total fish weight, including inedible parts. The
type Bl catch was not weighed, but weights were estimated
using the average weight derived from the type A catch for
the given species, state, fishing mode and season of the year.
For both the A and B1 catch, the intended disposition of the
catch (e.g., plan to eat, plan to throw away, etc.) was
ascertained.
EPA obtained the raw data tapes from NMFS in
order to generate intake distributions and other specialized
analyses. Fish intake distributions were generated using the
field survey tapes. Weights proportional to the inverse of
the angler's reported fishing frequency were employed to
correct for the unequal probabilities of sampling; this was
the same approach used by NMFS in deriving their
estimates. Note that in the field survey, anglers were
interviewed regardless of past interviewing experience;
thus, the use of inverse fishing frequency as weights was
justified (see Section 10.1).
For each angler interviewed in the field survey, the
yearly amount of fish caught that was intended to be eaten
Page
10-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
by the angler and his/her family or friends was estimated by
EPA as follows:
Y = [(wt of A catch) * IA + (wt of Bl catch) * IB] * [Fishing frequency] (Eqn. 10-1)
where IA (IB) are indicator variables equal to 1 if the type A
(Bl) catch was intended to be eaten and equal to 0
otherwise. To convert Y to a daily fish intake rate by the
angler, it was necessary to convert amount of fish caught to
edible amount of fish, divide by the number of intended
consumers, and convert from yearly to daily rate. Although
theoretically possible, EPA chose not to use species specific
edible fractions to convert overall weight to edible fish
weight since edible fraction estimates were not readily
available for many marine species. Instead, an average
value of 0.5 was employed. For the number of intended
consumers, EPA used an average value of 2.5 which was an
average derived from the results of several studies of
recreational fish consumption (Chemrisk, 1991; Puffer et
al, 1981; West et al., 1989). Thus, the average daily intake
rate (ADI) for each angler was calculated as
ADI = Y* (0.5)/[2.5* 365]
(Eqn. 10-2)
Note that ADI will be 0 for those anglers who either did not
intend to eat their catch or who did not catch any fish. The
distribution of ADI among anglers was calculated by region
and coastal status (i.e., coastal versus non-coastal counties).
A mean ADI for the overall population of a given area was
calculated as follows: first the estimated number of anglers
in the area was multiplied by the average number of
intended fish consumers (2.5) to get a total number of
recreational marine finfish consumers. This number was
then multiplied by the mean ADI among anglers to get the
total recreational marine finfish consumption in the area.
Finally, the mean ADI in the population was calculated by
dividing total fish consumption by the total population in the
area.
The results presented below are based on the results
of the 1993 survey. Samples sizes were 200,000 for the
telephone survey and 120,000 for the field surveys. All
coastal states in the continental U.S. were included in the
survey except Texas and Washington.
Table 10-18 presents the estimated number of
coastal, non-coastal, and out-of-state fishing participants
by state and region of fishing. Florida had the greatest
number of both Atlantic and Gulf participants. The total
number of coastal residents who participated in marine
finfishing in their home state was 8 million; an additional
750,000 non-coastal residents
participated in marine finfishing in their
home state.
Table 10-19 presents the estimated
total weight of the A and Bl catch by region and time of
year. For each region, the greatest catches were during the
six-month period from May through October. This period
accounted for about 90 percent of the North and
Mid-Atlantic catch, about 80 percent of the Northern
California and Oregon catch, about 70 percent of the
Southern Atlantic and Southern California catch and 62
percent of the Gulf catch. Note that in the North and
Mid-Atlantic regions, field surveys were not done in
January and February due to very low fishing activity. For
all regions, over half the catch occurred within 3 miles of
the shore or in inland waterways.
Table 10-20 presents the mean and 95th percentile
of average daily intake of recreationally caught marine
finfish among anglers by region. The mean ADI among all
anglers was 5.6, 7.2, and 2.0 g/day for the Atlantic, Gulf,
and Pacific regions, respectively. Also given is the per-
capita ADI in the overall population (anglers and non-
anglers) of the region and in the overall coastal population
of the region. Table 10-21 gives the distribution of the
catch by species for the Atlantic and Gulf regions and Table
10-22 for Pacific regions.
The NMFS surveys provide a large, up-to-date, and
geographically representative sample of marine angler
activity in the U.S. The major limitation of this database in
terms of estimating fish intake is the lack of information
regarding the intended number of consumers of each
angler's catch. In this analysis, it was assumed that every
angler's catch was consumed by the same number (2.5) of
people; this number was derived from averaging the results
of other studies. This assumption introduces a relatively
low level of uncertainty in the estimated mean intake rates
among anglers, but a somewhat higher level of uncertainly
in the estimated intake distributions. It should be noted that
under the above assumption, the distributions shown here
pertain not only to the population of anglers, but also to the
entire population of recreational fish consumers, which is
2.5 times the number of anglers. If the number of
consumers was changed, to, for instance, 2.0, then the
distribution would be increased by a factor of 1.25
(2.5/2.0), but the estimated population of recreational fish
consumers to which the distribution would apply would
decrease by a factor of 0.8 (2.0/2.5). Note that the mean
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
intake rate of marine finfish in the overall population is
independent of the assumption of number of intended fish
consumers.
Another uncertainty involves the use of 0.5 as an
(average) edible fraction. This figure is somewhat
conservative (i.e., the true average edible fraction is
probably lower); thus, the intake rates calculated here may
be biased upward somewhat.
It should be noted again that the recreational fish
intake distributions given refer only to marine finfish. In
addition, the intake rates calculated are based only on the
catch of anglers in their home state. Marine fishing
performed out-of-state would not be included in these
distributions. Therefore, these distributions give an
estimate of consumption of locally caught fish.
10.5. RELEVANT RECREATIONAL MARINE
STUDIES
Puffer et al. (1981) - Intake Rates of Potentially
Hazardous Marine Fish Caught in the Metropolitan Los
Angeles Area - Puffer et al. (1981) conducted a creel survey
with sport fishermen in the Los Angeles area in 1980. The
survey was conducted at 12 sites in the harbor and coastal
areas to evaluate intake rates of potentially hazardous
marine fish and shellfish by local, non-professional
fishermen. It was conducted for the full 1980 calendar year,
although inclement weather in January, February, and
March limited the interview days. Each site was surveyed
an average of three times per month, on different days, and
at a different time of the day. The survey questionnaire was
designed to collect information on demographic
characteristics, fishing patterns, species, number of fish
caught, and fish consumption patterns. Scales were used to
obtain fish weights. Interviews were conducted only with
anglers who had caught fish, and the anglers were
interviewed only once during the entire survey period.
Puffer et al. (1981) estimated daily consumption
rates (grams/day) for each angler using the following
equation:
(K x N x W x F)/[E x 365]
(Eqn. 10-3)
where:
K = edible fraction of fish (0.25 to 0.5 depending on species);
N = number of fish in catch;
W = average weight of (grams) fish in catch;
F = frequency of fishing/year; and
E = number offish eaters in family/living group.
No explicit survey weights were used in analyzing this
survey; thus, each respondent's data was given equal
weight.
A total of 1,059 anglers were interviewed for the
survey. The ethnic and age distribution of respondents is
shown in Table 10-23; 88 percent of respondents were
male. The median intake rate was higher for
Oriental/Samoan anglers (median 70.6 g/day) than for other
ethnic groups and higher for those ages over 65 years
(median 113.0 g/day) than for other age groups. Puffer et
al. (1981) found similar median intake rates for seasons;
36.3 g/day for November through March and 37.7 g/day for
April through October. Puffer et al. (1981) also evaluated
fish preparation methods; these data are presented in
Appendix 10B. The cumulative distribution of recreational
fish (finfish and shellfish) consumption by survey
respondents is presented in Table 10-24; this distribution
was calculated only for those fishermen who indicated they
eat the fish they catch. The median fish consumption rate
was 37 g/day and the 90th percentile rate was 225 g/day
(Puffer et al., 1981). A description of catch patterns for
primary fish species kept is presented in Table 10-25.
As mentioned in the Background to this Chapter,
intake distributions derived from analyses of creel surveys
which did not employ weights reflective of sampling
probabilities will overestimate the target population intake
distribution and will, in fact, be more reflective of the
"resource utilization distribution". Therefore, the reported
median level of 37.3 g/day does not reflect the fact that 50
percent of the target population has intake above this level;
instead 50 percent of recreational fish consumption is by
individuals consuming at or above 37.3 g/day. In order to
generate an intake distribution reflective of that in the target
population, weights inversely proportional to sampling
probability need to be employed. Price et al. (1994) made
this attempt with the Puffer et al. (1981) survey data, using
inverse fishing frequencies as the sampling weights. Price
et al. (1994) was unable to get the raw data for this survey,
but using frequency tables and the average level of fish
consumption per fishing trip provided in Puffer et al.
(1981), generated an approximate revised intake
distribution. This distribution was dramatically lower than
that obtained by Puffer et al. (1981); the median was
estimated at 2.9 g/day (compared with 37.3 from Puffer et
al., 1981) and the 90th percentile at 35 g/day (compared to
225 g/day from Puffer et al., 1981).
Page
10-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
There are several limitations to the interpretation of
the percentiles presented by both Puffer et al. (1981) and
Price et al. (1994). As described in Appendix 10A, the
interpretation of percentiles reported from creel surveys in
terms of percentiles of the "resource utilization distribution"
is approximate and depends on several assumptions. One
of these assumptions is that sampling probability is
proportional to inverse fishing frequency. In this survey,
where interviewers revisited sites numerous times and
anglers were not interviewed more than once, this
assumption is not valid, though it is likely that the sampling
probability is still highly dependant on fishing frequency so
that the assumption does hold in an approximate sense. The
validity of this assumption also impacts the interpretation of
percentiles reported by Price et al. (1994) since inverse
frequency was used as sampling weights. It is likely that the
value (2.9 g/day) of Price et al. (1994) underestimates
somewhat the median intake in the target population, but is
much closer to the actual value than the Puffer et al. (1981)
estimate of 37.3 g/day. Similar statements would apply
about the 90th percentile. Similarly, the 37.3 g/day median
value, if interpreted as the 50th percentile of the "resource
utilization distribution", is also somewhat of an
underestimate.
It should be noted again that the fish intake
distribution generated by Puffer et al. (1981) (and by Price
et al., 1994) was based only on fishermen who caught fish
and ate the fish they caught. If all anglers were included,
intake estimates would be somewhat lower. In contrast, the
survey assumed that the number of fish caught at the time of
the interview was all that would be caught that day. If it
were possible to interview fishermen at the conclusion of
their fishing day, intake estimates could be potentially
higher. An additional factor potentially affecting intake rates
is that fishing quarantines were imposed in early spring due
to heavy sewage overflow (Puffer et al., 1981).
Pierce et al. (1981) - Commencement Bay Seafood
Consumption Study - Pierce et al. (1981) performed a local
creel survey to examine seafood consumption patterns and
demographics of sport fishermen in Commencement Bay,
Washington. The objectives of this survey included
determining (1) seafood consumption habits and
demographics of non-commercial anglers catching seafood;
(2) the extent to which resident fish were used as food; and
(3) the method of preparation of the fish to be consumed.
Salmon were excluded from the survey since it was believed
that they had little potential for contamination. The first half
of this survey was
conducted from early July to mid-September, 1980 and the
second half from mid-September through most of
November. During the summer months, interviewers
visited each of 4 sub-areas of Commencement Bay on five
mornings and five evenings; in the fall the areas were
sampled 4 complete survey days. Interviews were
conducted only with persons who had caught fish. The
anglers were interviewed only once during the survey
period. Data were recorded for species, wet weight, size of
the living group (family, place of residence, fishing
frequency, planned uses of the fish, age, sex, and race
(Pierce et al., 1981). The analysis of Pierce et al. (1981)
did not employ explicit sampling weights (i.e., all weights
were set to 1).
There were 304 interviews in the summer and 204
in the fall. About 60 percent of anglers were white, 20
percent black, 19 percent Oriental and the rest Hispanic or
Native American. Table 10-26 gives the distribution of
fishing frequency calculated by Pierce et al. (1981); for both
the summer and fall, more than half of the fishermen caught
and consumed fish weekly. The dominant (by weight)
species caught were Pacific Hake and Walleye Pollock.
Pierce et al. (1981) did not present a distribution of fish
intake or a mean fish intake rate.
The U. S. EPA (1989a) used the Pierce et al. (1981)
fishing frequency distribution and an estimate of the average
amount of fish consumed per angling trip to create an
approximate intake distribution for the Pierce et al. (1981)
survey. The estimate of the amount of fish consumed per
angling trip (380 g/person-trip) was based on data on mean
fish catch weight and mean number of consumers reported
in Pierce et. al. (1981) and on an edible fraction of 0.5.
U.S. EPA (1989a) reported a median intake rate of 23
g/day.
Price et al. (1994) obtained the raw data from this
survey and performed a re-analysis using sampling weights
proportional to inverse fishing frequency. The rationale for
these weights is explained in Section 10.1 and in the
discussion above of the Puffer et al. (1981) study. In the re-
analysis, Price et al. (1994) found a median intake rate of
1.0 g/day and a 90th percentile rate of 13 g/day. The
distribution of fishing frequency generated by Price et al.
(1994) is shown in Table 10-27. Note that when equal
weights were used, Price et al. (1994) found a median rate
of 19 g/day, which was close to the approximate U.S. EPA
(1989a) value reported above of 23 g/day.
The same limitations apply to interpreting the results
presented here to those presented above in the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-11
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
discussion of Puffer et al. (1981). The median intake rate
found by Price et al. (1994) (using inverse frequency
weights) is more reflective of median intake in the target
population than is the value of 19 g/day (or 23 g/day); the
latter value reflects more the 50th percentile of the resource
utilization distribution, (i.e., that anglers with intakes above
19 g/day consume 50 percent of the recreational fish catch).
Similarly, the fishing frequency distribution generated by
Price et al. (1994) is more reflective of the fishing
frequency distribution in the target population than is the
distribution presented in Pierce et al. (1981). Note the
target population is those anglers who fished at
Commencement Bay during the time period of the survey.
As with the Puffer et al. (1981) data, these values
(1.0 g/day and 19 g/day) are both probably underestimates
since the sampling probabilities are less than proportional
to fishing frequency; thus, the true target population median
is probably somewhat above 1.0 g/day and the true 50th
percentile of the resource utilization distribution is probably
somewhat higher than 19 g/day. The data from this survey
provide an indication of consumption patterns for the time
period around 1980 in the Commencement Bay area.
However, the data may not reflect current consumption
patterns because fishing advisories were instituted due to
local contamination.
U.S. DHHS (1995) - Health Study to Assess the
Human Health Effects of Mercury Exposure to Fish
Consumed from the Everglades - A health study was
conducted in two phases in the Everglades, Florida for the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (U.S.
DHHS, 1995). The objectives of the first phase were to: (a)
describe the human populations at risk for mercury
exposure through their consumption of fish and other
contaminated animals from the Everglades and (b) evaluate
the extent of mercury exposure in those persons consuming
contaminated food and their compliance with the voluntary
health advisory. The second phase of the study involved
neurologic testing of all study participants who had total
mercury levels in hair greater than 7.5 //g/g. Study
participants were identified by using special targeted
screenings, mailings to residents, postings and multi-media
advertisements of the study throughout the Everglades
region, and direct discussions with people fishing along the
canals and waterways in the contaminated areas. The
contaminated areas were identified by the interviewers and
long-term Everglade residents. Of a total of 1,794
individuals sampled, 405 individuals were eligible to
participate in the study
because they had consumed fish or wildlife from the
Everglades at least once per month in the last 3 months of
the study period. The majority of the eligible participants (>
93 percent) were either subsistence fishermen, Everglade
residents, or both. Of the total eligible participants, 55
individuals refused to participate in the survey. Useable
data were obtained from 330 respondents ranging in age
from 10-81 years of age (mean age 39 years ± 18.8) (U.S.
DHHS, 1995). Respondents were administered a three
page questionnaire from which demographic information,
fishing and eating habits, and other variables were obtained
(U.S. DHHS, 1995).
Table 10-28 shows the ranges, means, and standard
deviations of selected characteristics by subgroups of the
survey population. Sixty-two percent of the respondents
were male with a slight preponderance of black individuals
(43 percent white, 46 percent black non-Hispanic, and 11
percent Hispanic) (Table 10-28). Most of the respondents
reported earning an annual income of $15,000 or less per
family before taxes (U.S. DHHS, 1995). The mean number
of years fished along the canals by the respondents was 15.8
years with a standard deviation of 15.8. The mean number
of times per week fish consumers reported eating fish over
the last 6 months and last month of the survey period was
1.8 and 1.5 per week with a standard deviation of 2.5 and
1.4, respectively (Table 10-28). Table 10-28 also indicates
that 71 percent of the respondents reported knowing about
the mercury health advisories. Of those who were aware,
26 percent reported that they had lowered their
consumption offish caught in the Everglades while the rest
(74 percent) reported no change in consumption patterns
(U.S. DHHS, 1995).
A limitation of this study is that fish intake rates
(g/day) were not reported. Another limitation is that the
survey was site limited, and, therefore, not representative of
the U. S. population. An advantage of this study is that it is
one of the few studies targeting subsistence fishermen.
10.6. KEY FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL
STUDIES
West et al. (1989) - Michigan Sport Anglers Fish
Consumption Survey, 1989 - surveyed a stratified random
sample of Michigan residents with fishing licences. The
sample was divided into 18 cohorts, with one cohort
receiving a mail questionnaire each week between January
and May 1989. The survey included both a short term
recall component recording respondents' fish intake over
Page
10-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
a seven day period and a usual frequency component. For
the short-term component, respondents were asked to
identify all household members and list all fish meals
consumed by each household member during the past seven
days. The source of the fish for each meal was requested
(self-caught, gift, market, or restaurant). Respondents were
asked to categorize serving size by comparison with
pictures of 8 oz. fish portions; serving sizes could be
designated as either "about the same size", "less", or
"more" than the 8 oz. picture. Data on fish species,
locations of self-caught fish and methods of preparation and
cooking were also obtained.
The usual frequency component of the survey asked
about the frequency of fish meals during each of the four
seasons and requested respondents to give the overall
percentage of household fish meals that come from
recreational sources. A sample of 2,600 individuals were
selected from state records to receive survey questionnaires.
A total of 2,334 survey questionnaires were deliverable and
1,104 were completed and returned, giving a response rate
of 47.3 percent among individuals receiving questionnaires.
In the analysis of the survey data by West et. al.
(1989), the authors did not attempt to generate the
distribution of recreationally caught fish intake in the survey
population. EPA obtained the raw data of this survey for
the purpose of generating fish intake distributions and other
specialized analyses.
As described elsewhere in this handbook, percentiles
of the distribution of average daily intake reflective of long-
term consumption patterns can not in general be estimated
using short-term (e.g., one week) data. Such data can be
used to estimate mean average daily intake rates (reflective
of short or long term consumption); in addition, short term
data can serve to validate estimates of usual intake based on
longer recall.
EPA first analyzed the short term data with the intent
of estimating mean fish intake rates. In order to compare
these results with those based on usual intake, only
respondents with information on both short term and usual
intake were included in this analysis. For the analysis of the
short term data, EPA modified the serving size weights used
by West et al. (1989), which were 5, 8 and 10 oz.,
respectively, for portions that were less, about the same, and
more than the 8 oz. picture. EPA examined the percentiles
of the distribution of fish meal sizes reported in Pao et al.
(1982) derived from the 1977-1978 USDA National Food
Consumption Survey and observed that a lognormal
distribution provided a good visual fit to
the percentile data. Using this lognormal distribution, the
mean values for serving sizes greater than 8 oz. and for
serving sizes at least 10 percent greater than 8 oz. were
determined. In both cases a serving size of 12 oz. was
consistent with the Pao et al. (1982) distribution. The
weights used in the EPA analysis then were 5, 8, and 12 oz.
for fish meals described as less, about the same, and more
than the 8 oz. picture, respectively. It should be noted that
the mean serving size from Pao et al. (1982) was about 5
oz., well below the value of 8 oz. most commonly reported
by respondents in the West et al. (1989) survey.
Table 10-29 displays the mean number of total and
recreational fish meals for each household member based
on the seven day recall data. Also shown are mean fish
intake rates derived by applying the weights described
above to each fish meal. Intake was calculated on both a
grams/day and grams/kg body weight/day basis. This
analysis was restricted to individuals who eat fish and who
reside in households reporting some recreational fish
consumption during the previous year. About 75 percent of
survey respondents (i.e., licensed anglers) and about 84
percent of respondents who fished in the prior year reported
some household recreational fish consumption.
The EPA analysis next attempted to use the short
term data to validate the usual intake data. West et al.
(1989) asked the main respondent in each household to
provide estimates of their usual frequency of fishing and
eating fish, by season, during the previous year. The survey
provides a series of frequency categories for each season
and the respondent was asked to check the appropriate
range. The ranges used for all questions were: almost daily,
2-4 times a week, once a week, 2-3 times a month, once a
month, less often, none, and don't know. For quantitative
analysis of the data it is necessary to convert this categorical
information into numerical frequency values. As some of
the ranges are relatively broad, the choice of conversion
values can have some effect on intake estimates. In order to
obtain optimal values, the usual fish eating frequency
reported by respondents for the season during which the
questionnaire was completed was compared to the number
offish meals reportedly consumed by respondents over the
seven day short-term recall period. The results of these
comparisons are displayed in Table 10-30; it shows that, on
average, there is general agreement between estimates made
using one year recall and estimates based on seven day
recall. The average number of meals (1.96/week) was at the
bottom of the range for the most frequent consumption
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
group with data (2-4 meals/week). In contrast, for the
lower usual frequency categories, the average number of
meals was at the top, or exceeded the top of category range.
This suggests some tendency for relatively infrequent fish
eaters to underestimate their usual frequency of fish
consumption. The last column of the table shows the
estimated fish eating frequency per week that was selected
for use in making quantitative estimates of usual fish intake.
These values were guided by the values in the second
column, except that frequency values that were inconsistent
with the ranges provided to respondents in the survey were
avoided.
Using the four seasonal fish eating frequencies
provided by respondents and the above conversions for
reported intake frequency, EPA estimated the average
number of fish meals per week for each respondent. This
estimate, as well as the analysis above, pertain to the total
number of fish meals eaten (in Michigan) regardless of the
source of the fish. Respondents were not asked to provide
a seasonal breakdown for eating frequency of recreationally
caught fish; rather, they provided an overall estimate for
the past year of the percent offish they ate that was obtained
from different sources. EPA estimated the annual
frequency of recreationally caught fish meals by multiplying
the estimated total number of fish meals by the reported
percent of fish meals obtained from recreational sources;
recreational sources were defined as either self caught or a
gift from family or friends.
The usual intake component of the survey did not
include questions about the usual portion size for fish meals.
In order to estimate usual fish intake, a portion size of 8 oz.
was applied (the majority of respondents reported this meal
size in the 7 day recall data). Individual body weight data
were used to estimate intake on a g/kg-day basis. The fish
intake distribution estimated by EPA is displayed in Table
10-31.
The distribution shown in Table 10-31 is based on
respondents who consumed recreational caught fish. As
mentioned above, these represent 75 percent of all
respondents and 84 percent of respondents who reported
having fished in the prior year. Among this latter
population, the mean recreational fish intake rate is
14.4*0.84=12.1 g/day; the value of 38.7 g/day (95th
percentile among consumers) corresponds to the 95.8th
percentile of the fish intake distribution in this (fishing)
population.
The advantages of this data set and analysis are that
the survey was relatively large and contained both short-
term and usual intake data. The presence of short term data
allowed validation of the usual intake data which was based
on long term recall; thus, some of the problems associated
with surveys relying on long term recall are mitigated here.
The response rate of this survey, 47 percent, was
relatively low. In addition, the usual fish intake distribution
generated here employed a constant fish meal size, 8 oz..
Although use of this value as an average meal size was
validated by the short-term recall results, the use of a
constant meal size, even if correct on average, may seriously
reduce the variation in the estimated fish intake distribution.
This study was conducted in the winter and spring
months of 1988. This period does not include the summer
months when peak fishing activity can be anticipated,
leading to the possibility that intake results based on the 7
day recall data may understate individuals' usual (annual
average) fish consumption. A second survey by West et al.
(1993) gathered diary data on fish intake for respondents
spaced over a full year. However, this later survey did not
include questions about usual fish intake and has not been
reanalyzed here. The mean recreational fish intake rates
derived from the short term and usual components were
quite similar, however, 14.0 versus 14.4 g/day.
Chemrisk (1991) - Consumption of Freshwater Fish
by Maine Anglers - Chemrisk conducted a study to
characterize the rates of freshwater fish consumption among
Maine residents (Chemrisk, 1991; Ebert et al., 1993).
Since the only dietary source of local freshwater fish is
recreational fish, the anglers in Maine were chosen as the
survey population. The survey was designed to gather
information on the consumption of fish caught by anglers
from flowing (rivers and streams) and standing (lakes and
ponds) water bodies. Respondents were asked to recall the
frequency of fishing trips during the 1989-1990 ice-fishing
season and the 1990 open water season, the number offish
species caught during both seasons, and estimate the
number of fish consumed from 15 fish species. The
respondents were also asked to describe the number,
species, and average length of each sport-caught fish
consumed that had been gifts from other members of their
households or other household. The weight of fish
consumed by anglers was calculated by first multiplying the
estimated weight of the fish by the edible fraction, and then
dividing this product by the number of intended consumers.
Species specific regression equations were utilized to
estimate weight from the reported fish length.
Page
10-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
The edible fractions used were 0.4 for salmon, 0.78 for
Atlantic smelt, and 0.3 for all other species (Ebert et al,
1993).
A total of 2,500 prospective survey participants were
randomly selected from a list of anglers licensed in Maine.
The surveys were mailed in during October, 1990. Since
this was before the end of the open fishing season,
respondents were also asked to predict how many more
open water fishing trips they would undertake in 1990.
Chemrisk (1991) and Ebert et al. (1993) calculated
distributions of freshwater fish intake for two populations,
"all anglers" and "consuming anglers". All anglers were
defined as licensed anglers who fished during either the
1989-1990 ice-fishing season or the 1990 open-water
season (consumers and non-consumers) and licensed
anglers who did not fish but consumed freshwater fish
caught in Maine during these seasons. "Consuming
anglers" were defined as those anglers who consumed
freshwater fish obtained from Maine sources during the
1989-1990 ice fishing or 1990 open water fishing season.
In addition, the distribution of fish intake from rivers and
streams was also calculated for two populations, those
fishing on rivers and streams ("river anglers") and those
consuming fish from rivers and streams ("consuming river
anglers").
A total of 1,612 surveys were returned, giving a
response rate of 64 percent; 1,369 (85 percent) of the 1,612
respondents were included in the "all angler" population
and 1,053 (65 percent) were included in the "consuming
angler" population. Freshwater fish intake distributions for
these populations are presented in Table 10-32. The mean
and 95th percentile was 5.0 g/day and 21.0 g/day,
respectively, for " all anglers," and 6.4 g/day and 26.0
g/day, respectively, for "consuming anglers." Table 10-32
also presents intake distributions for fish caught from rivers
and streams. Among "river anglers" the mean and 95th
percentiles were 1.9 g/day and 6.2 g/day, respectively, while
among "consuming river anglers" the mean was 3.7 g/day
and the 95th percentile was 12.0 g/day. Table 10-33
presents fish intake distributions by ethnic group for
consuming anglers. The highest mean intake rates reported
are for Native Americans (10 g/day) and French Canadians
(7.4 g/day). Because there was a low number of
respondents for Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and
African Americans, intake rates within these subgroups
were not calculated (Chemrisk, 1991).
The consumption, by species, of freshwater fish
caught is presented in Table 10-34. The largest specie
consumption was salmon from ice fishing (-292,000
grams); white perch (380,000 grams) for lakes and ponds;
and Brooktrout (420,000 grams) for rivers and streams
(Chemnsk, 1991).
EPA obtained the raw data tapes from the marine
anglers survey and performed some specialized analyses.
One analysis involved examining the percentiles of the
"resource utilization distribution" (this distribution was
defined in Section 10.1). The 50th, or more generally the
pth percentile of the resource utilization distribution, is
defined as the consumption level such that p percent of the
resource is consumed by individuals with consumptions
below this level and 100-p percent by individuals with
consumptions above this level. EPA found that 90 percent
of recreational fish consumption was by individuals with
intake rates above 3.1 g/day and 50 percent was by
individuals with intakes above 20 g/day. Those above 3.1
g/day make up about 30 percent of the "all angler"
population and those above 20 g/day make up about 5
percent of this population; thus, the top 5 percent of the
angler population consumed 50 percent of the recreational
fish catch.
EPA also performed an analysis offish consumption
among anglers and their families. This analysis was possible
because the survey included questions on the number, sex,
and age of each individual in the household and whether the
individual consumed recreationally caught fish. The total
population of licensed anglers in this survey and their
household members was 4,872; the average household size
for the 1,612 anglers in the survey was thus 3.0 persons.
Fifty-six percent of the population was male and 30 percent
was 18 or under.
A total of 55 percent of this population was reported
to consume freshwater recreationally caught fish in the year
of the survey. The sex and ethnic distribution of the
consumers was similar to that of the overall population. The
distribution of fish intake among the overall household
population, or among consumers in the household, can be
calculated under the assumption that recreationally caught
fish was shared equally among all members of the
household reporting consumption of such fish (note this
assumption was used above to calculate intake rates for
anglers). With this assumption, the mean intake rate among
consumers was 5.9 g/day with a median of 1.8 g/day and a
95th percentile of 23.1 g/day; for the overall population the
mean was 3.2 g/day and the 95th percentile was 14.1 g/day.
The results of this survey can be put into the context
of the overall Maine population. The 1,612
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
anglers surveyed represent about 0.7 percent of the
estimated 225,000 licensed anglers in Maine. It is
reasonable to assume that licensed anglers and their families
will have the highest exposure to recreationally caught
freshwater fish. Thus, to estimate the number of persons in
Maine with recreationally caught freshwater fish intake
above, for instance, 6.5 g/day (the 80th percentile among
household consumers in this survey), one can assume that
virtually all persons came from the population of licensed
anglers and their families. The number of persons above 6.5
g/day in the household survey population is calculated by
taking 20 percent (i.e., 100 percent - 80 percent) of the
consuming population in the survey; this number then is
0.2*(0.55*4872)=536. Dividing this number by the
sampling fraction of 0.007 (0.7 percent) gives about 77,000
persons above 6.5 g/day of recreational freshwater fish
consumption statewide. The 1990 census showed the
population of Maine to be 1.2 million people; thus the
77,000 persons above 6.5 g/day represent about 6 percent
of the state's population.
Chemrisk (1991) reported that the fish consumption
estimates obtained from the survey were conservative
because of assumptions made in the analysis. The
assumptions included: a 40 percent estimate as the edible
portion of landlocked and Atlantic salmon; inclusion of the
intended number of future fishing trips and an assumption
that the average success and consumption rates for the
individual angler during the trips already taken would
continue through future trips. The data collected for this
study were based on recall and self-reporting which may
have resulted in a biased estimate. The social desirability
of the sport and frequency of fishing are also bias
contributing factors; successful anglers are among the
highest consumers of freshwater fish (Chemrisk, 1991).
Over reporting appears to be correlated with skill level and
the importance of the activity to the individual; it is likely
that the higher consumption rates may be substantially
overstated (Chemrisk, 1991). Additionally, fish advisories
are in place in these areas and may affect the rate of fish
consumption among anglers. The survey results showed
that in 1990, 23 percent of all anglers consumed no
freshwater fish, and 55 percent of the river anglers ate no
freshwater fish. An advantage of this study is that it
presents area-specific consumption patterns and the sample
size is rather large.
West et al. (1993) - Michigan Sport Anglers Fish
Consumption Study, 1991-1992 - This survey, financed by
the Michigan Great Lakes Protection Fund, was a follow-
up to the earlier 1989 Michigan survey described
previously. The major purpose of!991-1992 survey was
to provide short-term recall data of recreational fish
consumption over a full year period; the 1989 survey, in
contrast, was conducted over only a half year period (West
etal, 1993).
This survey was similar in design to the 1989
Michigan survey. A sample of 7,000 persons with
Michigan fishing licenses was drawn and surveys were
mailed in 2-week cohorts over the period January, 1991 to
January, 1992. Respondents were asked to report detailed
fish consumption patterns during the preceding seven days,
as well as demographic information; they were also asked
if they currently eat fish. Enclosed with the survey were
pictures of about a half pound of fish. Respondents were
asked to indicate whether reported consumption at each
meal was more, less or about the same as the picture.
Based on responses to this question, respondents were
assumed to have consumed 10, 5 or 8 ounces of fish,
respectively.
A total of 2,681 surveys were returned. West et al.
(1993) calculated a response rate for the survey of 46.8
percent; this was derived by removing from the sample
those respondents who could not be located or who did not
reside in Michigan for at least six months.
Of these 2,681 respondents, 2,475 (93 percent)
reported that they currently eat fish; all subsequent analyses
were restricted to the current fish eaters. The mean fish
consumption rates were found to be 16.7 g/day for sport fish
and 26.5 g/day for total fish (West et al., 1993). Table 10-
35 shows mean sport-fish consumption rates by
demographic categories. Rates were higher among
minorities, people with low income, and people residing in
smaller communities. Consumption rates in g/day were also
higher in males than in females; however, this difference
would likely disappear if rates were computed on a g/kg-day
basis.
West et al. (1993) estimated the 80th percentile of
the survey fish consumption distribution. More extensive
percentile calculations were performed by U. S. EPA (1995)
using the raw data from the West et al. (1993) survey and
calculated 50th, 90th, and 95th percentiles. However, since
this survey only measured fish consumption over a short
(one week) interval, the resulting distribution will not be
indicative of the long-term fish consumption distribution
and the upper percentiles reported from the EPA analysis
will likely considerably overestimate the corresponding long
term percentiles. The overall 95th percentile calculated by
Page
10-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
U.S. EPA (1995) was 77.9; this is about double the 95th
percentile estimated using year long consumption data from
the 1989 Michigan survey.
The limitations of this survey are the relatively low
response rate and the fact that only three categories were
used to assign fish portion size. The main study strengths
were its relatively large size and its reliance on short-term
recall.
Connelly et al. (1996) - Sportfish Consumption
Patterns of Lake Ontario Anglers and the Relationship to
Health Advisories, 1992 - The objectives of this study were
to provide accurate estimates of fish consumption (overall
and sport caught) among Lake Ontario anglers and to
evaluate the effect of Lake Ontario health advisory
recommendations (Connelly et al., 1996). To target Lake
Ontario anglers, a sample of 2,500 names was randomly
drawn from 1990-1991 New York fishing license records
for licenses purchased in six counties bordering Lake
Ontario. Participation in the study was solicited by mail
with potential participants encouraged to enroll in the study
even if they fished infrequently or consumed little or no
sport caught fish. The survey design involved three survey
techniques including a mail questionnaire asking for 12
month recall of 1991 fishing trips and fish consumption,
self-recording information in a diary for 1992 fishing trips
and fish consumption, periodic telephone interviews to
gather information recorded in the diary and a final
telephone interview to determine awareness of health
advisories (Connelly et al., 1996).
Participants were instructed to record in the diary the
species of fish eaten, meal size, method by which fish was
acquired (sport-caught or other), fish preparation and
cooking techniques used and the number of household
members eating the meal. Fish meals were defined as
finfish only. Meal size was estimated by participants by
comparing their meal size to pictures of 8 oz. fish steaks
and fillets on dinner plates. An 8 oz. size was assumed
unless participants noted their meal size was smaller than
8 oz., in which case a 4 oz. size was assumed, or they noted
it was larger than 8 oz., in which case a 12 oz. size was
assumed. Participants were also asked to record
information on fishing trips to Lake Ontario and species and
length of any fish caught.
From the initial sample of 2,500 license buyers,
1,993 (80 percent) were reachable by phone or mail and
1,410 of these were eligible for the study, in that they
intended to fish Lake Ontario in 1992. A total of 1,202 of
these 1,410, or 85 percent, agreed to participate in the
study. Of the 1,202 participants, 853 either returned the
diary or provided diary information by telephone. Due to
changes in health advisories for Lake Ontario which
resulted in less Lake Ontario fishing in 1992, only 43
percent, or 366 of these 853 persons indicated that they
fished Lake Ontario during 1992. The study analyses
summarized below concerning fish consumption and Lake
Ontario fishing participation are based on these 366
persons.
Anglers who fished Lake Ontario reported an
average of 30.3 (S.E. = 2.3) fish meals per person from all
sources in 1992; of these meals 28 percent were sport
caught (Connelly et al., 1996). Less than 1 percent ate no
fish for the year and 16 percent ate no sport caught fish. The
mean fish intake rate from all sources was 17.9 g/day and
from sport caught sources was 4.9 g/day. Table 10-36 gives
the distribution of fish intake rates from all sources and
from sport caught fish. The median rates were 14.1 g/day
for all sources and 2.2 g/day for sport caught; the 95th
percentiles were 42.3 g/day and 17.9 g/day for all sources
and sport caught, respectively. As seen in Table 10-37,
statistically significant differences in intake rates were seen
across age and residence groups, with residents of large
cities and younger people having lower intake rates on
average.
The main advantage of this study is the diary format.
This format provides more accurate information on fishing
participation and fish consumption, than studies based on 1
year recall (Ebert et al., 1993). However, a considerable
portion of diary respondents participated in the study for
only a portion of the year and some errors may have been
generated in extrapolating these respondents' results to the
entire year (Connelly et al., 1996). In addition, the response
rate for this study was relatively low, 853 of 1,410 eligible
respondents, or 60 percent, which may have engendered
some non-response bias.
The presence of health advisories should be taken
into account when evaluating the intake rates observed in
this study. Nearly all respondents (>95 percent) were aware
of the Lake Ontario health advisory. This advisory
counseled to eat none of 9 fish species from Lake Ontario
and to eat no more than one meal per month of another 4
species. In addition, New York State issues a general
advisory to eat no more than 52 sport caught fish meals per
year. Among participants who fished Lake Ontario in 1992,
32 percent said they would eat more fish if health advisories
did not exist. A significant fraction of respondents did not
totally adhere to the fish advisory; however, 36 percent of
respondents, and 72 percent of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-17
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
respondents reporting Lake Ontario fish consumption, ate
at least one species of fish over the advisory limit.
Interestingly, 90 percent of those violating the advisory
reported that they believed they were eating within advisory
limits.
10.7. RELEVANT FRESHWATER
RECREATIONAL STUDIES
Fiore et al. (1989) - Sport Fish Consumption and
Body Burden Levels of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons: A
Study of Wisconsin Anglers. This survey, reported by Fiore
et al. (1989), was conducted to assess sociodemographic
factors and sport fishing habits of anglers, to evaluate
anglers' comprehension of and compliance with the
Wisconsin Fish Consumption Advisory, to measure body
burden levels of PCBs and DDE through analysis of blood
serum samples and to examine the relationship between
body burden levels and consumption of sport-caught fish.
The survey targeted all Wisconsin residents who had
purchased fishing or sporting licenses in 1984 in any of 10
pre-selected study counties. These counties were chosen in
part based on their proximity to water bodies identified in
Wisconsin fish advisories. A total of 1,600 anglers were
sent survey questionnaires during the summer of 1985.
The survey questionnaire included questions about
fishing history, locations fished, species targeted, kilograms
caught for consumption, overall fish consumption
(including commercially caught) and knowledge of fish
advisories. The recall period was one year.
A total of 801 surveys were returned (50 percent
response rate). Of these, 601 (75 percent) were from males
and 200 from females; the mean age was 37 years. Fiore et
al. (1989) reported that the mean number of fish meals for
1984 for all respondents was 18 for sport-caught meals and
24 for non-sport caught meals. Fiore et al. (1989) assumed
that each fish meal consisted of 8 ounces (227 grams) of
fish to generate means and percentiles of fish intake. The
reported per-capita intake rate of sport-caught fish was 11.2
g/day; among consumers, who comprised 91 percent of all
respondents, the mean sport-caught fish intake rate was
12.3 g/day and the 95th percentile was 37.3 g/day. The
mean daily fish intake from all sources (both sport caught
and commercial) was 26.1 g/day with a 95th percentile of
63.4 g/day. The 95th percentile of 37.3 g/day of sport
caught fish represents 60 fish meals per year; 63.4 g/day
(the 95th percentile of total fish intake) represents 102 fish
meals per year.
Fiore et al. (1989) assumed a (constant) meal size of
8 ounces (227 grams) of fish which may over-estimate
average meal size. Pao et al. (1982), using data from the
1977-78 USDA NFCS, reported an average fish meal size
of slightly less than 150 grams for adult males. EPA
obtained the raw data from this study and calculated the
distribution of the number of sport-caught fish meals and
the distribution offish intake rates (using 150 grams/meal);
these distributions are presented in Table 10-38. With this
average meal size, the per-capita estimate is 7.4 g/day.
This study is limited in its ability to accurately
estimate intake rates because of the absence of data on
weight offish consumed. Another limitation of this study is
that the results are based on one year recall, which may tend
to over-estimate the number of fishing trips (Ebert et
al.,1993). In addition, the response rate was rather low (50
percent).
Connelly et al. (1992) - Effects of Health Advisory
and Advisory Changes on Fishing Habits and Fish
Consumption in New York Sport Fisheries - Connelly et al.
(1992) conducted a study to assess the awareness and
knowledge of New York anglers about fishing advisories
and contaminants found in fish and their fishing and fish
consuming behaviors. The survey sample consisted of
2,000 anglers with New York State fishing licenses for the
year beginning October 1, 1990 through September 30,
1991. A questionnaire was mailed to the survey sample in
January, 1992. The questionnaire was designed to measure
catch and consumption of fish, as well as methods of fish
preparation and knowledge of and attitudes towards health
advisories (Connelly et al., 1992). The survey adjusted
response rate was 52.8 percent (1,030 questionnaires were
completed and 51 were not deliverable).
The average and median number of fishing days per
year were 27 and 15 days respectively (Connelly et al.
1992). The mean number of sport-caught fish meals was
11. About 25 percent of anglers reported that they did not
consume sport-caught fish.
Connelly et al. (1992) found that 80 percent of
anglers statewide did not eat listed species or ate them
within advisory limits and followed the 1 sport-caught fish
meal per week recommended maximum. The other 20
percent of anglers exceeded the advisory recommendations
in some way; 15 percent ate listed species above the limit
and 5 percent ate more than one sport caught meal per
week.
Page
10-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Connelly et al. (1992) found that respondents eating
more than one sport-caught meal per week were just as
likely as those eating less than one meal per week to know
the recommended level of sport-caught fish consumption,
although less than 1/3 in each group knew the level. An
estimated 85 percent of anglers were aware of the health
advisory. Over 50 percent of respondents said that they
made changes in their fishing or fish consumption behaviors
in response to health advisories.
The advisory included a section on methods that can
be used to reduce contaminant exposure. Respondents were
asked what methods they used for fish cleaning and
cooking. Summary results on preparation and cooking
methods are presented in Section 10.9 and in Appendix
10B.
A limitation of this study with respect to estimating
fish intake rates is that only the number of sport-caught
meals was ascertained, not the weight of fish consumed.
The fish meal data can be converted to an intake rate (g/day)
by assuming a value for a fish meal such as that from Pao et
al. (1982) (about 150 grams as the average amount offish
consumed per eating occasion for adult males - males
comprised 88 percent of respondents in the current study).
Using 150 grams/meal the mean intake rate among the
angler population would be 4.5 g/day; note that about 25
percent of this population reported no sport-caught fish
consumption.
The major focus of this study was not on
consumption, per se, but on the knowledge of and impact of
fish health advisories; Connelly et al. (1992) provides
important information on these issues.
Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. (1993) -
Hudson River Angler Survey - Hudson River Sloop
Clearwater, Inc. (1993) conducted a survey of adherence to
fish consumption health advisories among Hudson River
anglers. All fishing has been banned on the upper Hudson
River where high levels of PCB contamination are well
documented; while voluntary recreational fish consumption
advisories have been issued for areas south of the Troy Dam
(Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc., 1993).
The survey consisted of direct interviews with 336
shore-based anglers between the months of June and
November 1991, and April and July 1992. Socio-
demographic characteristics of the respondents are
presented in Table 10-39. The survey sites were selected
based on observations of use by anglers, and legal
accessibility. The selected sites included upper, mid-, and
lower Hudson River sites located in both rural and urban
settings. The interviews were conducted on weekends and
weekdays during morning, midday, and evening periods.
The anglers were asked specific questions concerning:
fishing and fish consumption habits; perceptions of
presence of contaminants in fish; perceptions of risks
associated with consumption of recreationally caught fish;
and awareness of, attitude toward, and response to fish
consumption advisories or fishing bans.
Approximately 92 percent of the survey respondents
were male. The following statistics were provided by
Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. (1993). The most
common reason given for fishing was for recreation or
enjoyment. Over 58 percent of those surveyed indicated
that they eat their catch. Of those anglers who eat their
catch, 48 percent reported being aware of advisories.
Approximately 24 percent of those who said they currently
do not eat their catch, have done so in the past. Anglers
were more likely to eat their catch from the lower Hudson
areas where health advisories, rather than fishing bans, have
been issued. Approximately 94 percent of Hispanic
Americans were likely to eat their catch, while 77 percent
of African Americans and 47 percent of Caucasian
Americans intended to eat their catch. Of those who eat
their catch, 87 percent were likely to share their meal with
others (including women of childbearing age, and children
under the age of fifteen).
For subsistence anglers, more low-income than
upper income anglers eat their catch (Hudson River Sloop
Clearwater, Inc., 1993). Approximately 10 percent of the
respondents stated that food was their primary reason for
fishing; this group is more likely to be in the lowest per
capita income group (Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc.,
1993).
The average frequency of fish consumption reported
was just under one (0.9) meal over the previous week, and
three meals over the previous month. Approximately 35
percent of all anglers who eat their catch exceeded the
amounts recommended by the New York State health
advisories. Less than half (48 percent) of all the anglers
interviewed were aware of the State health advisories or
fishing bans. Only 42 percent of those anglers aware of the
advisories have changed their fishing habits as a result.
The advantages of this study include: in-person
interviews with 95 percent of all anglers approached; field-
tested questions designed to minimize interviewer bias; and
candid responses concerning consumption of fish from
contaminated waters. The limitations of this
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-19
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
study are that specific intake amounts are not indicated, and
that only shore-based anglers were interviewed.
10.8. NATIVE AMERICAN FRESHWATER
STUDIES
Wolfe and Walker (1987) - Subsistence Economies
in Alaska: Productivity, Geography, and Development
Impacts - Wolfe and Walker (1987) analyzed a dataset from
98 communities for harvests of fish, land mammals, marine
mammals, and other wild resources. The analysis was
performed to evaluate the distribution and productivity of
subsistence harvests in Alaska during the 1980s. Harvest
levels were used as a measure of productivity. Wolfe and
Walker (1987) defined harvest to represent a single year's
production from a complete seasonal round. The harvest
levels were derived primarily from a compilation of data
from subsistence studies conducted between 1980 to 1985
by various researchers in the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game, Division of Subsistence.
Of the 98 communities studied, four were large
urban population centers and 94 were small communities.
The harvests for these latter 94 communities were
documented through detailed retrospective interviews with
harvesters from a sample of households (Wolfe and Walker,
1987). Harvesters were asked to estimate the quantities of
a particular species that were harvested and used by
members of that household during the previous 12-month
period. Wolfe and Walker (1987) converted harvests to a
common unit for comparison, pounds dressed weight per
capita per year, by multiplying the harvests of households
within each community by standard factors converting total
pounds to dressed weight, summing across households, and
then dividing by the total number of household members in
the household sample. Dressed weight varied by species
and community but in general was 70 to 75 percent of total
fish weight; dressed weight for fish represents that portion
brought into the kitchen for use (Wolfe and Walker, 1987).
Harvests for the four urban populations were
developed from a statewide data set gathered by the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game Divisions of Game and
Sports Fish. Urban sport fish harvest estimates were
derived from a survey that was mailed to a randomly
selected statewide sample of anglers (Wolfe and Walker,
1987). Sport fish harvests were disaggregated by urban
residency and the dataset was analyzed by converting the
harvests into pounds and dividing by the 1983 urban
population.
For the overall analysis, each of the 98 communities
was treated as a single unit of analysis and the entire group
of communities was assumed to be a sample of all
communities in Alaska (Wolfe and Walker, 1987). Each
community was given equal weight, regardless of
population size. Annual per capita harvests were
calculated for each community. F or the four urb an centers,
fish harvests ranged from 5 to 21 pounds per capita per year
(6.2 g/day to 26.2 g/day).
The range for the 94 small communities was 25 to
1,239 pounds per capita per year (31 g/day to 1,541 g/day).
For these 94 communities, the median per capita fish
harvest was 130 pounds per year (162 g/day). In most (68
percent) of the 98 communities analyzed, resource harvests
for fish were greater than the harvests of the other wildlife
categories (land mammal, marine mammal, and other)
combined.
The communities in this study were not made up
entirely of Alaska Natives. For roughly half the
communities, Alaska Natives comprised 80 percent or more
of the population, but for about 40 percent of the
communities they comprised less than 50 percent of the
population. Wolfe and Walker (1987) performed a
regression analysis which showed that the per capita harvest
of a community tended to increase as a function of the
percentage of Alaska Natives in the community. Although
this analysis was done for total harvest (i.e., fish, land
mammal, marine mammal and others) the same result
should hold for fish harvest since fish harvest is highly
correlated with total harvest.
A limitation of this report is that it presents (per-
capita) harvest rates as opposed to individual intake rates.
Wolfe and Walker (1987) compared the per capita harvest
rates reported to the results for the household component of
the 1977-1978 USDA National Food Consumption Survey
(MFCS). The NFCS showed that about 222 pounds of
meat, fish, and poultry were purchased and brought into the
household kitchen for each person each year in the western
region of the United States. This contrasts with a median
total resource harvest of 260 Ibs/yr in the 94 communities
studied. This comparison, and the fact that Wolfe and
Walker (1987) state that "harvests represent that portion
brought into the kitchen for use," suggest that the same
factors used to convert household consumption rates in the
NFCS to individual intake rates can be used to convert per
capita harvest rates to individual intake rates. In Section
10.3, a factor of 0.5 was used to convert fish consumption
from household to individual intake rates. Applying this
factor, the median
Page
10-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
per capita individual fish intake in the 94 communities
would be 81 g/day and the range 15.5 to 770 g/day.
A limitation of this study is that the data were based
on 1-year recall from a mailed survey. An advantage of the
study is that it is one of the few studies that present fish
harvest patterns for subsistence populations.
AIHC (1994) - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
Exposure Factors Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) provides data
for non-marine fish intake consistent with this document.
However, the total fish intake rate recommended in AIHC
(1994) is approximately 40 percent lower than that in this
document. The fish intake rates presented in this handbook
are based on more recent data from USDA CSFII (1989-
1991). AIHC (1994) presents probability distributions in
grams fish per kilogram of body weight for fish
consumption based on data from U.S. EPA Guidance
Manual, Assessing Human Health Risks from Chemically
Contaminated Fish and Shellfish (U.S. EPA, 1989b). The
@Risk formula is provided for direct use in the @Risk
simulation software. The @Risk formula was provided for
the distributions that were provided for the ingestion of
freshwater finfish, saltwater finfish, and fish (unspecified)
in the U.S. general population, children ages 1 to 6 years,
and males ages 13 years and above. Distributions were also
provided for saltwater finfish ingestion in the general
population and for females and for males 13 years of age
and older. Distributions for shellfish ingestion were
provided for the general population, children ages 1 to 6
years, and for males and females 13 years of age and above.
Additionally, distributions for "unspecified" fish ingestion
were presented for the above mentioned populations.
The Sourcebook has been classified as a relevant
rather than key study because it was not the primary source
for the data used to make recommendations in this
document. The Sourcebook is very similar to this document
in the sense that it summarizes exposure factor data and
recommends values. Therefore, it can be used as an
alternative information source on fish intake.
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
(CRITFC) (1994) - A Fish Consumption Survey of the
Umatilla, Nez Perce, Yakama, and Warm Springs Tribes
of the Columbia River Basin - CRITFC (1994) conducted
a fish consumption survey among four Columbia River
Basin Indian tribes during the fall and winter of 1991 -1992.
The target population included all adult tribal members who
lived on or near the Yakama, Warm Springs, Umatilla or
Nez Perce reservations. The survey
was based on a stratified random sampling design where
respondents were selected from patient registration files at
the Indian Health Service. Interviews were performed in
person at a central location on the member's reservation.
Information requested included annual and seasonal
numbers of fish meals, average serving size per fish meal,
species and part(s) of fish consumed, preparation methods,
changes in patterns of consumption over the last 20 years
and during ceremonies and festivals, breast feeding
practices and 24 hour dietary recall (CRITFC, 1994). Foam
sponge food models approximating four, eight, and twelve
ounce fish fillets were provided to help respondents
estimate average fish meal size. Fish intake rates were
calculated by multiplying the annual frequency of fish meals
by the average serving size per fish meal.
The study was designed to give essentially equal
sample sizes for each tribe. However, since the population
sizes of the tribes were highly unequal, it was necessary to
weight the data (in proportion to tribal population size) in
order that the survey results represent the overall population
of the four tribes. Such weights were applied to the analysis
of adults; however, because the sample size for children
was considered small, only an unweighted analysis was
performed for this population (CRITFC, 1994).
The survey respondents consisted of 513 tribal
members, 18 years old and above. Of these, 58 percent
were female and 59 percent were under 40 years old. In
addition, information for 204 children 5 years old and less
was provided by the participating adult respondent. The
overall response rate was 69 percent.
The results of the survey showed that adults
consumed an average of 1.71 fish meals/week and had an
average intake of 58.7 grams/day (CRITFC, 1994). Table
10-40 shows the adult fish intake distribution; the median
was between 29 and 32 g/day and the 95th percentile about
170 g/day. A small percentage (7 percent) of respondents
indicated that they were not fish consumers. Table 10-41
shows that mean intake was slightly higher in males than
females (63 g/d versus 56 g/d) and was higher in the over
60 years age group (74.4 g/d) than in the 18-39 years (57.6
g/d) or 40-59 years (55.8 g/d) age groups. Intake also
tended to be higher among those living on the reservation.
The mean intake for nursing mothers, 59.1 g/d, was similar
to the overall mean intake.
A total of 49 percent of respondents reported that
they caught fish from the Columbia River basin and its
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-21
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
tributaries for personal use or for tribal ceremonies and
distributions to other tribe members and 88 percent
reported that they obtained fish from either self-harvesting,
family or friends, at tribal ceremonies or from tribal
distributions. Of all fish consumed, 41 percent came from
self or family harvesting, 11 percent from the harvest of
friends, 35 percent from tribal ceremonies or distribution,
9 percent from stores and 4 percent from other sources
(CRITFC, 1994).
The analysis of seasonal intake showed that May and
June tended to be high consumption months and December
and January low consumption months. The mean adult
intake rate for May and June was 108 g/d while the mean
intake rate for December and January was 30.7 g/d.
Salmon was the species eaten by the highest number of
respondents (92 percent) followed by trout (70 percent),
lamprey (54 percent), and smelt (52 percent). Table 10-42
gives the fish intake distribution for children under 5 years
of age. The mean intake rate was 19.6 g/d and the 95th
percentile was approximately 70 g/d.
The authors noted that some non-response bias may
have occurred in the survey since respondents were more
likely to live near the reservation and were more likely to be
female than non-respondents. In addition, they
hypothesized that non fish consumers may have been more
likely to be non-respondents than fish consumers since non
consumers may have thought their contribution to the
survey would be meaningless; if such were the case, this
study would overestimate the mean intake rate. It was also
noted that the timing of the survey, which was conducted
during low fish consumption months, may have led to
underestimation of actual fish consumption; the authors
conjectured that an individual may report higher annual
consumption if interviewed during a relatively high
consumption month and lower annual consumption if
interviewed during a relatively low consumption month.
Finally, with respect to children's intake, it was observed
that some of the respondents provided the same information
for their children as for themselves, thereby the reliability of
some of these data is questioned.
Although the authors have noted these limitations,
this study does present information on fish consumption
patterns and habits for a Native American subpopulation.
It should be noted that the number of surveys that address
subsistence subpopulations is very limited.
Peterson et al. (1994) - Fish Consumption Patterns
and Blood Mercury Levels in Wisconsin Chippewa Indians
- Peterson et al. (1994) investigated the extent of exposure
of methylmercury to Chippewa Indians living on
a Northern Wisconsin reservation who consume fish caught
in northern Wisconsin lakes. The lakes in northern
Wisconsin are known to be contaminated with mercury and
the Chippewa have a reputation for high fish consumption
(Peterson et al., 1994). The Chippewa Indians fish by the
traditional method of spearfishing. Spearfishing (for
walleye) occurs for about two weeks each spring after the
ice breaks, and although only a small number of tribal
members participate in it, the spearfishing harvest is
distributed widely within the tribe by an informal
distribution network of family and friends and through
traditional tribal feasts (Peterson et al., 1994).
Potential survey participants, 465 adults, 18 years of
age and older, were randomly selected from the tribal
registries (Peterson et al., 1994). Participants were asked
to complete a questionnaire describing their routine fish
consumption and, more extensively, their fish consumption
during the two previous months. They were also asked to
give a blood sample that would be tested for mercury
content. The survey was carried out in May 1990. A
follow-up survey was conducted for a random sample of 75
non-respondents (80 percent were reachable), and their
demographic and fish consumption patterns were obtained.
Peterson et al. (1994) reported that the non-respondents'
socioeconomic and fish consumption were similar to the
respondents.
A total of 175 of the original random sample (38
percent) participated in the study. In addition, 152
nonrandomly selected participants were surveyed and
included in the data analysis; these participants were
reported by Peterson et al. (1994) to have fish consumption
rates similar to those of the randomly selected participants.
Results from the survey showed that fish consumption
varied seasonally, with 50 percent of the respondents
reporting April and May (spearfishing season) as the
highest fish consumption months (Peterson et al., 1994).
Table 10-43 shows the number of fish meals consumed per
week during the last 2 months (recent consumption) before
the survey was conducted and during the respondents' peak
consumption months grouped by gender, age, education,
and employment level. During peak consumption months,
males consumed more fish (1.9 meals per week) than
females (1.5 meals per week), respondents under 35 years
of age consumed more fish (1.8 meals per week) than
respondents 35 years of age and over (1.6 meals per week),
and the unemployed consumed more fish (1.9 meals per
week) than the employed (1.6 meals per week). During the
highest fish consumption season (April and May), 50
percent of respondents
Page
10-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
reported eating one or less fish meals per week and only 2
percent reported daily fish consumption (Figures 10-
1 and 10-2). A total of 72 percent of respondents reported
Walleye consumption in the previous two months. Peterson
et al. (1994) also reported that the mean number of fish
meals usually consumed per week by the respondents was
1.2.
The mean fish consumption rate reported (1.2 fish
meals per week, or 62.4 meals per year) in this survey was
compared with the rate reported in a previous survey of
Wisconsin anglers (Fiore et al., 1989) of 42 fish meals per
year. These results indicate that the Chippewa Indians do
not consume much more fish than the general Wisconsin
angler population (Peterson et al., 1994). The differences
in the two values may be attributed to differences in study
methodology (Peterson et al., 1994). Note that this number
(1.2 fish meals per week) includes fish from all sources.
Peterson et al. (1994) noted that subsistence fishing, defined
as fishing as a major food source, appears rare among the
Chippewa. Using the recommended rate in this handbook
of 129 g/meal as the average weight offish consumed per
fish meal in the general population, the rate reported here of
1.2 fish meals per week translates into a mean fish intake
rate of 22 g/day in this population.
Fitzgerald et al. (1995) - Fish PCB Concentrations
and Consumption Patterns Among Mohawk Women at
Akwesasne - Akwesasne is a native American community
of ten thousand plus persons located along the St. Lawrence
River (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). The local food chain has
been contaminated with PCBs and some species have levels
that exceed the U.S. FDA tolerance limits for human
consumption (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). Fitzgerald et al.
(1995) conducted a recall study from 1986 to 1992 to
determine the fish consumption patterns among nursing
Mohawk women residing near three industrial sites. The
study sample consisted of 97 Mohawk women and 154
nursing Caucasian controls. The Mohawk mothers were
significantly younger (mean age 24.9) than the controls
(mean age 26.4) and had significantly more years of
education (mean 13.1 for Mohawks versus 12.4 for
controls). A total of 97 out of 119 Mohawk nursing women
responded, a response rate of 78 percent; 154 out of 287
control nursing Caucasian women responded, a response
rate of 54 percent.
Potential participants were identified prior to, or
shortly after, delivery. The interviews were conducted at
home within one month postpartum and were structured to
collect information for sociodemographics, vital statistics,
use of medications, occupational and residential histories,
behavioral patterns (cigarette smoking and alcohol
consumption), drinking water source, diet, and fish
preparation methods (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). The dietary
data collected were based on recall for food intake during
the index pregnancy, the year before the pregnancy, and
more than one year before the pregnancy.
The dietary assessment involved the report by each
participant on the consumption of various foods with
emphasis on local species of fish and game (Fitzgerald et
al., 1995). This method combined food frequency and
dietary histories to estimate usual intake. Food frequency
was evaluated with a checklist of foods for indicating the
amount of consumption of a participant per week, month or
year. Information gathered for the dietary history included
duration of consumption, changes in the diet, and food
preparation method.
Table 10-44 presents the number of local fish meals
per year for both the Mohawk and control participants. The
highest percentage of participants reported consuming
between 1 and 9 local fish meals per year. Table 10-44
indicates that Mohawk respondents consumed statistically
significantly more local fish than did control respondents
during the two time periods prior to pregnancy; for the time
period during pregnancy there was no significant difference
in fish consumption between the two groups. Table 10-45
presents the mean number of local fish meals consumed per
year by time period for all respondents and for those ever
consuming (consumers only). A total of 82 (85 percent)
Mohawk mothers and 72 (47 percent) control mothers
reported ever consuming local fish. The mean number of
local fish meals consumed per year by Mohawk respondents
declined over time, from 23.4 (over one year before
pregnancy) to 9.2 (less than one year before pregnancy) to
3.9 (during pregnancy); a similar decline was seen among
consuming Mohawks only. There was also a decreasing
trend over time in consumption among controls, though it
was much less pronounced.
Table 10-46 presents the mean number offish meals
consumed per year for all participants by time period and
selected characteristics (age, education, cigarette smoking,
and alcohol consumption). Pairwise contrasts indicated that
control participants over 34 years of age had the highest fish
consumption of local fish meals (22.1) (Table 10-46).
However, neither the overall nor pairwise differences by
age among the Mohawk women over 34 years old were
statistically significant, and may be due to the small sample
size (N=6) (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). The most common fish
consumed by Mohawk
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-23
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
mothers was yellow perch; for controls the most common
fish consumed was trout.
An advantage of this study is that it presents data for
fish consumption patterns for Native Americans as
compared to a demographically similar group of
Caucasians. Although the data are based on nursing
mothers as participants, the study also captures
consumption patterns prior to pregnancy (up to 1 year
before and more than 1 year before). Fitzgerald et al.
(1995) noted that dietary recall for a period more than one
year before pregnancy may be inaccurate, but these data
were the best available measure of the more distant past.
They also noted that the observed decrease in fish
consumption among Mohawks from the period one year
before pregnancy to the period of pregnancy is due to a
secular trend of declining fish consumption over time in
Mohawks. This decrease, which was more pronounced
than that seen in controls, may be due to health advisories
promulgated by tribal, as well as state, officials. The
authors note that this decreasing secular trend in Mohawks
is consistent with a survey from 1979-1980 that found an
overall mean of 40 fish meals per year among male and
female Mohawk adults.
The data are presented as number of fish meals per
year; the authors did not assign an average weight to fish
meals. If assessors wanted to estimate the weight of fish
consumed, some average value of weight per fish meal
would have to be assumed. Pao et al. (1982)
reported 104 grams as the average weight of
fish consumed per eating occasion for females
19-34 years old.
10.9. OTHER FACTORS
Other factors to consider when using the available
survey data include location, climate, season, and ethnicity
of the angler or consumer population, as well as the parts of
fish consumed and the methods of preparation. Some
contaminants (for example, some dioxin compounds) have
the affinity to accumulate more in certain tissues, such as
the fatty tissue, as well as in certain internal organs. The
effects of cooking methods for various food products on the
levels of dioxin-like compounds have been addressed by
evaluating a number of studies in U.S. EPA (1996b). These
studies showed various results for contamination losses
based on the methodology of the study and the method of
food preparation. The reader is referred to U.S. EPA
(1996b) for a detailed review of these studies. In addition,
some studies suggest that there is a significant decrease of
contaminants in cooked fish when compared with raw fish
(San Diego County, 1990). Several studies cited in this
section have addressed fish preparation methods and parts
offish consumed. Table 10-47 provides summary results
from these studies on fish preparation methods; further
details on preparation methods, as well as results from some
studies on parts of fish consumed, are presented in
Appendix 10B.
The moisture content (percent) and total fat content
(percent) measured and/or calculated in various fish forms
(i.e., raw, cooked, smoked, etc.) for selected fish species are
presented in Table 10-48, based on data from USDA
(1979-1984). The total percent fat content is based on the
sum of saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fat.
The moisture content is based on the percent of water
present.
In some cases, the residue levels of contaminants in
fish are reported as the concentration of contaminant per
gram of fat. These contaminants are lipophilic compounds.
When using residue levels, the assessor should ensure
consistency in the exposure assessment calculations by
using consumption rates that are based on the amount of fat
consumed for the fish species of interest. Alternately,
residue levels for the "as consumed" portions of fish may be
estimated by multiplying the levels based on fat by the
fraction of fat (Table 10-48) per product as follows:
The resulting residue levels may then be used in conjunction
[residue level \
g-fat }
' g-fat \
^ g -product/
(Eqn. 10-4)
with " as consumed" consumption rates.
Additionally, intake rates may be reported in terms
of units as consumed or units of dry weight. It is essential
that exposure assessors be aware of this difference so that
they may ensure consistency between the units used for
intake rates and those used for concentration data (i. e., if the
unit of food consumption is grams dry weight/day, then the
unit for the amount of pollutant in the food should be grams
dry weight). If necessary, as consumed intake rates may be
converted to dry weight intake rates using the moisture
content percentages offish presented in Table 10-48 and
the following equation:
[(100-W)/100]
(Eqn. 10-5)
Page
10-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
"Dry weight" intake rates may be converted to "as
consumed" rates by using:
IRac = IRdw/[(100-W)/100]
where:
IRdw = dry weight intake rate;
IR^ = as consumed intake rate; and
W = percent water content.
(Eqn. 10-6
10.10. RECOMMENDATIONS
Fish consumption rates are recommended based on
the survey results presented in the key studies described in
the preceding sections. Considerable variation exists in the
mean and upper percentile fish consumption rates obtained
from these studies. This can be attributed largely to the
characteristics of the survey population (i.e., general
population, recreational anglers) and the type of water body
(i.e., marine, estuarine, freshwater), but other factors such
as study design, method of data collection and geographic
location also play a role. Based on these study variations,
recommendations for consumption rates were classified into
the following categories:
• General Population;
• Recreational Marine Anglers;
• Recreational Freshwater Anglers; and
• Native American Subsistence Fishing
Populations
The recommendations for each of these categories
were rated according to the level of confidence the Agency
has in the recommended values. These ratings were derived
according to the principles outlined in Volume I, Section
1.3; the ratings and a summary of the rationale behind them
are presented in tables which follow the discussion of each
category.
For exposure assessment purposes, the selection of
the appropriate category (or categories) from above will
depend on the exposure scenario being evaluated.
Assessors should use the recommended values (or range of
values) unless specific studies are felt to be particularly
relevant to their needs, in which case results from a specific
study or studies may be used. This is particularly true for
the last two categories where no nationwide key studies
exist. Even where national data exist, it may be
advantageous to use regional estimates if the assessment
targets a particular region. In addition, seasonal, age, and
gender variations should be considered when appropriate.
It should be noted that the recommended rates are
based on mean (or median) values which represent a typical
intake or central tendency for the population studied, and on
upper estimates (i.e., 90th-99th percentiles) which
represent the high-end fish consumption of the population
studied. For the recreational angler populations, the
recommended means and percentiles are based on all
persons engaged in recreational fishing, not just those
consuming recreationally caught fish.
10.10.1. Recommendations - General Population
The key study for estimating mean fish intake
(reflective of both short-term and long-term consumption)
is U.S. EPA (1996a) analysis of USDA CSFII 1989-1991.
The recommended values for mean intake by habitat and
fish type are shown in Table 10-49.
For all fish (finfish and shellfish), the recommended
values are 6.6 g/day for freshwater/ estuarine fish, 13.5
g/day for marine fish, and 20.1 g/day for all fish. Note that
these values are reported as uncooked fish weight. This is
important because the concentration of the contaminants in
fish are generally measured in the uncooked samples.
Assuming that cooking results in some reductions in weight
(e.g., loss of moisture), and the mass of the contaminant in
the fish tissue remains constant, then the contaminant
concentration in the cooked fish tissue will increase.
Although actual consumption may be overestimated when
intake is expressed in an uncooked basis, the net effect on
the dose may be canceled out since the actual concentration
may be underestimated when it is based on the uncooked
sample. On the other hand, if the "as consumed" intake rate
and the uncooked concentration are used in the dose
equation, dose may be underestimated since the
concentration in the cooked fish is likely to be higher, if the
mass of the contaminant remains constant after cooking.
Therefore, it is more conservative and appropriate to use
uncooked fish intake rates. If concentration data can be
adjusted to account for changes after cooking, then the "as
consumed" intake rates are appropriate. For example,
concentration may be expressed on a dry weight basis and,
if data are available, loss of contaminant mass after cooking
may be accounted for in the concentration. However, data
on the effects of cooking in contaminant concentrations are
limited and assessors generally make the conservative
assumption that cooking has no effect on the contaminant
mass. Both "as consumed" and uncooked fish intake values
have been
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-25
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
presented in this handbook so that the assessor can choose
the intake data that best matches the concentration data that
is being used.
CSFII data were based on a short-term survey and
could not be used to estimate the distribution over the long
term of the average daily fish intake. The long-term average
daily fish intake distribution can be estimated using the TRI
study which provided dietary data for a one month period.
However, because the data from the TRI study are now
over 20 years old, the value presented in Table 10-49 (56
g/day) has been adjusted by upward 25 percent based on
Ruffle et al. (1994) to reflect the increase in fish
consumption since the TRI survey was conducted. In
addition to the arguments provided by Ruffle et al. (1994)
for adjusting the data upward, recent data from C SFII 1989-
91 indicate an increase offish intake of 33 percent when
compared to USDA NFCS data from 1977-78. Therefore,
the adjustment recommended by Ruffle et al. (1994) of 25
percent seems appropriate. Then, as suggested by Ruffle et
al. (1994) the distributions generated from TRI should be
shifted upward by 25 percent to estimate the current fish
intake distribution. Thus, the recommended percentiles of
long-term average daily fish intake are those of Javitz
(1980) adjusted 25 percent upward (see Tables 10-3, 10-4).
Alternatively, the log-normal distribution of Ruffle et al.
(1994) (Table 10-6) may be used to approximate the long
term fish intake distribution; adjusting the log mean jj, by
adding log(l .5)= 0.4, will shift the distribution upward by
25 percent.
It is important to note that a limitation with these
data is that the total amount of fish reported by respondents
included fish from all sources (e.g., fresh, frozen, canned,
domestic, international origin). Neither the TRI nor the
CSFII surveys identified the source of the fish consumed.
This type of information may be relevant for some
assessments. It should be noted that because these
recommendations are based on 1989-91 CSFII data, they
may not reflect the most recent changes that may have
occurred in consumption patterns. However, as indicated
in Section 10.2, the 1989-91 CSFII data are believed to be
appropriate for assessing ingestion exposure for current
populations because the rate offish ingestion did not change
dramatically between 1977-78 and 1995.
The distribution of serving sizes may be useful for
acute exposure assessments. The recommended values are
129 grams for mean serving size and 326 grams for
the 95th percentile serving size based on the CSFII analyses
(Table 10-50).
10.10.2. Recommendations - Recreational Marine
Anglers
The recommended values presented in Table 10-51
are based on the surveys of the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS, 1993). The intake values are based on
finfish consumption only.
10.10.3. Recommendations - Recreational
Freshwater Anglers
The data presented in Table 10-52 are based on
mailed questionnaire surveys (Ebert et al., 1993 and West
et al., 1989; 1993) and a diary study (Connelly et al., 1992;
1996). The mean intakes ranged from 5-17 g/day. The
recommended mean and 95th percentile values for
recreational freshwater anglers are 8 g/day and 25 g/day,
respectively; these were derived by averaging the values
from the three populations surveyed in the key studies.
Since the two West et al. surveys studied the same
population, the average of the means from the two studies
was used to represent the mean for this population. The
estimate from the West et al. (1989) survey was used to
represent the 95th percentile for this population since the
long term consumption percentiles could not be estimated
from the West et al. (1993) study.
10.10.4. Recommendations - Native American
Subsistence Populations
Fish consumption data for Native American
subsistence populations are very limited. The CRITFC
(1994) study gives a per-capita fish intake rate of 59 g/day
and a 95th percentile of 170 g/day. The report by Wolfe
and Walker (1987) presents harvest rates for 94 small
communities engaged in subsistence harvests of natural
resources. A factor of 0.5 was employed to convert the per-
capita harvest rates presented in Wolfe and Walker (1987)
to per capita individual consumption rates; this is the same
factor used to convert from per capita household
consumption rates to per capita individual consumption
rates in the analysis of homegrown fish consumption from
the 1987-1988 NFCS. Based on this factor, the median
per-capita harvest in the 94 communities of 162 g/day (and
the range of 31 -1,540 g/day) is converted to the median per
capita intake rate of 81 g/day (range 16-770 g/day) shown
in Table 10-53. The recommended value for mean intake
is 70 g/day and the recommended 95th percentile is 170
g/day.
Page
10-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
It should be emphasized that the above
recommendations refer only to Native American subsistence
fishing populations, not the Native American general
population. Several studies show that intake rates of
recreationally caught fish among Native Americans with
state fishing licenses (West et al., 1989; Ebert et al., 1993)
are somewhat higher (50-100 percent) than intake rates
among other anglers, but far lower than the rates shown
above for Native American subsistence populations.
In addition, the studies of Peterson et al. (1994) and
Fiore et al. (1989) show that total fish intake among a
Native American population on a reservation (Chippewa in
Wisconsin) is roughly comparable (50 percent higher) to
total fish intake among licensed anglers in the same state.
Also, the study of Fitzgerald et al. (1995) showed that
pregnant women on a reservation (Mohawk in New York)
have sport-caught fish intake rates comparable to those of
a local white control population.
The survey designs, data generated, and
limitations/advantages of the studies described in this report
are summarized and presented in Table 10-54. The
confidence in recommendations is presented in Table 10-
55. The confidence rating for recreational marine anglers
is presented in Table 10-56. Confidence in fish intake
recommendations for recreational freshwater fish
consumption is presented in Table 10-57. The confidence
in intake recommendations for Native American subsistence
populations is presented in Table 10-58.
10.11. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 10
American Industrial Hygiene Council (AIHC) (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
ChemRisk (1991) Consumption of freshwater fish by
maine anglers. Portland, ME: ChemRisk.
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
(CRITFC). (1994) A fish consumption survey of
the Umatilla, Nez Perce, Yakama and Warm Springs
tribes of the Columbia River Basin. Technical
Report 94-3. Portland, OR: CRIFTC.
Connelly, N.A.; Knuth, B.A.; Bisogm, C.A. (1992)
Effects of the health advisory and advisory changes
on fishing habits and fish consumption in New York
sport fisheries. Human Dimension Research Unit,
Department of Natural Resources, New York State
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Fernow
Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Report for the New York Sea Grant Institute Project No.
R/FHD-2-PD. September.
Connelly, N.A.; Knuth, B.A.; Brown, T.L. (1996)
Sportfish consumption patterns of Lake Ontario
anglers and the relationship to health advisories. N.
Am. J. Fisheries Management, 16:90-101.
Ebert, E.; Harrington, N.; Boyle, K.; Knight, J.; Keenan,
R. (1993) Estimating consumption of freshwater
fish among Maine anglers. N. Am. J. Fisheries
Management 13:737-745.
Fiore, B.J.; Anderson, H.A.; Hanrahan, L.P.; Olsen, L.J.;
Sonzogni, W.C. (1989) Sport fish consumption and
body burden levels of chlorinated hydrocarbons: A
study of Wisconsin anglers. Arch. Environ. Health
44:82-88.
Fitzgerald, E.; Hwang, S.A.; Briz, K.A.; Bush, B.; Cook,
K.; Worswick,P. (1995) Fish PCB concentrations
and consumption patterns among Mohawk women at
Akwesasne. J. Exp. Anal. Environ. Epid. 5(1): 1-19.
Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. (1993) Hudson
River angler survey. Hudson River Sloop
Clearwater, Inc., Poughkeepsie, NY.
Javitz, H. (1980) Seafood consumption data analysis.
SRI International. Final report prepared for EPA
Office of Water Regulations and Standards. EPA
Contract 68-01-3 887.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1986a)
Fisheries of the United States, 1985. Current
Fisheries Statistics No. 8368. U.S. Department of
Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1986b)
National Marine Fisheries Service. Marine
Recreational Fishery Statistics Survey, Atlantic and
Gulf Coasts, 1985. Current Fisheries Statistics No.
8327. U.S. Department of Commerce, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1986c)
National Marine Fisheries Service. Marine
Recreational Fishery Statistics Survey, Pacific Coast.
Current Fisheries Statistics No. 8328. U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1993) Data
tapes for the 1993 NMFS provided to U.S. EPA,
National Center for Environmental Assessments.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-27
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Pao, E.M.; Fleming, K.H.; Guenther, P.M.; Mickle, S.J.
(1982) Foods commonly eaten by individuals:
amount per day and per eating occasion. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. Home Economics
Report No. 44.
Peterson, D.; Kanarek, M.; Kuykendall, M.; Diedrich, J.;
Anderson, H.; Remington, P.; Sheffy, T. (1994)
Fish consumption patterns and blood mercury levels
in Wisconsin Chippewa Indians. Archives. Environ.
Health, 49:53-58.
Pierce, R.S.; Noviello, D.T.; Rogers, S.H. (1981)
Commencement Bay seafood consumption report.
Preliminary report. Tacoma, WA: Tacoma-Pierce
County Health Department.
Pnce, P.; Su, S.; Gray, M. (1994) The effects of
sampling bias on estimates of angler consumption
rates in creel surveys. Portland, ME: ChemRisk.
Puffer, H.W., Azen, S.P.; Duda, M.J.; Young, D.R.
(1981) Consumption rates of potentially hazardous
marine fish caught in the metropolitan Los Angeles
area. EPA Grant #R807 120010.
Ruffle, B.; Burmaster, D.; Anderson, P.; Gordon, D.
(1994) Lognormal distributions for fish
consumption by the general U.S. population. Risk
Analysis 14(4):395-404.
Rupp,E.;Miler,F.L.;Baes, C.F. III. (1980) Some
results of recent surveys offish and shellfish
consumption by age and region of U.S. residents.
Health Physics 39:165-175.
San Diego County. (1990) San Diego Bay health risk
study. San Diego, CA. San Diego County
Department of Health Services.
Tsang, A.M.; Klepeis, N.E. (1996) Results tables from a
detailed analysis of the National Human Activity
Pattern Survey (NHAPS) response. Draft Report
prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency by Lockheed Martin, Contract No. 68-W6-
001, Delivery Order No. 13.
USDA. (1979-1984) Agricultural Handbook No. 8.
USDA. (1989-1991) Continuing Survey of Food Intakes
by Individuals (CSFII). U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
USDA. (1992a) Changes in food consumption and
expenditures in American households during the
1980's. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Washington, D.C. Statistical Bulletin No. 849.
USDA. (1992b) U.S. Department of Agnculture,
Human Nutrition Information Service. Food and
nutrient intakes by individuals in the United States, 1
day, 1987-88: Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey 1987-88, NFCS Rpt. No. 87-1-1, in
preparation.
USDA. (1996a) Data tables: results from USDA's 1994
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals
and 1994 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
USDA. (1996b) Data tables: results from USDA's 1995
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals
and 1995 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
U.S. DHHS. (1995) Final Report: Health study to
assess the human health effects of mercury exposure
to fish consumed from the Everglades. Prepared by
the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services for the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia. PB95-167276.
U.S. EPA. (1984) Ambient water quality criteria for
2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-dibenzo-p-dioxin. Washington,
DC: Office of Water Regulations and Standards.
EPA 440/5-84-007.
U.S. EPA. (1989a) Exposure factors handbook.
Washington, DC: Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment,
U. S. EPA. (1989b) Assessing human health risks from
chemically contaminated fish and shellfish: a
guidance manual. Washington, DC: Office of
Marine and Estuarine Protection. EPA 503/8-89-
002.
U.S. EPA. (1992) Consumption surveys for fish and
shellfish; a review and analysis of survey methods.
Washington, DC: Office of Water. EPA 822/R-92-
001.
U.S. EPA. (1995) Fish consumption estimates based on
the 1991-92 Michigan sport anglers fish
consumption study. Final Report. Prepared by
SAIC for the Office of Science and Technology.
U.S. EPA. (1996a) Daily average per capita fish
consumption estimates based on the combined
USDA 1989, 1990 and 1991 continuing survey of
food intakes by individuals (CSFII) 1989-91 data.
Volumes I and II. Preliminary Draft Report.
Washington, DC: Office of Water.
U.S. EPA. (1996b) Estimating exposure to dioxin-like
compounds. (Draft). Washington, DC: Office of
Research and Development, National Center for
Environmental Assessment.
Page
10-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
West, P.C.; Fly, M.J.; Marans, R.; Larkm, F. (1989)
Michigan sport anglers fish consumption survey. A
report to the Michigan Toxic Substance Control
Commission. Michigan Department of Management
and Budget Contract No. 87-20141.
West, P.C.; Fly, J.M.; Marans, R.; Larkin, F.; Rosenblatt,
D. (1993) 1991-92 Michigan sport anglers fish
consumption study. Prepared by the University of
Michigan, School of Natural Resources for the
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Ann
Arbor, MI. Technical Report No. 6. May.
Wolfe, R.J.; Walker, R.J. (1987) Subsistence economics
in Alaska: productivity, geography, and
development impacts. Arctic Anthropology
24(2):56-81.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-29
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-1. Total Fish Consumption by
Demographic Variables1
Demographic Category
Race
Caucasian
Black
Oriental
Other
Sex
Female
Male
Age (years)
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Census Region
New England
Middle Atlantic
East North Central
West North Central
South Atlantic
East South Central
West South Central
Mountain
Pacific
Community Type
Rural, non-SMSA
Central city, 2M or more
Outside central city, 2M or more
Central city, 1M - 2M
Outside central city, 1M - 2M
Central city, 500K - 1M
Outside central city, 500K - 1M
Outside central city, 250K - 500K
Central city, 250K - 500K
Central city, 50K - 250K
Outside central city, 50K - 250K
Other urban
Intake
Mean
14.2
16.0
21.0
13.2
13.2
15.6
6.2
10.1
14.5
15.8
17.4
20.9
21.7
13.3
16.3
16.2
12.9
12.0
15.2
13.0
14.4
12.1
14.2
13.0
19.0
15.9
15.4
14.5
14.2
14.0
12.2
14.1
13.8
11.3
13.5
(g/person/dav)
95th Percentile
41.2
45.2
67.3
29.4
38.4
44.8
16.5
26.8
38.3
42.9
48.1
53.4
55.4
39.8
46.5
47.8
36.9
35.2
44.1
38.4
43.6
32.1
39.6
38.3
55.6
47.3
41.7
41.5
41.0
39.7
32.1
40.5
43.4
31.7
39.2
1 The calculations in this table are based on respondents who consumed fish during the survey month. These respondents are
estimated to represent 94 percent of the U.S. population.
Source: Javitz, 1980.
Page
10-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-2. Mean and 95th Percentile of Fish
Consumption (g/day) by Sex and Age"
Age (years)
Female 0 - 9
10- 19
20- 19
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Male 0 - 9
10- 19
20- 19
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Overall
Total Fish
Mean
6.1
9.0
13.4
14.9
16.7
19.5
19.0
10.7
6.3
11.2
16.1
17.0
18.2
22.8
24.4
15.8
14.3
1 The calculations in this table are based upon respondents who consumed fish in the month of the survey.
are estimated to represent 94.0% of the U.S. population.
Source: Javitz, 1980.
95th Percentile
17.3
25.0
34.5
41.8
49.6
50.1
46.3
31.7
15.8
29.1
43.7
45.6
47.7
57.5
61.1
45.7
41.7
These respondents
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 10-31
-------
Table 1 0-3. Percent Distribution of Total Fish Consumption for Females by Age
Consumption Category (g/day)
Age (yrs)
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Overall
0.0-5.0
55.5
17.8
28.1
22.4
17.5
17.0
11.5
41.9
28.9
5.1-10.0
26.8
31.4
26.1
23.6
21.9
17.4
16.9
22.1
24.0
10.1-15.0
11.0
15.4
20.4
18.0
20.7
16.8
20.6
12.3
16.8
15.1-20.0 20.1-25.0
3.7
6.9
11.8
12.7
13.2
15.5
15.9
9.7
10.7
1.0
3.5
6.7
8.3
9.3
10.5
9.1
5.2
6.4
25.1-30.0
Percentage
1.1
2.4
3.5
4.8
4.5
8.5
9.2
2.9
4.3
30.1-37.5
0.7
1.2
4.4
3.8
4.6
6.8
6.0
2.6
3.5
37.6-47.5
0.3
0.7
2 2
2.8
2.8
5.2
6.1
1.2
2.4
47.6-60.0
0.0
0.2
0.9
1.9
3.4
4.2
2.4
0.8
1.6
a The percentage of females in an age bracket whose average daily fish consumption is within the specified range.
The calculations in this table are based upon the respondents who consumed fish during the month of the survey. These respondents are estimated to represent 94%
Source: Javitz, 1980.
60.1-122.5
0.0
0.4
0.9
1.7
2.1
2.0
2.1
1.2
1.2
over 122.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
of the U.S. population.
I
& .
S 5
* k
K* S=
Table 1 0-4. Percent Distribution of Total Fish Consumption for Males by Age
Consumption Category (g/day)
Age (yrs)
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Overall
0.0-5.0 5
52.1
27.8
16.7
16.6
11.9
9.9
7.4
24.5
22.6
a The percentage of males
The calculations in this table are
Source: Javitz, 1980.
1-10.0
30.1
29.3
22.9
21.2
22.3
15.2
15.0
21.7
23.1
10.1-15.0
11.9
19.0
19.6
19.2
18.6
15.4
15.6
15.7
17.0
15.1-20.0
3.1
10.4
14.5
13.2
14.7
14.4
12.8
9.9
11.3
20.1-25.0
1.2
6.0
8.8
9.5
8.4
10.4
11.4
9.8
7.7
25.1-30.0
Percent
0.6
3.2
6.2
7.3
8.5
9.7
8.5
5.3
5.7
30.1-37.5
ige
0.7
1.7
4.4
5.2
5.3
8.7
9.9
5.4
4.6
in an age bracket whose average daily fish consumption is within the specified range.
based upon respondents who consumed fish during the month of the survey. These respondents
37.6-47.5
0.1
1.7
3.1
3.2
5.2
7.6
8.3
3.1
3.6
47.6-60.0
0.2
0.4
1.9
1.3
3.3
4.3
5.5
1.7
9 9
are estimated to represent 94%
60.1-122.5 over 122.5
0.1
0.5
1.9
2 2
1.7
4.1
5 5
2.8
2.1
of the U.S. population.
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
Q
I
5-
I
ft
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-5. Mean Total Fish Consumption by Species"
Species
Not reported
Ab alone
Anchovies
Bassb
Bluefish
Bluegillsb
Bonito"
Buffalofish
Butterfish
Carp"
Catfish (Freshwater)"
Catfish (Marine)"
Clams"
Cod
Crab, King
Crab, other than King"
Crappie"
Croaker"
Dolphin"
Drums
Flounders"
Groupers
Haddock
Hake
Halibut"
Herring
Kingfish
Lobster (Northern)"
Lobster (Spiny)
Mackerel, Jack
Mackerel, other than Jack
Mean consumption
(g/day)
1.173
0.014
0.010
0.258
0.070
0.089
0.035
0.022
0.010
0.016
0.292
0.014
0.442
0.407
0.030
0.254
0.076
0.028
0.012
0.019
1.179
0.026
0.399
0.117
0.170
0.224
0.009
0.162
0.074
0.002
0.172
Species
Mullet"
Oysters"
Perch (Freshwater)"
Perch (Marine)
Pike (Marine)"
Pollock
Pompano
Rockfish
Sablefish
Salmon"
Scallops"
Scup"
Sharks
Shrimp"
Smelt"
Snapper
Snook"
Spot"
Squid and Octopi
Sunfish
Swordfish
Tilefish
Trout (Freshwater)"
Trout (Marine)"
Tuna, light
Tuna, White Albacore
Whitefish"
Other finfish"
Other shellfish"
Mean consumption
(g/day)
0.029
0.291
0.062
0.773
0.154
0.266
0.004
0.027
0.002
0.533
0.127
0.014
0.001
1.464
0.057
0.146
0.005
0.046
0.016
0.020
0.012
0.003
0.294
0.070
3.491
0.008
0.141
0.403
0.013
" The calculations in this table are based upon respondents who consumed fish during the month of the survey. These respondents are
estimated to represent 94% percent of the U.S. population.
" Designated as freshwater or estuarine species by Stephan (1980).
Source: Javitz, 1980.
Table 10-6. Best Fits of Lognormal Distributions Using the NonLinear Optimization (NLO) Method
Shellfish
IJ,
a
(min SS)
Finfish (freshwater)
a
(min SS)
Finfish (saltwater)
a
(min SS)
Adults
1.370
0.858
27.57
0.334
1.183
6.45
2.311
0.72
30.13
The following equations may be used with the appropriate // and a
percentiles of the DCR distribution.
DCR50 = exp <^i)
DCR90 = exp [// + z(0.90) • a]
DCR99 = exp [a + z(0.99) • a]
DCR,vg = exp[// + 0.5-a2]
Source: Ruffle etal., 1994.
Teenagers Children
-0.183
1.092
1.19
0.578
0.822
23.51
1.691
0.830
0.33
values to obtain an average Daily Consumption Rate (DCR^
0.854
0.730
16.06
-0.559
1.141
2.19
0.881
0.970
4.31
, in grams, and
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-33
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-7. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (g/day) by Habitat and Fish Type for the U.S. Population
(Uncooked Fish Weight)
Habitat
Statistic
Estimate (90% Interval)
Finfish
Shellfish
Total
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
3.6 (3.0-4.1)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.4 (0.00 - 0.7)
21.7(14.8-25.8)
87.3(80.1-98.0)
12.5(11.5- 13.5)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
47.5(43.6-49.8)
74.6 (70.3 - 76.3)
133.0(127.8- 143.2)
16.1(15.0- 17.2)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
59.1(54.6-62.3)
84.4(81.3-89.6)
156.7(148.7- 168.1)
2.4(2.0-2.8)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-0.3)
13.3(11.7- 17.8)
63.6(60.4-68.5)
1.6(1.3- 1.9)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-6.8)
50.3 (44.5 - 59.0)
4.0(3.4-4.6)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-3.5)
22.7(21.8-26.6)
99.0(87.8- 109.6)
6.0(5.3-6.7)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
15.9(14.4- 17.8)
40.0 (37.9 - 44.8)
107.6(98.3- 109.1)
14.1(13.1 - 15.1)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
52.1(47.8-55.9)
76.5(74.6-80.9)
138.2(133.0- 155.1)
20.1(18.8-21.4)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
70.1(65.4-74.2)
102.0(99.3- 106.7)
173.2(162.8- 176.5)
Note: Percentile confidence intervals estimated using the bootstrap method with 1,000 replications; percent consuming gives the percentage of
individuals consuming the specified category of fish during the 3-day survey period. Estimates are projected from a sample of 11,912 individuals
to the U.S. population.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Page
10-34
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-8. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day) by Habitat for Consumers Only
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine"
Marineb
All Fishc
(Uncooked Fish Weight'
Statistic
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Estimate
86.2
48.8
217.9
290.0
489.3
18.5
113.1
93.3
222.7
271.7
415.9
30.1
129.0
101.9
249.1
326.0
497.5
36.9
Note: Percentile confidence intervals estimated using the bootstrap method with 1,000 replications
individuals consuming the specified category offish during the 3-day survey period.
a Sample size = 1,892;
b Sample size = 3,184;
c Sample size = 3,927;
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a
population size = 44,946,000
population size = 73,100,000
population size = 89,800,000
90% Interval
78.4-94.0
45.6- 54.9
205.3 - 237.3
267.1-325.6
424.9 - 534.2
107.8- 118.4
92.0 - 94.9
216.5-225.6
260.6 - 279.9
367.3 - 440.5
123.7- 134.3
98.9- 103.9
241.0-264.1
306.1-335.6
469.2- 519.7
percent consuming gives the percentage of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-35
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-9. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (mg/kg-day) by Habitat and Fish Type for U.S. Population
(Uncooked Fish Weight)
Estimate (90% Interval)
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Statistic
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Finfish
58.1(48.4-67.7)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
5.9(0.0- 12.3)
340.5(252.9-410.1)
1,401.9(1,283.9- 1,511.8)
215.8(195.9-235.6)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
783.4(752.5-842.2)
1,208.1(1,149.5- 1,264.9)
2,400.0(2,284.2-2,660.1)
273.9(252.0-295.7)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
966.1(893.3- 1,039.5)
1,434.3(1,371.2- 1,526.8)
2,857.5(2,649.6-3,003.6) 1
Note: Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with
sample of 1 1,912 individuals to the U.S. population.
Source: U.S. EPA,
1996a.
Shellfish
35.9(30.2-41.6)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-3.8)
190.0(155.7-268.3)
953.5(871.3- 1,007.4)
24.3 (20.6 - 28.0)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-88.8
701.3(636.2-944.7)
60.2(52.3-68.2)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0 (0.0 - 47.4)
372.5(324.1-460.5)
412.4(1,296.0- 1,552.1)
1,000 bootstrap replications.
Total
94.0(83.4- 104.6)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
251.8(222.5-282.6)
677.7(631.9-729.1)
1,593.3(1,511.8- 1,659.2)
240.1(220.1 -260.0)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
855.6(809.7-909.8)
1,271.5(1,227.2- 1,371.2)
2,575.3 (2,393.2 - 2,708.6)
334.1(311.3-356.9)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
1,123.1(1,090.8- 1,179.0)
1,684.2(1,620.5- 1,718.5)
3,092.8(2,973.7-3,250.2)
Estimates are projected from a
Page
10-36
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-10.
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine"
Marine6
All Fishc
Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day) by Habitat for Consumers Only
(Uncooked Fish Weight'
Statistic
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Estimate
1,363.4
819.7
3,325.1
4,408.2
7,957.5
18.5
1,927.0
1,507.7
3,752.9
5,018.7
8,448.3
30.1
2,145.3
1,662.8
4,223.9
5,477.9
9,171.5
36.9
Note: Percentile confidence intervals estimated using the bootstrap method with 1,000 replications
individuals consuming the specified category offish during the 3-day survey period.
a Sample size = 1,892;
b Sample size = 3,184;
c Sample size = 3,927;
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a
population size = 44,946,000
population size = 73,100,000
population size = 89,800,000
90% Interval
1,242.2- 1,484.7
736.9- 895.7
3,232.6 - 3,677.0
4,085.6-4,781.3
6,979.2- 8,921.0
1,829.5-2,024.4
1,470.7- 1,538.8
3,632.0-4,001.2
4,852.1- 5,267.3
7,215.7-9,136.9
2,055.9-2,234.6
1,610.7- 1,720.1
4,085.8-4,454.2
5,163.3- 5,686.0
8,605.4-9,796.6
percent consuming gives the percentage of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-37
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-1 1. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (g/day) by Habitat and Fish Type for the U.S. Population
(Cooked Fish Weight - As Consumed)
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Statistic
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Finfish
2.8(2.4-3.3)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.3(0.0-0.7)
17.2(12.9-20.8)
70.9(60.3-75.7)
9.7(9.0- 10.5)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
37.3(33.7-37.4)
56.2(55.6-58.2)
103.1(98.5- 112.0)
12.6(11.7- 13.4)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
46.0 (43.6 - 49.0)
67.0 (63.0 - 70.7)
119.1(113.9- 125.9)
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with
of 1 1,912 individuals to the U.S. population.
Source: U.S. EPA,
1996a.
Estimate (90% Interval)
Shellfish
1.9(1.6-2.2)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-0.2)
10.1(7.9- 13.8)
49.9(45.6-56.4)
1.2(1.0- 1.4)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-5.3)
37.0(35.4-44.5)
3.1(2.7-3.5)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
0.0(0.0-2.6)
18.9(16.7-22.1)
74.3(68.7-82.0)
1,000 bootstrap replications.
Total
4.7(4.2-5.3)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
12.6(10.9- 14.0)
32.2(29.8-35.2)
82.5(77.2-86.4)
10.9(10.1 - 11.7)
0.0(0.0-0.0)
39.5(37.3-42.9)
59.6(57.0-61.8)
106.8(104.6- 114.6)
15.7(14.7- 16.6)
O.O(O.O-O.-O)
55.0(51.4-56.0)
78.3 (75.2 - 80.6)
133.5(125.3- 140.2)
Estimates are projected from a sample
Page
10-38
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-12. Per Capita Distribution of Fish Intake (g/day) by Habitat for Consumers Only
(Cooked Fish Weight - As Consumed)
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine"
Marine6
All Fishc
Statistic
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Estimate
68.0
39.5
170.8
224.8
374.7
18.5
87.8
71.8
169.4
208.5
320.4
30.1
100.6
80.8
197.4
253.4
371.6
36.9
Note: Percentile confidence intervals estimated using the bootstrap method with 1,000 replications
individuals consuming the specified category offish during the 3-day survey period.
a Sample size = 1,892;
b Sample size = 3,184;
c Sample size = 3,927;
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a
population size = 44,946,000
population size = 73,100,000
population size = 89,800,000
90% Interval
61.9-74.1
36.2 - 44.7
158.7- 181.8
212.9-246.0
336.5-341.3
83.7-91.8
69.7-74.2
167.0- 173.7
198.1-221.7
292.8-341.9
96.7- 104.6
79.3 - 83.9
188.7-205.1
231.5-264.5
359.3-401.6
percent consuming gives the percentage of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-39
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-13. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 1431
15-44 2891
45 or older 2340
All ages 6662
Males
14 or under 1546
15-44 2151
45 or older 1553
All ages 5250
Both Sexes
14 or under 2977
15-44 5042
45 or older 3893
All ages 11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
1.58(1.06-2.10)
4.28(3.55-5.02)
5.27(4.21-6.32)
4.02(3.43-4.61)
2.17(1.32-3.02)
6.14(5.08-7.19)
7.12(5.87-8.38)
5.46(4.81-6.11)
1.88(1.36-2.40)
5.17(4.46-5.87)
6.11(5.20-7.02)
4.71(4.17-5.25)
90th % (90% B.I.)
1.44(0.00-4.07)
10.90(8.79-13.84)
18.72(15.19-22.12)
10.66(8.11-13.19)
0.99(0.21-6.67)
18.19(10.21-24.20)
22.67 (19.28-27.83)
16.05(12.41-19.30)
1.31(0.00-4.33)
13.88(12.05-17.21)
21.48(16.69-23.33)
12.62(10.91-13.98)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
12.51 (6.00-14.20)
28.80 (26.26-33.53)
34.67(29.17-39.38)
28.11(23.14-31.27)
14.94(11.88-22.33)
48.61 (35.42-54.65)
46.62(41.27-58.01)
40.29 (35.92-43.73)
13.90(9.32-15.05)
36.21 (28.64-47.31)
40.55(35.80-47.31)
32.16(29.81-35.15)
99th % (90% B.I.)
36.09 (28.53-43.20)
70.87 (64.74-90.56)
85.35(71.71-100.50)
71.98(60.38-86.40)
48.72 (37.48-52.29)
96.32(85.60-115.75)
103.07(86.41-125.11)
86.40(78.37-103.07)
40.77(35.15-44.82)
86.14(74.67-96.67)
88.18(85.33-103.07)
82.45(77.17-86.40)
1,000 bootstrap replications.
Table 10-14. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed
Age
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Sample Size
1431
2891
2340
6662
1546
2151
1553
5250
2977
5042
3893
11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
6.60(5.16-8.05)
9.97(8.94-11.01)
12.59(11.36-13.82)
10.10(9.27-10.93)
7.25 (5.72-8.79)
13.33(11.89-14.77)
13.32(11.73-14.92)
11.85(10.75-12.95)
6.93 (5.63-8.23)
11.58(10.55-12.60)
12.92(11.86-13.98)
10.94(10.14-11.73)
(Marine)
90th % (90% B.I.)
24.84(18.67-31.20)
36.83(31.42-41.99)
42.92 (38.92-47.66)
36.97 (34.86-37.33)
24.85 (19.92-33.85)
52.73 (48.34-55.80)
50.39(47.13-53.33)
47.13(44.52-49.80)
24.88 (22.64-28.08)
44.24 (39.84-46.70)
46.51 (38.98-50.97)
39.51 (37.29-42.91)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with
Source: U.S.
EPA, 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
37.32 (32.27-42.05)
55.53 (47.67-59.59)
63.85 (57.27-72.36)
55.54(51.67-56.98)
49.89 (42.09-56.45)
71.49(63.99-80.00)
64.51(61.64-74.58)
64.50 (62.46-67.53)
42.07(38.15-48.96)
62.18(57.88-69.72)
64.19(60.67-72.00)
59.62(57.03-61.84)
99th % (90% B.I.)
87.05(63.26-112.06)
105.32(96.98-112.00)
103.08(91.61-121.52)
102.01(97.67-110.69)
92.64(65.87-132.39)
116.51(106.06-143.31)
116.86(106.93-144.94)
113.94(103.47-130.00)
91.64(68.59-112.06)
110.07(103.50-120.49)
113.33(104.59-119.53)
106.84(104.59-114.55)
1,000 bootstrap replications.
Page
10-40
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-15. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 1431
15-44 2891
45 or older 2340
All ages 6662
Males
14 or under 1546
15-44 2151
45 or older 1553
All ages 5250
Both Sexes
14 or under 2977
15-44 5042
45 or older 3893
All ages 11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
8.19(6.53-9.84)
14.25(12.96-15.55)
17.86(16.19-19.52)
14.13(13.07-15.18)
9.42(7.60-11.25)
19.46(17.75-21.18)
20.45 (18.41-22.49)
17.31 (16.04-18.59)
8.82(7.39-10.24)
16.74(15.54-17.94)
19.03 (17.54-20.52)
15.65(14.67-16.63)
(All Fish)
90th % (90% B.I.)
32.28 (26.78-37.33)
47.13(41.95-55.83)
56.70(54.13-62.99)
46.44 (43.63-49.67)
34.85 (27.77-42.09)
68.60 (65.74-74.70)
95th % (90% B.I.)
43.09(37.99-51.55)
71.58(64.74-82.11)
81.94(74.63-88.23)
70.23 (67.27-73.91)
52.85 (49.93-62.50)
93.65 (85.60-96.96)
64.44 (61.33-69.27) 87.21 (85.33-100.19)
60.23 (56.91-62.99)
32.88(27.97-37.11)
57.88 (56.00-60.85)
61.32(56.00-65.74)
55.02(51.38-56.00)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
85.69 (80.61-93.32)
50.95 (44.64-53.86)
84.59 (79.91-90.83)
86.21 (77.42-94.70)
78.34(75.21-80.56)
99th % (90% B.I.)
95.19(63.26-113.96)
120.84(110.69-132.79)
130.51 (122.02-140.21)
120.22(112.06-126.07)
98.36(71.74-132.39)
149.07(142.73-154.41)
168.49(143.78-174.55)
143.91(135.35-154.15)
98.33(86.40-113.96)
138.21 (122.84-149.15)
143.91(131.12-171.37)
133.46(125.27-140.21)
1,000 bootstrap replications.
Table 10-16
for the U
Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
S. Population Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed
Grams/day
90% Interval
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Statistic
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Estimate
5.59
0.00
17.80
39.04
86.30
12.42
0.00
45.98
64.08
111.38
18.01
0.00
60.64
86.25
142.96
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method
Note: Estimates are projected from a sample of 8,478 individuals of age
individuals of age 18 and older using 3-year combined survey weights.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Lower Bound
4.91
0.00
14.89
36.13
81.99
11.55
0.00
44.48
61.61
101.94
16.85
0.00
57.06
80.29
134.23
Upper Bound
6.28
0.00
20.63
42.16
96.67
13.29
0.00
48.34
68.05
120.49
19.17
0.00
64.63
91.00
154.15
with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
18 and older to the U.S. population of 177,807,000
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-41
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-17. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/k
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
1431
2891
2340
6662
1546
2151
1553
5250
2977
5042
3893
11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
67.12(46.16-88.09)
66.22(55.35-77.08)
78.29(63.27-93.30)
70.32(60.09-80.55)
73.93 (44.89-102.96)
75.35 (62.00-88.70)
86.75 (70.91-102.58)
78.36(69.10-87.61)
70.59(53.29-87.89)
70.58(61.27-79.89)
82.12(70.19-94.05)
74.16(65.74-82.57)
90th % (90% B.I.)
57.30(0.00-128.52)
174.96(115.11-205.05)
273.63(209.63-300.11)
177.91(132.69-212.30)
28.10(8.86-231.33)
230.13(132.30-309.85)
291.50(230.15-364.24)
231.57(186.27-276.04)
53.24(0.00-118.48)
197.11(154.78-229.29)
286.93 (228.49-332.88)
204.00(177.97-225.16)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
460.16(218.56-559.86)
451.04(421.65-505.49)
548.66(466.18-633.87)
497.30(442.20-558.85)
723.93(423.52-785.58)
577.84(410.09-706.31)
584.96(512.66-630.77)
589.22(549.64-630.09)
556.34(417.11-683.80)
502.26(410.09-604.29)
566.30(505.10-625.21)
547.64(505.10-565.37)
1,000 bootstrap replications.
g-day)
99th % (90% B.I.)
1356.54(1295.24-2118.93)
1188.16(977.85-1278.63)
1251.00(1038.97-1324.90)
1269.76(1093.19-1328.24)
1290.10(1279.82-1355.11)
1132.23(1028.61-1416.47)
1231.60(1115.58-1566.68)
1265.10(1133.18-1355.11)
1347.67(1279.82-1390.82)
1167.57(1021.96-1279.82)
1251.55(1115.58-1324.90)
1274.55(1197.29-1324.90)
Age
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Table
10-18. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(Marine)
Sample Size Mean (90% C.I.) 90th % (90% B.I.) 95th % (90% B.I.) 99th % (90% B.I.)
1431
2891
2340
6662
1546
2151
1553
5250
2977
5042
3893
11912
256.90(207.04-306.76) 936.94(723.73-1055.43) 1545.15(1260.24-1760.26) 3060.22(2403.50-4354.46)
159.79(142.76-176.82) 573.49(493.39-663.16) 873.73(780.56-929.55) 1700.21(1578.65-1815.48)
191.08(171.33-210.83) 644.33(608.39-725.83) 978.84(881.06-1103.01) 1694.58(1488.32-1791.84)
190.61(172.89-208.33) 658.64(627.61-700.33) 1024.76(958.94-1096.14) 1979.45(1793.40-2137.78)
230.25(188.33-272.17) 846.57(734.83-987.18) 1504.37(1320.60-1749.26) 2885.08(2631.87-3430.60)
165.92(147.73-184.12) 626.85(593.90-680.90) 933.05(833.43-982.30) 1472.98(1411.97-1525.47)
164.37(144.87-183.87) 621.00(562.90-691.03) 839.06(800.23-946.97) 1422.94(1293.89-1791.31)
181.08(163.00-199.15) 670.19(622.62-714.53) 981.87(934.45-1071.54) 1923.63(1802.17-1972.86)
243.31(202.43-284.18) 873.87(741.53-1093.69) 1522.52(1371.10-1587.20) 3059.93(2732.63-3430.60)
162.72(148.13-177.31) 602.58(564.88-648.54) 893.82(856.58-940.85) 1576.09(1503.11-1697.71)
178.99(164.13-193.84) 628.06(555.84-700.65) 914.67(825.21-1040.75) 1568.85(1483.71-1760.74)
186.06(170.81-201.31) 663.00(627.39-717.18) 991.96(960.40-1044.69) 1942.17(1815.48-2042.99)
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Page
10-42
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-19. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(All Fish)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 1431
15-44 2891
45 or older 2340
All ages 6662
Males
14 or under 1546
15-44 2151
45 or older 1553
All ages 5250
Both Sexes
14 or under 2977
15-44 5042
45 or older 3893
All ages 11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
324.02(264.25-383.80)
226.01 (205.01-247.01)
269.37(243.36-295.38)
260.93(239.15-282.72)
304.17(251.91-356.43)
241.27(219.25-263.29)
251.12(225.48-276.76)
259.43(239.81-279.06)
313.90(268.42-359.38)
233.30(216.16-250.44)
261.10(240.34-281.87)
260.22 (242.60-277.83)
90th % (90% B.I.)
1091.52(929.29-1407.54)
755.51(641.02-879.29)
862.18(796.63-955.82)
873.61(796.63-911.89)
1172.17
(1085.62-1320.60)
867.70(814.06-919.25)
797.83(762.30-858.52)
894.96(842.29-938.16)
1128.26
(1005.58-1320.60)
828.12(771.73-868.89)
818.10(771.23-882.53)
880.47(844.35-918.79)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
1690.99(1513.97-2072.35)
1126.02(975.49-1269.56)
1296.64(1186.00-1344.85)
1323.29(1269.56-1418.85)
1575.43(1496.19-1943.82)
1208.43(1101.68-1266.32)
1122.80(1041.28-1266.18)
1298.95(1224.82-1366.86)
1679.91 (1546.20-1848.43)
1155.30(1102.57-1212.19)
1249.97(1101.32-1323.53)
1308.54(1267.15-1346.71)
,000 bootstrap replications.
-day)
99th % (90% B.I.)
3982.60 (3219.32-4568.45)
2195.86(1762.90-2310.54)
2147.32(1791.84-2354.25)
2361.12(2272.41-2598.14)
3393.84(2731.95-3733.22)
1760.48(1611.45-1851.26)
1922.33(1786.53-2275.93)
2346.64(1972.86-2631.87)
3419.49 (3184.04-3733.22)
2003.46(1787.65-2182.19)
1967.01 (1796.52-2257.50)
2356.54 (2224.54-2556.68)
Table 10-20. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for the U.S. Population Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Statistic
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Estimate
75.56
0.00
242.49
547.61
1,171.84
172.86
0.00
624.83
911.05
1,573.20
248.42
0.00
829.02
1,197.36
2,014.67
90% Interval
Lower Bound
66.37
0.00
205.05
493.47
1,123.52
160.73
0.00
598.84
877.29
1,468.43
232.19
0.00
791.06
1,133.18
1,839.55
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Note: Estimates are projected from a sample of 8,478 individuals of age 18 and older to the population of 177
individuals of age 18 and older using 3-year combined survey weights.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Upper Bound
84.75
0.00
277.26
587.37
1,252.78
184.99
0.00
670.34
952.66
1,713.17
264.64
0.00
872.61
1,264.74
2,180.87
,807,000
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-43
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-21. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Sample
Age Size
Females
14 or under 138
15-44 445
45 or older 453
All ages 1036
Males
14 or under 157
15-44 356
45 or older 343
All ages 856
Both Sexes
14 or under 295
15-44 801
45 or older 796
All ages 1892
Mean (90% C.I.)
38.44
61.40
62.49
58.82(51.57-66.06)
52.44
81.56
82.23
77.50(70.21-84.80)
45.73
71.44
71.81
68.00(61.92-74.07)
90th % (90% B.I.)
91.30
148.83
150.67
145.65(130.73-152.24)
112.05
224.01
192.31
197.93(169.51-224.85)
108.36
180.67
174.54
170.84(158.74-181.79)
95th % (90% B.I.)
128.97
185.44
214.91
190.28(173.88-219.03)
154.44
275.02
255.68
253.48(216.54-290.00)
136.24
230.95
231.38
224.78(212.91-245.98)
99th % (90% B.I.)
182.66
363.56
296.69
330.41 (259.20-526.69)
230.74
371.53
449.09
404.65(371.63-421.60)
214.62
371.52
427.73
374.74(336.50-431.34)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Acute Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
Table 10-22. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(Marine)
Sample
Age Size
Females
14 or under 315
15-44 774
45 or older 715
All ages 1804
Males
14 or under 348
15-44 565
45 or older 467
All ages 1380
Both Sexes
14 or under 663
15-44 1339
45 or older 1182
All ages 3184
Mean (90% C.I.)
69.04
76.53
85.24
78.47(74.43-82.51)
78.44
104.57
101.46
98.59(93.16-104.03)
73.62
89.93
92.19
87.77(83.74-91.80)
90th % (90% B.I.)
114.23
149.78
167.11
155.38(147.00-166.64)
160.97
191.29
188.77
184.53(173.46-194.13)
153.2
171.88
178.33
169.39(167.00-173.65)
95th % (90% B.I.)
162.37
178.74
218.35
195.15(179.12-212.07)
190.68
227.56
259.85
224.89(210.00-250.28)
176.9
209.17
223.82
209.50(198.11-221.73)
99th % (90% B.I.)
336.59
271.06
264.8
279.79(263.48-336.17)
336.98
316.69
333.18
328.18(310.42-348.49)
337.24
308.06
314.44
320.41 (292.80-341.88)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Acute Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
Page
10-44
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-23. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(All Fish)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 378
15-44 952
45 or older 879
All ages 2209
Males
14 or under 429
15-44 702
45 or older 587
All ages 1718
Both Sexes
14 or under 807
15-44 1654
45 or older 1466
All ages 3927
Mean (90% C.I.)
69.54
88.8
96.47
88.47(83.98-92.97)
79.72
124.78
119.44
114.18(108.79-119.56)
74.8
106.06
106.62
100.63(96.66-104.60)
90th % (90% B.I.)
126.22
170.01
184.42
170.10(166.63-173.88)
161.62
230.77
224.82
219.96(209.17-229.91)
153.7
203.33
209.34
197.44(188.74-205.12)
95th % (90% B.I.)
165.27
212.56
226.25
220.56(201.97-236.00)
190
296.66
262.43
272.49(254.99-301.51)
178.08
271.66
254.69
253.38(231.51-264.45)
99th % (90% B.I.)
338.04
361.04
310.12
340.71(289.17-368.51)
308.59
397.7
434.28
411.68(371.43-447.85)
337.46
372.77
407.14
371.59(359.29-401.61)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Acute Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Table 10-24. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed
Habitat
Statistic
Estimate
90% Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Fresh/Estuarine
n= 1,541
N = 37,166,000
Marine
n = 2,432
N = 57,830,000
All Fish
n = 3,007
N = 70,949,000
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
70.91
42.45
176.58
230.41
402.56
91.49
77.56
172.29
215.62
313.05
106.39
85.36
206.76
258.22
399.26
64.16
37.24
165.08
224.00
358.58
87.35
74.89
168.00
201.99
292.80
102.37
84.00
197.84
241.00
336.50
77.65
46.91
193.26
255.55
518.41
95.64
78.52
182.00
225.63
324.81
110.41
87.36
213.00
266.86
423.56
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Note: Consumers only are individuals who consumed fish at least once during the 3-day reporting period; n = sample size; N = population size.
Estimates are projected from a sample of consumers only 18 years of age and older to the population of consumers only 18 years of age and
older using 3-year combined survey weights. The population for this survey consisted of individuals in the 48 conterminous states.
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-45
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-25. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Age
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Sample Size
0
138
445
453
1036
0
157
356
343
856
0
295
801
796
1892
Mean (90% C.I.)
0
1639.20
961.58
927.85
1037.29(905.50-1169.09)
0
1798.24
1004.96
992.11
1117.74
(1011.55-1223.94)
0
1721.99
983.19
958.20
1076.80(980.00-1173.61)
90th % (90% B.I.) 95th % (90% B.I.)
0
3915.56
2578.81
2229.97
2582.5(2248.8-2734.5) 3434.
0
3759.29
2744.61
2448.54
2789.95 3399.
(2526.87-3132.65)
0
3760.67
2616.63
2394.21
2695.81 3399.
(2546.77-2819.33)
0
6271.09
3403.75
2894.18
16 (2927.72-3979.82)
0
3952.99
3348.86
3281.38
26 (3256.87-3907.77)
0
4208.18
3360.85
3121.09
46(3132.65-3839.47)
99th % (90% B.I.)
0
10113.24
6167.24
4338.36
6923.5(4757.8-9134.9)
0
7907.38
4569.62
5716.41
5259.97(4834.34-6593.97)
0
9789.49
5089.78
5157.95
6526.10(5270.61-6931
61)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
Table 10-26. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(Marine)
Sample
Age Size
Females
14 or under 315
15-44 774
45 or older 715
All ages 1804
Males
14 or under 348
15-44 565
45 or older 467
All ages 1380
Both Sexes
14 or under 663
15-44 1339
45 or older 1182
All ages 3184
Mean (90% C.I.)
2591.57
1227.41
1293.99
1486.90(1400.58-1573.23)
2471.15
1302.62
1242.49
1505.19(1411.84-1598.55)
2532.95
1263.35
1271.92
1495.37(1422.63-1568.12)
90th % (90% B.I.)
5074.80
2469.67
2642.60
2992.38(2841.13-3303.96)
4852.33
2390.20
2251.43
2899.23 (2797.30-3199.05)
5068.69
2464.80
2461.37
2956.38(2838.46-3083.70)
95th % (90% B.I.)
6504.67
3007.98
3565.34
3961.24(3768.48-4192.13)
5860.72
2882.91
2877.73
3836.02(3563.32-4581.61)
6376.47
2961.92
3383.46
3887.52(3770.65-4113.22)
99th % (90% B.I.)
9970.44
4800.68
4237.73
6521.73(5792.54-7794.41)
8495.57
3887.23
4016.80
5859.85 (5247.79-7895.62)
8749.02
4251.47
4220.78
6510.73(5772.57-6852.01)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Page
10-46
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-27. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumer Only by Age and Gender - As Consumed
(All Fish)
Sample
Age Size
Females
14 or under 378
15-44 952
45 or older 879
All ages 2209
Males
14 or under 429
15-44 702
45 or older 587
All ages 1718
Both Sexes
14 or under 807
15-44 1654
45 or older 1466
All ages 3927
Mean (90% C.I.)
2683.51
1414.54
1449.43
1637.08(1546.08-1728.08)
2568.93
1545.93
1451.06
1715.79(1636.68-1794.90)
2624.35
1477.57
1450.15
1674.31(1606.79-1741.83)
90th % (90% B.I.)
5299.68
2726.46
2838.76
3122.82 (2992.63-3308.93)
4714.97
2854.49
2841.35
3399.26(3290.97-3766.18)
5020.14
2798.37
2839.04
3299.54 (3133.69-3462.35)
95th % (90% B.I.)
7160.73
3740.83
3736.61
4312.16(3969.22-4710.75)
5818.08
3773.51
3366.84
4244.32(4015.03-4581.61)
6904.83
3747.88
3515.81
4258.69 (4065.32-4483.83)
99th % (90% B.I.)
12473.65
6703.25
4693.94
7163.38 (6852.67-7794.41)
9350.89
5254.04
5091.31
6818.35(5792.54-7588.15)
10384.82
5386.43
4922.99
7126.90(6644.11-7794.41)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Table 10-28. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - As Consumed
Milligrams/kilogram/person/day
Habitat
Statistic
Estimate
90% Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Fresh/Estuarine
n= 1,541
N = 37,166,000
Marine
n = 2,432
N = 57,830,000
All Fish
n = 3,007
N = 70,949,000
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
959.15
601.88
2,442.97
3,116.28
5,151.98
1,270.78
1,062.93
2,467.68
3,116.74
4,250.22
1,461.71
1,189.29
2,802.28
3,588.11
5,355.90
867.58
532.31
2,233.16
2,839.90
4,432.30
1,214.65
1,019.60
2,331.88
2,906.16
4,037.74
1,406.34
1,156.77
2,685.81
3,308.93
5,095.58
1,050.72
656.86
2,606.66
3,303.96
6,931.61
1,326.90
1,087.06
2,585.09
3,264.98
4,387.96
1,517.09
1,225.43
2,868.73
3,798.54
5,766.99
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Note: Consumers only are individuals who consumed fish at least once during the 3-day reporting period; n = sample size; N = population size
Estimates are projected from a sample of consumers only 18 years of age and older to the population of consumers only 18 years of age and older
using 3-year combined survey weights. The population for this survey consisted of individuals in the 48 conterminous states.
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-47
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-29. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 1431
15-44 2891
45 or older 2340
All ages 6662
Males
14 or under 1546
15-44 2151
45 or older 1553
All ages 5250
Both Sexes
14 or under 2977
15-44 5042
45 or older 3893
All ages 11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
1.99(1.34-2.64)
5.50(4.53-6.48)
6.65 (5.30-8.00)
5.13(4.37-5.88)
2.69(1.62-3.76)
7.87 (6.46-9.29)
8.87(7.32-10.43)
6.91 (6.07-7.75)
2.35(1.70-3.00)
6.64(5.71-7.56)
7.66(6.50-8.81)
5.98(5.29-6.67)
90th % (90% B.I.)
1.81(0.00-4.63)
13.62(9.99-18.11)
24.18(18.11-27.41)
13.31 (10.48-16.67)
1.07(0.33-8.67)
22.10(13.43-31.80)
28.74 (24.23-33.07)
19.00 (14.99-23.69)
1.72(0.00-5.00)
18.30(14.99-21.14)
26.11(21.95-28.85)
15.89(14.39-17.76)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
15.88(7.89-18.38)
36.68(32.53-40.31)
46.91 (37.94-52.92)
35.63 (28.92-40.07)
18.47(14.39-25.91)
63.26(50.62-70.12)
61.15(52.57-71.59)
51.43(47.32-54.82)
17.46(12.78-18.68)
47.31 (36.22-59.65)
52.92(45.73-61.51)
40.03(37.94-44.75)
99th % (90% B.I.)
46.82 (36.72-54.55)
94.93(75.74-114.34)
108.90 (92.06-123.72)
94.61 (77.70-109.09)
57.07 (47.32-65.37)
126.61 (108.54-162.80)
125.90(112.28-147.62)
112.11(108.54-127.19)
50.14(43.58-55.00)
109.66(94.43-127.19)
113.10(107.18-133.74)
107.63(98.25-109.09)
with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Table 10-30. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
Age
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Sample Size
1431
2891
2340
6662
1546
2151
1553
5250
2977
5042
3893
11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
8.61 (6.67-10.56)
12.84(11.51-14.18)
16.26(14.68-17.84)
13.05(11.97-14.12)
9.40(7.36-11.45)
17.11(15.31-18.90)
17.22(15.19-19.25)
15.27(13.86-16.68)
9.02(7.28-10.75)
14.88(13.57-16.19)
16.69(15.34-18.04)
14.11(13.07-15.14)
(Marine)
90th % (90% B.I.)
31.23(26.85-37.29)
46.66 (38.35-54.30)
56.01(50.00-61.97)
46.70 (44.49-49.72)
31.32(25.20-44.12)
66.06 (62.21-73.20)
62.64 (59.39-68.44)
61.12(56.59-63.09)
31.52(30.19-35.75)
55.99(53.04-61.33)
59.12(52.84-64.53)
52.10(47.83-55.93)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method
Source: U.S.
EPA, 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
49.75(41.46-57.49)
72.16(63.12-77.18)
84.71 (75.05-93.29)
72.22 (65.55-75.47)
65.37 (54.60-73.39)
93.32(81.26-106.67)
84.96 (79.93-99.44)
81.89(77.91-87.16)
56.35 (50.22-62.25)
80.70(75.19-87.16)
84.92 (76.67-93.32)
76.51(74.58-80.89)
99th % (90% B.I.)
104.26 (83.35-140.07)
133.69(121.33-142.82)
131.43(112.07-156.01)
130.73(121.33-137.18)
118.42(82.34-176.52)
155.16(136.77-181.18)
146.78(142.58-185.44)
147.09(134.55-174.31)
117.75(91.82-140.07)
138.23(128.40-157.23)
142.92(134.55-155.13)
138.22(132.98-155.13)
with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Page
10-48
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-31 . Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(All Fish)
Age
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Sample Size
1431
2891
2340
6662
1546
2151
1553
5250
2977
5042
3893
11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
10.60
18.35
22.91
18.17
12.09
24.98
26.09
22.18
11.36
21.51
24.35
(8.40-12.81)
(16.67-20.02)
(20.78-25.04)
(16.82-19.53)
(9.70-14.49)
(22.79-27.17)
(23.52-28.67)
(20.52-23.83)
(9.49-13.24)
(19.97-23.06)
(22.46-26.24)
20.08(18.82-21.35)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated
Source: U.S.
EPA, 1996a.
90th
41
62
74
61
45
87
81
76
43
75
77
70
using the percentile
10
21
56
08
59
15
76
13
00
15
57
11
% (90% B.I.)
(35.80-47
(54.47-73
(65.37-79
(56.94-63
(34.69-53
(80.89-94
(76.67-88
(74.22-79
(34.69-47
(73.56-79
(72.07-84
(65.37-74
57)
56)
67)
12)
11)
63)
03)
92)
32)
71)
02)
20)
bootstrap method
95th % (90% B.I.)
56.16(49.78-65.55)
93.13(82.29-108.03)
107.66(97.64-111.71)
92.03(86.94-96.11)
68.18(64.28-79.90)
122.29(111.05-124.83)
112.33(109.65-130.36)
110.88(108.54-118.56)
65.34(56.28-68.51)
109.57(106.72-117.47)
110.13(100.42-119.87)
102.01 (99.26-106.67)
99th % (90% B.I.)
130
155
159
157
127
197
211
180
130
175
180
173
.78 (83.
75(137
97(157
08 (147
35-160.66)
.18-174.31)
.17-173.74)
.34-168.83)
.20 (87.29-176.52)
15(179
.86-198.87)
20 (190.74-223.72)
90 (174
41 (107
73 (162
74 (164
18(162
.39-198.87)
.12-160.66)
.80-198.63)
.76-210.75)
.80-176.52)
with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Table 10-32. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for the U.S. Population Aged 1 8 Years and Older by Habitat - Uncooked Fish Weight
90% Interval
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Statistic Estimate
Mean 7.09
50th % 0.00
90th % 21.72
95th % 49.89
99th % 111.13
Mean 16.01
50th % 0.00
90th % 59.35
95th % 82.95
99th % 142.78
Mean 23.10
50th % 0.00
90th % 76.84
95th % 110.28
99th % 177.44
Lower Bound
6.22
0.00
18.52
47.32
107.18
14.89
0.00
56.59
80.37
131.02
21.62
0.00
74.37
106.67
171.73
Upper Bound
7.96
0.00
25.82
54.67
116.38
17.12
0.00
61.49
88.36
156.89
24.58
0.00
80.13
115.32
198.63
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
NOTE: Estimates are projected from a sample of 8,478 individuals of age 18 and older to the U.S. population
of 177,807,000 individuals of age 18 and older using 3-year combined survey weights.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-49
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-33. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Age
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Sample Size
1431
2891
2340
6662
1546
2151
1553
5250
2977
5042
3893
11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
84.78(58.06-111.50)
85.15(70.68-99.62)
98.97(79.89-118.04)
89.54(76.51-102.58)
91.62(55.18-128.05)
96.91(78.91-114.90)
107.87(88.47-127.28)
98.86(87.19-110.52)
88.26(66.69-109.83)
90.77(78.37-103.16)
103.00(87.86-118.15)
93.99(83.41-104.57)
90th % (90% B.I.)
70.75(0.00-143.13)
202.83(153.48-259.97)
333.38(269.96-379.98)
225.51(176.38-280.11)
38.98(12.26-281.50)
281.17(165.37-387.46)
361.99(304.96-455.29)
292.58(217.42-342.11)
66.00(0.00-143.13)
250.26(194.04-289.19)
345.69(291.80-423.39)
251.82(222.54-282.58)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
599.06(266.71-722.58)
584.79(538.05-631.86)
733.74(606.36-820.68)
625.30(552.99-713.85)
868.97(485.33-1063.50)
740.91 (546.79-850.52)
702.35(628.25-810.62)
755.53(677.47-790.85)
717.37(485.60-880.64)
631.31(538.05-773.91)
719.81 (637.94-790.85)
677.66(631.86-729.11)
1,000 bootstrap replications.
99th % (90% B.I.)
1713.06(1511.78-2313.50)
1411.42(1236.72-1659.15)
1561.40(1331.46-1667.88)
1558.08(1394.99-1659.15)
1642.60(1599.78-1693.88)
1589.97(1353.43-1992.23)
1612.49(1344.07-1848.39)
1596.61(1538.89-1711.41)
1688.55(1511.78-1824.44)
1529.94(1352.50-1659.15)
1590.13(1373.97-1668.93)
1593.28(1511.78-1659.15)
Table 10-34. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Marine)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 1431
15-44 2891
45 or older 2340
All ages 6662
Males
14 or under 1546
15-44 2151
45 or older 1553
All ages 5250
Both Sexes
14 or under 2977
15-44 5042
45 or older 3893
All ages 11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
333.99(267.25-400.72)
206.03(183.95-228.11)
246.73(221.45-272.00)
246.47(223.28-269.66)
296.99(241.85-352.13)
212.88(190.31-235.44)
212.15(187.25-237.04)
233.07(209.65-256.49)
315.12(260.95-369.29)
209.30(190.68-227.92)
231.06(212.18-249.95)
240.07(220.14-260.01)
90th % (90% B.I.)
1132.99(864.83-1407.24)
762.54(617.86-857.55)
829.52(777.87-944.26)
847.60(811.19-893.29)
1089.46(1003.46-1256.97)
800.79(741.29-859.61)
792.86(747.56-890.31)
859.01 (798.27-907.76)
1123.28(993.12-1371.24)
780.16(722.86-843.41)
813.12(747.56-907.76)
855.63 (809.67-909.76)
95th % (90% B.I.)
1959.91 (1780.61-2347.02)
1137.58(1036.38-1211.86)
1236.00(1174.14-1413.34)
1305.49(1215.53-1385.66)
1907.65(1685.30-2186.58)
1191.75(1096.61-1245.94)
1100.20(1039.02-1210.66)
1255.35(1204.46-1382.05)
1909.37(1785.09-2062.64)
1174.69(1104.42-1215.53)
1193.22(1076.85-1333.72)
1271.54(1227.16-1371.24)
99th % (90% B.I.)
3776.60(3173.86-5736.90)
2174.21(2014.41-2393.16)
2161.65(1952.51-2303.80)
2615.85(2365.65-2857.62)
3723.81 (3274.93-4574.13)
1890.42(1685.30-1969.63)
1842.38(1749.67-2219.32)
2520.94(2263.58-2733.15)
3820.21(3370.59-4574.13)
2019.59(1918.45-2237.22)
2029.16(1863.17-2219.32)
2575.29(2393.16-2708.59)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Page
10-50
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-35. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for the U.S. Population by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(All Fish)
Age
Females
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Males
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Both Sexes
14 or under
15-44
45 or older
All ages
Sample
Size
1431
2891
2340
6662
1546
2151
1553
5250
2977
5042
3893
11912
Mean (90% C.I.)
418.76(339.58-497.95)
291.18(263.86-318.50)
345.69(312.49-378.90)
336.01 (307.83-364.20)
388.61 (320.66-456.56)
309.78(281.55-338.02)
320.02(287.79-352.25)
331.93(306.46-357.40)
403.38(343.65-463.12)
300.06(277.94-322.19)
334.07(307.87-360.26)
334.06(311.25-356.88)
90th % (90% B.I.)
1389.10(1150.77-1785.09)
993.92(854.63-1127.32)
1122.26(1050.15-1230.68)
1120.91(1054.05-1172.38)
1476.31(1371.24-1632.55)
1096.57(1044.57-1194.06)
1013.05(955.37-1096.43)
1126.66(1081.06-1225.66)
1442.72 (1279.82-1672.75)
1040.98(1003.55-1097.08)
1069.14(978.95-1140.98)
1123.14(1090.76-1178.95)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
95th % (90% B.I.)
2341.90 (2062.64-2860.52)
1436.00(1234.66-1631.25)
1669.72(1556.83-1784.37)
1720.84(1642.63-1855.69)
2038.58(1909.00-2631.42)
1566.39(1410.20-1609.35)
1459.73(1340.97-1601.79)
1621.80(1599.78-1696.20)
2191.90(2021.16-2536.75)
1514.82(1421.34-1572.40)
1579.43(1373.97-1696.20)
1684.23(1620.48-1718.51)
,000 bootstrap replications.
99th % (90% B.I.)
4985.96 (3971.54-5736.90)
2726.50(2406.11-3044.81)
2684.71 (2303.80-3064.38)
3093.76 (2973.66-3265.54)
4294.12(3556.31-4574.13)
2275.15(2047.18-2465.77)
2392.05(2233.16-2806.51)
3031.31(2806.51-3274.93)
4425.27 (4000.27-4669.59)
2481.23(2383.54-2773.15)
2653.45 (2292.45-2806.51)
3092.77 (2973.66-3250.20)
Table 10-36. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for the U.S. Population Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - Uncooked Fish Weight
90% Interval
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Statistic
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Estimate
95.99
0.00
306.74
677.39
1,547.81
222.86
0.00
810.43
1,190.45
2,033.92
318.85
0.00
1,061.14
1,548.77
2,559.07
Lower Bound
84.30
0.00
259.97
626.01
1,411.56
207.34
0.00
778.50
1,145.61
1,870.09
298.20
0.00
1,016.87
1,464.72
2,444.24
Upper Bound
107.69
0.00
334.58
734.34
1,599.78
238.37
0.00
859.61
1,219.60
2,263.58
339.49
0.00
1,105.01
1,609.14
2,764.50
Percentile intervals were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
NOTE: Estimates are projected from a sample of 8,478 individuals of age 18 and older to the population of
177,807,000 individuals of age 18 and older using 3-year combined survey weights.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-51
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-37. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 138
15-44 445
45 or older 453
All ages 1036
Males
14 or under 157
15-44 356
45 or older 343
All ages 856
Both Sexes
14 or under 295
15-44 801
45 or older 796
All ages 1892
Mean (90% C.I.)
48.3
78.56
78.77
74.67(65.46-83.88)
64.91
104.86
102.56
98.12(88.60-107.64)
56.95
91.66
90
86.19(78.41-93.97)
90th % (90% B.I.)
117.27
191.95
192.32
181.08(171.19-197.59)
141.35
269.96
234.28
246.93 (212.93-283.90)
134.89
237.27
220.76
217.92(205.28-237.27)
95th % (90% B.I.)
161.44
242.76
258.56
239.59(220.69-284.70)
193.79
343.66
326.96
324.53(283.28-381.58)
166.32
322.06
295.41
290.04(267.10-325.61)
99th % (90% B.I.)
230.63
472.21
368.84
409.00(345.96-671.54)
287.28
494.38
539.77
499.19(488.41-532.32)
262.87
494.64
523.94
489.29(424.87-534.20)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Table 10-38. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Marine)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 315
15-44 774
45 or older 715
All ages 1804
Males
14 or under 348
15-44 565
45 or older 467
All ages 1380
Both Sexes
14 or under 663
15-44 1339
45 or older 1182
All ages 3184
Mean (90% C.I.)
89.92
98.53
110
101.30(95.90-106.69)
101.5
133.86
131.2
126.85(119.75-133.94)
95.56
115.41
119.08
113.11(107.79-118.43)
90th % (90% B.I.)
169.23
194.59
214.73
195.37(186.67-213.33)
205.49
244.46
243.33
238.64(225.57-247.01)
189.32
223.99
226.55
222.67(216.50-225.56)
95th % (90% B.I.)
198.62
231.22
279.67
252.43(231.53-278.16)
242.28
297.67
327.14
296.68(279.95-316.81)
231.72
263.76
288.16
271.70(260.62-279.95)
99th % (90% B.I.)
432.51
317.42
345.37
372.17(314.67-428.00)
408.68
393.14
428.72
425.98(403.66-481.95)
442.87
383.16
418.23
415.88(367.26-440.45)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Page
10-52
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-39. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(All Fish)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 378
15-44 952
45 or older 879
All ages 2209
Males
14 or under 429
15-44 702
45 or older 587
All ages 1718
Both Sexes
14 or under 807
15-44 1654
45 or older 1466
All ages 3927
Mean (90% C.I.)
89.73
114.04
123.61
113.58(107.69-119.47)
102.01
160.06
152.52
146.18(138.99-153.38)
96.07
136.12
136.38
129.00(123.74-134.27)
90th % (90% B.I.)
163.47
220.63
236.3
220.44(206.27-226
205.25
305.61
292.95
95th % (90% B.I.)
204.14
277.69
298.66
80) 287.08(257.09-312.42)
244.46
379.38
350.26
283.46 (261.72-297.95) 350.99 (328.70-382.33)
195.35
262.15
263.95
249.09 (240.99-264
232.85
343.86
326.94
10) 326.00(306.02-335.58)
99th % (90% B.I.)
476.56
461.54
397.43
448.57(393.68-531.63)
386.47
495.51
555.11
520.51(488.41-591.47)
466.09
488.9
510.25
497.54(469.23-519.67)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Table 10-40. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (g/day)
for Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - Uncooked Fish Weight
Habitat
Statistic
Estimate
90% Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Fresh/Estuarine
n= 1,541
N = 37,166,000
Marine
n = 2,432
N = 57,830,000
All Fish
n = 3,007
N = 70,949,000
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
89.88
53.64
223.11
296.89
502.93
117.83
98.79
225.51
279.50
403.48
136.33
111.50
262.03
328.66
506.02
81.41
46.44
206.58
283.90
448.23
112.47
95.69
222.67
261.47
369.10
131.11
108.53
253.24
323.61
435.44
98.35
57.81
237.27
325.61
654.55
123.20
100.76
234.00
289.44
427.73
141.55
112.00
272.71
340.52
531.63
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Note: Consumers only are individuals who consumed fish at least once during the 3-day reporting period; n = sample size; and N = population size.
Estimates are projected from a sample of consumers only 18 years of age and older to the population of consumers only 18 years of age and older
using 3-year combined survey weights. The population for this survey consisted of individuals in the 48 conterminous states.
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-53
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-41. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Freshwater and Estuarine)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 138
15-44 445
45 or older 453
All ages 1036
Males
14 or under 157
15-44 356
45 or older 343
All ages 856
Both Sexes
14 or under 295
15-44 801
45 or older 796
All ages 1892
Mean (90% C.I.)
2070.41
1229.97
1171.17
1317.18
(1150.10-1484.26)
2229.31
1294.27
1235.55
1411.35
(1278.61-1544.08)
2153.11
1261.99
1201.57
1363.44
(1242.24-1484.65)
90th % (90% B.I.)
4450.54
3045.41
2886.48
3250.31
(2988.81-3491.38)
4638.34
3318.89
2898.00
3579.06
(3225.84-4060.30)
4634.82
3276.06
2892.52
3325.14
(3232.58-3676.99)
95th % (90% B.I.)
6915.31
4191.25
3519.87
4240.89 (3710.16-5025.02)
5071.41
4275.83
4097.24
4615.66(4121.91-5081.65)
5756.93
4246.63
3981.84
4408.18(4085.55-4781.34)
99th % (90% B.I.)
13269.61
7711.43
5577.34
8912.52(6385.55-11533.98)
9622.15
5974.96
7217.68
6594.61(5980.19-7944.55)
12388.27
6625.15
6378.11
7957.50 (6979.20-8920.99)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Table 10-42. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumers Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(Marine)
Age Sample Size
Females 0
14 or under 315
15-44 774
45 or older 715
All ages 1804
Males 0
14 or under 348
15-44 565
45 or older 467
All ages 1380
Both Sexes 0
14 or under 663
15-44 1339
45 or older 1182
All ages 3184
Mean (90% C.I.)
0
3359.10
1582.77
1669.73
1920.77
(1804.28-2037.26)
0
3180.45
1666.42
1604.71
1934.12
(1812.97-2055.28)
0
3272.13
1622.75
1641.87
1926.95
(1829.50-2024.39)
90th % (90% B.I.)
0
6058.97
3129.41
3429.24
3793.20
(3618.55-4328.00)
0
6434.20
3102.24
2931.17
3736.16
(3548.08-4072.42)
0
6278.74
3120.60
3320.87
3752.89
(3631.98-4001.16)
95th % (90% B.I.)
0
8573.62
3854.14
4397.07
5083.63
(4953.40-5552.65)
0
8089.26
3651.10
3725.63
4884.60
(4454.15-5710.83)
0
8424.77
3682.17
4328.34
5018.74
(4852.08-5267.31)
99th % (90% B.I.)
0
13050.09
5961.80
5476.02
8576.60(7527.83-9743.01)
0
10764.01
4998.14
5373.82
8066.96 (6852.67-9869.52)
0
11838.54
5517.95
5406.76
8448.28(7215.72-9136.89)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Page
10-54
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-43. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumer Only by Age and Gender - Uncooked Fish Weight
(All Fish)
Age Sample Size
Females
14 or under 378
15-44 952
45 or older 879
All ages 2209
Males
14 or under 429
15-44 702
45 or older 587
All ages 1718
Both Sexes
14 or under 807
15-44 1654
45 or older 1466
All ages 3927
Mean (90% C.I.)
3448.73
1818.32
1857.64
2102.20
(1982.89-2221.51)
3273.63
1983.16
1850.69
2193.24
(2089.20-2297.28)
3358.33
1897.40
1854.57
2145.26
(2055.92-2234.61)
90th % (90% B.I.)
7100.43
3506.20
3520.90
4092.51
(3842.15-4282.08)
5734.46
3720.05
3534.61
4385.06
(4121.91-4776.34)
6333.46
3674.88
3522.43
4223.91
(4085.76-4454.15)
95th % (90% B.I.)
9012.18
4661.96
4740.11
5545.07
(5080.72-6007.28)
7570.83
4769.44
4311.83
5351.38
(5055.10-5727.01)
8611.73
4709.78
4615.22
5477.86
(5163.33-5686.04)
99th % (90% B.I.)
15381.13
8789.33
6561.13
9630.23 (8166.44-9796.61)
11891.85
6121.56
6374.34
8596.82(7816.70-10199.24)
12406.35
7276.18
6440.17
9171.52(8605.35-9796.61)
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Consumers only are individuals with reported fish consumption at least once during the three day reporting period.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1996a.
Table 10-44. Per Capita Distribution of Fish (Finfish and Shellfish) Intake (mg/kg-day)
for Consumers Only Aged 18 Years and Older by Habitat - Uncooked Fish Weight
Habitat
Statistic
Estimate
90% Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Fresh/Estuarine
n= 1,541
N = 37,166,000
Marine
n = 2,432
N = 57,830,000
All Fish
n = 3,007
N = 70,949,000
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
Mean
50th %
90th %
95th %
99th %
1,216.82
740.93
3,050.95
4,025.44
6,638.62
1,637.10
1,370.42
3,169.02
3,926.74
5,452.75
1,873.84
1,515.91
3,599.04
4,665.15
7,022.47
1,101.74
639.11
2,931.26
3,639.76
6,007.28
1,564.27
1,302.29
3,006.55
3,632.70
5,353.12
1,801.93
1,477.99
3,443.64
4,264.03
6,459.64
1,331.90
822.65
3,270.80
4,121.91
8,920.99
1,709.92
1,422.69
3,328.98
4,156.98
5,596.31
1,945.75
1,570.40
3,676.99
4,812.97
7,294.80
Percentile intervals (B.I.) were estimated using the percentile bootstrap method with 1,000 bootstrap replications.
Note: Consumers only are individuals who consumed fish at least once during the 3-day reporting period; n = sample size; and N = population size.
Estimates are projected from a sample of consumers only 18 years of age and older to the population of consumers only 18 years of age and older
using 3-year combined survey weights. The population for this survey consisted of individuals in the 48 conterminous states.
Source: U.S. EPA. 1996a.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-55
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-45. Distribution of Quantity of Fish Consumed (in grams) Per Eating Occasion, by Age and Sex
Percentiles
Age (years )-Sex Group
1-2 Male-Female
3-5 Male-Female
6-8 Male-Female
9- 14 Male
9-14 Female
15- 18 Male
15-18 Female
19-34 Male
19-34 Female
3 5-64 Male
35-64 Female
65-74 Male
65-74 Female
75+ Male
75+ Female
Overall
Mean
52
70
81
101
86
117
111
149
104
147
119
145
123
124
112
117
SD
38
51
58
78
62
115
102
125
74
116
98
109
87
68
69
98
5th
8
12
19
28
19
20
24
28
20
28
20
35
24
36
20
20
25th
28
36
40
56
45
57
56
64
57
80
57
75
61
80
61
57
50th
43
57
72
84
79
85
85
113
85
113
85
113
103
106
112
85
75th
58
85
112
113
112
142
130
196
135
180
152
180
168
170
151
152
90th
112
113
160
170
168
200
225
284
184
258
227
270
227
227
196
227
95th
125
170
170
255
206
252
270
362
227
360
280
392
304
227
225
284
99th
168
240
288
425
288
454
568
643
394
577
480
480
448
336
360
456
Source: Paoetal., 1982.
Table 10-46. Mean Fish Intake in a Day, by Sex and Age"
Sex
Age (year)
Per capita intake
(g/day)
Percent of population consuming
fish in 1 day
Mean intake (g/day) for consumers
only"
Males or Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
All individuals
3
3
15
7
9
12
11
6.0
3.7
2.2
10.9
7.1
9.0
10.9
9.4
67
79
136
138
99
100
110
117
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1987-88 data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita consumption rate by the fraction of the population consuming fish in one day.
Source: USDA, 1992b.
Page
10-56
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 1 0-47. Percent of Respondents That Responded Yes, No, or Don't Know to Eating Seafood in 1 Month (including shellfish, eels, or squid)
Response
Population Group
Overall
Gender
*
Male
Female
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
*
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Hispanic
*
No
Yes
DK
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing data; DK
Source: Tsang and Klepeis,
Total N
4663
2
2163
2498
84
263
348
326
2972
670
60
3774
463
77
96
193
46
4243
348
26
958
2017
379
1309
1021
399
1253
895
650
445
1048
1036
1601
978
3156
1507
1264
1181
1275
943
4287
341
35
4500
125
38
4424
203
36
= Don't know; %
1996.
N
1811
1
821
989
25
160
177
179
997
273
20
1475
156
21
39
100
10
1625
165
11
518
630
134
529
550
196
501
304
159
101
370
449
590
402
1254
557
462
469
506
374
1674
131
6
1750
56
50
1726
80
5
= Row percentage;
No
/O
38.8
50.0
38.0
39.6
29.8
60.8
50.9
54.9
33.5
40.7
33.3
39.1
33.7
27.3
40.6
51.8
21.7
31.2
35.4
40.4
54.1
31.2
35.4
40.4
53.9
49.1
40.0
34.0
24.5
22.7
35.3
43.3
36.9
41.1
39.7
37.0
36.6
39.7
39.7
39.7
39.0
38.4
17.7
38.9
44.8
13.2
9.0
39.4
13.9
N = Sample size
N
2780
1
1311
1468
42
102
166
137
1946
387
22
2249
304
56
56
93
412
1366
236
766
412
1366
236
766
434
198
739
584
484
341
655
575
989
561
1848
932
780
691
745
564
2563
207
10
2698
68
14
2648
121
11
Yes
/O
59.6
50.0
60.6
58.8
50.0
38.8
47.7
42.0
65.5
57.8
36.7
59.6
65.7
72.7
58.3
48.2
43.0
67.7
62.3
58.5
43.0
67.7
62.3
58.5
42.5
49.6
59.0
65.3
74.5
76.6
62.5
55.5
61.8
57.4
58.6
61.8
61.7
58.5
58.4
59.8
59.8
60.7
28.6
60.0
54.4
36.8
59.6
59.6
30.6
N
72
*
31
41
17
1
5
10
29
10
18
50
3
*
1
*
28
21
9
14
28
21
9
14
37
45
13
7
7
3
23
12
22
15
54
18
22
21
24
5
50
3
19
52
1
19
50
0
20
DK
/O
1.5
*
1.4
1.6
20.2
0.4
1.4
3.1
1.0
1.5
30.0
1.3
0.6
*
1.0
*
41.3
1.2
*
*
2.9
1.0
2.4
1.1
3.6
1.3
1.0
0.8
1.1
0.7
2.2
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.2
1.7
1.8
1.9
0.5
1.2
0.9
54.3
1.2
0.8
50.0
1.1
1.0
55.6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-57
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-48. Number of Respondents Reporting Consumption of a Specified Number of Servings of Seafood in 1 Month
Population Group
Overall
Gender
*
Male
Female
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
*
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Hispanic
*
No
Yes
DK
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing data; DK
Source: Tsang and Klepeis,
Total N
2780
1311
1468
1
42
102
166
137
1946
387
2249
304
56
56
93
22
2566
182
15
17
399
1366
236
766
13
434
198
739
584
484
341
655
575
989
561
1848
932
780
691
745
564
2563
207
10
2698
68
14
2648
121
11
= Don't know; % = Row
1996.
Number of Servings in a Month
1-2
918
405
512
1
13
55
72
68
603
107
731
105
15
22
41
4
844
68
5
1
190
407
70
249
2
205
88
267
161
115
82
191
199
336
192
602
316
262
240
220
196
846
69
3
896
19
3
877
37
4
percentage;
3-5
990
458
532
*
16
29
57
54
679
155
818
103
17
18
25
9
922
52
8
8
140
466
95
285
4
149
62
266
219
183
111
241
221
339
189
661
329
284
244
249
213
917
71
2
960
27
3
940
47
3
N = Sample size
6-10
519
261
258
*
5
12
21
9
408
64
428
56
11
6
14
4
480
34
2
3
40
307
46
124
2
47
20
119
122
121
90
137
102
175
105
346
173
131
123
160
105
475
42
2
509
8
2
495
23
1
11-19
191
101
90
*
4
2
6
2
145
32
155
16
5
5
9
1
175
15
*
1
11
107
14
57
2
12
6
46
48
43
36
62
17
70
42
129
62
60
45
59
27
180
11
*
183
7
1
185
6
*
20+
98
57
41
*
1
*
4
1
79
13
76
10
5
3
2
0
88
8
*
0
5
57
8
26
0
7
10
21
26
17
17
12
22
41
23
70
28
28
25
31
14
88
9
1
95
1
2
91
6
1
DK
64
29
35
*
3
4
6
3
32
16
41
14
3
2
2
0
57
5
*
0
13
22
3
25
1
14
12
20
8
5
5
12
14
28
10
40
24
15
14
26
9
57
5
0
55
6
3
60
0
2
Refused = Respondent refused to answer.
Page
10-58
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-49. Numer of Respondents Reporting Monthly Consumption of Seafood That Was Purchased or Caught by Someone They
Population Group
Overall
Gender
*
Male
Female
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
*
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Hispanic
*
No
Yes
DK
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing data; DK = Don't know
Source: Tsang andKlepeis, 1996.
Total N
2780
1311
1468
1
42
102
166
137
1946
387
2249
304
56
56
93
22
2566
182
15
17
399
1366
236
766
13
434
198
739
584
484
341
655
575
989
561
1848
932
780
691
745
564
2563
207
10
2698
68
14
2648
121
11
N = Sample size;
* Mostly Purchased
3 2584
1 1206
2 1377
* 1
* 39
* 94
* 153
* 129
3 1810
* 359
1 2092
1 280
* 50
* 55
* 86
1 21
2 2387
* 169
* 12
1 16
* 368
2 1285
1 217
* 701
* 13
* 401
* 174
* 680
2 547
* 460
1 322
2 627
* 547
1 897
* 513
2 1724
1 860
* 741
* 655
2 674
1 514
2 2384
1 190
* 10
3 2507
* 63
* 14
3 2457
* 116
* 11
Refused = Respondent refused to answer.
Mostly Caught
154
85
69
*
,
8
9
6
106
22
124
19
4
*
7
*
140
13
1
*
25
64
15
50
*
26
20
48
28
19
13
21
20
73
40
100
54
35
27
54
38
142
12
*
151
3
*
149
5
*
Knew
DK
39
19
20
*
*
*
4
2
27
6
32
4
2
1
*
*
37
*
9
*
6
15
3
15
*
7
4
11
7
5
5
5
8
18
8
22
17
4
9
15
11
35
4
*
37
2
*
39
*
*
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-59
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-50. Estimated Number of Participants in Marine Recreational Fishing by State and Subregion
Subregion
Pacific
North Atlantic
Mid- Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf of Mexico
State Coastal
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
TOTAL
Delaware
Maryland
New Jersey
New York
Virginia
TOTAL
Florida
Georgia
N. Carolina
S. Carolina
TOTAL
Alabama
Florida
Louisiana
Mississippi
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
" Not additive across states. One person can be counted as
b An asterisk (*) denotes no non-coastal counties in state.
Source: NMFS, 1993.
Participants Non Coastal Participants
902
534
265
1,701
186
93
377
34
97
787
90
540
583
539
294
1,046
1,201
89
398
131
1,819
95
1,053
394
157
1.699
8,053
'OUT OF STATE'
8
99
.12
126
*b
9
69
10
*
00
oo
*
32
9
13
29
83
*
61
224
H
362
9
*
48
42
99
760
for more than one state.
Out of State "
159
63
78
47
100
273
32
157
159
268
433
70
131
741
29
745
304
101
1,349
63
51
Total Participants "
910
633
284
186
102
446
44
97
90
572
592
552
323
1,201
150
622
208
104
1,053
442
200
Page
10-60
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 1 0-5 1 . Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and B 1 ) by
Marine Recreational Fishermen, by Wave and Subregion
Jan/Feb
Mar/Apr
May/Jun
Jul/Aug
Sep/Oct
Nov/Dec
Reaion
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
Atlantic and Gulf
WeiehtOOOOke)
1,060
3.683
4,743
310
1,030
1,913
3.703
6,956
3,272
4,815
4,234
5.936
18,257
4,003
9,693
4,032
5.964
23,692
2,980
7,798
3,296
7.516
21,590
456
1,649
2,404
4^78
8,787
84,025
Resion
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
Pacific
WeiehtOOOOke")
418
101
165
684
590
346
J44
1,080
1,195
563
581
2,339
1,566
1,101
39
2,706
859
1,032
_T24
2,615
447
417
65
929
10,353
Source: NMFS. 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10-61
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-52. Average Daily Intake (g/day) of Marine Finfish, by Region and Coastal Status
Intake Among Anglers
Region3 Mean 95th Percentile
N. Atlantic
Mid-Atlantic
S. Atlantic
All Atlantic
Gulf
S. California
N. California
Oregon
All Pacific
a N. Atlantic -
(Gulf Coast)
b Mean intake
c Mean intake
Source: NMFS
6.2
6.3
4.7
5.6
7.2
2.0
2.0
2 2
2.0
ME, NH, MA, RI, and CT; Mid-Atlantic - NY
rate among entire coastal population of region.
rate among entire population of region.
, 1993.
20.1
18.9
15.9
18.0
26.1
5.5
5.7
8.9
6.8
, NJ, MD, DE, and VA
Per-Capita
(Coastal)'
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.3
3.0
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
S. Atlantic - NC,
Per-Capita
(Coastal & Non-Coastal)0
1.1
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.9
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
SC, GA, and FL (Atlantic Coast); Gulf
Proportion of
Population Coastal
0.82
0.70
0.51
0.66
0.60
0.96
0.70
0.87
0.86
AL, MS, LA, and FL
Table 10-53.
Cartilaginous fishes
Eels
Herrings
Catfishes
Toadfishes
Cods and Hakes
Searobins
Sculpins
Temperate Basses
Sea Basses
Bluefish
Jacks
Dolphins
Snappers
Grunts
Porgies
Drums
Mullets
Barracudas
Wrasses
Mackerels and Tunas
Flounders
Triggerfishes/Filefishes
Puffers
Other fishes
istimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and B 1 )a by Marine Recreational Fishermen
by Species Group and Subregion, Atlantic and Gulf
North Atlantic
fl.OOOke)
66
14
118
0
0
2,404
2
1
837
22
4,177
0
65
0
0
132
3
1
0
783
878
512
0
*
105
Mid Atlantic
fl.OOOke)
1,673
9
69
306
7
988
68
*
2,166
2,166
3,962
138
809
*
9
417
2,458
43
*
1,953
3,348
4,259
48
16
72
South Atlantic
n.OOOksl
162
*b
1
138
0
4
*
0
97
644
1,065
760
2,435
508
239
1,082
2,953
382
356
46
4,738
532
109
56
709
Gulf
O.OOOkel
318
Oc
89
535
*
0
*
0
4
2,477
158
2,477
1,599
3,219
816
2,629
9,866
658
244
113
4,036
377
544
4
915
All Regions
n.OOOksl
2,219
23
177
979
7
1,396
70
1
2 229
5,309
5,362
3,375
4,908
3,727
1,064
4,160
15,280
1,084
600
2,895
13,000
5,680
701
76
1,801
a For Catch Type A and B 1 , the fish were not thrown back.
b An asterisk (*) denotes data not reported.
c Zero (0) = < 1000 kg.
Source: NMFS. 1993.
Page
10-62
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-54. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl)" by Marine Recreational
Fishermen by Species Group and Subregion, Pacific
Species Group
Cartilaginous fish
Sturgeons
Herrings
Anchovies
Smelts
Cods and Hakes
Silversides
Striped Bass
Sea Basses
Jacks
Croakers
Sea Chubs
Surfperches
Pacific Barracuda
Wrasses
Tunas and Mackerels
Rockfishes
California Scorpionfish
Sablefishes
Greenlings
Sculpins
Flatfishes
Other fishes
" For Catch Type A and B 1
b Zero(0) = <1000kg.
Southern California
(1,000kg)
35
Ob
10
*c
0
0
58
0
1,319
469
141
53
74
866
73
1,260
409
86
0
22
6
106
89
, the fish were not thrown back.
Northern California
(1,000kg)
162
89
15
7
71
0
148
51
17
17
136
1
221
10
5
36
1,713
0
0
492
81
251
36
Oregon
(1,000kg)
1
13
40
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
47
0
0
1
890
0
5
363
44
5
307
Total
198
102
65
7
71
0
206
51
1,336
487
277
54
342
876
78
1,297
3,012
86
5
877
131
362
432
0 An asterisk (*) denotes data not reported.
Source: NMFS, 1993.
Table 10-55.
Ethnic Group
Caucasian
Black
Mexican- American
Oriental/Samoan
Other
Age (years)
<17
18-40
41-65
>65
Median Intake Rates Based on Demographic Data of Sport Fishermen and Their Family/Living Group
Percent of total interviewed
42
24
16
13
5
11
52
28
9
Median intake rates
(g/person-day)
46.0
24.2
33.0
70.6
--'
27.2
32.5
39.0
113.0
" Not reported.
Source: Puffer etal., 1981.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-63
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-56. Cumulative
Percentile
5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
95
Distribution of Total Fish/Shellfish Consumption by Surveyed Sport Fishermen
in the Metropolitan Los Angeles Area
Intake rate (g/person-day)
2.3
4.0
8.3
15.5
23.9
36.9
53.2
79.8
120.8
224.8
338.8
Source: Puffer et al. (1981).
Table 10-57.
Species
White Croaker
Pacific Mackerel
Pacific Bonito
Queenfish
Jacksmelt
Walleye Perch
Shiner Perch
Opaleye
Black Perch
Kelp Bass
California Halibut
Shellfish'
a Crab, mussels, lobster, abalone.
Catch Information for Primary Fish Species Kept by
Average Weight (Grams)
153
334
717
143
223
115
54
307
196
440
1752
421
Sport Fishermen (n = 1059)
Percent of Fishermen who Caught
34
25
18
17
13
10
7
6
5
5
4
3
Source: Modified from Puffer et al., 1981.
Table 10-58. Percent of Fishing Frequency During the Summer and Fall Seasons in Commencement Bay, Washington
Fishing Frequency
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Bimonthly
Biyearly
Yearlv
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
in the Summer" in the Fallb
10.4
50.3
20.1
6.7
4.4
8.1
8.3
52.3
15.9
3.8
6.1
13.6
Summer - July through September, includes 5 survey days and 4 survey areas (i.e., area #1, #2, #3 and #4)
Fall - September through November, includes 4 survey days and 4 survey areas (i.e., area #1, #2, #3 and #4)
Fall - September through November, includes 4 survey days described in footnote b plus an additional survey area (5
#1, #2, #3, #4 and #5)
Source: Pierce etal., 1981.
Frequency Percent
in the Fall0
5.8
51.0
21.1
4.2
6.3
11.6
survey areas) (i.e., area
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
10-64 August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-59. Selected Percentile Consumption Estimates (g/day) for the Survey and Total Angler
Based on the Reanalysis of the Puffer et al. (1981) and Pierce et al. (1981) Data
50th Percentile
Survey Population
Puffer etal. (1981)
Pierce etal. (1981)
Average
Total Angler Population
Puffer etal. (1981)
Pierce etal. (1981)
Average
37
19
28
2.9'
LO
2.0
Populations
90th Percentile
225
155
190
35"
11
24
" Estimated based on the average intake for the 0 - 90th percentile anglers.
b Estimated based on the average intake for the 91st- 96th percentile anglers.
Source: Price etal., 1994.
Table 10-60. Means and Standard Deviations of Selected Characteristics by
Subpopulation Groups
Variables
(N'=330)
Age (years)
Sex
Female
Male
Race/ethnicity
Black
White
Hispanic
Number of Years Fished
Number Per Week Fished in Past 6 Months of Survey Period
Number Per Week Fished in Last Month of Survey Period
Aware of Health Advisories
in Everglades, Florida
Mean ± Std. Dev.b
38.6 ± 18.8
38%
62%
46%
43%
11%
15. 8± 15.8
1.8 ±2.5
1.5 ± 1.4
71%
Range
2-81
-
-
—
—
-
0-70
0-20
0- 12
__
" Number of respondents who reported consuming fish
b Std. Dev. = standard deviation
Source: U.S. DHHS, 1995
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 10-65
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-61. Mean Fish Intake Among Individuals Who Eat Fish and Reside
in Households With Recreational Fish Consumption
Group
All household
members
Respondents (i.e.,
licensed anglers)
Age Groups (years)
1-5
6 to 10
Ito20
21 to 40
40 to 60
60 to 70
71 to 80
80+
All Fish
meals/week
0.686
0.873
0.463
0.49
0.407
0.651
0.923
0.856
1.0
0.8
Recreational Fish
meals/week
0.332
0.398
0.223
0.278
0.229
0.291
0.42
0.431
0.622
0.6
n
2196
748
121
151
349
793
547
160
45
10
Total Fish
grams/dav
21.9
29.4
11.4
13.6
12.3
22
29.3
28.2
32.3
26.5
Recreational
Fish
grams/dav
11.0
14.0
5.63
7.94
7.27
10.2
14.2
14.5
20.1
20
Total Fish
grams/ kg/day
0.356
0.364
0.737
0.481
0.219
0.306
0.387
0.377
0.441
0.437
Recreational
Fish grams/
kg/dav
0.178
0.168
0.369
0.276
0.123
0.139
0.186
0.193
0.271
0.345
Source: U.S. EPA analysis using data from West et al., 1989.
Table 10-62. Comparison of Seven-Day Recall and Estimated Seasonal Frequency for Fish Consumption
Usual Fish Consumption
Frequency Category
Almost daily
2-4 times a week
Once a week
2-3 times a month
Once a month
Less often
Mean Fish Meals/Week
7-dav Recall Data
no data
1.96
1.19
0.840 (3.6 times/month)
0.459 (1.9 times/month)
0.306 (1.3 times/month)
Usual frequency Value Selected
for Data Analysis (times/week)
4 [if needed]
2
1.2
0.7 (3 times/month)
0.4 (1.7 times/month)
0.2 (0.9 times/month)
Source: U.S. EPA analysis using data from West et al., 1989.
Table 10-63. Distribution of Usual Fish Intake Among Survey Main Respondents
Who Fished and Consumed Recreationally Caught Fish
n
mean
10%
25%
50%
75%
90%
95%
Source:
All Fish
Meals/Week
738
0.859
0.300
0.475
0.750
1.200
1.400
1.800
Recreational Fish
Meals/Week
738
0.447
0.040
0.125
0.338
0.672
1.050
1.200
U.S. EPA analysis using data from West et al.
All Fish Intake
grams/dav
738
27.74
9.69
15.34
24.21
38.74
45.20
58.11
1989.
Recreational
Fish Intake
grams/dav
738
14.42
1.29
4.04
10.90
21.71
33.90
38.74
All Fish Intake
grams/ kg/dav
726
0.353
0.119
0.187
0.315
0.478
0.634
0.747
Recreational
Fish Intake
grams/kg/dav
726
0.1806
0.0159
0.0504
0.1357
0.2676
0.4146
0.4920
Page
10-66
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-64. Estimates of Fish Intake Rates of Licensed Sport Anglers in Maine During the 1989-1990
Ice Fishing or 1990 Open-Water Seasons'
Intake Rates (grams/day)
Percentile Rankings
All Waters"
Rivers and Streams
All Anglers0
(N = 1.369)
Consuming Anglers'1
(N= 1.053)
River Anglers'
(N = 741)
Consuming Anglers
(N = 464)
50th (median)
66th
75th
90th
95th
Arithmetic Mean'
1.1
2.6
4.2
11.0
21.0
5.0
[791
2.0
4.0
5.8
13.0
26.0
6.4
[771
0.19
0.71
1.3
3.7
6.2
1.9
[821
0.99
1.8
2.5
6.1
12.0
3.7
[811
" Estimates are based on rank except for those of arithmetic mean.
b All waters based on fish obtained from all lakes, ponds, streams and rivers in Maine, from other household sources and from other non-
household sources.
0 Licensed anglers who fished during the seasons studied and did or did not consume freshwater fish, and licensed anglers who did not fish but
ate freshwater fish caught in Maine during those seasons.
d Licensed anglers who consumed freshwater fish caught in Maine during the seasons studied.
" Those of the "all anglers" who fished on rivers or streams (consumers and nonconsumers).
* Values in brackets [ ] are percentiles at the mean consumption rates.
Source: Chemrisk. 1991; Ebertetal.. 1993.
Table 10-65. Analysis of Fish Consumption by Ethnic Groups for "All Waters" (g/day)"
Consuming Anglers'
French Native Other White
Canadian Irish Italian American Non-Hispanic
Heritage Heritage Heritage Heritage Heritage
N of Cases 201 138 27 96 533
Median (50th percentile)0'" 2.3 2.4 1.8 2.3 1.9
66th percentile0-" 4.1 4.4 2.6 4.7 3.8
75th percentile0-" 6.2 6.0 5.0 6.2 5.7
Arithmetic Mean0 7.4 5.2 4.5 10 6.0
Percentile at the Mean" 80 70 74 83 76
90th percentile0-" 15 12 12 16 13
95th percentile0'" 27 20 21 51 24
Percentile at 6. 5 g/day"-' 77 75 81 77 77
Scandinavian
Heritage
37
1.3
2.6
4.9
5.3
78
9.4
25
84
" "All Waters" based on fish obtained from all lakes, ponds, streams and rivers in Maine, from other household sources and from other non-
household sources.
b "Consuming Anglers" refers to only those anglers who consumed freshwater fish obtained from Maine sources during the 1989-1990 ice
fishing or 1990 open water fishing season.
0 The average consumption per day by freshwater fish consumers in the household.
d Calculated by rank without any assumption of statistical distribution.
" Fish consumption rate recommended by U.S. EPA (1984) for use in establishing ambient water quality standards.
Source: Chemrisk, 1991.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10-67
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-66. Total Consumption of Freshwater Fish Caught by All Survey Respondents During the 1990 Season
Species
Landlocked salmon
Atlantic salmon
Togue (Lake trout)
Brook trout
Brown trout
Yellow perch
White perch
Bass (smallmouth and largemouth)
Pickerel
Lake whitefish
Hornpout (Catfish and bullheads)
Bottom fish (Suckers, carp and sturgeon)
Chub
Smelt
Other
TOTALS
Ice Fishing
Quantity Grams
Consumed (xlO3)
(#) Consumed
832
3
483
1,309
275
235
2,544
474
1,091
111
47
50
0
7,808
201
15.463
290
1.1
200
100
54
9.1
160
120
180
20
8.2
81
0
150
210
1.583.4
Lakes and Ponds
Quantity Grams
Consumed (xlO3)
(#) Consumed
928
33
459
3,294
375
1,649
6,540
73
553
558
1,291
62
252
428
90
16.587
340
9.9
160
210
56
52
380
5.9
91
13
100
22
35
4.9
110
1.590
Rivers and Streams
Quantity Grams
Consumed (xlO3)
(#) Consumed
305
17
33
10,185
338
188
3,013
787
303
55
180
100
219
4,269
54
20.046
120
11
2.7
420
23
7.4
180
130
45
2.7
7.8
6.7
130
37
45
1.168
Source: Chemrisk, 1991.
Table 10-67. Mean Sport-Fish Consumption by Demographic Variables, Michigan Sport
Income*
<$15,000
$15,000- $24,999
$25,000 - $39,999
>$40,000
Education
Some High School
High School Degree
Some College-College Degree
Post Graduate
Residence Sizeb
Large City/Suburb (>100,000)
Small City (20,000-100,000)
Town (2,000-20,000)
Small Town (100-2,000)
Rural, Non Farm
Farm
Age (years)
16-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60+
Sex'
Male
Female
Race/Ethnicityb
Minority
White
" P<.01, Ftest
b P < .05, F test
Source: Westetal, 1993
Anglers Fish Consumption Study,
N
290
369
662
871
299
1,074
825
231
487
464
475
272
598
140
266
583
556
419
596
299
1,074
160
2,289
1991-1992
Mean (g/dav)
21.0
20.6
17.5
14.7
16.5
17.0
17.6
14.5
14.6
12.9
19.4
22.8
17.7
15.1
18.9
16.6
16.5
16.5
16.2
17.5
13.7
23.2
16.3
95% C.I.
16.3-25.8
15.5-25.7
15.0-20.1
12.8- 16.7
12.9-20.1
14.9- 19.1
14.9-20.2
10.5- 18.6
11.8- 17.3
10.7- 15.0
15.5-23.3
16.8-28.8
15.1-20.3
10.3-20.0
13.9-23.9
13.5- 19.7
13.4- 19.6
13.6- 19.4
13.8- 18.6
15.8- 19.1
11.2- 16.3
13.4-33.1
14.9- 17.6
Page
10-68
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-68. Distribution of Fish Intake Rates
(from all sources and from sport-caught sources)
For 1992 Lake Ontario Anglers
Percentile of Lake Ontario Anglers
25%
50%
75%
90%
95%
99%
Fish from All Sources (s/dav)
8.8
14.1
23.2
34.2
42.3
56.6
Sport-Cauaht Fish (s/dav)
0.6
2.2
6.6
13.2
17.9
39.8
Source. Connelly et al., 1996.
Table 10-69. Mean Annual Fish Consumption (g/day)
for Lake Ontario Anglers, 1992,
by Sociodemographic Characteristics
Mean Consumption
Demographic Group
Overall
Residence
Rural
Small City
City (25-100,000)
City (> 100,000)
Income
< $20,000
$21,000-34,000
$34,000-50,000
>$50,000
Age (years)
<30
30-39
40-49
50+
Education
< High School
High School Graduate
Some College
College Graduate
Some Post Grad.
Note - Scheffe's test showed statistically
groups (all sources).
Source: Connellv et al., 1996.
Fish from all Sources
17.9
17.6
20.8
19.8
13.1
20.5
17.5
16.5
20.7
13.0
16.6
18.6
21.9
17.3
17.8
18.8
17.4
20.5
Sport-Caught Fish
4.9
5.1
6.3
5.8
2.2
4.9
4.7
4.8
6.1
4.1
4.3
5.1
6.4
7.1
4.7
5.5
4.2
5.9
significant differences between residence types (for all sources and sport caught) and age
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 10-69
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-70. Percentile and Mean Intake Rates for Wisconsin Sport Anglers
Percentile
25th
50th
75th
90th
95th
98th
100th
Mean
Annual Number of Sport
4
10
25
50
60
100
365
18
Source: Raw data on sport-caught meals from Fiore et al.,
meah this value is dervied from Pao et al., 1982.
Caught Meals Intake Rate of Sport-Caught Meals (g/dav)
1.7
4.1
10.2
20.6
24.6
41.1
150
7.4
1989. EPA calculated intake rates using a value of 150 grams per fish
Table 10-71.
Category
Geographic Distribution
Age Distribution (years)
Annual Household Income
Ethnic Background
Sociodemographic Characteristics
of Respondents
Subcategory
Upper Hudson
Mid Hudson
Lower Hudson
15-29
30-44
45-59
>60
< $10,000
$10 - 29,999
$30 - 49,999
$50 - 69,999
$70 - 89,999
> $90,000
Caucasian American
African American
Hispanic American
Asian American
Native American
Percent of Total1
18%
35%
48%
3%
26%
35%
23%
12%
16%
41%
29%
10%
2%
3%
67%
21%
10%
1%
1%
* A total of 336 shore-based anglers were interviewed
Source: Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc., 1993
Page
10-70
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-72. Number of Grams Per Day of Fish Consumed by All Adult Respondents
(Consumers and Non-consumers Combined) - Throughout the Year
Number of Grams/Day Cumulative Percent
N = 500
0.00
1.6
3.2
4.0
4.9
6.5
7.3
8.1
9.7
12.2
13.0
16.2
19.4
20.2
24.3
29.2
32.4
38.9
40.5
48.6
8.9%
9.0%
10.4%
10.8%
10.9%
12.8%
12.9%
13.7%
14.4%
14.9%
16.3%
22.8%
24.0%
24.1%
27.9%
28.1%
52.5%
52.9%
56.5%
67.6%
Number of Grams/Day
64.8
72.9
77.0
81.0
97.2
130
146
162
170
194
243
259
292
324
340
389
486
648
778
972
Cumulative Percent
80.6%
81.2%
81.4%
83.3%
89.3%
92.2%
93.7%
94.4%
94.8%
97.2%
97.3%
97.4%
97.6%
98.3%
98.7%
99.0%
99.6%
99.7%
99.9%
100%
Weighted Mean = 58.7 grams/day (g/d)
Weighted SE = 3.64
90th Percentile: 97.2 g/d < (90th) < 130 g/d
95th Percentile ~ 170 g/d
99th Percentile = 389 g/d
Source: CRITFC, 1994
Table 10-73. Fish Intake Throughout the Year by Sex, Age, and Location by All Adult Respondents
Sex
Female
Male
Total
Age (years)
18-39
40-59
60 & Older
Total
Location
On Reservation
Off Reservation
Total
N
278
222
500
287
155
58
500
440
60
500
Weighted Mean
(arams/dav)
55.8
62.6
58.7
57.6
55.8
74.4
58.7
60.2
47.9
58.7
Weighted SE
4.78
5.60
3.64
4.87
4.88
15.3
3.64
3.98
8.25
3.64
Source: CRITFC, 1994.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10-71
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-74.
Number of Grams/Day
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.1
4.9
6.5
8.1
9.7
12.2
13.0
16.2
19.4
20.3
24.3
32.4
48.6
64.8
72.9
81.0
97.2
162.0
N=194
Unweighted Mean = 19.6 grams/day
Unweighted SE = 1.94
Children's Fish Consumption Rates - Throughout Year
Unweighted Cumulative Percent
21.1%
21.6%
22.2%
24.7%
25.3%
28.4%
32.0%
33.5%
35.6%
47.4%
48.5%
51.0%
51.5%
72.7%
73.2%
74.2%
76.3%
87.1%
91.2%
94.3%
96.4%
97.4%
98.5%
100%
Source: CRITFC, 1994.
Table 10-75. Sociodemographic Factors and Recent Fish Consumption
Peak Consumption3
Recent Consumption
Average0 >3d(%)
All participants (N-323)
Gender
Male (n- 148)
Female (n- 175)
Age (y)
<35 (n-150)
>35(n-173)
High School Graduate
No (n- 105)
Yes(n-218)
Unemployed
Yes (n-78)
No (n-245)
1.7
1.9
1.5
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.9
1.6
20
26
15
23
17
18
21
27
18
Walleve
4.2
5.1
3.4
5.3a
3.2
3.6
4.4
4.8
4.0
N. Pike
0.3
0.5a
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.3
Muskellunge
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.2
Bass
0.5
0.7a
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.7
0.4
1.1
0.3
Highest number offish meals consumed/week.
Number of meals of each species in the previous 2 months.
Average peak fish consumption.
Percentage of population reporting peak fish consumption of > 3 fish meals/week.
Source: Peterson et al., 1994.
Page
10-72
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Which month! of the year do you
eat the most fish?
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul A.UQ Sap Oct Now Dec
MMM«K
pmniui
• Participams could 1st more than one month.
Figure 10-1. Sesonal Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990
E
During thOM months of the year when you ut the most fish.
how many fi*h meats do you •« in • week?
10
fish mate per wMfc
Figure 10-2. Peak Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990.
Source: Peterson et al., 1994.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10-73
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-76. Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period for All Respondents
Time Period
Number 01 ijocai ±Yr. Before Pregnancy*1
Mohawk
Nc
20
42
6
9
1
1
18
97
%
20.6
43.3
6.2
9.3
1.0
1.0
18.6
100.
0
Control
Nc
93
35
8
5
1
1
11
154
%
60.4
22.7
5.2
3.3
0.6
0.6
7.1
100.0
Table 10-77. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time
Period for All Respondents and Consumers Only
All Respondents
(N=97 Mohawks and 154 Controls)
During <1 Yr. Before >1 Yr. Before
Pregnancy Pregnancy Pregnancy
Mohawk 3.9(1.2) 9.2(2.3) 23.4(4.3)"
Control 7.3(2.1) 10.7(2.6) 10.9(2.7)
(N=82
During
Pregnancy
4.6(1.3)
15.5(4.2)"
Consumers Only
Mohawks and 72 Controls)
<1 Yr. Before
Pregnancy
10.9(2.7)
23.0(5.1)"
>1 Yr. Before
Pregnancy
27.6(4.9)
23.0(5.5)
p <0.001 for Mohawk vs. Control.
b p<0.05 for Mohawk vs. Control
( ) = standard error.
Test for linear trend:
p<0.001 for Mohawk (All participants and consumers only);
p=0.07 for Controls (All participants and consumers only).
Source: Fitzgerald et al., 1995.
Page
10-74
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-78. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period and Selected
Characteristics for All Respondents (Mohawk, N=97; Control, N=154)
Time Period
During Pregnancy
Background Variable Mohawk Control
Age (Yrs)
<20 7.7 0.8
20-24 1.3 5.9
25-29 3.9 9.9
30-34 12.0 7.6
>34 1.8 11.2
Education (Yrs)
<12 6.3 7.9
12 7.3 5.4
13-15 1.7 10.1
>15 0.9 6.8
Cigarette Smoking
Yes 3.8 8.8
No 3.9 6.4
Alcohol Consumption
Yes 4.2 9.9
No 3.8 6.3"
< 1 Year Before Pregnancy
Mohawk
13.5
5.7
15.5
9.5
1.8
14.8
8.1
8.0
10.7
10.4
8.4
6.8
12.1
Control
13.9
14.5
6.2
2.9
26.2
12.4
8.4
15.4
0.8
13.0
8.3
13.8
4.7C
>1 Year Before Pregnancy
Mohawk
27.4
20.4
25.1
12.0
52.3
24.7
15.3
29.2
18.7
31.6
18.1
18.0
29.8
Control
10.4
15.9
5.4
5.6
22.1"
8.6
11.4
13.3
2.1
10.9
10.8
14.8
2.9"
F (4, 149) = 2.66, p=0.035 for Age Among Controls.
b F (1,152) = 3.77, p=0.054 for Alcohol Among Controls.
F (1,152) = 5.20, p=0.024 for Alcohol Among Controls.
" F (1,152) = 6.42, p=0.012 for Alcohol Among Controls.
Source: Fitzgerald et al., 1995.
Table 10-79. Percentage of Individuals Using Various Cooking Methods at Specified Frequencies
Study
Connelly et al.,
1992
Connelly et al.,
1996
CRITFC, 1994
Fitzgerald et al.,
1995
Puffer et al.,
1981
Use
Frequency Bake
Always 24(a)
Ever 75(a)
Always 13
Ever 84
At least 79
monthly
Ever 98
Not
Specified
As Primary 16.3
Method
Pan Fry
51
88
4
72
51
80
94(e)(f)
52.5
Deep Fry Broil or
Grill Poach Boil Smoke
13 24(a)
59 75(a)
4
42
14 27 11 46 31
25 39 17 73 66
71(e)(g)
12
Raw Other
1 34(b)
29(c)
49(d)
3 67(b)
71(c)
75(d)
0.25 19(h)
" 24 and 75 listed as bake, BBQ, or poach
b Dried
0 Roasted
11 Canned
' Not specified whether deep or pan fried
* Mohawk women
8 Control population
h boil, stew, soup, or steam
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-75
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-80. Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species"
Species
Anchovy, European
Bass
Bass, Striped
Bluefish
Butterfish
Carp
Catfish
Cod, Atlantic
Cod, Pacific
Croaker, Atlantic
Dolphinfish, Mahimahi
Drum, Freshwater
Flatfish, Flounder and Sole
Grouper
Haddock
Halibut, Atlantic & Pacific
Halibut, Greenland
Herring, Atlantic & Turbot, domestic species
Herring, Pacific
Mackerel, Atlantic
Mackerel, Jack
Mackerel, King
Mackerel, Pacific & Jack
Mackerel, Spanish
Monkfish
Mullet, Striped
Ocean Perch, Atlantic
Perch, Mixed species
Pike, Northern
Pike, Walleve
Moisture
Content
73.37
50.30
75.66
79.22
70.86
74.13
76.31
69.63
76.39
58.81
81.22
75.61
75.92
16.14
81.28
78.03
59.76
77.55
77.33
79.06
73.16
79.22
73.36
79.92
74.25
71.48
77.92
71.69
70.27
72.05
64.16
59.70
55.22
71.52
63.55
53.27
69.17
75.85
70.15
71.67
68.46
83.24
77.01
70.52
78.70
72.69
79.13
73.25
78.92
72.97
79.31
Total Fat Content
FINFISH
4.101
8.535
3.273
1.951
3.768
NA
4.842
6.208
3.597
12.224
0.456
0.582
0.584
1.608
0.407
2.701
11.713
0.474
4.463
0.845
1.084
0.756
0.970
0.489
0.627
0.651
1.812
2.324
12.164
7.909
10.140
10.822
16.007
12.552
9.076
15.482
4.587
1.587
6.816
5.097
5.745
NA
2.909
3.730
1.296
1.661
0.705
0.904
0.477
0.611
0.990
Comments
Raw
Canned in oil, drained solids
Freshwater, mixed species, raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Channel, raw
Channel, cooked, breaded and fried
Atlantic, raw
Canned, solids and liquids
Cooked, dry heat
Dried and salted
Raw
Raw
Cooked, breaded and fried
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw, mixed species
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Smoked
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Kippered
Pickled
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Canned, drained solids
Raw
Canned, drained solids
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Page
10-76
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-8
Species
Pollock, Alaska & Walleye
Pollock, Atlantic
Rockfish, Pacific, mixed species
Roughy, Orange
Salmon, Atlantic
Salmon, Chinook
Salmon, Chum
Salmon, Coho
Salmon, Pink
Salmon, Red & Sockeye
Sardine, Atlantic
Sardine, Pacific
Sea Bass, mixed species
Seatrout, mixed species
Shad, American
Shark, mixed species
Snapper, mixed species
Sole, Spot
Sturgeon, mixed species
Sucker, white
Sunfish, Pumpkinseed
Swordfish
Trout, mixed species
Trout, Rainbow
Tuna, light meat
Tuna, white meat
Tuna, Bluefish, fresh
Turbot, European
Whitefish, mixed species
Whiting, mixed species
Yellowtail, mixed species
0. Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species" (continued)
Moisture
Content
(%)
81.56
74.06
78.18
79.26
73.41
75.90
68.50
73.17
72.00
75.38
70.77
72.63
65.35
76.35
68.81
70.24
68.72
61.84
59.61
68.30
78.27
72.14
78.09
68.19
73.58
60.09
76.87
70.35
75.95
76.55
69.94
62.50
79.71
79.50
75.62
68.75
71.42
71.48
63.43
59.83
74.51
64.02
69.48
68.09
59.09
76.95
72.77
70.83
80.27
74.71
74.52
Total Fat
Content
(%)b
0.701
0.929
0.730
1.182
1.515
3.630
5.625
9.061
3.947
3.279
4.922
4.908
6.213
2.845
5.391
4.560
6.697
9.616
10.545
11.054
1.678
2.152
2.618
NA
3.941
12.841
0.995
1.275
3.870
3.544
4.544
3.829
1.965
0.502
3.564
4.569
5.901
2.883
3.696
7.368
0.730
NA
2.220
4.296
5.509
NA
5.051
0.799
0.948
1.216
NA
Comments
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw (Mixed species)
Cooked, dry heat (mixed species)
Raw
Raw
Raw
Smoked
Raw
Canned, drained solids with bone
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Canned, solids with bone and liquid
Raw
Canned, drained solids with bone
Cooked, dry heat
Canned in oil, drained solids with bone
Canned in tomato sauce, drained solids with bone
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, batter-dipped and fried
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Smoked
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Canned in oil, drained solids
Canned in water, drained solids
Canned in oil
Canned in water, drained solids
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Smoked
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-77
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-80. Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species" (continued)
Moisture Total Fat
Species
Content
(%)
Content
(%)b
Comments
SHELLFISH
Crab, Alaska King
Crab, Blue
Crab, Dungeness
Crab, Queen
Crayfish, mixed species
Lobster, Northern
Shrimp, mixed species
Spiny Lobster, mixed species
Clam, mixed species
Mussel, Blue
Octopus, common
Oyster, Eastern
Oyster, Pacific
Scallop, mixed species
Squid
79.57
77.55
79.02
79.16
77.43
71.00
79.18
80.58
80.79
75.37
76.76
76.03
75.86
72.56
52.86
77.28
74.07
81.82
63.64
97.70
61.55
63.64
80.58
61.15
80.25
85.14
85.14
64.72
70.28
82.06
78.57
58.44
73.82
78.55
64.54
NA
0.854
0.801
0.910
1.188
6.571
0.616
0.821
0.732
0.939
NA
0.358
1.250
1.421
10.984
0.926
1.102
0.456
0.912
NA
10.098
0.912
1.538
3.076
0.628
1.620
1.620
11.212
3.240
1.752
0.377
10.023
NA
0.989
6.763
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Imitation, made from surimi
Raw
Canned (dry pack or drained solids of wet pack)
Cooked, moist heat
Crab cakes
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Canned (dry pack or drained solids of wet pack)
Cooked, breaded and fried
Cooked, moist heat
Imitation made from surimi, raw
Raw
Canned, drained solids
Canned, liquid
Cooked, breaded and fried
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Raw
Canned (solids and liquid based) raw
Cooked, breaded and fried
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, breaded and fried
Imitation, made from Surimi
Raw
Cooked, fried
" Data are reported as in the Handbook
b Total Fat Content - saturated, monosaturated and polyunsaturated
NA = Not available
Source: USDA, 1979-1984- U.S.
Agricultural Handbook No. 8
Page
10-78
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table, 10-81, Recommendations - General Population
Mean Intake
(g/day) - '••
20.1 (Total Fish)
14, 1 (Marine Fish) ,
6.0 (Freshwater/Bstuarine Fish)
95th Pereentile of Long-term
Intake Distribution (g/day)
•• • • •
63 (Value of 42 from Javitz was adjusted
upward by SO percent to account for recent
increase in fish consumption) ,
Study (Reference)
TRI (Javitz, 1980; Ruffle etal.s 1994)
U.S. EPA Analysis of CSFIL.1 989-91
Table 10-82. Recommendations - General Population -
Fish Serving Size-
Mean Intake (grams)
95,th Peroentile (grams)
Study (Reference)
129
326
1989-1991 CSFII (U.S. EPA, 1996)
Mean -Intake (g/day)
, . . 5.6
'7.2
. 2.0
Table 10-83. .Recommendations
95th Pereentile (g/day)
18.0 .
' . 26,0 ' : .
6.8
- Recreational Marine Anglers
Study Location
Atlantic
. Gulf
Pacific
Study
- NMFS, 1993
Mean Intake (g/day)
'5'
5
12
17
Table 10-84. Recommendations
Upper Pereentile (g/day)
13(95thpercentile)
18(95thpercentile),
39(96thpercentile)
"—'.'.
- Freshwater Anglers
Study Location
Maine
, New' York
Michigan
Michigan.
Reference
EbertetaL.il.992' . -
Connelly et at, 1996
West et a,l, 1989
. West etal, 1993
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-79
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table
Per-Capita (or Mean) Intake
. ' (g/
-------
Q
Table 10-86. Summary of Fish Intake Studies
I
*
i?
I,
Source of Data (Reference) Population Surveyed
Survey Time Period/Type
Analyses Performed (References)
Limitations/Advantages
General Population
Key Studies
Javitz, 1980 - TRI Survey
U.S. EPA, 1996a
Relevant Studies
AIHC, 1994
Paoetal., 1982
Tsang andKlepeis, 1996
USDA, 1992
25,162 individuals -
general population;
the TRI Survey
sample
11,912 individuals -
general population
37,874 individuals -
general population
9,386 individuals -
general population
10,000 individuals-
general population
Sept. 1973-Aug. 1974(1 year survey).
Completed diary over 1 month period
on date of meal consumption, species
offish, packaging type, amount offish
prepared, number of servings
consumed, etc.
Participants provided 3 consecutive
days of dietary data. Three survey years
(1989-1991) combined into one data
set.
Participants provided 3 consecutive
days of dietary data. Survey conducted
between April 1977 and March 1978.
Participants provided 24-hour diary
data. Follow-up questionnaires, survey
conducted between October 1992 and
September 1994.
Participants provided 3 consecutive
days of dietary data. Survey conducted
between April 1987 and March 1988.
Mean and distribution offish consumption
rates grouped by race, age, gender, census
region, fish species, community type, and
religion. Lognormal distribution fit to fish
intake distribution by age and region by
Ruffle etal. (1994).
Analysis of CSFII 1989-91. Fish grouped by
habitat (freshwater vs. marine) and type
(fmfish vs. shellfish). Per capita fish intake
rates calculated using cooked and uncooked
equivalent weight and reported in g/day and
g/kg-day; also intake distribution per day
eating fish.
Distributions using @Risk simulation
software.
Mean and distribution of average daily fish
intake and average fish intake per eating
occasion; by age-sex groups and overall.
Frequency of eating fish and number of
servings per month provided.
Per capita fish intake rates and percent of
population consuming fish in one day; by age
and sex.
High response rate (80%); population was
large and geographically and seasonally
representative; consumption rates based on
one month of diary data; survey data is over
20 years out of date
Large, geographically representative study;
relatively recent. Based on short-term (3
day) data so long-term percentiles offish
intake distribution could not be estimated.
Limited reviews of supporting studies; good
alternative source of information.
Population was large and geographically
representative; data were based on short-
term dietary recall; data are almost 20 years
out of date.
Population large and geographically and
seasonally balanced; data based on recall;
intake data not provided.
Population was large and geographically and
seasonally balanced; data based on short -
term dietary recall.
S
ri
=
-------
Table 10-86. Summary of Fish Intake Studies (continued)
Source of Data (Reference)
Population Surveyed
Survey Time Period/Type
Analyses Performed (References)
Limitations /Advantages
Recreational-Marine Fish
Key Study
NMFS 1986a, b, c; 1993
Relevant Studies
Pierce etal., 1981
Puffer et al., 1981
U.S. DHHS, 1995
Atlantic and Gulf Coasts -
41,000 field interviews and
58,000 telephone interviews;
Pacific Coast - 38,000 field
interviews and 73,000
telephone interviews.
—500 anglers in
Commencement Bay,
Washington
1,067 anglers in the Los
Angeles, California area.
330 everglade residents/
subsistence fishermen or both
Telephone interviews with residents of
coastal counties; information on fishing
frequency and mode of fishing trips. Field
interviews with marine anglers;
information on area and mode fished,
fishing frequency, species caught, weight
offish, and whether fish were intended to
be consumed.
July-November 1980; creel survey
interviews conducted consisting of 5
summer days and 4 fall days.
Creel survey conducted for the full 1980
calendar year.
1992-1993; questionnaire with
demographic information and fishing and
eating habits.
Intake rates were not calculated; total
catch size grouped by marine species,
seasons, and number of fishermen for
each coastal region were presented.
Distribution of fishing frequency; total
weight of catch grouped by species.
Re-analysis by Price et al. (1994)
using inverse fishing frequency as
sample weights.
Distribution of sport fish intake rates.
Median rates by age, ethnicity and fish
species. Re-analysis by Price et al.
(1994) using inverse fishing frequency
as sample weights.
Provides data for fishing frequency by
sex, age, and ethnicity.
Population was large geographically and
seasonally balanced; fish caught were
weighed in the field. No information on
number of potential consumers of catch.
Local survey. Original analysis by Pierce et
al. (1981) did not calculate intake rates;
analysis over-estimated fishing frequency
distribution by oversampling frequent
anglers. Re-analysis by Price et. al. (1994)
involved several assumptions; thus results
are questionable.
Local survey. Original (unweighted)
analysis over-estimated fish intake by
oversampling frequent anglers. Re-analysis
by Price et al. (1994) involves several
assumptions; thus results are questionable.
Intake rates were not reported, study not
representative of the U.S. population; one
of few studies that target subsistence
fishermen.
Q
Si
sT
I
S
a
1=
Si
a
s-
a
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
^_^
13
1
0
13
CO
fl
ummary of Fisl
Table 10-86. S
CJ
"S
CT3
-§
<
Limitations/
's
ed (Referenc
g
Ł
^
PH
1
>;
<
e Period/Type
g
N
6
3
w
"g
i
w
fl
o
"S
"3
o
o
fin
cfl
"c« '"
Q o
^o w
3 tS
w *~
sd jd jd -S1 T-t
° ~s >-• w s "S
»t 1 Pli 111
130 & ^ .S So ^ <3 2 -S
Ł *i g"i S^JSg T3 N lj
0 -j| "gco .S o "
«iu_ar oJ^ ^ "3
oSWo^ o5 5 OS
t_
° 5-2
OJ U -rt
! |i
t 1 ll
«l S8ll
!i nil
a S 1111
- -o ^ " ^ 0
§•§ g| 1, ° z ° >-.^ e
g s ^ S g ^3 «3
ll sllll
5 '1
^ S
S i> M w
'*"! J> dj JrJ
13 y, JJ
« -S S M
S-tn W fl
> .S ™
°< 13
2 § '-§ «
OJ -rt tn -O
•a ^ ° i
O _y -S O w
°n o o « m
_, x
(M J-, §^
0^ SO
•-' 0, -2
_f ^ t_ fl
rt ^_ OJ ^
^ 13 S S
1 S 1 S
I o|j
O fe K O
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10-83
-------
^
s^
I
Table 10-86. Summary of Fish Intake Studies (continued)
Source of Data
(Reference)
Native American
CRITFC, 1994
Fitzgerald et al. 1995
Petersen et al., 1994
Wolfe and Walker,
1987
Population Surveyed
Four tribes in Washington
state; total of 513 adults and
204 children under five
97 Mohawk women in New
York; 154 Caucasian women;
nursing mothers
327 residents of Chippewa
reservation, Wisconsin
Ninety-eight communities in
Alaska surveyed by various
researchers
Survey Time Period/Type
Fall and Winter of 1991-1992; stratified
random sampling approach; in-person
interviews; information requested included
24-hour dietary recall, seasonal and annual
number offish meals, average weight of
fish meals and species consumed.
1988-1992, up to 3-year recall
Self-administered questionaire completed in
May, 1990.
Surveys conducted between 1980 and 1985;
data based on 1 -year recall period. Annual
per capita harvest offish, land mammals,
marine mammals and other resources
estimated for each community.
Analyses Performed (References')
Mean and distribution offish intake
rates for adults and for children. Mean
intake rates by age and gender.
Frequency of cooking and preparation
methods.
Mean number of sport-caught fish meals
per year.
Mean number of fish meals per year.
Distribution among communities of
annual per-capita harvests for each
resource category.
L imitations/A dvantases
Survey was done at only one time of the year
and involved one year recall; fish intake rates
were based on all fish sources but great
majority was locally caught; study provides
consumption and habits for subsistence
subpopulation group.
Survey for nursing mothers only, recall for up
to 3 years; small sample size; may be
representative of Mohawk women; measured
in fish meals.
Did not distinguish between commercial and
sport-caught meals.
Data based on 1-year recall; data provided are
harvest data that must be converted to
individual intake rates; surveyed
communities are only a sample of all Alaska
communities.
a NFMS - National Marine Fisheries Services.
I
&!
1=
Q
I
5-
I
ft
Si
a
A,
&
I
I
A,
I
I
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-87. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for General Population
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Peer reviewed by USDA and EPA.
CSFII data are publicly available. Javitz is a
contractor report to EPA.
Enough information is available to reproduce
results.
The studies focused on fish ingestion.
The studies were conducted for U.S. population.
The studies are primary studies.
Studies were conducted from 1973-1974 to 1989-
1991.
Long-term distribution are based on one month data
collection period.
Data are collected using diaries and one-day recall.
However, data adjusted to account for changes in
eating pattern.
The Range of samples was 10,000 -37,000.
The data are representative of overall U.S.
population.
Long-term distribution (generated from 1973-1974
data) was shifted upward based on recent increase in
mean consumption.
Response rates were fairly high; there was no
obvious source of bias.
Estimates of intake amounts were imprecise.
There was 1 study for the mean, the results of 2
studies were utilized for long-term distribution.
High
High (CSFII)
Medium (Javitz)
High
High
High
High
Medium (mean)
Low (Long-Term Distribution)
High (Mean)
Medium (Long-term distribution)
Medium
High
High
Medium
High
Medium
Low
Medium
Medium (Mean)
Low (Long-term distribution)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-85
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-88. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for Recreational Marine Anglers
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Data were reviewed by NMFS and EPA. High
The analysis of the NMFS data is presented in the Handbook and High
NMFS data can be found in NMFS publications.
Enough information is available to reproduce results. High
Studies focused on fish catch rather than fish consumption per se. Medium
The studies were conducted in the U.S. High
Data are from primary studies. High
The data were based on 1993 studies. High
Data were collected once for each angler. The yearly catch of Medium
anglers were estimated from catch on intercepted trip and reported
fishing frequency.
The creel survey provided data on fishing frequency and fish Medium
weight; telephone survey data provided number of anglers. An
average value was used for the number of intended fish consumers
and edible fraction.
Studies encompassed a population of over 100,000. High
Data were representative of overall U.S. coastal state population. High
Distributions were generated. High
Response rates were fairly high; There was no obvious source of High
bias.
Fish were weighed in the field. High
There was 1 study. Low
N/A
Medium
Page
10-86
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-89. Confidence in Recommendations for Fish Consumption - Recreational Freshwater
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
Studies can be found in peer reviewed journals and has been
reviewed by the EPA.
The original study analyses are reported in accessible journals.
Subsequent EPA analyses are detailed in Handbook.
Enough information is available to reproduce results.
Studies focused on ingestion offish by the recreational freshwater
angler.
The studies were conducted in the U.S.
Data are from primary references.
Studies were conducted between 1988-1992.
Data were collected for one year period for 3 studies; and a one
week period for one study.
Data presented are as follows: one year recall of fishing trips (2
studies), one week recall offish consumption (1 study), and one
year diary survey (1 study). Weight offish consumed was
estimated using approximate weight offish catch and edible
fraction or approximate weight offish meal.
Study population ranged from 800-2600.
Each study was localized to a single state or area.
Distributions were generated.
Response rates were fairly high. One year recall of fishing trips
may result in overestimate.
Weight offish portions were estimated in one study, fish weight
was estimated from reported fish length in another study.
There are 4 key studies.
Intake rates in different parts of country may be expected to show
some variation.
The main drawback is that studies are not nationally
representative and not representative of long-term consumption.
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
High
Low
High
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
10-87
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-90. Confidence in Recommendations for Native American Subsistence Fish Consumption
Considerations
Rationale
Ratine
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Studies are from peer reviewed journal (1 study), and Medium
technical reports (Istudy).
Journal articles are publicly available. CRITFC is a Medium
technical report.
The studies were adequately detailed. High
Studies focused on fish ingestion and fish harvest. High
All studies were specific to area in the U.S. High
One study used primary data, the other used secondary Medium
data.
Data were from early 1980's to 1992. Medium
Data collected for one year period. High
One study used fish harvest data; EPA used a factor to Medium
convert to individual intake. Other study measured
individual intake directly.
The sample population was 500 for the study with primary Medium
data.
Only two states were represented. Low
Individual variation were not described in summary study. Medium
The response rate was 69% in study with primary data. Medium
Bias was hard to evaluate in summary study.
The weight of the fish was estimated. Medium
There were two studies; only one study described Medium
individual variation in intake.
Range of per-capita rates from summary study includes High
per-capita rate from study with primary data.
Studies are not nationally representative. Upper percentiles Medium (per capita intake)
are based on only one study.
Low (upper percentiles)
Page
10-88
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 10A
APPENDIX 10A
RESOURCE UTILIZATION DISTRIBUTION
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 10A-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 10A
Appendix 10A. Resource Utilization Distribution
The percentiles of the resource utilization distribution of Y are to be distinguished from the percentiles of the
(standard) distribution of Y. The latter percentiles show what percentage of individuals in the population are consuming
below a given level. Thus, the 50th percentile of the distribution of Y is that level such that 50 percent of individuals
consume below it; on the other hand, the 50th percentile of the resource utilization distribution is that level such that 50
percent of the overall consumption in the population is done by individuals consuming below it.
The percentiles of the resource utilization distribution of Y will always be greater than or equal to the corresponding
percentiles of the (standard) distribution of Y, and, in the case of recreational fish consumption, usually considerably exceed
the standard percentiles.
To generate the resource utilization distribution, one simply weights each observation in the data set by the Y level
for that observation and performs a standard percentile analysis of weighted data. If the data already have weights, then one
multiplies the original weights by the Y level for that observation, and then performs the percentile analysis.
Under certain assumptions, the resource utilization percentiles offish consumption may be related (approximately)
to the (standard) percentiles offish consumption derived from the analysis of creel studies. In this instance, it is assumed
that the creel survey data analysis did not employ sampling weights (i.e., weights were implicitly set to one); this is the case
for many of the published analyses of creel survey data. In creel studies the fish consumption rate for the ith individual is
usually derived by multiplying the amount of fish consumption per fishing trip (say C;) by the frequency of fishing (say f;).
If it is assumed that the probability of sampling of an angler is proportional to fishing frequency, then sampling weights of
inverse fishing frequency (I/ f;) should be employed in the analysis of the survey data. Above it was stated that for data that
are already weighted the resource utilization distribution is generated by multiplying the original weights by the individual's
fish consumption level to create new weights. Thus, to generate the resource utilization distribution from the data with
weights of (I/ f;), one multiplies (I/ f;) by the fish consumption level of f; C; to get new weights of C;.
Now if Q (amount of consumption per fishing trip) is constant over the population, then these new weights are constant
and can be taken to be one. But weights of one is what (it is assumed) were used in the original creel survey data analysis.
Hence, the resource utilization distribution is exactly the same as the original (standard) distribution derived from the creel
survey using constant weights.
The accuracy of this approximation of the resource utilization distribution of fish by the (standard) distribution of fish
consumption derived from an unweighted analysis of creel survey data depends then on two factors, how approximately
constant the Q's are in the population and how approximately proportional the relationship between sampling probability
and fishing frequency is. Sampling probability will be roughly proportional to frequency if repeated sampling at the same
site is limited or if re-interviewing is performed independent of past interviewing status.
Note: For any quantity Y that is consumed by individuals in a population, the percentiles of the "resource utilization
distribution" of Y can be formally defined as follows: Yp (R) is the pth percentile of the resource utilization
distribution if p percent of the overall consumption of Y in the population is done by individuals with consumption
below Yp (R) and 100-p percent is done by individuals with consumption above Yp(R).
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 10A-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 10B
APPENDIX 10B
FISH PREPARATION AND COOKING METHODS
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 10B-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 10B
Table 10B-1. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Residence Size"
Residence Size
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)b
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
" Large City = over
Large
City/Suburb
32.7
19.6
6.0
23.6
12.4
2.5
3.2
0.0000
393
45.8
12.2
2.8
20.2
11.8
2.7
4.5
0
205
100,000; Small City
Small City
31.0
24.0
3.0
20.8
12.4
6.0
2.8
0.0000
317
45.7
14.5
2.3
17.6
8.8
8.5
2.7
0
171
= 20,000-100,000;
Town
Total Fish
36.0
23.3
3.4
13.8
10.0
8.3
5.2
0.0000
388
Sport Fish
47.6
17.5
2.9
10.6
6.3
10.4
4.9
0
257
Town = 2,000-20,000;
Small Town
32.4
24.7
3.7
21.4
10.3
5.0
1.9
0.5
256
41.4
15.2
0.5
25.3
8.7
6.7
1.5
0.7
176
Small Town =
Rural Non-
Farm
38.6
26.2
3.4
13.7
12.7
2.3
2.9
0.2
483
51.2
21.9
3.6
8.2
9.7
1.9
3.5
0
314
100-2,000.
Farm
51.6
15.7
3.5
13.1
6.4
7.0
1.8
—
94
63.3
7.3
0
10.4
6.9
9.3
2.8
0
62
b N = Total number of respondents
Source: Westetal., 1993
Table 10B-2. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Age
Age (years)
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled or Boiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)'
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
" N = Total number of respondents.
Source: West etal, 1993.
17-30
45.9
23.0
0.0000
15.6
10.8
3.1
1.6
0.0000
246
57.6
18.2
0.0000
15.0
3.6
3.8
1.7
0.0000
174
31-40
Total Fish
31.7
24.7
6.0
15.2
13.0
5.2
4.2
0.0000
448
Sport Fish
42.6
21.0
4.4
10.1
10.4
7.2
4.3
0.0000
287
41-50
30.5
26.9
3.6
24.3
8.7
2.2
3.5
0.3
417
43.4
17.3
0.8
25.9
6.4
3.0
3.2
0.0000
246
51-64
33.9
23.7
3.9
16.1
12.8
6.5
2.7
0.4
502
46.6
14.8
3.2
12.2
11.7
7.5
3.5
0.4
294
>64
40.7
14.0
4.3
18.8
11.5
6.8
4.0
0.0000
287
54.1
7.7
3.1
12.2
9.9
8.2
4.8
0.0000
163
Overall
35.3
23.5
3.9
17.8
11.4
4.7
3.2
0.2
1946
47.9
16.5
2.4
14.8
8.9
5.9
3.5
0.1
1187
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10B-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix IOC
Table 10B-3. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Ethnicity
Ethnicity
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)'
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Total (N)
" N = Total number of respondents.
Source: Westetal., 1993.
Black
40.5
27.0
0
19.4
1.9
9.5
1.6
0
52
44.9
36.2
0
0
5.3
13.6
0
19
Native American
Total Fish
37.5
22.0
1.1
9.8
16.3
6.2
4.2
0
84
Sport Fish
47.9
20.2
0
1.5
18.2
8.6
3.6
60
Hispanic
16.1
83.9
0
0
0
0
3.5
0.3
12
52.1
47.9
0
0
0
0
0
4
White
35.8
22.7
4.3
17.7
11.7
4.5
2.7
0.4
1,744
48.8
15.7
2.7
14.7
8.6
5.6
3.7
39
Other
18.5
18.4
0
57.6
5.4
0
4.0
0
33
22.0
9.6
0
61.9
6.4
0
0
0
Table 10B-4. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Education
Education
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)'
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Baked
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
" N = Total number of respondents.
Source: West etal, 1993.
Through Some H.S.
44.7
23.6
2.2
8.9
8.1
10.0
2.1
0.5
236
56.1
13.6
2.8
6.3
7.4
10.1
2.8
0.8
146
H.S. Degree
Total Fish
41.8
23.6
2.8
10.9
12.1
5.1
3.4
0.3
775
Sport Fish
52.4
15.8
2.4
9.4
10.6
6.3
3.3
0
524
College Degree
28.8
23.8
5.1
23.8
11.6
3.0
4.0
0
704
41.8
18.6
3.0
21.7
6.1
3.9
4.6
0
421
Post Graduate
Education
22.9
19.4
5.8
34.1
12.8
3.8
1.3
0
211
36.3
12.9
0
28.3
14.9
6.5
1.0
0
91
Page
10B-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 10B
Table 10B-5.
Income
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)'
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
" N = Total number of respondents.
Source: Westetal., 1993.
Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by
0 - $24,999
Total Fish
44.8
21.7
2.1
11.3
9.1
8.7
2.4
0
544
Sport Fish
51.5
15.8
1.8
12.0
7.2
9.1
2.7
0
387
$25,000 - $39,999
39.1
22.2
3.5
15.8
12.3
2.9
4.0
0.2
518
51.4
15.8
2.1
12.2
10.0
3.8
4.6
0
344
iicome
$40,000 - or more
26.5
23.4
5.6
25.0
13.3
2.5
3.5
0.3
714
42.0
17.2
3.7
19.4
10.0
3.5
3.8
0.3
369
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10B-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix IOC
Table 10B-6. Percent of Fish Meals Where Fat was Trimmed or Skin was Removed, by Demographic Variables
Population
Residence Size
Large City/Suburb
Small City
Town
Small Town
Rural Non-Farm
Farm
Age (years)
17-30
31-40
41-50
51-65
Over 65
Ethnicity
Black
Native American
Hispanic
White
Other
Education
Some High School
High School Degree
College Degree
Post-Graduate
Income
<$25,000
$25-39,999
$40,000 or more
Overall
Source: Modified from West et. al.
Total Fish
Trimmed Fat (%)
51.7
56.9
50.3
52.6
42.4
37.3
50.6
49.7
53.0
48.1
41.6
25.8
50.0
59.5
49.3
77.1
50.8
47.2
51.9
47.6
50.5
47.8
50.2
49.0
1993.
Skin Off ("%•)
31.6
34.1
33.4
45.2
32.4
38.1
36.5
29.7
32.2
35.6
43.1
37.1
41.4
7.1
34.0
61.6
43.9
37.1
31.9
26.6
43.8
34.0
28.6
34.7
Sport Fish
Trimmed Fat (%)
56.7
59.3
51.7
55.8
46.2
39.4
53.9
51.6
58.8
48.8
43.0
16.0
56.3
50.0
51.8
75.7
49.7
49.5
55.9
53.4
50.6
54.9
51.7
52.1
Skin Off (%)
28.9
36.2
33.7
51.3
34.6
42.1
39.3
29.9
37.0
37.2
42.9
40.1
36.7
23.0
35.6
65.5
47.1
37.6
33.8
38.7
47.3
34.6
27.7
36.5
Page
10B-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 10B
Table 10B-7. Method of Cooking of Most Common Species Kept by Sportfishermen
Species Percent of Anglers
Use as Primary Cooking Method (Percent)
Catching Species
White Croaker
Pacific Mackerel
Pacific Bonito
Queenfish
Jacksmelt
Walleye Perch
Shiner Perch
Opaleye
Black Perch
Kelp Bass
California Halibut
Shellfish'
(n = 1059)
" Crab, mussels, lobster, abalone
b Boil, soup, steam, stew
34%
25%
18%
17%
13%
10%
7%
6%
5%
5%
4%
3%
Deep Fry
19%
10%
5%
15%
17%
12%
11%
16%
18%
12%
13%
0%
Pan Fry Bake and Charcoal Broil Raw
64%
41%
33%
70%
57%
69%
72%
56%
53%
55%
60%
0%
12%
28%
43%
6%
19%
6%
8%
14%
14%
21%
24%
0%
0%
0%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Otherb
5%
21%
17%
8%
7%
13%
11%
14%
15%
12%
3%
100%
Source: Modified from Puffer et al, 1981.
Table 10B-8. Adult Consumption of Fish Parts
Weighted Percent Consuming Specific Parts
Species
Salmon
Lamprey
Trout
Smelt
Whitefish
Sturgeon
Walleye
Squawfish
Sucker
Shad
Source: CRITFC,
Number
Consuming
473
249
365
209
125
121
46
15
42
16
1994.
Fillet
95. 1%
86.4%
89.4%
78.8%
93.8%
94.6%
100%
89.7%
89.3%
93.5%
Skin
55.8%
89.3%
68.5%
88.9%
53.8%
18.2%
20.7%
34. 1%
50.0%
15.7%
Head
42.7%
18.1%
13.7%
37.4%
15.4%
6.2%
6.2%
8.1%
19.4%
0.0%
Eggs
42.8%
4.6%
8.7%
46.4%
20.6%
11.9%
9.8%
11.1%
30.4%
0.0%
Bones
12.1%
5.2%
7.1%
28.4%
6.0%
2.6%
2.4%
5.9%
9.8%
3.3%
Organs
3.7%
3.2%
2.3%
27.9%
0.0%
0.3%
0.9%
0.0%
2.1%
0.0%
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
10B-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix IOC
APPENDIX IOC
PER CAPITA ESTIMATES BY SPECIES
BASED ON THE USDA CSFII DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 10C-1
-------
Table 10C-1. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates of Fish Consumption
U.S. Population - Mean Consumption by Species Within Habitat - As Consumed Fish
Habitat Species
Estuarine Shrimp
Perch
Flatfish (Estuarine)
Crab (Estuarine)
Flounder
Oyster
Clam (Estuarine)
Mullet
Croaker
Herring
Smelts
Scallop (Estuarine)
Anchovy
Scup
Sturgeon
Freshwater Catfish
Trout
Carp
Pike
Salmon (Freshwater)
Marine Tuna
Clam (Marine)
Cod
Flatfish (Marine)
Salmon (Marine)
Haddock
Pollock
Crab (Marine)
Ocean Perch
Porgy
Scallop (Marine)
Sea Bass
Lobster
Notes: Estimates are projected from a
48 conteminous states.
Source of individual consumption dat
Estimated Mean
Grams/Person/Day
1.37241
0.52580
0.43485
0.29086
0.24590
0.17840
0.14605
0.07089
0.05021
0.02937
0.02768
0.00247
0.00228
0.00050
0.00040
1.06776
0.43050
0.04846
0.01978
0.00881
4.19998
1.66153
1.22627
1.06307
0.73778
0.51533
0.44970
0.33870
0.31878
0.29844
0.21805
0.20794
0.20001
Habitat Species
Marine Swordfish
(Cont) Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Sole
Mackerel
Whiting
Halibut
Mussels
Shark
Whitefish
Seafood
Snapper
Octopus
Barracuda
Abalone
Unknown Fish
All Species Tuna
Clam (Marine)
Shrimp
Cod
Catfish
Faltfish (Marine)
Salmon (Marine)
Perch
Haddock
Pollock
Flatfish (Estuarine)
Trout
Crab (Marine)
Ocean Perch
Porgy
Crab (Estuarine)
Estimated Mean
Grams/Person/Day
0.13879
0.12196
0.10013
0.09131
0.07396
0.06379
0.05498
0.02463
0.02217
0.01901
0.00916
0.00574
0.00539
0.00375
0.00111
0.00075
0.00186
4.19998
.66153
.38883
.22827
.06776
.06307
0.73778
0.52580
0.51533
0.44970
0.43485
0.43050
0.33870
0.31878
0.29844
0.29088
Habitat Species
All Species Flounder
(Cont) Scallop (Marine)
Sea Bass
Lobster
Oyster
Clam (Estuarine)
Swordfish
Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Sole
Mullet
Mackarel
Whiting
Croaker
Carp
Herring
Smelts
Halibut
Mussels
Pike
Shark
Whitefish
Salmon (Freshwater)
Seafood
Snapper
Octopus
Scallop (Estuarine)
Anchovy
Fish
Barracuda
Abalone
Scup
Sturgeon
sample of 1 1,912 individuals to the U.S. population of 242,707,000 using 3-year combined survey weights. The population for this survey
Estimated Mean
Grams/Person/Day
0.24590
0.21805
0.20794
0.20001
0.17840
0.14605
0.13879
0.12196
0.10313
0.09131
0.07396
0.07089
0.06379
0.05498
0.05021
0.04846
0.02937
0.02768
0.02463
0.02217
0.01978
0.01901
0.00916
0.00881
0.00574
0.00539
0.00375
0.00247
0.00228
0.00166
0.00111
0.00075
0.00050
0.00040
consisted of individuals in
a: USDA Combined 1989, 1990, and 1991 Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII).
The fish component of foods containing fish was calculated using data from the recipe file for release 7 of the USDA's Nutrient Data Base for Individual Food Intake Surveys.
the
ft
=
I
I,
s
-------
I
& .
*$ K
S S
Kil
Habitat Species
Estuarine Shrimp
Perch
Flatfish (Estuarine)
Crab (Estuarine)
Flounder
Oyster
Mullet
Croaker
Smelts
Herring
Clam (Estuarine)
Anchovy
Scallop (Estuarine)
Scup
Sturgeon
Freshwater Catfish
Trout
Carp
Pike
Salmon (Freshwater)
Marine Tuna
Cod
Flatfish (Marine)
Salmon (Marine)
Haddock
Pollock
Crab (Marine)
Porgy
Ocean Perch
Clam (Marine)
Lobster
Sea Bass
Scallop (Marine)
Notes: Estimates are projected from a
48 conteminous states.
Table 10C-2
U.S. Population -
Estimated Mean
Grams/Person/Day
1.78619
0.66494
0.50832
0.40848
0.28559
0.18827
0.08959
0.06539
0.03470
0.03408
0.03339
0.00304
0.00297
0.00050
0.00040
1.38715
0.53777
0.06012
0.02244
0.01183
5.67438
1 .47609
1.24268
0.99093
0.62219
0.52906
0.47567
0.42587
0.39327
0.37982
0.27583
0.26661
0.26199
Habitat
Marine
(Cont)
Daily Average Per Capita Estimates of Fish Consumption
Mean Consumption by Species Within Habitat - Uncooked Fish
Species
Swordfish
Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Mackerel
Sole
Whiting
Mussels
Halibut
Shark
Whitefish
Snapper
Octopus
Barracuda
Abalone
Seafood
Unknown Fish
All Species Tuna
sample of 1 1,912 individuals to the U.S.
Shrimp
Cod
Catfish
Flatfish (Marine)
Salmon (Marine)
Perch
Haddock
Trout
Pollock
Flatfish (Estuarine)
Crab (Marine)
Porgy
Crab (Estuarine)
Ocean Perch
Clam (Marine)
Estimated Mean
Grams/Person/Day
0.17903
0.14420
0.13750
0.12160
0.09866
0.08339
0.06514
0.03718
0.03030
0.02385
0.00916
0.00551
0.00457
0.00130
0.00094
0.00043
0.00248
5.67438
1.78619
1 .47609
1.38715
1.24268
0.99093
0.66494
0.62219
0.53777
0.52906
0.50832
0.47567
0.42587
0.40848
0.39327
0.37982
Habitat Species
All Species Flounder
(Cont) Lobster
Sea Bass
Scallop (Marine)
Oyster
Swordfish
Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Mackarel
Mullet
Sole
Croaker
Whiting
Carp
Mussels
Smelts
Herring
Clam (Estuarine)
Halibut
Shark
Pike
Salmon (Freshwater)
Whitefish
Snapper
Octopus
Anchovy
Scallop (Estuarine)
Fish
Barracuda
Abalone
Scup
Seafood
Sturgeon
population of 242,707,000 using 3-year combined survey weights. The population for this survey
Estimated Mean
Grams/Person/Day
0.28559
0.27563
0.26661
0.26199
0.18827
0.17903
0.14420
0.13750
0.12160
0.09866
0.08958
0.08339
0.06539
0.06514
0.06012
0.03718
0.03470
0.03406
0.03339
0.03030
0.02385
0.02244
0.01183
0.00916
0.00551
0.00457
0.00304
0.00297
0.00248
0.00130
0.00094
0.00050
0.00043
0.00040
consisted of individuals in
Source of individual consumption data: USDA Combined 1989, 1990, and 1991 Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII).
Amount of consumed fish recorded by
survey respondents was converted to uncooked fish quantities using data from the recipe file for release 7 of USDA' s Nutrient Data Base for Individual Food Intake
Surveys. The fish component of foods containing fish was calculated using data from the recipe file for release 7
of the USDA's Nutrient Data Base for Individual Food Intake Surveys.
the
A,
I
I
-------
Table 10C-3. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates Of Fish Consumption
As Consumed Fish - Mean Consumption by Species Within Habitat
U.S. Population
Habitat
Estuarine
Freshwater
Marine
Species
Shrimp
Perch
Flatfish
Crab
Flounder
Oyster
Mullet
Croaker
Herring
Smelts
Clam
Scallop
Anchovy
Scup
Sturgeon
Catfish
Trout
Carp
Pike
Salmon
Tuna
Cod
Flatfish
Salmon
Haddock
Pollock
Crab
Ocean Perch
Clam
Porgy
Scallop
Sea Bass
Lobster
Estimated
Mean Habitat
Grams/person/day
1.37241 Marine (Con't
0.52580
0.43485
0.29086
0.24590
0.17419
0.07089
0.05021
0.02937
0.02768
0.02691
0.00247
0.00228
0.00050
0.00040
1.06776
0.43050 Unknown
0.04846
0.01978 All Species
0.00881
4.19998
1.22827
1.06307
0.73778
0.51533
0.44970
0.33870
0.31878
0.30617
0.29844
0.21805
0.20794
0.20001
Estimates are projected from a sample of 11,912 individuals to the U.S
Source: U.S.
EPA, 1996a.
Species
) Swordfish
Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Sole
Mackerel
Whiting
Halibut
Mussels
Shark
Whitefish
Snapper
Octopus
Barracuda
Abalone
Seafood
Fish
Tuna
Shrimp
Cod
Catfish
Flatfish (Marine)
Salmon (Marine)
Perch
Haddock
Pollock
Flatfish (Estuarine)
Trout
Crab (Marine)
Ocean Perch
Clam (Marine)
Porgy
Crab (Estuarine)
Estimated
Mean Habitat
Grams/person/day
0.13879 All Species
0.12196 (Con't.)
0.10313
0.09131
0.07396
0.06379
0.05498
0.02463
0.02217
0.01901
0.00916
0.00539
0.00375
0.00111
0.00075
0.00043
0.00186
4.19998
1.37241
1.22827
1.06776
1.06307
0.73778
0.52580
0.51533
0.44970
0.43485
0.43050
0.33870
0.31878
0.30617
0.29844
0.29086
Species
Flounder
Scallop (Marine)
Sea Bass
Lobster
Oyster
Swordfish
Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Sole
Mullet
Mackerel
Whiting
Croaker
Carp
Herring
Smelts
Clam (Estuarine)
Halibut
Mussels
Pike
Shark
Whitefish
Salmon
(Freshwater)
Snapper
Octopus
Scallop (Estuarine)
Anchovy
Fish
Barracuda
Abalone
Scup
Seafood
Sturgeon
Estimated
Mean
Grams/person/day
0.24590
0.21805
0.20794
0.20001
0.17419
0.13879
0.12196
0.10313
0.09131
0.07396
0.07089
0.06379
0.05498
0.05021
0.04846
0.02937
0.02768
0.02691
0.02463
0.02217
0.01978
0.01901
0.00916
0.00881
0.00539
0.00375
0.00247
0.00228
0.00186
0.00111
0.00075
0.00050
0.00043
0.00040
population of 242,707,000 using 3-year combined survey weights.
ft
=
I
I,
s
-------
I
I
&!
Table 10C-4. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates Of Fish Consumption
Uncooked Fish** - Mean Consumption by Species Within Habitat
U.S. Population
Habitat
Estuarine
Freshwater
Marine
Species
Shrimp
Perch
Flatfish
Crab
Flounder
Oyster
Mullet
Croaker
Smelts
Herring
Clam
Anchovy
Scallop
Scup
Sturgeon
Catfish
Trout
Carp
Pike
Salmon
Tuna
Cod
Flatfish
Salmon
Haddock
Pollock
Crab
Porgy
Ocean Perch
Clam
Lobster
Sea Bass
Scallop
Estimated
Mean Habitat
Grams/person/day
1.78619 Marine (Con't.)
0.66494
0.50832
0.40848
0.28559
0.18827
0.08958
0.06539
0.03470
0.03408
0.03339
0.00304
0.00297
0.00050
0.00040
1.38715
0.53777 Unknown
0.06012
0.02244 All Species
0.01183
5.67438
1.47609
1.24268
0.99093
0.62219
0.52906
0.47567
0.42587
0.39327
0.37982
0.27563
0.26661
0.26199
Estimates are projected from a sample of 11,912 individuals to the U
Source: U.S
EPA, 1996a.
Species
Swordfish
Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Mackerel
Sole
Whiting
Mussels
Halibut
Shark
Whitefish
Snapper
Octopus
Barracuda
Abalone
Seafood
Fish
Tuna
Shrimp
Cod
Catfish
Flatfish (Marine)
Salmon (Marine)
Perch
Haddock
Trout
Pollock
Flatfish (Estuarine)
Crab (Marine)
Porgy
Crab (Estuarine)
Ocean Perch
Clam (Marine)
S. population of 242
Estimated
Mean Habitat
Grams/person/day
0. 17903 All Species (Con't.)
0.14420
0.13750
0.12160
0.09866
0.08339
0.06514
0.03718
0.03030
0.02385
0.00916
0.00551
0.00457
0.00130
0.00094
0.00043
0.00248
5.67438
1.78619
1.47609
1.38715
1.24268
0.99093
0.66494
0.62219
0.53777
0.52906
0.50832
0.47567
0.42587
0.40848
0.39327
0.37982
,707,000 using 3-year combined survey
Species
Flounder
Lobster
Sea Bass
Scallop (Marine)
Oyster
Swordfish
Squid
Sardine
Pompano
Mackerel
Mullet
Sole
Croaker
Whiting
Carp
Mussels
Smelts
Herring
Clam (Estuarine)
Halibut
Shark
Pike
Salmon (Freshwater)
Whitefish
Snapper
Octopus
Anchovy
Scallop (Estuarine)
Fish
Barracuda
Abalone
Scup
Seafood
Sturgeon
weights.
Estimated
Mean
Grams/person/day
0.28559
0.27563
0.26661
0.26199
0.18827
0.17903
0.14420
0.13750
0.12160
0.09866
0.08958
0.08339
0.06539
0.06514
0.06012
0.03718
0.03470
0.03408
0.03339
0.03030
0.02385
0.02244
0.01183
0.00916
0.00551
0.00457
0.00304
0.00297
0.00248
0.00130
0.00094
0.00050
0.00043
0.00040
1=
A,
I
I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
11. INTAKE OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS 1
11.1. INTAKE STUDIES 1
11.1.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey and Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals .... 1
11.1.2. Key Meat and Dairy Products Intake Study Based on the CSFII . 2
11.1.3. Relevant Meat and Dairy Products Intake Studies 3
11.2. FAT CONTENT OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS 6
11.3. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE
RATES 7
11.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 7
11.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 11 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
11. INTAKE OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS
Consumption of meat, poultry, and dairy products is
a potential pathway of exposure to toxic chemicals. These
food sources can become contaminated if animals are
exposed to contaminated media (i.e., soil, water, or feed
crops).
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) and
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII)
are the primary sources of information on intake rates of
meat and dairy products in the United States. Data from the
NFCS have been used in various studies to generate
consumer-only and per capita intake rates for both
individual meat and dairy products and total meat and dairy
products. CSFII 1989-91 survey data have been analyzed
by EPA to generate per capita intake rates for various food
items and food groups. As described in Volume II, Chapter
9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables, consumer-only intake
is defined as the quantity of meat and dairy products
consumed by individuals who ate these food items during
the survey period. Per capita intake rates are generated by
averaging consumer-only intakes over the entire population
of users and non-users. In general, per capita intake rates
are appropriate for use in exposure assessments for which
average dose estimates for the general population are of
interest because they represent both individuals who ate the
foods during the survey period and individuals who may eat
the food items at some time, but did not consume them
during the survey period.
Intake rates may be presented on either an as
consumed or dry weight basis. As consumed intake rates
(g/day) are based on the weight of the food in the form that
it is consumed. In contrast, dry weight intake rates are
based on the weight of the food consumed after the moisture
content has been removed. In calculating exposures based
on ingestion, the unit of weight used to measure intake
should be consistent with those used in measuring the
contaminant concentration in the produce. Fat content data
are also presented for various meat and dairy products.
These data are needed for converting between residue levels
on a whole-weight or as consumed basis and lipid basis.
Intake data from the individual component of the NFCS and
CSFII are based on "as eaten" (i.e., cooked or prepared)
forms of the food items/groups. Thus, corrections to
account for changes in portion sizes from cooking losses are
not required.
The purpose of this section is to provide: (1) intake
data for individual meat and dairy products, total meat, and
total dairy; (2) guidance for converting between as
consumed and dry weight intake rates; and (3) data on the
fat content in meat and dairy products. Recommendations
are based on average and upper-percentile intake among the
general population of the U.S. Available data have been
classified as being either a key or a relevant study based on
the considerations discussed in Volume I, Section 1.3.1 of
the Introduction. Recommendations are based on data from
the 1989-91 CSFII survey, which was considered the only
key intake study for meats and dairy products. Other
relevant studies are also presented to provide the reader
with added perspective on this topic. It should be noted that
most of the studies presented in this section are based on
data from USDA's NFCS and CSFII. The USDA NFCS
and CSFII are described below.
11.1. INTAKE STUDIES
11.1.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide
Food Consumption Survey and Continuing
Survey of Food Intake by Individuals
The NFCS and CSFII are the basis of much of the
data on meat and dairy intake presented in this section.
Data from the 1977-78 NFCS are presented because the
data have been published by USDA in various reports and
reanalyzed by various EPA offices according to the food
items/groups commonly used to assess exposure. Published
one-day data from the 1987-88 NFCS and 1994 and 1995
CSFII are also presented. Recently, EPA conducted an
analysis of USDA's 1989-91 CSFII. These data were the
most recent food survey data that were available to the
public at the time that EPA analyzed the data for this
Handbook. The results of EPA's analyses are presented
here. Detailed descriptions of the NFCS and CSFII data are
presented in Volume II, Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and
Vegetables.
Individual average daily intake rates calculated from
NFCS and CSFII data are based on averages of reported
individual intakes over one day or three consecutive days.
Such short term data are suitable for estimating average
daily intake rates representative of both short-term and
long-term consumption. However, the distribution of
average daily intake rates generated using short term data
(e.g., 3 day) do not necessarily reflect the long-term
distribution of average daily intake rates. The distributions
generated from short term and long term data will differ to
the extent that each individual's intake varies from day to
day; the distributions will be similar to the extent that
individuals' intakes are constant from day to day.
Day-to-day variation in intake among individuals
will be great for food item/groups that are highly seasonal
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
and for items/groups that are eaten year around but that are
not typically eaten every day. For these foods, the intake
distribution generated from short term data will not be a
good reflection of the long term distribution. On the other
hand, for broad categories of foods (e.g., total meats) which
are eaten on a daily basis throughout the year with minimal
seasonality, the short term distribution may be a reasonable
approximation of the true long term distribution, although
it will show somewhat more variability. In this and the
following section then, distributions are shown only for the
following broad categories of foods: total meats and total
dairy products. Because of the increased variability of the
short-term distribution, the short-term upper percentiles
shown will overestimate somewhat the corresponding
percentiles of the long-term distribution.
11.1.2. Key Meat and Dairy Products Intake Study
Based on the CSFII
U.S. EPA Analysis of 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data -
EPA conducted an analysis of USDA's 1989-91 C SFII data
set. The general methodology used in analyzing the data is
presented in Volume II, Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and
Vegetables of this Handbook. Intake rates were generated
for the following meat and dairy products: total meats, total
dairy, beef, pork, poultry, game, and eggs. Appendix 9B
presents the food categories and codes used in generating
intake rates for these food groups. These data have been
corrected to account for mixtures as described in Volume II,
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables and Appendix
9A. However, it should be noted that although total meats
account for items such as luncheon meats, sausages, and
organ meats, these items are not included in the individual
meat groups (i.e., beef, poultry, etc.). Per capita intake rates
for total meat and total dairy are presented in Tables 11-1
and 11-2 at the end of this Chapter. Tables 11-3 to 11-7
present per capita intake data for individual meats and eggs.
The results are presented in units of g/kg-day. Thus, use of
these data in calculating potential dose does not require the
body weight factor to be included in the denominator of the
average daily dose (ADD) equation. It should be noted that
converting these intake rates into units of g/day by
multiplying by a single average body weight is
inappropriate, because individual intake rates were indexed
to the reported body weights of the survey respondents.
However, if there is a need to compare the intake data
presented here to intake data in units of g/day, a body
weight less than 70 kg (i.e., approximately 60 kg; calculated
based on the number of respondents in each age category
and the average body weights for these age groups, as
presented in Volume I, Chapter 7, Body Weight) should be
used because the total survey population included children
as well as adults.
The advantages of using the 1989-91 CSFII data set
are that the data are expected to be representative of the
U.S. population and that it includes data on a wide variety
of food types. The data set was the most recent of a series
of publicly available USDA data sets (i.e., NFCS 1977-78;
NFCS 1987-88; CSFII 1989-91) at the time the analysis
was conducted for this Handbook, and should reflect recent
eating patterns in the United States. The data set includes
three years of intake data combined. However, the 1989-91
CSFII data are based on a three day survey period. Short-
term dietary data may not accurately reflect long-term eating
patterns. This is particularly true for the tails of the
distribution of food intake. In addition, the adjustment for
including mixtures adds uncertainly to the intake rate
distributions. The calculation for including mixtures
assumes that intake of any mixture includes all of the foods
identified and the proportions specified in Appendix
Table 9A-1. This assumption yields valid estimates of per
capita consumption, but results in overestimates of the
proportion of the population consuming individual meats;
thus, the quantities reported in Tables 11-3 to 11-7 should
be interpreted as upper bounds on the proportion
consuming beef, pork, poultry, game, and eggs.
The data presented in this handbook for the USDA
1989-91 CSFII is not the most up-to-date information on
food intake. USDA has recently made available the data
from its 1994 and 1995 CSFII. Over 5,500 people
nationwide participated in both of these surveys, providing
recalled food intake information for 2 separate days.
Although the two-day data analysis has not been conducted,
USDA published the results for the respondents' intakes on
the first day surveyed (USDA, 1996a,b). USDA 1996
survey data will be made available later in 1997. As soon
as 1996 data are available, EPA will take steps to get the
3-year data (1994, 1995, and 1996) analyzed and the food
ingestion factors updated. Meanwhile, Table 11-8 presents
a comparison of the mean daily intakes per individual in a
day for the major meat and dairy groups from USDA survey
data from years 1977-78, 1987-88, 1989-91, 1994, and
1995. This table shows that food consumption patterns
have changed for beef and meat mixtures when comparing
1977 and 1995 data. In particular, consumption of beef
decreased by 50 percent when comparing data from 1977
and 1995, while consumption of meat mixtures increased by
44 percent. However, consumption of the food items
presented in Table 11-8 has remained fairly constant when
Page
11-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
comparing values from 1989-91 with the most recent data
from 1994 and 1995. Meat mixtures show the largest
change with an increase of 16 percent from 1989 to 1995.
This indicates that the 1989-91 CSFII data are probably
adequate for assessing ingestion exposure for current
populations; however, these data should be used with
caution.
It is interesting to note that there was not much
variation in beef and poultry consumption from 1989-91 to
1995. This seems to contradict the other USDA reports
that show that in recent years the U. S. population has been
substituting beef for other sources of protein such as poultry
and fish. One of those reports is the report titled Meat and
Poultry Inspection; 1994 Report of the Secretary of
Agriculture to the U.S. Congress (USDA, 1994). This
USDA report shows a 39% increase in the number of
poultry inspected at federally inspected plants in 1994
compared to 1984. In contrast, the number of meat animals
inspected at federally inspected plants increased only by 2%
from 1984 to 1994. This trend in food consumption
patterns was also reported in the USDA report titled Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1970-92 (USDA,
1993). This report shows that in 1992, consumption among
Americans averaged 18 pounds less red meat, 26 pounds
more poultry, and 3 pounds more fish and shellfish than in
1970. This apparent contradiction may be explained by
assuming that most of the increase in poultry consumption
has occured in the meat mixtures and grain mixtures
categories. There has been a considerable shift from
consuming individual food items to food in mixtures (such
as pizza, tacos, burritos, frozen entrees, and salads from
grocery stores). This may explain why, in Table 11-8,
domestic consumption has remained fairly constant in the
past few years.
11.1.3. Relevant Meat and Dairy Products Intake
Studies
The U.S. EPA's Dietary Risk Evaluation System
(ORES) - U.S. EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) -
EPA OPP's ORES contains per capita intake rate data for
various items of meat, poultry, and dairy products for 22
subgroups (age, regional, and seasonal) of the population.
As described in Volume II, Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and
Vegetables, intake data in ORES were generated by
determining the composition of 1977/78 NFCS food items
and disaggregating complex food dishes into their
component raw agricultural commodities (RACs) (White et
al, 1983). The ORES per capita, as consumed intake rates
for all age/sex/demographic groups combined are presented
in Table 11-9. These data are based on both consumers and
non-consumers of these food items. Data for specific
subgroups of the population are not presented in this
section, but are available through OPP via direct request.
The data in Table 11-9 may be useful for estimating the
risks of exposure associated with the consumption of the
various meat, poultry, and dairy products presented. It
should be noted that these data are indexed to the reported
body weights of the survey respondents and are expressed
in units of grams of food consumed per kg body weight per
day. Consequently, use of these data in calculating potential
dose does not require the body weight factor in the
denominator of the average daily dose (ADD) equation. It
should also be noted that conversion of these intake rates
into units of g/day by multiplying by a single average body
weight is not appropriate because the ORES data base did
not rely on a single body weight for all individuals. Instead,
ORES used the body weights reported by each individual
surveyed to estimate consumption in units of g/kg-day.
The advantages of using these data are that complex
food dishes have been disaggregated to provide intake rates
for a variety of meat, poultry, and dairy products. These
data are also based on the individual body weights of the
respondents. Therefore, the use of these data in calculating
exposure to toxic chemicals may provide more
representative estimates of potential dose per unit body
weight. However, because the data are based on NFCS
short-term dietary recall, the same limitations discussed
previously for other NFCS data sets also apply here. In
addition, consumption patterns may have changed since the
data were collected in 1977-78. OPP is in the process of
translating consumption information from the USDA CSFII
1989-91 survey to be used in ORES.
Food and Nutrient Intakes of Individuals in One
Day in the U.S., USDA (1980, 1992, 1996a, 1996b) -
USDA calculated mean per capita intake rates for meat and
dairy products using NFCS data from 1977-78 and 1987-88
(USDA, 1980; 1992) and CSFII data from 1994 and 1995
(USDA, 1996a; 1996b). The mean per capita intake rates
for meat and dairy products are presented in Tables 11-10
and 11-11 for meats and Tables 11-12 and 11-13 for dairy
based on intake data for one day from the 1977-78 and
1987-88 USDA NFCSs. Tables 11-14 and 11-15 present
similar data from the 1994 and 1995 CSFII for meats and
dairy products, respectively.
The advantages of using these data are that they
provide mean intake estimates for all meat, poultry, and
dairy products. The consumption estimates are based on
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
short-term (i.e., 1-day) dietary data which may not reflect
long-term consumption.
U.S. EPA - Office of Radiation Programs - The U.S.
EPA Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) has also used the
USDA 1977-78 NFCS to estimate daily food intake. ORP
uses food consumption data to assess human intake of
radionuclides in foods (U.S. EPA, 1984a; 1984b). The
1977-78 NFCS data have been reorganized by ORP, and
food items have been classified according to the
characteristics of radionuclide transport. The mean per
capita dietary intake of food sub classes (milk, other dairy
products, eggs, beef, pork, poultry, and other meat) grouped
by age for the U.S. population is presented in Table 11-16.
The mean daily intake rates of meat, poultry, and dairy
products for the U.S. population grouped by regions are
presented in Table 11-17. Because this study was based on
the USDA NFCS, the limitations and advantages associated
with the USDA NFCS data also apply to these data. Also,
consumption patterns may have changed since the data were
collected in 1977-78.
U.S. EPA - Office of Science and Technology - The
U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology (OST) within
the Office of Water (formerly the Office of Water
Regulations and Standards) used data from the FDA
revision of the Total Diet Study Food Lists and Diets
(Pennington, 1983) to calculate food intake rates. OST uses
these consumption data in its risk assessment model for land
application of municipal sludge. The FDA data used are
based on the combined results of the USDA 1977-78 NFCS
and the second National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey (NHANES II), 1976-80 (U.S. EPA, 1989).
Because food items are listed as prepared complex foods in
the FDA Total Diet Study, each item was broken down into
its component parts so that the amount of raw commodities
consumed could be determined. Table 11-18 presents
intake rates for meat, poultry, and dairy products for various
age groups. Estimated lifetime ingestion rates derived by
U.S. EPA (1989) are also presented in Table 11-18. Note
that these are per capita intake rates tabulated as grams dry
weight/day. Therefore, these rates differ from those in the
previous tables because Pao et al. (1982) and U.S. EPA
(1984a, 1984b) report intake rates on an as consumed
basis.
The EPA-OST analysis provides intake rates for
additional food categories and estimates of lifetime average
daily intake on a per capita basis. In contrast to the other
analyses of USDA NFCS data, this study reports the data in
terms of dry weight intake rates. Thus, conversion is not
required when contaminants are provided on a dry weight
basis. These data, however, may not reflect current
consumption patterns because they are based on 1977-78
data.
USDA (1993) - Food Consumption, Prices, and
Expenditures, 1970-92 -The USDA's Economic Research
Service (ERS) calculates the amount of food available for
human consumption in the United States annually. Supply
and utilization balance sheets are generated. These are
based on the flow of food items from production to end
uses. Total available supply is estimated as the sum of
production (i.e., some products are measured at the farm
level or during processing), starting inventories, and
imports (USDA, 1993). The availability of food for human
use commonly termed as "food disappearance" is
determined by subtracting exported foods, products used in
industries, farm inputs (seed and feed) and end-of-the year
inventories from the total available supply (USDA, 1993).
USDA (1993) calculates the per capita food consumption
by dividing the total food disappearance by the total U.S.
population.
USDA (1993) estimated per capita consumption
data for meat, poultry, and dairy products from 1970-1992
(1992 data are preliminary). In this section, the 1991
values, which are the most recent final data, are presented.
The meat consumption data were reported as carcass
weight, retail weight equivalent, and boneless weight
equivalent. The poultry consumption data were reported as
ready-to-cook (RTC) weight, retail weight, and boneless
weight (USDA, 1993). USDA (1993) defined beef carcass
weight as the chilled hanging carcass, which includes the
kidney and attached internal fat (kidney, pelvic, and heart
fat), excludes the skin, head, feet, and unattached internal
organs. The pork carcass weight includes the skin and feet,
but excludes the kidney and attached internal fat. Retail
weight equivalents assume all food was sold through retail
foodstores; therefore, conversion factors (Table 11-19)
were used to correct carcass or RTC to retail weight to
account for trimming, shrinkage, or loss of meat and
chicken at these retail outlets (USDA, 1993). Boneless
equivalent values for meat (pork, veal, beef) and poultry
excludes all bones, but includes separable fat sold on retail
cuts of red meat. Pet food was considered as an apparent
source of food disappearance for poultry in boneless weight
estimates, while pet food was excluded for beef, veal, and
pork (USDA, 1993). Table 11-19 presents per capita
consumption in 1991 for red meat (carcass weight, retail
equivalent, and boneless trimmed equivalent) and poultry
(RTC, retail equivalent for chicken only, and boneless
trimmed equivalent). Per capita consumption estimates
Page
11-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
based on boneless weights appear to be the most
appropriate data for use in exposure assessments, because
boneless meats are more representative of what people
would actually consume. Table 11 -20 presents per capita
consumption in 1991 for dairy products including eggs,
milk, cheese, cream, and sour cream.
One of the limitations of this study is that
disappearance data do not account for losses from the food
supply from waste, spoilage, or foods fed to pets. Thus,
intake rates based on these data will overestimate daily
consumption because they are based on the total quantity of
marketable commodity utilized. Therefore, these data may
be useful for estimating bounding exposure estimates. It
should also be noted that per capita estimates based on food
disappearance are not a direct measure of actual
consumption or quantity ingested, instead the data are used
as indicators of changes in usage over time (USDA, 1993).
An advantage of this study is that it provides per capita
consumption rates for meat, poultry, and dairy products
which are representative of long-term intake because
disappearance data are generated annually. Daily per capita
intake rates are generated by dividing annual consumption
by 365 days/year.
National Live Stock and Meat Board (1993) -
Eating in America Today: A Dietary Pattern and Intake
Report - The National Live Stock and Meat Board (NLMB)
(1993) assessed the nutritional value of the current
American diet based on two factors: (1) the composition of
the foods consumed, and (2) the amount of food consumed.
Data used in this study were provided by MRCA
Information Services, Inc. through MRCA's Nutritional
Marketing Information Division. The survey conducted by
MRCA consisted of a 2,000 household panels of over 4,700
individuals. The survey sample was selected to be
representative of the U.S. population. Information obtained
from the survey by MRCA's Menu Census included food
and beverage consumption over a period of 14 consecutive
days. The head of the household recorded daily food and
beverage consumption in-home and away-from-home in
diaries for each household member. The survey period was
from July 1,1990 through June 30,1991. This ensured that
all days carried equal weights and provided a seasonally
balanced data set. In addition, nutrient intake data
calculated by the MRCA's Nutrient Intake Database (NID)
(based on the 1987-88 USDA Food Intake Study) and
information on food attitudes were also collected. It should
be noted, however, that the 14 daily diaries provided only
the incidence of eating each food product by an individual,
but not the quantity eaten by each person. The intake rate
for each individual was estimated by multiplying the eating
frequency of a particular food item by the average amount
eaten per eating occasion. The data on the average amount
eaten per eating occasion were obtained from the USDA
NFCS survey.
Table 11-21 presents the adult daily mean intake of
meat and poultry grouped by region and gender. The adult
population was defined as consumers ages 19 and above
(NLMB, 1993). Beef consumption was high in all regions
compared to other meats and poultry (Table 11-21). The
average daily consumption of meat in the U.S. was 114.2
g/day which included beef (57 percent), veal (0.5 percent),
lamb (0.5 percent), game/variety meats (8 percent),
processed meats (18 percent), and pork (16 percent)
(NLMB, 1993). Table 11-22 shows the amount of meat
consumed by the adult population grouped as non-meat
eaters (1 percent), light meat eaters (30 percent), medium
meat eaters (33 percent), and heavy meat eaters (36
percent).
The advantage of this study is that the survey period
is longer (i.e., 14 days) than any other food consumption
survey. The survey is also based on a nationally
representative sample. The survey also accounts for foods
eaten as mixtures. However, only mean values are
provided. Therefore, distribution of long-term consumption
patterns cannot be derived. In addition, the survey collects
data on incidence of eating each food item and not actual
consumption rates. This may introduce some bias in the
results. The direction of this bias is unknown.
AIHC (1994) - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
AIHC Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) uses the data presented in
the 1989 version of the Exposure Factors Handbook which
reported data from the USDA 1977-78 NFCS. In this
Handbook, new analyses of more recent data from the
USDA 1989-91 CSFII are presented. Numbers, however,
cannot be directly compared with previous values since the
results from the new analysis are presented on a body
weight basis. The Sourcebook was selected as a relevant
study because it was not the primary source for the data
used to make recommendations in this document. However,
it is an alternative information source.
Pao et al. (1982) - Foods Commonly Eaten by
Individuals - Using data gathered in the 1977-78 USDA
NFCS, Pao et al. (1982) calculated percentiles for the
quantities of meat, poultry, and dairy products consumed
per eating occasion by members of the U.S. population.
The data were collected during NFCS home interviews of
37,874 respondents, who were asked to recall food intake
for the day preceding the interview, and record food intake
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
the day of the interview and the day after the interview.
Quantities consumed per eating occasion, are presented in
Table 11-23.
The advantages of using these data are that they were
derived from the USDA NFCS and are representative of the
U.S. population. This data set provides distributions of
serving sizes for a number of commonly eaten meat,
poultry, and dairy products, but the list of foods is limited
and does not account for meat, poultry, and dairy products
included in complex food dishes. Also, these data are based
on short-term dietary recall and may not accurately reflect
long-term consumption patterns. Although these data are
based on the 1977-78 NFCS, serving size data have been
collected but not published for the more recent USDA
surveys.
11.2. FAT CONTENT OF MEAT AND DAIRY
PRODUCTS
In some cases, the residue levels of contaminants in
meat and dairy products are reported as the concentration of
contaminant per gram of fat. This may be particularly true
for lipophilic compounds. When using these residue levels,
the assessor should ensure consistency in the exposure
assessment calculations by using consumption rates that are
based on the amount of fat consumed for the meat or dairy
product of interest. Alternately, residue levels for the "as
consumed" portions of these products may be estimated by
multiplying the levels based on fat by the fraction of fat per
product as follows:
residue level
g -product
residue level
g-fat
g-fat
, (bull. 11-1)
g -product
The resulting residue levels may then be used in conjunction
with "as consumed" consumption rates. The percentages of
lipid fat in meat and dairy products have been reported in
various publications. USDA's Agricultural Handbook
Number 8 (USDA, 1979-1984) provides composition data
for agricultural products. It includes a listing of the total
saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fats for
various meat and dairy items. Table 11 -24 presents the
total fat content for selected meat and dairy products taken
from Handbook Number 8. The total percent fat content is
based on the sum of saturated, monounsaturated, and
polyunsaturated fats.
The National Livestock and Meat Board (NLMB)
(1993) used data from Agricultural Handbook Number 8
and consumption data to estimate the fat contribution to the
U.S. diet. Total fat content in grams, based on a 3-ounce
(85.05 g) cooked serving size, was reported for several
categories (retail composites) of meats. These data are
presented in Table 11 -25 along with the corresponding
percent fat content values for each product. NLMB (1993)
also reported that 0.17 grams of fat are consumed per gram
of meat (i.e., beef, pork, lamb, veal, game, processed meats,
and variety meats) (17 percent) and 0.08 grams of fat are
consumed per gram of poultry (8 percent).
The average total fat content of the U.S. diet was
reported to be 68.3 g/day. The meat group (meat, poultry,
fish, dry beans, eggs, and nuts) was reported to contribute
the most to the average total fat in the diet (41 percent)
(NLMB, 1993). Meats (i.e., beef, pork, lamb, veal, game,
processed meats, and variety meats) reportedly contribute
less than 30 percent to the total fat of the average U. S. diet.
The milk group contributes approximately 12 percent to the
average total fat in the U. S. diet (NLMB, 1993). Fat intake
rates and the contributions of the major food groups to fat
intake for heavy, medium, and light meat eaters, and non
meat eaters are presented in Table 11-26 (NLMB, 1993).
NLMB (1993) also reported the average meat fat intake to
be 19.4 g/day, with beef contributing about 50 percent of
the fat to the diet from all meats. Processed meats
contributed 31 percent; pork contributed 14 percent; game
and variety meats contributed 4 percent; and lamb and veal
contributed 1 percent to the average meat fat intake.
The Center for Disease Control (CDC) (1994) used
data from NHANES III to calculate daily total food energy
intake (TFEI), total dietary fat intake, and saturated fat
intake for the U.S. population during 1988 to 1991. The
sample population comprised 20,277 individuals ages 2
months and above, of which 14,001 respondents (73
percent response rate) provided dietary information based
on a 24-hour recall. TFEI was defined as "all nutrients (i.e.,
protein, fat, carbohydrate, and alcohol) derived from
consumption of foods and beverages (excluding plain
drinking water) measured in kilocalories (kcal)." Total
dietary fat intake was defined as "all fat (i.e., saturated and
unsaturated) derived from consumption of foods and
beverages measured in grams."
CDC (1994) estimated and provided data on the
mean daily TFEI and the mean percentages of TFEI from
total dietary fat grouped by age and gender. The overall
mean daily TFEI was 2,095 kcal for the total population and
34 percent (or 82 g) of their TFEI was from total dietary fat
(CDC, 1994). Based on this information, the mean daily fat
intake was calculated for the various age groups and
Page
11-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
genders (see Appendix 11A for detailed calculation). Table
11 -27 presents the grams of fat per day obtained from the
daily consumption of foods and beverages grouped by age
and gender for the U.S. population, based on this
calculation.
11.3. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED
AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE RATES
As noted previously, intake rates may be reported in
terms of units as consumed or units of dry weight. It is
essential that exposure assessors be aware of this difference
so that they may ensure consistency between the units used
for intake rates and those used for concentration data (i.e.,
if the unit of food consumption is grams dry weight/day,
then the unit for the amount of pollutant in the food should
be grams dry weight). If necessary, as consumed intake
rates may be converted to dry weight intake rates using the
moisture content percentages of meat, poultry and dairy
products presented in Table 11-28 and the following
equation:
dw = IRac*[(100-W)/100]
(Eqn. 11-2)
Dry weight" intake rates may be converted to "as consumed"
rates by using:
= iRdB/[(ioo-wyioo]
(Eqn. 11-3)
where:
IRdw = dry weight intake rate;
IRac = as consumed intake rate; and
W = percent water content.
11.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1989-91 CSFII data described in this section
were used in selecting recommended meat, poultry, and
dairy product intake rates for the general population and
various subgroups of the United States population. The
general design of both key and relevant studies are
summarized in Table 11 -29. The recommended values for
intake of meat and dairy products are summarized in Table
11-30 and the confidence ratings for the recommended
values for meat and dairy intake rates are presented in Table
11-31. Per capita intake rates for specific meat items, on a
g/kg-day basis, may be obtained from Tables 11-3 to 11-7.
Percentiles of the intake rate distribution in the general
population for total meat and total dairy are presented in
Tables 11-1 and 11-2. From these tables, the mean and
95th percentile intake rates for meats are 2.1 g/kg-day and
5.1 g/kg-day, respectively. The mean and 95th percentile
intake rates for dairy products are 8.0 g/kg-day and 29.7
g/kg-day. It is important to note that the data presented in
Tables 11-1 through 11-7 are based on data collected over
a 3-day period and may not necessarily reflect the long-term
distribution of average daily intake rates. However, for
these broad categories of food (i.e., total meats and total
dairy products), because they may be eaten on a daily basis
throughout the year with minimal seasonality, the short-term
distribution may be a reasonable approximation of the long-
term distribution, although it will display somewhat
increased variability. This implies that the upper
percentiles shown here will tend to overestimate the
corresponding percentiles of the true long-term distribution.
Intake rates for the homeproduced form of these food
items/groups are presented in Volume II, Chapter 13. It
should be noted that because these recommendations are
based on 1989-91 CSFII data, they may not reflect recent
the most changes in consumption patterns. However, as
indicated in Table 11-8, intake has remained fairly constant
between 1989-91 and 1995. Thus, the 1989-91 CSFII data
are believed to be appropriate for assessing ingestion
exposure for current populations.
11.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 11
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. Washington, DC.,
AIHC.
CDC. (1994) Dietary fat and total food-energy intake.
Third National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, Phase 1, 1988-91. Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, February 25, 1994: 43(7)118-125.
Finley, B.L.; Paustenbach, B.L. (1992) Opportunities for
improving exposure assessments using population
distribution estimates. Presented for the Committee on
Risk Assessment Methodology, February 10-11,
Washington, DC.
National Livestock and Meat Board (NLMB). (1993)
Eating in America today: A dietary pattern and intake
report. National Livestock and Meat Board. Chicago,
IL.
Pao, E.M.; Fleming, K.H.; Guenther, P.M.; Mickle, S.J.
(1982) Foods commonly eaten by individuals: amount
per day and per eating occasion. U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Home Economics Report No. 44.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Pennington, J.A.T. (1983) Revision of the total diet
study food list and diets. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
82:166-173.
USDA. (1979-1984) Agricultural Handbook No. 8.
United States Department of Agriculture.
USDA. (1980) Food and nutrient intakes of individuals
in one day in the United States, Spring 1977. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. Nationwide Food
Consumption Survey 1977-1978. Preliminary Report
No. 2.
USDA. (1992) Food and nutrient intakes by individuals
in the United States, 1 day, 1987-88. U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Human Nutrition Information Service.
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1987-88,
NFCSRpt. No. 87-1-1.
USDA. (1993) Food consumption, prices, and
expenditures (1970-1992) U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Statistical
Bulletin, No. 867.
USDA. (1994) Meat and poultry inspection; 1994
report of the Secretary of Agriculture to the U.S.
Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
USDA. (1996a) Data tables: results from USDA's 1994
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and
1994 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
USDA. (1996b) Data tables: results from USDA's 1995
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and
1995 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
U.S. EPA. (1984a) An estimation of the daily average
food intake by age and sex for use in assessing the
radionuclide intake of individuals in the general
population. EPA-520/1-84-021.
U.S. EPA. (1984b) An estimation of the daily food
intake based on data from the 1977-1978 USDA
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey. Washington,
DC: Office of Radiation Programs.
EPA-520/1-84-015.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Development of risk assessment
methodologies for land application and distribution and
marketing of municipal sludge. Washington, DC:
Office of Science and Technology. EPA 600/-89/001.
White, S.B.; Peterson, B.; Clayton, C.A.; Duncan, D.P.
(1983) Interim Report Number 1: The construction of
a raw agricultural commodity consumption data base.
Prepared by Research Triangle Institute for EPA Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Page
11-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Population Percent
Group Consuming Mean
Total 96.4%
Age (years)
< 01 66.7%
01-02 95.6%
03-05 97.5%
06-11 97.6%
12-19 97.7%
20-39 97.9%
40-69 97.3%
70+ 97.1%
Season
Fall 97.1%
Spring 95.8%
Summer 96.3%
Winter 96.4%
Urbanization
Central City 96.7%
Nonmetropolitan 95.7%
Suburban 96.6%
Race
Asian 89.3%
Black 95.5%
Native American 86.5%
Other/NA 95.1%
White 96.9%
Region
Midwest 96.5%
Northeast 96.5%
South 96.7%
West 95.8%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91
2.146
2.867
4.384
3.873
3.011
2.078
1.923
1.700
1.531
2.182
2.053
2.178
2.173
2.163
2.168
2.126
2.233
2.434
2.269
2.628
2.083
2.204
2.148
2.249
1.903
CSFII
Table
SE
0.014
0.187
0.116
0.092
0.052
0.034
0.019
0.017
0.028
0.029
0.027
0.031
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.021
0.131
0.053
0.131
0.109
0.015
0.029
0.033
0.025
0.030
H-l. Per Capita Intake of Total Meats (g/kg-day as consumed)
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0.33
0
1.07
1.12
0.66
0.42
0.39
0.36
0.32
0.37
0.26
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.30
0.39
0
0.33
0
0
0.34
0.44
0.35
0.37
0.08
P10
0.63
0
1.58
1.38
1.02
0.67
0.64
0.59
0.49
0.66
0.61
0.63
0.63
0.59
0.63
0.64
0.60
0.62
0.41
0.65
0.63
0.69
0.67
0.68
0.47
P25
1.13
0
2.70
2.21
1.80
1.19
1.09
1.03
0.89
1.15
1.09
1.11
1.18
1.09
1.15
1.13
1.10
1.15
1.32
1.40
1.12
1.21
1.16
1.18
0.92
P50
1.84
2.34
4.13
3.50
2.78
1.99
1.73
1.58
1.42
1.85
1.75
1.86
1.88
1.79
1.90
1.84
1.86
1.94
1.87
2.29
1.81
1.85
1.89
1.90
1.60
P75
2.78
4.72
5.38
5.04
3.98
2.79
2.54
2.20
2.03
2.80
2.63
2.84
2.87
2.82
2.79
2.74
3.23
3.02
3.38
3.34
2.72
2.82
2.75
2.88
2.54
P90
4.06
6.52
7.69
6.64
5.12
3.49
3.49
2.95
2.73
4.11
3.93
4.10
4.06
4.14
4.04
4.03
4.49
5.03
4.64
4.90
3.87
4.08
3.98
4.35
3.69
P95
5.06
8.56
8.41
8.23
6.08
4.40
4.14
3.47
3.20
5.16
4.91
5.18
5.05
5.22
5.12
4.94
4.66
6.14
5.09
6.03
4.87
5.05
4.99
5.34
4.57
P99
7.67
11.52
11.88
11.25
8.38
5.95
5.46
4.73
4.28
8.06
7.31
7.86
7.35
7.97
7.69
7.31
6.86
9.87
7.32
11.25
7.18
7.86
8.27
7.73
6.64
PI 00
25.67
25.67
21.61
15.00
11.68
8.28
8.37
7.64
6.63
25.67
15.00
18.19
14.61
25.67
14.61
15.00
8.13
25.67
8.57
11.25
18.19
21.61
15.00
13.42
25.67
Q
I
a
I
3'
V:
I
ft
ft
I,
s
ft
-------
I
5 .
S 5
* k
K* S=
Table 1 1-2. Per Capita Intake of Total Dairy Products (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population Percent
Group Consumin2
Total 97.1%
Age (years)
< 01 89.6%
01-02 95.6%
03-05 97.5%
06-11 97.4%
12-19 97.9%
20-39 97.9%
40-69 96.9%
70 + 97.6%
Season
Fall 97.7%
Spring 96.8%
Summer 96.8%
Winter 97.1%
Urbanization
Central City 97.2%
Nonmetropolitan 96.6%
Suburban 97.4%
Race
Asian 94.0%
Black 94.8%
Native American 88.9%
Other/NA 97.1%
White 97.7%
Region
Midwest 97.3%
Northeast 97.2%
South 97.3%
West 96.7%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91
Mean
8.015
62.735
26.262
21.149
13.334
6.293
3.618
3.098
3.715
8.262
8.273
7.561
7.964
8.528
7.224
8.058
8.730
7.816
6.987
10.727
7.943
9.291
7.890
6.926
8.454
CSFII
SE
0.147
2.800
0.743
0.517
0.264
0.147
0.062
0.053
0.104
0.286
0.335
0.257
0.293
0.309
0.261
0.209
1.264
0.498
1.057
1.002
0.156
0.341
0.330
0.225
0.313
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0.15
0
2.69
3.27
1.81
0.27
0.12
0.10
0.16
0.17
0.13
0.14
0.16
0.17
0.10
0.17
0
0.03
0.02
0.12
0.22
0.20
0.18
0.11
0.17
P10
0.40
0.61
8.19
6.75
3.54
0.61
0.30
0.26
0.47
0.38
0.39
0.37
0.43
0.41
0.28
0.43
0.14
0.11
0.14
0.33
0.49
0.50
0.42
0.27
0.49
P25
1.36
24.68
15.22
11.89
6.72
2.31
0.95
0.94
1.46
1.32
1.37
1.37
1.39
1.44
1.08
1.42
0.63
0.64
0.81
1.03
1.50
1.66
1.42
1.01
1.60
P50
3.61
45.78
23.48
19.52
11.88
5.29
2.64
2 23
3.03
3.53
3.50
3.51
3.90
3.78
3.34
3.61
3.86
2.49
2.83
4.15
3.76
4.20
3.41
3.10
3.93
P75
8.18
91.12
36.13
28.31
18.58
9.20
5.04
4.36
4.93
8.31
7.88
7.93
8.77
8.05
7.82
8.45
7.23
7.29
8.06
11.28
8.24
9.61
7.54
7.49
8.67
P90
18.55
136.69
45.72
39.54
25.38
12.75
8.15
6.99
8.03
20.16
18.02
18.01
17.60
18.25
17.28
19.50
21.62
17.28
20.20
34.64
18.16
21.33
18.07
15.86
19.88
P95
29.72
170.86
55.07
44.16
28.76
15.12
10.64
9.05
9.63
32.71
27.02
30.86
27.34
29.51
24.70
32.04
36.16
27.78
24.17
40.33
28.76
34.35
32.04
25.76
29.89
P99
72.16
210.72
69.42
57.58
39.60
23.58
17.23
12.99
16.49
75.83
116.00
64.95
63.27
106.93
59.17
69.42
72.01
116.00
66.71
121.50
66.11
90.88
78.15
54.94
84.46
PI 00
390.53
390.53
108.95
62.88
62.55
53.47
43.31
34.42
26.33
351.48
390.53
347.93
307.54
318.93
390.53
351.48
124.26
347.93
139.37
166.48
390.53
390.53
307.54
347.93
174.65
Q
I
A,
b
I,
-------
Population Percent
Group Consuming
Total 91%
Age (years)
< 01 64%
01-02 93%
03-05 95%
06-11 95%
12-19 95%
20-39 94%
40-69 90%
70 + 87%
Season
Fall 92%
Spring 91%
Summer 90%
Winter 92%
Urbanization
Central City 91%
Nonmetropolitan 91%
Suburban 92%
Race
Asian 89%
Black 87%
Native American 82%
Other/NA 90%
White 93%
Region
Midwest 92%
Northeast 93%
South 90%
West 92%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
Mean
0.825
0.941
1.46
1.392
1.095
0.83
0.789
0.667
0.568
0.834
0.797
0.845
0.823
0.808
0.841
0.828
0.895
0.665
0.995
1.159
0.833
0.853
0.805
0.846
0.775
Table
SE
0.007
0.075
0.056
0.05
0.028
0.02
0.012
0.011
0.018
0.014
0.014
0.017
0.015
0.013
0.015
0.011
0.072
0.019
0.088
0.069
0.008
0.015
0.017
0.013
0.016
.1-3. Per Capita Intake of Beef (g/kg-dav as consumed)
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0.028
0.032
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0.055
0
0.187
0.14
0.102
0.114
0.087
0.031
0
0.063
0.046
0.045
0.066
0.037
0.064
0.059
0.08
0
0.016
0
0.068
0.07
0.054
0.058
0.039
P25
0.268
0
0.531
0.506
0.337
0.3
0.297
0.221
0.151
0.296
0.254
0.254
0.272
0.271
0.269
0.265
0.228
0.151
0.182
0.389
0.284
0.31
0.253
0.268
0.235
P50
0.626
0.488
1.339
1.162
0.924
0.654
0.644
0.536
0.427
0.665
0.595
0.605
0.636
0.611
0.637
0.63
0.694
0.42
0.73
0.739
0.651
0.66
0.595
0.648
0.562
P75
1.163
1.417
2.166
1.905
1.56
1.204
1.109
0.977
0.817
1.167
1.132
1.187
1.157
1.13
1.196
1.163
1.251
0.963
1.299
1.63
1.18
1.191
1.136
1.195
1.105
P90
1.804
2.536
2.783
3.163
2.376
1.775
1.662
1.458
1.324
1.785
1.788
1.887
1.767
1.777
1.852
1.797
2.065
1.488
2.338
2.756
1.784
1.853
1.816
1.805
1.73
P95
2.327
3.205
3.65
3.573
2.92
2.192
2.165
1.76
1.651
2.277
2.295
2.519
2.271
2.329
2.308
2.337
2.444
2.177
2.825
3.269
2.28
2.345
2.352
2.324
2.226
P99
3.478
5.776
4.741
5.908
3.944
3.108
3.059
2.474
2.62
3.339
3.531
3.707
3.266
3.325
3.531
3.511
3.135
3.126
4.958
5.908
3.41
3.65
3.41
3.511
3.219
P100
7.959
7.959
7.571
6.769
6.024
4.508
6.086
4.968
4.02
6.086
7.959
7.085
7.571
6.182
6.66
7.959
5.862
6.769
6.66
6.182
7.959
6.468
6.769
7.959
6.66
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the
1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
a
I
3'
V:
I
ft
ft
I,
s
i Ore
-------
I
5 .
S 5
* k
K* S=
Table 1 1-4. Per Capita Intake of Pork (g/kg-dav as consumed)
Population Percent
Group Consuming
Total 90.2%
Age (years)
< 01 63.0%
01-02 92.4%
03-05 95.0%
06-11 94.5%
12-19 94.0%
20-39 92.5%
40-69 88.3%
70 + 86.5%
Season
Fall 91.9%
Spring 88.8%
Summer 89.4%
Winter 90.6%
Urbanization
Central City 89.5%
Nonmetropolitan 90.3%
Suburban 90.6%
Race
Asian 85.9%
Black 89.2%
Native American 83.6%
Other/NA 88.3%
White 90.6%
Region
Midwest 91.3%
Northeast 90.4%
South 89.5%
West 89.7%
Mean
0.261
0.291
0.492
0.473
0.352
0.27
0.23
0.212
0.207
0.254
0.264
0.245
0.279
0.258
0.299
0.244
0.256
0.418
0.188
0.191
0.241
0.284
0.236
0.283
0.22
SE
0.005
0.04
0.041
0.035
0.018
0.013
0.007
0.007
0.011
0.008
0.009
0.01
0.009
0.009
0.01
0.006
0.049
0.019
0.024
0.021
0.005
0.009
0.01
0.008
0.009
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0.005
0
0.033
0.021
0.015
0.012
0.009
0
0
0.01
0
0
0.006
0.001
0.007
0.006
0.003
0.002
0
0
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.005
0
P25
0.031
0
0.071
0.057
0.052
0.039
0.031
0.025
0.016
0.037
0.027
0.027
0.032
0.027
0.038
0.03
0.027
0.035
0.027
0.027
0.031
0.034
0.027
0.032
0.028
P50
0.083
0.078
0.182
0.147
0.116
0.09
0.08
0.068
0.061
0.098
0.076
0.072
0.084
0.076
0.099
0.078
0.057
0.123
0.08
0.075
0.081
0.095
0.071
0.09
0.072
P75
0.263
0.228
0.424
0.362
0.311
0.289
0.233
0.242
0.223
0.267
0.265
0.22
0.3
0.235
0.324
0.253
0.192
0.48
0.179
0.183
0.249
0.318
0.227
0.281
0.198
P90
0.735
0.69
1.525
1.372
1.098
0.742
0.704
0.613
0.667
0.723
0.728
0.688
0.819
0.736
0.863
0.678
0.72
1.19
0.473
0.48
0.685
0.776
0.699
0.802
0.59
P95
1.137
1.671
2.633
2.35
1.418
1.118
1.039
0.915
0.924
1.045
1.19
1.097
1.195
1.085
1.212
1.098
1.157
2.108
0.889
0.845
1.061
1.113
1.064
1.212
1.009
P99
2.384
3.269
3.633
3.309
2.869
2.699
1.747
1.865
1.74
2.118
2.762
2.43
2.608
2.699
2.808
2.269
2.487
3.178
1.317
1.638
2.035
2.487
2.11
2.769
1.944
P100
8.231
5.431
6.94
8.231
5.024
5.157
6.363
4.342
3.035
5.338
6.94
8.231
5.946
6.94
8.231
5.946
3.966
8.231
1.662
5.252
5.946
6.362
5.338
8.231
5.946
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
A,
b
ri
-------
Table 11-5. Per Cavita Intake of Poultry
Population Percent
Group Consuming
Total 91.7%
Age (years)
< 01 64.9%
01-02 94.2%
03-05 95.0%
06-11 95.7%
12-19 94.3%
20-39 94.6%
40-69 90.5%
70 + 86.7%
Season
Fall 92.9%
Spring 91.0%
Summer 90.4%
Winter 92.6%
Urbanization
Central City 91.7%
Nonmetropolitan 90.6%
Suburban 92.4%
Race
Asian 88.6%
Black 91.9%
Native American 80.7%
Other/NA 91.7%
White 92.0%
Region
Midwest 91.7%
Northeast 92.7%
South 91.7%
West 91.0%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
Mean
0.598
0.816
1.156
1.068
0.871
0.558
0.53
0.477
0.463
0.635
0.538
0.625
0.595
0.627
0.54
0.608
0.79
0.798
0.54
0.81
0.559
0.551
0.651
0.643
0.526
SE
0.007
0.087
0.064
0.049
0.028
0.017
0.01
0.01
0.017
0.015
0.013
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.011
0.068
0.025
0.051
0.049
0.007
0.014
0.017
0.012
0.014
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0.017
0
0.022
0
0.005
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0.015
0
0.08
0.044
0.047
0.02
0.021
0.011
0
0.022
0.009
0.013
0.025
0.011
0.014
0.02
0.035
0.02
0
0.005
0.016
0.013
0.016
0.02
0.011
(g/kg-dav as consumed)
P25
0.097
0
0.211
0.18
0.166
0.088
0.098
0.084
0.072
0.112
0.071
0.089
0.113
0.095
0.093
0.1
0.112
0.143
0.071
0.169
0.092
0.095
0.093
0.106
0.086
P50
0.344
0.178
0.636
0.607
0.556
0.378
0.332
0.294
0.286
0.366
0.305
0.359
0.372
0.333
0.314
0.37
0.503
0.521
0.324
0.467
0.318
0.318
0.391
0.394
0.28
P75
0.83
1.07
1.695
1.647
1.364
0.813
0.768
0.696
0.692
0.867
0.74
0.905
0.82
0.877
0.781
0.842
1.15
1.133
0.985
1.252
0.771
0.735
0.934
0.93
0.754
P90
1.506
2.467
2.931
2.662
2.182
1.476
1.35
1.192
1.189
1.571
1.368
1.562
1.443
1.589
1.321
1.542
1.901
1.867
1.343
2.11
1.419
1.328
1.687
1.581
1.33
P95
2.035
3.453
4.144
3.603
2.851
1.806
1.744
1.528
1.539
2.209
1.829
2.171
1.94
2.218
1.71
2.06
2.368
2.352
1.545
2.695
1.906
1.938
2.134
2.173
1.766
P99
3.273
7.373
5.429
5.024
3.861
2.394
2.666
2.358
2.284
3.543
3.052
3.863
3.091
3.518
3.077
3.111
2.939
4.288
2.348
3.863
3.091
3.244
3.38
3.426
2.942
P100
12.239
12.239
11.747
7.565
6.936
3.535
3.801
6.219
4.092
12.239
11.543
6.596
8.418
12.239
11.543
8.306
4.745
12.239
4.158
4.002
11.543
11.747
8.306
8.418
12.239
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the
1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
a
I
3'
V:
I
ft
ft
I,
s
i Ore
ft
-------
I
j
& ^
>Q ttj
'•*. 3
^1=
Table 11-6. Per Capita Intake of Game (g/kg-dav as consumed)
Population Percent
Group Consuming
Total 1.2%
Age (years)
< 01 0.5%
01-02 0.9%
03-05 1.5%
06-11 1.1%
12-19 1.0%
20-39 1.3%
40-69 1.3%
70+ 1.1%
Season
Fall 1.7%
Spring 0.7%
Summer 0.7%
Winter 1.6%
Urbanization
Central City 0.7%
Nonmetropolitan 2.0%
Suburban 1.1%
Race
Asian 0.0%
Black 0.1%
Native American 0.6%
Other/NA 0.3%
White 1.4%
Region
Midwest 2.2%
Northeast 0.5%
South 0.8%
West 1.3%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Mean
0.01
0.014
0.026
0.01
0.004
0.004
0.01
0.012
0.002
0.016
0.006
0.003
0.013
0.005
0.019
0.008
0
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.011
0.012
0.005
0.009
0.012
SE
0.01
0.091
0.125
0.04
0.016
0.019
0.021
0.017
0.01
0.022
0.019
0.012
0.021
0.014
0.018
0.018
0
0.027
0.012
0.046
0.011
0.012
0.026
0.025
0.022
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P90
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P95
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P99
0.098
1.113
0.692
0
0
0
0.098
0.462
0
0.521
0
0
0.446
0
0.822
0
0
0
0
0
0.329
0.588
0
0
0.446
P100
5.081
1.866
2.638
2.953
1.176
1.78
5.081
2.882
2.261
3.488
2.882
1.78
5.081
1.8
1.866
5.081
0
0.887
0.255
0.636
5.081
1.866
2.055
5.081
2.953
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
A,
b
ri
-------
Population Percent
Group Consuming
Total 41.4%
Age (years)
< 01 32.3%
01-02 43.3%
03-05 39.6%
06-11 36.6%
12-19 36.0%
20-39 43.3%
40-69 44.0%
70 + 42.0%
Season
Fall 40.1%
Spring 42.7%
Summer 40.5%
Winter 42.2%
Urbanization
Central City 41.6%
Nonmetropolitan 43.8%
Suburban 39.7%
Race
Asian 38.9%
Black 48.9%
Native American 49.7%
Other/NA 55.1%
White 39.5%
Region
Midwest 36.9%
Northeast 35.9%
South 44.3%
West 46.6%
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Mean
0.317
0.791
0.822
0.677
0.414
0.244
0.271
0.225
0.218
0.291
0.307
0.344
0.325
0.315
0.338
0.309
0.452
0.385
0.491
0.472
0.297
0.288
0.264
0.325
0.392
Table 1 1-7.
SE
0.009
0.126
0.087
0.088
0.033
0.023
0.012
0.009
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.02
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.013
0.094
0.023
0.17
0.056
0.01
0.019
0.02
0.014
0.022
Per Capita Intake of Eggs (g/kg-dav as
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
consumed)
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0.445
1.537
1.381
0.89
0.735
0.345
0.439
0.375
0.328
0.422
0.402
0.476
0.47
0.423
0.493
0.434
0.615
0.595
0.457
0.712
0.408
0.35
0.376
0.469
0.563
P90
0.968
2.744
2.604
2.224
1.312
0.828
0.897
0.725
0.653
0.871
1.015
1.035
0.98
0.924
1.043
0.95
1.47
1.134
1.395
1.26
0.922
0.893
0.791
0.999
1.135
P95
1.422
3.645
3.299
3.106
1.617
1.26
1.193
1.029
0.969
1.237
1.42
1.496
1.409
1.422
1.438
1.399
2.604
1.486
1.61
2.247
1.368
1.44
1.229
1.422
1.603
P99
2.953
5.487
5.242
7.475
3.037
2.137
1.764
1.496
1.582
2.744
2.604
3.533
2.841
3.106
2.826
2.73
2.672
2.881
10.799
3.292
2.906
3.106
2.815
2.531
3.08
P100
13.757
13.757
8.577
10.799
6.331
4.12
5.392
3.216
2.791
6.331
13.548
13.757
11.39
13.757
13.548
11.39
2.672
6.213
13.548
5.997
13.757
13.548
11.39
8.737
13.757
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1989-91 CSFII
Q
I
a
I
3'
V:
I
ft
ft
I,
s
i Ore
ft
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Food Product
77-78 Data
(g-day)
87-88 Data
(g/day)
89-91 Data
(g/day)
94 Data
(g/day)
95 Data
(g/day)
Table 11-8. Main Daily Intake of Meat and Dairy Products Per Individual in a Day for USDA 1977-78, 87-88, 89-91, 94, and 95 Surveys
Beef 52 32 26 24 27
Poultry 25 26 27 29 24
Meat Mixtures1 69 86 90 95 104
Dairy Products2 314 290 286 277 284
1 Includes mixtures having meat, poultry, or fish as a main ingredient; frozen meals in which the main course is a meat, poultry, or fish item;
meat, poultry, or fish sandwiches coded as a single item; and baby-food meat and poultry mixtures.
2 Includes total milk, cream, milk desserts, and cheese. Total milk includes fluid milk, yogurt, flavored milk, milk drinks, meal replacements
with milk, milk-based infant formulas, and unreconstituted dry milk and powdered mixtures.
Sources: USDA, 1980; 1992; 1996a; 1996b.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
11-16 August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-9. Mean Per Capita Intake
Rates for Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products (g/kj
;-d as consumed)
Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups
Raw Agricultural Commodity3
Milk-Non-Fat Solids
Milk-Non-Fat Solids (Food additive)
Milk-Fat Solids
Milk-Fat Solids (Food additive)
Milk Sugar (Lactose)
Beef-Meat Byproducts
Beef (Organ Meats) - Other
Beef-FJried
Beef (Boneless) - Fat (Beef Tallow)
Beef (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Beef (Organ Meats) - Liver
Beef (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable Fat)
Goat-Meat Byproducts
Goat (Organ Meats) - Other
Goat (Boneless) - Fat
Goat (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Goat (Organ Meats) - Liver
Goat (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable Fat)
Horse
Rabbit
Sheep - Meat Byproducts
Sheep (Organ Meats) - Other
Sheep (Boneless) - Fat
Sheep (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Sheep (Organ Meats) - Liver
Sheep (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable Fat)
Pork - Meat Byproducts
Pork (Organ Meats) - Other
Pork (Boneless) - Fat (Including Lard)
Pork (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Pork (Organ Meats) - Liver
Pork (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable Fat)
Meat, Game
Turkey - Byproducts
Turkey - Giblets (Liver)
Turkey - Flesh (w/o Skin, w/o Bones)
Turkey - Flesh (+ Skin, w/o Bones)
Turkey - Unspecified
Poultry, Other - Byproducts
Poultry, Other - Giblets (Liver)
Poultry, Other - Flesh (+ Skin, w/o Bones)
Eggs - Whole
Eggs - White Only
Eggs - Yolk Only
Chicken - Byproducts
Chicken - Giblets (Liver)
Chicken - Flesh (w/o Skin, w/o Bones)
Chicken - Flesh (+ Skin, w/o Bones)
NA = Not applicable
" Consumed in any raw or prepared form.
Source: ORES database (based on 1977-78 NFCS)
Average Consumption (Grams/kg
Body Weight/Day)
0.9033354
0.9033354
0.4297199
0.4297199
0.0374270
0.0176621
0.0060345
0.0025325
0.3720755
0.0004798
0.0206980
1.1619987
0.0000000
0.0000000
0.0000397
0.0000000
0.0000000
0.0001891
0.0000000
0.0014207
0.0000501
0.0000109
0.0042966
0.0000090
0.0000000
0.0124842
0.0250792
0.0038496
0.2082022
0.0000168
0.0048194
0.3912467
0.0063507
0.0002358
0.0000537
0.0078728
0.0481655
0.0000954
0.0000000
0.0002321
0.0053882
0.5645020
0.0092044
0.0066323
0.0000000
0.0050626
0.0601361
0.3793205
Standard Error
0.0134468
0.0134468
0.0060264
0.0060264
0.0033996
0.0005652
0.0007012
0.0004123
0.0048605
0.0003059
0.0014002
0.0159453
NA
NA
0.0000238
NA
NA
0.0001139
NA
0.00003544
0.0000381
0.0000197
0.0005956
0.0000079
NA
0.0015077
0.0022720
0.0003233
0.0032032
0.0000106
0.0004288
0.0060683
0.0010935
0.0000339
0.0000370
0.0007933
0.0026028
0.0000552
NA
0.0001440
0.0007590
0.0076651
0.0004441
0.0004295
NA
0.0005727
0.0021616
0.0104779
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
11-17
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11
Group Age (yrs.)
Males and Females
1 and Under
1-2
3-5
6-8
Males
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and Over
Females
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and Over
Males and Females
All Ages
-10. Mean Meat Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as c
Total
Meat, Poultry
and Fish
72
91
121
149
188
218
272
310
285
295
274
231
196
162
176
180
184
183
187
187
159
134
207
onsumed)" for
1977-1978
Lamb, Frankfurters,
Veal, Sausages, Luncheon
Beef
9
18
23
33
41
53
82
90
86
75
70
54
41
38
47
46
52
48
49
52
34
31
54
Pork
4
6
8
15
22
18
24
21
27
28
32
25
39
17
19
14
19
17
19
19
21
17
20
Game Meats
3
(b)
(b)
1
3
(b)
1
2
1
1
1
2
7
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
4
2
2
, Spreads
2
15
15
17
19
25
25
33
30
26
29
22
19
20
18
16
18
16
14
12
12
9
20
Total
Poultry
4
16
19
20
24
27
37
45
31
31
31
29
28
27
23
28
26
24
24
26
30
19
27
Chicken
Only
1
13
19
19
21
24
32
43
29
28
29
26
25
23
22
27
24
22
21
24
25
16
24
Meat
Mixtures0
51
32
49
55
71
87
93
112
94
113
86
72
54
55
61
61
61
66
63
60
47
49
72
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1977-78 data for one day.
b Less than 0.5 g/day but more than 0.
0 Includes mixtures containing meat, poultry
Source: USDA, 1980.
, or fish as a main ingredient.
Table 11
-11. Mean Meat Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as c
Total Meat,
Group
Age (yrs.)
Males and Females
5 and Under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
All individuals
Poultry, and
Fish Beef
92
156
252
250
151
169
170
193
10
22
38
44
26
31
29
32
Pork
9
14
17
19
9
10
12
14
Lamb,
Veal, Game
<0.5
<0.5
1
23
1
<0.5
1
1
Frankfurters,
Sausages,
Luncheon Meats
11
13
20
2
11
18
13
17
onsumed)" for 1987-1988
Total
Poultry
14
27
27
31
20
17
24
26
Chicken
Only
12
24
20
25
17
13
18
20
Meat
Mixturessb
39
74
142
108
74
80
73
86
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1987-88 data for one day.
b Includes mixtures containing meat, poultry, or fish as a main ingredient.
Source: USDA, 1992.
Page
11-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-12.
Group Age (yrs.)
1 and Under
1-2
3-5
6-8
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and Over
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and Over
All Ages
Mean Dairy Product Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Aj
Total Milk
618
404
353
433
432
504
519
388
243
203
180
217
193
402
387
316
224
182
130
139
166
214
266
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
Source: USDA, 1980.
Fluid Milk
361
397
330
401
402
461
467
353
213
192
173
204
184
371
343
279
205
158
117
128
156
205
242
1977-78 data for one day.
;e (g/day as consumed)" for
Cheese
1
8
9
10
8
9
13
15
21
18
17
14
18
7
11
11
18
19
18
19
14
20
15
1977-1978
Eggs
5
20
22
18
26
28
31
32
38
41
36
36
41
14
19
21
26
26
23
24
22
19
27
Table 11-13. Mean Dairy Product Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)" for 1987-1988
Group Age (yrs.)
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
All individuals
Total Fluid Milk
347
439
392
202
310
260
148
224
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
Source: USDA, 1992.
Whole Milk
177
224
183
88
135
124
55
99
1987-88 data for one day.
Lowfat/Skim Milk
129
159
168
94
135
114
81
102
Cheese
7
10
12
17
9
12
15
14
Eggs
11
17
17
27
14
18
17
20
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 11-19
-------
*s
^ »
Table 1 1-14. Mean Meat Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)for 1994 and 1995
Total Meat,
Group Poultry, and
Age (yrs.) Fish Beef
1994 1995 1994 1995
Males and Females
5 and Under 94 87 10 8
Males
6-11 131 161 19 18
12-19 238 256 31 29
20 and over 266 283 35 41
Females
6-11 117 136 18 16
12-19 164 158 23 22
20 and over 168 167 18 21
All individuals 195 202 24 27
' Based on USDA CSFII 1994 and 1995 data for one day.
b Less than 0.5 g/day but more than 0.
Pork
1994 1995
6 4
9 7
11 11
17 14
5 5
5 7
9 11
11 10
Lamb
Veal,
Game
1994
(b)
0
1
2
(b)
(b)
1
1
1995
(b)
(b)
1
1
(b)
0
1
1
Frankfurters,
Sausages,
Luncheon
Meats
1994
17
22
21
29
18
16
16
21
1995
18
27
27
27
20
10
15
21
Total Poultry
1994
16
19
40
39
19
20
25
29
1995
15
25
26
31
17
19
22
24
Chicken Only
1994
14
16
29
30
15
15
20
23
1995
14
22
23
27
14
18
19
21
Meat
Mixtures0
1994
41
51
119
124
51
94
87
98
1995
39
68
150
149
69
82
83
104
0 Includes mixtures containing meat, poultry, or fish as a main ingredient.
Source: USDA, 1996a; 1996b.
Q
I
I
&!
1=
Table 11-15. Mean Dairy Product Intakes Per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumedjbr 1994 and 1995
Group Age (yrs.)
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
All individuals
' Based on USDA CSFII 1994 and
Source: USDA, 1996a; 1996b.
Total Fluid Milk
1994
424
407
346
195
340
239
157
229
1995
441
400
396
206
330
235
158
236
Whole Milk
1994
169
107
105
50
101
75
37
65
1995
165
128
105
57
93
71
32
66
Lowfat Milk
1994
130
188
160
83
136
88
56
89
1995
129
164
176
88
146
107
57
92
Cheese
1994
12
11
19
19
17
14
16
17
1995
9
12
20
16
13
13
15
15
Eg
1994
11
13
18
23
12
13
15
17
gs
1995
13
15
24
23
15
17
16
19
1995 data for one day.
I
A,
b
I,
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-16. Mean and Standard Error for the Dietary Intake
of Food Sub Classes Per Capita by Age (g/day as consumed)
Age (yrs.)
All Ages
<1
1-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-39
40-59
>60
Source: U.S
Fresh Cows'
Milk
253.5 ±4.9
272.0 ±31. 9
337.3 ± 15.6
446.2 ± 13.1
456.0 ± 12.3
404.8 ± 12.9
264.3 ± 16.4
217.6 ± 17.2
182.9 ± 13.5
169.1 ± 10.5
192.4± 11.8
EPA, 1984a (based on
Other Dairy
Products
55.1 ± 1.2
296.7 ±7.6
41.0 ±3.7
47.3 ±3.1
53.3 ±2.9
52.9 ±3.1
44.2 ± 4.0
51.5±4.1
53.8 ±3.2
52.0 ±2.5
55.9 ±2.8
1977-78 NFCS).
Eggs
26.9 ±0.5
4.9 ±3.2
19.8 ± 1.6
17.0 ± 1.3
19.3 ± 1.2
24.8 ± 1.3
28.3 ± 1.7
27.9 ± 1.7
30.1 ± 1.4
31.1 ± 1.0
28.7 ± 1.2
Beef
87.6 ± 1.1
18.4 ±7.4
42.2 ±3.7
63.4 ±3.1
81. 9 ±2.9
99.5 ±3.0
103.7 ±3. 9
103.8 ±4.0
105.8 ±3. 2
99.0 ±2.5
74.3 ±2.8
Pork
28.2 ±0.6
5. 8 ±3.6
13.6 ± 1.8
18.2 ± 1.5
22.2 ± 1.4
29.5 ± 1.5
29.6 ± 1.9
31.8±2.0
33.0 ± 1.5
33.5 ± 1.2
27.5 ± 1.3
Poultry
31. 3 ±0.8
18.4 ±4.9
19.0 ±2.4
24.7 ±2.0
30.0 ± 1.9
33.0 ±2.0
33.0 ±2.6
33.8 ±2.7
34.0 ±2.1
33.8 ± 1.6
31. 5± 1.8
Other Meat
25.1 ±0.4
2.6 ±2.8
17.6 ± 1.4
22.3 ± 1.2
26.1 ± 1.1
27.6 ± 1.1
28.8 ± 1.5
28.9 ± 1.5
28.4 ± 1.2
27.4 ±0.9
21.1 ± 1.0
Table 11-17. Mean and Standard Error for the Per Capita Daily Intake of Food Class and Sub Class by Region (g/day as consumed)
US Population
Northeast
North Central
South
West
Dairy Products (Total)
Fresh Cows Milk
Other
Eggs
Meats (Total)
Beef and Veal
Pork
Poultry
Other
308.6 ±5.3
253.5 ±4.9
55.1 ± 1.2
26.9 ±0.5
172.2 ± 1.6
87.6 ± 1.1
28.2 ±0.6
31.3 ±0.8
25.1 ±0.4
318.6 ± 10.4
256.1 ±9.7
62.5 ±2.3
23.8 ± 1.0
169.9 ±3.3
82.3 ±2.3
28.8± 1.1
31.7 ± 1.5
27.1 ±0.9
336.1± 10.0
279.7 ±9.4
56.5 ±2.2
23.5 ±0.9
176.9 ±3.1
92.9 ±2.2
29.6 ± 1.1
26.6 ± 1.4
27.8 ±0.8
253.6 ±8.4
211.0±7.8
42.6 ± 1.9
31.0±0.8
171.9 ±2.6
84.0 ± 1.8
30.1 ±0.9
36.5 ± 1.2
21.3 ±0.7
348.1± 12.3
283.5 ± 11.5
64.6 ±2.7
29.1± 1.2
168.6 ±3.9
92.9 ±2.7
22.1± 1.3
28.9 ± 1.8
24.7 ± 1.0
NOTE: Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania.
North Central = Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
and Kansas.
South = Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma.
West = Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1984b (based on 1977-78 NFCS).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-21
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-18.
Consumption of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products for Different Age Groups (averaged across sex), and
Estimated Lifetime Average Intakes for 70 Kg Adult Citizens Calculated from the FDA Diet Data.
Produce
Beef
Beef Liver
Lamb
Pork
Poultry
Dairy
Eggs
Beef Fat
Baby
(0-1 yrs)
3.99
0.17
0.14
1.34
2.27
40.70
3.27
2.45
Beef Liver Fat 0.05
Lamb Fat
Dairy Fat
Pork Fat
Poultry Fat
a The estimE
0.14
38.99
2.01
1.10
Toddler
1-6 yrs)
9.66
0.24
0.08
4.29
3.76
32.94
6.91
6.48
0.07
0.08
16.48
8.19
0.83
Child
(6- 14 yrs)
15.64
0.30
0.06
6.57
5.39
38.23
7.22
11.34
0.08
0.07
20.46
10.47
1.12
Teen
(14-20 yrs)
g - dry weight/day
21.62
0.36
0.05
8.86
7.03
43.52
7.52
16.22
0.10
0.06
24.43
12.75
1.41
Adult
(20-45 yrs)
23.28
1.08
0.30
10.27
7.64
27.52
8.35
20.40
0.29
0.31
18.97
14.48
1.54
Old
(45-70 yrs)
18.34
1.2
0.21
9.94
6.87
22.41
9.33
14.07
0.33
0.22
14.51
13.04
1.31
Estimated
Lifetime Intake3
19.25
0.89
0.20
9.05
6.70
28.87
8.32
15.50
0.25
0.21
18.13
12.73
1.34
ted lifetime dietary intakes were estimated by:
Estimated lifetime intake = IR(O-l) + 5vis * IR (1-5) + 8 vrs *
where IR = the intake rate for a specific aŁ
Source: U.S
EPA, 1989 (based in 1977-7
e group.
8 NFCS and NHANES II data)
IR (6-13) + 6 vrs *IR 04-19)
70 years
+ 25 vrs * IR (20
-44) + 25 vrs * IR (45-70)
Table 11-19. Per Capita Consumption of Meat and Poultry in 1991'
Food Item
Per Capita Consumption Carcassb
Weight
(g/dav)'
Per Capita Consumption
RTC1
(g/dav)'
Per Capita Consumption Retail Cut
Equivalent11
(g/dav)'
Per Capita Consumption Boneless
Trimmed Equivalent6
(g/dav)'
Red Meat
Beef
Veal
Pork
Lamb and Mutton
Total8
Poultry
Young Chicken
Other Chicken
Chicken
Turkey
Total8
118.3
1.5
8.0
2.0
201.7
1.2
62.1
1.7
147.9
78.3
1.7
91.3
22.2
109.2
78.4
0.99
58.3
1.2
139.1
54.51"
17.5h
72.1
Includes processed meats and poultry in a fresh basis; excludes shipments to U.S. territories; uses U.S. total population, luly 1, and does not include residents of the U.S.
territories.
Beef-Carcass-Weight is the weight of the chilled hanging carcass, which includes the kidney and attached internal fat [kidney, pelvic, and heart fat (kph)] but not head, feet,
and unattached internal organs. Definitions of carcass weight for other red meats differ slightly.
RTC - ready-to-cook poultry weight is the entire dressed bird which includes bones, skin, fat, liver, heart, gizzard, and neck.
Retail equivalents in 1991 were converted from carcass weight by multiplying by a factor of 0.7, 0.83, 0.89, and 0.776 for beef, veal, lamb, and pork, respectively; 0.877 was
the factor used each for young chicken and other chicken.
Boneless equivalent for red meat derived from carcass weight in 1991 by using conversion factors of 0.663, 0.685, 0.658 and 0.729 for beef, veal, lamb, and pork, respectively;
0.597, 0.597 and 0.790 were the factors used for young chicken, other chicken, and turkey.
Original data were presented in Ibs; converted to g/day by multiplying by a factor of 453.6 g/lb and dividing by 365 days/yr.
Computed from unrounded data.
Includes skin, neck, and giblets.
Excludes amount of RTC chicken going to pet food as well as some water leakage that occurs when chicken is cut-up before packaging.
:e: USDA. 1993.
Page
11-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-20. Per Capita Consumption of Dairy Products in 1991'
Food Item Per Capita Consumption
(g/dayy
Eggs
Farm Weight"'' 37.8
Retail Weight" 37.3
Fluid Milk and Cream 289.7
Plain Whole Milk 105.3
Lowfat Plain Milk (2%) 98.1
Lowfat Plain Milk (1%) 25.8
Skim Plain Milk 29.7
Whole Flavored Milk and Drink 3.4
Lowfat Flavored Milk and Drink 8.5
Buttermilk (lowfat and skim) 4.2
Half and Half Cream 3.9
Light Cream 0.4
Heavy Cream 1.6
Sour Cream 3.2
Eggnog 0.5
Evaporated and Condensed Milk
Canned Whole Milk 2.6
Bulk Whole Milk 1.4
Bulk and Canned Skim Milk 6.2
Total' 10.2
Dry Milk Products'
Dry Whole Milk 0.5
Nonfat Dry Milk 3.2
Dry Buttermilk 0.3
Total' 4.0
Dried Whey 4.5
Butter 5.2
Food Item Per Capita
Consumption (g/day)'
Cheese
American
Cheddar 11.2
Other" 2.5
Italian
Provolone 0.8
Romano 0.2
Parmesan 0.6
Mozzarella 9.0
Ricotta 1.0
Other 0.07
Miscellaneous
Swiss' 1.5
Brick 0.07
Muenster 0.5
Cream 1.9
Neufchatel 0.3
Blue8 0.2
Other 1.2
Processed Products
Cheese 6.1
Foods and spreads 4.7
Cheese Content 8.5
Consumed as Natural 22.6
Cottage Cheese (lowfat) 1.6
Frozen Dairy Products
Ice Cream 20.3
Ice Milk 9.2
Sherbet 1.5
Other Frozen Products'1 5.3
Total' 36.4
All Diary Products
USDA Donations 17.1
Commercial Sales 685.2
Total 702.4
" All per capita consumption figures use U.S. total populations, except fluid milk and cream data, which are based on U.S. residential
population. For eggs, excludes shipments to U.S. territories, uses U.S. total population, July 1, which does not include U.S. territories.
b A dozen eggs converted at 1.57 pounds.
0 The factor for converting farm weight to retail weight was 0.97 in 1960 and was increased 0.003 per year until 0.985 was reached in 1990.
11 Includes Colby, washed curd, Monterey, and Jack.
' Computed from unrounded data.
* Includes imports of Gruyere and Emmenthaler.
8 Includes Gorgonzola.
h Includes mellorine, frozen yogurt beginning 1981, and other nonstandardized frozen diary products.
1 Includes quantities used in other dairy products.
' Original data were presented in Ibs, conversions to g/day were calculated by multiplying by a factor of 453.6 and dividing by 365 days.
Source: USDA, 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-23
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-21. Adult Mean Daily Intake (as consumed) of Meat and Poultry Grouped by Region and Gender"
Mean Daily Intake (g/day)
Region
Pacific Mountain North Central Northeast
Food Item
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male
Beef 84.8 52.8 89.8 59.6 86.8 55.9 71.8 46.6 87.3
Pork 18.6 12.6 23.7 16.8 26.5 18.8 22.4 15.9 24.4
Lamb 1.3 1.2 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4 1.3 1.0 0.5
Veal 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 2.8 1.5 0.3
Variety
Meats/Game 11.1 7.9 9.1 7.4 11.9 8.0 8.1 6.8 9.4
Processed Meats 22.8 15.4 22.9 13.2 26.3 15.8 21.2 15.5 26.0
Poultry 67.3 56.1 51.0 45.2 51.7 44.7 56.2 49.2 57.7
" Adult population represents consumers ages 19 and above.
NOTE: Pacific = Washington, Oregon and California
Mountain = Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada
North Central = Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota
and Kansas.
South
Female
54.9
17.2
0.3
0.3
7.8
17.0
50.2
, Nebraska,
Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
South = Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma.
Source: National Livestock and Meat Board, 1993.
Florida,
Table 1 1-22. Amount (as consumed) of Meat Consumed bv Adults Grouped by Frequency of Eatings'
Percent of Total
Frequency of Eatings Eaters
Non-Meat Eaters" 1%
Light Meat Eaters'" 30%
Medium Meat Eaters0 33%
Heavy Meat Eaters'1 36%
Percent of Eaters Total
Consumption for Median Daily
,, , T^ i 14 Days Intake
Male Female J
(g) (g/day)
20 80 None
27 73 <1025
39 61 1025-1584
73 27 >1548
None
54
93
144
" A female who is employed and on a diet. She lives alone or in a small household (without children).
b Female who may or may not be on a diet. There are probably 2-4 people in her household but that number is not likely to include children.
0 This person may be of either sex, might be on a diet, and probably lives in a household of 2-4 people, which may include children.
11 Male who is not on a diet and lives in a household of 2-4 individuals, which may include children.
' Adult population represents consumers ages 19 and above.
Source: National Livestock and Meat Board, 1993.
Page
11-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Food category
Msaf
Best
Pork
Lamb
Vea\
Poultry
Chicken
Turkey
Dairy Products
Eggs
Butter
Margarine
Milkb
Cheese0
Table
% Indiv. using
food in 3 days
84.6
67.3
49.9
1.5
2.3
42.8
38.7
5.8
54.3
31.4
43.1
82.5
40
1 1-23. Quantity (as consumed) of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products Consumed Per Eating Occasion
and the Percentage of Individuals Using These Foods in Three Days
Quantity consumed per eating
occasion
(g)
Average
107
133
69
146
130
128
131
105
82
12
11
203
41
Standard 5
Deviation
85 16
85 41
69 8
84 43
71 42
77 42
76 43
73 28
44 40
13 2
11 2
134 15
28 14
Consumers-only
Quantity consumed per eating occasion at Specified Percentiles (g)
25 50 75 90 95 99
46 86 140 224 252 432
84 112 168 224 280 448
16 44 92 160 194 320
88 123 184 227 280 448
84 112 168 224 276 352
82 112 168 224 280 388
84 112 170 224 280 388
57 86 129 172 240 350
50 64 100 128 150 237
5 7 14 28 28 57
5 7 14 28 28 57
122 244 245 366 488 552
28 28 56 58 85 140
Meat - beef, pork, lamb, and veal.
b Milk - fluid milk, milk beverages, and milk-based infant formulas.
Cheese - natural and processed cheese.
Source: Pao et al., 1982 (based on 1977-78 NFCS).
Q
I
a
I
3'
V:
I
ft
ft
I,
s
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 1 1-24. Percentage Lipid Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grams of Edible Portions)
of Selected Meat and Dairy Products"
Product
Meats
Beef
Lean only
Lean and fat, 1/4 in. fat trim
Brisket (point half)
Lean and fat
Brisket (flat half)
Lean and fat
Lean only
Pork
Lean only
Lean and fat
Cured shoulder, blade roll, lean and fat
Cured ham, lean and fat
Cured ham, lean only
Sausage
Ham
Ham
Lamb
Lean
Lean and fat
Veal
Lean
Lean and fat
Rabbit
Composite of cuts
Chicken
Meat only
Meat and skin
Turkey
Meat only
Meat and skin
Ground
Fat Percentage
6.16
9.91
19.24
21.54
22.40
4.03
5.88
9.66
14.95
17.18
20.02
12.07
7.57
38.24
4.55
9.55
5.25
9.52
21.59
20.94
2.87
6.58
6.77
11.39
5.55
8.05
3.08
7.41
15.06
13.60
2.86
4.97
8.02
9.73
6.66
Comment
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Unheated
Center slice
Raw, center, country style
Raw, fresh
Cooked, extra lean (5% fat)
Cooked, (11% fat)
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Page
11-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 1 1-24. Percentage Lipid Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grams of Edible Portions)
of Selected Meat and Dairy Products" (continued)
Product
Dairy
Milk
Whole
Human
Lowfat(l%)
Lowfat (2%)
Skim
Cream
Half and half
Medium
Heavy-whipping
Sour
Butter
Cheese
American
Cheddar
Swiss
Cream
Parmesan
Cottage
Colby
Blue
Provolone
Mozzarella
Yogurt
Eggs
Fat Percentage
3.16
4.17
0.83
1.83
0.17
18.32
23.71
35.09
19.88
76.93
29.63
31.42
26.02
33.07
24.50; 28.46
1.83
30.45
27.26
25.24
20.48
1.47
8.35
Comment
3.3% fat, raw or pasteurized
Whole, mature, fluid
Fluid
Fluid
Fluid
Table or coffee, fluid
25% fat, fluid
Fluid
Cultured
Regular
Pasteurized
Hard; grated
Lowfat, 2% fat
Plain, lowfat
Chicken, whole raw, fresh or frozen
" Based on the lipid content in 100 grams, edible portion.
Source: USDA, 1979-1984.
Table 11-25.
Meat Product
3-oz cooked serving (85.05 g)
Beef, retail composite, lean only
Pork, retail composite, lean only
Lamb, retail composite, lean only
Veal, retail composite, lean only
Broiler chicken, flesh only
Turkey, flesh only
Fat Content of Meat Products
Total Fat
(g)
8.4
8.0
8.1
5.6
6.3
4.2
Percent Fat
Content (%)
9.9
9.4
9.5
6.6
7.4
4.9
Source: National Livestock and Meat Board, 1993
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-27
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-26.
Average Fat Intake (g)
Percent of Population
Meat Group (%)"
Bread Group (%)
Milk Group (%)
Fruits (%)
Vegetables (%)
Fats/oil/sweets (%)
Fat Intake, Contribution of Various Food Groups to Fat Intake, and Percentage of the Population in
Various Meat Eater Groups of the U.S. Population
Total Heavy Meat Medium Meat
Population Eaters Eaters
68.3 84.5 62.5
100 36 33
41 44 40
24 23 24
12 11 13
1 1 1
99 9
13 12 13
Light Meat Non-Meat
Eaters Eaters
53.5 32.3
30 1
37 33
26 25
14 14
1 1
9 11
14 17
" Meat Group includes meat, poultry, dry beans, eggs, and nuts.
Source: National Livestock and MeatBoard, 1993.
Table 1 1-27. Mean Total Daily Dietary Fat Intake (g/day) Grouped by Age and Gender"
Age
(yrs)
2-11 (months)
1-2
3-5
6-11
12-16
16-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
> 80
Total
> 2
Total
N Mean Fat Intake
(g/day)
871
1,231
1,647
1,745
711
785
1,882
1,628
1,228
929
1,108
851
809
14,801
13,314
" Total dietary fat intake includes all fat (i.e
drinking water).
Source: Adapted from CDC, 1994.
37.52
49.96
60.39
74.17
85.19
100.50
97.12
93.84
84.90
79.29
69.15
61.44
54.61
81.91
82.77
Males
N
439
601
744
868
338
308
844
736
626
473
646
444
290
7,322
6,594
Mean Fat Intake
(g/day)
38.31
51.74
70.27
79.45
101.94
123.23
118.28
114.28
99.26
96.11
80.80
73.35
68.09
97.18
98.74
N
432
630
803
877
373
397
638
791
602
456
560
407
313
7,479
8,720
, saturated and unsaturated) derived from consumption of foods and beveraj
Females
Mean Fat Intake
(g/day)
36.95
48.33
61.51
68.95
71.23
77.46
76.52
74.06
70.80
63.32
59.52
53.34
47.84
67.52
68.06
;es (excluding plain
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
11-28 August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-28. Percentage Mean Moisture Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grams of Edible Portions)"
Food
Meat
Beef
Beef liver
Chicken (light meat)
Chicken (dark meat)
Duck - domestic
Duck - wild
Goose - domestic
Ham - cured
Horse
Lamb
Lard
Pork
Rabbit - domestic
Turkey
Dairy Products
Eggs
Butter
Cheese American pasteurized
Cheddar
Swiss
Parmesan, hard
Parmesan, grated
Cream, whipping, heavy
Cottage, lowfat
Colby
Blue
Cream
Yogurt
Plain, lowfat
Plain, with fat
Human milk - estimated
from USDA Survey
Human
Skim
Lowfat
" Based on the water content in 100 grams, edible portion.
Source: USDA, 1979-1984.
Moisture Content Percent
71.60
68.99
74.86
75.99
73.77
75.51
68.30
66.92
72.63
63.98
73.42
0.00
70.00
72.81
69.11
74.16
74.57
15.87
39.16
36.75
37.21
29.16
17.66
57.71
79.31
38.20
42.41
53.75
85.07
87.90
87.50
90.80
90.80
Comments
Raw, composite, trimmed, retail cuts
Raw
Raw, without skin
Raw, without skin
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw, roasted
Cooked, roasted
Raw, composite, trimmed, retail cuts
Raw
Raw
Raw, roasted
Cooked, roasted
Raw
Raw
Regular
Made from whole milk
Whole, mature, fluid
1%
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-29
-------
Table 1 1-29. Summary ofMeai, Poultry, and Dairy Intake Studies
i?
i
Study
Survey Population Used in
Calculating Intake
Types of Data Used
Units
Food Items
KEY STUDIES
EPA Analysis of
1989-91 CSFII Data
Per capita
RELEVANT STUDIES
AIHC, 1994 Adults, Per Capita
1989-91 CSFII data; g/kg-day; as consumed
Based on 3-day average individual
intake rates.
USDA NFCS 1977-78 data g/day
presented in the 1989 version of the
Exposure Factors Handbook that
were analyzed by Finley and
Paustenbach (1992).
EPAs ORES Per capita (i.e., consumers and 1977-78 NFCS
(White et al., 1983) nonconsumers) 3-day individual intake data
NLMB, 1993
Pao et al., 1982
USDA, 1980; 1992;
1996a; 1996b
USDA, 1993
Adult daily mean intake rates MRCA's Menu Census
U.S. EPA/ORP,
1984a; 1984b
Consumers only serving size
data provided
Per capita and consumer only
grouped by age and sex
Per capita consumption based
on "food disappearance"
Per capita
U.S. EPA/OST, 1989 Estimated lifetime dietary
intake
1977-78 NFCS
3-day individual intake data
1977-78 and 1987-88 NFCS, and
1994 and 1995 CSFII
1-day individual intake data
Based on food supply and
utilization data which were
provided by National Agricultural
Statistics Service (NASS), Customs
Service reports, and trade
associations.
1977-78 NFCS
Individual intake data
Based on FDA Total Diet Study
Food List which used 1977-78
NFCS data, and NHANES II data
g/kg-day; as consumed
g/day; as consumed
g; as consumed
g/day; as consumed
g/day; as consumed
g/day; as consumed
g/day; dry weight
Distributions of intake rates for total meats
and total dairy; individual food items.
Distribution for beef consumption
presented in @Risk format.
Intake for a wide variety of meats, poultry,
and dairy products presented; complex food
groups were disaggregated
Intake rates for various meats by region
and gender.
Distributions of serving sizes for meats,
poultry, and diary products.
Total meat, poultry and fish, total poultry,
total milk, cheese and eggs.
Intake rates of meats, poultry, and diary
products; intake rates of individual food
items.
Mean intake rates for total meats, total
diary products, and individual food items.
Various food groups; complex foods
disaggregated
Q
a
8
A,
b
a
I-
§
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors K~r^fXŁ
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products ™
Table 11-30, Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of
Meat and Dairy Products and Serving Size • • ' ' ' .. •
Mean 95th Perceritile Multiple Pereentiles
Total Meat Intake .• ' ' '
• • . 2.1 g/kg-day : • 5.1 g/kg-day ' see Table 11-1 •'• ••
Total Dairy Intake • . '
8.0 g/kg-day . 29.7 g/kg-day - . see Table 11-2
Individual Meat and Dairy Products
see Tables 11-3 to 11-7 ' see Tables 11-3 to 11-7 see Tables 11 -3 to 11-7
• • . Study ' . •
. EPA Analysis of CSFE 1989-91 Data
. EPA Analysis of CSFH 1989-91 Data
EPA Analysis of CSFH 1989-91 Data
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
11-31
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-31. Confidence in Meats and Dairy Products Intake Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U. S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
• Lack of bias in study design (high rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
USDA CSFII survey receives high level of peer review.
EPA analysis of these data has been peer reviewed
outside the Agency.
CSFII data are publicly available.
Enough information is included to reproduce results.
Analysis is specifically designed to address food intake.
Data focuses on the U.S. population.
This is new analysis of primary data.
Were the most current data publicly available at the time
the analysis was conducted for this Handbook.
Survey is designed to collect short-term data.
Survey methodology was adequate.
Study size was very large and therefore adequate.
The population studied was the U.S. population.
Survey was not designed to capture long term day-to-day
variability. Short term distributions are provided for
various age groups, regions, etc.
Response rate was adequate.
No measurements were taken. The study relied on
survey data.
1
CSFII was the most recent data set publicly available at
the time the analysis was conducted for this Handbook.
Therefore, it was the only study classified as key study.
Although the CSFII was the only study classified as key
study, the results are in good agreement with earlier data.
The survey is representative of U.S. population.
Although there was only one study considered key, these
data are the most recent and are in agreement with
earlier data. The approach used to analyze the data was
adequate. However, due to the limitations of the survey
design, estimation of long-term percentile values
(especially the upper percentiles) is uncertain.
Hrgh
Hrgh
Hrgh
Hrgh
Hrgh
Hrgh
Hrgh
Medium confidence for
average values;
Low confidence for long term
percentile distribution
Hrgh
Hrgh
Hrgh
Medium
Medium
N/A
Low
Hrgh
High confidence in the average;
Low confidence in the long-
term upper percentiles
Page
11-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 11A
APPENDIX 11A
SAMPLE CALCULATION OF MEAN DAILY FAT INTAKE BASED ON CDC (1994) DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 11A-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 11A
Sample Calculation of Mean Daily Fat Intake Based on CDC (1994) Data
CDC (1994) provided data on the mean daily total food energy intake (TFEI) and the mean percentages of TFEI from
total dietary fat grouped by age and gender. The overall mean daily TFEI was 2,095 kcal for the total population and 34
percent (or 82 g) of their TFEI was from total dietary fat (CDC, 1994). Based on this information, the amount of fat per kcal
was calculated as shown in the following example.
0.34 x 2,095 x X - = 82
day day day
x = 0.12
kcal
where 0.34 is the fraction of fat intake, 2,095 is the total food intake, and X is the conversion factor from kcal/day to g-
fat/day.
Using the conversion factor shown above (i.e., 0.12 g-fat/kcal) and the information on the mean daily TFEI and
percentage of TFEI for the various age/gender groups, the daily fat intake was calculated for these groups. An example of
obtaining the grams of fat from the daily TFEI (1,591 kcal/day) for children ages 3-5 and their percent TFEI from total
dietary fat (33 percent) is as follows:
1591 x 0.33 x 0.12 = 63
day kcal day
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 11A-3
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
12. INTAKE OF GRAIN PRODUCTS 1
12.1. INTAKE STUDIES 1
12.1.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey and Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals .... 1
12.1.2. Key Grain Products Intake Studies Based on the CSFII 2
12.1.3. Relevant Grain Products Intake Studies 2
12.1.4. Key Grain Products Serving Size Study Based on the USDA NFCS
4
12.2. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE
RATES 4
12.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 12 5
APPENDIX 12A 12A-1
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 12-1. Per Capita Intake of Total Grains Including Mixtures (g/kg-day as consumed)
12-6
Table 12-2. Per Capita Intake of Breads (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-7
Table 12-3. Per Capita Intake of Sweets (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-8
Table 12-4. Per Capita Intake of Snacks Containing Grain (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-9
Table 12-5. Per Capita Intake of Breakfast Foods (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-10
Table 12-6. Per Capita Intake of Pasta (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-11
Table 12-7. Per Capita Intake of Cooked Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-12
Table 12-8. Per Capita Intake of Rice (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-13
Table 12-9. Per Capita Intake of Ready-to-Eat Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed)a 12-14
Table 12-10. Per Capita Intake of Baby Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed) 12-15
Table 12-12. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates for Grains Based on All Sex/Age/Demographic
Subgroups 12-16
Table 12-13 - Mean Grain Intake Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed/
for 1977-1978 12-17
Table 12-14 - Mean Grain Intakes Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed/
for 1987-1988 12-17
Table 12-15 - Mean Grain Intakes Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed/
for 1994 and 1995 12-18
Table 12-16. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Per Capita Intake of Grains, by Age (g/day
as consumed) 12-18
Table 12-17. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Grains, by Region (g/day as
consumed) 12-19
Table 12-18. Consumption of Grains (g dry weight/day) for Different Age Groups and
Estimated Lifetime Average Daily Food Intakes for a U.S. Citizen(averaged across sex)
Cal 12-19
Table 12-19. Per Capita Consumption of Flour and Cereal Products in 1991a 12-20
Table 12-20. Quantity (as consumed) of Grain Products Consumed Per Eating Occasion
and the Percentage of Individuals Using These Foods in 3 Days 12-20
Table 12-22. Summary of Grain Intake Studies 12-22
Table 12-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of Grain
Products 12-22
Table 12-24. Confidence in Grain Products Intake Recommendation 12-23
Table 12A-1. Food Codes and Definitions Used in the Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII
Grains Data 12-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
12. INTAKE OF GRAIN PRODUCTS
Consumption of grain products is a potential
pathway of exposure to toxic chemicals. These food
sources can become contaminated by absorption or
deposition of ambient air pollutants onto the plants, contact
with chemicals dissolved in rainfall or irrigation waters, or
absorption of chemicals through plant roots from soil and
ground water. The addition of pesticides, soil additives, and
fertilizers may also result in contamination of grain
products.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) and
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII)
are the primary sources of information on intake rates of
grain products in the United States. Data from the NFCS
have been used in various studies to generate consumer-
only and per capita intake rates for both individual grain
products and total grains. CSFII 1989-91 survey data have
been analyzed by EPA to generate per capita intake rates for
various food items and food groups. As described in
Volume II, Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables,
consumer-only intake is defined as the quantity of grain
products consumed by individuals who ate these food items
during the survey period. Per capita intake rates are
generated by averaging consumer-only intakes over the
entire population of users and non-users. In general, per
capita intake rates are appropriate for use in exposure
assessments for which average dose estimates for the
general population are of interest because they represent
both individuals who ate the foods during the survey period
and individuals who may eat the food items at some time,
but did not consume them during the survey period.
This Chapter provides intake data for individual
grain products and total grains. Recommendations are
based on average and upper-percentile intake among the
general population of the U.S. Available data have been
classified as being either a key or a relevant study based on
the considerations discussed in Volume I, Section 1.3.1 of
the Introduction. Recommendations are based on data from
the 1989-91 CSFII survey, which was considered the only
key intake study for grain products. Other relevant studies
are also presented to provide the reader with added
perspective on this topic. It should be noted that most of the
key and relevant studies presented in this Chapter are based
on data from USDA's NFCS and CSFII. The USDA NFCS
and CSFII are described below.
12.1. INTAKE STUDIES
12.1.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide
Food Consumption Survey and Continuing
Survey of Food Intake by Individuals
The NFCS and CSFII are the basis of much of the
data on grain intake presented in this section. Data from the
1977-78 NFCS are presented because the data have been
published by USDA in various reports and reanalyzed by
various EPA offices according to the food items/groups
commonly used to assess exposure. Published one-day data
from the 1987-88 NFCS and 1994 and 1994 CSFII are also
presented. Recently, EPA conducted an analysis of USDA's
1989-91 CSFII. These data were the most recent food
survey data available to the public at the time that EPA
analyzed the data for this Handbook. The results of EPA's
analyses are presented here. Detailed descriptions of the
NFCS and CSFII data are presented in Volume II, Chapter
9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables.
Individual average daily intake rates calculated from
NFCS and CSFII data are based on averages of reported
individual intakes over one day or three consecutive days.
Such short term data are suitable for estimating average
daily intake rates representative of both short-term and
long-term consumption. However, the distribution of
average daily intake rates generated using short term data
(e.g., 3-day) do not necessarily reflect the long-term
distribution of average daily intake rates. The distributions
generated from short term and long term data will differ to
the extent that each individual's intake varies from day to
day; the distributions will be similar to the extent that
individuals' intakes are constant from day to day.
Day-to-day variation in intake among individuals will
be great for food item/groups that are highly seasonal and
for items/groups that are eaten year around, but that are not
typically eaten every day. For these foods, the intake
distribution generated from short term data will not be a
good reflection of the long term distribution. On the other
hand, for broad categories of foods (e.g., total grains) which
are eaten on a daily basis throughout the year with minimal
seasonality, the short term distribution may be a reasonable
approximation of the true long term distribution, although
it will show somewhat more variability. In this Chapter,
distributions are shown for the various grain categories.
Because of the increased variability of the short-term
distribution, the short-term upper percentiles shown will
overestimate somewhat the corresponding percentiles of the
long-term distribution.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
12-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
12.1.2. Key Grain Products Intake Studies Based on
the CSFII
U.S. EPA Analysis of 1989-91 USDA CSFII Data -
EPA conducted an analysis of USDA's 1989-91 C SFII data
set. The general methodology used in analyzing the data is
presented in Volume II, Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and
Vegetables of this Handbook. Intake rates were generated
for the following grain products: total grains, breads,
sweets, snacks, breakfast foods, pasta, cooked cereals, rice,
ready-to-eat cereals, and baby cereals. Appendix 12A
provides the food codes and descriptions used in this grain
analysis. The data for total grains have been corrected to
account for mixtures as described in Volume II, Chapter 9 -
Intake of Fruits and Vegetables and Appendix 9A using an
assumed grain content of 31 percent for grain mixtures and
13 percent for meat mixtures. Per capita intake rates for
total grains are presented in Tables 12-1. Table 12-2
through 12-10 present per capita intake data for individual
grain products. The results are presented in units of g/kg-
day. Thus, use of these data in calculating potential dose
does not require the body weight factor to be included in the
denominator of the average daily dose (ADD) equation. It
should be noted that converting these intake rates into units
of g/day by multiplying by a single average body weight is
inappropriate, because individual intake rates were indexed
to the reported body weights of the survey respondents.
However, if there is a need to compare the intake data
presented here to intake data in units of g/day, a body
weight less than 70 kg (i.e., approximately 60 kg; calculated
based on the number of respondents in each age category
and the average body weights for these age groups, as
presented in Volume I, Chapter 7) should be used because
the total survey population included children as well as
adults.
The advantages of using the 1989-91 CSFII data set
are that the data are expected to be representative of the
U.S. population and that it includes data on a wide variety
of food types. The data set was the most recent of a series
of publicly available USDA data sets (i.e., NFCS 1977-78;
NFCS 1987-88; CSFII 1989-91) at the time the analysis
was conducted for this Handbook, and should reflect recent
eating patterns in the United States. The data set includes
three years of intake data combined. However, the 1989-91
CSFII data are based on a three day survey period. Short-
term dietary data may not accurately reflect long-term eating
patterns. This is particularly true for the tails of the
distribution of food intake. In addition, the adjustment for
including mixtures adds uncertainty to the intake rate
distributions. The calculation for including mixtures
assumes that intake of any mixture includes grains in the
proportions specified in Appendix Table 9A-1. This
assumption yields valid estimates of per capita
consumption, but results in overestimates of the proportion
of the population consuming total grains; thus, the quantities
reported in Table 12-1 should be interpreted as upper
bounds on the proportion of the population consuming grain
products.
The data presented in this handbook for the USDA
1989-91 CSFII is not the most up-to-date information on
food intake. USDA has recently made available the data
from its 1994 and 1995 CSFII. Over 5,500 people
nationwide participated in both of these surveys providing
recalled food intake informatin for 2 separate days.
Although the 2-day data analysis has not been conducted,
USDA published the results for the respondents' intakes on
the first day surveyed (USDA, 1996a; 1996b). USDA
1996 survey data will be made available later in 1997. As
soon as 1996 data are available, EPA will take steps to get
the 3-year data (1994, 1995, and 1996) analyzed and the
food ingestion factors updated. Meanwhile, Table 12-11
presents a comparison of the mean daily intakes per
individual in a day for grains from the USDA survey data
from years 1977-78, 1987-88, 1989-91, 1994, and 1995.
This table shows that food consumption patterns have
changed for grains and grain mixtures when comparing
1977 and 1995 data. When comparing data from 1977 and
1995, consumption of grains mixtures and grain increased
by 106 percent and 41 percent, respectively. However,
consumption of grains has remained fairly constant when
comparing values from 1989-91 with the most recent data
from 1994 and 1995. Grain mixtures and grains increase
20 percent and 11 percent, respectively from 1989 to 1995.
The 1989-91 CSFII data are probably adequate for
assessing ingestion exposure for current populations, but
these data should be used with caution.
12.1.3. Relevant Grain Products Intake Studies
The U.S. EPA's Dietary Risk Evaluation System
(ORES) - USEPA, Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) -
EPA OPP's ORES contains per capita intake rate data for
various grain products for 22 subgroups (age, regional, and
seasonal) of the population. As described in Volume II,
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables, intake data in
ORES were generated by determining the composition of
1977/78 NFCS food items and disaggregating complex food
dishes into their component raw agricultural commodities
(RACs) (White et al, 1983). The ORES per capita, as
consumed intake rates for all age/sex/demographic groups
Page
12-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
combined are presented in Table 12-12. These data are
based on both consumers and non-consumers of these food
items. Data for specific subgroups of the population are not
presented in this section, but are available through OPP via
direct request. The data in Table 12-12 may be useful for
estimating the risks of exposure associated with the
consumption of the various grain products presented. It
should be noted that these data are indexed to the reported
body weights of the survey respondents and are expressed
in units of grams of food consumed per kg body weight per
day. Consequently, use of these data in calculating potential
dose does not require the body weight factor in the
denominator of the average daily dose (ADD) equation. It
should also be noted that conversion of these intake rates
into units of g/day by multiplying by a single average body
weight is not appropriate because the ORES data base did
not rely on a single body weight for all individuals. Instead,
ORES used the body weights reported by each individual
surveyed to estimate consumption in units of g/kg-day.
The advantages of using these data are that complex
food dishes have been disaggregated to provide intake rates
for a variety of grains. These data are also based on the
individual body weights of the respondents. Therefore, the
use of these data in calculating exposure to toxic chemicals
may provide more representative estimates of potential dose
per unit body weight. However, because the data are based
on NFCS short-term dietary recall, the same limitations
discussed previously for other NFCS data sets also apply
here. In addition, consumption patterns may have changed
since the data were collected in 1977-78. OPP is in the
process of translating consumption information from the
USDA CSFII 1989-91 survey to be used in ORES.
Food and Nutrient Intakes of Individuals in One
Day in the U.S., USDA (1980, 1992; 1996a; 1996b) -
USDA calculated mean per capita intake rates for total and
individual grain products using NFCS data from 1977-78
and 1987-88 (USDA 1980; 1992) and CSFII data from
1994 and 1995 (USDA, 1996a; 1996b). The mean per
capita intake rates for grain products are presented in
Tables 12-13 and 12-14 for the two NFCS survey years,
respectively. Table 12-15 presents similar data from the
1994 and 1995 CSFII for grain products.
The advantages of using these data are that they
provide mean intake estimates for various grain products.
The consumption estimates are based on short-term (i.e.,
1-day) dietary data which may not reflect long-term
consumption.
U.S. EPA - Office of Radiation Programs - The U.S.
EPA Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) has also used the
USDA 1977-78 NFCS to estimate daily food intake. ORP
uses food consumption data to assess human intake of
radionuchdes in foods (U.S. EPA, 1984a; 1984b). The
1977-78 NFCS data have been reorganized by ORP, and
food items have been classified according to the
characteristics of radionuclide transport. The mean dietary
per capita intake of grain products, grouped by age, for the
U.S. population are presented in Table 12-16. The mean
daily intake rates of grain products for the U.S. population
grouped by regions are presented in Table 12-17. Because
this study was based on the USDA NFCS, the limitations
and advantages associated with the USDA-NFCS data also
apply to this data set. Also, consumption patterns may have
changed since the data were collected in 1977-78.
U.S. EPA - Office of Science and Technology - The
U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology (OST) within
the Office of Water (formerly the Office of Water
Regulations and Standards) used data from the FDA
revision of the Total Diet Study Food Lists and Diets
(Pennington, 1983) to calculate food intake rates. OST uses
these consumption data in its risk assessment model for land
application of municipal sludge. The FDA data used are
based on the combined results of the USDA 1977-78 NFCS
and the second National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey (NHANES II), 1976-80 (U.S. EPA, 1989).
Because food items are listed as prepared complex foods in
the FDA Total Diet Study, each item was broken down into
its component parts so that the amount of raw commodities
consumed could be determined. Table 12-18 presents
intake rates for grain products for various age groups.
Estimated lifetime ingestion rates derived by U.S. EPA
(1989) are also presented in Table 12-18. Note that these
are per capita intake rates tabulated as grams dry
weight/day. Therefore, these rates differ from those in the
previous tables because USDA (1980; 1992) and U.S.
EPA (1984a, 1984b) report intake rates on an as consumed
basis.
The EPA-OST analysis provides intake rates for
additional food categories and estimates of lifetime average
daily intake on a per capita basis. In contrast to the other
analyses of USDA NFCS data, this study reports the data in
terms of dry weight intake rates. Thus, conversion is not
required when contaminants are provided on a dry weight
basis. These data, however, may not reflect current
consumption patterns because they are based on 1977-78
data.
USDA (1993) - Food Consumption, Prices, and
Expenditures, 1970-92 - The USDA's Economic Research
Service (ERS) calculates the amount of food available for
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
12-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
human consumption in the United States annually. Supply
and utilization balance sheets are generated. These are
based on the flow of food items from production to end
uses. Total available supply is estimated as the sum of
production (i.e., some products are measured at the farm
level or during processing), starting inventories, and
imports (USDA, 1993). The availability of food for human
use commonly termed as "food disappearance" is
determined by subtracting exported foods, products used in
industries, farm inputs (seed and feed) and end-of-the year
inventories from the total available supply (USDA, 1993).
USDA (1993) calculates the per capita food consumption
by dividing the total food disappearance by the total U.S.
population.
USDA (1993) estimated per capita consumption
data for grain products from 1970-1992 (1992 data are
preliminary). In this section, the 1991 values, which are the
most recent final data, are presented. Table 12-19 presents
per capita consumption in 1991 for grains.
One of the limitations of this study is that
disappearance data do not account for losses from the food
supply from waste, spoilage, or foods fed to pets. Thus,
intake rates based on these data may overestimate daily
consumption because they are based on the total quantity of
marketable commodity utilized. Therefore, these data may
be useful for estimating bounding exposure estimates. It
should also be noted that per capita estimates based on food
disappearance are not a direct measure of actual
consumption or quantity ingested, instead the data are used
as indicators of changes in usage over time (USDA, 1993).
An advantage of this study is that it provides per capita
consumption rates for grains which are representative of
long-term intake because disappearance data are generated
annually. Daily per capita intake rates are generated by
dividing annual consumption by 365 days/year.
12.1.4. Key Grain Products Serving Size Study Based
on the USDA NFCS
Pao et al. (1982) - Foods Commonly Eaten by
Individuals - Using data gathered in the 1977-78 USDA
NFCS, Pao et al. (1982) calculated percentiles for the
quantities of grain products consumed per eating occasion
by members of the U.S. population. The data were
collected during NFCS home interviews of 37,874
respondents, who were asked to recall food intake for the
day preceding the interview, and record food intake the day
of the interview and the day after the interview. Quantities
consumed per eating occasion, are presented in Table 12-
20.
The advantages of using these data are that they were
derived from the USDA NFCS and are representative of the
U.S. population. This data set provides distributions of
serving sizes for a number of commonly eaten grain
products, but the list of foods is limited and does not
account for grain products included in complex food dishes.
Also, these data are based on short-term dietary recall and
may not accurately reflect long-term consumption patterns.
Although these data are based on the 1977-78 NFCS,
serving size data have been collected, but not published, for
the more recent USDA surveys.
12.2. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED
AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE RATES
As noted previously, intake rates may be reported in
terms of units as consumed or units of dry weight. It is
essential that exposure assessors be aware of this difference
so that they may ensure consistency between the units used
for intake rates and those used for concentration data (i.e.,
if the unit of food consumption is grams dry weight/day,
then the unit for the amount of pollutant in the food should
be grams dry weight). If necessary, as consumed intake
rates may be converted to dry weight intake rates using the
moisture content percentages of grain products presented in
Table 12-21 and the following equation:
dw = IRac*[(100-W)/100]
(Eqn. 12-1)
Dry weight" intake rates may be converted to "as consumed"
rates by using:
= iRdB/[(ioo-wyioo]
(Eqn. 12-2)
where:
IRdw = dry weight intake rate;
IRac = as consumed intake rate; and
W = percent water content.
12.3. RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1989-91 CSFII data described in this section
were used in selecting recommended grain, product intake
rates for the general population and various subgroups of
the United States population. The general design of both
key and relevant studies are summarized in Table 12-22
The recommended values for intake of grain products are
Page
12-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
summarized in Table 12-23 and the confidence ratings for
the recommended values for grain intake rates are presented
in Table 12-24. Per capita intake rates for specific grain
items, on a g/kg-day basis, may be obtained from Tables
12-2 through 12-10. Percentiles of the intake rate
distribution in the general population for total grains, are
presented in Table 12-1. From these tables, the mean and
95th percentile intake rates for grains are 4.1 g/kg-day and
10.8 g/kg-day, respectively. It is important to note that the
data presented in Tables 12-1 through 12-10 are based on
data collected over a 3-day period and may not necessarily
reflect the long-term distribution of average daily intake
rates. However, for the broad categories of foods (i.e., total
grains, breads), because they may be eaten on a daily basis
throughout the year with minimal seasonality, the short-term
distribution may be a reasonable approximation of the long-
term distribution, although it will display somewhat
increased variability. This implies that the upper
percentiles shown will tend to overestimate the
corresponding percentiles of the true long-term distribution.
It should be noted that because these recommendations are
based on 1989-91 CSFII data, they may not reflect the most
recent changes in consumption patterns. However, as
indicated in Table 12-11, intake has remained fairly
constant between 1989-19 and 1995. Thus, the 1989-91
CSFII data are believed to be appropriate for assessing
ingestion exposure for current populations.
12.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 12
Pao, E.M.; Fleming, K.H.; Guenther, P.M.; Mickle, S.J.
(1982) Foods commonly eaten by individuals:
amount per day and per eating occasion. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. Home Economics Report
No. 44.
Pennington, J.A.T. (1983) Revision of the total diet
study food list and diets. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
82:166-173.
USDA. (1980) Food and nutrient intakes of individuals
in one day in the United States, Spring 1977. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. Nationwide Food
Consumption Survey 1977-1978. Preliminary Report
No. 2.
USDA. (1992) Food and nutrient intakes by individuals
in the United States, 1 day, 1987-88. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition
Information Service. Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey 1987-88, NFCS Rpt. No. 87-1-1.
USDA. (1993) Food consumption prices and
expenditures (1970-1992) U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Statistical
Bulletin, No. 867.
USDA. (1996a) Data tables: results from USDA's 1994
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and
1994 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
USDA. (1996b) Data tables: results from USDA's 1995
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and
1995 Diet and Health Knowledge Survey. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, Riverdale, MD.
U.S. EPA. (1984a) An estimation of the daily average
food intake by age and sex for use in assessing the
radionuclide intake of individuals in the general
population. EPA-520/1-84-021.
U.S. EPA. (1984b) An estimation of the daily food
intake based on data from the 1977-1978 USDA
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey. Washington,
DC: Office of Radiation Programs.
EPA-520/1-84-015.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Development of risk assessment
methodologies for land application and distribution
and marketing of municipal sludge. Washington, DC:
Office of Science and Technology. EPA 600/-89/001.
White, S.B.; Peterson, B.; Clayton, C.A.; Duncan, D.P.
(1983) Interim Report Number 1: The construction
of a raw agricultural commodity consumption data
base. Prepared by Research Triangle Institute for
EPA Office of Pesticide Programs.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
12-5
-------
I
I
a
1=
Table 12-1. Per Capita Intake of Total Grains
Population Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
1-2
3-5
6-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
97.5%
80.4%
95.8%
97.5%
97.7%
98.2%
98.4%
98.3%
98.7%
97.9%
97.0%
97.5%
97.6%
97.6%
96.9%
97.8%
94.0%
96.9%
87.7%
97.1%
97.9%
97.3%
97.6%
97.9%
97.2%
Includes breads; sweets such as cakes
Note: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the
MEAN
4.061
7.049
10.567
9.492
6.422
3.764
3.095
2.792
3.263
4.282
3.983
3.948
4.031
4.159
4.013
4.02
6.479
4.372
3.98
4.561
3.962
4.016
4.255
3.943
4.116
pie, and pastries;
1989-91 CSFII.
SE PI
0.033 0
0.361 0
0.285 0
0.201 0
0.117 0
0.065 0
0.035 0
0.031 0
0.066 0.38
0.066 0
0.071 0
0.062 0
0.063 0
0.061 0
0.067 0
0.049 0
0.402 0
0.103 0
0.276 0
0.208 0
0.035 0
0.07 0
0.079 0
0.052 0
0.072 0
P5
0.74
0
2.86
3.13
2.14
1.15
0.70
0.69
0.89
0.84
0.70
0.74
0.70
0.75
0.60
0.80
0
0.55
0
0
0.79
0.79
0.78
0.71
0.69
Including Mixtures (g/kg-day as consumed)
P10
1.16
0
4.34
4.35
2.88
1.52
1.08
0.98
1.24
1.24
1.10
1.13
1.17
1.13
1.11
1.18
1.46
0.94
0.61
1.21
1.18
1.17
1.26
1.10
1.13
snack and breakfast foods made with grains
P25 P50
1.90 3.06
1.46 6.05
6.55 9.59
6.09 8.91
4.07 5.70
2.16 3.31
1.75 2.73
1.59 2.47
1.86 2.72
2.07 3.19
1.79 2.95
1.82 2.99
1.95 3.17
1.91 3.06
1.85 3.12
1.90 3.04
3.02 5.44
1.81 3.05
1.63 3.67
2.26 3.56
1.90 3.03
1.90 2.92
2.02 3.19
1.83 3.06
1.92 3.13
P75
4.96
10.18
14.06
11.88
7.82
4.81
4.00
3.54
4.04
5.19
4.73
4.96
4.99
5.07
4.93
4.91
9.07
5.69
5.81
5.36
4.80
4.69
5.37
4.89
5.03
, pasta; cooked ready-to-eat,
P90
8.04
16.75
18.92
15.13
10.26
6.46
5.47
4.96
5.81
8.54
7.78
7.98
8.00
8.71
7.81
7.79
14.13
9.47
6.90
8.87
7.79
7.80
8.44
8.13
7.98
P95
10.77
19.50
21.57
19.14
12.85
8.03
6.55
6.09
7.63
11.88
10.52
10.16
10.48
11.61
10.08
10.63
14.63
12.47
9.00
11.72
10.20
11.04
11.61
10.20
10.90
P99
18.53
27.61
28.22
23.87
21.40
10.92
9.57
8.40
10.47
19.10
23.87
15.34
16.86
17.69
21.05
18.53
20.65
18.96
20.43
22.07
18.07
20.36
17.73
16.42
19.50
P100
42.98
37.41
42.98
33.08
31.93
19.30
25.71
20.34
21.45
37.77
31.93
30.13
42.98
37.77
31.93
42.98
23.78
40.07
21.84
30.51
42.98
31.93
42.98
40.07
25.89
and baby cereals, rice and grain mixtures.
Q
I
a
I
ft
I,
2>
-------
Table 12-2. Per Capita Intake of Breads (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population Group Percent
Consuming
Total 91.6%
Age (years)
< 01 50.9%
1-2 88.9%
3-5 91.9%
6-11 93.4%
12-19 91.8%
20-39 92.9%
40-69 93.7%
70+ 95.1%
Season
Fall 91.3%
Spring 91.4%
Summer 92.4%
Winter 91.2%
Urbanization
Central City 91.2%
Nonmetropolitan 91.7%
Suburban 91.8%
Race
Asian 78.5%
Black 88.8%
Native American 81.3%
Other/NA 89.1%
White 92.5%
Region
Midwest 91.2%
Northeast 91.1%
South 91.8%
West 92.1%
MEAN
1.133
1.072
2.611
2.217
1.668
1.068
0.936
0.915
0.976
1.181
1.095
1.126
1.129
1.127
1.184
1.113
0.981
1.159
1.336
1.333
1.121
1.109
1.104
1.155
1.153
Includes breads, rolls, muffins, bagels, biscuits
Note: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91
SE
0.010
0.102
0.089
0.063
0.037
0.025
0.012
0.011
0.021
0.020
0.018
0.018
0.019
0.017
0.020
0.014
0.078
0.030
0.133
0.067
0.010
0.018
0.021
0.017
0.022
PI P5 P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0.19
0 0
0 0.44
0 0.44
0 0.40
0 0.21
0 0.18
0 0.20
15 0.29
0 0.17
0 0.18
0 0.21
0 0.19
0 0.18
0 0.18
0 0.19
0 0
0 0.11
0 0.13
0 0
0 0.20
0 0.20
0 0.18
0 0.18
0 0.19
P25
0.48
0
1.17
1.19
0.88
0.45
0.43
0.46
0.56
0.50
0.48
0.48
0.47
0.49
0.48
0.49
0.34
0.37
0.41
0.62
0.51
0.50
0.51
0.46
0.49
P50
0.90
0.34
2.39
2.03
1.44
0.91
0.81
0.81
0.87
0.94
0.89
0.90
0.89
0.91
0.93
0.89
0.86
0.84
0.72
1.11
0.91
0.90
0.90
0.92
0.91
P75
1.50
1.65
3.86
3.04
2.18
1.46
1.27
1.25
1.31
1.57
1.45
1.51
1.50
1.50
1.54
1.49
1.51
1.55
1.80
1.70
1.48
1.49
1.48
1.54
1.48
P90
2.31
3.29
4.68
4.01
3.16
2.15
1.81
1.77
1.76
2.45
2.18
2.24
2.37
2.33
2.51
2.20
2.57
2.59
2.91
2.66
2.23
2.22
2.26
2.41
2.35
P95
3.04
4.06
5.42
5.14
3.98
2.78
2.27
2.08
2.15
3.16
2.91
2.98
3.07
2.98
3.24
2.89
2.61
3.29
4.13
3.79
2.95
2.91
2.83
3.13
3.12
P99
4.67
6.09
8.23
6.95
5.95
3.43
3.41
2.83
2.76
5.27
4.54
4.43
4.66
4.50
4.97
4.68
3.34
5.58
9.09
6.16
4.51
4.43
4.50
4.89
5.14
P100
12.99
12.99
10.29
12.35
9.17
7.44
7.04
11.16
11.81
11.81
12.35
9.17
12.99
11.81
12.99
12.35
3.34
8.94
11.71
9.98
12.99
7.97
9.98
12.99
12.35
, cornbread, and tortillas.
CSFII.
Q
I
a
I
a
§»
I
ft
I,
Ł
X) ft
-------
oo
I
I
a
1=
Table 12-3
Population Group Percent MEAN
Consuming
Total 50.2% 0.508
Age (years)
<01 28.1% 0.447
1-2 49.6% 1.144
3-5 59.2% 1.139
6-11 63.7% 0.881
12-19 54.0% 0.511
20-39 45.0% 0.383
40-69 49.1% 0.381
70 + 56.3% 0.444
Season
Fall 52.9% 0.533
Spring 48.3% 0.466
Summer 48.5% 0.527
Winter 51.2% 0.508
Urbanization
Central City 45.3% 0.495
Nonmetropolitan 52.3% 0.593
Suburban 52.4% 0.477
Race
Asian 37.6% 0.515
Black 39.3% 0.387
Native American 33.9% 0.325
Other/NA 32.3% 0.283
White 53.2% 0.537
Region
Midwest 53.0% 0.573
Northeast 55.9% 0.587
South 47.5% 0.471
West 46.7% 0.416
SE
0.011
0.096
0.111
0.079
0.046
0.030
0.015
0.015
0.029
0.022
0.021
0.025
0.022
0.021
0.025
0.015
0.101
0.030
0.075
0.088
0.012
0.024
0.027
0.018
0.022
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Includes cakes, cookies, pies, pastries, doughnuts, breakfast bars,
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91 CSFII.
Per Capita Intake of Sweets (g/kg-day as consumed)
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0.13
0
0.43
0.56
0.43
0.22
0
0.08
0.16
0.14
0.10
0.06
0.19
0.11
0.25
0.10
0.05
0
0
0
0.17
0.17
0.22
0.09
0
P75
0.71
0.41
1.75
1.82
1.29
0.75
0.59
0.55
0.63
0.76
0.65
0.70
0.71
0.65
0.82
0.69
0.78
0.46
0.33
0.21
0.77
0.79
0.83
0.65
0.55
P90
1.50
1.42
3.32
3.01
2.33
1.47
1.24
1.13
1.29
1.55
1.36
1.50
1.55
1.58
1.42
1.82
1.20
1.47
0.64
1.55
1.65
1.63
1.39
1.25
P95
2.12
2.26
4.87
4.33
3.28
1.99
1.66
1.58
1.64
2.21
1.82
2.35
2.00
2.12
2.34
2.00
2.22
1.71
1.48
1.45
2.17
2.41
2.21
1.98
1.91
P99
3.96
5.51
6.51
6.78
5.39
3.25
2.48
2.70
2.73
3.82
3.58
4.54
4.00
4.24
4.52
3.55
2.52
3.51
2.44
3.04
4.09
4.00
4.60
3.89
3.33
P100
13.39
9.35
13.39
9.25
12.97
9.65
7.45
5.70
6.94
13.39
9.35
8.73
10.84
9.94
13.39
9.65
4.06
9.67
3.78
9.94
13.39
12.97
13.39
10.84
9.65
and coffee cakes.
Q
I
a
I
ft
I,
2>
-------
a ^
a g
Ł a
vo *q
'I
a
1=
I
Table 12-4. Per Capita Intake of Snacks Containing Grain (g/kg-day as
Population Group Percent
Consuming
Total 40.3%
Age (years)
<01 31.4%
1-2 46.7%
3-5 48.9%
6-11 43.1%
12-19 40.2%
20-39 38.2%
40-69 40.3%
70 + 40.9%
Season
Fall 41.6%
Spring 38.3%
Summer 37.5%
Winter 43.9%
Urbanization
Central City 36.5%
Nonmetropolitan 39.8%
Suburban 43.3%
Race
Asian 22.1%
Black 25.9%
Native American 30.4%
Other/NA 28.3%
White 43.7%
Region
Midwest 45.2%
Northeast 35.8%
South 39.8%
West 39.4%
MEAN
0.160
0.321
0.398
0.393
0.269
0.170
0.123
0.104
0.074
0.180
0.136
0.165
0.160
0.158
0.144
0.169
0.077
0.107
0.142
0.139
0.170
0.202
0.113
0.162
0.155
SE
0.005
0.064
0.040
0.034
0.023
0.016
0.007
0.006
0.007
0.012
0.009
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.009
0.008
0.035
0.014
0.050
0.026
0.006
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.011
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5 P10
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0.10
0.12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
consumed)
P75
0.18
0.35
0.65
0.58
0.32
0.21
0.15
0.14
0.10
0.18
0.15
0.18
0.19
0.16
0.17
0.18
0.04
0.07
0.16
0.17
0.19
0.23
0.10
0.19
0.16
P90
0.47
1.24
1.30
1.22
0.86
0.50
0.41
0.33
0.20
0.50
0.43
0.52
0.44
0.46
0.44
0.50
0.27
0.33
0.32
0.43
0.49
0.57
0.35
0.46
0.46
P95
0.78
1.82
1.61
1.65
1.24
0.74
0.60
0.46
0.36
0.87
0.67
0.86
0.76
0.81
0.66
0.80
0.37
0.59
0.44
0.69
0.81
0.99
0.61
0.80
0.76
P99
1.74
4.66
2.03
2.20
2.43
1.94
1.21
1.06
0.70
1.99
1.29
1.72
1.77
1.81
1.32
1.75
1.09
1.19
1.29
1.27
1.80
1.95
1.28
1.63
1.81
P100
6.73
5.73
6.73
4.76
4.00
3.51
4.60
2.85
1.47
6.73
3.43
5.73
4.60
3.70
4.76
6.73
1.34
4.76
4.60
1.91
6.73
6.73
5.73
4.76
4.60
Includes grain snacks such as crackers, salty snacks, popcorn, and pretzels.
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91 CSFII.
Q
I
a
I
ft
I,
Ł
ft
-------
I
I
a
1=
Table 12-5. Per Capita Intake of Breakfast Foods (g/kg-day
Population Group Percent
Consuming
Total 15.0%
Age (years)
< 01 13.2%
1-2 20.9%
3-5 24.5%
6-11 25.0%
12-19 18.4%
20-39 13.2%
40-69 10.8%
70 + 12.5%
Season
Fall 15.1%
Spring 13.2%
Summer 14.8%
Winter 17.0%
Urbanization
Central City 15.1%
Nonmetropolitan 13.3%
Suburban 15.9%
Race
Asian 10.1%
Black 11.9%
Native American 18.7%
Other/NA 13.7%
White 15.6%
Region
Midwest 14.7%
Northeast 15.2%
South 12.3%
West 19.7%
MEAN
0.144
0.255
0.418
0.446
0.307
0.193
0.086
0.063
0.096
0.146
0.120
0.145
0.168
0.142
0.120
0.157
0.076
0.114
0.156
0.079
0.152
0.121
0.158
0.130
0.184
SE
0.012
0.108
0.103
0.078
0.045
0.038
0.014
0.011
0.025
0.021
0.023
0.022
0.027
0.021
0.020
0.019
0.060
0.032
0.073
0.037
0.013
0.020
0.034
0.019
0.024
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10 P25
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
J-S>
as consumed)
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0
0
0.37
0.56
0.31
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.21
0
0
0
0
0
0
P90
0.46
0.57
1.54
1.63
1.12
0.65
0.31
0.23
0.41
0.49
0.34
0.53
0.55
0.42
0.39
0.52
0.24
0.20
0.53
0.40
0.51
0.38
0.43
0.42
0.67
P95
0.95
2.08
2.50
2.33
1.69
1.16
0.61
0.51
0.65
0.93
0.71
0.98
1.04
0.93
0.85
1.06
0.61
0.78
0.61
0.43
0.97
0.75
1.02
0.92
1.14
P99
2.46
3.82
4.62
3.92
2.82
3.06
1.53
0.95
1.37
2.61
2.32
2.02
2.94
2.61
1.97
2.45
1.04
2.46
1.23
1.40
2.56
2.06
2.61
2.33
2.58
P100
13.61
5.72
9.92
11.90
13.61
5.38
4.41
2.98
3.09
6.83
6.23
7.41
13.61
7.17
7.41
13.61
1.46
7.41
6.83
2.33
13.61
7.41
13.61
4.59
6.96
Includes breakfast foods made with grains such as pancakes, waffles, and french toast.
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91
Q
I
a
I
I,
2>
-------
Q
Population Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
1-2
3-5
6-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Percent
Consuming
13.6%
7.3%
14.0%
15.3%
15.9%
14.3%
15.2%
12.5%
9.9%
14.0%
13.9%
13.6%
12.9%
12.9%
11.4%
15.4%
18.8%
6.6%
8.6%
15.1%
12.8%
21.9%
9.2%
14.7%
MEAN
0.233
0.172
0.569
0.543
0.338
0.194
0.232
0.172
0.083
0.239
0.250
0.251
0.193
0.197
0.171
0.286
0.918
0.138
0.115
0.243
0.182
0.367
0.179
0.252
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91
Table
SE
0.018
0.124
0.212
0.142
0.063
0.047
0.027
0.028
0.029
0.038
0.036
0.039
0.034
0.034
0.032
0.028
0.355
0.054
0.083
0.019
0.030
0.043
0.035
0.038
CSFII.
12-6. Per Capita Intake of Pasta (g/kg-day as consumed)
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5 P10
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.70
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P90
0.90
0.00
1.72
2.19
1.47
0.77
0.96
0.62
0.03
0.94
0.96
0.97
0.68
0.65
0.63
1.12
3.80
0.00
0.00
0.94
0.74
1.47
0.45
1.07
P95
1.60
1.18
5.14
3.37
2.35
1.47
1.57
1.32
0.76
1.72
1.65
1.72
1.33
1.34
1.33
1.96
5.78
1.08
1.16
1.65
1.24
2.14
1.32
1.63
P99 PI 00
3.67 24.01
3.79 6.43
6.68 24.01
6.51 7.72
3.43 7.72
3.36 7.24
2.83 7.17
2.67 10.20
1.57 2.62
3.77 24.01
3.28 9.47
3.80 11.12
3.22 8.73
3.43 24.01
2.48 11.12
3.92 10.20
6.51 10.20
3.27 5.14
2.43 3.86
3.46 24.01
2.76 9.46
4.62 24.01
3.63 11.12
3.25 10.20
I
a
I
a
§»
I
I,
Ł
i Ore
-------
I
j
& ^
>Q ttj
a a
Ki&
Table 12-7. Per Capita Intake of Cooked Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
1-2
3-5
6-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetopolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
NativeAmerican
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
NOTE: SE =
Percent
Consuming
17.1%
17.9%
23.6%
21.2%
18.1%
11.0%
10.5%
18.3%
35.3%
21.2%
15.8%
12.1%
19.1%
19.3%
20.0%
13.9%
30.3%
17.5%
12.6%
15.1%
15.5%
13.2%
21.4%
15.2%
Standard error
MEAN
0.441
1.350
1.783
1.335
0.669
0.156
0.166
0.307
0.782
0.573
0.439
0.288
0.463
0.523
0.483
0.369
0.838
0.372
0.510
0.382
0.507
0.395
0.396
0.483
SE
0.035
0.417
0.365
0.258
0.142
0.065
0.040
0.036
0.079
0.066
0.082
0.069
0.062
0.068
0.066
0.052
0.092
0.196
0.293
0.039
0.083
0.093
0.044
0.086
PI P5
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0
0
1.39
0
0
0
0
0
1.08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.65
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P90
1.37
7.17
7.00
4.99
2.32
0
0
1.30
2.71
1.90
1.07
0.55
1.57
1.52
1.52
1.09
2.95
2.15
1.12
1.11
1.39
1.00
1.40
1.45
P95
2.79
8.60
9.41
8.18
4.49
1.26
1.33
2.20
3.80
3.71
2.29
1.98
3.12
3.27
2.72
2.35
4.45
2.99
3.18
2.32
3.01
2.73
2.48
3.12
P99 PI 00
8.18 28.63
20.47 24.16
14.84 28.63
12.51 18.66
10.76 16.42
3.34 11.85
3.33 13.18
3.97 18.23
7.37 10.03
9.15 28.63
12.28 21.84
5.37 24.16
7.00 24.34
10.03 28.63
7.41 20.94
7.37 24.34
10.03 28.63
4.80 5.73
7.60 20.94
7.38 24.34
10.32 21.85
7.02 24.34
5.53 28.63
9.41 16.47
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91 CSFII.
Q
I
a
I
I,
Ł
-------
Q
Table 12-8. Per Capita Intake of Rice (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
<01
1-2
3-5
6-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetopolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Other/NA
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
NOTE: SE =
Percent
Consuming
20.0%
11.8%
24.4%
25.0%
20.8%
20.1%
21.3%
19.6%
14.9%
18.8%
21.5%
19.3%
20.5%
26.1%
15.9%
18.3%
72.5%
37.2%
37.7%
15.9%
12.3%
20.3%
25.2%
20.4%
Standard error
P = Percentile of the di
MEAN
0.357
0.405
0.811
0.736
0.504
0.316
0.341
0.259
0.229
0.307
0.395
0.376
0.350
0.449
0.311
0.320
2.353
0.603
0.655
0.281
0.207
0.378
0.455
0.349
stribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91
SE PI
0.022 0
0.209 0
0.192 0
0.127 0
0.090 0
0.052 0
0.037 0
0.028 0
0.050 0
0.041 0
0.046 0
0.045 0
0.041 0
0.039 0
0.046 0
0.031 0
0.316 0
0.048 0
0.116 0
0.023 0
0.046 0
0.050 0
0.036 0
0.045 0
CSFII.
P5 P10
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.32
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0
0
0.36
0.76
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.18
0
0
2.83
0.87
0.80
0
0
0
0
0
P90
1.26
1.40
3.36
2.83
1.71
1.26
1.20
0.94
0.81
0.94
1.34
1.31
1.37
1.51
1.04
1.16
6.20
2.08
2.15
0.94
0.62
1.45
1.62
1.25
P95
2.15
2.89
4.52
3.77
3.33
1.91
1.90
1.64
1.73
2.13
2.47
2.05
2.09
2.51
1.90
2.01
10.39
2.93
3.78
1.79
1.25
2.15
2.71
1.84
P99
4.85
7.87
9.81
6.70
7.86
3.74
5.02
3.35
3.12
4.92
5.05
5.02
4.17
5.54
5.02
4.30
15.06
5.16
6.06
4.30
3.59
4.65
5.21
4.52
P100
17.59
15.54
17.59
14.35
13.39
9.60
12.69
12.00
7.97
16.74
15.54
12.55
17.59
16.74
12.91
17.59
17.59
12.91
10.71
15.54
13.39
16.74
15.54
17.59
I
a
I
a
§»
I
I,
Ł
i Ore
ft
-------
I
& ^
>Q ttj
a a
Ki&
Population Percent MEAN
Group Consuming
Total 45.6% 0.306
Age (years)
<01 38.9% 0.431
1-2 70.7% 0.954
3-5 77.3% 1.026
6-11 69.0% 0.631
12-19 50.8% 0.317
20-39 34.3% 0.174
40-69 37.1% 0.166
70 + 52.4% 0.222
Season
Fall 45.2% 0.293
Spring 45.6% 0.320
Summer 46.6% 0.330
Winter 44.8% 0.280
Urbanization
Central City 46.6% 0.319
Nonmetropolitan 43.6% 0.283
Suburban 46.0% 0.307
Race
Asian 33.6% 0.218
Black 41.1% 0.269
Native American 38.6% 0.298
Other/NA 42.9% 0.340
White 46.7% 0.311
Region
Midwest 48.7% 0.328
Northeast 46.9% 0.286
South 41.4% 0.284
West 47.7% 0.336
a Incluldes dry ready-to-eat corn, rice, wheat,
NOTE: SE = Standard error
P = Percentile of the distribution
Table 12-9.
SE
0.007
0.059
0.057
0.044
0.025
0.019
0.010
0.008
0.013
0.014
0.015
0.016
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.011
0.065
0.018
0.078
0.050
0.008
0.015
0.017
0.012
0.016
Per Capita Intake of Ready-to-Eat Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed1)
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10 P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0.31
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0.74
0.83
0.45
0.16
0
0
0.08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P75
0.42
0.64
1.46
1.48
0.92
0.48
0.23
0.25
0.36
0.40
0.44
0.45
0.39
0.43
0.38
0.44
0.24
0.40
0.32
0.43
0.42
0.47
0.38
0.40
0.46
P90
0.92
1.55
2.28
2.35
1.55
0.90
0.61
0.55
0.64
0.94
0.95
0.99
0.81
0.94
0.85
0.93
0.81
0.82
0.76
1.12
0.94
0.98
0.89
0.81
1.05
P95
1.37
1.94
2.89
2.99
1.97
1.14
0.88
0.74
0.83
1.42
1.42
1.42
1.22
1.42
1.33
1.36
1.28
1.16
1.23
1.59
1.39
1.37
1.33
1.26
1.47
P99
2.61
3.40
4.77
3.67
3.12
2.61
1.51
1.32
1.55
2.38
2.69
2.82
2.61
2.86
2.52
2.46
2.79
2.50
3.26
2.69
2.61
2.55
2.70
2.34
2.84
P100
7.12
4.40
6.47
5.65
7.12
4.06
5.11
3.36
2.71
7.12
5.88
5.65
6.47
5.11
7.12
6.47
3.12
4.46
4.40
4.18
7.12
7.12
6.47
5.88
5.11
and bran cereals in the form of flakes, puffs, etc.
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the 1989-91 CSFII.
Q
I
a
I
I,
Ł
-------
^. flj
aLJ
kŁ*
>0 ^
a g
^. a
^
^o ^
'I
&
a
1=
I
ST-
Table 12-10. Per Capita Intake of Baby Cereals (g/kg-day as consumed)
Population Group Percent MEAN
Consuming
Total 1.1%
Age (years)3
< 01 28.5%
Season
Fall 1.1%
Spring 1.1%
Summer 1.0%
Winter 1.0%
Urbanization
Central City 1.3%
Nonmetropolitan 0.9%
Suburban 1.0%
Race
Asian 0.7%
Black 2.1%
Native American 1.2%
Other/NA 3.1%
White 0.8%
Region
Midwest 1.1%
Northeast 1.0%
South 1.0%
West 1.1%
a Data presented only for children less than
NOTE: SE = Standard error
0.037
1.205
0.036
0.059
0.017
0.035
0.048
0.011
0.042
0.017
0.092
0.010
0.050
0.029
0.020
0.084
0.016
0.046
1 year of a;
SE
0.051
0.280
0.075
0.138
0.068
0.107
0.088
0.040
0.093
0.137
0.151
0.088
0.133
0.059
0.050
0.208
0.060
0.101
PI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
je. Available data for other age groups was based on a very small
P75
0
0.64
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P90
0
4.59
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P95
0
6.94
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P99 PI 00
0 22.57
16.99 22.57
0.69 14.94
0.13 16.99
0 12.03
0 22.57
1.05 22.57
0 9.41
0 16.99
1.10 1.10
4.59 22.57
0 1.63
2.94 13.42
0 16.99
0 12.50
1.25 16.99
0 22.57
1.18 10.18
number of observations
P = Percentile of the distribution
Source: Based on EPA's analysis of the
1989-91 CSFII.
Q
I
a
I
a
§»
I
I,
^
i Ore
ft
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
Table 12-11. Mean Daily Intakes of Grains Per Individual in a Day for
USDA 1977-78, 87-88, 89-91, 94, and 95 Surveys
Food Product
Grains
Grains Mixtures
77-78 Data
(g/day)
215
52
87-88 Data
(g/day)
237
72
89-91 Data
(g/day)
273
89
94 Data
(g/day)
300
112
95 Data
(g/day)
303
107
Source: USDA, 1980; 1992; 1996a; 1996b.
Table 12-12.
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Oats
Rice-rough
Rice-milled
Rye-rough
Rye-germ
Rye-flour
Wheat-rough
Wheat-germ
Wheat-bran
Wheat-flour
Millet
Mean Per Capita Intake Rates for Grains Based on All
Average Consumption
(Grams/kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0825748
0.0030600
0.1552627
0.0000010
0.0002735
0.0040285
0.1406118
0.0008051
0.0121575
1.2572489
0.0000216
Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups
Standard Error
0.0026061
0.0004343
0.0083546
-
0.0000483
0.0002922
0.0050410
0.0000789
0.0004864
0.0127412
0.0000104
" Consumed in any raw or prepared form.
Source: DRES database (based on
1977-78 NFCS).
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
12-16 August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
Table 12-13.
Mean Grain Intake Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)" for 1977-1978
Breads, Rolls, Other Baked
Group Age (years)
Males and Females
Under 1
1-2
3-5
6-8
Males
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and Over
Females
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and Over
Males and Females
All Ages
Total Grains
42
158
181
206
238
288
303
253
256
234
229
235
196
214
235
196
161
163
161
155
175
178
204
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
b Includes mixtures containing
Source: USDA, 1980.
grain as the main ingredient
Biscuits
4
27
46
53
67
76
91
84
82
82
78
71
70
58
57
57
44
49
49
52
57
54
62
1977-78 data for one day.
Goods
5
24
37
56
56
80
77
53
60
58
57
60
50
59
61
43
36
38
37
40
42
44
49
Cereals, Pasta
30
44
54
60
51
57
53
64
40
44
48
69
58
44
45
41
33
32
32
36
47
58
44
Mixtures, Mainly
Grainb
3
63
45
38
64
74
82
52
74
50
46
35
19
53
72
55
48
44
43
27
29
22
49
Table 12-14. Mean Grain Intakes Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)" for 1987-1988
Quick
Breads, Cakes,
Group
Age (years)
Males and Females 5 and Under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and Over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and Over
All Individuals
Yeast
Total Breads and
Grains Rolls
167
268
304
272
231
239
208
237
30
51
65
65
43
45
45
52
Pancakes, Cookies,
French Pastries,
Toast Pies
8
16
28
20
19
13
14
16
22
37
45
37
30
29
28
32
Crackers,
Popcorn,
Pretzels,
Com Chips
4
8
10
8
6
7
6
7
Cereals and
Pastas
52
74
72
58
66
52
53
57
Mixtures,
Mostly
Grain"
51
83
82
83
68
91
62
72
" Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1987-88 data for one day.
b Includes mixtures containing grain as the main ingredient.
Source: USDA, 1992.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
12-17
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
Table 12-15. Mean Grain Intakes Per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)3 for 1994 and 1995
Crackers,
Group
Age (years) Total Grains
1994 1995
Males and 213 210
Females 5 and
Under
Males
6-11 285 341
12-19 417 364
20 and 357 365
Over
Females
6-11 260 286
12-19 317 296
20 and 254 257
Over
All Individuals 300 303
Yeast Breads
and Rolls
1994
26
51
53
64
43
40
44
50
1995
28
45
54
61
46
37
45
49
Quick Breads,
Pancakes,
French Toast
1994
11
15
30
77
16
16
16
18
1995
11
21
21
24
21
14
15
19
Cakes, Cookies, Popcorn,
Pastries, Pies Pretzels, Corn
Chips
1994
22
42
54
43
37
39
33
38
1995 1994
23 8
46 12
43 17
46 13
51 11
35 17
34 9
39 12
1995
7
18
22
15
14
16
10
13
Cereals and
Pastas
1994
58
66
82
86
57
63
59
70
1995
57
97
84
91
54
52
69
76
Mixtures,
Mostly Gram'
1994
89
101
180
128
94
142
92
112
1995
84
115
138
128
100
143
83
107
Based on USDA CSFII 1 994 and 1 995 data for one day.
b Includes mixtures containing grain as the main ingredient.
Source: USDA, 1996a; 1996b.
Table 12-16. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Per Capita Intake of Grains, by Age (g/day as consumed)
Age (years)
All ages
Under 1
Ito4
5 to 9
10 to 14
15 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40 to 59
60 and over
Source: U.S.
Breads
147.3+1.4
16.2+9.2
104.6+4.5
154.3+3.8
186.2+3.6
188.5+3.7
166.5+4.9
170.0+5.0
156.8+3.9
144.4+3.1
122.1+3.4
EPA, 1984a (based on 1977-78 NFCS).
Cereals
29.9+1.3
37.9+8.2
38.4+4.0
39.5+3.4
36.4+3.2
28.8+3.3
20.2+4.3
18.2+4.4
18.8+3.5
24.7+2.7
42.5+3.0
Other Grains
22.9+1.7
1.8+10.9
14.8+5.4
22.7+4.5
25.6+4.2
27.8+4.4
25.0+5.8
26.6+5.9
26.4+4.6
23.3+3.6
19.3+4.0
Page
12-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
Table 12-17. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Grains, by Region (g/day as consumed)
Region
Total Grains
Breads
Cereals
Other
Grains
All Regions
Northeast
North Central
South
West
200.0+3.0
203.5+5.8
192.8+5.6
202.2+4.7
202.6+6.9
147.3+1.4
153.1+2.8
150.9+2.7
143.9+2.3
139.5+3.3
29.9+1.3
24.6+2.5
28.7+2.4
34.6+2.0
30.9+3.0
22.9+1.7
25.9+3.3
13.3+3.2
23.7+2.7
32.1+4.0
NOTE: Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
North Central = Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and
Kansas.
South = Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma.
West = Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1984b (based on 1977-78 NFCS).
Table
12-18. Consumption of Grains (g dry weight/day) for Different Age Groups and
Estimated Lifetime Average Daily Food Intakes for a U.S. Citizen
(averaged across sex) Calculated from the FDA Diet Data
Age (years)
Wheat
Corn
Rice
Oats
Other Grain
Total Grain
(0-1)
27.60
4.00
2.22
3.73
0.01
37.56
(1-5)
42.23
15.35
4.58
2.65
0.08
64.82
(6-13)
60.80
19.28
5.24
2.27
0.41
87.58
(14-19)
79.36
23.21
5.89
1.89
0.73
110.34
EstimatHetime
(20-44) (45-70)
65.86 55.13 60.30
12.83 14.82 12.01
5.78 4.21 5.03
1.32 2.00 1.85
13.45 4.41 6.49
90.59 76.12 84.19
" The estimated lifetime dietary intakes were estimated by:
Estimated lifetime = IR(O-l) + 5vrs * IR (1-5) + 8 vrs * IR (6-13) + 6 vrs *
where IR = the intake rate for a specific age group.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1989 (based on 1977-78 NFCS and NHANES
70 years
II data).
IR (14-19) + 25 vrs * IR (20-44) + 25 vrs * IR (45-70)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
12-19
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
Table 12-19. Per Capita Consumption of Flour and Cereal Products in 1991'
Food Item
Per Capita Consumption
(g/day)'
Total Wheat Flourb
Rye Flour
Ricec
Total Corn Products'1
Oat Products'
Barley Products'
Total Flour and Cereal Products8
169.8
0.7
20.9
27.2
10.7
1.1
230.6
" Original data were presented in Ibs/yr; data were converted to g/day by multiplying by a factor of 454 g/lb and dividing by 365 days/yr.
Consumption of most items at the processing level. Excludes quantities used in alcoholic beverages and fuel.
b Includes white, whole wheat, and durum flour.
0 Milled basis.
11 Includes com flour and meal, hominy and grits, and corn starch.
' Includes rolled oats, ready-to-eat cereals, oat flour, and oat bran.
* Includes barley flour, pearl barley, and malt and malt extract used in food processing.
8 Excludes wheat not ground into flour, for example, shredded wheat breakfast cereals.
Source: USDA, 1993.
Table 12-20. Quantity (as consumed) of Grain Products Consumed Per Eating Occasion
and the Percentage of Individuals Using These Foods in Three Days
Food category
Yeast Breads
Pancakes
Waffles
Tortillas
Cakes and Cupcakes
Cookies
Pies
Doughnuts
Crackers
Popcorn
Pretzels
Corn-based Salty Snacks
Pasta
Rice
Cooked Cereals
Readv-to-Eat Cereals
% Indiv. Quantity consumed per
using food eating occasion
in 3 days (g)
Average
93.7
8.3
2.9
2.9
25.5
30.8
11.9
9.9
26.2
5.6
2.2
5.9
11.4
18.5
12.4
43.4
46
113
87
69
79
32
129
64
22
19
29
33
153
147
203
36
Standard
Deviation
26
85
74
39
59
30
60
40
21
22
28
30
108
91
110
25
Consumers-only
Quantity consumed per eating occasion at specified percentiles (g)
5
21
27
20
28
23
7
57
26
6
5
3
9
35
41
31
8
25
25
54
40
30
41
14
97
42
12
9
12
18
70
88
123
22
50
44
81
78
60
63
26
120
43
15
15
21
21
140
165
240
29
75
50
146
100
90
99
40
150
84
24
18
36
40
210
125
245
45
90
75
219
158
120
144
60
195
106
42
36
57
60
280
263
360
60
95
100
282
200
140
184
84
236
126
57
45
85
80
320
350
480
84
99
140
438
400
210
284
144
360
208
113
108
160
156
560
438
490
120
Source: Pao et al., 1982 (based on 1977-78 NFCS).
Page
12-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
Table 12-21.
Food
Barley - pearled
Com - grain - endosperm
Corn - grain - bran
Millet
Oats
Rice - rough - white
Rye - rough
Rye - flour - medium
Sorghum (including milo)
Wheat - rough - hard white
Wheat - germ
Wheat - bran
Wheat - flour - whole grain
Mean Moisture Content of Selected Grains Expressed as Percentages of Edible
Moisture Content (Percent)
Raw Cooked
10.09 68.80
10.37
3.71
8.67 71.41
8.22
11.62 68.72
10.95
9.85
9.20
9.57
11.12
9.89
10.27
Portions
Comments
crude
crude
crude
Source: USDA, 1979-1986.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 12-21
-------
Table 12-22. Summary of Grain Intake Studies
Study
KEY STUDIES
EPA Analysis of 1989-91
CSFII Data
RELEVANT STUDIES
EPA's ORES
(White et al., 1983)
Pao et al., 1982
USDA, 1980; 1992; 1996a;
1996b
USDA, 1993b
U.S. EPA/ORP,
1984a; 1984b
U.S. EPA/OST, 1989
Survey Population Used in
Calculating Intake
Per capita
Per capita (i.e., consumers and
nonconsumers)
Consumers only serving size
data provided
Per capita and consumer only
grouped by age and sex
Per capita consumption based
on "food disappearance"
Per capita
Estimated lifetime dietary
intake
Types of Data Used
1989-91 CSFII data;
Based on 3-day average individual
intake rates.
1977-78 NFCS
3 -day individual intake data
1977-78 NFCS
3 -day individual intake data
1977-78 and 1987-88 NFCS, and
1994 and 1995 CSFII
1-day individual intake data
Based on food supply and
utilization data
1977-78 NFCS
Individual intake data
Based on FDA Total Diet Study
Food List which used 1977-78
NFCS data, and NHANES II data
Units
g/kg-day; as
consumed
g/kg-day; as
consumed
g; as consumed
g/day; as consumed
g/day; as consumed
g/day; as consumed
g/day; dry weight
Food Items
Distributions of intake rates for total
grain; individual grain items
Intake for a wide variety of grain
products presented; complex food groups
were disaggregated
Distributions of serving sizes for grain
products
Total grains and various grain products
Intake rates of grain products
Mean intake rates for total grain
products, and individual grain items.
Various food groups; complex foods
disaggregated
=
Mean
Table 12-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of Grain Products
Total Grain Intake
4.1 g/kg-day
Individual Grain Products
see Tables 12-2 to 12-10
95th Percentile
Multiple Percentiles
10.8 g/kg-day
see Tables 12-2 to 12-10
see Table 12-1
see Table 12-2 to 12-10
Study
EPA Analysis of CSFII 1989-91 Data
EPA Analysis of CSFII 1989-91 Data
a
I
(%
1
».
i- §
I !
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake of Grain Products
Table 12-24.
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of
interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Confidence in Grain Products Intake Recommendation
Rationale
USDA CSFII survey receives high level of peer review.
EPA analysis of these data has been peer reviewed outside
the Agency.
CSFII data are publicly available.
Enough information is included to reproduce results.
Analysis is specifically designed to address food intake.
Data focuses on the U.S. population.
This is new analysis of primary data.
Were the most current data publicly available at the time
the analysis was conducted for this Handbook.
Survey is designed to collect short-term data.
Survey methodology was adequate.
Study size was very large and therefore adequate.
The population studied was the U.S. population.
Survey was not designed to capture long term day-to-day
variability. Short term distributions are provided for
various age groups, regions, etc.
Response rate was adequate.
No measurements were taken. The study relied on survey
data.
1
CSFII was the most recent data set publicly available at
the time the analysis was conducted for this Handbook.
Therefore, it was the only study classified as key study.
Although the CSFII was the only study classified as key
study, the results are in good agreement with earlier data.
The survey is representative of U.S. population. Although
there was only one study considered key, these data are the
most recent and are in agreement with earlier data. The
approach used to analyze the data was adequate.
However, due to the limitations of the survey design
estimation of long-term percentile values (especially the
upper percentiles) is uncertain.
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium confidence for
average values;
Low confidence for long term
percentile distribution
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
N/A
Low
High
High confidence in the
average;
Low confidence in the long-
term upper percentiles
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
12-23
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 12A
APPENDIX 12A
FOOD CODES AND DEFINITIONS USED IN THE
ANALYSIS OF THE 1989-91 USDA CSFII GRAINS DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 12A-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 12A
Table 12A-1. Food Codes and Definitions Used in the Analysis of the 1989-91 USDA CSFII Grains Data
Food Product
Total Grains
Food Codes and Descriptions
51-
52-
53-
54-
55-
561-
562-
57-
breads
tortillas
sweets
snacks
breakfast foods
pasta
cooked cereals and rice
ready-to-eat and baby cereals
Food Product Food Codes and Descriptions
Pasta 561-
macaroni
noodles
spaghetti
Also includes the average portion of grain
mixtures (i.e., 3 1 percent) and the average
portion of meat mixtures (i.e., 13 percent)
made up by grain.
Breads
Sweets
Snacks
Breakfast Foods
Grain Mixtures
51-
52-
53-
54-
55-
58-
breads
rolls
muffins
bagel
biscuits
com bread
tortillas
cakes
cookies
pies
pastries
doughnuts
breakfast bars
coffee cakes
crackers
salty snacks
popcorn
pretzels
pancakes
waffles
french toast
grain mixtures
Cooked Cereals 56200-
56201-
56202-
56203-
562069-
56207-
56208-
56209-
Rice 56204-
56205-
5620601
Ready-to-eat 570-
Cereals 571-
572-
573-
574-
575-
576-
Baby Cereals 578-
Meat Mixtures 27-
28-
includes grits, oatmeal,
cornmeal mush, millet,
etc.
includes all varieties of
rice
includes all varieties of
ready-to-eat cereals
baby cereals
meat mixtures
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
12A-3
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
13. INTAKE RATES FOR VARIOUS HOME PRODUCED FOOD ITEMS 1
13.1. BACKGROUND 1
13.2. METHODS 2
13.3. RESULTS 7
13.4. ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS 9
13.5. RECOMMENDATIONS 10
13.6. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 13 10
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 13-1. 1986 Vegetable Gardening by Demographic Factors 13-1
Table 13-2. Percentage of Gardening Households
Growing Different Vegetables in 1986 13-1
Table 13-3. Sub-category Codes and Definitions 13-4
Table 13-4. Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations (Individuals) for NFCS Data
Used in Analysis of Food Intake 13-6
Table 13-5. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Meats 13-8
Table 13-6. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Fruits 13-8
Table 13-7. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Vegetables 13-9
Table 13-8. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined
13-12
Table 13-9. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) -Northeast 13-13
Table 13-10. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - Midwest 13-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
13. INTAKE RATES FOR VARIOUS HOME
PRODUCED FOOD ITEMS
13.1. BACKGROUND
Ingestion of contaminated foods is a potential
pathway of exposure to toxic chemicals. Consumers of
home produced food products may be of particular concern
because exposure resulting from local site contamination
may be higher for this subpopulation. According to a
survey by the National Gardening Association (1987), a
total of 34 million (or 38 percent) U.S. households
participated in vegetable gardening in 1986. Table 13-1
contains demographic data on vegetable gardening in 1986
by region/section, community size, and household size.
Table 13-1. 1986 Vegetable Gardening by Demographic Factors
Demographic
Factor
Total
Region/section
East
New England
Mid- Atlantic
Midwest
East Central
West Central
South
Deep South
Rest of South
West
Rocky Mountain
Pacific
Size of community
City
Suburb
Small town
Rural
Household size
Single, separated,
divorced, widowed
Married, no children
Married, with children
Percentage of
total households
that have gardens
38
33
37
32
50
50
50
33
44
29
37
53
32
26
33
32
61
54
45
44
Number of
households
(million)
34
7.3
1.9
5.4
11.0
6.6
4.5
9.0
3.1
5.9
6.2
2.3
4.2
6.2
10.2
3.4
14.0
8.5
11.9
13.2
Source: National Gardening Association, 1987.
Table 13-2 contains information on the types of vegetables
grown by home gardeners in 1986. Tomatoes, peppers,
onions, cucumbers, lettuce, beans, carrots, and com are
among the vegetables grown by the largest percentage of
gardeners. Home produced foods can become contaminated
in a variety of ways. Ambient pollutants in the air may be
deposited on plants, adsorbed onto or absorbed by the
plants, or dissolved in rainfall or
Table 13-2. Percentage of Gardening Households
Growing Different Vegetables in 1986
Vegetable
Percent
Artichokes
Asparagus
Beans
Beets
Broccoli
Brussel sprouts
Cabbage
Carrots
Cauliflower
Celery
Chard
Corn
Cucumbers
Dried peas
Dry beans
Eggplant
Herbs
Kale
Kohlrabi
Leeks
Lettuce
Melons
Okra
Onions
Oriental vegetables
Parsnips
Peanuts
Peas
Peppers
Potatoes
Pumpkins
Radishes
Rhubarb
Spinach
Summer squash
Sunflowers
Sweet potatoes
Tomato
Turnips
Winter squash
0.8
8.2
43.4
20.6
19.6
5.7
29.6
34.9
14.0
5.4
3.5
34.4
49.9
2.5
8.9
13.0
9.8
3.1
3.0
1.2
41.7
21.9
13.6
50.3
2.1
2.2
1.9
29.0
57.7
25.5
10.2
30.7
12.2
10.2
25.7
8.2
5.7
85.4
10.7
11.1
Source: National Gardening Association, 1987.
irrigation waters that contact the plants. Pollutants may also
be adsorbed onto plants roots from contaminated soil and
water. Finally, the addition of pesticides, soil additives, and
fertilizers to crops or gardens may result in contamination
of food products. Meat and dairy products can become
contaminated if animals consume contaminated soil, water,
or feed crops. Intake rates for home produced food
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
products are needed to assess exposure to local
contaminants present in homegrown or home caught foods.
Recently, EPA analyzed data from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's (USDA) Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey (NFCS) to generate distributions of intake rates for
home produced foods. The methods used and the results of
these analyses are presented below.
13.2. METHODS
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) data
were used to generate intake rates for home produced foods.
USDA conducts the NFCS every 10 years to analyze the
food consumption behavior and dietary status of Americans
(USDA, 1992). The most recent NFCS was conducted in
1987-88. The survey used a statistical sampling technique
designed to ensure that all seasons, geographic regions of
the 48 conterminous states in the U.S., and socioeconomic
and demographic groups were represented (USDA, 1994).
There were two components of the NFCS. The household
component collected information over a seven-day period
on the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of
households, and the types, amount, value, and sources of
foods consumed by the household (USDA, 1994). The
individual intake component collected information on food
intakes of individuals within each household over a three-
day period (USDA, 1993). The sample size for the 1987-
88 survey was approximately 4,300 households (over
10,000 individuals). This is a decrease over the previous
survey conducted in 1977-78 which sampled approximately
15,000 households (over 36,000 individuals) (USDA,
1994). The sample size was lower in the 1987-88 survey
as a result of budgetary constraints and low response rate
(i.e., 38 percent for the household survey and 31 percent for
the individual survey) (USDA, 1993). However, NFCS
data from 1987-88 were used to generate homegrown
intake rates because they were the most recent data
available and were believed to be more reflective of current
eating patterns among the U.S. population.
The USDA data were adjusted by applying the
sample weights calculated by USDA to the data set prior to
analysis. The USDA sample weights were designed to
"adjust for survey non-response and other vagaries of the
sample selection process" (USDA, 1987-88). Also, the
USDA weights are calculated "so that the weighted sample
total equals the known population total, in thousands, for
several characteristics thought to be correlated with eating
behavior" (USDA, 1987-88).
For the purposes of this study, home produced foods
were defined as homegrown fruits and vegetables, meat and
dairy products derived from consumer-raised livestock or
game meat, and home caught fish. The food items/groups
selected for analysis included major food groups (i.e., total
fruits, total vegetables, total meats, total dairy, total fish and
shellfish), individual food items for which >30 households
reported eating the home produced form of the item, fruits
and vegetables categorized as exposed, protected, and roots,
and various USDA fruit and vegetable subcategories (i.e.,
dark green vegetables, citrus fruits, etc.). Food
items/groups were identified in the NFCS data base
according to NFCS-defined food codes. Appendix 13A
presents the codes used to determine the various food
groups.
Although the individual intake component of the
NFCS gives the best measure of the amount of each food
item eaten by each individual in the household, it could not
be used directly to measure consumption of home produced
food because the individual component does not identify the
source of the food item (i.e., as home produced or not).
Therefore, an analytical method which incorporated data
from both the household and individual survey components
was developed to estimate individual home produced food
intake. The USDA household data were used to determine
(1) the amount of each home produced food item used
during a week by household members and (2) the number
of meals eaten in the household by each household member
during a week. Note that the household survey reports the
total amount of each food item used in the household
(whether by guests or household members); the amount
used by household members was derived by multiplying the
total amount used in the household by the proportion of all
meals served in the household (during the survey week) that
were consumed by household members.
The individual survey data were used to generate
average sex- and age-specific serving sizes for each food
item. The age categories used in the analysis were as
follows: 1 to 2 years; 3 to 5 years; 6 to 11 years; 12 to 19
years; 20 to 39 years; 40 to 69 years; and over 70 years
(intake rates were not calculated for children under 1; the
rationale for this is discussed below). These serving sizes
were used during subsequent analyses to generate
homegrown food intake rates for individual household
members. Assuming that the proportion of the household
quantity of each homegrown food item/group was a function
of the number of meals and the mean sex- and age-specific
serving size for each family member, individual intakes of
home produced food were calculated for all members of the
survey population using SAS programming in which the
following general equation was used:
Page
13-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
(Eqn. 13-1)
where:
W; = Homegrown amount of food item/group attributed to
member i during the week (g/week);
W( = Total quantity of homegrown food item/group used by
the family members (g/week);
nij = Number of meals of household food consumed by
member i during the week (meals/week); and
qi = Serving size for an individual within the age and sex
category of the member (g/meal).
Daily intake of a homegrown food item/group was
determined by dividing the weekly value (w;) by seven.
Intake rates were indexed to the self-reported body weight
of the survey respondent and reported in units of g/kg-day.
Intake rates were not calculated for children under one year
of age because their diet differs markedly from that of other
household members, and thus the assumption that all
household members share all foods would be invalid for this
age group. In Section 13.5, a method for estimating per-
capita homegrown intake in this age group is suggested.
For the major food groups (fruits, vegetables, meats,
dairy, and fish) and individual foods consumed by at least
30 households, distributions of home produced intake
among consumers were generated for the entire data set and
according to the following subcategories: age groups,
urbanization categories, seasons, racial classifications,
regions, and responses to the questionnaire.
Consumers were defined as members of survey
households who reported consumption of the food
item/group of interest during the one week survey period. In
addition, for the major food groups, distributions were
generated for each region by season, urbanization, and
responses to the questionnaire. Table 13-3 presents the
codes, definitions, and a description of the data included in
each of the subcategories. Intake rates were not calculated
for food items/groups for which less than 30 households
reported home produced usage because the number of
observations may be inadequate for generating distributions
that would be representative of that segment of consumers.
Fruits and vegetables were also classified as exposed,
protected, or roots, as shown in Appendix 13A of this
document. Exposed foods are those that are grown above
ground and are likely to be contaminated by pollutants
deposited on surfaces that are eaten. Protected products are
those that have outer protective coatings that are typically
removed before consumption. Distributions of intake were
tabulated for these food classes for the same subcategories
listed above. Distributions were also tabulated for the
following USDA food classifications: dark green
vegetables, deep yellow vegetables, other vegetables, citrus
fruits, and other fruits. Finally, the percentages of total
intake of the food items/groups consumed within survey
households that can be attributed to home production were
tabulated. The percentage of intake that was homegrown
was calculated as the ratio of total intake of the homegrown
food item/group by the survey population to the total intake
of all forms of the food by the survey population.
As disccussed in Section 13.3, percentiles of average
daily intake derived from short time intervals (e.g., 7 days)
will not, in general, be reflective of long term patterns. This
is especially true regarding consumption of many
homegrown products (e.g., fruits, vegetables), where there
is often a strong seasonal component associated with their
use. To try to derive, for the major food categories, the long
term distribution of average daily intake rates from the
short-term data available here, an approach was developed
which attempted to account for seasonal variability in
consumption. This approach used regional "seasonally
adjusted distributions" to approximate regional long term
distributions and then combined these regional adjusted
distributions (in proportion to the weights for each region)
to obtain a U.S. adjusted distribution which approximated
the U.S. long term distribution.
The percentiles of the seasonally adjusted distribution
for a given region were generated by averaging the
corresponding percentiles of each of the four seasonal
distributions of the region. More formally, the seasonally
adjusted distribution for each region is such that its inverse
cumulative distribution function is the average of the
inverse cumulative distribution functions of each of the
seasonal distributions of that region. The use of regional
seasonally adjusted distributions to
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
13-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Table 13-3. Sub-category Codes and Definitions
Code
Definition
Description
Region"
1
2
3
4
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont
Includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North
Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin
Includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia
Includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming
Urbanization
1
2
3
Central City
Suburban
Nonmetropolitan
Cities with populations of 50,000 or more that is the main city within the metropolitan
statistical area (MSA).
An area that is generally within the boundaries of an MS A, but is not within the legal limit of
the central city.
An area that is not within an MSA.
Race
1
2
3
4
5,8,9
-
-
-
-
Other/NA
White (Caucasian)
Black
Asian and Pacific Islander
Native American, Aleuts, and Eskimos
Don't know, no answer, some other race
Responses to Survey Questions
Grow
Raise Animals
Fish/Hunt
Farm
Question 75
Question 76
Question 77
Question 79
Did anyone in the household grow any vegetables or fruit for use in the household?
Did anyone in the household produce any animal products such as milk, eggs, meat, or poultry
for home use in your household?
Did anyone in the household catch any fish or shoot game for home use?
Did anyone in the household operate a farm or ranch?
Season
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
-
-
-
-
April, May, June
July, August, September
October, November, December
January, February, March
" Alaska and Hawaii were not included.
Source: USDA 1987-88.
approximate regional long term distributions is based on the
assumption that each individual consumes at the same
regional percentile levels for each season and consumes at
a constant weekly rate throughout a given season. Thus, for
instance, if the 60th percentile weekly intake level in the
South is 14.0 gin the summer and 7.0 g in each of the three
other seasons, then an individual in the South with an
average weekly intake of 14.0 g over the summer would be
assumed to have an intake of 14.0 g for each week of the
summer and an intake of 7.0 g for each week of the other
seasons.
Note that the seasonally adjusted distributions derived
above were generated using the overall distributions, i.e.,
both consumers and non-consumers. However, since all the
other distributions presented in this section are based on
consumers only, the percentiles for the adjusted
distributions have been revised to reflect the percentiles
among consumers only. Given the above assumption about
Page
13-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
how each individual consumes, the percentage consuming
for the seasonally adjusted distributions give an estimate of
the percentage of the population consuming the specified
food category at any time during the year.
The intake data presented here for consumers of home
produced foods and the total number of individuals
surveyed may be used to calculate the mean and the
percentiles of the distribution of home produced food
consumption in the overall population (consumers and non-
consumers) as follows:
Assuming that IRp is the homegrown intake rate of
food item/group at the p* percentile and Nc is the weighted
number of individuals consuming the homegrown food item,
and NT is the weighted total number of individuals surveyed,
then NT - Isj, is the weighted number of individuals who
reported zero consumption of the food item. In addition,
there are (p/100 x Nc) individuals below the p* percentile.
Therefore, the percentile that corresponds to a particular
intake rate (IRp) for the overall distribution of homegrown
food consumption (including consumers and nonconsumers)
can be obtained by:
100
(Eqn. 13-2)
For example, the percentile of the overall population
that is equivalent to the 50th percentile consumer only
intake rate for homegrown fruits would be calculated as
follows:
From Table 13-8, the 50th percentile homegrown fruit intake rate
(IRjo) is 1.07 g/kg-day. The weighted number of individuals
consuming fruits (Nc) is 14,744,000. From Table 13-4, the
weighted total number of individuals surveyed (NT) is
188,019,000. The number of individuals consuming fruits below
the 50th percentile is:
p/100 x Nc = (0.5) x (14,744,000)
= 7,372,000
The number of individuals that did not consume fruit during the
survey period is:
NT-NC
= 188,019,000- 14,744,000
= 173,275,000
The total number of individuals with homegrown intake rates at or
below 1.07 g/kg-day is
(p/100 x Nc) + (NT - Nc)
= 7,372,000 + 173,275,000
= 180,647,000
The percentile of the overall population that is represented by this
intake rate is:
th = 100 x (180,647,000 / 188,109,000)
Poverall ^^ i -i
= 96f« percentile
Therefore, an intake rate of 1.07 g/kg-day of homegrown fruit
corresponds to the 96th percentile of the overall population.
Following the same procedure described above, 5.97
g/kg-day, which is the 90th percentile of the consumers
only population, corresponds to the 99th percentile of the
overall population. Likewise, 0.063 g/kg-day, which is the
1st percentile of the consumers only population,
corresponds to the 92nd percentile of the overall
population. Note that the consumers only distribution
corresponds to the tail of the distribution for the overall
population. Consumption rates below the 92nd percentile
are very close to zero. The mean intake rate for the overall
population can be calculated by multiplying the mean intake
rate among consumers by the proportion of individuals
consuming the homegrown food item, NC/NT.
Table 13-4 displays the weighted numbers NT, as well
as the unweighted total survey sample sizes, for each
sub category and overall. It should be noted that the total
unweighted number of observations in Table 13-4 (9,852)
is somewhat lower than the number of observations
reported by USDA because this study only used
observations for family members for which age and body
weight were specified.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13-5
-------
I
Table 13-4. Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations (Individuals) for NFCS Data Used in Analysis of Food Intake
All Regions
Total
Age (years)
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Surburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Response to Questionnaire
Do you garden?
Do you raise animals?
Do you hunt?
Do you fish?
Do vou farm?
wgtd
188019000
2814000
5699000
8103000
16711000
20488000
61606000
56718000
15880000
47667000
46155000
45485000
48712000
56352000
45023000
86584000
2413000
21746000
1482000
4787000
157531000
68152000
10097000
20216000
39733000
7329000
unwgtd
9852
156
321
461
937
1084
3058
3039
796
1577
3954
1423
2898
2217
3001
4632
114
1116
91
235
8294
3744
631
1148
2194
435
Northeast
wgtd
41167000
545000
1070000
1490000
3589000
4445000
12699000
13500000
3829000
9386000
10538000
9460000
11783000
9668000
5521000
25978000
333000
3542000
38000
1084000
36170000
12501000
1178000
3418000
5950000
830000
unwgtd
2018
29
56
92
185
210
600
670
176
277
803
275
663
332
369
1317
13
132
4
51
1818
667
70
194
321
42
Midwest
wgtd
46395000
812000
1757000
2251000
4263000
5490000
15627000
13006000
3189000
14399000
10657000
10227000
11112000
17397000
14296000
14702000
849000
2794000
116000
966000
41670000
22348000
3742000
6948000
12621000
2681000
unwgtd
2592
44
101
133
263
310
823
740
178
496
1026
338
732
681
1053
858
37
126
6
37
2386
1272
247
411
725
173
South
wgtd
64331000
889000
1792000
2543000
5217000
6720000
21786000
19635000
5749000
13186000
16802000
17752000
16591000
17245000
19100000
27986000
654000
13701000
162000
1545000
48269000
20518000
2603000
6610000
13595000
2232000
unwgtd
3399
51
105
140
284
369
1070
1080
300
439
1437
562
961
715
1197
1487
32
772
8
86
2501
1136
162
366
756
130
West
wgtd
36066000
568000
1080000
1789000
3612000
3833000
11494000
10577000
3113000
10696000
8158000
7986000
9226000
12042000
6106000
17918000
577000
1709000
1166000
1192000
31422000
12725000
2574000
3240000
7567000
1586000
unwgtd
1841
32
59
95
204
195
565
549
142
365
688
246
542
489
382
970
32
86
73
61
1589
667
152
177
392
90
Q
§=
ft
&
I
I
a,
ft
I,
s
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
As mentioned above, the intake rates derived in this
section are based on the amount of household food
consumption. As measured by the NFCS, the amount of
food "consumed" by the household is a measure of
consumption in an economic sense, i.e., a measure of the
weight of food brought into the household that has been
consumed (used up) in some manner. In addition to food
being consumed by persons, food may be used up by
spoiling, by being discarded (e.g., inedible parts), through
cooking processes, etc.
USDA estimated preparation losses for various foods
(USDA, 1975). For meats, a net cooking loss, which
includes dripping and volatile losses, and a net post cooking
loss, which involves losses from cutting, bones, excess fat,
scraps and juices, were derived for a variety of cuts and
cooking methods. For each meat type (e.g., beef) EPA has
averaged these losses across all cuts and cooking methods
to obtain a mean net cooking loss and a mean net post
cooking loss; these are displayed in Table 13-5. For
individual fruits and vegetables, USDA (1975) also gave
cooking and post-cooking losses. These data are presented
in Tables 13-6 and 13-7.
The following formulas can be used to convert the
intake rates tabulated here to rates reflecting actual
consumption:
- L2)
(Eqn. 13-3)
IA=Ix(l-L.)
(Eqn. 13-4)
where IA is the adjusted intake rate, I is the tabulated intake
rate, Lj is the cooking loss, L2 is the post-cooking loss and
LP is the paring or preparation loss. For fruits, corrections
based on postcooking losses only apply to fruits that are
eaten in cooked forms. For raw forms of the fruits, paring
or preparation loss data should be used to correct for losses
from removal of skin, peel, core, caps, pits, stems, and
defects, or draining of liquids from canned or frozen forms.
To obtain preparation losses for food categories, the
preparation losses of the individual foods making up the
category can be averaged.
In calculating ingestion exposure, assessors should
use consistent forms in combining intake rates with
contaminant concentrations. This issue has been previously
discussed in the other food Chapters.
13.3. RESULTS
The intake rate distributions (among consumers) for
total home produced fruits, vegetables, meats, fish and dairy
products are shown, respectively, in Tables 13-8 through
13-32 (displayed at the end of Chapter 13). Also shown in
these tables is the proportion of respondents consuming the
item during the (one-week) survey period. Homegrown
vegetables were the most commonly consumed of the major
food groups (18.3%), followed by fruit (7.8%), meat
(4.9%), fish (2.1%), and dairy products (0.7%). The intake
rates for the major food groups vary according to region,
age, urbanization code, race, and response to survey
questions. In general, intake rates of home produced foods
are higher among populations in non-metropolitan and
suburban areas and lowest in central city areas. Results of
the regional analyses indicate that intake of homegrown
fruits, vegetables, meat and dairy products is generally
highest for individuals in the Midwest and South and lowest
for those in the Northeast. Intake rates of home caught fish
were generally highest among consumers in the South.
Homegrown intake was generally higher among individuals
who indicated that they operate a farm, grow their own
vegetables, raise animals, and catch their own fish. The
results of the seasonal analyses for all regions combined
indicated that, in general, homegrown fruits and vegetables
were eaten at a higher rate in summer, and home caught fish
was consumed at a higher rate in spring; however, seasonal
intake varied based on individual regions. Seasonally
adjusted intake rate distributions for the major food groups
are presented in Table 13-33.
Tables 13-34 through 13-60 present distributions of
intake for individual home produced food items for
households that reported consuming the homegrown form
of the food during the survey period. Intake rate
distributions among consumers for homegrown foods
categorized as exposed fruits and vegetables, protected
fruits and vegetables, and root vegetables are presented in
Tables 13-61 through 13-65; the intake distributions for
various USDA classifications (e.g., dark green vegetables)
are presented in Tables 13-66 through 13-70. The results
are presented in units of g/kg-day. Table 13-71 presents the
fraction of household intake attributed to home produced
forms of the food items/groups evaluated. Thus, use of
these data in calculating potential dose does not require the
body weight factor to be included in the denominator of the
average daily dose (ADD) equation. It should be noted that
converting these intake rates into units of g/day by
multiplying by a single average body
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Table 13-5. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Meats
Meat Type
Mean Net Cooking Loss (%)"
Mean Range of Means
Standard
Deviation
Mean Net Post Cooking Loss (%)b
Mean Range of Means
Standard
Deviation
Beef
Pork
Chicken
Turkey
Lamb
Veal
Fishc
Shellfish"
27
28
32
32
30
29
30
33
11 to 42
Ito67
7 to 55
11 to 57
25 to 37
lO.to 45
-19to81
Ito94
7
10
9
7
5
11
19
30
24
36
31
28
34
25
11
10
10 to 46
14 to 52
16to51
8 to 48
14to61
18 to 37
Ito26
10 to 10
9
11
8
10
14
9
6
0
" Includes dripping and volatile losses during cooking. Averaged over various cuts and preparation methods.
b Includes losses from cutting, shrinkage, excess fat, bones, scraps, and juices. Averaged over various cuts and preparation methods.
0 Averaged over a variety offish, to include: bass, bluefish, butterfish, cod, flounder, haddock, halibut, lake trout, makerel, perch, porgy,
red snapper, rockfish, salmon, sea trout, shad, smelt, sole, spot, squid, swordfish steak, trout, and whitefish.
d Averaged over a variety of shellfish, to include: clams, crab, crayfish, lobster, oysters, and shrimp and shrimp dishes.
Source: USDA. 1975.
Table 13-6. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Fruits
Mean Net Post Cooking Loss (%)'
Range of Standard
Type of Fruit Mean Means Deviation
Apples 25 3 to 42 13
Pears
Peaches 36 19 to 50 12
Strawberries
Oranges
b
Source:
Mean Paring or Preparation Loss (%)b-c
Range of
Mean Means Standard
22"
22"
41C
24"
10"
30C
29"
13 to 40"
12 to 60"
25 to 47C
6 to 68"
6 to 14"
96 to 41°
19 to 38"
NAb
NAb
NAC
NAb
NAb
15C
NAb
Includes losses from draining cooked forms.
Includes losses from removal of skin or peel, core or pit, stems or caps, seeds and defects.
Includes losses from removal of drained liquids from canned or frozen forms.
USDA. 1975
Page
13-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Table 13-7. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Vegetables
Type of Vegetable
Mean Net Cooking Loss (%)"
Mean Range of Means
Standard
Deviation
Mean Net Post Cooking Loss (%)b
Mean Range of Means
Standard
Deviation
Asparagus
Beets
Broccoli
Cabbage
Carrots
Corn
Cucumbers
Lettuce
Lima Beans
Okra
Onions
Peas, green
Peppers
Pumpkins
Snap Beans
Tomatoes
Potatoes
23
28
14
11
19
26
18
22
-12
12
5
2
13
19
18
15
-22
5 to 47
4 to 60
Oto39
4 to 20
2 to 41
-Ito64
5 to 40
6 to 36
-143 to 56
-10 to 40
-90 to 63
-147 to 62
3 to 27
8 to 30
5 to 42
2 to 34
-527 to 46
16
17
13
6
12
22
14
12
69
16
38
63
9
11
13
10
121
22
Ito33
11
Includes losses due to paring, trimming, flowering the stalk, thawing, draining, scraping, shelling, slicing, husking, chopping, and dicing
and gains from the addition of water, fat, or other ingredients. Averaged over various preparation methods.
Includes losses from draining or removal of skin.
Source: USDA. 1975
weight is inappropriate, because individual intake rates
were indexed to the reported body weights of the survey
respondents. However, if there is a need to compare the
total intake data presented here to other intake data in units
of g/day, abody weight less than 70 kg (i.e., approximately
60 kg; calculated based on the number of respondents in
each age category and the average body weights for these
age groups, as presented in Volume I, Chapter 7) should be
used because the total survey population included children
as well as adults.
13.4. ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS
The USDA NFCS data set is the largest publicly
available source of information on food consumption habits
in the United States. The advantages of using this data set
are that it is expected to be representative of the U.S.
population and that it provides information on a wide
variety of food groups. However, the data collected by the
USDA NFCS are based on short-term dietary recall and the
intake distributions generated from them may not accurately
reflect long-term intake patterns, particularly with respect
to the tails (extremes) of the distributions. Also, the two
survey components (i.e., household and individual) do not
define food items/groups in a consistent manner; as a result,
some errors may be introduced into these analyses because
the two survey components are linked. The results
presented here may also be biased by assumptions that are
inherent in the analytical method utilized. The analytical
method may not capture all high-end consumers within
households because average serving sizes are used in
calculating the proportion of homegrown food consumed by
each household member. Thus, for instance, in a two-
person household where one member had high intake and
one had low intake, the method used here would assume
that both members had an equal and moderate level of
intake. In addition, the analyses assume that all family
members consume a portion of the home produced food
used within the household. However, not all family
members may consume each home produced food item and
serving sizes allocated here may not be entirely
representative of the portion of household foods consumed
by each family member. As was mentioned in Section 13.2,
no analyses were performed for the under 1 year age group
due to the above concerns. Below, in Section 13.5, a
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
recommended approach for dealing with this age group is
presented.
The preparation loss factors discussed in Section
13.2 are intended to convert intake rates based on
"household consumption" to rates reflective of what
individuals actually consume. However, these factors do
not include losses to spoilage, feeding to pets, food thrown
away, etc.
It should also be noted that because this analysis is
based on the 1987-88 MFCS, it may not reflect recent
changes in food consumption patterns. The low response
rate associated with the 1987-88 NFCS also contributes to
the uncertainty of the homegrown intake rates generated
using these data.
13.5. RECOMMENDATIONS
The distribution data presented in this study may be
used to assess exposure to contaminants in foods grown,
raised, or caught at a specific site. Table 13-72 presents the
confidence ratings for homegrown food intake. The
recommended values for mean intake rates among
consumers for the various home produced foods can be
taken from the tables presented here; these can be converted
to per capita rates by multiplying by the fraction consuming.
The data presented here for consumers of home produced
foods represent average daily intake rates of food
items/groups over the seven-day survey period and do not
account for variations in eating habits during the rest of the
year; thus the percentiles presented here (except the
seasonally adjusted) are only valid when considering
exposures over time periods of about one week. Similarly,
the figures for percentage consuming are also only valid
over a one week time period. Since the tabulated
percentiles reflect the distribution among consumers only,
Eqn. 13-2 must be used to convert the percentiles shown
here to ones valid for the general population.
In contrast, the seasonally adjusted percentiles are
designed to give percentiles of the long term distribution of
average daily intake and the percentage consuming shown
with this distribution is designed to estimate the percent of
the population consuming at any time during a year.
However, because the assumptions mentioned in Section
13.2 can not be verified to hold, these upper percentiles
must be assigned a low confidence rating. Eqn. 13-2 may
also be used with this distribution to convert percentiles
among consumers to percentiles for the general population.
For all the rates tabulated here, preparation loss
factors should be applied, where appropriate. The form of
the food used to estimate intake should be consistent with
the form used to measure contaminant concentration.
As described above, the tables do not display rates
for children under 1 year of age. For this age group, it is
recommended that per-capita homegrown consumption
rates be estimated using the following approach. First, for
each specific home produced food of interest, the ratio of
per capita intake for children under 1 year compared to that
of children 1 to 2 years is calculated using the USDA CSFII
1989-1991 results displayed in Volume II, Chapters 9 and
11. Note these results are based on individual food intakes;
however, they consider all sources of food, not just home
produced. Second, the per-capita intake rate in the 1 to 2
year age group of the home produced food of interest is
calculated as described above by multiplying the fraction
consuming by the mean intake rate among consumers (both
these numbers are displayed in the tables). Finally, the per
capita homegrown intake rate in children under 1 year of the
food of interest is estimated by multiplying the homegrown
per-capita intake rate in the 1 to 2 year age group by the
above ratio of intakes in the under 1 year age group as
compared to the 1 to 2 year age group.
The AIHC Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) used data
presented in the 1989 version of the Exposure Factors
Handbook which reported data from the USDA 1977-78
NFCS. In this Handbook, new analyses of more recent data
from USDA were conducted. Numbers, however, cannot
be directly compared with previous values since the results
from the new analyses are presented on a body weight basis.
13.6. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 13
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC) (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
National Gardening Association. (1987) National
gardening survey: 1986-1987. Burlington,
Vermont: The National Gardening Association, Inc.
USDA. (1975) Food yields summarized by different
stages of preparation. Agriculture Handbook No.
102. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
Research Service, Washington, DC.
Page
13-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
USDA. (1987-88) Dataset: Nationwide Food USDA. (1993) Food and nutrient intakes by individuals
Consumption Survey 1987/88 Household Food Use. in the United States, 1 Day, 1987-88. Nationwide
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C. Food Consumption Survey 1987-88, NFCS Report
1987/88 NFCS Database. No. 87-1-1.
USDA. (1992) Changes in food consumption and USDA. (1994) Food consumption and dietary levels of
expenditures in American households during the households in the United States, 1987-88. U.S.
1980's. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Washington, D.C. Statistical Bulletin No. 849. Service. Report No. 87-H-l.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 13-11
-------
I
5 .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Population
Group
Total
Age (years)
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Questionnaire Response
Hoiseholds who garden
Households who farm
NOTE : SE = standard error
Nc
Nc
wgtd unwgtd
14744000
360000
550000
1044000
1189000
3163000
5633000
2620000
3137000
2963000
4356000
4288000
3668000
4118000
6898000
450000
14185000
12742000
1917000
817
23
34
75
67
164
309
134
108
301
145
263
143
278
394
20
793
709
112
%
Consuming
7.84
6.32
6.79
6.25
5.80
5.13
9.93
16.50
6.58
6.42
9.58
8.80
6.51
9.15
7.97
2.07
9.00
18.70
26.16
Table 13-8.
Mean
2.68E+00
8.74E+00
4.07E+00
3.59E+00
1.94E+00
1.95E+00
2.66E+00
2.25E+00
1.57E+00
1.58E+00
3.86E+00
3.08E+00
2.31E+00
2.41E+00
3.07E+00
1.87E+00
2.73E+00
2.79E+00
2.58E+00
Consumer Only
SE
1.89E-01
3.10E+00
1.48E+00
6.76E-01
3.66E-01
3.33E-01
3.04E-01
2.34E-01
1.59E-01
1.37E-01
6.40E-01
3.41E-01
2.64E-01
3.09E-01
3.22E-01
8.53E-01
1.94E-01
2.10E-01
2.59E-01
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1 987/88 NFCS
Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day)
PI
6.26E-02
9.59E-01
l.OOE-02
l.OOE-02
8.74E-02
8.14E-02
6.26E-02
4.41E-02
2.63E-01
8.89E-02
l.OOE-02
4.41E-02
4.41E-02
6.26E-02
1.25E-01
1.32E-01
7.22E-02
5.60E-02
7.22E-02
in survey.
P5
1.68E-01
1.09E+00
l.OOE-02
1.91E-01
1.27E-01
1.28E-01
1.91E-01
2.24E-01
3.04E-01
1.98E-01
9.18E-02
1.72E-01
1.82E-01
1.27E-01
2.30E-01
2.84E-01
1.82E-01
1.84E-01
2.76E-01
P10
2.78E-01
1.30E+00
3.62E-01
4.02E-01
2.67E-01
2.04E-01
2.86E-01
3.80E-01
3.90E-01
2.54E-01
1.56E-01
2.69E-01
3.33E-01
2.32E-01
2.95E-01
4.55E-01
2.82E-01
2.87E-01
4.13E-01
- All Regions Combined
P25
4.97E-01
1.64E+00
9.77E-01
6.97E-01
4.41E-01
3.74E-01
4.69E-01
6.11E-01
5.70E-01
4.23E-01
4.45E-01
5.56E-01
5.67E-01
4.50E-01
4.91E-01
6.08E-01
5.10E-01
5.30E-01
7.53E-01
P50
1.07E+00
3.48E+00
1.92E+00
1.31E+00
6.61E-01
7.03E-01
1.03E+00
1.18E+00
1.04E+00
8.57E-01
1.26E+00
1.15E+00
1.08E+00
1.15E+00
9.93E-01
1.13E+00
1.07E+00
1.12E+00
1.61E+00
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
2.37E+00 5.97E+00 1.11E+01 2.40E+01 6.06E+01
7.98E+00 1.93E+01 6.06E+01 6.06E+01 6.06E+01
2.73E+00 6.02E+00 8.91E+00 4.83E+01 4.83E+01
3.08E+00 1.18E+01 1.58E+01 3.22E+01 3.22E+01
2.35E+00 6.76E+00 8.34E+00 1.85E+01 1.85E+01
1.77E+00 4.17E+00 6.84E+00 1.61E+01 3.70E+01
2.33E+00 5.81E+00 1.30E+01 2.38E+01 5.33E+01
2.35E+00 5.21E+00 8.69E+00 1.17E+01 1.53E+01
1.92E+00 3.48E+00 4.97E+00 1.06E+01 1.06E+01
1.70E+00 4.07E+00 5.10E+00 8.12E+00 3.17E+01
3.31E+00 1.09E+01 1.46E+01 5.33E+01 6.06E+01
2.61E+00 8.04E+00 1.53E+01 2.49E+01 4.83E+01
2.46E+00 5.34E+00 1.05E+01 1.43E+01 1.93E+01
2.42E+00 4.46E+00 8.34E+00 2.40E+01 5.33E+01
2.33E+00 7.26E+00 1.52E+01 3.70E+01 6.06E+01
1.53E+00 2.29E+00 2.29E+00 1.93E+01 1.93E+01
2.46E+00 6.10E+00 1.17E+01 2.40E+01 6.06E+01
2.50E+00 6.10E+00 1.18E+01 2.49E+01 6.06E+01
3.62E+00 5.97E+00 7.82E+00 1.58E+01 1.58E+01
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
Ł
-------
Table 13-9. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - Northeast
Population Nc Nc %
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 1279000 72 3.11
Season
Fall 260000 8 2.77
Spring 352000 31 3.34
Summer 271000 9 2.86
Winter 396000 24 3.36
Urbanization
Central City 50000 3 0.52
Nonmetropolitan 176000 10 3.19
Suburban 1053000 59 4.05
Questionnaire Response
Households who garden 983000 59 7.86
Households who farm 132000 4 15.90
Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50
9.29E-01 2.20E-01 7.91E-02 8.48E-02 1.61E-01 3.11E-01 4.85E-01
8.80E-01 2.32E-01 8.74E-02 1.61E-01 1.68E-01 2.87E-01 4.85E-01
7.10E-01 1.13E-01 1.84E-01 2.07E-01 2.30E-01 2.93E-01 5.42E-01
1.05E+00 2.63E-01 1.84E-01 2.30E-01 2.93E-01 4.37E-01 5.43E-01
1.04E+00 2.64E-01 8.74E-02 1.82E-01 2.13E-01 3.75E-01 5.43E-01
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
7.82E-01 1.29E+00 2.16E+00 1.17E+01 1.17E+01
8.79E-01 1.83E+00 2.16E+00 7.13E+00 7.13E+00
8.81E-01 1.38E+00 1.79E+00 2.75E+00 2.75E+00
8.12E-01 1.29E+00 2.75E+00 1.17E+01 1.17E+01
8.81E-01 1.38E+00 2.75E+00 1.17E+01 1.17E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1 987-88 NFCS
Table 13-10. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc %
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 4683000 302 10.09
Season
Fall 1138000 43 7.90
Spring 1154000 133 10.83
Summer 1299000 44 12.70
Winter 1092000 82 9.83
Urbanization
Central City 1058000 42 6.08
Nonmetropolitan 1920000 147 13.43
Suburban 1705000 113 11.60
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 4060000 267 18.17
Households who farm 694000 57 25.89
Mean
3.01E+00
1.54E+00
1.69E+00
7.03E+00
1.18E+00
1.84E+00
2.52E+00
4.29E+00
3.27E+00
2.59E+00
SE
4.13E-01
1.86E-01
2.76E-01
1.85E+00
1.80E-01
3.93E-01
5.43E-01
8.72E-01
4.69E-01
3.01E-01
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consvj
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1 987-88 NFCS
PI P5
4.41E-02 1.25E-01
2.63E-01 3.04E-01
8.89E-02 2.09E-01
6.26E-02 9.18E-02
2.57E-02 5.60E-02
4.15E-02 1.01E-01
5.60E-02 1.08E-01
9.18E-02 2.04E-01
4.41E-02 1.01E-01
5.60E-02 1.91E-01
tmers in survey.
P10
2.35E-01
4.74E-01
2.62E-01
1.25E-01
1.46E-01
2.63E-01
1.46E-01
3.10E-01
2.04E-01
4.08E-01
P25
4.68E-01
6.11E-01
4.23E-01
4.28E-01
3.62E-01
5.21E-01
3.96E-01
4.81E-01
4.48E-01
1.26E+00
- Midwest
P50
1.03E+00
1.07E+00
9.23E-01
1.55E+00
6.09E-01
1.07E+00
1.03E+00
7.64E-01
1.07E+00
1.63E+00
P75
2.31E+00
1.92E+00
1.72E+00
8.34E+00
1.42E+00
1.90E+00
2.07E+00
3.01E+00
2.37E+00
3.89E+00
P90
6.76E+00
3.48E+00
2.89E+00
1.61E+01
2.61E+00
2.82E+00
4.43E+00
1.39E+01
7.15E+00
6.76E+00
P95
1.39E+01
4.34E+00
4.47E+00
3.70E+01
3.73E+00
9.74E+00
6.84E+00
1.80E+01
1.46E+01
8.34E+00
P99
5.33E+01
5.33E+00
1.60E+01
6.06E+01
1.09E+01
1.09E+01
5.33E+01
6.06E+01
5.33E+01
1.11E+01
P100
6.06E+01
5.33E+00
3.17E+01
6.06E+01
1.09E+01
1.09E+01
5.33E+01
6.06E+01
6.06E+01
1.11E+01
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
i Ore
ft
-------
Table 13-11. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (Ł/kg-day) -
Population
Group
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
4148000 208
896000 29
620000 59
1328000 46
1304000 74
1066000 39
1548000 89
1534000 80
3469000 174
296000 16
%
Consuming
6.45
6.80
3.69
7.48
7.86
6.18
8.10
5.48
16.91
13.26
* Intake data not provided for subpopulatins for which there were less
Mean
2.97E+00
1.99E+00
2.05E+00
2.84E+00
4.21E+00
3.33E+00
2.56E+00
3.14E+00
2.82E+00
*
SE
3.00E-01
4.39E-01
2.55E-01
6.50E-01
6.51E-01
5.39E-01
3.87E-01
6.02E-01
2.94E-01
*
PI P5 P10 P25
1.12E-01 2.42E-01 3.55E-01 5.97E-01
3.92E-01 4.27E-01 4.46E-01 6.50E-01
1.55E-01 2.82E-01 3.11E-01 4.50E-01
8.14E-02 1.56E-01 2.67E-01 4.41E-01
1.12E-01 2.36E-01 3.82E-01 8.92E-01
2.36E-01 3.92E-01 4.55E-01 8.34E-01
8.14E-02 2.67E-01 3.38E-01 6.12E-01
1.12E-01 1.56E-01 2.84E-01 5.08E-01
1.56E-01 2.84E-01 3.84E-01 6.50E-01
* * * *
South
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
1.35E+00 3.01E+00 8.18E+00 1.41E+01 2.38E+01 2.40E+01
1.13E+00 1.96E+00 4.97E+00 8.18E+00 1.06E+01 1.06E+01
1.06E+00 4.09E+00 5.01E+00 6.58E+00 7.05E+00 7.05E+00
1.31E+00 2.83E+00 6.10E+00 1.43E+01 2.40E+01 2.40E+01
1.88E+00 3.71E+00 1.41E+01 1.97E+01 2.38E+01 2.38E+01
2.55E+00 4.77E+00 8.18E+00 1.06E+01 1.43E+01 1.43E+01
1.40E+00 2.83E+00 5.97E+00 1.04E+01 2.40E+01 2.40E+01
1.10E+00 2.29E+00 1.18E+01 1.55E+01 2.38E+01 2.38E+01
1.39E+00 2.94E+00 6.10E+00 1.41E+01 2.11E+01 2.40E+01
******
than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-12. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - West
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 4574000 233
Season
Fall 843000 28
Spring 837000 78
Summer 1398000 44
Winter 1496000 83
Urbanization
Central City 1494000 59
Nonmetiopolitan 474000 32
Suburban 2606000 142
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 4170000 207
Households who farm 795000 35
%
Consuming
12.68
7.88
10.26
17.51
16.22
12.41
7.76
14.54
32.77
50.13
Mean SE
2.62E+00 3.07E-01
1.47E+00 2.49E-01
1.37E+00 1.59E-01
2.47E+00 4.72E-01
4.10E+00 7.91E-01
1.99E+00 4.24E-01
2.24E+00 5.25E-01
3.04E+00 4.63E-01
2.76E+00 3.39E-01
1.85E+00 2.59E-01
PI
1.50E-01
2.91E-01
1.73E-01
1.86E-01
7.14E-02
7.14E-02
1.84E-01
1.83E-01
l.OOE-01
2.75E-01
P5 P10
2.75E-01 3.33E-01
2.91E-01 2.95E-01
1.96E-01 2.51E-01
2.75E-01 4.04E-01
2.96E-01 3.33E-01
2.35E-01 3.42E-01
2.76E-01 4.24E-01
2.75E-01 3.14E-01
2.75E-01 3.14E-01
2.76E-01 5.98E-01
P25
6.17E-01
4.83E-01
5.10E-01
6.17E-01
7.74E-01
5.26E-01
6.25E-01
7.10E-01
6.29E-01
7.10E-01
P50
1.20E+00
1.04E+00
9.81E-01
1.28E+00
1.51E+00
8.63E-01
7.68E-01
1.39E+00
1.20E+00
1.26E+00
P75
2.42E+00
2.15E+00
1.61E+00
3.14E+00
3.74E+00
2.04E+00
2.64E+00
3.14E+00
2.54E+00
2.50E+00
P90
5.39E+00
2.99E+00
2.95E+00
7.26E+00
1.11E+01
4.63E+00
4.25E+00
5.81E+00
5.81E+00
4.63E+00
P95
1.09E+01
4.65E+00
5.29E+00
1.09E+01
1.85E+01
9.52E+00
1.09E+01
1.03E+01
1.09E+01
5.00E+00
P99
2.49E+01
5.39E+00
6.68E+00
1.30E+01
4.83E+01
1.93E+01
1.09E+01
3.22E+01
2.49E+01
6.81E+00
P100
4.83E+01
5.39E+00
7.02E+00
1.30E+01
4.83E+01
1.93E+01
1.09E+01
4.83E+01
4.83E+01
6.81E+00
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Q
Table 13-13. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 34392000 1855
Age
01-02 951000 53
03-05 1235000 76
06-11 3024000 171
12-19 3293000 183
20-39 8593000 437
40-69 12828000 700
70+ 4002000 211
Seasons
Fall 11026000 394
Spring 6540000 661
Summer 11081000 375
Winter 5745000 425
Urbanizations
Central City 6183000 228
Nonmetropolitan 13808000 878
Suburban 14341000 747
Race
Black 1872000 111
White 31917000 1714
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 30217000 1643
Households who farm 4319000 262
%
Consuming
18.29
16.69
15.24
18.10
16.07
13.95
22.62
25.20
23.13
14.17
24.36
11.79
10.97
30.67
16.56
8.61
20.26
44.34
58.93
Mean SE
2.08E+00 6.76E-02
5.20E+00 8.47E-01
2.46E+00 2.79E-01
2.02E+00 2.54E-01
1.48E+00 1.35E-01
1.47E+00 9.59E-02
2.07E+00 1.02E-01
2.51E+00 1.94E-01
1.88E+00 1.28E-01
1.36E+00 7.23E-02
2.86E+00 1.93E-01
1.79E+00 1.14E-01
1.40E+00 1.23E-01
2.68E+00 1.19E-01
1.82E+00 9.12E-02
1.78E+00 2.33E-01
2.10E+00 7.09E-02
2.17E+00 7.09E-02
3.29E+00 2.51E-01
PI
4.79E-03
2.32E-02
O.OOE+00
5.95E-03
O.OOE+00
1.69E-02
5.13E-03
5.21E-03
4.98E-02
2.44E-03
6.93E-02
3.73E-03
1.01E-02
2.12E-02
3.34E-03
O.OOE+00
7.34E-03
5.21E-03
O.OOE+00
P5 P10
1.10E-01 1.80E-01
2.45E-01 3.82E-01
4.94E-02 3.94E-01
l.OOE-01 1.60E-01
6.46E-02 1.45E-01
7.77E-02 1.57E-01
1.19E-01 2.14E-01
1.51E-01 2.39E-01
1.13E-01 1.80E-01
4.47E-02 1.35E-01
1.57E-01 2.24E-01
4.49E-02 1.56E-01
6.59E-02 1.50E-01
1.58E-01 2.58E-01
1.10E-01 1.63E-01
7.77E-02 1.39E-01
1.13E-01 1.84E-01
1.11E-01 1.85E-01
1.61E-01 2.92E-01
P25
4.47E-01
1.23E+00
7.13E-01
4.00E-01
3.22E-01
2.73E-01
5.26E-01
5.81E-01
4.13E-01
3.21E-01
7.12E-01
4.69E-01
3.00E-01
5.99E-01
3.94E-01
4.38E-01
4.54E-01
4.84E-01
8.46E-01
P50
1.11E+00
3.27E+00
1.25E+00
8.86E-01
8.09E-01
7.61E-01
1.18E+00
1.37E+00
9.83E-01
7.04E-01
1.62E+00
1.05E+00
7.50E-01
1.45E+00
9.63E-01
9.32E-01
1.12E+00
1.18E+00
1.67E+00
P75
2.47E+00
5.83E+00
3.91E+00
2.21E+00
1.83E+00
1.91E+00
2.47E+00
3.69E+00
2.11E+00
1.63E+00
3.44E+00
2.27E+00
1.67E+00
3.27E+00
2.18E+00
2.06E+00
2.48E+00
2.68E+00
3.61E+00
P90
5.20E+00
1.31E+01
6.35E+00
4.64E+00
3.71E+00
3.44E+00
5.12E+00
6.35E+00
4.88E+00
3.37E+00
6.99E+00
3.85E+00
3.83E+00
6.35E+00
4.32E+00
4.68E+00
5.18E+00
5.35E+00
8.88E+00
P95
7.54E+00
1.96E+01
7.74E+00
6.16E+00
6.03E+00
4.92E+00
6.94E+00
8.20E+00
6.94E+00
5.21E+00
9.75E+00
6.01E+00
4.67E+00
9.33E+00
6.78E+00
5.70E+00
7.68E+00
7.72E+00
1.18E+01
P99
1.55E+01
2.70E+01
1.06E+01
1.76E+01
7.71 E+00
1.05E+01
1.49E+01
1.25E+01
1.25E+01
8.35E+00
1.87E+01
1.06E+01
9.96E+00
1.75E+01
1.25E+01
8.20E+00
1.55E+01
1.55E+01
1.76E+01
P100
2.70E+01
2.70E+01
1.28E+01
2.36E+01
9.04E+00
2.06E+01
2.29E+01
1.55E+01
1.89E+01
2.36E+01
2.70E+01
2.06E+01
1.66E+01
2.70E+01
2.06E+01
1.89E+01
2.70E+01
2.36E+01
2.36E+01
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
i Ore
ft
-------
Table 13-14. Cnnsumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Seasons
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanizations
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Nc
Nc
%
wgtd unwgtd Consuming
4883000
1396000
1204000
1544000
739000
380000
787000
3716000
236
41
102
48
45
14
48
174
11.86
14.87
11.43
16.32
6.27
3.93
14.25
14.30
Mean
1.78E+00
1.49E+00
8.18E-01
2.83E+00
1.67E+00
.
3.05E+00
1.59E+00
SE
1.68E-01
4.06E-01
1.07E-01
4.67E-01
2.74E-01
.
5.41E-01
1.74E-01
PI P5 P10 P25
2.18E-03 8.27E-02 1.43E-01 2.80E-01
8.27E-02 1.34E-01 1.74E-01 2.69E-01
O.OOE+00 2.89E-03 4.47E-02 1.72E-01
1.11E-01 1.45E-01 1.59E-01 7.38E-01
3.23E-03 4.23E-03 9.15E-02 2.56E-01
....
O.OOE+00 4.68E-02 1.14E-01 2.02E-01
2.44E-03 8.27E-02 1.42E-01 2.75E-01
- Northeast
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
7.47E-01 1.89E+00 6.03E+00 7.82E+00 1.27E+01 1.49E+01
5.81E-01 1.17E+00 6.64E+00 9.97E+00 1.02E+01 1.02E+01
4.55E-01 9.52E-01 2.26E+00 3.11E+00 6.52E+00 6.78E+00
1.29E+00 3.63E+00 7.82E+00 9.75E+00 1.49E+01 1.49E+01
1.25E+00 2.77E+00 3.63E+00 6.10E+00 8.44E+00 8.44E+00
,,,,,,
2.18E+00 4.61E+00 9.04E+00 1.27E+01 1.49E+01 1.49E+01
7.18E-01 1.64E+00 4.82E+00 6.80E+00 1.02E+01 1.02E+01
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
4381000
352000
211
19
35.05
42.41
1.92E+00
.
1.84E-01
*
2.18E-03 8.27E-02 1.42E-01 3.10E-01
....
8.83E-01 2.18E+00 6.16E+00 7.82E+00 1.27E+01 1.49E+01
******
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtc
= unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
& .
>Q h
s S
Kil
Table 13-15. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 12160000 699
Seasons
Fall 4914000 180
Spring 2048000 246
Summer 3319000 115
Winter 1879000 158
Urbanizations
Central City 3177000 113
Nonmetropolitan 5344000 379
Suburban 3639000 207
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 10927000 632
Households who farm 1401000 104
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
26.21
34.13
19.22
32.45
16.91
18.26
37.38
24.75
48.89
52.26
Mean SE
2.26E+00 1.20E-01
1.84E+00 1.76E-01
1.65E+00 1.49E-01
3.38E+00 3.87E-01
2.05E+00 2.64E-01
1.36E+00 1.91E-01
2.73E+00 1.86E-01
2.35E+00 2.16E-01
2.33E+00 1.27E-01
3.97E+00 4.31E-01
PI
1.59E-02
1.01E-02
6.04E-02
1.05E-01
2.41E-03
O.OOE+00
2.12E-02
3.26E-02
1.59E-02
1.40E-01
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers
P5
7.77E-02
6.51E-02
1.53E-01
1.62E-01
2.14E-02
6.05E-02
1.13E-01
1.54E-01
1.04E-01
3.35E-01
n survey.
P10
1.80E-01
1.60E-01
2.21E-01
3.02E-01
6.59E-02
1.10E-01
2.61E-01
2.22E-01
1.76E-01
5.51E-01
P25
4.88E-01
4.16E-01
4.59E-01
8.47E-01
3.62E-01
2.45E-01
5.98E-01
6.36E-01
5.03E-01
8.67E-01
- Midwest
P50 P75
1.15E+00 2.58E+00
1.03E+00 2.10E+00
9.13E-01 1.72E+00
2.07E+00 3.94E+00
8.77E-01 2.13E+00
7.13E-01 1.67E+00
1.31E+00 3.15E+00
1.39E+00 2.75E+00
1.18E+00 2.74E+00
2.18E+00 5.24E+00
P90
5.64E+00
5.27E+00
4.49E+00
7.72E+00
5.32E+00
3.94E+00
7.19E+00
4.87E+00
5.81E+00
1.06E+01
P95
7.74E+00
6.88E+00
5.83E+00
1.40E+01
7.83E+00
5.50E+00
1.06E+01
7.18E+00
7.75E+00
1.44E+01
P99
1.75E+01
1.31E+01
1.28E+01
1.96E+01
1.67E+01
9.96E+00
1.75E+01
1.96E+01
1.67E+01
1.75E+01
P100
2.36E+01
1.31E+01
2.36E+01
2.29E+01
2.06E+01
1.66E+01
2.36E+01
2.06E+01
2.36E+01
2.36E+01
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Table 13-16. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 11254000 618
Seasons
Fall 2875000 101
Spring 2096000 214
Summer 4273000 151
Winter 2010000 152
Urbanizations
Central City 1144000 45
Nonmetropolitan 6565000 386
Suburban 3545000 187
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 9447000 522
Households who farm 1609000 91
%
Consuming
17.49
21.80
12.47
24.07
12.12
6.63
34.37
12.67
46.04
72.09
NOTE: SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwg
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Mean
2.19E+00
2.07E+00
1.55E+00
2.73E+00
1.88E+00
1.10E+00
2.78E+00
1.44E+00
2.27E+00
3.34E+00
SE
1.21E-01
2.82E-01
1.13E-01
3.16E-01
1.37E-01
1.62E-01
1.84E-01
1.13E-01
1.22E-01
4.57E-01
PI
2.92E-02
9.59E-02
1.41E-02
1.10E-01
3.03E-03
1.10E-02
5.08E-02
O.OOE+00
3.46E-02
O.OOE+00
d = unweighted number of consumers
P5
1.60E-01
1.13E-01
9.21E-02
1.72E-01
1.63E-01
9.59E-02
2.23E-01
1.13E-01
1.61E-01
1.32E-01
n survey.
P10
2.41E-01
1.91E-01
2.61E-01
2.50E-01
3.53E-01
1.50E-01
3.50E-01
1.99E-01
2.62E-01
2.33E-01
P25
5.63E-01
5.24E-01
5.33E-01
6.15E-01
6.40E-01
2.63E-01
7.12E-01
3.96E-01
6.10E-01
1.03E+00
-South
P50 P75
1.24E+00 2.69E+00
1.14E+00 2.69E+00
9.35E-01 2.07E+00
1.54E+00 3.15E+00
1.37E+00 2.69E+00
6.15E-01 1.37E+00
1.66E+00 3.31E+00
9.33E-01 1.72E+00
1.37E+00 3.02E+00
1.72E+00 3.15E+00
P90 P95
4.92E+00 7.43E+00
4.48E+00 6.02E+00
3.58E+00 4.81E+00
5.99E+00 9.70E+00
3.79E+00 5.35E+00
2.79E+00 3.70E+00
5.99E+00 9.56E+00
3.61E+00 5.26E+00
5.18E+00 7.43E+00
9.56E+00 1.18E+01
P99
1.70E+01
1.55E+01
8.35E+00
2.36E+01
7.47E+00
4.21E+00
1.89E+01
8.20E+00
1.55E+01
2.36E+01
P100
2.70E+01
1.89E+01
1.03E+01
2.70E+01
8.36E+00
4.58E+00
2.70E+01
8.20E+00
2.36E+01
2.36E+01
I,
s
Table 13-17. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - West
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 6035000 300
Seasons
Fall 1841000 72
Spring 1192000 99
Summer 1885000 59
Winter 1117000 70
Urbanizations
Central City 1482000 56
Nonmetropolitan 1112000 65
Suburban 3441000 179
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 5402000 276
Households who farm 957000 48
NOTE : SE = standard error
%
Consuming
16.73
17.21
14.61
23.60
12.11
12.31
18.21
19.20
42.45
60.34
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwg
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Mean SE
1.81E+00 1.38E-01
2.01E+00 2.93E-01
1.06E+00 1.74E-01
2.39E+00 3.71E-01
1.28E+00 1.72E-01
1.80E+00 2.76E-01
1.52E+00 2.24E-01
1.90E+00 1.98E-01
1.91E+00 1.04E-03
2.73E+00 3.32E-03
PI P5
7.35E-03 9.85E-02
9.83E-02 1.50E-01
3.31E-03 7.35E-03
6.93E-02 1.04E-01
1.29E-02 1.52E-01
2.58E-02 7.39E-02
3.42E-03 9.80E-03
1.29E-02 1.04E-01
8.53E-03 1.04E-01
1.17E-01 4.14E-01
P10
1.66E-01
2.04E-01
4.66E-02
2.46E-01
1.99E-01
1.57E-01
2.04E-01
1.52E-01
1.66E-01
4.69E-01
P25
3.79E-01
4.81E-01
1.95E-01
5.45E-01
4.83E-01
4.81E-01
2.69E-01
3.94E-01
4.33E-01
7.65E-01
P50
9.01E-01
1.21E+00
3.56E-01
1.37E+00
7.65E-01
1.10E+00
6.75E-01
9.32E-01
1.07E+00
1.42E+00
P75
2.21E+00
2.21E+00
9.08E-01
3.23E+00
1.43E+00
2.95E+00
2.13E+00
2.20E+00
2.37E+00
3.27E+00
P90
4.64E+00
4.85E+00
3.37E+00
4.67E+00
2.81E+00
4.64E+00
4.13E+00
4.63E+00
4.67E+00
6.94E+00
P95
6.21E+00
7.72E+00
5.54E+00
8.36E+00
5.12E+00
4.85E+00
5.12E+00
7.98E+00
6.21E+00
1.09E+01
P99
1.14E+01
1.25E+01
8.60E+00
1.55E+01
7.57E+00
1.14E+01
8.16E+00
1.25E+01
1.25E+01
1.55E+01
P100
1.55E+01
1.25E+01
8.60E+00
1.55E+01
7.98E+00
1.14E+01
8.16E+00
1.55E+01
1.55E+01
1.55E+01
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
ft
i QTQ
X) ft
-------
oo
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-18. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Seasons
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanizations
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Response to Questionnaire
Households who
raise animals
Households who farm
Nc Nc
%
wgtd unwgtd Consuming
9257000 569
276000 22
396000 26
1064000 65
1272000 78
2732000 158
2872000 179
441000 28
2852000 107
1726000 197
2368000 89
2311000 176
736000 28
4932000 315
3589000 226
128000 6
8995000 556
5256000 343
3842000 243
4.92
4.84
4.89
6.37
6.21
4.43
5.06
2.78
5.98
3.74
5.21
4.74
1.31
10.95
4.15
0.59
5.71
52.06
52.42
Mean SE
2.21E+00 1.07E-01
3.65E+00 6.10E-01
3.61E+00 5.09E-01
3.65E+00 4.51E-01
1.70 E+00 1.68E-01
1.82E+00 1.53E-01
1.72E+00 1.11E-01
1.39E+00 2.34E-01
1.57E+00 1.39E-01
2.37E+00 1.52E-01
3.10E+00 3.82E-01
1.98E+00 1.74E-01
1.15E+00 1.83E-01
2.70E+00 1.76E-01
1.77E+00 1.03E-01
*
2.26E+00 1.09E-01
2.80E+00 1.45E-01
2.86E+00 1.85E-01
PI P5
1.21E-01 2.37E-01
3.85E-01 9.49E-01
8.01E-01 8.01E-01
3.72E-01 6.52E-01
1.90E-01 3.20E-01
1.23E-01 1.85E-01
1.81E-02 2.12E-01
9.26E-02 9.26E-02
1.23E-01 2.10E-01
2.44E-01 3.20E-01
1.81E-02 1.85E-01
1.35E-01 2.37E-01
1.82E-01 1.85E-01
1.23E-01 2.63E-01
2.90E-02 2.87E-01
* *
9.26E-02 2.57E-01
2.12E-01 3.86E-01
1.97E-01 4.45E-01
P10
3.74E-01
9.49E-01
1.51E+00
7.21E-01
4.70E-01
2.95E-01
3.43E-01
1.25E-01
3.52E-01
4.46E-01
4.06E-01
3.67E-01
2.10E-01
4.06E-01
3.67E-01
*
3.86E-01
6.23E-01
5.98E-01
P25
6.60E-01
1.19E+00
2.17E+00
1.28E+00
6.23E-01
5.28E-01
5.84E-01
5.47E-01
5.21E-01
7.76E-01
8.52E-01
6.48E-01
4.42E-01
7.49E-01
6.80E-01
*
6.80E-01
1.03E+00
8.94E-01
P50 P75
1.39E+00 2.89E+00
2.66E+00 4.72E+00
2.82E+00 3.72E+00
2.09E+00 4.71E+00
1.23E+00 2.35E+00
1.11E+00 2.65E+00
1.17E+00 2.38E+00
1.01E+00 1.81E+00
1.11E+00 2.27E+00
1.69E+00 3.48E+00
1.77E+00 4.34E+00
1.33E+00 2.43E+00
7.21E-01 1.58E+00
1.63E+00 3.41E+00
1.33E+00 2.49E+00
* *
1.41E+00 2.91E+00
1.94E+00 3.49E+00
1.84E+00 3.64E+00
P90
4.89E+00
8.68E+00
7.84E+00
8.00E+00
3.66E+00
4.52E+00
3.67E+00
2.82E+00
3.19E+00
5.00E+00
7.01E+00
3.96E+00
2.69E+00
6.06E+00
3.66E+00
*
5.00E+00
5.90E+00
6.09E+00
P95
6.78E+00
l.OOE+01
9.13E+00
1.40E+01
4.34E+00
6.23E+00
5.16E+00
3.48E+00
4.41 E+00
6.67E+00
1.05E+01
6.40E+00
3.40E+00
8.47E+00
4.71 E+00
*
7.01E+00
7.84E+00
8.00E+00
P99
1.40E+01
1.15E+01
1.30E+01
1.53E+01
6.78E+00
9.17E+00
5.90E+00
7.41 E+00
6.78E+00
1.01E+01
2.23E+01
1.09E+01
3.64E+00
1.53E+01
7.20E+00
*
1.40E+01
1.40E+01
1.40E+01
P100
2.32E+01
1.15E+01
1.30E+01
1.53E+01
7.51E+00
1.09E+01
7.46E+00
7.41 E+00
7.84E+00
1.30E+01
2.23E+01
2.32E+01
3.64E+00
2.32E+01
1.01E+01
*
2.32E+01
2.32E+01
2.32E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwg!
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Table 13-19. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - Northeast
Population
Group
Total
Seasons
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanizations
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
1113000 52
569000 18
66000 8
176000 6
302000 20
0 0
391000 17
722000 35
509000 25
373000 15
%
Consuming
2.70
6.06
0.63
1.86
2.56
0.00
7.08
2.78
43.21
44.94
Mean
1.46E+00
*
*
*
2.02E+00
*
1.49 E+00
2.03E+00
*
SE PI P5 P10 P25
2.10E-01 2.92E-01 3.40E-01 3.52E-01 6.44E-01
*****
*****
*****
5.56E-01 2.92E-01 3.14E-01 4.30E-01 6.19E-01
*****
1.53E-01 2.92E-01 3.52E-01 4.30E-01 6.80E-01
3.85E-01 6.19E-01 6.46E-01 6.46E-01 8.78E-01
*****
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
8.94E-01 1.87E+00 2.68E+00 2.89E+00 1.09E+01 1.09E+01
******
******
******
1.11E+00 2.38E+00 2.93E+00 7.46E+00 1.09E+01 1.09E+01
******
1.39E+00 2.34E+00 2.68E+00 2.89E+00 3.61E+00 3.61E+00
1.62E+00 2.38E+00 2.93E+00 7.46E+00 1.09E+01 1.09E+01
******
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
i Ore
ft
Table 13-
Population Nc Nc %
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming Mean
Total 3974000 266 8.57 2.55E+00
Seasons
Fall 1261000 49 8.76 1.76E+00
Spring 940000 116 8.82 2.58E+00
Summer 930000 38 9.09 4.10E+00
Winter 843000 63 7.59 2.00E+00
Urbanizations
Central City 460000 18 2.64 *
Nonmetropolitan 2477000 175 17.33 3.15E+00
Suburban 1037000 73 7.05 1.75E+00
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals 2165000 165 57.86 3.20E+00
Households who farm 1483000 108 55.32 3.32E+00
20. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - Midwest
SE
1.81E-01
2.31E-01
2.24E-01
7.45E-01
2.41E-01
*
2.58E-01
1.99E-01
2.23E-01
2.91E-01
PI
1.25E-01
2.10E-01
2.44E-01
9.26E-02
1.21E-01
*
9.26E-02
2.87E-01
2.56E-01
3.65E-01
P5
2.57E-01
2.57E-01
3.11E-01
1.25E-01
2.37E-01
*
2.95E-01
3.65E-01
3.86E-01
5.43E-01
P10
3.85E-01
3.72E-01
4.08E-01
5.78E-01
3.28E-01
*
4.25E-01
4.08E-01
5.78E-01
5.89E-01
P25
6.60E-01
4.95E-01
7.33E-01
8.93E-01
6.48E-01
*
8.16E-01
6.60E-01
1.07E+00
1.07E+00
P50
1.40 E+00
1.19E+00
1.98E+00
2.87E+00
1.36E+00
*
2.38E+00
1.11E+00
2.56E+00
2.75E+00
P75
3.39E+00
2.66E+00
3.67E+00
5.42E+00
2.69E+00
*
4.34E+00
2.03E+00
4.42E+00
4.71 E+00
P90
5.75E+00
3.49E+00
5.14E+00
8.93E+00
4. 11 E+00
*
6.15E+00
4.16E+00
6.06E+00
6.78E+00
P95
7.20E+00
6.06E+00
7.79E+00
1.53E+01
5.30E+00
*
9.17E+00
5.39E+00
9.13E+00
9.17E+00
P99
1.53E+01
6.78E+00
1.15E+01
2.23E+01
8.10E+00
*
1.53E+01
7.20E+00
1.53E+01
1.53E+01
P100
2.23E+01
6.78E+00
1.30E+01
2.23E+01
1.22E+01
*
2.23E+01
1.01E+01
1.53E+01
1.53E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
-------
:|
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 2355000 146
Seasons
Fall 758000 28
Spring 511000 53
Summer 522000 18
Winter 564000 47
Urbanizations
Central City 40000 1
Nonmetropolitan 1687000 97
Suburban 628000 48
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals 1222000 74
Households who farm 1228000 72
%
Consuming
3.66
5.75
3.04
2.94
3.40
0.23
8.83
2.24
46.95
55.02
Table 13
Mean
2.24E+00
1.81E+00
2.33E+00
.
1.80E+00
.
2.45E+00
1.79E+00
3.16E+00
2.85E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observ
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
21 . Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - South
SE
1.94E-01
2.87E-01
2.66E-01
.
2.45E-01
.
2.59E-01
2.30E-01
3.16E-01
3.24E-01
itions
PI
1.81E-02
1.23E-01
1.93E-01
.
3.70E-02
.
1.23E-01
1.81E-02
2.63E-01
1.95E-01
P5
1.56E-01
1.56E-01
2.97E-01
.
1.97E-01
.
1.90E-01
2.90E-02
6.67E-01
4.99E-01
P10 P25
2.97E-01 7.21E-01
1.90E-01 8.19E-01
4.99E-01 7.52E-01
. .
2.51E-01 7.16E-01
. .
4.02E-01 7.77E-01
3.70E-02 6.28E-01
8.35E-01 1.34E+00
5.98E-01 1.01E+00
P50
1.53E+00
1.53E+00
1.80E+00
.
1.40E+00
.
1.61E+00
1.40E+00
2.11E+00
1.93E+00
P75 P90
3.07E+00 5.07E+00
2.38E+00 3.19E+00
2.82E+00 5.16E+00
. .
2.17E+00 3.55E+00
. .
3.19E+00 6.09E+00
2.31E+00 4.56E+00
3.79E+00 6.67E+00
3.48E+00 6.23E+00
P95
6.71E+00
4.41 E+00
6.71E+00
.
4.58E+00
.
7.84E+00
4.61E+00
8.47E+00
8.47E+00
P99
1.40E+01
7.84E+00
7.51E+00
.
8.47E+00
.
1.40E+01
6.40E+00
1.40E+01
1.40E+01
P100
1.40E+01
7.84E+00
7.51E+00
.
8.47E+00
.
1.40E+01
6.40E+00
1.40E+01
1.40E+01
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
I
4n
1=
Table 13-22. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - West
Population
Group
Total
Seasons
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanizations
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
1815000 105
264000 12
209000 20
740000 27
602000 46
236000 9
377000 26
1202000 70
1360000 79
758000 48
%
Consuming
5.03
2.47
2.56
9.27
6.53
1.96
6.17
6.71
52.84
47.79
Mean
1.89E+00
.
1.86E+00
2.20E+00
2.11E+00
.
2.10E+00
1.95E+00
2.12E+00
2.41E+00
SE
2.12E-01
.
2.27E-01
3.18E-01
4.55E-01
.
7.00E-01
1.99E-01
2.65E-01
4.26E-01
PI P5 P10 P25
1.52E-01 2.25E-01 3.90E-01 6.58E-01
....
2.99E-01 4.25E-01 8.70E-01 1.22E+00
1.85E-01 4.06E-01 5.35E-01 1.07E+00
1.35E-01 3.56E-01 4.28E-01 6.72E-01
....
3.30E-01 3.30E-01 4.06E-01 6.72E-01
1.52E-01 2.25E-01 3.67E-01 7.80E-01
1.52E-01 2.25E-01 3.90E-01 8.15E-01
1.35E-01 3.30E-01 4.67E-01 7.85E-01
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
1.42E+00 2.49E+00 3.66E+00 4.71E+00 8.00E+00 2.32E+01
,,,,,,
1.56E+00 2.43E+00 3.48E+00 4.20E+00 4.20E+00 4.20E+00
1.69E+00 3.27E+00 4.44E+00 4.71E+00 8.00E+00 8.00E+00
1.19E+00 2.35E+00 3.64E+00 7.02E+00 2.32E+01 2.32E+01
,,,,,,
1.19E+00 1.77E+00 3.72E+00 4.97E+00 2.32E+01 2.32E+01
1.52E+00 2.71E+00 4.20E+00 4.71E+00 8.00E+00 8.00E+00
1.56E+00 2.71E+00 4.20E+00 4.97E+00 8.00E+00 2.32E+01
1.55E+00 2.91E+00 4.71E+00 7.02E+00 2.32E+01 2.32E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Q
I
ft
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Table 13-23.
Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined
Nc Nc %
wgtd unwgtd Consuming
3914000
82000
142000
382000
346000
962000
1524000
450000
1220000
1112000
911000
671000
999000
Nonmetropolitan 1174000
Suburban
Race
Black
White
1741000
593000
3228000
239
6
11
29
21
59
86
24
45
114
29
51
46
94
99
41
188
2.08
1.44
1.75
2.29
1.69
1.56
2.69
2.83
2.56
2.41
2.00
1.38
1.77
2.61
2.01
2.73
2.05
Mean
2.07E+00
.
.
2.78E+00
1.52E+00
1.91E+00
1.79E+00
1.22E+00
1.31E+00
3.08E+00
1.88E+00
2.05E+00
1.79E+00
3.15E+00
1.50E+00
1.81E+00
2.07E+00
SE
2.38E-01
.
.
8.40E-01
4.07E-01
3.34E-01
2.56E-01
2.30E-01
2.16E-01
5.55E-01
4.24E-01
3.68E-01
3.40E-01
5.74E-01
2.30E-01
3.74E-01
2.81E-01
PI
8.16E-02
.
.
1.60E-01
1.95E-01
8.16E-02
9.47E-02
9.88E-02
1.84E-01
9.88E-02
8.16E-02
9.47E-02
9.47E-02
9.88E-02
8.16E-02
1.84E-01
8.16E-02
P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
9.11E-02 1.95E-01 2.28E-01 4.31E-01 9.97E-01
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
1.60E-01 1.84E-01 2.28E-01 5.47E-01 1.03E+00
1.95E-01 1.95E-01 1.95E-01 3.11E-01 9.84E-01
8.16E-02 9.11E-02 1.18E-01 4.43E-01 1.06E+00
9.47E-02 2.10E-01 2.75E-01 3.45E-01 9.85E-01
9.88E-02 2.33E-01 2.33E-01 5.68E-01 7.64E-01
1.84E-01 1.96E-01 2.10E-01 3.18E-01 9.16E-01
1.16E-01 3.08E-01 3.40E-01 5.59E-01 1.27E+00
8.16E-02 9.11E-02 2.04E-01 3.01E-01 7.64E-01
9.47E-02 1.11E-01 1.60E-01 5.10E-01 1.06E+00
9.47E-02 1.60E-01 2.84E-01 6.08E-01 1.07E+00
1.16E-01 3.10E-01 3.62E-01 5.68E-01 1.88E+00
8.16E-02 1.84E-01 2.01E-01 2.86E-01 5.87E-01
1.84E-01 2.01E-01 2.86E-01 3.18E-01 9.84E-01
8.16E-02 1.60E-01 2.27E-01 3.93E-01 9.97E-01
P90 P95 P99 P100
2.17E+00 4.68E+00 7.83E+00 1.55E+01
....
....
3.67E+00 7.05E+00 7.85E+00 2.53E+01
1.79E+00 4.68E+00 6.67E+00 8.44E+00
2.18E+00 4.46E+00 9.57E+00 1.30E+01
1.99E+00 4.43E+00 6.56E+00 1.08E+01
1.56E+00 3.73E+00 3.73E+00 5.12E+00
1.79E+00 2.64E+00 3.73E+00 6.56E+00
2.64E+00 6.68E+00 1.08E+01 3.73E+01
3.19E+00 4.43E+00 5.65E+00 9.57E+00
2.09E+00 5.89E+00 7.85E+00 1.31E+01
1.85E+00 3.73E+00 9.57E+00 9.57E+00
3.86E+00 6.52E+00 7.83E+00 3.73E+01
1.38E+00 4.37E+00 7.05E+00 1.08E+01
2.17E+00 4.68E+00 9.57E+00 9.57E+00
2.16E+00 4.99E+00 6.68E+00 1.61E+01
Response to Questionnaire
Households who frsh 3553000
* Intake data
220
8.94
2.22E+00
2.58E-01
8.16E-02
8.16E-02 1.84E-01 2.27E-01 4.66E-01 1.09E+00
2.23E+00 5.61E+00 7.85E+00 1.61E+01
lot provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
I,
2>
-------
Table 13-24. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - Northeast
Population
Group
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Response to Questionnaire
Households who fish
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
334000
135000
14000
132000
53000
42000
292000
334000
12
4
2
3
3
0
4
8
12
Consuming Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50
0.81 ,,,,,,,
1.44 * * * * * * *
0.13 ,,,,,,,
1.40 * * * * * * *
0.45 ,,,,,,,
0.76 ,,,,,,,
1.12 ,,,,,,,
5.61 ,,,,,,,
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
,
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd= unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
Table 13-25. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Nc
wgtd
1113000
362000
224000
264000
263000
190000
501000
422000
Nc
%
unwgtd Consuming
71
13
27
8
23
9
40
22
2.40
2.51
2.10
2.58
2.37
1.09
3.50
2.87
Mean
2.13E+00
*
3.45E+00
*
2.38E+00
*
3.42E+00
9.09E-01
SE
4.19E-01
*
1.22E+00
*
5.33E-01
7.17E-01
1.81E-01
PI P5 P10 P25
8.16E-02 8.16E-02 1.96E-01 2.27E-01
* * * *
1.16E-01 1.16E-01 1.18E-01 3.10E-01
* * * *
5.10E-01 5.10E-01 5.10E-01 5.48E-01
* * * *
1.16E-01 1.16E-01 3.30E-01 4.66E-01
8.16E-02 8.16E-02 8.16E-02 1.96E-01
Midwest
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
4.71E-01 1.03E+00 1.95E+00 6.10E+00 6.56E+00 1.61E+01
******
4.87E-01 8.21E-01 1.67E+00 1.55E+01 1.61E+01 2.53E+01
******
1.03E+00 1.56E+00 2.13E+00 5.89E+00 6.10E+00 1.31E+01
******
5.33E-01 1.88E+00 5.65E+00 6.56E+00 1.31E+01 2.53E+01
3.01E-01 5.48E-01 1.28E+00 2.09E+00 2.78E+00 3.73E+00
Response to Questionnaire
Households who frsh
956000
60
7.57
2.35E+00
4.85E-01
8.16E-02 8.16E-02 1.18E-01 2.27E-01
4.66E-01 1.12E+00 2.16E+00 6.52E+00 6.56E+00 2.53E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-26. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - South
Population
Group
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Response to Questionnaire
Households who fish
Nc Nc
%
wgtd unwgtd Consuming
1440000 101
274000 1 1
538000 58
376000 14
252000 18
281000 16
550000 41
609000 44
1280000 95
2.24
2.08
3.20
2.12
1.52
1.63
2.88
2.18
9.42
Mean
2.74E+00
*
4.00E+00
*
*
*
3.33E+00
2.73E+00
3.00E+00
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75 P90
4.76E-01 9.47E-02 9.47E-02 2.04E-01 2.86E-01 5.07E-01 1.48E+00 3.37E+00
******* *
9.42E-01 3.08E-01 3.08E-01 3.87E-01 4.46E-01 8.74E-01 1.94E+00 3.71E+00
******* *
******* *
******* *
1.06E+00 2.85E-01 2.85E-01 3.38E-01 5.07E-01 1.12E+00 1.94E+00 3.19E+00
4.98E-01 2.04E-01 2.04E-01 2.75E-01 2.86E-01 4.26E-01 1.08E+00 4.37E+00
5.14E-01 9.47E-02 9.47E-02 2.04E-01 2.80E-01 7.06E-01 1.93E+00 3.67E+00
P95 P99 P100
5.61E+00 8.44E+00 3.73E+01
* * *
8.33E+00 1.30E+01 4.52E+01
* * *
* * *
* * *
4.43E+00 6.67E+00 4.52E+01
8.33E+00 1.04E+01 1.30E+01
6.68E+00 8.44E+00 3.73E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standrad error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwg
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Table 13-27. Consumer Only Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - West
Population
Group
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Nc
Nc
wgtd unwgtd
1027000
449000
336000
139000
103000
528000
81000
418000
55
17
27
4
7
21
9
25
%
Consuming
2.85
4.20
4.12
1.74
1.12
4.38
1.33
2.33
Mean
1.57E+00
*
1.35E+00
*
*
2.03E+00
*
1.09E+00
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75 P90 P95 P99
2.72E-01 9.88E-02 1.60E-01 2.01E-01 2.38E-01 4.43E-01 8.38E-01 1.79E+00 3.73E+00 5.67E+00
******** * *
2.94E-01 9.88E-02 9.88E-02 2.38E-01 3.27E-01 4.43E-01 6.08E-01 1.68E+00 4.68E+00 5.61E+00
******** * *
******** * *
5.25E-01 3.27E-01 3.27E-01 4.33E-01 5.29E-01 7.12E-01 1.45E+00 1.85E+00 3.73E+00 9.57E+00
******** * *
2.49E-01 1.84E-01 1.84E-01 2.01E-01 2.10E-01 3.08E-01 5.87E-01 1.21E+00 2.90E+00 4.68E+00
P100
9.57E+00
*
5.67E+00
*
*
9.57E+00
*
5.61E+00
Response to Questionnaire *
Households who frsh
983000
53
12.99
1.63E+00
2.81E-01 9.88E-02 1.60E-01 2.01E-01 2.18E-01 5.47E-01 9.64E-01 1.79E+00 3.73E+00 5.67E+00
9.57E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
-------
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Seasons
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanizations
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
1409000 89
79000 6
57000 5
264000 16
84000 5
612000 36
216000 16
77000 3
211000 7
253000 27
549000 22
396000 33
115000 7
988000 59
306000 23
0 0
1382000 86
1228000 80
1020000 63
%
Consumin
g
0.75
1.39
0.70
1.58
0.41
0.99
0.38
0.48
0.44
0.55
1.21
0.81
0.20
2.19
0.35
0.00
0.88
12.16
13.92
Table 13-28
Mean
1.40E+01
*
*
*
*
7.41 E+00
*
*
*
1.78E+01
1.53E+01
8.08E+00
*
1.68E+01
9.86E+00
1.43E+01
1.59E+01
1.71E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observ
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy fe/kg-day) - All Regions
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75 P90
1.62E+00 1.80E-01 4.46E-01 5.08E-01 3.18E+00 1.02E+01 1.95E+01 3.42E+01
********
********
********
********
1.02E+00 2.05E-01 3.96E-01 4.46E-01 1.89E+00 6.46E+00 1.21E+01 1.54E+01
********
********
********
4.27E+00 6.28E-01 6.54E-01 6.72E-01 5.06E+00 1.22E+01 1.95E+01 5.09E+01
2.73E+00 4.46E-01 4.46E-01 5.08E-01 5.36E+00 1.06E+01 2.51E+01 3.49E+01
1.99E+00 1.80E-01 2.05E-01 2.80E-01 7.36E-01 5.47E+00 1.15E+01 1.98E+01
********
2.10E+00 4.79E-01 9.58E-01 1.89E+00 6.74E+00 1.08E+01 2.04E+01 3.49E+01
2.38E+00 3.96E-01 3.96E-01 4.46E-01 5.71E-01 5.36E+00 1.31E+01 2.81E+01
1.65E+00 1.80E-01 4.46E-01 5.08E-01 3.82E+00 1.03E+01 1.95E+01 3.42E+01
1.73E+00 1.80E-01 3.96E-01 1.89E+00 6.13E+00 1.08E+01 1.96E+01 3.49E+01
1.99E+00 3.96E-01 7.36E-01 3.18E+00 9.06E+00 1.21E+01 2.04E+01 3.49E+01
itions
P95 P99 P100
4.40 E+01 7.26E+01 1.11E+02
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
1.95E+01 2.30E+01 2.30E+01
* * *
* * *
* * *
8.01E+01 1.11E+02 1.11E+02
3.67E+01 4.68E+01 4.68E+01
2.04E+01 7.26E+01 7.26E+01
* * *
4.40E+01 8.01E+01 1.11E+02
2.89E+01 5.09E+01 5.09E+01
4.40E+01 8.01E+01 1.11E+02
4.40E+01 8.01E+01 1.11E+02
4.40E+01 8.01E+01 1.11E+02
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-29. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - Northeast
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 312000 16
Seasons
Fall 48000 2
Spring 36000 4
Summer 116000 4
Winter 112000 6
Urbanizations
Central City 0 0
Nonmetropolitan 240000 10
Suburban 72000 6
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals 312000 16
Households who farm 312000 16
Consuming
0.76
0.51
0.34
1.23
0.95
0.00
4.35
0.28
26.49
37.59
Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50
,
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
,
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
ft
I,
2>
Table 13-30. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - Midwest
Population
Group
Total
Seasons
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanizations
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Nc
wgtd
594000
163000
94000
252000
85000
43000
463000
88000
490000
490000
Nc
unwgtd
36
5
12
11
8
1
31
4
32
32
%
Consu
ming
1.28
1.13
0.88
2.46
0.76
0.25
3.24
0.60
13.09
18.28
Mean
1.86E+01
*
*
*
*
*
2.33E+01
*
2.23E+01
2.23E+01
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50
3.15E+00 4.46E-01 4.46E-01 1.97E+00 8.27E+00 1.24E+01
******
******
******
******
******
3.40E+00 4.25E+00 8.27E+00 9.06E+00 1.21E+01 1.60E+01
******
3.33E+00 4.25E+00 5.36E+00 8.27E+00 1.08E+01 1.54E+01
3.33E+00 4.25E+00 5.36E+00 8.27E+00 1.08E+01 1.54E+01
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
2.30E+01 4.40E+01 4.68E+01 1.11E+02 1.11E+02
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
3.14E+01 4.40E+01 4.68E+01 1.11E+02 1.11E+02
*****
3.14E+01 4.40E+01 4.68E+01 1.11E+02 1.11E+02
3.14E+01 4.40E+01 4.68E+01 1.11E+02 1.11E+02
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwg
:d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
-------
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
13-26 August 1997
Table 13-31. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - South
Population Nc Nc %
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming Mean SE PI P5 P 1 0 P25 P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P 1 00
Total 242000 17 0.38 * * * * * * * * * * * *
Seasons
Fall 00 0.00
Spring 27000 3 0.16 * * * * * * * * * * * *
Summer 131000 5 0.74 ***** * **** * *
Winter 84000 9 0.51 * * * * * * * * * * * *
Urbanizations
Central City 27000 3 0.16 *********** *
Nonmetropolitan 21500014 1.13 * * * * * * * * * * * *
Suburban 0 0 0.00
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals 215000 14 8.26 *********** *
Households who farm 148000 8 6.63 *********** *
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE: SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Table 13-32. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - West
Population Nc Nc %
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming Mean SE PI P5 P 1 0 P25 P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P 1 00
Total 261000 20 0.72 l.OOE+01 2.75E+00 1.80E-01 1.80E-01 2.05E-01 5.08E-01 6.10E+00 1.33E+01 2.81E+01 2.89E+01 5.09E+01 5.09E+01
Seasons
Fall 0 0 0.00
Spring 96000 81. 18 * * **** * * * * * *
Summer 50000 2 0.63 ************
Winter 115000 10 1.25 * * **** * * * * * *
Urbanizations
Central City 45000 3 0.37 ************
Nonmetropolitan 70000 41. 15 * * * * * * * * * * * *
Suburban 146000 13 0.81 ************
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals 211000 18 8.20 ************
Households who farm 70000 7 4.41 ************
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE: SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
jd^^ Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
^^ Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Population Group
Total Vegetables
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
All Regions
Total Fruit
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
All Regions
Total Meat
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
All Regions
Percent
Consuming
16.50
33.25
24.00
23.75
24.60
3.50
12.75
8.00
17.75
10.10
6.25
9.25
5.75
9.50
7.40
PI
1.16E-03
3.69E-03
4.78E-03
1.80E-03
5.00E-03
3.96E-03
1.22E-03
6.13E-03
5.50E-04
2.00E-03
3.78E-03
1.77E-03
6.12E-03
7.24E-04
3.20E-03
Table 13-33.
P5
1.59E-02
4.11E-02
3.24E-02
1.91E-02
2.90E-02
1.97E-02
7.01E-03
3.23 E-02
5.66E-02
1.90E-02
3.01E-02
3.68E-02
2.88E-02
2.83 E-02
3.90E-02
Seasonally Adjusted Consumer Only Homegrown Intake (g/kg-day)
P10
3.56E-02
8.26E-02
5.58E-02
3. 83 E-02
5.90E-02
4.76E-02
1.46E-02
1.09E-01
8.82E-02
6.20E-02
7.94E-02
2.21E-01
5.02E-02
9.56E-02
9.20E-02
P25
1.99E-01
2.91E-01
2.05E-01
1.14E-01
2.19E-01
1.73E-01
1.36E-01
3.84E-01
2.87E-01
2.50E-01
1.25E-01
5.25E-02
1.86E-01
2.35E-01
2.20E-01
P50
4.55E-01
8.11E-01
6.10E-01
4.92E-01
6.38E-01
3.61E-01
7.87E-01
9.47E-01
6.88E-01
7.52E-01
2.11E-01
1.61E+00
5.30E-01
5.64E-01
6.55E-01
P75
1.37E+00
1.96E+00
1.86E+00
1.46E+00
1.80E+00
6.55E-01
2.98E+00
2.10E+00
1.81E+00
2.35E+00
7.00E-01
3.41E+00
1.84E+00
1.30E+00
1.96E+00
P90
3.32E+00
4.40E+00
3.95E+00
2.99E+00
4.00E+00
1.48E+00
5.79E+00
6.70+00
4.75E+00
5.61E+00
1.56E+00
5.25E+00
3.78E+00
2.29E+00
4.05E+00
P95
5.70E+00
7.41E+00
5.63E+00
5.04E+00
6.08E+00
3.00E+00
9.52E+00
1.02E+01
8.54E+00
9.12E+00
1.91E+00
7.45E+00
4.95E+00
3.38E+00
5.17E+00
P99
8.78E+00
1.31E+00
1.20E+01
8.91E+00
1.17E+01
5.10E+00
2.22E+01
1.49E+01
1.45E+01
1.76E+01
4.09E+00
1.19E+01
8.45E+00
7.20E+00
9.40E+00
P100
1.01E+01
2.01E+01
1.62E+01
1.12E+01
2.01E+01
5.63E+00
2.71E+01
1.64E+01
1.84E+01
2.71E+01
4.80E+00
1.36E+01
9.45E+00
9.10E+00
1.36E+01
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
a,
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
Oo
s
ft
t
I
I
&!
1=
Table 13-34. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Apples (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nc Nc %
wgtd unwgtd Consuming
5306000 272 2.82
199000 12 3.49
291000 16 3.59
402000 25 2.41
296000 12 1.44
1268000 61 2.06
1719000 90 3.03
1061000 52 6.68
1707000 60 3.58
639000 74 1.38
1935000 68 4.25
1025000 70 2.10
912000 30 1.62
Nonmetiopolitan 2118000 122 4.70
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
2276000 120 2.63
84000 4 0.39
5222000 268 3.31
2044000 123 4.41
442000 18 1.07
1310000 65 2.04
1510000 66 4.19
Mean
1.19E+00 7
*
*
1.28E+00 1
*
7.95E-01 1
9.61E-01 1
1.45E+00 1
1.28E+00 1
9.50E-01 1
1.12E+00 1
1.30E+00 1
SE PI
58E-02 8.34E-02
* *
* *
88E-01 4.72E-01
* *
07E-01 1.85E-01
37E-01 5.57E-02
41E-01 1.99E-01
24E-01 2.56E-01
14E-01 1.94E-01
69E-01 5.57E-02
78E-01 1.85E-01
1.24E+00 2.60E-01 2.31E-01
1.27E+00 1
1.09E+00 9
*
1.18E+00 7
1.38E+00 1
*
1.10E+00 1
1.20E+00 1
26E-01 5.57E-02
16E-02 1.86E-01
* *
67E-02 8.34E-02
45E-01 2.16E-01
* *
07E-01 1.99E-01
29E-01 5.57E-02
P5
2.30E-01
*
*
4.72E-01
*
2.30E-01
8.94E-02
2.60E-01
2.95E-01
2.38E-01
8.94E-02
2.30E-01
2.56E-01
1.18E-01
2.37E-01
*
2.30E-01
2.85E-01
*
2.38E-01
1.86E-01
P10
2.84E-01
*
*
5.63E-01
*
2.56E-01
2.55E-01
4.46E-01
3.20E-01
2.84E-01
1.86E-01
3.23E-01
3.92E-01
2.49E-01
2.91E-01
*
2.79E-01
3.04E-01
*
3.01E-01
2.64E-01
P25
4.50E-01
*
*
7.40E-01
*
3.04E-01
3.98E-01
6.27E-01
5.83E-01
3.76E-01
3.98E-01
5.71E-01
5.10E-01
4.11E-01
4.37E-01
*
4.48E-01
5.20E-01
*
4.39E-01
4.72E-01
P50 P75
8.17E-01 1.47E+00
* *
* *
9.56E-01 1.29E+00
* *
6.02E-01 9.22E-01
6.48E-01 1.08E+00
1.18E+00 1.82E+00
1.03E+00 1.66E+00
5.67E-01 1.10E+00
6.92E-01 1.41E+00
8.81E-01 1.59E+00
9.17E-01 1.59E+00
9.00E-01 1.55E+00
7.74E-01 1.29E+00
* *
7.98E-01 1.41E+00
9.23E-01 1.61E+00
* *
9.17E-01 1.38E+00
7.89E-01 1.82E+00
P90
2.38E+00
*
*
2.98E+00
*
1.55E+00
1.59E+00
3.40E+00
2.69E+00
2.00E+00
2.29E+00
2.75E+00
2.19E+00
2.92E+00
2.29E+00
*
2.38E+00
2.69E+00
*
1.90E+00
2.75E+00
P95
3.40E+00
*
*
4.00E+00
*
1.97E+00
2.38E+00
3.62E+00
3.40E+00
2.78E+00
2.98E+00
3.40E+00
2.26E+00
3.48E+00
3.40E+00
*
3.40E+00
3.40E+00
*
2.98E+00
3.62E+00
P99
5.42E+00
*
*
4.00E+00
*
5.42E+00
9.83E+00
4.20E+00
4.25E+00
5.87E+00
9.83E+00
1.01E+01
1.01E+01
9.83E+00
5.42E+00
*
5.42E+00
9.83E+00
*
4.00E+00
4.25E+00
P100
1.01E+01
*
*
4.00E+00
*
5.42E+00
9.83E+00
4.20E+00
4.25E+00
5.87E+00
9.83E+00
1.01E+01
1.01E+01
9.83E+00
5.42E+00
*
1.01E+01
1.01E+01
*
4.91E+00
4.25E+00
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 4707000 246 6.91
Households who farm 1299000 68 17.72
* Intake data
1.21E+00 8
1.39E+00 1
22E-02 1.27E-01
31E-01 5.57E-02
2.49E-01
3.57E-01
2.95E-01
5.36E-01
4.70E-01
7.03E-01
8.17E-01 1.47E+00
9.56E-01 1.58E+00
2.38E+00
2.99E+00
3.40E+00
4.00E+00
5.87E+00
4.91E+00
1.01E+01
5.87E+00
not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distibution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc ui
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
iwgtd = unweighted
number of consumers
n survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-35. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Asparagus (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc
wgtd
763000
8000
25000
31000
70000
144000
430000
55000
62000
608000
0
93000
190000
215000
358000
0
763000
368000
270000
95000
30000
669000
157000
Nc
%
unwgtd Consuming
66
1
3
3
5
11
38
5
2
59
0
5
9
27
30
0
66
33
20
9
4
59
16
0.41
0.14
0.31
0.19
0.34
0.23
0.76
0.35
0.13
1.32
0.00
0.19
0.34
0.48
0.41
0.00
0.48
0.79
0.66
0.15
0.08
0.98
2.14
Mean
5.59E-01
.
.
.
.
.
4.65E-01
.
.
6.12E-01
.
.
7.59E-01
4.27E-01
5.59E-01
4.78E-01
7.17E-01
.
.
5.33E-01
.
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
5.12E-02 l.OOE-01 1.41E-01 1.91E-01 2.75E-01 4.00E-01 7.07E-01
,,,,,, ,
,,,,,, ,
,,,,,, ,
,,,,,, ,
,,,,,, ,
5.38E-02 1.10E-01 1.13E-01 1.81E-01 2.34E-01 4.00E-01 5.96E-01
****** *
****** *
5.75E-02 l.OOE-01 1.57E-01 1.91E-01 2.98E-01 4.46E-01 8.8/.4E-01
****** *
****** *
1.19E-01 l.OOE-01 1.13E-01 1.41E-01 2.30E-01 5.43E-01 1.24E+00
4.05E-02 1.10E-01 1.69E-01 1.81E-01 2.75E-01 3.65E-01 5.79E-01
5.12E-02 l.OOE-01 1.41E-01 1.91E-01 2.75E-01 4.00E-01 7.07E-01
6.49E-02 l.OOE-01 1.10E-01 1.41E-01 2.28E-01 4.00E-01 6.14E-01
9.99E-02 1.81E-01 2.34E-01 2.34E-01 3.65E-01 5.96E-01 9.29E-01
****** *
****** *
5.50E-02 l.OOE-01 1.41E-01 1.81E-01 2.75E-01 4.00E-01 6.99E-01
****** *
P90 P95 P99 P100
1.12E+00 1.63E+00 1.97E+00 1.97E+00
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
8.84E-01 1.24E+00 1.75E+00 1.75E+00
* * * *
* * * *
1.18E+00 1.63E+00 1.97E+00 1.97E+00
* * * *
* * * *
1.75E+00 1.92E+00 1.97E+00 1.97E+00
7.01E-01 9.31E-01 1.12E+00 1.12E+00
1.12E+00 1.63E+00 1.97E+00 1.97E+00
9.31E-01 1.12E+00 1.97E+00 1.97E+00
1.24E+00 1.63E+00 1.92E+00 1.92E+00
* * * *
* * * *
1.12E+00 1.63E+00 1.97E+00 1.97E+00
* * * *
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-36. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Beef (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 4958000 304
Age
01-02 110000 8
03-05 234000 13
06-11 695000 38
12-19 656000 41
20-39 1495000 83
40-69 1490000 105
70+ 188000 11
Season
Fall 1404000 55
Spring 911000 108
Summer 1755000 69
Winter 888000 72
Urbanization
Central City 100000 5
Nonmetiopolitan 3070000 194
Suburban 1788000 105
Race
Black 0 0
White 4950000 303
Region
Midwest 2261000 161
Northeast 586000 25
South 1042000 61
West 1069000 57
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals 3699000 239
Households who farm 2850000 182
%
Consumin
g
2.64
1.93
2.89
4.16
3.20
2.43
2.63
1.18
2.95
1.97
3.86
1.82
0.18
6.82
2.07
0.00
3.14
4.87
1.42
1.62
2.96
36.63
38.89
Mean
2.45E+00
*
*
3.77E+00
1.72E+00
2.06E+00
1.84E+00
*
1.55E+00
2.32E+00
3.48E+00
1.95E+00
*
2.80E+00
1.93E+00
2.45E+00
2.83E+00
1.44E+00
2.45E+00
2.20E+00
2.66E+00
2.63E+00
SE
1.49E-01
*
*
5.94E-01
1.63E-01
2.00E-01
1.41E-01
*
1.74E-01
1.63E-01
4.12E-01
2.75E-01
*
2.18E-01
1.50E-01
1.50E-01
2.31E-01
2.13E-01
3.46E-01
2.83E-01
1.60E-01
1.96E-01
PI
1.83E-01
*
*
3.54E-01
3.78E-01
2.69E-01
1.83E-01
*
1.83E-01
2.70E-01
1.02E-01
3.93E-02
*
1.83E-01
2.67E-01
1.83E-01
1.83E-01
3.52E-01
1.02E-01
3.13E-01
1.83E-01
2.70E-01
P5 P10
3.74E-01 4.65E-01
* *
* *
6.63E-01 7.53E-01
4.78E-01 5.13E-01
3.52E-01 3.94E-01
3.61E-01 4.55E-01
* *
3.52E-01 3.61E-01
3.90E-01 5.10E-01
6.08E-01 7.45E-01
3.75E-01 3.94E-01
* *
3.77E-01 4.99E-01
3.75E-01 4.16E-01
3.74E-01 4.65E-01
3.54E-01 4.16E-01
3.52E-01 4.73E-01
3.90E-01 5.84E-01
3.80E-01 5.56E-01
3.88E-01 6.63E-01
3.94E-01 5.85E-01
P25
8.78E-01
*
*
1.32E+00
8.96E-01
6.80E-01
8.33E-01
*
5.17E-01
1.04E+00
1.02E+00
6.74E-01
*
8.64E-01
9.07E-01
8.78E-01
8.47E-01
7.42E-01
8.16E-01
1.04E+00
1.04E+00
8.96E-01
P50
1.61E+00
*
*
2.11E+00
1.51E+00
1.59E+00
1.52E+00
*
1.33E+00
1.96E+00
2.44E+00
1.33E+00
*
1.81E+00
1.52E+00
1.61E+00
2.01E+00
1.06E+00
1.59E+00
1.60E+00
1.83E+00
1.64E+00
P75 P90
3.07E+00 5.29E+00
* *
* *
4.43E+00 1.14E+01
2.44E+00 3.53E+00
2.73E+00 4.88E+00
2.38E+00 4.10E+00
* *
2.01E+00 2.86E+00
3.29E+00 4.22E+00
4.43E+00 7.51E+00
2.14E+00 4.23E+00
* *
3.57E+00 6.03E+00
2.44E+00 4.06E+00
3.07E+00 5.29E+00
3.66E+00 5.90E+00
1.68E+00 2.62E+00
2.41E+00 6.36E+00
2.86E+00 4.06E+00
3.48E+00 5.39E+00
3.25E+00 5.39E+00
P95
7.24E+00
*
*
1.25E+01
3.57E+00
6.50E+00
5.39E+00
*
3.90E+00
5.23E+00
1.14E+01
5.39E+00
*
8.44E+00
5.10E+00
7.24E+00
8.39E+00
2.62E+00
7.24E+00
4.42E+00
7.51E+00
7.51E+00
P99
1.33E+01
*
*
1.33E+01
4.28E+00
8.26E+00
5.90E+00
*
7.24E+00
8.62E+00
1.87E+01
1.94E+01
*
1.87E+01
7.51E+00
1.33E+01
1.87E+01
6.03E+00
1.33E+01
7.51E+00
1.25E+01
1.13E+01
P100
1.94E+01
*
*
1.33E+01
4.28E+00
8.26E+00
5.90E+00
*
7.24E+00
9.28E+00
1.87E+01
1.94E+01
*
1.94E+01
9.28E+00
1.94E+01
1.87E+01
6.03E+00
1.33E+01
1.94E+01
1.94E+01
1.94E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consvj
tmers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
2214000 125
27000 2
51000 4
167000 10
227000 13
383000 22
951000 51
408000 23
562000 21
558000 55
676000 22
418000 27
651000 27
758000 51
805000 47
0 0
2186000 124
885000 53
230000 13
545000 31
554000 28
%
Consuming
1.18
0.47
0.63
1.00
1.11
0.62
1.68
2.57
1.18
1.21
1.49
0.86
1.16
1.68
0.93
0.00
1.39
1.91
0.56
0.85
1.54
Mean
5.12E-01
*
*
*
*
3.81E-01
4.28E-01
5.80E-01
5.45E-01
4.70E-01
3.85E-01
7.30E-01
5.18E-01
5.77E-01
4.45E-01
5.18E-01
6.30E-01
*
4.51E-01
3.96E-01
Fable 13-37.
SE
4.96E-02
*
*
*
*
6.26E-02
4.34E-02
8.80E-02
9.36E-02
8.98E-02
4.54E-02
1.54E-01
1.15E-01
9.06E-02
5.77E-02
4.99E-02
7.93E-02
*
1.17E-01
7.75E-02
Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Beets (g/kg-day)
PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
3.21E-02 7.37E-02 1.09E-01 1.88E-01 3.97E-01 5.87E-01
******
******
******
******
7.57E-02 7.57E-02 1.22E-01 1.43E-01 2.85E-01 5.56E-01
5.00E-02 7.31E-02 7.46E-02 2.05E-01 3.97E-01 5.49E-01
3.21E-02 3.21E-02 4.76E-02 2.71E-01 4.49E-01 9.09E-01
3.21E-02 4.76E-02 5.00E-02 2.57E-01 3.56E-01 9.49E-01
7.46E-02 8.06E-02 1.09E-01 1.43E-01 2.73E-01 4.47E-01
7.57E-02 1.20E-01 1.22E-01 1.84E-01 3.97E-01 5.49E-01
7.31E-02 7.31E-02 7.37E-02 2.80E-01 5.20E-01 8.28E-01
1.11E-01 1.35E-01 1.83E-01 2.57E-01 4.01E-01 5.49E-01
5.00E-02 7.31E-02 7.37E-02 1.80E-01 3.86E-01 6.61E-01
3.21E-02 4.76E-02 8.06E-02 1.43E-01 3.97E-01 5.56E-01
3.21E-02 7.46E-02 1.13E-01 2.05E-01 3.97E-01 5.87E-01
5.00E-02 1.13E-01 1.83E-01 3.15E-01 4.54E-01 9.09E-01
******
7.46E-02 7.57E-02 8.06E-02 1.80E-01 2.64E-01 4.84E-01
3.21E-02 4.76E-02 7.31E-02 1.21E-01 2.86E-01 5.49E-01
P90 P95 P99 P100
1.03E+00 1.36E+00 3.69E+00 4.08E+00
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
9.99E-01 9.99E-01 1.12E+00 1.12E+00
9.25E-01 1.15E+00 1.40E+00 1.40E+00
1.36E+00 1.36E+00 1.59E+00 1.59E+00
1.36E+00 1.36E+00 1.40E+00 1.40E+00
8.73E-01 1.59E+00 4.08E+00 4.08E+00
6.24E-01 9.09E-01 9.09E-01 9.09E-01
1.13E+00 2.32E+00 3.69E+00 3.69E+00
9.09E-01 1.12E+00 3.69E+00 3.69E+00
1.36E+00 1.40E+00 4.08E+00 4.08E+00
9.25E-01 9.99E-01 2.32E+00 2.32E+00
1.03E+00 1.36E+00 3.69E+00 4.08E+00
1.15E+00 1.36E+00 3.69E+00 3.69E+00
* * * *
6.61E-01 9.44E-01 4.08E+00 4.08E+00
6.24E-01 7.04E-01 2.32E+00 2.32E+00
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
2107000 120
229000 11
3.09
3.12
5.26E-01
*
5.16E-02
*
3.21E-02 7.37E-02 9.56E-02 2.05E-01 4.01E-01 6.06E-01
******
1.03E+00 1.36E+00 3.69E+00 4.08E+00
* * * *
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s:
I
I
ft
ft
ft
I,
2>
-------
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-38. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Broccoli (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 1745000 80
Age
01-02 0 0
03-05 13000 1
06-11 187000 9
12-19 102000 4
20-39 486000 19
40-69 761000 37
70+ 196000 10
Season
Fall 624000 20
Spring 258000 27
Summer 682000 22
Winter 181000 11
Urbanization
Central City 165000 5
Nonmetropolitan 647000 34
Suburban 933000 41
Race
Black 0 0
White 1719000 79
Region
Midwest 792000 38
Northeast 427000 19
South 373000 16
West 153000 7
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 1729000 78
Households who farm 599000 29
%
Consuming
0.93
0.00
0.16
1.12
0.50
0.79
1.34
1.23
1.31
0.56
1.50
0.37
0.29
1.44
1.08
0.00
1.09
1.71
1.04
0.58
0.42
2.54
8.17
Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
4.20E-01 4.75E-02 7.61E-02 8.24E-02 1.56E-01 1.96E-01 2.90E-01 4.59E-01
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
4.12E-01 6.50E-02 8.24E-02 1.06E-01 1.64E-01 2.22E-01 3.51E-01 4.61E-01
........
2.87E-01 3.70E-02 7.99E-02 7.99E-02 8.24E-02 1.75E-01 2.31E-01 3.79E-01
5.43E-01 1.18E-01 4.50E-02 1.54E-01 1.70E-01 2.65E-01 3.31E-01 5.89E-01
5.08E-01 1.05E-01 7.61E-02 1.29E-01 1.78E-01 2.15E-01 3.99E-01 6.61E-01
........
,,,,,,,,
4.23E-01 4.21E-02 4.50E-02 1.29E-01 1.70E-01 2.23E-01 3.69E-01 5.89E-01
4.29E-01 8.26E-02 7.99E-02 8.24E-02 1.44E-01 2.13E-01 2.44E-01 4.41E-01
4.22E-01 4.81E-02 7.61E-02 8.24E-02 1.56E-01 1.96E-01 2.88E-01 4.59E-01
2.63E-01 5.86E-02 7.61E-02 7.99E-02 8.24E-02 1.75E-01 2.13E-01 2.75E-01
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
........
4.22E-01 4.83E-02 7.61E-02 8.24E-02 1.64E-01 1.96E-01 2.90E-01 4.59E-01
4.66E-01 8.37E-02 4.50E-02 7.61E-02 1.54E-01 1.95E-01 3.10E-01 6.61E-01
P90 P95 P99 P100
8.15E-01 9.74E-01 2.48E+00 3.02E+00
....
....
....
....
6.14E-01 8.15E-01 3.02E+00 3.02E+00
....
4.52E-01 5.29E-01 8.15E-01 8.15E-01
1.25E+00 2.37E+00 3.02E+00 3.02E+00
8.86E-01 9.74E-01 2.48E+00 2.48E+00
....
....
7.47E-01 8.86E-01 9.74E-01 9.74E-01
6.84E-01 2.37E+00 2.48E+00 3.02E+00
8.15E-01 9.74E-01 2.48E+00 3.02E+00
3.44E-01 4.03E-01 3.02E+00 3.02E+00
....
....
....
8.15E-01 9.74E-01 2.48E+00 3.02E+00
8.86E-01 9.74E-01 3.02E+00 3.02E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distibution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-39. Consumer Only Intake of HomeRrown CabbaRe (R/kR-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group WRtd unwRtd
Total 2019000 89
ARC
01-02 14000 2
03-05 29000 1
06-11 61000 3
12-19 203000 9
20-39 391000 16
40-69 966000 44
70+ 326000 13
Season
Fall 570000 21
SprinR 126000 15
Summer 1142000 39
Winter 181000 14
Urbanization
Central City 157000 5
Nonmetiopolitan 1079000 48
Suburban 783000 36
Race
Black 7000 1
White 1867000 83
ReRion
Midwest 884000 37
Northeast 277000 1 1
South 616000 32
West 242000 9
Response to Questionnaire
Households who Rarden 1921000 86
Households who farm 546000 26
%
ConsuminR
1.07
0.25
0.36
0.37
0.99
0.63
1.70
2.05
1.20
0.27
2.51
0.37
0.28
2.40
0.90
0.03
1.19
1.91
0.67
0.96
0.67
2.82
7.45
Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75 P90
1.03E+00 l.OOE-01 1.07E-01 2.03E-01 3.17E-01 4.21E-01 7.76E-01 1.33E+00 1.97E+00
******** *
******** *
******** *
******** *
******** *
1.14E+00 1.80E-01 2.17E-01 2.22E-01 3.25E-01 4.08E-01 7.13E-01 1.41E+00 1.82E+00
******** *
1.28E+00 3.24E-01 1.86E-01 1.86E-01 2.03E-01 3.85E-01 5.42E-01 1.49E+00 5.29E+00
******** *
9.65E-01 9.35E-02 2.01E-01 2.22E-01 3.25E-01 5.55E-01 8.28E-01 1.24E+00 1.79E+00
******** *
******** *
9.37E-01 8.83E-02 2.01E-01 3.17E-01 3.40E-01 4.54E-01 7.13E-01 1.33E+00 1.79E+00
1.26E+00 2.11E-01 3.20E-02 2.22E-01 3.25E-01 4.49E-01 1.05E+00 1.37E+00 2.17E+00
******** *
1.05E+00 1.07E-01 1.07E-01 2.03E-01 2.46E-01 4.13E-01 7.88E-01 1.37E+00 1.97E+00
7.42E-01 7.35E-02 1.07E-01 1.86E-01 2.22E-01 3.55E-01 5.95E-01 1.10E+00 1.29E+00
******** *
1.11E+00 1.34E-01 3.20E-02 2.01E-01 2.17E-01 4.49E-01 8.50E-01 1.79E+00 2.17E+00
******** *
1.07E+00 1.03E-01 1.07E-01 2.03E-01 3.17E-01 4.54E-01 7.88E-01 1.37E+00 1.97E+00
9.96E-01 1.15E-01 2.01E-01 2.06E-01 3.51E-01 5.87E-01 8.28E-01 1.37E+00 1.79E+00
P95 P99 P100
2.35E+00 5.43E+00 5.43E+00
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
5.29E+00 5.43E+00 5.43E+00
WWW
5.43E+00 5.43E+00 5.43E+00
WWW
2.35E+00 2.77E+00 2.77E+00
WWW
WWW
2.35E+00 2.77E+00 2.77E+00
5.29E+00 5.43E+00 5.43E+00
WWW
2.35E+00 5.43E+00 5.43E+00
1.49E+00 1.82E+00 1.98E+00
WWW
2.35E+00 2.77E+00 2.77E+00
WWW
2.35E+00 5.43E+00 5.43E+00
2.35E+00 2.35E+00 2.35E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc WRtd = weiRhted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwRtd = unweiRhted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-40. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Carrots (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
4322000 193
51000 4
53000 3
299000 14
389000 17
1043000 46
1848000 82
574000 24
1810000 66
267000 28
1544000 49
701000 50
963000 29
1675000 94
1684000 70
107000 7
3970000 178
2001000 97
735000 29
378000 20
1208000 47
4054000 182
833000 40
%
Consuming
2.30
0.89
0.65
1.79
1.90
1.69
3.26
3.61
3.80
0.58
3.39
1.44
1.71
3.72
1.94
0.49
2.52
4.31
1.79
0.59
3.35
5.95
11.37
Mean
4.38E-01
.
.
.
.
2.83E-01
4.25E-01
4.44E-01
4.61E-01
5.55E-01
3.88E-01
4.44E-01
2.82E-01
5.18E-01
4.48E-01
.
4.13E-01
4.57E-01
4.05E-01
6.27E-01
3.68E-01
4.04E-01
3.60E-01
SE
4.29E-02
.
.
.
.
3.46E-02
3.42E-02
5.50E-02
9.77E-02
1.01E-01
3.95E-02
7.44E-02
3.86E-02
8.98E-02
4.02E-02
.
2.58E-02
3.99E-02
8.79E-02
3.60E-01
3.24E-02
2.67E-02
5.95E-02
PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
4.12E-02 6.35E-02 9.23E-02 1.79E-01 3.28E-01 5.25E-01
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
4.47E-02 5.02E-02 8.00E-02 1.20E-01 1.99E-01 4.09E-01
3.90E-02 6.74E-02 1.23E-01 2.15E-01 3.67E-01 5.50E-01
7.39E-02 1.79E-01 1.96E-01 2.60E-01 3.70E-01 5.39E-01
9.09E-02 1.10E-01 1.20E-01 1.99E-01 3.08E-01 5.09E-01
1.39E-01 1.49E-01 2.02E-01 2.16E-01 3.92E-01 6.09E-01
4.12E-02 5.02E-02 6.74E-02 1.64E-01 3.76E-01 5.13E-01
3.90E-02 4.34E-02 6.35E-02 1.56E-01 2.25E-01 6.40E-01
3.90E-02 6.35E-02 8.00E-02 1.63E-01 2.09E-01 3.85E-01
4.12E-02 5.36E-02 6.81E-02 2.00E-01 3.28E-01 5.13E-01
6.74E-02 9.09E-02 1.16E-01 2.02E-01 3.77E-01 6.35E-01
,,,,,,
4.34E-02 7.96E-02 1.11E-01 1.94E-01 3.33E-01 5.27E-01
3.90E-02 8.00E-02 1.37E-01 2.00E-01 3.73E-01 5.39E-01
4.12E-02 5.36E-02 6.15E-02 9.34E-02 1.49E-01 6.35E-01
4.47E-02 4.47E-02 5.02E-02 1.49E-01 2.72E-01 4.09E-01
6.74E-02 9.11E-02 1.43E-01 1.90E-01 3.33E-01 4.59E-01
4.12E-02 6.81E-02 9.34E-02 1.79E-01 3.28E-01 5.09E-01
9.09E-02 9.34E-02 1.10E-01 1.79E-01 2.28E-01 4.59E-01
P90 P95 P99 P100
7.95E-01 1.08E+00 2.21E+00 7.79E+00
....
....
....
....
5.64E-01 7.56E-01 1.19E+00 1.19E+00
7.76E-01 1.01E+00 1.53E+00 2.21E+00
9.64E-01 1.08E+00 1.08E+00 1.08E+00
7.76E-01 1.08E+00 1.71E+00 7.79 E+00
9.94E-01 2.11E+00 2.94E+00 2.94E+00
8.40E-01 9.64E-01 1.19E+00 1.19E+00
1.05E+00 1.53E+00 3.06E+00 3.06E+00
5.25E-01 5.88E-01 9.64E-01 9.64E-01
9.55E-01 1.19E+00 7.79E+00 7.79E+00
7.95E-01 1.09E+00 1.71 E+00 1.71 E+00
....
7.76E-01 1.01E+00 1.59E+00 3.06E+00
9.55E-01 1.10E+00 2.11E+00 3.06E+00
1.09E+00 1.71E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00
5.02E-01 9.94E-01 7.79E+00 7.79E+00
7.56E-01 8.40E-01 9.64E-01 9.64E-01
7.62E-01 1.08E+00 1.71E+00 3.06E+00
6.19E-01 1.19E+00 2.11E+00 2.94E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA1 analyses of the 1 987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
ri
-------
Table 13-41. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Corn (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
6891000 421
205000 13
313000 24
689000 43
530000 32
1913000 108
2265000 142
871000 53
2458000 89
1380000 160
1777000 62
1276000 110
748000 27
Nonmetropolitan 4122000 268
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
2021000 126
188000 9
6703000 412
2557000 188
586000 33
2745000 153
1003000 47
%
Consuming
3.67
3.60
3.86
4.12
2.59
3.11
3.99
5.48
5.16
2 99
3.91
2.62
1.33
9.16
2.33
0.86
4.26
5.51
1.42
4.27
2.78
Mean
8.92E-01
*
1.25E+00
9.32E-01
5.92E-01
5.97E-01
8.64E-01
9.43E-01
5.44E-01
6.35E-01
1.82E+00
5.45E-01
7.37E-01
9.63E-01
8.04E-01
*
8.87E-01
9.34E-01
6.14E-01
8.73E-01
9.99E-01
SE PI
6.48E-02 5.15E-02
* *
2.57E-01 3.25E-01
1.66E-01 1.10E-01
9.56E-02 9.87E-02
6.00E-02 6.59E-02
1.05E-01 1.13E-01
2.59E-01 3.91E-02
8.37E-02 3.91E-02
5.57E-02 1.42E-01
2.62E-01 6.59E-02
4.67E-02 1.14E-01
1.41E-01 3.91E-02
8.18E-02 7.40E-02
1.30E-01 1.05E-01
* *
6.51E-02 5.15E-02
9.74E-02 3.91E-02
8.42E-02 9.87E-02
9.52E-02 7.40E-02
2.77E-01 1.05E-01
P5
1.22E-01
*
3.25E-01
1.19E-01
1.05E-01
1.41E-01
1.52E-01
5.15E-02
1.05E-01
1.68E-01
1.78E-01
1.20E-01
3.91E-02
1.22E-01
1.53E-01
*
1.22E-01
1.19E-01
1.66E-01
1.22E-01
1.47E-01
P10
1.65E-01
*
4.00E-01
1.89E-01
1.35E-01
1.52E-01
1.66E-01
1.05E-01
1.42E-01
1.93E-01
3.43E-01
1.49E-01
5.15E-02
1.66E-01
1.66E-01
*
1.63E-01
1.68E-01
1.86E-01
1.66E-01
1.52E-01
P25
2.44E-01
*
5.98E-01
2.52E-01
2.12E-01
2.08E-01
2.55E-01
1.88E-01
1.88E-01
2.64E-01
6.44E-01
2.22E-01
1.77E-01
2.49E-01
2.39E-01
*
2.37E-01
2.47E-01
2.44E-01
2.83E-01
1.77E-01
P50
4.80E-01
*
l.OOE+00
5.13E-01
3.43E-01
3.71E-01
5.16E-01
3.64E-01
3.17E-01
4.48E-01
9.36E-01
4.05E-01
5.46E-01
5.31E-01
3.96E-01
*
4.80E-01
4.56E-01
3.81E-01
5.61E-01
3.96E-01
P75
9.07E-01
*
1.21E+00
1.08E+00
7.11E-01
7.08E-01
8.83E-01
7.57E-01
5.46E-01
7.68E-01
2.13E+00
6.14E-01
9.29E-01
l.OOE+00
6.47E-01
*
8.84E-01
9.29E-01
8.83E-01
9.35E-01
7.45E-01
P90 P95
1.88E+00 3.37E+00
* *
1.67E+00 5.35E+00
3.13E+00 3.37E+00
1.55E+00 1.88E+00
1.53E+00 2.04E+00
1.42E+00 3.22E+00
1.34E+00 6.49E+00
1.27E+00 1.42E+00
1.21E+00 1.57E+00
4.52E+00 6.84E+00
1.16E+00 1.47E+00
2.04E+00 2.23E+00
2.13E+00 3.38E+00
1.34E+00 1.71E+00
* *
1.88E+00 3.22E+00
2.28E+00 3.22E+00
1.34E+00 1.71E+00
1.55E+00 3.37E+00
2.23E+00 6.49E+00
P99 P100
7.44E+00 9.23E+00
* *
5.35E+00 5.35E+00
4.52E+00 4.52E+00
1.88E+00 1.88E+00
3.70E+00 3.70E+00
7.44E+00 7.44E+00
9.23E+00 9.23E+00
5.35E+00 5.69E+00
5.15E+00 6.68E+00
9.23E+00 9.23E+00
2.04E+00 3.94E+00
3.04E+00 3.04E+00
7.44E+00 8.97E+00
9.23E+00 9.23E+00
* *
7.44E+00 9.23E+00
6.84E+00 7.44E+00
1.71E+00 1.71E+00
5.69E+00 8.97E+00
9.23E+00 9.23E+00
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 6233000 387
Households who farm 1739000 114
* Intake data
9.15
23.73
8.75E-01
1.20E+00
6.30E-02 5.15E-02
1.77E-01 3.91E-02
1.35E-01
1.08E-01
1.65E-01
1.66E-01
2.44E-01
2.29E-01
5.02E-01
3.81E-01
9.14E-01
9.74E-01
1.82E+00 3.13E+00
3.37E+00 6.49E+00
6.84E+00 9.23E+00
9.23E+00 9.23E+00
lot provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distributions
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
<•»! ft
-------
I
& .
>Q h
s S
Kil
Table 13-42. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Cucumbers (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
3994000 141
132000 5
107000 4
356000 12
254000 10
864000 29
1882000 68
399000 13
370000 12
197000 15
3427000 114
0 0
640000 18
1530000 64
1824000 59
86000 2
3724000 132
969000 31
689000 22
1317000 54
1019000 34
3465000 123
710000 29
%
Consuming
2.12
2.32
1.32
2.13
1.24
1.40
3.32
2.51
0.78
0.43
7.53
0.00
1.14
3.40
2.11
0.40
2.36
2.09
1.67
2.05
2.83
5.08
9.69
Mean
1.02E+00
*
*
*
*
5.04E-01
1.33E+00
*
*
*
1.06E+00
*
1.74E+00
6.71E-01
*
9.35E-01
l.OOE+00
1.92E+00
8.85E-01
6.01E-01
1.05E+00
6.99E-01
SE
1.55E-01
*
*
*
*
9.27E-02
3.01E-01
*
*
*
1.83E-01
*
3.43E-01
7.52E-02
*
1.62E-01
3.92E-01
6.78E-01
1.05E-01
1.06E-01
1.75E-01
1.07E-01
PI P5 P10 P25
3.08E-02 6.71E-02 1.08E-01 2.40E-01
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
3.08E-02 5.45E-02 6.31E-02 1.83E-01
4.16E-02 7.46E-02 1.76E-01 3.93E-01
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
O.OOE+00 7.46E-02 1.08E-01 2.42E-01
* * * *
1.01E-01 1.21E-01 1.90E-01 3.86E-01
O.OOE+00 7.46E-02 1.62E-01 2.78E-01
* * * *
3.08E-02 6.31E-02 1.01E-01 2.22E-01
3.08E-02 4.16E-02 5.45E-02 1.35E-01
2.33E-01 2.78E-01 2.78E-01 4.75E-01
O.OOE+00 1.21E-01 1.83E-01 2.87E-01
6.71E-02 7.46E-02 1.01E-01 2.09E-01
3.08E-02 6.71E-02 1.01E-01 2.78E-01
O.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 1.43E-01 1.88E-01
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
5.40E-01 1.13E+00 2.11E+00 2.79E+00 1.34E+01 1.37E+01
******
******
******
******
3.09E-01 6.17E-01 1.35E+00 1.49E+00 2.12E+00 2.12E+00
6.84E-01 1.29E+00 2.11E+00 3.27E+00 1.37E+01 1.37E+01
* * * * * *
******
******
5.18E-01 1.13E+00 2.12E+00 2.79E+00 1.34E+01 1.37E+01
******
1.06E+00 1.67E+00 3.09E+00 4.50E+00 1.37E+01 1.37E+01
4.99E-01 8.33E-01 1.34E+00 1.73E+00 3.27E+00 3.27E+00
******
5.01E-01 1.03E+00 1.49E+00 2.40E+00 1.34E+01 1.37E+01
4.53E-01 1.03E+00 2.35E+00 2.45E+00 1.34E+01 1.34E+01
6.84E-01 1.53E+00 4.18E+00 1.17E+01 1.37E+01 1.37E+01
7.53E-01 1.28E+00 1.73E+00 2.13E+00 4.50E+00 4.50E+00
4.30E-01 7.01E-01 1.29E+00 2.11E+00 3.27E+00 3.27E+00
5.18E-01 1.13E+00 2.11E+00 2.79E+00 1.34E+01 1.37E+01
3.86E-01 1.27E+00 1.49E+00 1.71E+00 2.09E+00 2.09E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Table 13-43. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Eggs (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Seasons
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
2075000 124
21000 3
20000 2
170000 12
163000 14
474000 30
718000 43
489000 18
542000 18
460000 54
723000 26
350000 26
251000 9
1076000 65
748000 50
63000 9
2012000 115
665000 37
87000 7
823000 44
500000 36
1824000 113
741000 44
%
Consuming
1.10
0.37
0.25
1.02
0.80
0.77
1.27
3.08
1.14
1.00
1.59
0.72
0.45
2.39
0.86
0.29
1.28
1.43
0.21
1.28
1.39
18.06
10.11
Mean
7.31E-01
*
*
*
*
6.32E-01
5.91E-01
*
*
1.31E+00
4.96E-01
8.60E-01
*
7.34E-01
8.54E-01
*
7.41E-01
7.93E-01
*
5.36E-01
9.21E-01
7.46E-01
8.98E-01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observ
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
SE
l.OOE-01
*
*
*
*
9.23E-02
5.77E-02
*
*
2.88E-01
8.14E-02
9.50E-02
*
1.23E-01
1.98E-01
*
1.05E-01
1.96E-01
*
6.46E-02
2.75E-01
1.11E-01
1.70E-01
itions
PI P5
7.16E-02 1.50E-01
* *
* *
* *
* *
7.16E-02 7.16E-02
1.37E-01 1.41E-01
* *
* *
1.57E-01 3.25E-01
7.16E-02 1.37E-01
1.67E-01 1.75E-01
* *
7.16E-02 1.41E-01
1.37E-01 1.50E-01
* *
7.16E-02 1.50E-01
7.16E-02 1.37E-01
* *
1.52E-01 1.77E-01
1.67E-01 2.06E-01
7.16E-02 1.50E-01
1.52E-01 1.65E-01
P10 P25
1.75E-01 2.68E-01
* *
* *
* *
* *
2.15E-01 3.00E-01
1.52E-01 3.17E-01
* *
* *
3.94E-01 5.02E-01
1.41E-01 2.60E-01
2.15E-01 4.03E-01
* *
1.67E-01 2.60E-01
2.06E-01 3.80E-01
* *
1.75E-01 2.68E-01
1.41E-01 2.17E-01
* *
1.96E-01 2.60E-01
2.08E-01 4.58E-01
1.65E-01 2.56E-01
1.77E-01 2.72E-01
P50
4.66E-01
*
*
*
*
4.16E-01
5.14E-01
*
*
6.66E-01
3.32E-01
7.51E-01
*
4.74E-01
5.88E-01
*
4.82E-01
3.39E-01
*
3.60E-01
6.66E-01
4.82E-01
6.66E-01
P75
9.02E-01
*
*
*
*
8.14E-01
8.44E-01
*
*
1.31E+00
5.41E-01
1.17E+00
*
9.16E-01
1.17E+00
*
9.03E-01
1.08E+00
*
5.99E-01
1.05E+00
9.02E-01
1.19E+00
P90
1.36E+00
*
*
*
*
1.32E+00
1.30E+00
*
*
2.10E+00
1.36E+00
1.62E+00
*
1.34E+00
1.36E+00
*
1.36E+00
1.51E+00
*
1.18E+00
1.36E+00
1.36E+00
1.65E+00
P95 P99
1.69E+00 6.58E+00
* *
* *
* *
* *
1.93E+00 2.50E+00
1.36E+00 1.38E+00
* *
* *
3.26E+00 1.35E+01
1.51E+00 1.65E+00
1.93E+00 1.93E+00
* *
1.65E+00 6.58E+00
1.85E+00 1.35E+01
* *
1.69E+00 6.58E+00
2.10E+00 9.16E+00
* *
1.62E+00 1.93E+00
1.36E+00 1.35E+01
1.85E+00 6.58E+00
1.85E+00 6.58E+00
P100
1.35E+01
*
*
*
*
2.50E+00
1.38E+00
*
*
1.35E+01
1.65E+00
1.93E+00
*
9.16E+00
1.35E+01
*
1.35E+01
9.16E+00
*
1.93E+00
1.35E+01
1.35E+01
9.16E+00
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
X) ft
-------
oo
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who hunt
Nc
wgtd
2707000
89000
94000
362000
462000
844000
694000
74000
876000
554000
273000
1004000
506000
1259000
942000
0
2605000
1321000
394000
609000
383000
2357000
Nc
%
unwgtd Consuming
185
8
8
28
27
59
41
7
31
68
9
77
20
101
64
0
182
97
20
47
21
1.44
1.56
1.16
2.17
2.25
1.37
1.22
0.47
1.84
1.20
0.60
2.06
0.90
2.80
1.09
0.00
1.65
2.85
0.96
0.95
1.06
158 11.66
Mean
9.67E-01
.
.
1.09E+00
1.04E+00
8.24E-01
9.64E-01
.
9.97E-01
9.06E-01
.
1.07E+00
6.89E-01
9.45E-01
1.15E+00
9.77E-01
8.83E-01
1.13E+00
1.26E+00
6.28E-01
1.04E+00
Table 13-44.
SE
6.14E-02
.
.
1.44E-01
1.39E-01
1.08E-01
1.40E-01
.
1.56E-01
8.78E-02
.
1.05E-01
1.27E-01
8.91E-02
1.04E-01
6.30E-02
8.32E-02
2.16E-01
1.29E-01
7.21E-02
6.84E-02
Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Game (g/kg-day)
PI P5 P10 P25
O.OOE+00 1.17E-01 2.10E-01 3.97E-01
....
....
1.16E-01 2.31E-01 4.28E-01 6.33E-01
2.10E-01 2.10E-01 2.91E-01 6.30E-01
1.04E-01 1.17E-01 1.88E-01 3.01E-01
1.24E-01 1.72E-01 2.87E-01 3.42E-01
....
1.17E-01 1.48E-01 2.18E-01 4.28E-01
O.OOE+00 1.04E-01 1.72E-01 4.43E-01
....
O.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 1.65E-01 3.88E-01
O.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 1.88E-01 2.77E-01
O.OOE+00 1.17E-01 1.65E-01 3.20E-01
O.OOE+00 2.56E-01 3.97E-01 5.21E-01
O.OOE+00 1.17E-01 2.02E-01 3.76E-01
O.OOE+00 7.53E-02 2.18E-01 3.42E-01
2.87E-01 2.87E-01 3.21E-01 4.30E-01
O.OOE+00 1.17E-01 1.48E-01 6.32E-01
1.24E-01 1.51E-01 1.88E-01 3.97E-01
O.OOE+00 1.40E-01 2.77E-01 4.42E-01
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
7.09E-01 1.22E+00 2.27E+00 2.67E+00 3.61E+00 4.59E+00
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
7.61E-01 1.48E+00 2.67E+00 2.85E+00 2.90E+00 2.90E+00
8.46E-01 1.22E+00 1.99E+00 3.13E+00 3.13E+00 3.13E+00
6.31E-01 1.09E+00 1.57E+00 2.50E+00 4.59E+00 4.59E+00
5.10E-01 1.41E+00 2.51E+00 3.19E+00 3.61E+00 3.61E+00
......
6.33E-01 1.19E+00 2.50E+00 3.13E+00 3.19E+00 3.19E+00
7.46E-01 1.22E+00 1.75E+00 2.52E+00 3.61E+00 3.61E+00
,,,,,,
8.18E-01 1.52E+00 2.20E+00 2.67E+00 4.59E+00 4.59E+00
6.30E-01 7.74E-01 1.48E+00 1.99E+00 2.34E+00 2.34E+00
6.59E-01 1.19E+00 2.27E+00 3.05E+00 4.59E+00 4.59E+00
8.18E-01 1.52E+00 2.51E+00 2.85E+00 3.13E+00 3.61E+00
7.29E-01 1.38E+00 2.34E+00 2.85E+00 3.61E+00 4.59E+00
6.12E-01 1.10E+00 1.99E+00 2.51E+00 4.59E+00 4.59E+00
7.74E-01 1.41E+00 3.13E+00 3.13E+00 3.61E+00 3.61E+00
1.09E+00 1.93E+00 2.38E+00 3.19E+00 3.19E+00 3.19E+00
6.33E-01 7.74E-01 1.12E+00 1.22E+00 1.52E+00 1.52E+00
7.46E-01 1.44E+00 2.38E+00 2.90E+00 3.61E+00 4.59E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
, Nc unwg
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-45. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Lettuce (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 1520000 80
Age
01-02 54000 4
03-05 25000 2
06-11 173000 7
12-19 71000 3
20-39 379000 17
40-69 485000 26
70+ 317000 20
Season
Fall 214000 8
Spring 352000 35
Summer 856000 30
Winter 98000 7
Urbanization
Central City 268000 8
Nonmetropolitan 566000 36
Suburban 686000 36
Race
Black 51000 3
White 1434000 75
Region
Midwest 630000 33
Northeast 336000 16
South 305000 20
West 249000 1 1
Responses to Questionnaire
Households who garden 1506000 78
Households who farm 304000 18
0.81
0.95
0.31
1.04
0.35
0.62
0.86
2.00
0.45
0.76
1.88
0.20
0.48
1.26
0.79
0.23
0.91
1.36
0.82
0.47
0.69
2.21
4.15
Mean
3.87E-01
*
*
*
*
*
4.84E-01
4.52E-01
*
4.52E-01
3.02E-01
*
*
3.67E-01
3.49E-01
*
3.79E-01
3.83E-01
*
3.52E-01
*
3.90E-01
*
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
3.18E-02 O.OOE+00 4.49E-02 9.43E-02 1.70E-01 2.84E-01 5.45E-01
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
6.07E-02 1.15E-01 1.15E-01 1.24E-01 2.21E-01 4.91E-01 6.84E-01
7.17E-02 5.04E-02 6.71E-02 1.12E-01 2.23E-01 2.88E-01 5.68E-01
* * * * * * *
4.86E-02 5.04E-02 6.71E-02 1.24E-01 1.99E-01 4.53E-01 5.79E-01
3.96E-02 1.98E-02 3.35E-02 4.93E-02 1.42E-01 2.30E-01 4.24E-01
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
4.78E-02 1.98E-02 3.35E-02 4.49E-02 1.23E-01 2.88E-01 5.45E-01
4.32E-02 O.OOE+00 9.43E-02 9.68E-02 1.53E-01 2.30E-01 4.91E-01
* * * * * * *
3.33E-02 O.OOE+00 4.49E-02 9.43E-02 1.56E-01 2.75E-01 5.45E-01
5.54E-02 1.98E-02 3.35E-02 4.49E-02 1.56E-01 2.34E-01 5.68E-01
* * * * * * *
5.74E-02 O.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 1.27E-01 1.64E-01 2.75E-01 4.83E-01
* * * * * * *
3.22E-02 O.OOE+00 4.49E-02 9.43E-02 1.74E-01 2.84E-01 5.45E-01
* * * * * * *
P90 P95 P99 P100
8.36E-01 1.03E+00 1.05E+00 1.28E+00
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
8.86E-01 1.05E+00 1.28E+00 1.28E+00
1.03E+00 1.03E+00 1.03E+00 1.03E+00
* * * *
7.98E-01 9.94E-01 1.28E+00 1.28E+00
5.98E-01 8.14E-01 8.86E-01 8.86E-01
* * * *
* * * *
8.14E-01 8.86E-01 1.28E+00 1.28E+00
7.67E-01 9.94E-01 1.05E+00 1.05E+00
* * * *
8.86E-01 1.03E+00 1.05E+00 1.28E+00
9.42E-01 1.03E+00 1.03E+00 1.03E+00
* * * *
5.79E-01 1.04E+00 1.28E+00 1.28E+00
* * * *
8.36E-01 1.03E+00 1.05E+00 1.28E+00
* * * *
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
ft
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
ft
ft
I,
2>
-------
*v
-------
Table 13-47. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Okra (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
1696000 82
53000 2
68000 3
218000 11
194000 9
417000 18
587000 32
130000 6
228000 9
236000 24
1144000 41
88000 8
204000 6
1043000 55
449000 21
236000 13
1419000 68
113000 7
1443000 70
140000 5
1564000 77
233000 14
%
Consuming
0.90
0.93
0.84
1.30
0.95
0.68
1.03
0.82
0.48
0.51
2.52
0.18
0.36
2.32
0.52
1.09
0.90
0.24
2.24
0.39
2.29
3.18
Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
3.91E-01 3.81E-02 O.OOE+00 5.03E-02 9.59E-02 1.48E-01 2.99E-01 4.58E-01
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
4.00E-01 4.73E-02 6.57E-02 1.11E-01 1.37E-01 2.47E-01 3.07E-01 4.62E-01
........
,,,,,,,,
3.87E-01 6.22E-02 2.98E-02 4.58E-02 6.57E-02 1.10E-01 4.10E-01 5.95E-01
3.86E-01 5.75E-02 O.OOE+00 5.03E-02 9.59E-02 1.44E-01 2.99E-01 4.38E-01
........
,,,,,,,,
3.65E-01 4.99E-02 O.OOE+00 2.69E-02 8.48E-02 1.48E-01 2.57E-01 4.38E-01
5.14E-01 6.97E-02 6.57E-02 9.60E-02 1.11E-01 3.13E-01 4.62E-01 6.00E-01
,,,,,,,,
4.26E-01 4.40E-02 O.OOE+00 6.57E-02 9.60E-02 1.76E-01 3.30E-01 5.23E-01
,,,,,,,,
3.73E-01 4.21E-02 O.OOE+00 5.03E-02 8.48E-02 1.44E-01 2.59E-01 4.38E-01
........
3.84E-01 4.05E-02 O.OOE+00 5.03E-02 9.59E-02 1.48E-01 2.98E-01 4.52E-01
........
P90 P95 P99 P100
7.81E-01 1.21E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00
....
....
....
....
....
7.81E-01 1.14E+00 1.14E+00 1.14E+00
....
....
7.81E-01 9.99E-01 1.07E+00 1.07E+00
1.15E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00
....
....
7.81E-01 1.53E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00
1.14E+00 1.15E+00 1.15E+00 1.15E+00
....
1.14E+00 1.21E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00
....
7.47E-01 1.21E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00
....
1.07E+00 1.21E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00
....
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ri
ft
ft
I,
2>
ri
-------
^
fcs
t
I
!
4n
1=
Table 13-48. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Onions (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 6718000 370
Age
01-02 291000 17
03-05 178000 9
06-11 530000 31
12-19 652000 37
20-39 1566000 78
40-69 2402000 143
70+ 1038000 52
Season
Fall 1557000 59
Spring 1434000 147
Summer 2891000 101
Winter 836000 63
Urbanization
Central City 890000 37
Nonmetropolitan 2944000 177
Suburban 2884000 156
Race
Black 253000 16
White 6266000 345
Region
Midwest 2487000 143
Northeast 876000 52
South 1919000 107
West 1436000 68
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 6441000 356
Households who farm 1390000 81
Consuming
3.57
5.11
2.20
3.17
3.18
2.54
4.23
6.54
3.27
3.11
6.36
1.72
1.58
6.54
3.33
1.16
3.98
5.36
2.13
2.98
3.98
9.45
18.97
Mean
2.96E-01
*
*
3.03E-01
2.11E-01
2.88E-01
2.50E-01
4.33E-01
3.75E-01
1.95E-01
3.06E-01
2.88E-01
2.16E-01
3.24E-01
2.92E-01
*
3.08E-01
2.70E-01
2.32E-01
3.32E-01
3.32E-01
3.00E-01
3.75E-01
SE
1.87E-02
*
*
5.61E-02
3.65E-02
3.40E-02
2.07E-02
8.86E-02
6.93E-02
1.96E-02
2.91E-02
3.86E-02
2.85E-02
2.06E-02
3.70E-02
*
1.99E-02
1.94E-02
4.43E-02
2.93E-02
6.90E-02
1.93E-02
3.84E-02
PI
3.68E-03
*
*
9.80E-03
5.14E-03
9.09E-03
3.03E-03
4.76E-03
3.68E-03
2.01E-03
8.58E-03
3.03E-03
4.76E-03
8.12E-03
3.03E-03
*
3.57E-03
4.25E-03
2.01E-03
4.79E-03
3.57E-03
3.68E-03
3.00E-02
P5 P10
9.09E-03 2.90E-02
* *
* *
1.08E-02 2.76E-02
8.36E-03 8.58E-03
3.80E-02 5.80E-02
4.59E-03 1.11E-02
6.68E-03 2.68E-02
2.55E-02 5.80E-02
5.47E-03 2.68E-02
1.68E-02 4.22E-02
4.59E-03 5.04E-03
1.02E-02 2.55E-02
3.14E-02 6.75E-02
5.20E-03 1.10E-02
* *
9.09E-03 3.06E-02
4.02E-02 5.73E-02
3.73E-03 8.36E-03
2.76E-02 3.70E-02
6.68E-03 1.68E-02
9.09E-03 3.06E-02
4.04E-02 5.15E-02
P25
8.81E-02
*
*
1.06E-01
5.97E-02
9.40E-02
7.66E-02
1.35E-01
1.23E-01
5.73E-02
1.08E-01
3.06E-02
6.60E-02
1.42E-01
5.85E-02
*
9.16E-02
1.02E-01
1.08E-02
1.46E-01
5.68E-02
9.11E-02
1.11E-01
P50
2.06E-01
*
*
2.28E-01
1.42E-01
1.91E-01
1.72E-01
2.86E-01
2.55E-01
1.06E-01
2.28E-01
1.99E-01
1.93E-01
2.55E-01
1.30E-01
*
2.24E-01
2.24E-01
1.08E-01
2.51E-01
1.52E-01
2.13E-01
2.78E-01
P75 P90
3.77E-01 6.09E-01
* *
* *
3.83E-01 6.09E-01
2.55E-01 5.74E-01
3.04E-01 6.38E-01
3.58E-01 5.52E-01
4.61E-01 5.63E-01
4.36E-01 6.03E-01
2.59E-01 4.26E-01
3.76E-01 6.90E-01
4.60E-01 6.42E-01
2.96E-01 5.18E-01
4.33E-01 6.30E-01
3.56E-01 6.35E-01
* *
3.86E-01 6.18E-01
3.43E-01 5.63E-01
3.53E-01 6.35E-01
3.93E-01 6.90E-01
3.86E-01 5.49E-01
3.81E-01 6.09E-01
5.15E-01 9.35E-01
P95
9.12E-01
*
*
1.36E+00
7.59E-01
9.35E-01
6.90E-01
2.68E+00
7.83E-01
5.23E-01
9.69E-01
9.16E-01
5.63E-01
9.12E-01
9.69E-01
*
9.35E-01
7.24E-01
1.05E+00
1.08E+00
9.69E-01
9.16E-01
1.11E+00
P99
1.49E+00
*
*
1.36E+00
9.12E-01
1.49E+00
1.11E+00
3.11E+00
3.11E+00
1.41E+00
1.49E+00
1.36E+00
5.63E-01
1.49E+00
3.11E+00
*
1.77E+00
1.34E+00
1.36E+00
1.49E+00
3.11E+00
1.77E+00
1.49E+00
P100
3.11E+00
*
*
1.36E+00
9.12E-01
1.49E+00
1.41E+00
3.11E+00
3.11E+00
1.77E+00
1.49E+00
1.36E+00
5.63E-01
1.77E+00
3.11E+00
*
3.11E+00
1.34E+00
1.41E+00
1.77E+00
3.11E+00
3.11E+00
1.49E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distributions
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
s
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-49. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Other Berries (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 1626000 99
Age
01-02 41000 2
03-05 53000 3
06-11 106000 10
12-19 79000 5
20-39 309000 20
40-69 871000 51
70+ 159000 7
Season
Fall 379000 13
Spring 287000 29
Summer 502000 18
Winter 458000 39
Urbanization
Central City 378000 15
Nonmetropolitan 466000 37
Suburban 722000 45
Race
Black 76000 4
White 1490000 93
Region
Midwest 736000 56
Northeast 211000 11
South 204000 12
West 415000 18
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 1333000 84
Households who farm 219000 16
0.86
0.72
0.65
0.63
0.39
0.50
1.54
1.00
0.80
0.62
1.10
0.94
0.67
1.04
0.83
0.35
0.95
1.59
0.51
0.32
1.15
1.96
2 99
Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50
4.80E-01 4.24E-02 O.OOE+00 4.68E-02 9.24E-02 2.32E-01 3.84E-01
, , , , , , ,
, , , , , , ,
* * * ....
, , , , , , ,
3.90E-01 6.31E-02 7.95E-02 9.18E-02 9.18E-02 1.25E-01 3.30E-01
4.89E-01 5.72E-02 7.69E-02 1.01E-01 1.34E-01 2.48E-01 3.89E-01
* * * * * * *
* * * ....
3.06E-01 4.11E-02 4.68E-02 4.68E-02 7.69E-02 1.84E-01 2.54E-01
, , , , , , ,
5.35E-01 7.39E-02 O.OOE+00 1.02E-01 1.59E-01 2.32E-01 3.89E-01
* * * ....
6.43E-01 8.96E-02 O.OOE+00 9.24E-02 1.02E-01 2.51E-01 4.39E-01
4.48E-01 5.32E-02 9.18E-02 1.25E-01 1.58E-01 2.58E-01 3.84E-01
, , , , , , ,
5.03E-01 4.43E-02 4.68E-02 9.18E-02 1.01E-01 2.51E-01 3.95E-01
4.57E-01 6.26E-02 O.OOE+00 7.69E-02 9.18E-02 1.25E-01 3.00E-01
* * * ....
, , , , , , ,
... ....
4.72E-01 4.83E-02 l.OOE-02 O.OOE+00 9.18E-02 2.00E-01 3.53E-01
... ....
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
5.89E-01 1.07E+00 1.28E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
5.52E-01 7.94E-01 1.07E+00 1.07E+00 1.07E+00
6.12E-01 7.68E-01 1.28E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00
.....
, , , , ,
4.08E-01 5.40E-01 7.24E-01 1.07E+00 1.07E+00
, , , , ,
6.23E-01 1.07E+00 1.95E+00 2.08E+00 2.08E+00
, , , , ,
1.02E+00 1.31E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00
5.35E-01 5.89E-01 9.02E-01 2.08E+00 2.08E+00
, , , , ,
6.04E-01 1.07E+00 1.31E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00
5.87E-01 1.12E+00 1.28E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00
*****
*****
*****
5.52E-01 1.07E+00 1.28E+00 2.21E+00 2.21E+00
*****
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
I
& .
>9 I.
s S
Kil
Table 13-50. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Peaches (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 2941000 193
Age
01-02 103000 8
03-05 65000 6
06-11 329000 26
12-19 177000 13
20-39 573000 35
40-69 1076000 70
70 + 598000 33
Season
Fall 485000 19
Spring 756000 91
Summer 1081000 35
Winter 619000 48
Urbanization
Central City 429000 12
Nonmetropolitan 1110000 99
Suburban 1402000 82
Race
Black 39000 1
White 2861000 191
Region
Midwest 824000 75
Northeast 75000 5
South 852000 51
West 1190000 62
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 2660000 174
Households who farm 769000 54
%
Consuming
1.56
1.81
0.80
1.97
0.86
0.93
1.90
3.77
1.02
1.64
2.38
1.27
0.76
2.47
1.62
0.18
1.82
1.78
0.18
1.32
3.30
3.90
10.49
Mean
1.67E+00
*
*
3.11E+00
*
1.17E+00
1.53E+00
1.01E+00
*
1.67E+00
2.26E+00
1.25E+00
*
1.87E+00
1.47E+00
*
1.70E+00
1.39E+00
*
1.67E+00
1.80E+00
1.75E+00
1.56E+00
SE PI
1.70E-01 5.20E-02
* *
* *
6.32E-01 9.75E-02
* *
1.74E-01 5.07E-02
2.83E-01 5.87E-02
1.97E-01 9.13E-02
* *
3.04E-01 5.07E-02
4.78E-01 1.65E-01
1.03E-01 3.52E-02
* *
2.59E-01 5.87E-02
1.75E-01 5.07E-02
* *
1.73E-01 5.20E-02
2.91E-01 1.76E-01
* *
2.57E-01 3.52E-02
3.26E-01 5.07E-02
1.85E-01 5.20E-02
2.49E-01 6.79E-02
P5
1.65E-01
*
*
1.01E-01
*
5.50E-02
1.90E-01
1.38E-01
*
5.87E-02
2.25E-01
2.39E-01
*
2.62E-01
1.40E-01
*
1.65E-01
2.20E-01
*
1.38E-01
1.40E-01
1.66E-01
1.76E-01
P10
2.25E-01
*
*
1.40E-01
*
2.25E-01
2.39E-01
1.79E-01
*
1.01E-01
3.61E-01
5.56E-01
*
3.93E-01
2.04E-01
*
2.30E-01
2.59E-01
*
1.79E-01
2.25E-01
2.59E-01
2.26E-01
P25
4.74E-01
*
*
6.25E-01
*
4.74E-01
5.56E-01
2.82E-01
*
2.76E-01
5.67E-01
7.79E-01
*
6.46E-01
4.61E-01
*
5.03E-01
4.60E-01
*
6.43E-01
4.68E-01
5.26E-01
4.61E-01
P50
8.97E-01
*
*
1.13E+00
*
8.09E-01
8.92E-01
8.22E-01
*
7.74E-01
1.12E+00
1.04E+00
*
1.02E+00
9.20E-01
*
8.97E-01
7.40E-01
*
1.02E+00
8.63E-01
9.25E-01
9.02E-01
P75 P90
1.88E+00 3.79E+00
* *
* *
6.36E+00 8.53E+00
* *
1.30E+00 2.92E+00
1.61E+00 2.63E+00
1.19E+00 1.60E+00
* *
1.45E+00 4.44E+00
2.99E+00 6.36E+00
1.71E+00 2.35E+00
* *
2.18E+00 3.86E+00
1.87E+00 3.79E+00
* *
1.96E+00 3.79E+00
1.19E+00 3.06E+00
* *
1.96E+00 3.83E+00
1.94E+00 4.43 E+00
1.96E+00 3.79E+00
2.02E+00 2.99E+00
P95
6.36E+00
*
*
8.53E+00
*
2.99E+00
4.43E+00
3.79E+00
*
6.77E+00
8.53E+00
2.60E+00
*
6.36E+00
4.43E+00
*
6.36E+00
3.56E+00
*
6.36E+00
7.37E+00
6.36E+00
6.36E+00
P99
1.23E+01
*
*
1.15E+01
*
5.27E+00
1.23E+01
7.13E+00
*
2.23E+01
1.23E+01
3.56E+00
*
1.15E+01
7.37E+00
*
1.23E+01
1.15E+01
*
8.53E+00
1.23E+01
1.23E+01
8.53E+00
P100
2.23E+01
*
*
1.15E+01
*
5.27E+00
1.23E+01
7.13E+00
*
2.23E+01
1.23E+01
3.56E+00
*
2.23E+01
7.37E+00
*
2.23E+01
2.23E+01
*
8.53E+00
1.23E+01
2.23E+01
8.53E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
&
I
I
a.
I,
Ł
ri
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-51. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Pears (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc %
Group W2td unwatd Consuming
Total 1513000 94 0.80
Age
01-02 24000 3 0.42
03-05 45000 3 0.56
06-11 145000 10 0.87
12-19 121000 7 0.59
20-39 365000 23 0.59
40-69 557000 33 0.98
70+ 256000 15 1.61
Season
Fall 308000 11 0.65
Spring 355000 39 0.77
Summer 474000 16 1.04
Winter 376000 28 0.77
Urbanization
Central City 222000 11 0.39
Nonmetiopolitan 634000 44 1.41
Suburban 657000 39 0.76
Race
Black 51000 3 0.23
White 1462000 91 0.93
Region
Midwest 688000 57 1.48
Northeast 18000 2 0.04
South 377000 13 0.59
West 430000 22 1.19
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 1312000 85 1.93
Households who farm 528000 35 7.20
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd =
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Mean
9.37E-01
*
*
*
*
6.19E-01
6.57E-01
*
*
6.87E-01
*
1.48E+00
*
7.81E-01
8.50E-01
*
9.65E-01
8.71E-01
*
*
1.14E+00
9.45E-01
1.09E+00
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50
9.68E-02 1.01E-01 1.84E-01 2.38E-01 4.28E-01 6.82E-01
******
******
******
******
6.42E-02 1.13E-01 3.18E-01 3.79E-01 4.28E-01 5.03E-01
5.53E-02 1.01E-01 1.08E-01 3.33E-01 4.23E-01 6.45E-01
******
******
7.89E-02 1.01E-01 1.13E-01 1.82E-01 3.38E-01 6.02E-01
******
2.77E-01 1.08E-01 1.08E-01 3.79E-01 6.45E-01 9.49E-01
******
8.52E-02 3.33E-01 3.52E-01 4.19E-01 4.43E-01 5.70E-01
1.17E-01 1.01E-01 1.08E-01 1.82E-01 3.89E-01 7.29E-01
******
9.88E-02 1.08E-01 2.38E-01 3.52E-01 4.43E-01 7.01E-01
9.49E-02 2.22E-01 3.38E-01 3.76E-01 4.43E-01 6.45E-01
******
******
2.89E-01 1.01E-01 1.08E-01 1.13E-01 3.56E-01 7.52E-01
1.04E-01 1.01E-01 1.82E-01 3.52E-01 4.31E-01 6.75E-01
2.10E-01 1.08E-01 2.22E-01 3.76E-01 4.28E-01 6.14E-01
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
1.09E+00 1.60E+00 2.76E+00 5.16E+00 5.16E+00
*****
*****
*****
*****
6.82E-01 1.22E+00 1.24E+00 1.24E+00 1.24E+00
9.22E-01 1.10E+00 1.13E+00 1.51E+00 1.51E+00
*****
*****
8.66E-01 1.15E+00 1.83E+00 2.54E+00 2.54E+00
*****
1.38E+00 4.82E+00 5.16E+00 5.16E+00 5.16E+00
*****
8.13E-01 1.56E+00 1.86E+00 2.88E+00 2.88E+00
1.10E+00 1.50E+00 2.57E+00 4.79E+00 4.79E+00
*****
1.09E+00 1.60E+00 2.88E+00 5.16E+00 5.16E+00
1.04E+00 1.60E+00 2.57E+00 4.79E+00 4.79E+00
*****
*****
1.13E+00 2.76E+00 4.82E+00 5.16E+00 5.16E+00
1.09E+00 1.56E+00 2.88E+00 5.16E+00 5.16E+00
1.09E+00 2.76E+00 4.82E+00 5.16E+00 5.16E+00
than 20 observations
unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ri
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
ri
ft
-------
QTQ
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-52. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Peas (Ł/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 4252000 226
Age
01-02 163000 9
03-05 140000 7
06-11 515000 26
12-19 377000 22
20-39 1121000 52
40-69 1366000 80
70 + 458000 26
Season
Fall 1239000 41
Spring 765000 78
Summer 1516000 51
Winter 732000 56
Urbanization
Central City 558000 19
Nonmetiopolitan 2028000 126
Suburban 1666000 81
Race
Black 355000 19
White 3784000 203
Region
Midwest 1004000 55
Northeast 241000 14
South 2449000 132
West 558000 25
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 3980000 214
Households who farm 884000 55
%
Consuming
2.26
2.86
1.73
3.08
1.84
1.82
2.41
2.88
2.60
1.66
3.33
1.50
0.99
4.50
1.92
1.63
2.40
2.16
0.59
3.81
1.55
5.84
12.06
Mean SE
5.05E-01 3.23E-02
* *
* *
6.05E-01 8.91E-02
4.08E-01 4.28E-02
4.08E-01 6.21E-02
4.58E-01 4.61E-02
3.34E-01 5.58E-02
3.03E-01 2.97E-02
4.38E-01 4.26E-02
5.85E-01 7.36E-02
7.53E-01 8.86E-02
* *
4.81E-01 3.55E-02
5.13E-01 4.63E-02
* *
4.95E-01 3.35E-02
4.03E-01 7.24E-02
* *
5.67E-01 4.30E-02
3.77E-01 5.70E-02
5.13E-01 3.39E-02
4.59E-01 5.83E-02
PI
4.58E-02
*
*
1.54E-01
5.81E-02
9.96E-02
6.78E-02
3.48E-02
3.48E-02
5.81E-02
6.78E-02
1.17E-01
*
8.42E-02
6.78E-02
*
3.48E-02
3.48E-02
*
1.27E-01
6.78E-02
3.48E-02
3.48E-02
P5
1.02E-01
*
*
1.54E-01
1.33E-01
1.15E-01
1.02E-01
3.48E-02
4.58E-02
1.08E-01
1.27E-01
1.84E-01
*
1.36E-01
1.15E-01
*
1.02E-01
4.58E-02
*
1.74E-01
6.78E-02
1.02E-01
4.58E-02
P10
1.40E-01
*
*
2.18E-01
1.58E-01
1.40E-01
1.20E-01
4.58E-02
1.15E-01
1.18E-01
1.74E-01
2.12E-01
*
1.74E-01
1.34E-01
*
1.33E-01
9.96E-02
*
1.96E-01
1.02E-01
1.40E-01
8.65E-02
P25
2.28E-01
*
*
3.04E-01
2.35E-01
1.80E-01
2.26E-01
1.84E-01
2.09E-01
1.90E-01
2.24E-01
2.73E-01
*
2.48E-01
2.29E-01
*
2.18E-01
1.40E-01
*
2.62E-01
2.18E-01
2.28E-01
2.08E-01
P50 P75
3.21E-01 6.22E-01
* *
* *
3.87E-01 9.00E-01
3.58E-01 5.02E-01
2.54E-01 4.06E-01
3.04E-01 6.10E-01
2.73E-01 3.72E-01
2.62E-01 3.53E-01
3.26E-01 5.16E-01
3.87E-01 8.22E-01
5.44E-01 9.48E-01
* *
3.53E-01 5.79E-01
3.87E-01 6.84E-01
* *
3.26E-01 6.00E-01
2.52E-01 3.53E-01
* *
3.72E-01 6.82E-01
2.73E-01 4.79E-01
3.21E-01 6.28E-01
3.53E-01 5.16E-01
P90
1.04E+00
*
*
1.35E+00
7.10E-01
8.47E-01
9.95E-01
9.95E-01
5.99E-01
9.19E-01
1.35E+00
1.54E+00
*
1.04E+00
9.95E-01
*
9.99E-01
8.80E-01
*
1.24E+00
9.00E-01
1.04E+00
9.00E-01
P95
1.46E+00
*
*
1.40E+00
8.22E-01
1.36E+00
1.30E+00
9.95E-01
7.14E-01
1.40E+00
1.60E+00
2.36E+00
*
1.36E+00
1.30E+00
*
1.40E+00
1.54E+00
*
1.60E+00
9.40E-01
1.54E+00
1.40E+00
P99
2.66E+00
*
*
2.06E+00
8.22E-01
2.71E+00
2.36E+00
1.46E+00
9.95E-01
2.06E+00
2.66E+00
2.89E+00
*
1.89E+00
2.28E+00
*
2.66E+00
2.71E+00
*
2.66E+00
1.40E+00
2.66E+00
1.60E+00
P100
2.89E+00
*
*
2.06E+00
8.22E-01
2.71E+00
2.36E+00
1.46E+00
9.95E-01
2.06E+00
2.66E+00
2.89E+00
*
2.89E+00
2.36E+00
*
2.89E+00
2.89E+00
*
2.66E+00
1.40E+00
2.89E+00
2.89E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
s
-------
Table 13-53. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Peppers (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc
wgtd
5153000
163000
108000
578000
342000
1048000
2221000
646000
1726000
255000
2672000
500000
865000
1982000
2246000
127000
4892000
1790000
786000
1739000
778000
4898000
867000
Nc
unwgtd
208
6
5
26
16
40
88
25
53
28
94
33
30
89
87
6
198
74
31
72
29
199
35
%
Consuming
2.74
2.86
1.33
3.46
1.67
1.70
3.92
4.07
3.62
0.55
5.87
1.03
1.53
4.40
2.59
0.58
3.11
3.86
1.91
2.70
2.16
7.19
11.83
Mean
*
*
2.26E-01
*
2.24E-01
2.50E-01
2.56E-01
1.97E-01
2.95E-01
2.46E-01
2.42E-01
2.47E-01
*
2.47E-01
2.34E-01
2.30E-01
2.13E-01
2.35E-01
3.03E-01
SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50 P75
*******
*******
4.09E-02 O.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 3.03E-02 8.99E-02 1.62E-01 2.98E-01
*******
6.10E-02 1.74E-02 3.26E-02 5.66E-02 8.55E-02 1.19E-01 2.18E-01
2.78E-02 5.32E-03 3.40E-02 4.52E-02 7.58E-02 1.66E-01 3.21E-01
6.22E-02 1.73E-02 2.15E-02 2.30E-02 7.47E-02 1.38E-01 2.39E-01
2.51E-02 O.OOE+00 3.26E-02 4.05E-02 8.55E-02 1.66E-01 2.39E-01
7.15E-02 O.OOE+00 1.73E-02 3.86E-02 6.93E-02 1.47E-01 3.21E-01
4.23E-02 3.86E-02 5.66E-02 6.72E-02 1.10E-01 1.84E-01 2.73E-01
3.93E-02 5.32E-03 2.22E-02 3.34E-02 6.93E-02 1.19E-01 2.72E-01
3.00E-02 O.OOE+00 2.70E-02 3.50E-02 8.55E-02 1.60E-01 2.91E-01
*******
2.23E-02 1.74E-02 2.96E-02 4.05E-02 8.55E-02 1.54E-01 2.91E-01
4.06E-02 5.32E-03 2.22E-02 3.26E-02 5.98E-02 1.47E-01 2.57E-01
2.89E-02 3.34E-02 6.74E-02 7.60E-02 1.07E-01 1.66E-01 2.73E-01
5.04E-02 1.73E-02 2.30E-02 2.70E-02 4.05E-02 8.58E-02 2.53E-01
2.09E-02 O.OOE+00 2.22E-02 3.40E-02 7.58E-02 1.54E-01 2.85E-01
7.50E-02 O.OOE+00 2.70E-02 2.96E-02 7.11E-02 1.66E-01 3.55E-01
P90 P95 P99 P100
* * * *
* * * *
4.25E-01 7.70E-01 8.45E-01 8.45E-01
* * * *
3.97E-01 6.24E-01 2.48E+00 2.48E+00
4.77E-01 7.44E-01 1.50E+00 1.50E+00
9.24E-01 9.39E-01 1.07E+00 1.07E+00
3.49E-01 3.97E-01 1.07E+00 1.07E+00
1.09E+00 1.20E+00 1.53E+00 1.53E+00
3.61E-01 9.39E-01 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
5.37E-01 7.70E-01 2.48E+00 2.48E+00
4.90E-01 9.73E-01 1.50E+00 1.53E+00
* * * *
4.90E-01 9.24E-01 1.81E+00 2.48E+00
3.90E-01 8.45E-01 2.48E+00 2.48E+00
4.25E-01 5.26E-01 1.81E+00 1.81E+00
5.37E-01 9.24E-01 1.07E+00 1.07E+00
4.77E-01 8.45E-01 1.50E+00 2.48E+00
6.00E-01 8.45E-01 2.48E+00 2.48E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s:
I
I
ft
ft
I,
2>
X| ft
-------
I
Table 13-54. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Pork (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
1732000 121
38000 5
26000 3
129000 11
291000 20
511000 32
557000 38
180000 12
362000 13
547000 59
379000 15
444000 34
90000 2
1178000 77
464000 42
0 0
1732000 121
844000 64
97000 5
554000 32
237000 20
1428000 100
1218000 82
%
Consuming
0.92
0.67
0.32
0.77
1.42
0.83
0.98
1.13
0.76
1.19
0.83
0.91
0.16
2.62
0.54
0.00
1.10
1.82
0.24
0.86
0.66
14.14
16.62
Mean
1.23E+00
.
.
.
1.28E+00
1.21E+00
1.02E+00
.
.
1.13E+00
.
1.40E+00
.
1.39E+00
8.77E-01
1.23E+00
1.06E+00
.
1.35E+00
1.15E+00
1.34E+00
1.30E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observ
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
SE PI P5 P10 P25
9.63E-02 9.26E-02 1.40E-01 3.05E-01 5.41E-01
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
2.42E-01 3.05E-01 3.23E-01 3.37E-01 5.24E-01
1.80E-01 1.11E-01 2.83E-01 4.09E-01 5.52E-01
1.15E-01 1.19E-01 1.81E-01 2.22E-01 4.05E-01
.....
, , , , ,
1.29E-01 1.11E-01 1.40E-01 2.22E-01 3.52E-01
, , , , ,
2.39E-01 1.26E-01 2.58E-01 3.77E-01 5.03E-01
, , , , ,
1.31E-01 9.26E-02 2.15E-01 4.05E-01 6.17E-01
1.20E-01 1.11E-01 1.19E-01 1.81E-01 3.31E-01
9.63E-02 9.26E-02 1.40E-01 3.05E-01 5.41E-01
1.19E-01 9.26E-02 1.19E-01 2.13E-01 5.02E-01
, , , , ,
1.46E-01 1.81E-01 2.58E-01 3.37E-01 8.11E-01
3.09E-01 1.26E-01 3.23E-01 3.77E-01 4.40E-01
9.86E-02 1.40E-01 3.23E-01 4.05E-01 5.89E-01
1.11E-01 2.15E-01 3.42E-01 4.08E-01 5.85E-01
itions
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
8.96E-01 1.71E+00 2.73E+00 3.37E+00 4.93E+00 7.41E+00
,,,,,,
******
******
8.85E-01 1.75E+00 3.69E+00 3.69E+00 4.29E+00 4.29E+00
7.89E-01 1.43E+00 2.90E+00 3.08E+00 4.93E+00 4.93E+00
8.11E-01 1.71E+00 1.78E+00 2.28E+00 3.16E+00 3.16E+00
******
******
8.96E-01 1.50E+00 2.68E+00 3.68E+00 4.29E+00 4.29E+00
******
8.83E-01 2.21E+00 3.08E+00 4.93E+00 7.41E+00 7.41E+00
******
9.66E-01 1.75E+00 3.16E+00 3.69E+00 4.93E+00 7.41E+00
5.89E-01 1.10E+00 2.28E+00 2.73E+00 2.90E+00 2.90E+00
8.96E-01 1.71E+00 2.73E+00 3.37E+00 4.93E+00 7.41E+00
6.72E-01 1.20E+00 2.68E+00 3.37E+00 3.69E+00 3.73E+00
******
1.26E+00 1.75E+00 2.44E+00 3.08E+00 4.29E+00 4.29E+00
7.29E-01 1.10E+00 1.75E+00 2.73E+00 7.41E+00 7.41E+00
9.66E-01 1.75E+00 2.90E+00 3.37E+00 4.29E+00 4.93E+00
9.24E-01 1.71E+00 3.08E+00 3.69E+00 4.93E+00 4.93E+00
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
&
I
I
a.
I,
s
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-55. Consumer Only Intake of Home Produced Poultry (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Nc
Nc
%
wgtd unwgtd Consuming Mean
1816000
91000
70000
205000
194000
574000
568000
80000
562000
374000
312000
568000
230000
997000
589000
44000
1772000
765000
64000
654000
333000
1333000
917000
105
8
5
12
12
33
30
3
23
34
11
37
8
56
41
2
103
41
4
38
22
81
59
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there
NOTE: SE = standard error
0.97
1.60
0.86
1.23
0.95
0.93
1.00
0.50
1.18
0.81
0.69
1.17
0.41
2.21
0.68
0.20
1.12
1.65
0.16
1.02
0.92
13.20
12.51
were
1.57E+00
.
.
.
.
1.17E+00
1.51E+00
.
1.52E+00
1.87E+00
.
1.55E+00
.
1.48E+00
1.94E+00
.
1.57E+00
1.60E+00
.
1.67E+00
1.24E+00
1.58E+00
1.54E+00
SE PI P5 P10 P25
1.15E-01 1.95E-01 3.03E-01 4.18E-01 6.37E-01
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
1.47E-01 1.73E-01 4.02E-01 4.02E-01 5.57E-01
2.43E-01 1.95E-01 1.97E-01 3.03E-01 4.91E-01
.....
1.75E-01 4.07E-01 4.18E-01 4.60E-01 8.11E-01
2.79E-01 1.73E-01 2.28E-01 3.03E-01 5.22E-01
, , , , ,
2.00E-01 1.95E-01 1.97E-01 4.33E-01 5.95E-01
, , , , ,
1.32E-01 1.95E-01 2.82E-01 4.07E-01 6.72E-01
2.30E-01 2.28E-01 2.67E-01 4.33E-01 6.24E-01
, , , , ,
1.17E-01 1.95E-01 3.03E-01 4.18E-01 6.24E-01
1.40E-01 4.07E-01 4.18E-01 5.57E-01 9.79E-01
, , , , ,
2.50E-01 1.73E-01 1.97E-01 3.03E-01 4.60E-01
1.80E-01 2.67E-01 2.67E-01 4.27E-01 5.60E-01
1.18E-01 2.28E-01 4.07E-01 4.72E-01 7.09E-01
1.79E-01 1.95E-01 2.28E-01 3.03E-01 5.95E-01
P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
1.23E+00 2.19E+00 3.17E+00 3.83E+00 5.33E+00 6.17E+00
,,,,,,
******
******
******
1.15E+00 1.37E+00 1.80E+00 2.93E+00 4.59E+00 4.59E+00
7.74E-01 2.69E+00 3.29E+00 4.60E+00 5.15E+00 5.15E+00
******
1.39E+00 2.23E+00 2.69E+00 3.17E+00 3.17E+00 3.17E+00
1.38E+00 3.29E+00 4.60E+00 5.15E+00 5.33E+00 5.33E+00
******
1.23E+00 2.18E+00 2.95E+00 3.47E+00 6.17E+00 6.17E+00
******
1.19E+00 2.10E+00 3.17E+00 3.29E+00 3.86E+00 5.33E+00
1.59E+00 2.69E+00 4.59E+00 4.83E+00 6.17E+00 6.17E+00
******
1.23E+00 2.19E+00 3.17E+00 3.86E+00 5.33E+00 6.17E+00
1.39E+00 2.19E+00 2.70E+00 3.17E+00 3.86E+00 5.33E+00
******
9.08E-01 2.11E+00 4.59E+00 4.83E+00 6.17E+00 6.17E+00
1.02E+00 1.89E+00 2.45E+00 2.93E+00 2.93E+00 2.93E+00
1.37E+00 2.19E+00 2.93E+00 3.29E+00 5.33E+00 6.17E+00
1.06E+00 2.18E+00 3.47E+00 4.83E+00 6.17E+00 6.17E+00
less than 20 observations
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd= unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
I
Table 13-56. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Pumpkins (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 2041000 87
Age
01-02 73000 4
03-05 18000 2
06-11 229000 9
12-19 244000 10
20-39 657000 26
40-69 415000 20
70+ 373000 15
Season
Fall 1345000 49
Spring 48000 6
Summer 405000 13
Winter 243000 19
Urbanization
Central City 565000 20
Nonmetiopolitan 863000 44
Suburban 613000 23
Race
Black 22000 1
White 2019000 86
Region
Midwest 1370000 54
Northeast 15000 1
South 179000 10
West 477000 22
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 1987000 85
Households who farm 449000 18
1.09
1.28
0.22
1.37
1.19
1.07
0.73
2.35
2.82
0.10
0.89
0.50
1.00
1.92
0.71
0.10
1.28
2.95
0.04
0.28
1.32
2.92
6.13
Mean SE PI P5 P10 P25 P50
7.78E-01 6.83E-02 1.25E-01 1.84E-01 2.41E-01 3.18E-01 5.55E-01
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
8.01E-01 1.29E-01 1.76E-01 1.84E-01 3.01E-01 3.77E-01 4.77E-01
8.22E-01 1.57E-01 2.86E-01 2.86E-01 3.16E-01 3.71E-01 5.23E-01
* * * * * * *
8.19E-01 8.91E-02 1.25E-01 1.76E-01 2.81E-01 3.71E-01 6.14E-01
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
6.29E-01 1.08E-01 1.84E-01 1.84E-01 2.41E-01 2.81E-01 3.77E-01
6.44E-01 9.64E-02 1.25E-01 1.65E-01 1.89E-01 3.10E-01 5.10E-01
1.10E+00 1.34E-01 2.86E-01 2.88E-01 3.01E-01 4.67E-01 1.04E+00
* * * * * * *
7.82E-01 6.90E-02 1.25E-01 1.84E-01 2.41E-01 3.16E-01 5.55E-01
8.21E-01 9.68E-02 1.25E-01 2.34E-01 2.41E-01 3.18E-01 5.72E-01
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
7.87E-01 9.65E-02 1.76E-01 1.89E-01 3.08E-01 3.71E-01 7.44E-01
7.70E-01 6.93E-02 1.25E-01 1.84E-01 2.41E-01 3.16E-01 5.55E-01
* * * * * * *
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
1.07E+00 1.47E+00 1.79E+00 3.02E+00 4.48E+00
*****
*****
*****
*****
1.03E+00 1.73E+00 2.67E+00 2.67E+00 2.67E+00
9.62E-01 1.47E+00 3.02E+00 3.02E+00 3.02E+00
*****
1.17E+00 1.73E+00 1.79E+00 3.02E+00 3.02E+00
*****
*****
*****
9.40E-01 1.24E+00 1.33E+00 2.24E+00 2.24E+00
6.65E-01 1.22E+00 1.45E+00 4.48E+00 4.48E+00
1.47E+00 1.79E+00 2.67E+00 2.67E+00 2.67E+00
*****
1.10E+00 1.47E+00 1.79E+00 3.02E+00 4.48E+00
1.04E+00 1.73E+00 2.67E+00 3.02E+00 4.48E+00
*****
*****
1.17E+00 1.47E+00 1.51E+00 1.51E+00 1.51E+00
1.04E+00 1.46E+00 1.79E+00 3.02E+00 4.48E+00
*****
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers;
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
&
I
I
a.
I,
s
-------
Table 13-57. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Snap Beans (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 12308000 739
Age
01-02 246000 17
03-05 455000 32
06-11 862000 62
12-19 1151000 69
20-39 2677000 160
40-69 4987000 292
70+ 1801000 100
Season
Fall 3813000 137
Spring 2706000 288
Summer 2946000 98
Winter 2843000 216
Urbanization
Central City 2205000 78
Nonmetropolitan 5696000 404
Suburban 4347000 255
Race
Black 634000 36
White 11519000 694
Region
Midwest 4651000 307
Northeast 990000 52
South 4755000 286
West 1852000 92
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 11843000 700
Households who farm 2591000 157
6.55
4.32
5.62
5.16
5.62
4.35
8.79
11.34
8.00
5.86
6.48
5.84
3.91
12.65
5.02
2.92
7.31
10.02
2.40
7.39
5.14
17.38
35.35
Mean
8.00E-01
*
1.49E+00
8.97E-01
6.38E-01
6.13E-01
7.19E-01
9.15E-01
8.12E-01
9.00E-01
6.33E-01
8.64E-01
5.97E-01
9.61E-01
7.04E-01
7.55E-01
8.10E-01
8.60E-01
5.66E-01
8.82E-01
5.92E-01
7.90E-01
7.95E-01
SE PI
3.02E-02 5.65E-02
* *
2.37E-01 O.OOE+00
1.15E-01 O.OOE+00
6.10E-02 O.OOE+00
4.09E-02 7.05E-02
3.20E-02 9.99E-02
1.16E-01 5.65E-02
8.19E-02 5.65E-02
5.44E-02 2.93E-02
4.81E-02 O.OOE+00
5.28E-02 1.14E-01
5.59E-02 5.65E-02
5.06E-02 9.35E-02
3.76E-02 9.67E-02
1.43E-01 2.51E-01
3.12E-02 7.05E-02
6.11E-02 7.44E-02
6.63E-02 O.OOE+00
4.04E-02 1.33E-01
4.35E-02 7.05E-02
3.08E-02 5.65E-02
4.78E-02 5.65E-02
P5
1.49E-01
*
O.OOE+00
1.99E-01
1.61E-01
1.31E-01
1.61E-01
7.44E-02
1.50E-01
1.51E-01
1.18E-01
1.80E-01
7.44E-02
1.77E-01
1.39E-01
2.51E-01
1.50E-01
1.54E-01
9.66E-02
2.13E-01
1.43E-01
1.49E-01
1.27E-01
P10 P25
1.88E-01 3.38E-01
* *
3.49E-01 9.01E-01
2.21E-01 3.21E-01
2.22E-01 3.20E-01
1.57E-01 2.60E-01
2.28E-01 3.62E-01
1.51E-01 3.69E-01
1.83E-01 2.72E-01
2.19E-01 3.70E-01
1.57E-01 3.31E-01
2.44E-01 4.24E-01
1.59E-01 2.56E-01
2.29E-01 3.67E-01
1.88E-01 3.41E-01
2.79E-01 2.99E-01
1.89E-01 3.49E-01
1.89E-01 3.36E-01
1.06E-01 1.81E-01
2.51E-01 3.98E-01
1.83E-01 2.72E-01
1.87E-01 3.31E-01
1.89E-01 4.05E-01
P50
5.69E-01
*
1.16E+00
6.42E-01
5.04E-01
4.96E-01
5.61E-01
6.38E-01
5.39E-01
5.91E-01
5.04E-01
6.20E-01
5.12E-01
6.75E-01
5.20E-01
4.78E-01
5.73E-01
5.50E-01
4.91E-01
6.75E-01
5.14E-01
5.63E-01
6.59E-01
P75
1.04E+00
*
1.66E+00
1.21E+00
8.11E-01
7.85E-01
8.59E-01
1.22E+00
1.18E+00
1.11E+00
8.50E-01
1.12E+00
7.12E-01
1.19E+00
9.32E-01
1.04E+00
1.06E+00
9.88E-01
8.15E-01
1.22E+00
7.41E-01
1.02E+00
1.12E+00
P90
1.58E+00
*
3.20E+00
1.79E+00
1.34E+00
1.24E+00
1.45E+00
1.70E+00
1.52E+00
1.72E+00
1.30E+00
1.72E+00
1.23E+00
1.89E+00
1.36E+00
1.30E+00
1.63E+00
1.70E+00
1.28E+00
1.72E+00
1.20E+00
1.60E+00
1.54E+00
P95
2.01E+00
*
4.88E+00
2.75E+00
1.79E+00
1.64E+00
1.77E+00
2.01E+00
2.01E+00
2.85E+00
1.70E+00
2.02E+00
1.54E+00
2.70E+00
1.77E+00
1.34E+00
2.01E+00
2.47E+00
1.36E+00
2.01E+00
1.52E+00
2.01E+00
1.98E+00
P99
3.90E+00
*
6.90E+00
4.81E+00
2.72E+00
2.05E+00
2.70E+00
9.96E+00
4.82E+00
5.66E+00
2.05E+00
3.85E+00
1.93E+00
4.88E+00
2.98E+00
5.98E+00
3.90E+00
4.88E+00
1.97E+00
3.23E+00
2.19E+00
3.85E+00
2.96E+00
P100
9.96E+00
*
6.90E+00
5.66E+00
2.72E+00
4.26E+00
4.23E+00
9.96E+00
9.96E+00
6.90E+00
2.63E+00
7.88E+00
3.35E+00
9.96E+00
6.08E+00
5.98E+00
9.96E+00
9.96E+00
3.09E+00
5.98E+00
2.19E+00
9.96E+00
4.23E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Nc unwgtc
= unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
••s
ft
t
I
I
4n
1=
Table 13-58. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Strawberries (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nc
wgtd
2057000
30000
66000
153000
201000
316000
833000
449000
250000
598000
388000
821000
505000
Nonmetropolitan 664000
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
888000
0
2057000
1123000
382000
333000
219000
Nc
%
unwgtd Consuming
139
2
6
15
11
22
55
27
8
66
11
54
23
52
64
0
139
76
25
23
15
1.09
0.53
0.81
0.92
0.98
0.51
1.47
2.83
0.52
1.30
0.85
1.69
0.90
1.47
1.03
0.00
1.31
2.42
0.93
0.52
0.61
Mean
6.52E-01
*
*
*
*
3.21E-01
6.44E-01
6.36E-01
*
8.30E-01
*
5.13E-01
7.54E-01
6.18E-01
6.20E-01
6.52E-01
6.85E-01
6.35E-01
6.69E-01
*
SE
5.15E-02
*
*
*
*
6.41E-02
6.37E-02
1.11E-01
*
1.03E-01
*
6.42E-02
1.22E-01
1.05E-01
5.88E-02
5.15E-02
8.28E-02
1.01E-01
8.41E-02
*
PI P5 P10 P25 P50
4.15E-02 8.16E-02 1.18E-01 2.55E-01 4.67E-01
*****
*****
*****
*****
7.92E-02 8.16E-02 1.05E-01 1.18E-01 2.05E-01
2.44E-02 6.53E-02 1.75E-01 3.55E-01 5.83E-01
4.15E-02 4.41E-02 8.64E-02 2.62E-01 4.69E-01
*****
7.92E-02 8.92E-02 1.80E-01 2.75E-01 4.69E-01
*****
2.44E-02 4.41E-02 1.05E-01 2.07E-01 3.86E-01
4.15E-02 4.41E-02 8.92E-02 3.82E-01 4.88E-01
2.44E-02 6.53E-02 8.16E-02 1.25E-01 3.85E-01
7.92E-02 1.81E-01 2.21E-01 3.45E-01 5.30E-01
4.15E-02 8.16E-02 1.18E-01 2.55E-01 4.67E-01
2.44E-02 6.53E-02 8.16E-02 1.82E-01 4.16E-01
8.92E-02 1.59E-01 1.82E-01 2.55E-01 4.67E-01
1.33E-01 2.05E-01 3.77E-01 5.15E-01 6.21E-01
*****
P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
8.20E-01 1.47E+00 1.77E+00 2.72E+00 4.83E+00
*****
*****
*****
*****
4.59E-01 8.20E-01 9.73E-01 1.56E+00 1.56E+00
9.41E-01 1.42E+00 1.47E+00 2.37E+00 2.37E+00
7.00E-01 1.66E+00 1.89E+00 2.72E+00 2.72E+00
*****
9.73E-01 1.93E+00 2.54E+00 4.83E+00 4.83E+00
*****
6.01E-01 1.27E+00 1.46E+00 2.37E+00 2.37E+00
1.33E+00 1.47E+00 1.69E+00 2.37E+00 2.37E+00
8.14E-01 1.66E+00 2.16E+00 4.83E+00 4.83E+00
6.96E-01 1.27E+00 1.56E+00 2.97E+00 2.97E+00
8.20E-01 1.47E+00 1.77E+00 2.72E+00 4.83E+00
l.OOE+00 1.66E+00 1.93E+00 2.97E+00 4.83E+00
8.65E-01 1.46E+00 1.83E+00 2.16E+00 2.16E+00
6.96E-01 l.OOE+00 l.OOE+00 2.72E+00 2.72E+00
*****
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 1843000
Households who farm 87000
* Intake data
123
9
2.70
1.19
6.37E-01
*
5.48E-02
*
4.15E-02 7.92E-02 1.18E-01 2.28E-01 4.53E-01
*****
8.20E-01 1.46E+00 1.77E+00 2.54E+00 4.83E+00
*****
not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 16737000 743
Age
01-02 572000 26
03-05 516000 26
06-11 1093000 51
12-19 1411000 61
20-39 4169000 175
40-69 6758000 305
70+ 1989000 89
Season
Fall 5516000 201
Spring 1264000 127
Summer 8122000 279
Winter 1835000 136
Urbanization
Central City 2680000 90
Nonmetropolitan 7389000 378
Suburban 6668000 275
Race
Black 743000 28
White 15658000 703
Region
Midwest 6747000 322
Northeast 2480000 87
South 4358000 202
West 3152000 132
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 14791000 661
Households who farm 2269000 112
NOTE : SE = standard error
8.90
10.04
6.37
6.54
6.89
6.77
11.92
12.53
11.57
2.74
17.86
3.77
4.76
16.41
7.70
3.42
9.94
14.54
6.02
6.77
8.74
21.70
30.96
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwg
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Table 13-59.
Mean SE
1.18E+00 5.26E-02
3.14E+00 5.30E-01
1.61E+00 2.65E-01
1.63E+00 2.68E-01
7.15E-01 8.52E-02
8.54E-01 1.03E-01
1.05E+00 5.23E-02
1.26E+00 9.40E-02
1.02E+00 8.55E-02
8.39E-01 6.26E-02
1.30E+00 8.75E-02
1.37E+00 1.77E-01
1.10E+00 1.27E-01
1.26E+00 7.35E-02
1.13E+00 9.14E-02
6.14E-01 8.60E-02
1.22E+00 5.54E-02
1.18E+00 8.91E-02
1.17E+00 1.64E-01
1.15E+00 9.07E-02
1.23E+00 9.90E-02
1.21E+00 5.70E-02
1.42E+00 1.58E-01
Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Tomatoes (g/kg-day)
PI
7.57E-02
7.26E-01
4.96E-01
2.17E-01
O.OOE+00
7.32E-02
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
7.32E-02
1.36E-01
1.05E-01
9.07E-02
O.OOE+00
1.13E-01
7.57E-02
O.OOE+00
1.05E-01
6.34E-02
7.57E-02
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
7.57E-02
O.OOE+00
P5
1.52E-01
8.55E-01
5.07E-01
3.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.31E-01
1.73E-01
2.36E-01
1.35E-01
1.89E-01
1.66E-01
2.07E-01
1.52E-01
2.16E-01
1.35E-01
O.OOE+00
1.68E-01
1.45E-01
1.35E-01
2.07E-01
2.39E-01
1.52E-01
1.80E-01
P10
2.34E-01
9.34E-01
5.07E-01
3.92E-01
1.82E-01
1.47E-01
2.81E-01
2.98E-01
2.23E-01
2.39E-01
2.36E-01
2.85E-01
2.25E-01
2.62E-01
1.78E-01
7.32E-02
2.41E-01
2.06E-01
1.48E-01
2.53E-01
2.84E-01
2.34E-01
2.26E-01
P25
3.92E-01
1.23E+00
7.54E-01
5.30E-01
2.68E-01
2.54E-01
3.97E-01
4.82E-01
3.43E-01
3.73E-01
4.08E-01
4.97E-01
3.54E-01
4.23E-01
3.70E-01
2.36E-01
4.06E-01
3.62E-01
3.50E-01
4.23E-01
4.11E-01
4.06E-01
4.23E-01
P50
7.43E-01
1.66E+00
1.25E+00
7.55E-01
5.21E-01
5.15E-01
7.46E-01
1.14E+00
5.95E-01
6.31E-01
8.03E-01
8.29E-01
7.54E-01
7.62E-01
6.68E-01
5.07E-01
7.55E-01
6.82E-01
7.51E-01
7.46E-01
7.65E-01
7.58E-01
7.66E-01
P75
1.46E+00
4.00E+00
1.65E+00
1.66E+00
8.50E-01
l.OOE+00
1.41E+00
1.77E+00
1.34E+00
1.11E+00
1.55E+00
1.49E+00
1.51E+00
1 .47E+00
1.38E+00
9.02E-01
1.49E+00
1.41E+00
1.38E+00
1.43E+00
1.84E+00
1.50E+00
1.86E+00
P90
2.50E+00
7.26E+00
3.00E+00
5.20E+00
1.67E+00
1.83E+00
2.40E+00
2.51E+00
2.24E+00
1.75E+00
3.05E+00
2.48E+00
2.16E+00
2.77E+00
2.35E+00
1.18E+00
2.55E+00
2.51E+00
2.44E+00
2.32E+00
2.78E+00
2.51E+00
3.55E+00
P95 P99
3.54E+00 7.26E+00
1.07E+01 1.07E+01
6.25E+00 6.25E+00
5.70E+00 9.14E+00
1.94E+00 3.39E+00
2.10E+00 5.52E+00
3.05E+00 4.50E+00
2.99E+00 3.67E+00
2.87E+00 6.25E+00
2.00E+00 3.79E+00
4.05E+00 7.26E+00
3.38E+00 8.29E+00
2.95E+00 7.26E+00
3.85E+00 6.87E+00
3.32E+00 5.52E+00
1.55E+00 1.66E+00
3.59E+00 7.26E+00
3.69E+00 6.87E+00
3.52E+00 1.09E+01
3.67E+00 6.82E+00
3.08E+00 7.26E+00
3.52E+00 7.26E+00
5.20E+00 9.14E+00
P100
1.93E+01
1.07E+01
6.25E+00
9.14E+00
3.39E+00
1.93E+01
5.00E+00
3.67E+00
1.07E+01
5.28E+00
1.09E+01
1.93E+01
8.29E+00
1.07E+01
1.93E+01
1.66E+00
1.93E+01
1.93E+01
1.09E+01
9.14E+00
7.26E+00
1.93E+01
9.14E+00
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
••s
ft
I
I
I
4n
1=
Table 13-60. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown White Potatoes (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc %
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming Mean
Total 5895000 281 3.14 1.66E+00
Age
01-02 147000 10 2.58 *
03-05 119000 6 1.47 *
06-11 431000 24 2.58 2.19E+00
12-19 751000 31 3.67 1.26E+00
20-39 1501000 66 2.44 1.24E+00
40-69 1855000 95 3.27 1.86E+00
70+ 1021000 45 6.43 1.27E+00
Season
Fall 2267000 86 4.76 1.63E+00
Spring 527000 58 1.14 1.23E+00
Summer 2403000 81 5.28 1.63E+00
Winter 698000 56 1.43 2.17E+00
Urbanization
Central City 679000 25 1.20 9.60E-01
Nonmetropolitan 3046000 159 6.77 1.96E+00
Suburban 2110000 95 2.44 1.49E+00
Race
Black 140000 5 0.64 *
White 5550000 269 3.52 1.67E+00
Region
Midwest 2587000 133 5.58 1.77E+00
Northeast 656000 31 1.59 1.28E+00
South 1796000 84 2.79 2.08E+00
West 796000 31 2.21 7.61E-01
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 5291000 250 7.76 1.65E+00
Households who farm 1082000 62 14.76 1.83E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 2
NOTE : SE = standard error
SE
1.05E-01
*
*
3.85E-01
1.85E-01
1.21E-01
2.29E-01
1.22E-01
2.23E-01
1.28E-01
1.82E-01
1.98E-01
1.51E-01
1.55E-01
1.67E-01
*
1.09E-01
1.47E-01
2.04E-01
2.39E-01
1.05E-01
1.09E-01
1.78E-01
3 observations
PI
O.OOE+00
*
*
O.OOE+00
6.67E-02
1.64E-01
1.27E-01
2.06E-01
1.64E-01
6.67E-02
O.OOE+00
1.41E-01
1.64E-01
1.84E-01
1.05E-01
*
1.41E-01
1.75E-01
6.67E-02
1.64E-01
1.64E-01
O.OOE+00
6.67E-02
P5
1.87E-01
*
*
O.OOE+00
1.87E-01
1.64E-01
2.62E-01
2.17E-01
2.23E-01
1.05E-01
1.87E-01
3.95E-01
1.64E-01
2.65E-01
1.87E-01
*
2.06E-01
2.36E-01
1.27E-01
3.50E-01
2.16E-01
2.06E-01
2.06E-01
P10
3.08E-01
*
*
4.10E-01
2.59E-01
1.96E-01
3.50E-01
3.57E-01
2.65E-01
1.96E-01
3.19E-01
4.97E-01
1.75E-01
3.68E-01
3.19E-01
*
3.08E-01
3.39E-01
1.67E-01
4.61E-01
2.59E-01
3.08E-01
5.76E-01
P25
5.50E-01
*
*
7.20E-01
3.84E-01
4.77E-01
6.99E-01
5.50E-01
4.61E-01
4.10E-01
6.20E-01
8.64E-01
3.75E-01
7.67E-01
5.40E-01
*
5.50E-01
6.41E-01
3.48E-01
9.24E-01
4.11E-01
5.55E-01
9.24E-01
P50
1.27E+00
*
*
1.76E+00
1.22E+00
l.OOE+00
1.31E+00
1.21E+00
1.13E+00
8.55E-01
1.32E+00
2.02E+00
5.55E-01
1.50E+00
9.29E-01
*
1.28E+00
1.35E+00
8.64E-01
1.56E+00
5.43E-01
1.28E+00
1.46E+00
P75
2.07E+00
*
*
3.10E+00
1.80E+00
1.62E+00
2.04E+00
1.69E+00
1.79E+00
1.91E+00
2.09E+00
2.95E+00
1.52E+00
2.38E+00
1.68E+00
*
2.09E+00
2.15E+00
1.97E+00
2.40E+00
9.63E-01
2.09E+00
2.31E+00
P90
3.11E+00
*
*
5.94E+00
2.95E+00
2.54E+00
3.43E+00
2.35E+00
3.43E+00
2.86E+00
3.08E+00
4.26E+00
2.07E+00
3.55E+00
3.11E+00
*
3.11E+00
3.77E+00
2.95E+00
3.44E+00
1.40E+00
3.10E+00
3.80E+00
P95
4.76E+00
*
*
6.52E+00
3.11E+00
3.08E+00
5.29E+00
2.88E+00
4.14E+00
3.08E+00
5.29E+00
5.40E+00
2.25E+00
5.64E+00
4.76E+00
*
4.76E+00
5.29E+00
3.80E+00
5.64E+00
1.95E+00
4.28E+00
5.09E+00
P99
9.52E+00
*
*
6.52E+00
4.14E+00
4.29E+00
1.28E+01
3.92E+00
1.28E+01
4.28E+00
9.43E+00
6.00E+00
2.54E+00
1.28E+01
9.43E+00
*
9.52E+00
9.43E+00
5.09E+00
1.28E+01
3.11E+00
9.52E+00
6.52E+00
P100
1.28E+01
*
*
6.52E+00
4.14E+00
5.09E+00
1.28E+01
3.92E+00
1.28E+01
4.28E+00
9.43E+00
6.00E+00
2.54E+00
1.28E+01
9.43E+00
*
1.28E+01
9.43E+00
5.09E+00
1.28E+01
3.11E+00
1.28E+01
6.52E+00
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Table 13-61. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Exposed Fruit (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 11770000 679
Age
01-02 306000 19
03-05 470000 30
06-11 915000 68
12-19 896000 50
20-39 2521000 139
40-69 4272000 247
70+ 2285000 118
Season
Fall 2877000 100
Spring 2466000 265
Summer 3588000 122
Winter 2839000 192
Urbanization
Central City 2552000 99
Nonmetropolitan 3891000 269
Suburban 5267000 309
Race
Black 250000 12
White 11411000 663
Region
Midwest 4429000 293
Northeast 1219000 69
South 2532000 141
West 3530000 174
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 10197000 596
6.26
5.37
5.80
5.48
4.37
4.09
7.53
14.39
6.04
5.34
7.89
5.83
4.53
8.64
6.08
1.15
7.24
9.55
2.96
3.94
9.79
14.96
Households who farm 1917000 112 26.16
Mean SE
1.49E+00 8.13E-02
t t
2.60E+00 7.78E-01
2.52E+00 4.24E-01
1.33E+00 2.06E-01
1.09E+00 1.44E-01
1.25E+00 1.10E-01
1.39E+00 1.17E-01
1.37E+00 1.16E-01
1.49E+00 1.51E-01
1.75E+00 2.50E-01
1.27E+00 1.06E-01
1.34E+00 1.98E-01
1.78E+00 1.67E-01
1.36E+00 9.00E-02
* *
1.51E+00 8.33E-02
1.60E+00 1.42E-01
7.55E-01 1.18E-01
1.51E+00 1.84E-01
1.60E+00 1.43E-01
1.55E+00 9.12E-02
2.32E+00 2.50E-01
PI
4.41E-02
*
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
8.46E-02
7.93E-02
6.46E-02
4.41E-02
2.59E-01
8.91E-02
O.OOE+00
4.15E-02
4.41E-02
6.46E-02
9.18E-02
*
6.49E-02
4.41E-02
8.08E-02
7.93E-02
l.OOE-01
4.15E-02
7.21E-02
P5 P10
1.37E-01 2.55E-01
* *
O.OOE+00 3.73E-01
1.71E-01 3.73E-01
1.23E-01 2.58E-01
1.30E-01 1.67E-01
1.64E-01 2.54E-01
2.07E-01 2.82E-01
2.91E-01 3.42E-01
1.98E-01 2.54E-01
8.66E-02 1.30E-01
1.04E-01 2.31E-01
1.01E-01 2.59E-01
1.04E-01 1.67E-01
2.07E-01 2.93E-01
* *
1.55E-01 2.59E-01
1.25E-01 2.23E-01
8.66E-02 1.65E-01
2.32E-01 3.01E-01
2.40E-01 3.17E-01
1.58E-01 2.58E-01
2.76E-01 3.71E-01
P25
4.46E-01
*
l.OOE+00
6.19E-01
4.04E-01
3.04E-01
4.39E-01
5.71E-01
5.43E-01
4.32E-01
3.89E-01
4.59E-01
4.46E-01
4.15E-01
4.69E-01
*
4.49E-01
4.23E-01
3.00E-01
5.08E-01
5.69E-01
4.49E-01
6.81E-01
P50
8.33E-01
*
1.82E+00
1.11E+00
6.09E-01
6.15E-01
7.19E-01
9.57E-01
1.03E+00
8.56E-01
6.41E-01
8.29E-01
8.63E-01
9.42E-01
7.73E-01
*
8.56E-01
8.78E-01
4.74E-01
9.16E-01
9.57E-01
8.78E-01
1.30E+00
P75
1.70E+00
*
2.64E+00
2.91E+00
2.27E+00
1.07E+00
1.40E+00
1.66E+00
1.88E+00
1.65E+00
1.76E+00
1.55E+00
1.60E+00
1.94E+00
1.65E+00
*
1.72E+00
1.88E+00
7.84E-01
1.63E+00
1.97E+00
1.73E+00
3.14E+00
P90
3.16E+00
*
5.41E+00
6.98E+00
3.41E+00
2.00E+00
2.61E+00
3.73E+00
2.88E+00
2.91E+00
4.29E+00
2.61E+00
2.37E+00
4.07E+00
3.16E+00
*
3.31E+00
3.58E+00
1.39E+00
2.63E+00
3.72E+00
3.41E+00
5.00E+00
P95
4.78E+00
*
6.07E+00
1.17E+01
4.78E+00
3.58E+00
3.25E+00
4.42E+00
4.25E+00
4.67E+00
6.12E+00
4.66E+00
2.88E+00
5.98E+00
4.67E+00
*
4.78E+00
4.78E+00
2.86E+00
5.98E+00
5.00E+00
5.00E+00
6.12E+00
P99
1.20E+01
*
3.25E+01
1.57E+01
5.90E+00
1.29E+01
1.30E+01
5.39E+00
5.41E+00
8.27E+00
1.30E+01
8.16E+00
1.30E+01
1.57E+01
7.29E+00
*
1.20E+01
1.20E+01
5.21E+00
1.57E+01
1.30E+01
1.29E+01
1.57E+01
P100
3.25E+01
*
3.25E+01
1.59E+01
5.90E+00
1.29E+01
1.30E+01
7.13E+00
5.41E+00
3.25E+01
1.57E+01
1.13E+01
1.30E+01
3.25E+01
1.29E+01
*
3.25E+01
3.25E+01
7.13E+00
1.57E+01
1.30E+01
3.25E+01
1.57E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
, Nc unwg
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
<•»! ft
-------
I
I
Table 13-62. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Protected Fruits (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nc Nc
%
wgtd unwgtd Consuming
3855000 173
79000 5
80000 4
181000 9
377000 20
755000 29
1702000 77
601000 26
394000 12
497000 36
1425000 47
1539000 78
1312000 50
Nonmetropolitan 506000 19
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
2037000 104
200000 8
3655000 165
657000 24
105000 5
1805000 74
1288000 70
2.05
1.39
0.99
1.08
1.84
1.23
3.00
3.78
0.83
1.08
3.13
3.16
2.33
1.12
2.35
0.92
2.32
1.42
0.26
2.81
3.57
Mean
5.74E+00
.
.
.
2.96E+00
4.51E+00
5.65E+00
4.44E+00
.
2.08E+00
7.39E+00
6.24E+00
3.94E+00
.
6.83E+00
.
5.91E+00
1.07E+01
.
4.77E+00
4.85E+00
SE PI P5 P10
6.25E-01 1.50E-01 2.66E-01 3.35E-01
....
....
....
9.93E-01 1.17E-01 1.60E-01 2.83E-01
1.08E+00 1.81E-01 3.62E-01 4.87E-01
8.66E-01 1.12E-01 2.44E-01 2.87E-01
6.91E-01 2.62E-01 2.62E-01 2.85E-01
....
3.47E-01 1.60E-01 1.81E-01 2.55E-01
1.45E+00 1.12E-01 2.66E-01 3.93E-01
9.10E-01 1.50E-01 3.02E-01 3.76E-01
5.80E-01 1.50E-01 2.62E-01 3.33E-01
....
9.38E-01 1.12E-01 2.53E-01 2.92E-01
....
6.48E-01 1.17E-01 2.62E-01 3.33E-01
2.60E+00 2.53E-01 2.62E-01 2.85E-01
....
6.47E-01 1.60E-01 3.64E-01 4.50E-01
9.26E-01 1.12E-01 1.81E-01 2.68E-01
P25 P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
9.33E-01 2.34E+00 7.45E+00 1.60E+01 1.97E+01 4.73E+01 5.36E+01
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
3.93E-01 1.23E+00 2.84E+00 7.44E+00 1.14E+01 1.91E+01 1.91E+01
1.22E+00 1.88E+00 4.47E+00 1.46E+01 1.61E+01 2.41E+01 2.41E+01
6.69E-01 2.22E+00 9.36E+00 1.55E+01 2.12E+01 4.13E+01 4.13E+01
1.95E+00 3.29E+00 7.06E+00 8.97E+00 9.97E+00 1.52E+01 1.52E+01
,,,,,,,
3.78E-01 1.22E+00 4.08E+00 5.10E+00 6.57E+00 6.79E+00 6.79E+00
1.25E+00 3.06E+00 1.03E+01 1.66E+01 2.41E+01 5.36E+01 5.36E+01
1.39E+00 2.65E+00 8.23E+00 1.78E+01 2.12E+01 4.73E+01 4.73E+01
8.34E-01 3.01E+00 5.01E+00 9.23E+00 9.97E+00 1.88E+01 1.88E+01
.......
5.94E-01 2.01E+00 1.03E+01 1.79E+01 2.38E+01 5.36E+01 5.36E+01
,,,,,,,
1.06E+00 2.44E+00 7.46E+00 1.60E+01 2.12E+01 4.73E+01 5.36E+01
1.18E+00 7.44E+00 1.46E+01 2.41E+01 4.13E+01 5.36E+01 5.36E+01
,,,,,,,
1.23E+00 2.54E+00 5.10E+00 1.52E+01 1.66E+01 2.38E+01 2.40E+01
4.94E-01 1.84E+00 5.34E+00 1.23E+01 1.88E+01 4.73E+01 4.73E+01
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 3360000 146
Households who farm 357000 14
* Intake data
4.93
4.87
5.90E+00
.
6.97E-01 1.17E-01 2.65E-01 3.35E-01
....
1.16E+00 2.42E+00 7.46E+00 1.60E+01 1.91E+01 4.73E+01 5.36E+01
.......
not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Q
Table 13-63. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Exposed Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 28762000 1511
Age
01-02 815000 43
03-05 1069000 62
06-11 2454000 134
12-19 2611000 143
20-39 6969000 348
40-69 10993000 579
70+ 3517000 185
Season
Fall 8865000 314
Spring 4863000 487
Summer 10151000 348
Winter 4883000 362
Urbanization
Central City 4859000 173
Nonmetropolitan 11577000 711
Suburban 12266000 625
Race
Black 1713000 100
White 26551000 1386
Region
Midwest 10402000 570
Northeast 4050000 191
South 9238000 503
West 5012000 245
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 25737000 1361
Households who farm 3596000 207
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
15.30
14.30
13.19
14.68
12.74
11.31
19.38
22.15
18.60
10.54
22.32
10.02
8.62
25.71
14.17
7.88
16.85
22.42
9.84
14.36
13.90
37.76
49.07
Nc unwg!
Mean SE
1.52E+00 5.10E-02
3.48E+00 5.14E-01
1.74E+00 2.20E-01
1.39E+00 1.76E-01
1.07E+00 9.43E-02
1.05E+00 8.14E-02
1.60E+00 8.32E-02
1.68E+00 1.21E-01
1.31E+00 9.80E-02
1.14E+00 6.35E-02
2.03E+00 1.26E-01
1.21E+00 9.50E-02
1.11E+00 1.02E-01
1.87E+00 8.79E-02
1.35E+00 7.01E-02
1.23E+00 1.27E-01
1.53E+00 5.41E-02
1.48E+00 8.91E-02
1.65E+00 1.78E-01
1.55E+00 7.79E-02
1.43E+00 1.02E-01
1.57 5.50E-02
2.17 1.61E-01
PI
3.25E-03
2.28E-02
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
8.20E-03
3.25E-03
5.21E-03
5.24E-02
2.35E-03
2.17E-03
4.23E-03
1.01E-02
1.65E-02
2.93E-03
O.OOE+00
4.67E-03
l.OOE-02
2.35E-03
5.20E-02
3.25E-03
3.25E-03
O.OOE+00
P5 P10
9.15E-02 1.72E-01
2.39E-01 8.34E-01
7.23E-03 4.85E-02
4.44E-02 9.42E-02
2.92E-02 1.42E-01
6.56E-02 1.17E-01
1.41E-01 2.44E-01
1.51E-01 2.39E-01
1.11E-01 1.80E-01
4.53E-02 1.53E-01
1.13E-01 2.04E-01
2.28E-02 1.37E-01
6.04E-02 8.02E-02
1.72E-01 2.52E-01
9.68E-02 1.56E-01
7.74E-02 1.41E-01
9.74E-02 1.77E-01
7.14E-02 1.57E-01
8.05E-02 1.38E-01
1.63E-01 2.61E-01
2.61E-02 1.45E-01
8.87E-02 1.68E-01
1.84E-01 3.72E-01
P25
3.95E-01
1.20E+00
5.79E-01
3.12E-01
3.04E-01
2.55E-01
4.79E-01
5.22E-01
3.33E-01
3.38E-01
6.07E-01
3.70E-01
2.83E-01
5.01E-01
3.55E-01
3.52E-01
3.95E-01
3.88E-01
2.61E-01
5.18E-01
3.91E-01
4.13E-01
6.47E-01
P50
8.60E-01
1.89E+00
1.16E+00
6.43E-01
6.56E-01
5.58E-01
9.81E-01
1.13E+00
6.49E-01
6.58E-01
1.30E+00
6.67E-01
7.01E-01
1.16E+00
7.44E-01
8.93E-01
8.59E-01
8.06E-01
6.65E-01
9.99E-01
7.63E-01
8.89E-01
1.38E+00
P75
1.83E+00
4.23E+00
2.53E+00
1.60E+00
1.46E+00
1.26E+00
1.92E+00
2.38E+00
1.56E+00
1.39E+00
2.52E+00
1.42E+00
1.43E+00
2.20E+00
1.58E+00
1.51E+00
1.82E+00
1.69E+00
1.75E+00
1.92E+00
2.13E+00
1.97E+00
2.81E+00
P90
3.55E+00
1.07E+01
3.47E+00
3.22E+00
2.35E+00
2.33E+00
3.59E+00
4.08E+00
3.13E+00
2.76E+00
4.32E+00
2.76E+00
2.49E+00
4.12E+00
3.22E+00
3.32E+00
3.48E+00
3.55E+00
5.58E+00
3.19E+00
3.45E+00
3.63E+00
6.01E+00
P95
5.12E+00
1.19E+01
6.29E+00
5.47E+00
3.78E+00
3.32E+00
5.22E+00
4.96E+00
4.45E+00
4.02E+00
6.35E+00
3.69E+00
3.29E+00
6.10E+00
5.22E+00
3.92E+00
5.12E+00
4.67E+00
6.80E+00
4.52E+00
4.84E+00
5.45E+00
6.83E+00
P99
1.03E+01
1.21E+01
7.36E+00
1.33E+01
5.67E+00
7.57E+00
8.99E+00
6.96E+00
8.92E+00
7.51E+00
1.27E+01
8.86E+00
8.34E+00
1.22E+01
8.61E+00
5.55E+00
1.03E+01
1.19E+01
1.27E+01
9.92E+00
7.51E+00
1.03E+01
1.03E+01
P100
2.06E+01
1.21E+01
8.86E+00
1.33E+01
5.67E+00
2.06E+01
1.90E+01
1.02E+01
1.22E+01
1.07E+01
1.90E+01
2.06E+01
1.21E+01
1.90E+01
2.06E+01
7.19E+00
2.06E+01
2.06E+01
1.49E+01
1.33E+01
8.34E+00
2.06E+01
1.33E+01
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
X) ft
-------
oo
s
ft
I
I
4n
Table 13-64. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Protected Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
11428000 656
348000 21
440000 32
1052000 63
910000 51
3227000 164
3818000 226
1442000 89
3907000 143
2086000 236
3559000 118
1876000 159
1342000 49
5934000 391
4152000 216
479000 27
10836000 625
4359000 273
807000 48
4449000 253
1813000 82
10286000 602
2325000 142
%
Consuming
6.08
6.11
5.43
6.30
4.44
5.24
6.73
9.08
8.20
4.52
7.82
3.85
2.38
13.18
4.80
2.20
6.88
9.40
1.96
6.92
5.03
15.09
31.72
Mean SE PI P5
1.01E+00 4.95E-02 1.03E-01 1.54E-01
2.46E+00 4.91E-01 3.15E-01 3.15E-01
1.30E+00 2.13E-01 2.33E-01 2.33E-01
1.10E+00 1.34E-01 1.89E-01 2.08E-01
7.76E-01 8.71E-02 5.88E-02 1.61E-01
7.62E-01 6.03E-02 1.13E-01 1.52E-01
9.30E-01 7.32E-02 6.87E-02 1.35E-01
1.05E+00 1.62E-01 1.19E-01 2.10E-01
8.51E-01 7.02E-02 1.19E-01 1.61E-01
7.02E-01 4.48E-02 5.88E-02 1.35E-01
1.40E+00 1.56E-01 1.03E-01 1.77E-01
9.30E-01 7.70E-02 1.18E-01 1.42E-01
9.96E-01 1.51E-01 1.19E-01 1.53E-01
1.07E+00 6.36E-02 1.14E-01 1.66E-01
9.26E-01 7.97E-02 6.87E-02 1.50E-01
1.50E+00 2.25E-01 1.62E-01 2.64E-01
9.93E-01 4.83E-02 1.03E-01 1.53E-01
1.01E+00 7.38E-02 1.13E-01 1.71E-01
7.01E-01 8.99E-02 5.88E-02 1.50E-01
1.08E+00 7.17E-02 1.29E-01 1.71E-01
9.57E-01 1.62E-01 6.87E-02 1.19E-01
1.01E+00 4.73E-02 1.03E-01 1.53E-01
1.30E+00 1.45E-01 8.65E-02 1.66E-01
P10
1.94E-01
5.38E-01
3.22E-01
3.18E-01
2.39E-01
1.71E-01
1.66E-01
2.42E-01
2.04E-01
1.70E-01
2.33E-01
1.82E-01
1.67E-01
2.14E-01
1.88E-01
3.31E-01
1.92E-01
2.31E-01
1.68E-01
2.14E-01
1.52E-01
1.92E-01
2.09E-01
P25
3.22E-01
1.36E+00
4.80E-01
3.87E-01
3.54E-01
2.41E-01
3.16E-01
3.57E-01
3.22E-01
2.66E-01
3.81E-01
3.12E-01
3.18E-01
3.53E-01
2.94E-01
8.66E-01
3.21E-01
3.26E-01
2.65E-01
3.76E-01
2.08E-01
3.36E-01
3.37E-01
P50
6.25E-01
1.94E+00
1.04E+00
7.91E-01
5.83E-01
5.08E-01
6.03E-01
5.72E-01
5.68E-01
4.90E-01
7.81E-01
6.01E-01
7.21E-01
6.48E-01
5.64E-01
9.35E-01
6.10E-01
5.72E-01
5.09E-01
7.12E-01
4.79E-01
6.42E-01
5.99E-01
P75
1.20E+00
2.96E+00
1.48E+00
1.31E+00
8.24E-01
9.67E-01
1.11E+00
1.21E+00
1.10E+00
9.08E-01
1.69E+00
1.20E+00
1.18E+00
1.30E+00
1.15E+00
2.20E+00
1.20E+00
1.08E+00
9.91E-01
1.38E+00
1.01E+00
1.21E+00
1.40E+00
P90
2.24E+00
3.88E+00
2.51E+00
2.14E+00
1.85E+00
1.73E+00
1.87E+00
1.86E+00
1.73E+00
1.44E+00
3.05E+00
2.32E+00
2.36E+00
2.51E+00
1.85E+00
3.05E+00
2.17E+00
2.45E+00
1.71E+00
2.32E+00
1.86E+00
2.32E+00
3.55E+00
P95
3.05E+00
9.42E+00
5.10E+00
3.12E+00
2.20E+00
2.51E+00
3.04E+00
3.05E+00
2.51E+00
1.86E+00
5.40E+00
3.06E+00
2.83E+00
3.55E+00
2.67E+00
3.23E+00
3.04E+00
3.68E+00
2.33E+00
3.05E+00
3.12E+00
3.05E+00
5.40E+00
P99
6.49E+00
9.42E+00
5.31E+00
5.40E+00
2.69E+00
3.63E+00
6.84E+00
9.23E+00
4.78E+00
3.74E+00
9.23E+00
4.76E+00
4.78E+00
6.84E+00
6.49E+00
4.95E+00
6.49E+00
6.84E+00
2.77E+00
5.40E+00
9.23E+00
6.49E+00
9.23E+00
P100
9.42E+00
9.42E+00
5.31E+00
5.40E+00
2.69E+00
4.76E+00
7.44E+00
9.23E+00
5.31E+00
5.73E+00
9.42E+00
6.39E+00
4.78E+00
9.42E+00
9.23E+00
4.95E+00
9.42E+00
7.44E+00
2.77E+00
9.42E+00
9.23E+00
9.23E+00
9.23E+00
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
1=
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
Table 13-65. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Root Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
13750000 743
371000 22
390000 23
1106000 67
1465000 76
3252000 164
4903000 276
2096000 107
4026000 153
2552000 260
5011000 169
2161000 161
2385000 96
6094000 366
5211000 279
521000 31
12861000 697
5572000 314
1721000 92
3842000 205
2555000 130
12578000 682
2367000 136
%
Consuming
7.31
6.51
4.81
6.62
7.15
5.28
8.64
13.20
8.45
5.53
11.02
4.44
4.23
13.54
6.02
2.40
8.16
12.01
4.18
5.97
7.08
18.46
32.30
Mean SE
1.16E+00 5.84E-02
2.52E+00 6.10E-01
1.28E+00 3.24E-01
1.32E+00 2.14E-01
9.37E-01 1.19E-01
8.74E-01 7.39E-02
1.13E+00 9.86E-02
1.22E+00 1.02E-01
1.42E+00 1.53E-01
6.87E-01 6.08E-02
1.19E+00 1.20E-01
1.17E+00 1.19E-01
7.49E-01 8.40E-02
1.43E+00 9.81E-02
1.06E+00 8.62E-02
8.83E-01 3.93E-01
1.18E+00 5.97E-02
1.31E+00 9.54E-02
8.38E-01 1.03E-01
1.38E+00 1.38E-01
7.68E-01 6.43E-02
1.15E+00 5.72E-02
1.39E+00 1.26E-01
PI
4.72E-03
1.66E-01
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
7.59E-03
1.21E-02
3.34E-03
1.73E-02
5.15E-02
3.34E-03
O.OOE+00
3.23E-03
2.68E-02
8.57E-03
3.73E-03
4.72E-03
7.79E-03
3.37E-02
3.23E-03
1.10E-02
4.72E-03
4.79E-03
1.11E-01
P5
3.64E-02
1.66E-01
O.OOE+00
1.39E-02
8.00E-03
5.35E-02
3.29E-02
2.90E-02
1.38E-01
1.73E-02
4.76E-02
8.57E-03
3.90E-02
6.87E-02
1.21E-02
9.28E-03
4.58E-02
7.48E-02
7.79E-03
5.35E-02
2.24E-02
3.64E-02
1.58E-01
P10 P25
1.12E-01 2.51E-01
2.19E-01 3.59E-01
1.17E-01 2.25E-01
3.64E-02 2.32E-01
6.84E-02 2.69E-01
9.93E-02 2.00E-01
1.17E-01 2.51E-01
1.69E-01 3.76E-01
1.72E-01 3.09E-01
3.00E-02 1.44E-01
1.32E-01 2.77E-01
4.34E-02 2.38E-01
1.43E-01 2.23E-01
1.29E-01 2.78E-01
7.17E-02 2.32E-01
3.64E-02 8.82E-02
1.29E-01 2.61E-01
1.66E-01 2.69E-01
8.69E-03 1.43E-01
1.32E-01 2.77E-01
1.14E-01 2.38E-01
1.17E-01 2.58E-01
1.84E-01 3.65E-01
P50
6.66E-01
9.20E-01
4.62E-01
5.23E-01
5.65E-01
5.64E-01
6.75E-01
8.51E-01
9.20E-01
3.65E-01
7.26E-01
5.57E-01
4.26E-01
7.58E-01
7.34E-01
5.42E-01
6.80E-01
7.39E-01
4.81E-01
6.90E-01
5.70E-01
6.74E-01
8.83E-01
P75
1.47E+00
3.67E+00
1.68E+00
1.63E+00
1.37E+00
1.24E+00
1.27E+00
1.71E+00
1.67E+00
7.69E-01
1.51E+00
1.56E+00
9.16E-01
1.85E+00
1.19E+00
7.65E-01
1.50E+00
1.67E+00
1.18E+00
1.70E+00
9.77E-01
1.50E+00
1.85E+00
P90 P95
2.81E+00 3.71E+00
7.25E+00 1.04E+01
4.26E+00 4.73E+00
3.83E+00 5.59E+00
2.26E+00 3.32E+00
2.11E+00 3.08E+00
2.74E+00 3.56E+00
2.86E+00 3.21E+00
3.26E+00 3.85E+00
1.69E+00 2.80E+00
2.74E+00 3.64E+00
3.08E+00 4.14E+00
1.91E+00 2.70E+00
3.32E+00 4.24E+00
2.34E+00 3.26E+00
1.06E+00 1.25E+00
2.82E+00 3.72E+00
3.23E+00 4.26E+00
2.05E+00 2.77E+00
3.32E+00 3.83E+00
1.69E+00 2.45E+00
2.81E+00 3.64E+00
3.11E+00 4.58E+00
P99
9.52E+00
1.04E+01
4.73E+00
7.47E+00
5.13E+00
4.64E+00
9.52E+00
4.01E+00
1.23E+01
4.24E+00
1.04E+01
6.21E+00
3.56E+00
1.13E+01
6.29E+00
1.23E+01
9.52E+00
1.04E+01
4.78E+00
1.23E+01
3.72E+00
7.47E+00
7.47E+00
P100
1.28E+01
1.04E+01
4.73E+00
7.47E+00
5.13E+00
6.03E+00
1.28E+01
4.77E+00
1.28E+01
7.69E+00
1.19E+01
1.13E+01
3.93E+00
1.28E+01
1.19E+01
1.23E+01
1.28E+01
1.19E+01
6.03E+00
1.28E+01
3.72E+00
1.28E+01
7.69E+00
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-66. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Dark Green Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
8855000 428
180000 8
226000 12
826000 39
628000 32
1976000 87
3710000 184
1253000 63
2683000 88
1251000 127
3580000 124
1341000 89
1298000 48
3218000 167
4279000 211
724000 49
7963000 373
2668000 121
1554000 76
2945000 148
1628000 81
8521000 412
1450000 66
%
Consuming
4.71
3.16
2.79
4.94
3.07
3.21
6.54
7.89
5.63
2.71
7.87
2.75
2.30
7.15
4.94
3.33
5.05
5.75
3.77
4.58
4.51
12.50
19.78
Mean SE
3.91E-01 2.95E-02
t t
• *
3.05E-01 5.19E-02
4.20E-01 1.47E-01
3.36E-01 6.09E-02
4.01E-01 4.24E-02
4.08E-01 7.27E-02
4.41 E-01 7.42E-02
5.59E-01 7.90E-02
3.39E-01 4.10E-02
2.72E-01 3.92E-02
2.69E-01 3.68E-02
3.31E-01 3.54E-02
4.79E-01 5.23E-02
1.04E+00 1.80E-01
3.21E-01 2.20E-02
2.81E-01 3.54E-02
5.08E-01 9.14E-02
4.78E-01 5.07E-02
3.18E-01 7.25E-02
3.95E-01 3.03E-02
3.80E-01 6.08E-02
PI
2.01E-03
*
*
O.OOE+00
4.92E-03
2.21E-03
2.25E-03
2.84E-03
1.01E-02
1.63E-03
O.OOE+00
2.01E-03
2.84E-03
2.21E-03
2.25E-03
O.OOE+00
2.25E-03
2.84E-03
2.17E-03
3.64E-02
2.25E-03
1.63E-03
1.62E-03
P5
4.28E-03
*
*
6.34E-03
5.38E-03
3.74E-03
3.67E-03
4.23E-03
4.46E-02
3.66E-03
2.84E-03
3.97E-03
4.71E-03
4.67E-03
5.21E-03
l.OOE-01
4.67E-03
4.77E-03
2.80E-03
6.83E-02
3.37E-03
4.23E-03
4.67E-03
P10 P25
1.01E-02 8.70E-02
* *
* *
2.42E-02 9.00E-02
6.65E-03 5.62E-02
l.OOE-02 8.70E-02
2.60E-02 8.19E-02
5.68E-03 1.10E-01
8.70E-02 1.45E-01
5.72E-03 1.01E-01
5.68E-03 6.34E-02
5.21E-03 2.30E-02
1.01E-02 1.06E-01
1.70E-02 6.86E-02
2.15E-02 9.22E-02
1.13E-01 2.21E-01
1.01E-02 7.75E-02
6.26E-03 6.34E-02
4.23E-03 5.62E-02
9.23E-02 1.45E-01
6.34E-03 3.50E-02
1.05E-02 8.76E-02
5.38E-03 6.68E-02
P50 P75
2.11E-01 4.35E-01
* *
* *
1.81E-01 3.87E-01
2.03E-01 3.73E-01
1.76E-01 3.79E-01
2.33E-01 4.80E-01
2.31E-01 4.69E-01
2.38E-01 4.59E-01
3.09E-01 5.38E-01
1.51E-01 4.05E-01
1.51E-01 3.71E-01
2.05E-01 3.24E-01
1.72E-01 4.52E-01
2.33E-01 4.59E-01
5.52E-01 1.17E+00
1.99E-01 3.79E-01
2.11E-01 3.58E-01
1.96E-01 4.92E-01
2.87E-01 6.43E-01
1.10E-01 3.09E-01
2.12E-01 4.48E-01
2.31E-01 4.84E-01
P90
9.19E-01
*
*
9.48E-01
9.24E-01
6.69E-01
9.79E-01
9.29E-01
7.90E-01
1.28E+00
9.79E-01
6.59E-01
6.32E-01
7.52E-01
1.15E+00
3.29E+00
7.76E-01
4.96E-01
1.25E+00
9.24E-01
6.59E-01
9.19E-01
9.48E-01
P95
1.25E+00
*
*
1.04E+00
1.64E+00
9.19E-01
1.25E+00
1.08E+00
1.08E+00
2.81E+00
1.15E+00
1.17E+00
9.19E-01
l.OOE+00
2.18E+00
3.86E+00
1.07E+00
9.79E-01
1.93E+00
1.28E+00
9.29E-01
1.25E+00
1.25E+00
P99
3.53E+00
*
*
1.28E+00
4.86E+00
2.94E+00
3.29E+00
3.45E+00
3.86E+00
4.86E+00
2.48E+00
2.04E+00
1.07E+00
2.48E+00
3.86E+00
4.86E+00
2.37E+00
2.48E+00
3.53E+00
3.86E+00
4.86E+00
3.53E+00
2.48E+00
P100
5.82E+00
*
*
1.28E+00
4.86E+00
4.29E+00
5.82E+00
3.45E+00
4.29E+00
5.82E+00
2.48E+00
2.18E+00
1.07E+00
5.82E+00
4.86E+00
4.86E+00
5.82E+00
3.02E+00
5.82E+00
4.29E+00
4.86E+00
5.82E+00
3.02E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwg
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
:d = unweighted number of consumers
n survey.
Q
&
I
I
a.
I,
S
-------
Table 13-67. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Deep Yellow Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population
Group
Total
Age
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70 +
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Black
White
Region
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
Nc Nc
wgtd unwgtd
5467000 245
124000 8
61000 4
382000 17
493000 21
1475000 63
2074000 96
761000 32
2664000 97
315000 34
1619000 52
869000 62
1308000 43
2100000 118
2059000 84
129000 8
5093000 229
2792000 128
735000 29
557000 30
1383000 58
%
Consuming
2.91
2.18
0.75
2.29
2.41
2.39
3.66
4.79
5.59
0.68
3.56
1.78
2.32
4.66
2.38
0.59
3.23
6.02
1.79
0.87
3.83
Mean SE PI
6.43E-01 4.44E-02 4.34E-02
...
...
...
4.73E-01 9.18E-02 6.05E-02
5.32E-01 7.54E-02 4.89E-02
5.39E-01 5.15E-02 3.90E-02
7.81E-01 9.20E-02 7.64E-02
7.38E-01 8.18E-02 9.21E-02
5.64E-01 7.52E-02 1.43E-01
5.09E-01 6.37E-02 4.16E-02
6.29E-01 9.15E-02 3.90E-02
5.07E-01 7.07E-02 3.90E-02
6.66E-01 7.72E-02 4.16E-02
7.07E-01 6.99E-02 6.48E-02
...
6.45E-01 4.03E-02 4.89E-02
7.52E-01 6.01E-02 4.34E-02
3.96E-01 8.06E-02 4.16E-02
5.39E-01 2.08E-01 4.89E-02
5.97E-01 7.07E-02 6.48E-02
P5
6.70E-02
.
.
.
6.05E-02
5.55E-02
9.22E-02
2.02E-01
1.22E-01
1.45E-01
5.49E-02
4.34E-02
6.29E-02
5.55E-02
9.22E-02
.
9.21E-02
1.32E-01
5.55E-02
5.49E-02
1.27E-01
P10 P25
1.26E-01 2.22E-01
. .
. .
. .
6.29E-02 9.07E-02
1.15E-01 1.66E-01
1.43E-01 2.21E-01
2.77E-01 3.70E-01
1.43E-01 2.61E-01
1.98E-01 2.47E-01
6.48E-02 2.26E-01
6.29E-02 1.72E-01
1.43E-01 2.13E-01
9.07E-02 2.20E-01
1.26E-01 2.62E-01
. .
1.43E-01 2.41E-01
1.93E-01 2.82E-01
6.05E-02 9.22E-02
7.74E-02 2.20E-01
1.43E-01 2.21E-01
P50
4.17E-01
.
.
.
3.63E-01
3.05E-01
4.03E-01
5.72E-01
4.51E-01
4.45E-01
4.10E-01
3.52E-01
3.88E-01
3.70E-01
4.25E-01
.
4.25E-01
5.09E-01
1.50E-01
3.05E-01
4.10E-01
P75
7.74E-01
.
.
.
7.79E-01
5.11E-01
6.54E-01
1.24E+00
9.74E-01
6.43E-01
6.35E-01
7.96E-01
5.88E-01
8.65E-01
9.74E-01
.
7.96E-01
9.55E-01
6.35E-01
4.38E-01
6.42E-01
P90
1.44E+00
.
.
.
1.13E+00
1.22E+00
1.09E+00
1.61E+00
1.73E+00
1.01E+00
9.64E-01
1.54E+00
9.64E-01
1.39E+00
1.67E+00
.
1.50E+00
1.73E+00
1.09E+00
7.74E-01
1.44E+00
P95
2.03E+00
.
.
.
1.44E+00
2.03E+00
1.33E+00
1.99E+00
2.23E+00
1.42E+00
1.67E+00
2.23E+00
1.41E+00
2.12E+00
2.03E+00
.
2.03E+00
2.23E+00
1.37E+00
1.22E+00
1.89E+00
P99
2.67E+00
.
.
.
1.58E+00
2.67E+00
3.02E+00
1.99E+00
3.02E+00
2.41E+00
2.31E+00
4.37E+00
2.24E+00
4.37E+00
2.67E+00
.
2.67E+00
3.02E+00
2.21E+00
6.63E+00
2.31E+00
P100
6.63E+00
.
.
.
1.58E+00
2.67E+00
3.02E+00
1.99E+00
6.63E+00
2.41E+00
2.31E+00
4.37E+00
2.24E+00
6.63E+00
2.67E+00
.
4.37E+00
4.37E+00
2.21E+00
6.63E+00
2.31E+00
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden
Households who farm
5177000 233
1088000 51
7.60
14.85
6.23E-01 3.93E-02 4.16E-02
6.06E-01 8.52E-02 9.21E-02
9.07E-02
9.22E-02
1.32E-01 2.32E-01
1.22E-01 1.94E-01
4.15E-01
3.40E-01
7.50E-01
9.40E-01
1.42E+00
1.28E+00
1.99E+00
1.73E+00
2.67E+00
3.02E+00
4.37E+00
3.02E+00
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
I
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
-------
^
as
I
!
&5
1=
Table 13-68. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Other Vegetables (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 25221000 1437
Age
01-02 613000 38
03-05 887000 59
06-11 2149000 134
12-19 2379000 141
20-39 6020000 328
40-69 9649000 547
70+ 3226000 174
Season
Fall 6934000 253
Spring 5407000 567
Summer 8454000 283
Winter 4426000 334
Urbanization
Central City 4148000 161
Nonmetropolitan 10721000 710
Suburban 10292000 564
Race
Black 1347000 84
White 23367000 1327
Region
Midwest 8296000 522
Northeast 2914000 162
South 9218000 518
West 4733000 233
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 22417000 1291
Households who farm 3965000 239
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
13.41
10.76
10.95
12.86
11.61
9.77
17.01
20.31
14.55
11.71
18.59
9.09
7.36
23.81
11.89
6.19
14.83
17.88
7.08
14.33
13.12
32.89
54.10
Nc unwg!
Mean
1.38E+00
3.80E+00
2.15E+00
1.30E+00
9.80E-01
9.30E-01
1.40E+00
1.58E+00
1.19E+00
1.16E+00
1.79E+00
1.19E+00
9.66E-01
1.78E+00
1.14E+00
1.30E+00
1.39E+00
1.43E+00
1.33E+00
1.53E+00
1.08E+00
1.44E+00
1.95E+00
SE
5.00E-02
6.27E-01
2.67E-01
1.38E-01
8.56E-02
6.00E-02
8.72E-02
1.41E-01
8.62E-02
6.19E-02
1.53E-01
7.28E-02
8.81E-02
8.99E-02
5.98E-02
1.70E-01
5.26E-02
9.25E-02
1.65E-01
7.82E-02
9.85E-02
5.25E-02
1.63E-01
PI
9.44E-03
1.92E-01
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
3.19E-02
5.20E-03
1.85E-02
4.92E-02
3.66E-03
O.OOE+00
4.79E-03
3.50E-02
2.74E-02
4.79E-03
4.41E-02
1.29E-02
3.19E-02
1.97E-03
1.41E-02
1.11E-02
1.11E-02
1.41E-02
P5 P10
1.07E-01 1.76E-01
2.73E-01 4.04E-01
2.28E-01 3.72E-01
1.21E-01 1.93E-01
5.76E-02 1.15E-01
9.37E-02 1.48E-01
1.11E-01 1.86E-01
1.52E-01 2.38E-01
1.48E-01 1.86E-01
4.32E-02 1.04E-01
1.18E-01 1.81E-01
1.41E-01 2.31E-01
9.37E-02 1.63E-01
1.60E-01 2.26E-01
8.98E-02 1.46E-01
1.74E-01 2.06E-01
1.10E-01 1.79E-01
1.21E-01 1.90E-01
5.69E-02 1.07E-01
1.68E-01 2.53E-01
7.06E-02 1.22E-01
1.11E-01 1.80E-01
1.36E-01 2.34E-01
P25
3.62E-01
1.04E+00
7.20E-01
3.54E-01
3.17E-01
2.43E-01
3.95E-01
4.62E-01
3.28E-01
3.10E-01
3.85E-01
4.09E-01
3.24E-01
4.68E-01
3.06E-01
3.50E-01
3.76E-01
3.66E-01
2.44E-01
4.87E-01
2.55E-01
3.84E-01
5.20E-01
P50
7.78E-01
2.61E+00
1.37E+00
8.00E-01
6.40E-01
5.60E-01
8.43E-01
9.48E-01
7.16E-01
7.10E-01
9.68E-01
7.33E-01
6.07E-01
1.01E+00
6.47E-01
7.11E-01
7.93E-01
7.29E-01
5.97E-01
1.03E+00
5.73E-01
8.18E-01
1.21E+00
P75
1.65E+00
4.55E+00
3.16E+00
1.61E+00
1.33E+00
1.12E+00
1.58E+00
1.91E+00
1 .44E+00
1.39E+00
1.97E+00
1.49E+00
1.23E+00
2.01E+00
1 .44E+00
1.49E+00
1.65E+00
1.65E+00
1.64E+00
1.76E+00
1.21E+00
1.70E+00
2.04E+00
P90
3.09E+00
7.74E+00
4.47E+00
3.04E+00
2.05E+00
2.19E+00
2.92E+00
3.46E+00
2.74E+00
2.67E+00
4.13E+00
2.41E+00
1.97E+00
4.05E+00
2.69E+00
3.88E+00
3.04E+00
3.05E+00
3.07E+00
3.37E+00
2.41E+00
3.22E+00
5.32E+00
P95 P99
4.52E+00 9.95E+00
1.12E+01 1.80E+01
5.96E+00 8.41E+00
4.57E+00 9.95E+00
3.17E+00 5.41E+00
3.04E+00 5.10E+00
4.65E+00 1.41E+01
5.79E+00 9.96E+00
4.00E+00 6.74E+00
4.21E+00 7.35E+00
6.14E+00 1.46E+01
3.37E+00 7.00E+00
3.22E+00 7.00E+00
5.74E+00 1.41E+01
3.77E+00 6.81E+00
5.47E+00 6.21E+00
4.49E+00 9.96E+00
4.65E+00 1.12E+01
5.41E+00 1.20E+01
4.70E+00 8.33E+00
3.73E+00 8.02E+00
4.65E+00 9.95E+00
7.02E+00 1.46E+01
P100
1.84E+01
1.80E+01
1.40E+01
9.95E+00
5.41E+00
7.00E+00
1.84E+01
1.14E+01
9.96E+00
1.40E+01
1.84E+01
1.10E+01
8.85E+00
1.84E+01
1.14E+01
7.72E+00
1.84E+01
1.84E+01
1.41E+01
1.80E+01
1.14E+01
1.84E+01
1.59E+01
d = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
ri
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 13-69. Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Citrus (g/kg-day)
Population Nc Nc
Group wgtd unwgtd
Total 2530000 125
Age
01-02 54000 4
03-05 51000 3
06-11 181000 9
12-19 194000 14
20-39 402000 18
40-69 1183000 55
70+ 457000 21
Season
Fall 280000 8
Spring 437000 33
Summer 334000 1 1
Winter 1479000 73
Urbanization
Central City 1053000 43
Nonmetropolitan 0 0
Suburban 1477000 82
Race
Black 200000 8
White 2330000 117
Region
Midwest 64000 4
Northeast 0 0
South 1240000 55
West 1226000 66
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 2151000 102
Households who farm 130000 5
%
Consuming
1.35
0.95
0.63
1.08
0.95
0.65
2.09
2.88
0.59
0.95
0.73
3.04
1.87
0.00
1.71
0.92
1.48
0.14
0.00
1.93
3.40
3.16
1.77
Mean SE PI P5 P10
4.76E+00 6.05E-01 7.82E-02 1.57E-01 2.86E-01
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
4.54E+00 8.06E-01 8.11E-02 1.50E-01 2.47E-01
4.43 E+00 7.58E-01 7.82E-02 7.82E-02 4.94E-01
*****
2.31E+00 3.76E-01 1.57E-01 1.84E-01 2.35E-01
*****
6.47E+00 9.53E-01 1.50E-01 3.33E-01 4.94E-01
3.57E+00 5.18E-01 1.50E-01 3.33E-01 4.50E-01
5.61E+00 9.14E-01 7.82E-02 1.14E-01 2.47E-01
*****
4.93E+00 6.31E-01 7.82E-02 1.50E-01 2.84E-01
*****
5.18E+00 7.37E-01 1.57E-01 3.76E-01 6.44E-01
4.56E+00 9.79E-01 7.82E-02 1.14E-01 2.35E-01
4.55E+00 6.61E-01 7.82E-02 1.50E-01 2.84E-01
*****
P25 P50 P75 P90 P95 P99 P100
7.56E-01 1.99E+00 5.10E+00 1.41E+01 1.97E+01 3.22E+01 4.79E+01
*******
*******
*******
*******
*******
5.21E-01 1.74E+00 5.24E+00 1.52E+01 1.97E+01 2.38E+01 2.38E+01
1.95E+00 3.53E+00 6.94E+00 8.97E+00 8.97E+00 1.57E+01 1.57E+01
*******
3.69E-01 1.36E+00 4.15E+00 5.10E+00 6.50E+00 7.52E+00 7.52E+00
*******
1.64E+00 2.93E+00 8.59E+00 1.91E+01 2.38E+01 4.79E+01 4.79E+01
1.13E+00 3.01E+00 4.97E+00 7.46E+00 8.97E+00 2.00E+01 2.00E+01
5.17E-01 1.81E+00 8.12E+00 1.79E+01 2.38E+01 4.79E+01 4.79E+01
*******
7.82E-01 2.34E+00 5.34E+00 1.41E+01 1.97E+01 3.22E+01 4.79E+01
*******
1.60E+00 3.42E+00 6.50E+00 1.41E+01 1.97E+01 2.38E+01 2.38E+01
3.69E-01 1.42E+00 4.53E+00 1.24E+01 2.00E+01 4.79E+01 4.79E+01
7.56E-01 1.99E+00 4.99E+00 1.24E+01 1.79E+01 3.22E+01 4.79E+01
*******
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distributions
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumers; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Sources: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
Q
I
a
I
3.
s
45
Ł
I
ft
a,
ft
ft
I,
2>
ft
-------
••s
ft
I
I
4n
1=
Population Nc Nc
%
Group wgtd unwgtd Consuming
Total 12615000 706
Age
01-02 306000 19
03-05 499000 31
06-11 915000 68
12-19 1021000 54
20-39 2761000 146
40-69 4610000 259
70+ 2326000 119
Season
Fall 2923000 102
Spring 2526000 268
Summer 4327000 144
Winter 2839000 192
Urbanization
Central City 2681000 102
Nonmetropolitan 4118000 278
Suburban 5756000 324
Race
Black 250000 12
White 12256000 690
Region
Midwest 4619000 298
Northeast 1279000 72
South 3004000 157
West 3653000 177
Response to Questionnaire
Households who garden 10926000 619
Households who farm 1917000 112
6.71
5.37
6.16
5.48
4.98
4.48
8.13
14.65
6.13
5.47
9.51
5.83
4.76
9.15
6.65
1.15
7.78
9.96
3.11
4.67
10.13
16.03
26.16
Table 13-70.
Mean SE
2.20E+00 1.86E-01
* *
2.66E+00 7.60E-01
2.60E+00 4.38E-01
1.62E+00 2.77E-01
1.85E+00 3.72E-01
2.09E+00 3.08E-01
1.66E+00 1.84E-01
1.39E+00 1.14E-01
1.47E+00 1.51E-01
1.29E+00 1.08E-01
1.79E+00 2.88E-01
2.43E+00 3.10E-01
2.25E+00 3.06E-01
* *
2.24E+00 1.91E-01
3.07E+00 4.25E-01
9.32E-01 2.20E-01
1.99E+00 2.59E-01
1.76E+00 1.64E-01
2.38E+00 2.12E-01
2.57E+00 2.65E-01
Consumer Only Intake of Homegrown Other Fruit (g/kg-day)
PI
5.41E-02
*
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
8.40E-02
7.94E-02
6.52E-02
4.41E-02
2.59E-01
8.66E-02
4.15E-02
4.41E-02
6.52E-02
1.25E-01
*
6.96E-02
4.41E-02
7.98E-02
7.94E-02
l.OOE-01
4.41E-02
6.96E-02
P5
1.47E-01
*
O.OOE+00
1.77E-01
1.20E-01
1.30E-01
1.47E-01
2.07E-01
3.04E-01
1.98E-01
1.01E-01
1.66E-01
1.20E-01
1.99E-01
*
1.50E-01
1.25E-01
8.55E-02
2.38E-01
2.16E-01
1.58E-01
2.76E-01
P10 P25
2.55E-01 4.60E-01
* *
3.80E-01 1.02E+00
3.86E-01 6.37E-01
2.57E-01 3.86E-01
1.80E-01 3.07E-01
2.54E-01 4.44E-01
3.56E-01 5.71E-01
3.81E-01 5.67E-01
2.54E-01 4.25E-01
2.25E-01 4.54E-01
2.91E-01 5.21E-01
2.38E-01 4.50E-01
2.82E-01 4.46E-01
* *
2.59E-01 4.66E-01
2.35E-01 4.54E-01
1.62E-01 3.11E-01
2.99E-01 5.46E-01
2.91E-01 5.44E-01
2.57E-01 4.74E-01
3.61E-01 7.33E-01
P50
9.06E-01
*
1.87E+00
1.14E+00
6.09E-01
6.20E-01
7.68E-01
1.07E+00
1.07E+00
8.33E-01
8.33E-01
8.87E-01
1.13E+00
7.64E-01
*
9.16E-01
1.04E+00
4.75E-01
1.10E+00
9.71E-01
9.94E-01
1.55E+00
P75
1.91E+00
*
2.71E+00
2.99E+00
2.36E+00
1.39E+00
1.77E+00
1.65E+00
1.88E+00
1.65E+00
1.55E+00
1.60E+00
2.43E+00
1.81E+00
*
1.94E+00
2.35E+00
8.12E-01
1.82E+00
2.04E+00
1.96E+00
3.62E+00
P90
4.59E+00
*
5.54E+00
7.13E+00
3.92E+00
3.70E+00
3.17E+00
4.06E+00
2.89E+00
2.89E+00
2.70E+00
2.61E+00
4.60E+00
4.72E+00
*
4.65E+00
6.73E+00
1.29E+00
4.06E+00
4.35E+00
4.94E+00
5.80E+00
P95
8.12E+00
*
6.30E+00
1.21E+01
6.81E+00
6.64E+00
9.77E+00
5.21E+00
4.06E+00
4.59E+00
4.79E+00
1.04E+01
8.12E+00
7.61E+00
*
8.26E+00
1.42E+01
2.16E+00
6.30E+00
5.75E+00
1.04E+01
8.06E+00
P99
1.84E+01
*
3.32E+01
1.62E+01
8.12E+00
3.70E+01
1.84E+01
1.17E+01
5.39E+00
8.26E+00
8.06E+00
1.54E+01
2.40E+01
1.84E+01
*
1.84E+01
5.33E+01
1.17E+01
1.62E+01
1.30E+01
1.84E+01
1.62E+01
P100
6.26E+01
*
3.32E+01
1.65E+01
8.12E+00
3.70E+01
5.33E+01
1.17E+01
5.54E+00
3.32E+01
1.13E+01
1.54E+01
5.33E+01
6.26E+01
*
6.26E+01
6.26E+01
1.17E+01
2.40E+01
1.30E+01
6.26E+01
1.62E+01
* Intake data not provided for subpopulations for which there were less than 20 observations
NOTE : SE = standard error
P = percentile of the distribution
Nc wgtd = weighted number of consumer
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
s; Nc unwgtd = unweighted number of consumers in survey.
Q
ft
&
I
I
a,
I,
S
-------
i:oizi
Season
Vail
Spring
Summer
Winter
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Surburban
Race
Black
White
Regions
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Questionnaire Response
Households who garden
Households who raise animals
Households who farm
Households who frsh
Total
Fruits
0.040
0.021
0.021
0.058
0.059
0.027
0.052
0.047
0.007
0.049
0.005
0.059
0.042
0.062
0.101
0.161
Total
Vegetables
0.068
0.081
0.037
0.116
0.041
0.027
0.144
0.058
0.027
0.081
0.038
0.112
0.069
0.057
0.173
0.308
Table 13-71
Total
Meats
0.024
0.020
0.020
0.034
0.022
0.003
0.064
0.018
0.001
0.031
0.009
0.046
0.017
0.023
0.306
0.319
. Fraction of Food Intake that is Home Produced
Total
Dairy
0.012
0.008
0.011
0.022
0.008
0.000
0.043
0.004
0.000
0.014
0.010
0.024
0.006
0.007
0.207
0.254
Total
Fish
0.094
0.076
0.160
0.079
0.063
0.053
0.219
0.075
0.063
0.110
0.008
0.133
0.126
0.108
0.325
Exposed
Vegetables
0.095
0.106
0.05
0.164
0.052
0.037
0.207
0.079
0.037
0.109
0.062
0.148
0.091
0.079
0.233
0.420
Protected
Vegetables
0.069
0.073
0.039
0.101
0.048
0.027
0.134
0.054
0.029
0.081
0.016
0.109
0.077
0.060
0.178
0.394
Root
Vegetables
0.043
0.06
0.02
0.066
0.026
0.016
0.088
0.035
0.012
0.050
0.018
0.077
0.042
0.029
0.106
0.173
Exposed
Fruits
0.050
0.039
0.047
0.068
0.044
0.030
0.100
0.043
0.008
0.059
0.010
0.078
0.040
0.075
0.116
0.328
Protected
Fruits
0.037
0.008
0.008
0.054
0.068
0.026
0.025
0.050
0.007
0.045
0.002
0.048
0.044
0.054
0.094
0.030
ft
I,
s
Table 13-71. Fraction of Food Intake that is Home Produced (continued)
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Surburban
Race
Black
White
Regions
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Questionnaire Response
Households who garden
Households who farm
Dark Green
Vegetables
0.044
0.059
0.037
0.063
0.018
0.012
0.090
0.054
0.053
0.043
0.039
0.054
0.049
0.034
0.120
0.220
Deep Yellow
Vegetables
0.065
0.099
0.017
0.08
0.041
0.038
0.122
0.058
0.056
0.071
0.019
0.174
0.022
0.063
0.140
0.328
Other
Vegetables
0.069
0.069
0.051
0.114
0.044
0.026
0.154
0.053
0.026
0.082
0.034
0.102
0.077
0.055
0.180
0.368
Citrus
Fruits
0.038
0.114
0.014
0.01
0.091
0.035
0.000
0.056
0.012
0.045
0.000
0.001
0.060
0.103
0.087
0.005
Other
Fruits
0.042
0.027
0.025
0.07
0.03
0.022
0.077
0.042
0.004
0.051
0.008
0.083
0.031
0.046
0.107
0.227
Apples
0.030
0.032
0.013
0.053
0.024
0.017
0.066
0.024
0.007
0.035
0.004
0.052
0.024
0.043
0.070
0.292
Peaches
0.147
0.09
0.206
0.133
0.183
0.087
0.272
0.121
0.018
0.164
0.027
0.164
0.143
0.238
0.316
0.461
Pears
0.067
0.038
0.075
0.066
0.111
0.038
0.155
0.068
0.004
0.089
0.002
0.112
0.080
0.093
0.169
0.606
Strawberries
0.111
0.408
0.064
0.088
0.217
0.107
0.133
0.101
0.000
0.125
0.085
0.209
0.072
0.044
0.232
0.057
Other Berries
0.217
0.163
0.155
0.232
0.308
0.228
0.282
0.175
0.470
0.214
0.205
0.231
0.177
0.233
0.306
0.548
ft
<•»! ft
-------
a
Table 13-71. Fraction of food Intake that is Home Produced (continued)
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Surburban
Race
Black
White
Regions
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Questionnaire Response
Households who garden
Households who farm
Asparagus
0.063
0.024
0.103
0
0.019
0.058
0.145
0.040
0.000
0.071
0.091
0.194
0.015
0.015
0.125
0.432
Beets
0.203
0.199
0.191
0.209
0.215
0.212
0.377
0.127
0.000
0.224
0.074
0.432
0.145
0.202
0.420
0.316
Broccoli
0.015
0.013
0.011
0.034
0.006
0.004
0.040
0.016
0.000
0.018
0.020
0.025
0.013
0.006
0.043
0.159
Cabbage
0.038
0.054
0.011
0.08
0.008
0.004
0.082
0.045
0.001
0.056
0.047
0.053
0.029
0.029
0.099
0.219
Carrots
0.043
0.066
0.015
0.063
0.025
0.018
0.091
0.039
0.068
0.042
0.025
0.101
0.020
0.039
0.103
0.185
Corn
0.078
0.076
0.048
0.118
0.043
0.025
0.173
0.047
0.019
0.093
0.020
0.124
0.088
0.069
0.220
0.524
Cucumbers
0.148
0.055
0.04
0.32
0
0.029
0.377
0.088
0.060
0.155
0.147
0.193
0.140
0.119
0.349
0.524
Lettuce
0.010
0.013
0.01
0.017
0.002
0.009
0.017
0.009
0.007
0.011
0.009
0.020
0.006
0.009
0.031
0.063
Lima Beans
0.121
0.07
0.082
0.176
0.129
0.037
0.132
0.165
0.103
0.135
0.026
0.149
0.140
0.000
0.258
0.103
Okra
0.270
0.299
0.211
0.304
0.123
0.068
0.411
0.299
0.069
0.373
0.000
0.224
0.291
0.333
0.618
0.821
Onions
0.056
0.066
0.033
0.091
0.029
0.017
0.127
0.050
0.009
0.068
0.022
0.098
0.047
0.083
0.148
0.361
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
Table 13-71. Fraction of Food Intake that is Home Produced (continued)
Total
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Central City
Nonmetropolitan
Surburban
Race
Black
White
Regions
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Questionnaire Response
Households who garden
Households who farm
Households who raise animals
Households who hunt
Peas
0.069
0.046
0.048
0.126
0.065
0.033
0.123
0.064
0.047
0.076
0.021
0.058
0.106
0.051
0.193
0.308
Peppers
0.107
0.138
0.031
0.194
0.03
0.067
0.228
0.086
0.039
0.121
0.067
0.188
0.113
0.082
0.246
0.564
Pumpkin
0.155
0.161
0.046
0.19
0.154
0.130
0.250
0.127
0.022
0.187
0.002
0.357
0.044
0.181
0.230
0.824
Snap Beans
0.155
0.199
0.152
0.123
0.147
0.066
0.307
0.118
0.046
0.186
0.052
0.243
0.161
0.108
0.384
0.623
Tomatoes
0.184
0.215
0.045
0.318
0.103
0.100
0.313
0.156
0.060
0.202
0.117
0.291
0.149
0.182
0.398
0.616
White
Potatoes
0.038
0.058
0.01
0.06
0.022
0.009
0.080
0.029
0.007
0.044
0.016
0.065
0.042
0.013
0.090
0.134
Beef
0.038
0.028
0.027
0.072
0.022
0.001
0.107
0.026
0.000
0.048
0.014
0.076
0.022
0.041
0.485
0.478
Game
0.276
0.336
0.265
0.1
0.33
0.146
0.323
0.316
0.000
0.359
0.202
0.513
0.199
0.207
0.729
Pork
0.013
0.012
0.015
0.01
0.014
0.001
0.040
0.006
0.000
0.017
0.006
0.021
0.012
0.011
0.242
0.239
Poultry
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.007
0.014
0.002
0.026
0.011
0.001
0.014
0.002
0.021
0.012
0.008
0.156
0.151
Eggs
0.014
0.009
0.022
0.013
0.011
0.002
0.029
0.014
0.002
0.017
0.004
0.019
0.012
0.021
0.146
0.214
Source: Based on EPA's analyses of the 1987-88 NFCS
S
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Table 13-72. Confidence in Homegrown Food Consumption Recommendations
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of Peer Review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Bias in study design (high
rating desirable)
• Measurement Error
(high rating desirable)
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
USDA and EPA review
Methods described in detail in Handbook
see above
Yes
U.S. population
Yes
1987-88
Statistical method used to estimate long-term
distribution from one-week survey data.
Individual intakes inferred from household
consumption.
10,000 individuals, 4500 households
Nationwide survey representative of general
U.S. population
Non-response bias can not be ruled out due to
low response rate.
Individuals' estimates of food weights
imprecise
1
N/A
Highest confidence in means, lowest
confidence in long term percentiles
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
High (Means & Short-term distributions)
Low (Long-term distributions)
Medium (Means)
Low (Distributions)
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium (Means)
Medium
(Short-term distributions)
Low (Long-term
distributions)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13-67
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
APPENDIX 13A
FOOD CODES AND DEFINITIONS USED IN ANALYSIS
OF THE 1987-88 USDA NFCS DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 13A-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
MAJOR FOOD GROUPS
Total Fruits
50- Fresh Fruits
citrus
other vitamin-C rich
other fruits
512- Commercially Canned Fruits
522- Commercially Frozen Fruits
533- Canned Fruit Juice
534- Frozen Fruit Juice
535- Aseptically Packed Fruit Juice
536- Fresh Fruit Juice
542- Dried Fruits
(includes baby foods)
6- Fruits
citrus fruits and juices
dried fruits
other fruits
fruits/juices & nectar
fruit/juices baby food
(includes baby foods)
Total
Vegetables
48- Potatoes, Sweetpotatoes
49- Fresh Vegetables
dark green
deep yellow
tomatoes
light green
other
511- Commercially Canned Vegetables
521- Commercially Frozen Vegetables
531- Canned Vegetable Juice
532- Frozen Vegetable Juice
537- Fresh Vegetable Juice
538- Aseptically Packed Vegetable Juice
541- Dried Vegetables
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners)
7- Vegetables (all forms)
white potatoes & PR starchy
dark green vegetables
deep yellow vegetables
tomatoes and torn, mixtures
other vegetables
veg. and mixtures/baby food
veg. with meat mixtures
(includes baby foods; mixtures, mostly vegetables)
Total Meats
44- Meat
beef
pork
veal
lamb
mutton
goat
game
lunch meat
mixtures
451- Poultry
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
20- Meat, type not specified
21- Beef
22- Pork
23- Lamb, veal, game, carcass meat
24- Poultry
25- Organ meats, sausages, lunchmeats, meat spreads
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby foods)
Total Dairy
40- Milk Equivalent
fresh fluid milk
processed milk
cream and cream substitutes
frozen desserts with milk
cheese
dairy-based dips
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
1 - Milk and Milk Products
milk and milk drinks
cream and cream substitutes
milk desserts, sauces, and gravies
cheeses
(includes regular fluid milk, human milk, imitation milk
products, yogurt, milk-based meal replacements, and infant
formulas)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Total Fish
452- Fish, Shellfish
various species
fresh, frozen, commercial, dried
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
26- Fish, Shellfish
various species and forms
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks)
INDIVIDUAL FOODS
White
Potatoes
4811 - White Potatoes, fresh
4821- White Potatoes, commercially canned
4831- White Potatoes, commercially frozen
4841- White Potatoes, dehydrated
4851- White Potatoes, chips, sticks, salad
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
71- White Potatoes and PR Starchy Veg.
baked, boiled, chips, sticks, creamed, scalloped, au
gratin, fried, mashed, stuffed, puffs, salad, recipes,
soups, Puerto Rican starchy vegetables
(does not include vegetables soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Peppers
4913- Green/Red Peppers, fresh
5111201 Sweet Green Peppers, commercially canned
5111202 Hot Chili Peppers, commercially canned
5211301 Sweet Green Peppers, commercially frozen
5211302 Green Chili Peppers, commercially frozen
5211303 Red Chili Peppers, commercially frozen
5413112 Sweet Green Peppers, dry
5413113 Red Chili Peppers, dry
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
7512100 Pepper, hot chili, raw
7512200 Pepper, raw
7512210 Pepper, sweet green, raw
7512220 Pepper, sweet red, raw
7522600 Pepper, green, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522601 Pepper, green, cooked, fat not added
7522602 Pepper, green, cooked, fat added
7522604 Pepper, red, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522605 Pepper, red, cooked, fat not added
7522606 Pepper, red, cooked, fat added
7522609 Pepper, hot, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522610 Pepper, hot, cooked, fat not added
7522611 Pepper, hot, cooked, fat added
7551101 Peppers, hot, sauce
7551102 Peppers, pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Onions
4953- Onions, Garlic, fresh
onions
chives
garlic
leeks
5114908 Garlic Pulp, raw
5114915 Onions, commercially canned
5213722 Onions, commercially frozen
5213723 Onions with Sauce, commercially frozen
5413103 Chives, dried
5413105 Garlic Flakes, dried
5413110 Onion Flakes, dried
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
7510950 Chives, raw
7511150 Garlic, raw
7511250 Leek, raw
7511701 Onions, young green, raw
7511702 Onions, mature
7521550 Chives, dried
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7522100 Onions, mature cooked, NS as to fat added
7522101 Onions, mature cooked, fat not added
7522102 Onions, mature cooked, fat added
7522103 Onions, pearl cooked
7522104 Onions, young green cooked, NS as to fat
7522105 Onions, young green cooked, fat not added
7522106 Onions, young green cooked, fat added
7522110 Onion, dehydrated
7541501 Onions, creamed
7541502 Onion rings
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Page
13A-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Corn
4956- Com, fresh
5114601 Yellow Corn, commercially canned
5114602 White Corn, commercially canned
5114603 Yellow Creamed Com, commercially canned
5114604 White Creamed Com, commercially canned
5114605 Corn on Cob, commercially canned
5114607 Hominy, canned
5115306 Low Sodium Com, commercially canned
5115307 Low Sodium Cr. Corn, commercially canned
5213501 Yellow Com on Cob, commercially frozen
5213502 Yellow Corn off Cob, commercially frozen
5213503 Yell. Corn with Sauce, commercially frozen
5213504 Com with other Veg., commercially frozen
5213505 White Corn on Cob, commercially frozen
5213506 White Corn off Cob, commercially frozen
5213507 Wh. Corn with Sauce, commercially frozen
5413104 Corn, dried
5413106 Hominy, dry
5413603 Corn, instant baby food
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby food)
7510960 Corn, raw
7521600 Com, cooked, NS as to color/fat added
7521601 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/fat not added
7521602 Com, cooked, NS as to color/fat added
7521605 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/cream style
7521607 Corn, cooked, dried
7521610 Corn, cooked, yellow/NS as to fat added
7521611 Corn, cooked, yellow/fat not added
7521612 Corn, cooked, yellow/fat added
7521615 Com, yellow, cream style
7521616 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./NS as to fat
7521617 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./fat not added
7521618 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./fat added
7521619 Corn, yellow, cream style, fat added
7521620 Corn, cooked, white/NS as to fat added
7521621 Corn, cooked, white/fat not added
7521622 Com, cooked, white/fat added
7521625 Com, white, cream style
7521630 Corn, yellow, canned, low sodium, NS fat
7521631 Corn, yell., canned, low sod., fat not add
7521632 Corn, yell., canned, low sod., fat added
7521749 Hominy, cooked
752175- Hominy, cooked
7541101 Corn scalloped or pudding
7541102 Corn fritter
7541103 Corn with cream sauce
7550101 Corn relish
76405- Corn, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby food)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Apples
5031- Apples, fresh
5122101 Applesauce with sugar, commercially canned
5122102 Applesauce without sugar, comm. canned
5122103 Apple Pie Filling, commercially canned
5122104 Apples, Applesauce, baby/jr., comm. canned
5122106 Apple Pie Filling, Low Cal., comm. canned
5223101 Apple Slices, commercially frozen
5332101 Apple Juice, canned
5332102 Apple Juice, baby, Comm. canned
5342201 Apple Juice, comm. frozen
5342202 Apple Juice, home frozen
5352101 Apple Juice, aseptically packed
5362101 Apple Juice, fresh
5423101 Apples, dried
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
6210110 Apples, dried, uncooked
6210115 Apples, dried, uncooked, low sodium
6210120 Apples, dried, cooked, NS as to sweetener
6210122 Apples, dried, cooked, unsweetened
6210123 Apples, dried, cooked, with sugar
6310100 Apples, raw
6310111 Applesauce, NS as to sweetener
6310112 Applesauce, unsweetened
6310113 Applesauce with sugar
6310114 Applesauce with low calorie sweetener
6310121 Apples, cooked or canned with syrup
6310131 Apple, baked NS as to sweetener
6310132 Apple, baked, unsweetened
6310133 Apple, baked with sugar
6310141 Apple rings, fried
6310142 Apple, pickled
6310150 Apple, fried
6340101 Apple, salad
6340106 Apple, candied
6410101 Apple cider
6410401 Apple juice
6410405 Apple juice with vitamin C
6710200 Applesauce baby fd., NS as to str. or jr.
6710201 Applesauce baby food, strained
6710202 Applesauce baby food, junior
6720200 Apple juice, baby food
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Tomatoes
4931- Tomatoes, fresh
5113- Tomatoes, commercially canned
5115201 Tomatoes, low sodium, commercially canned
5115202 Tomato Sauce, low sodium, comm. canned
5115203 Tomato Paste, low sodium, comm. canned
5115204 Tomato Puree, low sodium, comm. canned
5311- Canned Tomato Juice and Tomato Mixtures
5321- Frozen Tomato Juice
5371- Fresh Tomato Juice
5381102 Tomato Juice, aseptically packed
5413115 Tomatoes, dry
5614- Tomato Soup
5624- Condensed Tomato Soup
5654- Dry Tomato Soup
(does not include mixtures, and readv-to-eat dinners)
74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures
raw, cooked, juices, sauces, mixtures, soups,
sandwiches
Page
13A-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Snap Beans
4943- Snap or Wax Beans, fresh
5114401 Green or Snap Beans, commercially canned
5114402 Wax or Yellow Beans, commercially canned
5114403 Beans, baby/jr., commercially canned
5115302 Green Beans, low sodium, comm. canned
5115303 Yell, or Wax Beans, low sod., comm. canned
5213301 Snap or Green Beans, comm. frozen
5213302 Snap or Green w/sauce, comm. frozen
5213303 Snap or Green Beans w/other veg., comm. fr.
5213304 Sp. or Or. Beans w/other veg./sc., comm. fr.
5213305 Wax or Yell. Beans, comm. frozen
(does not include soups, mixtures, and ready-to-eat dinners;
includes baby foods)
7510180 Beans, string, green, raw
7520498 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/fat added
7520499 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/no fat
7520500 Beans, string, cooked, NS color & fat
7520501 Beans, string, cooked, green/NS fat
7520502 Beans, string, cooked, green/no fat
7520503 Beans, string, cooked, green/fat
7520511 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/NS fat
7520512 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/no fat
7520513 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/fat
7520600 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/NS fat
7520601 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/no fat
7520602 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/fat
7540301 Beans, string, green, creamed
7540302 Beans, string, green, w/mushroom sauce
7540401 Beans, string, yellow, creamed
7550011 Beans, string, green, pickled
7640100 Beans, green, string, baby
7640101 Beans, green, string, baby, str.
7640102 Beans, green, string, baby, junior
7640103 Beans, green, string, baby, creamed
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods)
Beef
441- Beef
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
21- Beef
beef, nfs
beefsteak
beef oxtails, neckbones, ribs
roasts, stew meat, corned, brisket, sandwich steaks
ground beef, patties, meatballs
other beef items
beef baby food
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
Pork
442- Pork
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
22- Pork
pork, nfs; ground dehydrated
chops
steaks, cutlets
ham
roasts
Canadian bacon
bacon, salt pork
other pork items
pork baby food
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
Game
445- Variety Meat, Game
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
233- Game
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Poultry
451- Poultry
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
24- Poultry
chicken
turkey
duck
other poultry
poultry baby food
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
Eggs
46- Eggs (fresh equivalent)
fresh
processed eggs, substitutes
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
3- Eggs
eggs
egg mixtures
egg substitutes
eggs baby food
froz. meals with egg as main ingred.
(includes baby foods)
Broccoli
4912- Fresh Broccoli (and home canned/froz.)
5111203 Broccoli, comm. canned
52112- Comm. Frozen Broccoli
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
722- Broccoli (all forms)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Carrots
4921- Fresh Carrots (and home canned/froz.)
51121- Comm. Canned Carrots
5115101 Carrots, Low Sodium, Comm. Canned
52121- Comm. Frozen Carrots
5312103 Comm. Canned Carrot Juice
5372102 Carrot Juice Fresh
5413502 Carrots, Dried Baby Food
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7310- Carrots (all forms)
7311140 Carrots in Sauce
7311200 Carrot Chips
76201- Carrots, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
Pumpkin
4922- Fresh Pumpkin, Winter Squash (and home
canned/froz.)
51122- Pumpkin/Squash, Baby or Junior, Comm. Canned
52122- Winter Squash, Comm. Frozen
5413504 Squash, Dried Baby Food
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
732- Pumpkin (all forms)
733- Winter squash (all forms)
76205- Squash, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods)
Asparagus
4941- Fresh Asparagus (and home canned/froz.)
5114101 Comm. Canned Asparagus
5115301 Asparagus, Low Sodium, Comm. Canned
5 2131 - Comm. Frozen Asparagus
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7510080 Asparagus, raw
75202- Asparagus, cooked
7540101 Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures, or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Page
13A-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Lima Beans
4942- Fresh Lima and Fava Beans (and home
canned/froz.)
5114204 Comm. Canned Mature Lima Beans
5114301 Comm. Canned Green Lima Beans
5115304 Comm. Canned Low Sodium Lima Beans
52132- Comm. Frozen Lima Beans
54111- Dried Lima Beans
5411306 Dried Fava Beans
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures; does not
include succotash)
7510200 Lima Beans, raw
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
752041- Lima Beans, canned
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; does not include succotash)
Cabbage
4944- Fresh Cabbage (and home canned/froz.)
4958601 Sauerkraut, home canned orpkgd
5114801 Sauerkraut, comm. canned
5114904 Comm. Canned Cabbage
5114905 Comm. Canned Cabbage (no sauce; incl. baby)
5115501 Sauerkraut, low sodium., comm. canned
5312102 Sauerkraut Juice, comm. canned
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7510300 Cabbage, raw
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw
7510500 Cabbage, red, raw
7514100 Cabbage salad or coleslaw
7514130 Cabbage, Chinese, salad
75210- Chinese Cabbage, cooked
75211- Green Cabbage, cooked
75212- Red Cabbage, cooked
752130- Savoy Cabbage, cooked
75230- Sauerkraut, cooked
7540701 Cabbage, creamed
755025- Cabbage, pickled or in relish
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Lettuce
4945- Fresh Lettuce, French Endive (and home
canned/froz.)
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
75113- Lettuce, raw
75143- Lettuce salad with other veg.
7514410 Lettuce, wilted, with bacon dressing
7522005 Lettuce, cooked
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Okra
4946- Fresh Okra (and home canned/froz.)
5114914 Comm. Canned Okra
5213720 Comm. Frozen Okra
5213721 Comm. Frozen Okra with Oth. Veg. & Sauce
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7522000 Okra, cooked, NS as to fat
7522001 Okra, cooked, fat not added
7522002 Okra, cooked, fat added
7522010 Lufta, cooked (Chinese Okra)
7541450 Okra, fried
7550700 Okra, pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Peas
4947- Fresh Peas (and home canned/froz.)
51147- Comm Canned Peas (incl. baby)
5115310 Low Sodium Green or English Peas (canned)
5115314 Low Sod. Blackeye, Gr. or Imm. Peas (canned)
5114205 Blackeyed Peas, comm. canned
52134- Comm. Frozen Peas
5412- Dried Peas and Lentils
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7512000 Peas, green, raw
7512775 Snowpeas, raw
75223- Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye, cooked
75224- Peas, green, cooked
75225- Peas, pigeon, cooked
75231- Snowpeas, cooked
7541650 Pea salad
7541660 Pea salad with cheese
75417- Peas, with sauce or creamed
76409- Peas, baby
76411- Peas, creamed, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Cucumbers
4952- Fresh Cucumbers (and home canned/froz.)
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7511100 Cucumbers, raw
75142- Cucumber salads
752167- Cucumbers, cooked
7550301 Cucumber pickles, dill
7550302 Cucumber pickles, relish
7550303 Cucumber pickles, sour
7550304 Cucumber pickles, sweet
7550305 Cucumber pickles, fresh
7550307 Cucumber, Kim Chee
7550311 Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
7550314 Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Beets
4954- Fresh Beets (and home canned/froz.)
51145- Comm. Canned Beets (incl. baby)
5115305 Low Sodium Beets (canned)
5213714 Comm. Frozen Beets
5312104 Beet Juice
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7510250 Beets, raw
752080- Beets, cooked
752081- Beets, canned
7540501 Beets, harvard
75 50021 Beets, pickled
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
Strawberries
5022- Fresh Strawberries
5122801 Comm. Canned Strawberries with sugar
5122802 Comm. Canned Strawberries without sugar
5122803 Canned Strawberry Pie Filling
5222- Comm. Frozen Strawberries
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
6322- Strawberries
6413250 Strawberry Juice
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Other
Berries
5033- Fresh Berries Other than Strawberries
5122804 Comm. Canned Blackberries with sugar
5122805 Comm. Canned Blackberries without sugar
5122806 Comm. Canned Blueberries with sugar
5122807 Comm. Canned Blueberries without sugar
5122808 Canned Blueberry Pie Filling
5122809 Comm. Canned Gooseberries with sugar
5122810 Comm. Canned Gooseberries without sugar
5122811 Comm. Canned Raspberries with sugar
5122812 Comm. Canned Raspberries without sugar
5122813 Comm. Canned Cranberry Sauce
5122815 Comm. Canned Cranberry-Orange Relish
52233- Comm. Frozen Berries (not strawberries)
5332404 Blackberry Juice (home and comm. canned)
5423114 Dried Berries (not strawberries)
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
6320- Other Berries
6321- Other Berries
6341101 Cranberry salad
6410460 Blackberry Juice
64105- Cranberry Juice
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Page
13A-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Peaches
Pears
Household Code/Definition
5036- Fresh Peaches
5 1224- Comm. Canned Peaches (incl. baby)
5223601 Comm. Frozen Peaches
5332405 Home Canned Peach Juice
5423105 Dried Peaches (baby)
5423 106 Dried Peaches
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
5037- Fresh Pears
5 1225- Comm. Canned Pears (incl. baby)
5332403 Comm. Canned Pear Juice, baby
5362204 Fresh Pear Juice
5423107 Dried Pears
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
Individual Code
62116- Dried Peaches
63135- Peaches
6412203 Peach Juice
6420501 Peach Nectar
67108- Peaches,baby
6711450 Peaches, dry, baby
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
62119- Dried Pears
63137- Pears
634 1201 Pear salad
6421501 Pear Nectar
67109- Pears, baby
67 11 45 5 Pears, dry, baby
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
EXPOSED/PROTECTED FRUITS/VEGETABLES, ROOT VEGETABLES
Exposed
Fruits
5022- Strawberries, fresh
5023101 Acerola, fresh
5023401 Currants, fresh
5031- Apples/Applesauce, fresh
5033- Berries other than Strawberries, fresh
5034- Cherries, fresh
5036- Peaches, fresh
5037- Pears, fresh
50381- Apricots, Nectarines, Loquats, fresh
5038305 Dates, fresh
50384- Grapes, fresh
50386- Plums, fresh
50387- Rhubarb, fresh
5038805 Persimmons, fresh
5038901 Sapote, fresh
51221- Apples/ Applesauce, canned
5 1 222- Apricots, canned
51223- Cherries, canned
5 1 224- Peaches, canned
51225- Pears, canned
51228- Berries, canned
5122903 Grapes with sugar, canned
5122904 Grapes without sugar, canned
5122905 Plums with sugar, canned
5122906 Plums without sugar, canned
5122907 Plums, canned, baby
5122911 Prunes, canned, baby
5122912 Prunes, with sugar, canned
5122913 Prunes, without sugar, canned
5 1229 14 Raisin Pie Filling
5222- Frozen Strawberries
52231- Apples Slices, frozen
52233- Berries, frozen
52234- Cherries, frozen
52236- Peaches, frozen
52239- Rhubarb, frozen
53321- Canned Apple Juice
53322- Canned Grape Juice
62101- Apple, dried
62104- Apricot, dried
62108- Currants, dried
62110- Date, dried
62116- Peaches, dried
62119- Pears, dried
62121- Plum, dried
62122- Prune, dried
62125- Raisins
63101- Apples/applesauce
63102- Wi-apple
63103- Apricots
63 1 1 1 - Cherries, maraschino
63112- Acerola
63113- Cherries, sour
63115- Cherries, sweet
63117- Currants, raw
63123- Grapes
6312601 Juneberry
63131- Nectarine
63135- Peach
63137- Pear
63139- Persimmons
63143- Plum
63146- Quince
63147- Rhubarb/Sapodillo
632- Berries
64101- Apple Cider
64104- Apple Juice
64105- Cranberry Juice
64116- Grape Juice
64122- Peach Juice
64132- Prune/Strawberry Juice
6420101 Apricot Nectar
64205- Peach Nectar
64215- Pear Nectar
67102- Applesauce, baby
67108- Peaches, babv
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-11
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Exposed
Fruits
(continued)
5332402 Canned Prune Juice
5332403 Canned Pear Juice
5332404 Canned Blackberry Juice
5332405 Canned Peach Juice
53421- Frozen Grape Juice
5342201 Frozen Apple Juice, comm. fr.
5342202 Frozen Apple Juice, home fr.
5352101 Apple Juice, asep. packed
5352201 Grape Juice, asep. packed
5362101 Apple Juice, fresh
5362202 Apricot Juice, fresh
5362203 Grape Juice, fresh
5362204 Pear Juice, fresh
5362205 Prune Juice, fresh
5421- Dried Prunes
5422- Raisins, Currants, dried
5423101 Dry Apples
5423102 Dry Apricots
5423103 Dates without pits
5423104 Dates with pits
5423105 Peaches, dry, baby
5423106 Peaches, dry
5423107 Pears, dry
5423114 Berries, dry
5423115 Cherries, dry
(includes baby foods)
67109- Pears, baby
6711450 Peaches, baby, dry
671145 5 Pears, baby, dry
67202- Apple Juice, baby
6720380 White Grape Juice, baby
67212- Pear Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures; excludes
fruit mixtures)
Protected
Fruits
501- Citrus Fruits, fresh
5 021 - Cantaloupe, fresh
5023201 Mangoes, fresh
5023301 Guava, fresh
5023601 Kiwi, fresh
5023701 Papayas, fresh
5023801 Passion Fruit, fresh
5032- Bananas, Plantains, fresh
5035- Melons otherthan Cantaloupe, fresh
50382- Avocados, fresh
5038301 Figs, fresh
5038302 Figs, cooked
5038303 Figs, home canned
5038304 Figs, home frozen
50385- Pineapple, fresh
5038801 Pomegranates, fresh
5038902 Cherimoya, fresh
5038903 Jackfruit, fresh
5038904 Breadfruit, fresh
5038905 Tamarind, fresh
5038906 Carambola, fresh
5038907 Longan, fresh
5121- Citrus, canned
51226- Pineapple, canned
5122901 Figs with sugar, canned
5122902 Figs without sugar, canned
5122909 Bananas, canned, baby
5122910 Bananas and Pineapple, canned, baby
5122915 Litchis. canned
61- Citrus Fr., Juices (incl. cit. juice mixtures)
62107- Bananas, dried
62113- Figs, dried
62114- Lychees/Papayas, dried
62120- Pineapple, dried
62126- Tamarind, dried
63105- Avocado, raw
63107- Bananas
63109- Cantaloupe, Carambola
63110- Cassaba Melon
63119- Figs
63121- Genip
63125- Guava/Jackfruit, raw
6312650 Kiwi
6312651Lychee, raw
6312660 Lychee, cooked
63127- Honeydew
63129- Mango
63133- Papaya
63134- Passion Fruit
63141- Pineapple
63145- Pomegranate
63148- Sweetsop, Soursop, Tamarind
63149- Watermelon
64120- Papaya Juice
64121- Passion Fruit Juice
64124- Pineapple Juice
64133- Watermelon Juice
6420150 Banana Nectar
Page
13A-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Protected
Fruits
(continued)
5122916 Mangos with sugar, canned
5122917 Mangos without sugar, canned
5122918 Mangos, canned, baby
5122920 Guava with sugar, canned
5122921 Guava without sugar, canned
5122923 Papaya with sugar, canned
5122924 Papaya without sugar, canned
52232- Bananas, frozen
52235- Melon, frozen
52237- Pineapple, frozen
5331- Canned Citrus Juices
53323- Canned Pineapple Juice
5332408 Canned Papaya Juice
5332410 Canned Mango Juice
5332501 Canned Papaya Concentrate
5341- Frozen Citrus Juice
5342203 Frozen Pineapple Juice
5351- Citrus and Citrus Blend Juices, asep. packed
5352302 Pineapple Juice, asep. packed
5361- Fresh Citrus and Citrus Blend Juices
5362206 Papaya Juice, fresh
5362207 Pineapple-Coconut Juice, fresh
5362208 Mango Juice, fresh
5362209 Pineapple Juice, fresh
5423108 Pineapple, dry
5423109 Papaya, dry
5423110 Bananas, dry
5423111 Mangos, dry
5423117 Litchis, dry
5423118 Tamarind, dry
5423119 Plantain, dry
(includes baby foods)
64202-
64203-
64204-
64210-
64213-
64221-
Cantaloupe Nectar
Guava Nectar
Mango Nectar
Papaya Nectar
Passion Fruit Nectar
Soursop Nectar
6710503 Bananas, baby
6711500 Bananas, baby, dry
6720500 Orange Juice, baby
6721300 Pineapple Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures; excludes fruit
mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Exposed
Veg.
491- Fresh Dark Green Vegetables
493- Fresh Tomatoes
4941- Fresh Asparagus
4943- Fresh Beans, Snap or Wax
4944- Fresh Cabbage
4945- Fresh Lettuce
4946- Fresh Okra
49481- Fresh Artichokes
49483- Fresh Brussel Sprouts
4951- Fresh Celery
4952- Fresh Cucumbers
4955- Fresh Cauliflower
4958103 Fresh Kohlrabi
4958111 Fresh Jerusalem Artichokes
4958112 Fresh Mushrooms
4958113 Mushrooms, home canned
4958114 Mushrooms, home frozen
4958118 Fresh Eggplant
4958119 Eggplant, cooked
4958120 Eggplant, home frozen
4958200 Fresh Summer Squash
4958201 Summer Squash, cooked
4958202 Summer Squash, home canned
4958203 Summer Squash, home frozen
4958402 Fresh Bean Sprouts
4958403 Fresh Alfalfa Sprouts
4958504 Bamboo Shoots
4958506 Seaweed
4958508 Tree Fern, fresh
4958601 Sauerkraut
5111- Dark Green Vegetables (all are exposed)
5113- Tomatoes
5114101 Asparagus, comm. canned
51144- Beans, green, snap, yellow, comm. canned
5114704 Snow Peas, comm. canned
5114801 Sauerkraut, comm. canned
5114901 Artichokes, comm. canned
5114902 Bamboo Shoots, comm. canned
5114903 Bean Sprouts, comm. canned
5114904 Cabbage, comm. canned
5114905 Cabbage, comm. canned, no sauce
5114906 Cauliflower, comm. canned, no sauce
5114907 Eggplant, comm. canned, no sauce
5114913 Mushrooms, comm. canned
5114914 Okra, comm. canned
5114918 Seaweeds, comm. canned
5114920 Summer Squash, comm. canned
721- Dark Green Leafy Veg.
722- Dark Green Nonleafy Veg.
74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures
7510050 Alfalfa Sprouts
7510075 Artichoke, Jerusalem, raw
7510080 Asparagus, raw
75101- Beans, sprouts and green, raw
7510275 Brussel Sprouts, raw
7510280 Buckwheat Sprouts, raw
7510300 Cabbage, raw
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw
7510500 Cabbage, Red, raw
7510700 Cauliflower, raw
7510900 Celery, raw
7510950 Chives, raw
7511100 Cucumber, raw
7511120 Eggplant, raw
7511200 Kohlrabi, raw
75113- Lettuce, raw
7511500 Mushrooms, raw
7511900 Parsley
7512100 Pepper, hot chili
75122- Peppers, raw
7512750 Seaweed, raw
7512775 Snowpeas, raw
75128- Summer Squash, raw
7513210 Celery Juice
7514100 Cabbage or cole slaw
7514130 Chinese Cabbage Salad
7514150 Celery with cheese
75142- Cucumber salads
75143- Lettuce salads
7514410 Lettuce, wilted with bacon dressing
7514600 Greek salad
7514700 Spinach salad
7520600 Algae, dried
75201- Artichoke, cooked
75202- Asparagus, cooked
75203- Bamboo shoots, cooked
752049- Beans, string, cooked
75205- Beans, green, cooked/canned
75206- Beans, yellow, cooked/canned
75207- Bean Sprouts, cooked
752085- Breadfruit
752090- Brussel Sprouts, cooked
75210- Cabbage, Chinese, cooked
75211- Cabbage, green, cooked
Page
13A-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Exposed
Veg.
(cont.)
5114923 Chinese or Celery Cabbage, comm. canned
51152- Tomatoes, canned, low sod.
5115301 Asparagus, canned, low sod.
5115302 Beans, Green, canned, low sod.
5115303 Beans, Yellow, canned, low sod.
5115309 Mushrooms, canned, low sod.
51154- Greens, canned, low sod.
5115501 Sauerkraut, low sodium
5211- Dark Or. Veg., comm. frozen (all exp.)
52131- Asparagus, comm. froz.
52133- Beans, snap, green, yellow, comm. froz.
5213407 Peapods, comm froz.
5213408 Peapods, with sauce, comm froz.
5213409 Peapods, with other veg., comm froz.
5213701 Brussel Sprouts, comm. froz.
5213702 Brussel Sprouts, comm. froz. with cheese
5213703 Brussel Sprouts, comm. froz. with other veg.
5213705 Cauliflower, comm. froz.
5213706 Cauliflower, comm. froz. with sauce
5213707 Cauliflower, comm. froz. with other veg.
5213708 Caul., comm. froz. with other veg. & sauce
5213709 Summer Squash, comm. froz.
5213710 Summer Squash, comm. froz. with other veg.
5213716 Eggplant, comm. froz.
5213718 Mushrooms with sauce, comm. froz.
5213719 Mushrooms, comm. froz.
5213720 Okra, comm. froz.
5213721 Okra, comm. froz., with sauce
5311- Canned Tomato Juice and Tomato Mixtures
5312102 Canned Sauerkraut Juice
5321- Frozen Tomato Juice
5371- Fresh Tomato Juice
5381102 Aseptically Packed Tomato Juice
5413101 Dry Algae
5413102 Dry Celery
5413103 Dry Chives
5413109 Dry Mushrooms
5413111 Dry Parsley
5413112 Dry Green Peppers
5413113 Dry Red Peppers
5413114 Dry Seaweed
5413115 Dry Tomatoes
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
75212- Cabbage, red, cooked
752130- Cabbage, savoy, cooked
75214- Cauliflower
75215- Celery, Chives, Christophine (chayote)
752167- Cucumber, cooked
752170- Eggplant, cooked
752171- Fern shoots
752172- Fern shoots
752173- Flowers of sesbania, squash or lily
7521801 Kohlrabi, cooked
75219- Mushrooms, cooked
75220- Okra/lettuce, cooked
7522116 Palm Hearts, cooked
7522121 Parsley, cooked
75226- Peppers, pimento, cooked
75230- Sauerkraut, cooked/canned
75231- Snowpeas, cooked
75232- Seaweed
75233- Summer Squash
7540050 Artichokes, stuffed
7540101 Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
75403- Beans, green with sauce
75404- Beans, yellow with sauce
7540601 Brussel Sprouts, creamed
7540701 Cabbage, creamed
75409- Cauliflower, creamed
75410- Celery/Chiles, creamed
75412- Eggplant, fried, with sauce, etc.
75413- Kohlrabi, creamed
75414- Mushrooms, Okra, fried, stuffed, creamed
754180- Squash, baked, fried, creamed, etc.
7541822 Christophine, creamed
75 50011 Beans, pickled
75 50051 Celery, pickled
7550201 Cauliflower, pickled
755025- Cabbage, pickled
7550301 Cucumber pickles, dill
7550302 Cucumber pickles, relish
7550303 Cucumber pickles, sour
7550304 Cucumber pickles, sweet
7550305 Cucumber pickles, fresh
7550307 Cucumber, Kim Chee
7550308 Eggplant, pickled
7550311 Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
7550314 Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
7550500 Mushrooms, pickled
7550700 Okra, pickled
75510- Olives
7551101 Peppers, hot
7551102 Peppers,pickled
7551301 Seaweed, pickled
7553500 Zucchini, pickled
76102- Dark Green Veg., baby
76401- Beans, baby (excl. most soups & mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Protected
Veg.
4922- Fresh Pumpkin, Winter Squash
4942- Fresh Lima Beans
4947- Fresh Peas
49482- Fresh Soy Beans
4956- Fresh Corn
4958303 Succotash, home canned
4958304 Succotash, home frozen
4958401 Fresh Cactus (prickly pear)
4958503 Burdock
4958505 Bitter Melon
4958507 Horseradish Tree Pods
51122- Comm. Canned Pumpkin and Squash (baby)
51142- Beans, comm. canned
51143- Beans, lima and soy, comm. canned
51146- Com, comm. canned
5114701 Peas, green, comm. canned
5114702 Peas, baby, comm. canned
5114703 Peas, blackeye, comm. canned
5114705 Pigeon Peas, comm. canned
5114919 Succotash, comm. canned
5115304 Lima Beans, canned, low sod.
5115306 Com, canned, low sod.
5115307 Creamed Corn, canned, low sod.
511531- Peas and Beans, canned, low sod.
52122- Winter Squash, comm. froz.
52132- Lima Beans, comm. froz.
5213401 Peas, gr., comm. froz.
5213402 Peas, gr., with sauce, comm. froz.
5213403 Peas, gr., with other veg., comm. froz.
5213404 Peas, gr., with other veg., comm. froz.
5213405 Peas, blackeye, comm froz.
5213406 Peas, blackeye, with sauce, comm froz.
52135- Com, comm. froz.
5213712 Artichoke Hearts, comm. froz.
5213713 Baked Beans, comm. froz.
5213717 Kidney Beans, comm. froz.
5213724 Succotash, comm. froz.
5411- Dried Beans
5412- Dried Peas and Lentils
5413104 Dry Corn
5413106 Dry Hominy
5413504 Dry Squash, baby
5413603 Dry Creamed Corn, baby
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
732- Pumpkin
733- Winter Squash
7510200 Lima Beans, raw
7510550 Cactus, raw
7510960 Corn, raw
7512000 Peas, raw
7520070 Aloe vera juice
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
752041- Lima Beans, canned
7520829 Bitter Melon
752083- Bitter Melon, cooked
7520950 Burdock
752131- Cactus
752160- Corn, cooked
752161- Com, yellow, cooked
752162- Com, white, cooked
752163- Com, canned
7521749 Hominy
752175- Hominy
75223- Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye, cooked
75224- Peas, green, cooked
75225- Peas, pigeon, cooked
75301- Succotash
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
75411- Com, scalloped, fritter, with cream
7541650 Pea salad
7541660 Pea salad with cheese
75417- Peas, with sauce or creamed
7550101 Corn relish
76205- Squash, yellow, baby
76405- Corn, baby
76409- Peas, baby
76411- Peas, creamed, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Page
13A-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Root
Vegetables
48- Potatoes, Sweetpotatoes
4921- Fresh Carrots
4953- Fresh Onions, Garlic
4954- Fresh Beets
4957- Fresh Turnips
4958101 Fresh Celeriac
4958102 Fresh Horseradish
4958104 Fresh Radishes, no greens
4958105 Radishes, home canned
4958106 Radishes, home frozen
4958107 Fresh Radishes, with greens
4958108 Fresh Salsify
4958109 Fresh Rutabagas
4958110 Rutabagas, home frozen
4958115 Fresh Parsnips
4958116 Parsnips, home canned
4958117 Parsnips, home frozen
4958502 Fresh Lotus Root
4958509 Ginger Root
4958510 Jicama, including yambean
51121- Carrots, comm. canned
51145- Beets, comm. canned
5114908 Garlic Pulp, comm. canned
5114910 Horseradish, comm. prep.
5114915 Onions, comm. canned
5114916 Rutabagas, comm. canned
5114917 Salsify, comm. canned
5114921 Turnips, comm. canned
5114922 Water Chestnuts, comm. canned
51151 - Carrots, canned, low sod.
5115305 Beets, canned, low sod.
5115502 Turnips, low sod.
52121- Carrots, comm. froz.
5213714 Beets, comm. froz.
5213722 Onions, comm. froz.
5213723 Onions, comm. froz., with sauce
5213725 Turnips, comm. froz.
5312103 Canned Carrot Juice
5312104 Canned Beet Juice
5372102 Fresh Carrot Juice
5413105 Dry Garlic
5413110 Dry Onion
5413502 Dry Carrots, baby
5413503 Dry Sweet Potatoes, baby
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures)
71- White Potatoes and Puerto Rican St. Veg.
7310- Carrots
7311140 Carrots in sauce
7311200 Carrot chips
734- Sweetpotatoes
7510250 Beets, raw
7511150 Garlic, raw
7511180 Jicama (yambean), raw
7511250 Leeks, raw
75117- Onions, raw
7512500 Radish, raw
7512700 Rutabaga, raw
7512900 Turnip, raw
752080- Beets, cooked
752081- Beets, canned
7521362 Cassava
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7521771 Horseradish
7521850 Lotus root
752210- Onions, cooked
7522110 Onions, dehydrated
752220- Parsnips, cooked
75227- Radishes, cooked
75228- Rutabaga, cooked
75229- Salsify, cooked
75234- Turnip, cooked
75235- Water Chestnut
7540501 Beets, harvard
75415- Onions, creamed, fried
7541601 Parsnips, creamed
7541810 Turnips, creamed
75 50021 Beets, pickled
7550309 Horseradish
7551201 Radishes, pickled
7553403 Turnip, pickled
76201- Carrots, baby
76209- Sweetpotatoes, baby
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-17
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
USDA SUBCATEGORIES
Dark Green
Vegetables
491- Fresh Dark Green Vegetables
5111 - Comm. Canned Dark Green Veg.
51154- Low Sodium Dark Green Veg.
5211- Comm. Frozen Dark Green Veg.
5413111 Dry Parsley
5413112 Dry Green Peppers
5413113 Dry Red Peppers
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners;
excludes vegetable juices and dried vegetables)
72- Dark Green Vegetables
all forms
leafy, nonleafy, dk. gr. veg. soups
Deep
Yellow
Vegetables
492- Fresh Deep Yellow Vegetables
5112- Comm. Canned Deep Yellow Veg.
51151 - Low Sodium Carrots
5212- Comm. Frozen Deep Yellow Veg.
5312103 Carrot Juice
54135- Dry Carrots, Squash, Sw. Potatoes
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners;
excludes vegetable juices and dried vegetables)
73- Deep Yellow Vegetables
all forms
carrots, pumpkin, squash, sweetpotatoes, dp. yell.
veg. soups
Other
Vegetables
494- Fresh Light Green Vegetables
495- Fresh Other Vegetables
5114- Comm. Canned Other Veg.
51153- Low Sodium Other Veg.
51155- Low Sodium Other Veg.
5213- Comm. Frozen Other Veg.
5312102 Sauerkraut Juice
5312104 Beet Juice
5411- Dreid Beans
5412- Dried Peas, Lentils
541310- Dried Other Veg.
5413114 Dry Seaweed
5413603 Dry Cr. Corn, baby
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners;
excludes vegetable juices and dried vegetables)
75- Other Vegetables
all forms
Citrus Fruits
501- Fresh Citrus Fruits
5121- Comm. Canned Citrus Fruits
5331- Canned Citrus and Citrus Blend Juice
5341- Frozen Citrus and Citrus Blend Juice
5351- Aseptically Packed Citrus and Citr. Blend Juice
5361- Fresh Citrus and Citrus Blend Juice
(includes baby foods; excludes dried fruits)
61- Citrus Fruits and Juices
6720500 Orange Juice, baby food
6720600 Orange-Apricot Juice, baby food
6720700 Orange-Pineapple Juice, baby food
6721100 Orange-Apple-Banana Juice, baby food
(excludes dried fruits)
Page
13A-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Appendix 13A
Appendix 13A. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1987-88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Other Fruits
502- Fresh Other Vitamin C-Rich Fruits
503- Fresh Other Fruits
5122- Comm. Canned Fruits Other than Citrus
5222- Frozen Strawberries
5223- Frozen Other than Citr. or Vitamin C-Rich Fr.
5332- Canned Fruit Juice Other than Citrus
5342- Frozen Juices Other than Citrus
5352- Aseptically Packed Fruit Juice Other than Citr.
5362- Fresh Fruit Juice Other than Citrus
542- Dry Fruits
(includes baby foods; excludes dried fruits)
62- Dried Fruits
63- Other Fruits
64- Fruit Juices and Nectars Excluding Citrus
671- Fruits, baby
67202- Apple Juice, baby
67203- Baby Juices
67204- Baby Juices
67212- Baby Juices
67213- Baby Juices
673- Baby Fruits
674- Baby Fruits
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
13A-19
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
14. BREAST MILK INTAKE 1
14.1. BACKGROUND 1
14.2. KEY STUDIES ON BREAST MILK INTAKE 1
14.3. RELEVANT STUDIES ON BREAST MILK INTAKE 4
14.4. KEY STUDIES ON LIPID CONTENT AND FAT INTAKE FROM BREAST
MILK 5
14.5. OTHER FACTORS 6
14.6. RECOMMENDATIONS 7
14.7 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 14 8
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 14-1. Daily Intakes of Breast Milk 2
Table 14-2. Breast Milk Intake for Infants Aged 1 to 6 Months 2
Table 14-3. Breast Milk Intake Among Exclusively Breast-fed
Infants During the First 4 Months of Life 3
Table 14-4. Breast Milk Intake During a 24-Hour Period 3
Table 14-5. Breast Milk Intake Estimated by the DARLING Study 4
Table 14-6. Milk Intake for Bottle- and Breast-fed
Infants by Age Group 4
Table 14-7. Milk Intake for Boys and Girls 4
Table 14-8. Intake of Breast Milk and Formula 5
Table 14-9. Lipid Content of Human Milk and Estimated Lipid Intake
Among Exclusively Breast-fed Infants 6
Table 14-10. Predicted Lipid Intakes for Breast-fed Infants
Under 12 Months of Age 6
Table 14-11. Number of Meals Per Day 7
Table 14-12. Percentage of Mothers Breast-feeding Newborn Infants in the Hospital and Infants
at 5 or 6 Months
of Age in the United States in 1989a, by Ethnic Background and Selected Demographic
Variables'3 10
Table 14-13. Breast Milk Intake Studies 11
Table 14-14. Confidence in Breast Milk Intake Recommendations 13
Table 14-15. Breast Milk Intake Rates Derived From Key Studies 14
Table 14-16. Summary of Recommended Breast Milk and Lipid Intake Rates 15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
14. BREAST MILK INTAKE
14.1. BACKGROUND
Breast milk is a potential source of exposure to toxic
substances for nursing infants. Lipid soluble chemical
compounds accumulate in body fat and may be transferred
to breast-fed infants in the lipid portion of breast milk.
Because nursing infants obtain most (if not all) of their
dietary intake from breast milk, they are especially
vulnerable to exposures to these compounds. Estimating
the magnitude of the potential dose to infants from breast
milk requires information on the quantity of breast milk
consumed per day and the duration (months) over which
breast-feeding occurs. Information on the fat content of
breast milk is also needed for estimating dose from breast
milk residue concentrations that have been indexed to lipid
content.
Several studies have generated data on breast milk
intake. Typically, breast milk intake has been measured
over a 24-hour period by weighing the infant before and
after each feeding without changing its clothing (test
weighing). The sum of the difference between the measured
weights over the 24-hour period is assumed to be equivalent
to the amount of breast milk consumed daily. Intakes
measured using this procedure are often corrected for
evaporative water losses (insensible water losses) between
infant weighings (NAS, 1991). Neville et al. (1988)
evaluated the validity of the test weight approach among
bottle-fed infants by comparing the weights of milk taken
from bottles with the differences between the infants'
weights before and after feeding. When test weight data
were corrected for insensible water loss, they were not
significantly different from bottle weights. Conversions
between weight and volume of breast milk consumed are
made using the density of human milk (approximately 1.03
g/mL) (NAS, 1991). Recently, techniques for measuring
breast milk intake using stable isotopes have been
developed. However, few data based on this new technique
have been published (NAS, 1991).
Studies among nursing mothers in industrialized
countries have shown that intakes among infants average
approximately 750 to 800 g/day (728 to 777 mL/day)
during the first 4 to 5 months of life with a range of 450 to
1,200 g/day (437 to 1,165 mL/day) (NAS, 1991). Similar
intakes have also been reported for developing countries
(NAS, 1991). Infant birth weight and nursing frequency
have been shown to influence the rate of intake (NAS,
1991). Infants who are larger at birth and/or nurse more
frequently have been shown to have higher intake rates.
Also, breast milk production among nursing mothers has
been reported to be somewhat higher than the amount
actually consumed by the infant (NAS, 1991).
The available studies on breast milk intake are
summarized in the following sections. Studies on breast
milk intake rates have been classified as either key studies
or relevant studies based on the criteria described in the
Introduction (Volume I, Section 1.3.1). Recommended
intake rates are based on the results of key studies, but
relevant studies are also presented to provide the reader
with added perspective on the current state of knowledge
pertaining to breast milk intake.
Relevant data on lipid content and fat intake,
breast-feeding duration and frequency, and the estimated
percentage of the U.S. population that breast-feeds are also
presented.
14.2. KEY STUDIES ON BREAST MILK INTAKE
Pao et al. (1980) - Milk Intakes and Feeding
Patterns of Breast-fed Infants - Pao et al. (1980) conducted
a study of 22 healthy breast-fed infants to estimate breast
milk intake rates. Infants were categorized as completely
breast-fed or partially breast-fed. Breast feeding mothers
were recruited through LaLeche League groups. Except for
one black infant, all other infants were from white middle-
class families in southwestern Ohio. The goal of the study
was to enroll infants as close to one month of age as
possible and to obtain records near one, three, six, and nine
months of age (Pao et al., 1980). However, not all
mother/infant pairs participated at each time interval. Data
were collected for these 22 infants using the test weighing
method. Records were collected for three consecutive 24-
hour periods at each test interval. The weight of breast milk
was converted to volume by assuming a density of 1.03
g/mL. Daily intake rates were calculated for each infant
based on the mean of the three 24-hour periods. Mean daily
breast milk intake rates for the infants surveyed at each time
interval are presented in Table 14-1. For completely
breast-fed infants, the mean intake rates were 600 mL/day
at 1 month of age and 833 mL/day at 3 months of age.
Partially breast-fed infants had mean intake rates of 485
mL/day, 467 mL/day, 395 mL/day, and 554 mL/day at 1, 3,
6, and 9 months of age, respectively. Pao et al. (1980) also
noted that intake rates for boys in both groups were slightly
higher than for girls.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
14-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-1
Age
Completely Breast-fed
1 month
3 months
6 months
Partially Breast-fed
1 month
3 months
6 months
9 months
Daily Intakes of Breast Milk
Number of
Infants
Surveyed at
Each Time
Period
11
2
1
4
11
6
3
Mean
Intake
(mL/day) a
600 ±159
833
682
485 ± 79
467 ±100
395 ±175
<554
Range of
Daily Intake
(mL/day)
426 - 989
645 - 1,000
616-786
398 - 655
242 - 698
147 - 684
451 -732
a Data expressed as mean ± standard deviation.
Source: Paoetal., 1980.
The advantage of this study is that data for both
exclusively and partially breast-fed infants were collected
for multiple time periods. Also, data for individual infants
were collected over 3 consecutive days which would
account for some individual variability. However, the
number of infants in the study was relatively small and may
not be entirely representative of the U. S. population, based
on race and socioeconomic status, which may introduce
some bias in the results. In addition, this study did not
account for insensible water loss which may underestimate
the amount of breast milk ingested.
Dewey and Lonnerdal (1983) - Milk and Nutrient
Intakes of Breast-fed Infants from 1 to 6 Months - Dewey
and Lonnerdal (1983) monitored the dietary intake of 20
breast-fed infants between the ages of 1 and 6 months.
Most of the infants in the study were exclusively breast-fed
(five were given some formula, and several were given
small amounts of solid foods after 3 months of age).
According to Dewey and Lonnerdal (1983), the mothers
were all well educated and recruited through L amaze
childbirth classes in the Davis area of California. Breast
milk intake volume was estimated based on two 24-hour
test weighings per month. Breast milk intake rates for the
various age groups are presented in Table 14-2. Breast
milk intake averaged 673,782, and 896 mL/day at 1, 3, and
6 months of age, respectively.
The advantage of this study is that it evaluated breast-
fed infants for a period of 6 months based on two 24-hour
observations per infant per month. Corrections for
insensible water loss apparently were not made. Also, the
number of infants in the study was relatively small and may
not be representative of U.S. population, based on race and
socioeconomic status.
Table 14-2. Breast Milk Intake for Infants Aged 1 to 6 Months
Age
(months)
1
2
3
4
5
6
Number
of Infants
16
19
16
13
11
11
Mean
(mL/day)
673
756
782
810
805
896
SD
(mL/day) a
192
170
172
142
117
122
Range
(mL/day)
341-1,003
449-1,055
492-1,053
593-1,045
554-1,045
675-1,096
a Standard deviation.
Source:
Dewev and
Lonnerdal, 1983.
Butte et al. (1984) - Human Milk Intake and Growth
in Exclusively Breast-fed Infants - Breast milk intake was
studied in exclusively breast-fed infants during the first 4
months of life (Butte et al., 1984). Breastfeeding mothers
were recruited through the Baylor Milk Bank Program in
Texas. Forty-five mother/infant pairs participated in the
study. However, datafor some time periods (i.e., 1, 2, 3, or
4 months) were missing for some mothers as a result of
illness or other factors. The mothers were from the middle-
to upper-socioeconomic stratum and had a mean age of 28.0
±3.1 years. A total of 41 mothers were white, 2 were
Hispanic, 1 was Asian, and 1 was West Indian. Infant
growth progressed satisfactorily over the course of the
study. The amount of milk ingested over a 24-hour period
was determined using the test weighing procedure. Test
weighing occurred over a 24-hour period for most
participants, but intake among several infants was studied
over longer periods (48 to 96 hours) to assess individual
variation in intake. The study did not indicate whether the
data were corrected for insensible water loss. Mean breast
milk intake ranged from 723 g/day (702 mL/day) at 3
months to 751 g/day (729 mL/day) at 1 month, with an
overall mean of 733 g/day (712 mL/day) for the entire study
period (Table 14-3). Intakes were also calculated on the
basis of body weight (Table 14-3). Based on the results of
test weighings conducted over 48 to 96 hours, the mean
variation in individual daily intake was estimated to be
7.9±3.6 percent.
Page
14-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-3. Breast Milk Intake Among Exclusively Breast-fed
Infants During the First 4 Months of Life
Number Breast Milk Breast Milk Body
Age of Intake" Intake" Weight'
(months) Infants (g/day) (g/kg-day) (kg)
1 37 751.0 ±130.0 159.0 ±24.0 4.7
2 40 725. 0± 131.0 129.0 ±19.0 5.6
3 37 723.0 ±114.0 117.0 ±20.0 6.2
4 41 740.0± 128.0 111. 0± 17.0 6.7
a Data expressed as mean ± standard deviation.
b Calculated by dividing breast milk intake (g/day) by breast milk intake (g/kg-
day).
Source: Butteetal., 1984.
Drevious studies, and the population studied may not be
representative of the U.S. population, based on race and
socioeconomic status.
Table 14-4. Breast Milk Intake During a 24-Hour Period
Standard
Age Number Mean Deviation Range
(days) of Infants (g/day) (g/day) (g/day)
1 7 44 71 -31-149 a
2 10 182 86 44-355
3 11 371 153 209-688
4 11 451 176 164-694
5 12 498 129 323-736
6 10 508 167 315-861
The advantage of this study is that data for a larger
number of exclusively breast-fed infants were collected than
were collected by Pao et al. (1980). However, data were
collected over a shorter time period (i.e., 4 months
compared to 6 months) and day-to-day variability was not
characterized for all infants. In addition, the population
studied may not be representative of the U.S. population
based on race and socioeconomic status.
Neville et al. (1988) - Studies on Human Lactation -
Neville et al. (1988) studied breast milk intake among 13
infants during the first year of life. The mothers were all
multiparous, nonsmoking, Caucasian women of middle- to
upper-socioeconomic status living in Denver, Colorado
(Neville et al., 1988). All women in the study practiced
exclusive breast-feeding for at least 5 months. Solid foods
were introduced at mean age of 7 months. Daily milk intake
was estimated by the test weighing method with corrections
for insensible weight loss. Data were collected daily from
birth to 14 days, weekly from weeks 3 through 8, and
monthly until the study period ended at 1 year after
inception. The estimated breast milk intakes for this study
are listed in Table 14-4. Mean breast milk intakes were
770 g/day (748 mL/day), 734 g/day (713 mL/day), 766
g/day (744 mL/day), and 403 g/day (391 mL/day) at 1, 3, 6,
and 12 months of age, respectively.
In comparison to the previously described studies,
Neville et al. (1988) collected data on numerous days over
a relatively long time period (12 months) and they were
corrected for insensible weight loss. However, the intake
rates presented in Table 14-4 are estimated based on intake
during only a 24-hour period. Consequently, these intake
rates are based on short-term data that do not account for
day-to-day variability among individual infants. Also, a
smaller number of subjects was included than in the
Deweyetal. (199la; 199Ib) - The DARLING Study
- The Davis Area Research on Lactation, Infant Nutrition
and Growth (DARLING) study was conducted in 1986 to
evaluate growth patterns, nutrient intake, morbidity, and
activity levels in infants who were breast-fed for at least the
first 12 months of life (Dewey et al., 1991a; 1991b).
Seventy-three infants aged 3 months were included in the
study. The number of infants included in the study at
subsequent time intervals was somewhat lower as a result
of attrition. All infants in the study were healthy and of
normal gestational age and weight at birth, and did not
consume solid foods until after the first 4 months of age.
The mothers were highly educated and of "relatively high
socioeconomic status" from the Davis area of California
(Dewey et al., 1991a; 1991b). Breast milk intake was
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
14-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
estimated by weighing the infants before and after each
feeding and correcting for insensible water loss. Test
weighings were conducted over a 4-day period every 3
months. The results of the study indicate that breast milk
intake declines over the first 12 months of life. Mean breast
milk intake was estimated to be 812 g/day (788 mL/day) at
3 months and 448 g/day (435 mL/day) at 12 months (Table
14-5). Based on the estimated intakes at 3 months of age,
variability between individuals (coefficient of variation
(CV) = 16.3 percent) was higher than individual day-to-day
variability (CV = 5.4 percent) for the infants in the study
(Deweyetal., 1991a).
(Table 14-7). Breast milk intake was estimated to be 656
g/day (637 mL/day) at 1 month and 776 g/day (753 mL/day)
at 3 months.
Table 1 4-5 . Breast Milk Intake Estimated by the DARLING Study
Age
(months)
3
6
9
12
Number of
Infants
73
60
50
42
Mean Intake
(g/day)
812
769
646
448
Standard Deviation
(g/day)
133
171
217
251
Source: Dewev et al. (1991b).
The advantages of this study are that data were
collected over a relatively long-time (4 days) period at each
test interval which would account for some day-to-day
infant variability, and corrections for insensible water loss
were made. However, the population studied may not be
representative of the U.S. population, based on race and
socioeconomic status.
14.3. RELEVANT STUDIES ON BREAST MILK
INTAKE
Hofvander et al. (1982) - The Amount of Milk
Consumed by 1- to 3-Month Old Breast- or Bottle-Fed
Infants - Hofvander et al. (1982) compared milk intake
among breast-fed and bottle-fed infants at ages 1, 2, and 3
months of age. Intake of breast milk and breast milk
substitutes was tabulated for 25 Swedish infants in each age
group. Daily intake among breast-fed infants was estimated
using the test weighing method. Test weighings were
conducted over a 24-hour time period at each time interval.
Daily milk intake among bottle-fed infants was estimated by
measuring the volumetric differences in milk contained in
bottles at the beginning and end of all feeding sessions in a
24-hour period. The mean intake rates for bottle-fed infants
were slightly higher than for breast-fed infants for all age
groups (Table 14-6). Also, boys consumed breast milk or
breast milk substitutes at a slightly higher rate than girls
Table 14-6. Milk Intake for Bottle- and Breast-fed
Age
(months)
1
2
3
Infants by Age Group
Breast Milk Substitutes
Mean (g/day)a
713
(500-1,000)
811
(670-1,180)
853
(655-1,065)
Breast Milk
Mean (g/day)a
656
(360-860)
773
(575-985)
776
(600-930)
a Range given in parentheses.
Source: Hofvander et al., 1982.
Table 14-7. Milk Intake for Boys and Girls
Boys
Age
Breast milk
1
2
3
Breast milk substitute
1
2
3
Source: Hofvander et al.
Mean
(g/dav)
663
791
811
753
863
862
1982.
N
12
14
12
10
13
13
Girls
Mean
(g/dav)
649
750
743
687
753
843
N
13
11
13
15
12
12
This study was conducted among a small number of
Swedish infants, but the results are similar to those
summarized previously for U.S. studies. Insensible water
losses were apparently not considered in this study, and only
short-term data were collected.
Kohler et al. (1984) - Food Intake and Growth of
Infants Between Six and Twenty-six Weeks of Age on
Breast Milk, Cow 's Milk, Formula, and Soy Formula -
Kohler et al. (1984) evaluated breast milk and formula
intake among normal infants between the ages of 6 and 26
weeks. The study included 25 fully breast-fed and 34
formula-fed infants from suburban communities in Sweden.
Intake among breast-fed infants was estimated using the test
weighing method over a 48-hour test period. Intake among
formula-fed infants was estimated by feeding infants from
Page
14-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
bottles with known volumes of formula and recording the
amount consumed over a 48-hour period. Table 14-8
presents the mean breast milk and formula intake rates for
the infants studied. Data were collected for both cow's
milk-based formula and soy-based formula. The results
indicated that the daily intake for bottle-fed infants was
greater than for breast-fed infants.
The advantages of this study are that it compares breast
milk intake to formula intake and that test weightings were
conducted over 2 consecutive days to account for variability
the length of time that an infant nurses. Lipid content
increases from the beginning to the end of a single nursing
session (NAS, 1991). The lipid portion accounts for
approximately 4 percent of human breast milk (39 ± 4.0
g/L) (NAS, 1991). This value is supported by various
studies that evaluated lipid content from human breast milk.
Several studies also estimated the quantity of lipid
consumed by breast-feeding infants. These values are
appropriate for performing exposure assessments for
nursing infants when the contaminant(s) have residue
Table 14-8. Intake of Breast Milk and Formula
Age
(wks)
6
14
22
26
Source:
N
26
21
13
12
Kohler et al., 1984.
Breast Milk
Mean
(g/day)
746
726
111
689
Cow's Formula
SD
(g/day)
101
143
114
120
N
20
19
18
18
Mean
(g/day)
823
921
818
111
SD
(g/day)
111
95
201
209
N
13
13
13
12
Soy Formula
Mean
(g/day)
792
942
861
776
SD
(g/day)
127
78
196
159
in individual intake. Although the population studied was
not representative of the U.S. population, similar intake
rates were observed in the studies that were previously
summarized.
Axelsson et al. (1987) - Protein and Energy Intake
During Weaning - Axelsson et al. (1987) measured food
consumption and energy intake in 30 healthy Swedish
infants between the ages of 4 and 6 months. Both formula-
fed and breast-fed infants were studied. All infants were fed
supplemental foods (i.e., pureed fruits and vegetables after
4 months, and pureed meats and fish after 5 months). Milk
intake among breast-fed infants was estimated by weighing
the infants before and after each feeding over a 2-day period
at each sampling interval. Breast milk intake averaged 765
mL/day at 4.5 months of age, and 715 mL/day at 5.5 months
of age.
This study is based on short-term data, a small number
of infants, and may not be representative of the U.S.
population. However, the intake rates estimated by this
study are similar to those generated by the U.S. studies that
were summarized previously.
14.4. KEY STUDIES ON LIPID CONTENT AND
FAT INTAKE FROM BREAST MILK
Human milk contains over 200 constituents including
lipids, various proteins, carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals,
and trace elements as well as enzymes and hormones (NAS,
1991). The lipid content of breast milk varies according to
concentrations that are indexed to the fat portion of human
breast milk.
Butte et al. (1984) - Human Milk Intake and Growth
in Exclusively Breast-fed Infants - Butte et al., (1984)
analyzed the lipid content of breast milk samples taken from
women who participated in a study of breast milk intake
among exclusively breast-fed infants. The study was
conducted with over 40 women during a 4-month period.
The mean lipid content of breast milk at various infants'
ages is presented in Table 14-9. The overall lipid content
for the 4-month study period was 34.3 ± 6.9 mg/g (3.4
percent). Butte et al. (1984) also calculated lipid intakes
from 24-hour breast milk intakes and the lipid content of the
human milk samples. Lipid intake was estimated to range
from 23.6 g/day (3.8 g/kg-day) to 28.0 g/day (5.9 g/kg-day).
The number of women included in this study was small,
and these women were selected primarily from middle- to
upper-socioeconomic classes. Thus, data on breast milk
lipid content from this study may not be entirely
representative of breast milk lipid content among
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
14-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-9. Lipid Content of Human Milk and Estimated Lipid Intake
Among Exclusively Breast-fed Infants
Aj
1
2
3
4
;e (months) Number
of
Observations
37
40
37
41
Lipid
Content
(mg/g) a
36.2 ±7.5
34.4 ±6.8
32.2 ±7.8
34.8 ± 10.8
Lipid
Content
(percent)
3.6
3.4
3.2
3.5
Lipid
Intake
(g/day) a
28.0 ±8.5
25.2 ±7.1
23.6 ±7.2
25.6 ±8.6
Lipid
Intake
(g/kg-day) a
5.9 ± 1.7
4.4 ± 1.2
3.8± 1.2
3.8± 1.3
a Data expressed as means ± standard deviations.
Percents calculated from lipid content reported in mg/g.
Source: Butte, etal., 1984.
the U.S. population. Also, these estimates are based on
short-term data and day-to-day variability was not
characterized.
Maxwell and Burmaster (1993) -A Simulation Model
to Estimate a Distribution of Lipid Intake from Breast Milk
Intake During the First Year of Life -Maxwell and
Burmaster (1993) used a hypothetical population of 5,000
infants between birth and 1 year of age to simulate a
distribution of daily lipid intake from breast milk. The
hypothetical population represented both bottle-fed and
breast-fed infants aged 1 to 365 days. A distribution of
daily lipid intake was developed based on data in Dewey et
al. (1991b) on breast milk intake for infants at 3, 6, 9, and
12 months and breast milk lipid content, and survey data in
Ryan et al. (1991) on the percentage of breast-fed infants
under the age of 12 months (i.e., approximately 22 percent).
A model was used to simulate intake among 1,113 of the
5,000 infants that were expected to be breast-fed. The
results of the model indicated that lipid intake among
nursing infants under 12 months of age can be characterized
by a normal distribution with a mean of 26.8 g/day and a
standard deviation of 7.4 g/day (Table 14-10). The model
assumes that nursing infants are completely breast-fed and
does not account for infants who are breast-fed longer than
1 year. Based on data collected by Dewey et al. (1991b),
Maxwell and Burmaster (1993) estimated the lipid content
of breast milk to be 36.7 g/L at 3 months (35.6 mg/g or
3.6%) and 40.2 g/L (39.0 mg/g or 3.9%) at 12 months.
The advantage of this study is that it provides a
"snapshot" of daily lipid intake from breast milk for breast-
fed infants. These results are, however, based on a
simulation model and there are uncertainties associated with
the assumptions made. The estimated mean lipid intake rate
represents the average daily intake for nursing infants under
12 months of age. These data are useful for performing
exposure assessments when the age of the infant cannot be
specified (i.e., 3 months or 6 months). Also, because intake
rates are indexed to the lipid portion of the breast milk, they
may be used in conjunction with residue concentrations
indexed to fat content.
Table 14-10. Predicted Lipid Intakes for Breast-fed Infants
Under 12 Months of Age
Statistic
Number of Observations in Simulation
Minimum Lipid Intake
Maximum Lipid Intake
Arithmetic Mean Lipid Intake
Standard Deviation Lipid Intake
Value
1,113
1.0 g/day
51.5 g/day
26.8 g/day
7.4 g/dav
Source: Maxwell and Burmaster, 1993.
14.5. OTHER FACTORS
Other factors associated with breast milk intake
include: the frequency of breast-feeding sessions per day,
the duration of breast-feeding per event, the duration of
breast-feeding during childhood, and the magnitude and
nature of the population that breast-feeds.
Frequency and Duration of Feeding - Hofvander et al.
(1982) reported on the frequency of feeding among 25
bottle-fed and 25 breast-fed infants at ages 1, 2, and 3
months. The mean number of meals for these age groups
was approximately 5 meals/day (Table 14-11). Neville et
al. (1988) reported slightly higher mean feeding
frequencies. The mean number of meals per day for
exclusively breast-fed infants was 7.3 at ages 2 to 5 months
and 8.2 at ages 2 weeks to 1 month. Neville et al. (1988)
reported that, for infants between the ages of 1 week and 5
months, the average duration of a breast feeding session is
16-18 minutes.
Page
14-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-11. Number of Meals Per Day
Age (months)
1
2
3
Bottle-fed Infants
(meals/day) a
5.4 (4-7)
4.8 (4-6)
4.7 (3-6)
Breast-fed
(meals/day) a
5.8 (5-7)
5.3 (5-7)
5.1(4-8)
a Data expressed as mean with range in parentheses.
Source: Hofvander et al., 1982.
Population of Nursing Infants and Duration of
Breast-Feeding During Infancy - According to NAS
(1991), the percentage of breast-feeding women has
changed dramatically over the years. Between 1936 and
1940, approximately 77 percent of infants were breast fed,
but the incidence of breast-feeding fell to approximately 22
percent in 1972. The duration of breast-feeding also
dropped from about 4 months in the early 1930s to 2
months in the late 1950s. After 1972, the incidence of
breast-feeding began to rise again, reaching its peak at
approximately 61 percent in 1982. The duration of
breast-feeding also increased between 1972 and 1982.
Approximately 10 percent of the mothers who initiated
breast-feeding continued for at least 3 months in 1972;
however, in 1984, 37 percent continued breast-feeding
beyond 3 months. In 1989, breast-feeding was initiated
among 52.2 percent of newborn infants, and 40 percent
continued for 3 months or longer (NAS, 1991). Based on
the data for 1989, only about 20 percent of infants were still
breast fed by age 5 to 6 months (NAS, 1991). Data on the
actual length of time that infants continue to breast-feed
beyond 5 or 6 months are limited (NAS, 1991). However,
Maxwell and Burmaster (1993) estimated that
approximately 22 percent of infants under 1 year of age are
breast-fed. This estimate is based on a reanalysis of survey
data in Ryan et al. (1991) collected by Ross Laboratories
(Maxwell and Burmaster, 1993). Studies have also
indicated that breast-feeding practices may differ among
ethnic and socioeconomic groups and among regions of the
United States. The percentages of mothers who breast feed,
based on ethnic background and demographic variables, are
presented in Table 14-12 (NAS, 1991).
Intake Rates Based on Nutritional Status - Information
on differences in the quality and quantity of breast milk
consumed based on ethnic or socioeconomic characteristics
of the population is limited. Lonnerdal et al. (1976) studied
breast milk volume and composition (nitrogen, lactose,
proteins) among underprivileged and privileged Ethiopian
mothers. No significant differences were observed between
the data for these two groups; and similar data for well-
nourished Swedish mothers were observed. Lonnerdal et
al. (1976) stated that these results indicate that breast milk
quality and quantity are not affected by maternal
malnutrition. However, Brown et al. (1986a; 1986b) noted
that the lactational capacity and energy concentration of
marginally-nourished women in Bangladesh were "modestly
less than in better nourished mothers." Breast milk intake
rates for infants of marginally-nourished women in this
study were 690±122 g/day at 3 months, 722±105 g/day at
6 months, and 719±119 g/day at 9 months of age (Brown et
al., 1986a). Brown et al. (1986a) observed that breast milk
from women with larger measurements of arm
circumference and triceps skinfold thickness had higher
concentrations of fat and energy than mothers with less body
fat. Positive correlations between maternal weight and milk
fat concentrations were also observed. These results
suggest that milk composition may be affected by maternal
nutritional status.
14.6. RECOMMENDATIONS
The key studies described in this section were used in
selecting recommended values for breast milk intake, fat
content and fat intake, and other related factors. Although
different survey designs, testing periods, and populations
were utilized by the key and relevant studies to estimate
intake, the mean and standard deviation estimates reported
in these studies are relatively consistent. There are,
however, limitations with the data. Data are not available
for infants under 1 month of age. This subpopulation may
be of particular concern since a larger number of newboms
are totally breast fed. In addition, with the exception of
Butte (1984), data were not presented on a body weight
basis. This is particularly important since intake rates may
be higher on a body weight basis for younger infants. Also,
the data used to derive the recommendations are over 10
years old and the sample size of the studies was small.
Other subpopulations of concern such as mothers highly
committed to breast feeding, sometimes for periods longer
than 1 year, may not be captured by the studies presented in
this chapter. Further research is needed to identify these
subgroups and to get better estimates of breast milk intake
rates. The general designs of both key and relevant studies
and their limitations are summarized in Table 14-13. Table
14-14 presents the confidence rating for breast milk intake
recommendations.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
14-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Breast Milk Intake - The breast milk intake rates for
nursing infants that have been reported in the key studies
described in this section are summarized in Table 14-15.
Based on the combined results of these studies, 742 mL/day
is recommended to represent an average breast milk intake
rate, and 1,033 mL/day represents an upper-percentile
intake rate (based on the middle range of the mean plus 2
standard deviations) for infants between the ages of 1 and 6
months of age. The average value is the mean of the
average intakes at 1, 3, and 6 months from the key studies
listed in Table 14-15. It is consistent with the average
intake rate of 718 to 777 mL/day estimated by NAS (1991)
for infants during the first 4 to 5 months of life. Intake
among older infants is somewhat lower, averaging 413
mL/day for 12-month olds (Neville et al. 1988; Dewey et al.
1991a; 1991b). When a time weighted average is
calculated for the 12-month period, average breast milk
intake is approximately 688 mL/day, and upper-percentile
intake is approximately 980 mL/day. Table 14-16
summarizes these recommended intake rates.
Lipid Content and Lipid Intake - Recommended lipid
intake rates are based on data from Butte et al. (1984) and
Maxwell and Burmaster (1993). Butte et al. (1984)
estimated that average lipid intake ranges from 23.6 ± 7.2
g/day (22.9 ± 7.0 mL/day) to 28.0 ± 8.5 g/day (27.2 ± 8.3
mL/day) between 1 and 4 months of age. These intake rates
are consistent with those observed by Burmaster and
Maxwell (1993) for infants under 1 year of age [(26.8 ± 7.4
g/day (26.0 ±7.2 mL/day)]. Therefore, the recommended
breast milk lipid intake rate for infants under 1 year of age
is 26.0 mL/day and the upper-percentile value is 40.4
mL/day (based on the mean plus 2 standard deviations).
The recommended value for breast milk fat content is 4.0
percent based on data from NAS (1991), Butte et al.
(1984), and Maxwell and Burmaster (1993).
14.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 14
Axelsson, I.; Borulf, S.; Righard, L.; Raiha, N (1987)
Protein and energy intake during weaning: effects
and growth. Acta Paediatr. Scand. 76:321-327.
Brown, K.H.; Akhtar, N.A.; Robertson, A.D.; Ahmed,
M.G. (1986a) Lactational capacity of marginally
nourished mothers: relationships between maternal
nutritional status and quantity and proximate
composition of milk. Pediatrics. 78: 909-919.
Brown, K.H.; Robertson, A.D.; Akhtar, N.A. (1986b)
Lactational capacity of marginally nourished
mothers: infants' milk nutrient consumption and
patterns of growth. Pediatrics. 78: 920-927.
Butte, N.F.; Garza, C.; Smith, E.G.; Nichols, B.L. (1984)
Human milk intake and growth in exclusively breast-
fed infants. Journal of Pediatncs. 104:187-195.
Dewey, K.G.; Lonnerdal, B. (1983) Milk and nutrient
intake of breast-fed infants from 1 to 6
months:relation to growth and fatness. Journal of
Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition. 2:497-
506.
Dewey, K.G.; Heinig, J.; Nommsen, L.A.; Lonnerdal, B.
(1991 a) Maternal versus infant factors related to
breast milk intake and residual volume: the
DARLING study. Pediatncs. 87:829-837.
Dewey, K.G.; Heinig, J.; Nommsen, L.; Lonnerdal, B.
(199 Ib) Adequacy of energy intake among breast-
fed infants in the DARLING study: relationships to
growth, velocity, morbidity, and activity levels. The
Journal of Pediatncs. 119:538-547.
Hofvander, Y.; Hagman, U.; Hillervik, C.; Sjolin, S.
(1982) The amount of milk consumed by 1-3
months old breast- or bottle-fed infants. Acta
Paediatr. Scand. 71:953-958.
Kohler, L.; Meeuwisse, G.; Mortensson, W. (1984)
Food intake and growth of infants between six and
twenty-six weeks of age on breast milk, cow's milk
formula, and soy formula. Acta Paediatr. Scand.
73:40-48.
Lonnerdal, B.; Forsum, E.; Gebre-Medhim, M.;
Hombraes, L. (1976) Breast milk composition in
Ethiopian and Swedish mothers: lactose, nitrogen,
and protein contents. The American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition. 29:1134-1141.
Maxwell, N.I.; Burmaster, D.E. (1993) A simulation
model to estimate a distribution of lipid intake from
breast milk during the first year of life. Journal of
Exposure Analysis and Environmental
Epidemiology. 3:383-406.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS). (1991) Nutrition
during lactation. Washington, DC. National
Academy Press.
Neville, M.C.; Keller, R.; Seacat, J.; Lutes, V.; Neifert,
M.;etal. (1988) Studies in human lactation: milk
volumes in lactating women during the onset of
lactation and full lactation. American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition. 48:1375-1386.
Pao,E.M.;Hmes, J.M.; Roche, A.F. (1980) Milk
intakes and feeding patterns of breast-fed infants.
Page
14-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Journal of the American Dietetic Association.
77:540-545.
Ryan, A.S.; Rush, D.; Krieger, F.W.; Lewandowski, G.E.
(1991) Recent declines in breastfeeding in the
United States, 1984-1989. Pediatrics. 88:719-727.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
14-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-12. Percentage of Mothers Breast-feeding Newborn Infants in the Hospital and Infants at 5 or 6 Months
of Age in the United States in 1989", by Ethnic Background and Selected Demographic Variables'"
Total White
Category Newborns 5-6 Mo Newborns 5-6 Mo
Infants Infants
All mothers 52.2 19.6 58.5 22.7
Parity
Primiparous 52.6 16.6 58.3 18.9
Multiparous 51.7 22.7 58.7 26.8
Marital status
Married 59.8 24.0 61.9 25.3
Unmarried 30.8 7.7 40.3 9.8
Maternal age
<20yr 30.2 6.2 36.8 7.2
20-24 yr 45.2 12.7 50.8 14.5
25-29 yr 58.8 22.9 63.1 25.0
30-34yr 65.5 31.4 70.1 34.8
>35yr 66.5 36.2 71.9 40.5
Maternal education
No college 42.1 13.4 48.3 15.6
College" 70.7 31.1 74.7 34.1
Family income
<$7,000 28.8 7.9 36.7 9.4
$7,000-$14,999 44.0 13.5 49.0 15.2
$15,000-$24,999 54.7 20.4 57.7 22.3
> $25,000 66.3 27.6 67.8 28.7
Maternal employment
Fulltime 50.8 10.2 54.8 10.8
Part time 59.4 23.0 63.8 25.5
Not employed 51.0 23.1 58.7 27.5
U.S. census region
New England 52.2 20.3 53.2 21.4
Middle Atlantic 47.4 18.4 52.4 21.8
East North Central 47.6 18.1 53.2 20.7
West North Central 55.9 19.9 58.2 20.7
South Atlantic 43.8 14.8 53.8 18.7
East South Central 37.9 12.4 45.1 15.0
West South Central 46.0 14.7 56.2 18.4
Mountain 70.2 30.4 74.9 33.0
Pacific 70.3 28.7 76.7 33.4
Black
Newborns
23.0
23.1
23.0
35.8
17.2
13.5
19.4
29.9
35.4
35.6
17.6
41.1
14.5
23.5
31.7
42.8
30.6
26.0
19.3
35.6
30.6
21.0
27.7
19.6
14.2
14.5
31.5
43.9
5-6 Mo
Infants
7.0
5.9
7.9
12.3
4.6
3.6
4.7
9.4
13.6
14.3
5.5
12.2
4.3
7.3
8.7
14.5
6.9
6.6
7.2
5.0
9.7
7.2
7.9
5.7
3.7
3.8
11.0
15.0
Hispani
Newborns
48.4
49.9
47.2
55.3
37.5
35.3
46.9
56.2
57.6
53.9
42.6
66.5
35.3
47.2
52.6
65.4
50.4
59.4
46.0
47.6
41.4
46.2
50.8
48.0
23.5
39.2
53.9
58.5
C
C
5-6 Mo
Infants
15.0
13.2
16.5
18.8
8.6
6.9
12.6
19.5
23.4
24.4
12.2
23.4
10.3
13.0
16.5
23.0
9.5
17.7
16.7
14.9
10.8
12.6
22.8
13.8
5.0
11.4
18.2
19.7
a Mothers were surveyed when their infants were 6 months of age. They were asked to recall the method of feeding the infant when in the
hospital, at age 1 week, at months 1 through 5, and on the day preceding completion of the survey. Numbers in the columns labeled "5-6
Mo Infants" are an average of the 5-month and previous day responses.
Based on data from Ross Laboratories.
c Hispanic is not exclusive of white or black.
College includes all women who reported completing at least 1 year of college.
Source: NAS, 1991.
Page
14-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
^. flj
aLJ
kŁ*
>0 ^
a g
05 J2
"t- S
l— 5
^0 ^
^o ^
1
&
&
1=
I
ST-
Table 14-13. Breast Milk Intake Studies
Study
KEY STUDIES
Butte et al., 1984
Dewey et al.,
1991a; 199 Ib
Dewey and
Lonnerdal, 1983
Neville etal., 1988
Pao et al., 1980
Number of
Individuals Type of Feeding
45 Exclusively breast-fed for
first 4 months
73 Breast-fed for 12 months;
exclusively breast-fed for at
least first 4 months
20 Most infants exclusively
breast-fed
13 Exclusively breast-fed
infants
22 Completely or partially
breast-fed infants
Sampling Time and Interval
Most infants studied over 1 day
only, at 1, 2, 3, 4 months some
studied over 48 to 96 hours to
study individual variability
Test weighing over 4-day period
every 3 months for 1 year
Two test weighings per month
for 6 months
Infants studied over 24-hour
period at each sampling interval;
numerous sampling intervals
over first year of life
Three consecutive days at 1, 3,
6, and 9 months
Population Studied
Mid- to upper-
socioeconomic stratum
Highly educated, high-
socioeconomic class from
Davis area of California
Mid to upper class from
Davis area of California
Nonsmoking Caucasian
mothers; middle- to upper-
socioeconomic status
White middle class from
southeastern Ohio
Comments
Estimated breast milk intake;
corrected for insensible water loss
Estimated breast milk intake;
corrected for insensible water loss
Estimated breast milk intake; did not
correct for insensible water loss
Estimated breast milk intake and lipid
intake; corrected for insensible water
loss; estimated frequency and duration
of feeding
Estimated breast milk intake; did not
correct for insensible water loss
Q
I
Co
I,
^
ri
i Ore
-------
I
I
Table 14-13. Breast Milk Intake Studies (continued)
Study
RELEVANT
STUDIES
Axelsson et al., 1987
Brown et al., 1986a;
1986b
Hofvander et al.,
1982
Kohler et al., 1984
Maxwell and
Burmaster, 1993
NAS, 1991
Number of
Individuals Type of Feeding
30 Breast-fed infants and
infants fed formula with two
different energy contents
58, 60 Breast-fed infants
50 25 breast-fed and 25
formula-fed infants
59 25 fully breast-fed and 34
formula-fed infants
1,113 Population of 1 , 1 1 3 breast-
fed infants based on a
hypothetical population of
5,000 breast-fed and bottle-
fed infants
NA Breast-fed infants
Sampling Time and Interval
Studied over 2-day periods at
4.5 and 5.5 months of age
Studied over 3 days at each
interval
Studied 24-hour period at 1, 2,
and 3 months
Studied over 48-hour periods
at 6, 14, 22, and 26 weeks of
age
NA
NA
Population Studied Comments
Swedish infants Measured intake rates; not corrected for
insensible water loss
Bangledeshi infants; Measured milk and nutrient intake
marginally nourished mothers based on nutritional status; not
corrected for insensible water loss
Swedish infants Estimated breast milk and formula
intake; no corrections for insensible
water loss among breast-fed infants;
estimated frequency of feeding
Swedish infants Estimated breast milk and formula
intake based on nutritional status; no
corrections for insensible water loss
among breast-fed infants
NA Simulated distribution of breast milk
intake based on data from Dewey
1991a; estimated percent of breast-fed
infants under 12 months of age
NA Summarizes current state-of-knowledge
on breast milk volume, composition
and breast-feeding populations
8 j
! ta
Co
A,
I
& .
>Q h
s 5
Kil
I
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-14. Confidence in Breast Milk Intake Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the population
• Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
All key studies are from peer review literature. High
Papers are widely available from peer review journals. High
Methodology used was clearly presented. High
The focus of the studies was on estimating breast milk intake. High
Subpopulations of the U.S. were the focus of all the key studies. High
All the studies were based on primary data. High
Studies were conducted between 1980-1986. Although incidence of breast Medium
feeding may change with time, breast milk intake among breastfed infants
may not.
Infants were not studied long enough to fully characterize day to day Medium
variability.
Methodology uses changes in body weight as a surrogate for total ingestion. Medium
This is the best methodology there is to estimate breast milk ingestion.
Mothers were instructed in the use of infant scales to minimize measurement
errors. Three out of the 5 studies corrected data for insensible water loss.
The sample sizes used in the key studies were fairly small (range 13-73).
Population is not representative of the U.S.; only mid-upper class, well Low
nourished mothers were studied. Socioeconomic factors may affect the
incidence of breastfeeding. Mother's nourishment may affect milk production.
Not very well characterized. Infants under 1 month not captured, mothers Low
committed to breast feeding over 1 year not captured.
Bias in the studies was not characterized. Three out of 5 studies corrected for Low
insensible water loss. Not correcting for insensible water loss may
underestimate intake. Mothers selected for the studies were volunteers;
therefore response rate does not apply. Population studied may introduce
some bias in the results (see above).
All mothers were well educated and trained in the use of the scale which Medium
helped minimize measurement error.
There are 5 key studies. High
There is good agreement among researchers. High
Studies were well designed. Results were consistent. Sample size was fairly Medium
low and not representative of U.S. population or population of nursing
mothers. Variability cannot be characterized due to limitations in data
collection period.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
14-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-15. Breast Milk Intake Rates Derived From Key Studies
Mean (mL/day)
Age: 1 Month
600
729
747
673
weighted avg = 702
Age: 3 Months
833
702
712
782
788
weighted avg = 759
Age: 6Months
682
744
896
747
weighted avg = 765
Age: 9 Months
600
627
avg = 622
Age: 12 Months
391
435
weighted avg = 427
12-MONTH TIME WEIGHTED AVERAGE
688
Upper Percentile (mL/day)
N (mean plus 2 standard
deviations)
11 918
37 981
13 1,095
16 1,057
1,007'
2
37 923
12 934
16 1,126
73 1,046
1,025'
1
13 978
11 1,140
60 1,079
l,059a
12 1,027
50 1,049
1,038
9 877
42 923
900
Range 900-1,059
(middle of the range 980)
Reference
Paoetal., 1980
Butteetal., 1984
Neville et al., 1988
Dewey and Lonnerdal,
Paoetal., 1980
Butteetal., 1984
Neville et al., 1988
Dewey and Lonnerdal,
Dewey etal., 1991b
Paoetal., 1980
Neville et al., 1988
Dewey and Lonnerdal,
Dewey etal., 1991b
Neville et al., 1988
Dewey etal., 1991b
Neville et al., 1988
1983
1983
1983
Dewey etal., 1991a; 1991b
" Middle of the range.
Page
14-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 14 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 14-16. Summary of Recommended Breast Milk and Lipid Intake Rates
Age
Breast Milk
1-6 Months
12 Month Average
Lipids"
<1 Year
Mean
742 mL/day
688 mL/day
26.0 mL/day
Upper Percentile
1,033 mL/day
980 mL/day
40.4 mL/day
a The recommended value for the lipid content of breastmilk is 4. 0 percent.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 14-15
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
15. ACTIVITY FACTORS 1
15.1. ACTIVITY PATTERNS 1
15.1.1. Key Activity Pattern Studies 1
15.1.2. Relevant Activity Pattern Studies 7
15.2. OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY 11
15.2.1. Background 11
15.2.2. Key Occupational Mobility Studies 11
15.3. POPULATION MOBILITY 12
15.3.1. Background 12
15.3.2. Key Population Mobility Studies 13
15.3.3. Relevant Population Mobility Studies 15
15.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 15
15.4.1. Recommendations for Activity Patterns 15
15.4.2. Recommendations: Occupational Mobility 17
15.4.3. Recommendations: Population Mobility 17
15.4.4. Summary of Recommended Activity Factors 18
15.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 15 18
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
15. ACTIVITY FACTORS
In calculating exposure, a person's average daily
dose is determined from a combination of variables
including the pollutant concentration, exposure duration,
and frequency of exposure (Sexton and Ryan, 1987). These
variables can be dependent on human activity patterns and
time spent at each activity and/or location. A person's total
exposure can be predicted using indirect approaches such
as computerized mathematical models. This indirect
approach of predicting exposure also requires activity
patterns (time use) data. Thus, individual or group
activities are important determinants of potential exposure
because toxic chemicals introduced into the environment
may not cause harm to an individual until an activity is
performed subjecting the individual to contact with those
contaminants. An individual's choice on how to spend time
will vary according to their occupation, hobbies, culture,
location, gender, age, and personal preferences.
Educational level attained and socioeconomic status also
influence chosen activities and their duration.
The purpose of this section is to describe published
time use studies that provide information on activities in
which various individuals engage, length of time spent
performing various activities, locations in which individuals
spend time and length of time spent by individuals within
those various microenvironments. According to Robinson
and Thomas (1991), microenvironments refer to a
combination of activities and locations that yield potential
exposures. Information on time spent in specific
occupations and residing in specific areas also is included
in this section.
This section summarizes data on how much time
individuals spend doing various activities and in various
microenvironments. These data cover a wide scope of
activities and populations. The following table (Table 15-
1) should be used as a guide to locating the information
relevant to activities and microenvironments of concern.
Assessors can consider using these data to develop
exposure duration estimates for specific exposure scenarios.
Available studies are grouped as key or relevant studies.
The classifications of these studies are based on the
applicability of their data to exposure assessments. All
tables that provide data from these studies are presented at
the back of this chapter.
15.1. ACTIVITY PATTERNS
The purpose of this section is to describe published
time use studies that provide information on time-activity
patterns of the national population and various sub-
populations in the U. S. The studies involve survey designs
where time diaries were used to collect information on the
time spent at various activities and locations for children,
adolescents, and adults, and to collect certain demographic
and socioeconomic data. Available studies on time-activity
data are summarized in the following sections. It should be
noted that other site-limited studies, based on small sample
sites, are available, but are not presented in this section.
The studies presented in this section are ones believed to be
the most appropriate for the purpose of the handbook.
Activity pattern studies are presented in Sections 15.1.1 and
15.1.2.
15.1.1. Key Activity Pattern Studies
Timmer et al. (1985) - How Children Use Time -
Timmer et al. (1985) conducted a study using the data
obtained on children's time use from a 1981-1982 Panel
study. This study was a follow-up of households from a
previous survey conducted in 1975-76. The 922
respondents in the 1981-82 study were those who had
completed at least three out of four waves of interview in
the 1975 - 1976 survey. Timmer et al. (1985) conducted
the survey during February through December 1981, and
households were contacted four times during a 3 month
interval of the survey period. The first contact was a
personal interview, followed by subsequent telephone
interviews for most of the respondents. However, families
with children were contacted personally and questionnaires
were administered to a maximum of three children per
household.
The children surveyed were between the ages of 3
and 17 years and were interviewed twice. The
questionnaires administered to children had two
components: a time diary and a standardized interview. The
time diary involved children reporting their activities
beginning at 12.00 a.m. the previous night; the duration and
location of each activity; the presence of another individual;
and whether they were performing other activities at the
same time. The standardized interview administered to the
children was to gather information about their
psychological, intellectual (using reading comprehension
tests), and emotional well-being; their hopes and goals;
their family environment; and their attitudes and beliefs.
For preschool children, parents provided information
about the child's previous day's activities. Children in first
through third grades completed the time
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-1
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
diary with their parents assistance and, in addition,
completed reading tests. Children in fourth grade and
above provided their own diary information and participated
in the interview. Parents were asked to assess their
children's socioemotional and intellectual development. A
survey form was sent to a teacher of each school-age child
to evaluate each child's socioemotional and intellectual
development. The activity descriptor codes used in this
study were developed by luster et al. (1983). The activity
codes and descriptors used for the adult time diaries in both
surveys are presented in Appendix Table 15A-1.
The mean time spent performing major activities on
weekdays and weekends by age and sex, and type of day is
presented in Table 15-2. On weekdays, children spend
about 40 percent of their time sleeping, 20 percent in
school, and 10 percent eating, washing, dressing, and
performing other personal activities (Timmer et al., 1985).
The data in Table 15-2 indicates that girls spend more time
than boys performing household work and personal care
activities, and less time playing sports. Also, children
spend most of their free time watching television. Table 15-
3 presents the mean time children spend during weekdays
and weekends performing major activities by five different
age groups. Also, the significant effects of each variable
(i.e., age, sex) are shown in Table 15-3. Older children
spend more time performing household and market work,
studying and watching television, and less time eating,
sleeping, and playing. Timmer et al. (1985) estimated that
on the average, boys spend 19.4 hours a week watching
television and girls spend 17.8 hours per week performing
the same activity.
A limitation associated with this study is that the data
do not provide overall annual estimates of children's time
use since the data were collected only during the time of the
year when children attend school and not during school
vacation. Another limitation is that a distribution pattern of
children's time use was not provided. In addition, the
survey was conducted in 1981 so there is a potential that
activity patterns in children may have changed significantly
from that period to the present. Therefore, application of
these data for current exposure situations may bias exposure
assessments results. An advantage of this survey is that
diary recordings of activity patterns were kept and the data
obtained were not based completely on recall. Another
advantage is that because parents assisted younger children
with keeping their diaries and with interviews, any bias that
may have been
created by having younger children record their data should
have been minimized.
James and Knuiman (1987) - An Application of
Bayes Methodology to the Analysis of Diary Records from
a Water Use Study - In 1987, James and Knuiman provided
a distribution of the amount of time (1-20 minutes) spent
showering by individuals in households located in Australia.
The distribution presented in the study of James and
Knuiman was based on diary records of 2,500 households.
James and Knuiman (1987) reported that 50 additional
households provided data for shower durations exceeding
20 minutes, but were excluded from their analysis because
specific values over 20 minutes were not reported. Using
the data of James and Knuiman, a cumulative frequency
distribution was derived for the handbook, based on the
2,550 households and is presented in Table 15-3. Based on
the results in Table 15-3, approximate showering times are
7 minutes for the median value, 13 minutes for the 90th
percentile, 16 minutes for the 95th percentile, and >20
minutes for the 99th percentile. The mean shower length is
approximately 8 minutes using the shower durations of 1 to
20 minutes.
A mean value could not be calculated using the data
for the 50 households that reported showering time >20
minutes. However, if a 30 minute showering time was
assumed for the >20 minutes duration, the mean value
would be 8.5 minutes as compared to a mean of 8 minutes
if these households are excluded. Therefore, including the
50 additional households would give a similar mean and the
results at the upper end of the distribution would not be
affected.
A limitation of the study is that the data are from
households in Australia and may not be representative of
U.S. households. An advantage is that it presents
cumulative distribution data.
Robinson and Thomas (1991) - Time Spent in
Activities, Locations, and Microenvironments: A
California-National Comparison - Robinson and Thomas
(1991) reviewed and compared data from the 1987-88
California Air Resources Board (CARB) time activity study
and from a similar 1985 national study, American's Use of
Time. Data from the national study were recorded similarly
to the CARB code categories, in order to make data
comparisons (Robinson and Thomas, 1991).
The CARB study involved residents who lived in the
state of California. One adult 18 years or older was
randomly sampled in each household and was asked to
complete a diary with entries for the previous day's
Page
15-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
activities and the location of each activity. Time use
patterns for other individuals 12 years and older in the
households contacted were also included in the diaries.
Telephone interviews based on the random-digit-dialing
(ROD) procedure were conducted for approximately 1,762
respondents in the GARB survey. These interviews were
distributed across all days of the week and across different
months of the year (between October 1987-August 1988).
In the 1985 National study, single day diaries were
collected from over 5,000 respondents across the U.S., 12
years of age and older. The study was conducted during
January through December 1985. Three modes of time
diary collection were employed for this survey: mailback,
telephone interview, and personal interview. Data obtained
from the personal interviews were not used in this study
(Robinson and Thomas, 1991). The sample population for
the mail-back and telephone interview was selected based
on a RDD method. The RDD was designed to represent all
telephone households in the contiguous United States
(Robinson and Thomas, 1991). In addition to estimates of
time spent at various activities and locations, the survey
design provided information on the employment status, age,
education, race, and gender for each member of the
respondent's household. The mail-back procedure was
based on a "tomorrow" approach, and the telephone
interview was based on recall. In the "tomorrow" approach,
respondents know, and agree ahead of time, that they will be
keeping a diary (Robinson and Thomas, 1991).
Data comparisons by Robinson and Thomas (1991)
were based on 10 major activity categories (100 sub-
category codes) and 3 major locations (44 sub-location
codes) employed in both the GARB and the 1985 national
study. In order to make data comparisons, Robinson and
Thomas (1991) excluded responses from individuals of
ages 65 years and older and 18 years or younger in both
surveys. In addition, only mail-back responses were
analyzed for the 1985 national study. The data were then
weighted to project both the California and national
population in terms of days of the week, region, numbers of
respondents per household, and 3 monthly seasons of the
year (Robinson and Thomas, 1991).
Table 15-5 shows the mean time spent in the 10
major activities by gender and for all respondents between
the ages of 18-64 years (time use data for the individual
activities are presented in Appendix Table 15A-2). In both
studies respondents spent most of their time (642 mins/day)
on personal needs and care (i.e., sleep).
Califomians spent more time on paid work, education and
training, obtaining goods and services, and communication,
and less time on household work, child care, organizational
activities, entertainment/social activities, and recreation
than the national population. The male and female
population closely followed the same trends as the general
population. Table 15-6 shows the mean time spent at 3
major locations for the CARB and national study grouped
by total sample and gender, ages 18-64 years (time use data
for the 44 detailed microenvironments are presented in
Appendix Table 15A-3). Respondents spent most of their
time at home, 892 minutes/day for the CARB and 954
minutes/day for the national study. Califomians spent more
of their time away from home and traveling compared to the
national population.
In addition, Robinson and Thomas (1991) defined a
set of 16 microenvironments based on the activity and
location codes employed in both studies. The analysis
included data for adolescents (12-17 years) and adults (65
years and older) in both the CARB study and the mail-back
portion of the 1985 national study (Robinson and Thomas,
1991). The mean duration of time spent in locations for
total sample population, 12 years and older, across three
types of locations is presented in Table 15-7 for both
studies. Respondents spent most of their time indoors,
1255 and 1279 minutes/day for the CARB and national
study, respectively.
Table 15-8 presents the mean duration of time and
standard mean error for the 16 microenvironments grouped
by total sample population and gender. Also included is the
mean time spent for respondents ("Doers") who reported
participating in each activity. Table 15-8 shows that in both
studies men spend more time in work locations,
automobiles and other vehicles, autoplaces (garages), and
physical outdoor activities, outdoor sites. In contrast,
women spend more time cooking, engaging in other kitchen
activities, performing other chores, and shopping. The
same trends also occur on a per participant basis.
Table 15-9 shows the mean time spent in various
microenvironments grouped by type of the day (weekday or
weekend) in both studies. Generally, respondents spent
most of their time during the weekends in restaurants/bars
(CARB study), motor vehicles, outdoor activities, social-
cultural settings, leisure/communication activities, and
sleeping. Microenvironmental differences by age are
presented in Table 15-10. Respondents in the age groups
18-24 years and 25-44 years spent most of their time in
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-3
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
restaurants/bars and traveling. The oldest age group, 65
years and older, spent most of their time in the kitchen
(cooking and other kitchen related activities) and in
communication activities.
Limitations associated with the Robinson and
Thomas (1991) study are that the GARB survey was based
on recall and the survey was performed in California only.
Therefore, if applied to other populations, the data set may
be biased. Another limitation is that time distribution
patterns (statistical analysis) were not provided for both
studies. Also, the data are based on short term studies. An
advantage of this study is that the 1985 national study
represents the general U.S. population. Also, the 1985
national study provides time estimates by activities,
locations, and microenvironments grouped by age, gender,
and type of day. Another advantage is that the data were
compared and that, overall, both data sets showed similar
patterns of activity (Robinson and Thomas, 1991).
Wiley et al. (1991) - Study of Children's Activity
Patterns - The California children's activity pattern survey
design provided time estimates of children (under 12 years
old) in various activities and locations (microenvironments)
on a typical day (Wiley et al., 1991). The sample
population, which consisted of 1,200 respondents
(including children under 12 years of age and adult
informants residing in the child's household), was selected
using Waksberg RDD methods from English-speaking
households. One child was selected from each household.
If the selected child was 8 years old or less, the adult in the
same household who spent the most time with the child
responded. However, if the selected child was between 9
and 11 years old, that child responded. The population was
also stratified to provide representative estimates for major
regions of the state. The survey questionnaire included a
time diary which provided information on the children's
activity and location patterns based on a 24-hour recall
period. In addition, the survey questionnaire included
questions about potential exposure to sources of indoor air
pollution (i.e., presence of smokers) on the diary day and
the socio-demographic characteristics (i.e., age, gender,
marital status of adult) of children and adult respondents.
The questionnaires and the time diaries were administered
via a computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI)
technology (Wiley et al., 1991). The telephone interviews
were conducted during April 1989 to February 1990 over
four seasons: Spring (April-June 1989), Summer (July-
September 1989), Fall (October-December 1989), and
Winter (January-February 1990).
The data obtained from the survey interviews
resulted in ten major activity categories, 113 detailed
activity codes, 6 major categories of locations, and 63
detailed location codes. The average time respondents spent
during the 10 activity categories for all children are
presented in Table 15-11. Also included in this table are
the detailed activity, including its code, with the highest
mean duration of time; the percentage of respondents who
reported participating in any activity (percent doing); and
the mean, median, and maximum time duration for "doers."
The dominant activity category, personal care (night sleep
being the highest contributor), had the highest time
expenditure of 794 mins/day (13.2 hours/day). All
respondents reported sleeping at night, resulting in a mean
daily time per participant of 794 mins/day spent sleeping.
The activity category "don't know" had a duration of about
2 mins/day and only 4 percent of the respondents reported
missing activity time.
Table 15-12 presents the mean time spent in the 10
activity categories by age and gender. Differences in
activity patterns for boys and girls tended to be small.
Table 15-13 presents the mean time spent in the 10 activity
categories grouped by seasons and California regions.
There were seasonal differences for 5 activity categories:
personal care, educational activities, social/entertainment,
recreation, and communication/ passive leisure. Time
expenditure differences in various regions of the State were
minimal for childcare, work-related activities, shopping,
personal care, education, social life, and recreation.
Table 15-14 presents the distribution of time across
six location categories. The participation rates (percent) of
respondents, the mean, median, and maximum time for
"doers." The detailed location with the highest average time
expenditure are also shown. The largest amount of time
spent was at home (1,078 minutes/day); 99 percent of
respondents spent time at home (1,086 minutes/
participant/day). Tables 15-15 and 15-16 show the average
time spent in the six locations grouped by age and gender,
and season and region, respectively. There are age
differences in time expenditure in educational settings for
boys and girls (Table 15-15). There are no differences in
time expenditure at the six locations by regions, and time
spent in school decreased in the summer months compared
to other seasons (Table 15-16). Table 15-17 shows the
average potential exposure time children spent in proximity
to tobacco smoke, gasoline fumes, and gas oven fumes
grouped by age and gender. The sampled children spent
more time closer to tobacco smoke (77
Page
15-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
mins/day) than gasoline fumes (2 mins/day) and gas oven
fumes (11 mins/day).
A limitation of this study is that the sampling
population was restricted to only English-speaking
households; therefore, the data obtained does not represent
the diverse population group present in California. Another
limitation is that time use values obtained from this survey
were based on short-term recall (24-hr) data; therefore, the
data set obtained may be biased. Other limitations are: the
survey was conducted in California and is not representative
of the national population, and the significance of the
observed differences in the data obtained (i.e., gender, age,
seasons, and regions) were not tested statistically. An
advantage of this study is that time expenditure in various
activities and locations were presented for children grouped
by age, gender, and seasons. Also, potential exposures of
respondents to pollutants were explored in the survey.
Another advantage is the use of the CATI program in
obtaining time diaries, which allows automatic coding of
activities and locations onto a computer tape, and allows
activities forgotten by respondents to be inserted into its
appropriate position during interviewing (Wiley et al,
1991).
U.S. EPA (1992) - Dermal Exposure Assessment:
Principles and Applications - U.S. EPA (1992) addressed
the variables of exposure time, frequency, and duration
needed to calculate dermal exposure as related to activity.
The reader is referred to the document for a detailed
discussion of these variables in relation to soil and water
related activities. The suggested values that can be used for
dermal exposure are presented in Table 15-18. Limitations
of this study are that the values are based on small data sets
and a limited number of studies. An advantage is that it
presents default values for frequency and duration for use in
exposure assessments when specific data are not available.
Tsang and Klepeis (1996) - National Human
Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) - The National Human
Activity Pattern Survey was conducted by the U.S. EPA
(Tsang and Klepeis, 1996). It is the largest and most
current human activity pattern survey available (Tsang and
Klepeis, 1996). Data for 9,386 respondents in the 48
contiguous United States were collected via minute-by-
minute 24-hour diaries between October 1992 and
September 1994. Detailed data were collected for a
maximum of 82 different possible locations, and a
maximum of 91 different activities. Participants were
selected using a Random Digit Dial (RDD) method and
Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI). The
response rate was 63 percent, overall. If the chosen
respondent was a child too young to interview, an adult in
the household gave a proxy interview. Each participant was
asked to recount their entire daily routine from midnight to
midnight immediately previous to the day that they were
interviewed. The survey collected information on duration
and frequency of selected activities and of the time spent in
selected microenvironments. In addition, demographic
information was collected for each respondent to allow for
statistical summaries to be generated according to specific
subgroups of the U.S. population (i.e., by gender, age, race,
employment status, census region, season, etc.). The
participants' responses were weighted according to
geographic, socioeconomic, time/season, and other
demographic factors to ensure that results were
representative of the U.S. population. The weighted sample
matches the 1990 U.S. census population for each gender,
age group, census region, and the day-of-week and seasonal
responses are equally distributed. Saturdays and Sundays
were over sampled to ensure an adequate weekend sample.
The data presented are a compilation of 24-hour
diary locations, activities, and follow-up exposure questions
based on exposure-related events (personal, exposure,
household characteristics, medical background) (Tsang and
Klepeis, 1996). Data presented are reported in the form of
means, percentages of time spent, and percentages of
respondent occurrences. The diary data are useful for
obtaining national representative distributions of time spent
in a large variety of activities and locations in a single day
(Tsang and Klepeis, 1996). According to Tsang and
Klepeis (1996), the 24-hour diaries in the NHAPS are
useful in probabilistic modeling (Monte-Carlo) that
provides frequency distributions of exposure. Overall
survey results indicate that for time spent in
microenvironments, the largest overall percentage of time
was spent in residential-indoors (67 percent), followed by
time spent outdoors (8 percent), and then time spent in
vehicles (5 percent) (Tsang and Klepeis, 1996). Tables 15-
19 through 15-146 provide data from the NHAPS study.
NHAPS data on the time spent in selected activities are
presented in Tables 15-19 through 15-92. NHAPS data on
the time spent in selected microenvironments are presented
in Tables 15-93 to 15-139 and of these tables, Tables 15-66
through 15-139 present 24-hour cumulative statistics
(mean, minimum, maximuim, and percentiles) data for time
spent in various activities and in various
microenvironments.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-5
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Tables 15-19 through 15-32 provide
information on the frequency and duration of
taking baths, frequency of taking showers, and
on the amount of time spent in the shower or
bathroom after completion of the activity.
Table 15-33 provides the frequency for washing
the hands in a day.
Tables 15-34 through 15-36 present
information on time spent by persons working
with or being near foods while being grilled or
barbecued; working with or near open flames;
and working or being near excessive dust in the
air.
Tables 15-37 through 15-39 provide data for
the number of times a vehicle was started in a
garage or carport and if started with the door
closed; and for time spent at a gas station or
repair shop.
Tables 15-40 through 15-42 present
information on the number of times windows
and doors were opened and the number of
minutes they were left open at home while the
respondent was at home.
Tables 15-43 through 15-47 provide data for
time spent in heavy traffic either running,
walking, standing, or in a vehicle; and for time
spent in indoor and outdoor parking lots and
garages.
Tables 15-48 through 15-50 present
information for time spent working for pay;
working at different times of day; and for the
amount of that time was spent working
outdoors.
Tables 15-51 through 15-56 provide
information for number of times of performing
household tasks in a day such as vacuuming,
and washing dishes and clothes in a residence.
Tables 15-57 through 15-64 present data for
number of times per day and the duration for
playing in sand, gravel, and dirt; and for
working in circumstances where one comes in
contact with soil such as in a garden.
Tables 15-65 through 15-67 provide
information on the frequency of swimming in a
fresh water swimming pool and the amount of
time spent swimming during a 1 -month period.
Tables 15-68 through 15-87 present statistics
for time spent in various major categories.
They are as follows: Paid Work (main job);
Household Work (food preparation and
cleanup, cleaning house, clothes care); Child
Care (indoor and outdoor playing); Obtaining
Goods and Services (car repair); Personal
Needs and Care (sleeping/napping); Free Time
and Education (school); and Recreation (active
sports, exercise, outdoor recreation).
Tables 15-88 through 15-94 provide statistics
for time spent in various activities that are the
results of regrouping/combining activities
described in Tables 15-68 through 15-87.
Because the occurrences in some major
categories were too small to conduct analyses,
these categories were regrouped into broader
categories so that new categories could be
developed with a larger number of occurrences
(Tsang and Klepeis, 1996). This regrouping
was performed to create a better data set for
estimating exposure activities from the
available data (Tsang and Klepeis, 1996).
Tables 15-95 through 15-103 provide
cumulative statistics for time spent in various
indoor microenvironments such as repair
shops/gas stations; bar/ night club/bowling
alley; and at school.
Tables 15-104 through 15-112 present
statistical data for time spent in various outdoor
locations. These tables include data for
locations such as schoolgrounds/ playground;
parking lots; construction sites; parks and golf
courses; and farms.
Page
15-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
• Tables 15-113 through 15-120 present statistics
fortune spent in various locations in the home.
Data are presented for the number of minutes
spent in the kitchen, bathroom, bedroom,
garage, basement, utility room or laundry room;
in the outdoor pool or spa; and in the yard or
other areas outside the house.
• Tables 15-121 through 15-130 provide data on
time spent traveling and for traveling in various
types of vehicles; and for time spent walking.
• Tables 15-131 through 15-140 provide
statistics for total time spent indoors at home
(categories regrouped/combined based on
various data described in Tables 15-95 through
15-130), including all rooms; outdoors at home;
traveling inside a vehicle; outdoors near a
vehicle; outdoors other than near a residence; in
an office or factory; in malls and other stores; in
various public buildings; in bars, restaurants,
etc.; and outdoor locations such as auto repair
shops and laundromats.
• Table 15-141 provides the number of minutes
spent in an activity or microenvironment where
a smoker was present.
• Tables 15-142 and 15-143 present data for time
spent smoking in a day.
Tables 15-144 through 15-148 provide
information for time spent smoking selected
tobacco products such as cigars, cigarettes, and
pipe tobacco.
Advantages of the NHAPS dataset are that it is
representative of the U.S. population and it has been
adjusted to be balanced geographically, seasonally, and for
dayAime. Also, it is representative of all ages, gender, and
is race specific. A disadvantage of the study is that means
cannot be calculated for time spent over 60, 120, and 181
minutes in selected activities. Therefore, actual time spent
at the high end of the distribution for these activities cannot
be captured.
15.1.2. Relevant Activity Pattern Studies
Robinson - Changes in Americans' Use of Time:
1965-1975 (1977) - Robinson (1977) compared time use
data obtained from two national surveys that were
conducted in 1965-1966 and in 1975. Each survey used the
time-diary method to collect data. The 1965-66 survey
excluded people in the following categories: (a) Non-
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (non-SMSA)
(designation of Census Bureau areas having no city with
more than 50,000 population); (b) households where no
adult members were in the labor force for at least 10 hours
per week; (c) age 65 and over; and (d) farm-related
occupations (Robinson, 1977). The 1,244 respondents in
the 1965-66 study included either employed men and
women or housewives (Robinson, 1977). The survey was
conducted between November-December 1965 and March-
April 1966. Respondents recorded their daily activities in
time diaries by using the "tomorrow" approach. In this
approach, diaries were kept on the day following the
interviewer's initial contact. The interviewer then made a
second call to the respondent to determine if the information
in diaries were correct and to obtain additional data. Only
one person per household was interviewed. The survey was
designed to obtain information on time spent with family
members, time spent at various locations during activities,
and performing primary and secondary activities.
A similar study was conducted in 1975 from October
through December. Unlike the 1965-1966 survey, the 1975
survey included rural areas, farmers, the unemployed,
students, and retirees. Time diary data were collected using
the "yesterday" approach. In this approach, interviewers
made only one contact with respondents (greater than 1500)
and the diaries were filled out based on a 24-hour recall
(Robinson, 1977). Time diary data were also collected
from the respondents' spouses.
In both surveys, the various activities were coded
into 96 categories, and then were combined into five major
categories. Free-time activities were grouped into 5 sub-
categories (Appendix Table 15A-2). In order to compare
data obtained from both surveys, Robinson (1977) excluded
the same population groups in the 1975 survey that were
excluded in the 1965-66 survey (i.e., farmers, rural
residents).
Results obtained from the surveys were presented by
gender, age, marital and employment status, race, and
education. Robinson (1977) reported the data collected in
hours/week; however, the method for converting daily
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
activities to hours/week were not presented. Table 15-149
shows the differences in time use by gender, employment,
and marital status for five major activity categories and five
subcategories for 1965 and 1975. Time spent on work
related activities (i.e., work for pay and family care) was
lower in 1975 than in 1965 for employed men and women.
Table 15-149 also shows that there was an overall increase
in free time activities for all the six groups. The difference
in time use in 1965 and 1975 are presented by age,
education, and race in Tables 15-150, 15-151, and 15-152,
respectively. These tables include data for students and
certain employed respondents that were excluded in Table
15-148 (Robinson, 1977). In 1975, the eldest group (ages
56-65 years) showed a decline in paid work, and an
increase in family care, personal care and sleep (Table 15-
150). Education level comparisons across the ten-year
interval indicated that the less educated had a decrease in
paid work and an increase in sleep and personal care; the
most educated had an increase in work time and a decrease
in other leisure (Table 15-151). For racial comparisons,
Blacks spent less time at paid work than Whites across the
ten-year interval (Table 15-152). Table 15-152 also shows
that Blacks spent more time than Whites at free time
activities in 1975.
A limitation of the study survey design is that time
use data were gathered as social indicators. Therefore, the
activity categories presented may not be relevant in
exposure assessments. Another limitation is that statistical
analysis of the data set was not provided. Additional
limitations are that the time use data are old and the data
may not reflect recent changes in time use. The 1965 and
1975 data sets excluded certain population groups and,
therefore, may not be entirely representative of the U.S.
population. Another limitation is that these are short-term
studies and may not necessarily represent long-term activity
patterns. An advantage of this study is that time use data
were presented by age, gender, race, education level, and
employment and marital status. Another advantage is that
earlier investigations on the study method (24-hr recall)
employed in the 1965 study revealed no systematic biases
in reported activities (Robinson, 1977). Robinson (1977)
also noted that the time-diary method provides a "zero-sum"
measure (i.e., since there are only 24 daily hours or 168
weekly hours, if time on one activity increases then time on
another activity must decrease).
Juster et al. (1983) - 1975-1981 Time Use
Longitudinal Panel Study - The Time Allocation
longitudinal study of the U. S. population began as part of a
multinational project with the first survey conducted in
1965-66. A second national time use survey was conducted
in 1975-1976 and another in 1981 (Juster et al. 1983).
Juster et al. (1983) provided study descriptions of the
second and third surveys. The surveys included a
probability sample of the adult population (18 years and
older) and children between the ages of 3 and 17 years in
the United States. In both surveys, time use was measured
from 24-hour recall diaries administered to respondents and
their spouses. The 1975-1976 survey involved four waves
of interview: wave 1, October-November 1975; wave 2,
February 1976; wave 3, May-June 1976; wave 4,
September 1976. The first wave was a personal interview
and the other three waves were telephone interviews. The
1975-1976 survey sample consisted of 2,300 individuals,
and of that sample, 1,519 respondents. Four recall diaries
(one from each wave of interviews) were obtained from 947
respondents, with data on time use measures for two
weekdays, one Saturday and one Sunday. The survey was
designed to gather information for: employment status;
earnings and other income; "consumption benefits for
activities of respondents and their spouses;" health,
friendships and associations of the respondents; stock
technology available to the household, house repair, and
maintenance activities of the family; division of labor in
household work and related attitudes; physical
characteristics of the respondents housing structure, net
worth and housing values; job characteristics; and
characteristics of mass media usage on a typical day (Juster
etal, 1983).
The 1981 survey was a follow-up of respondents and
spouses who had completed at least three waves of
interview in the 1975-1976 survey. For the 1981 survey,
920 individuals were eligible. The survey design was
similar to the 1975-1976 survey, however in this survey, the
adult population was 25 years and older and consisted of
620 respondents. Four waves of interviews were conducted
between February -March 1981 (wave 1), May - June 1981
(wave 2), September 1981 (wave 3), and November -
December (wave 4). The 1981 survey included the
respondents' children between the ages of 3 and 17 years.
The survey design for children provided information on
time use measures from two time diary reports: one school
day and one non-school day. In addition, information for
academic achievement measures,
Page
15-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
school and family life measures, and ratings from the
children's teachers were gathered during the survey.
luster et al. (1983) did not report the time use data
obtained for the 1975-1976 survey or the 1981 survey.
These data are stored in four tape files and can be obtained
from the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social
Research (ICPSR) in Michigan. The response rate for the
first wave of interview (1975-76 survey) based on the
original sample population was 66 percent, and response
rates for the subsequent waves ranged from 42 percent
(wave 4) to 50 percent (wave 2). In the 1981 survey, the
response rate based on eligible respondents was 67 percent
for the first interview, and ranged from 54 percent (wave 4)
to 60 percent (wave 2) in the subsequent interviews (luster
et al., 1983). The 1975-1976 survey included 87 activities.
In the 1981 survey, these 87 activities were broken down
into smaller components, resulting in 223 activities (luster
et al., 1983). The activity codes and descriptors used for
the adult time diaries in both surveys are presented in
Appendix Table 15A-3.
A limitation of this study is that the surveys were not
designed for exposure assessment purposes. Therefore, the
time use data set may be biased. Another limitation is that
time use data collected were based on a 24-hour diary
recall. This may somewhat bias the data set obtained from
this survey. An advantage associated with this survey is that
it provides a database of information on various human
activities. This information can be used to assess various
exposure pathways and scenarios associated with these
activities. Also, some of the data from these surveys were
used in the studies conducted by Timmer et al. (1985) and
Hill (1985). In addition, the activity descriptor codes
developed in these studies were used by Timmer et al
(1985), Hill (1985), and Robinson and Thomas (1991).
These studies are presented in Sections 15.1.1 and 15.1.2.
Another advantage of this survey is that the data are based
on a national survey and conducted over a one year period,
resulting in a seasonally balanced survey and one
representative of the U.S. population.
Hill (1985) - Patterns of Time Use - Hill (1985)
investigated the total amount of time American adults spend
in one year performing various activities and the variation
in time use across three different dimensions: demographic
characteristics, geographical location, and seasonal
characteristics. In this study, time estimates were based on
data collected from time diaries in four waves (1 per
season) of a survey conducted in the fall of 1975
through the fall of 1976 for the 1975-1976 Time Allocation
Study. The sampling periods included two weekdays, one
Saturday and one Sunday. The 1975-1976 Time Allocation
Study provided information on the amount of time spent
performing primary activities. The information gathered
were responses to the survey question "What were you
doing?" The survey also provided information on secondary
activities (i.e., respondents performing more than one
activity at the same time). Hill (1985) analyzed time
estimates for 10 broad categories of activities based on data
collected from 87 activities. These estimates included
seasonal variation in time use patterns and comparisons of
time use patterns for different days of the week. The 10
major categories and ranges of activity codes are listed in
Appendix Table 15A-4. Hill (1985) collected data on time
use for the major activity patterns in four different age
groups (18-24, 25-44, 45-64, and 65 years and older).
However, the time use data were summarized in graphs
rather than in tables.
Analysis of the 1975-76 survey data revealed very
small regional differences in time use among the broad
activity patterns (Hill, 1985). The weighted mean hours per
week spent performing the 10 major activity categories
presented by region are shown in Table 15-153. In all
regions, adults spent more time on personal care (included
night sleep). Adults in the North Central region of the
country spent more time on market work activities than
adults in other regions of the country. Adults in the South
spent more time on leisure activities (passive and active
combined) than adults elsewhere (Table 15-153). Table
15-154 presents the time spent per day, by the day of the
week for the 10 major activity categories. Time spent on
the 87 activities (components of the 10 major categories)
are presented in Appendix Table 15A-5. Adult time use
was dominated in descending order by personal care
(including sleep), market work, passive leisure, and house
work. Collectively, these activities represent about 80
percent of available time (Hill, 1985).
According to Hill (1985), sleep was the single most
dominant activity averaging about 56.3 hours per week.
Television watching (passive leisure) averaged about 21.8
hours per week, and housework activities averaged about
14.7 hours per week. Weekdays were predominantly
market-work oriented. Weekends (Saturday and Sunday)
were predominantly devoted to household tasks ("sleeping
in," socializing, and active leisure) (Hill, 1985). Table 15-
155 presents the mean time spent performing these 10
groups of activities during each wave of interview (fall,
winter, spring, and summer). Adjustments
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-9
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
were made to the data to assure equal distributions of
weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays (Hill, 1985). The data
indicates that the time periods adults spent performing
market work, child care, shopping, organizational activities,
and active leisure were fairly constant throughout the year
(Hill, 1985). The mean hours spent per week in performing
the 10 major activity patterns are presented by gender in
Table 15-156 (time use patterns for all 87 activities are
presented in Appendix Table 15A-6). Table 15-156
indicates that time use patterns determined by data collected
for the mid-1970's survey show gender differences. Men
spent more time on activities related to labor market work
and education, and women spent more time on household
work activities.
A limitation associated with this study is that the time
data were obtained from an old survey conducted in the
mid-1970s. Because of fairly rapid changes in American
society, applying these data to current exposure assessments
may result in some biases. Another limitation is that time
use data were not presented for children. An advantage of
this study is that time diaries were kept and data were not
based on recall. The former approach may result in a more
accurate data set. Another advantage of this study is that the
survey is seasonally balanced since it was conducted
throughout the year and the data are from a large survey
sample.
Sell (1989) - The Use of Children's Activity Patterns
in the Development of a Strategy for Soil Sampling in West
Central Phoenix - In a report prepared for the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality, Sell (1989)
investigated the activity patterns of preschool and school
age children in the west central portion of Phoenix known
as Mary vale. The survey was conducted in two parts: (1)
most of the school age children were interviewed personally
from May through June, 1989 in three schools; and
(2) survey questionnaires were mailed to parents of
preschool children.
In the first survey, 15 percent of the total school
population (2,008) was sampled with 111 children in
grades K-6 participating (response rate of 37 percent). The
surveyed population was 53.2 percent male and 46.8
percent female. Of this population, 41 percent were
Hispanics, 49.5 percent Anglos, 7.2 percent Blacks, and 1.7
percent Asians. The children interviewed were between the
ages of 5 and 13 years. Within each school, the children in
grades K-6 were stratified into two groups, primary (grades
K-3) and intermediate (grades 4-6), and children were
selected randomly from each group. Children in grades K-2
were either interviewed in school
or at home in the presence of a parent or an adult care-
provider. In the course of the interview, children were
asked to identify locations of activity areas, social areas (i.e.,
places they went with friends), favorite areas, and locations
of forts or clubhouses. Aerial photographs were used to
mark these areas.
The second survey involved only preschool children.
Parents completed questionnaires which provided
information on the amount of time their children spent
outdoors, outdoor play locations, favorite places, digging
areas, use of park or playgrounds, and swimming or wading
locations. This survey was conducted between June-July
1989. One thousand (1,000) parents were sampled, but
only 211 questionnaires were usable out of 886
questionnaires received resulting in a response rate for the
preschool's survey of about 24 percent. The sample
population consisted of children 1 month and up to
preschool age. Of this population, 53 percent were Anglos,
18 percent Hispanics, 2 percent Blacks, and 3 percent
Asians.
The survey design considered the kinds of activities
children engaged in, but not the amount of time children
spent in each activity. Therefore, Sell (1989) presented the
data obtained from the survey in terms of percent of
respondents who engaged in specific activities or locations.
A summary of percent responses of the preschool and
school-age children's activities at various locations in the
Maryvale study areas are presented in Table 15-157. Also
included in this table is a ranking of children's play locations
based on other existing research works. Based on the
survey data, Sell (1989) reported that the median time
preschool children spent outdoors on weekdays was 1 -2
hours, and on weekends the median time spent outdoors
was 2-5 hours. Most of these children played outside in
their own yards, and some played in other people's yards or
parks and playgrounds (Sell, 1989).
Limitations associated with this study are that the
survey design did not report the time spent in various
activities or locations and the response rates obtained from
the surveys were low and, therefore, may result in biased
data. In addition, because the survey was conducted in
Arizona, the surveyed population does not represent the
children's population on a national basis. Advantages of
this study are that it provides data on various activities
children engage in and locations of these activities, and
provides for time spent outdoors. This information is useful
in determining exposure pathways to toxic pollutants for
children.
Page
15-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Tarshis (1981) - The Average American Book -
Tarshis (1981) compiled a book addressing the habits,
tastes, lifestyles, and attitudes of the American people in
which he reported data on time spent in personal grooming.
The data presented are gathered from small surveys, the
Newspaper Advertising Bureau, and magazines. Tarshis
reported frequency and percentage data by gender and age
for grooming activities such as showering and bathing as
follows:
• 90 percent take some sort of a bath in an average
24-hour period;
• 5 percent average more than 1 shower or bath a
day;
• 75 percent of men shower, 25 percent take baths;
• 50 percent of women take showers, 50 percent
take baths;
• 65 percent of teenage girls 16-19 shower daily;
• 55 percent of teenage girls take at least one bath a
week;
• 50 percent of women use an additive in their bath
every time they bathe;
• People are more likely to shower than bathe if they
are young and have higher income; and
• Showering is more popular than bathing in large
cities.
Limitations of this study are that the data are
compiled from other sources, and that the data are old; it is
possible that these data may not reflect the current trends of
the general population. An advantage of the study is that it
presents frequency data that are useful in exposure
assessment, especially concerning volatilization of
chemicals from water.
AIHC (1994) - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
activity factors data presented in the Sourcebook are similar
to that in this handbook. The AIHC Sourcebook uses
tenure data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (1987),
while this handbook uses more recent data (Carey, 1988)
and provides general and specific recommendations for
various age groups. Distributions were derived using data
presented in U. S. EPA (1989) version of this handbook, the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (1987), and various other
references. Distribution data and/or recommendations are
presented for time in one residence, residential occupancy,
time spent indoors/outdoors, hours at home/away from
home for adults and children, hours at work for adults,
working tenure, and shower duration. For each distribution,
the @Risk formula is provided for
direct use in the @Risk software (Palisade, 1992). The
Sourcebook has been classified as a relevant rather than a
key study because it is not the primary source for the data
used to make recommendations. It is a relevant source of
alterative information.
15.2. OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY
15.2.1. Background
The amount of time spent in different types of
occupations may affect the duration and/or magnitude of
exposures to contaminants specific to those occupations.
For example, an individual who spends an entire lifetime as
a farmer may experience a longer duration of exposure to
certain contaminants, especially pesticides, than individuals
who have indoor occupations. Also, individual exposures
to specific chemicals in the work place may be significantly
reduced when individuals change jobs. Work place
exposures among women may be of shorter duration than
among men because women's careers may be interrupted by
home and family responsibilities. The key studies presented
in the following section provide occupational tenure for
workers grouped by age, race, gender, and employment
status.
15.2.2. Key Occupational Mobility Studies
Carey (1988) - Occupational Tenure in 1987:
Many Workers Have Remained in Their Fields - Carey
(1988) presented median occupational and employer tenure
for different age groups, gender, earnings, ethnicity, and
educational attainment. Occupational tenure was defined as
"the cumulative number of years a person worked in his or
her current occupation, regardless of number of employers,
interruptions in employment, or time spent in other
occupations" (Carey, 1988). The information presented
was obtained from supplemental data to the January 1987
Current Population Study, a U.S. Bureau of the Census
publication. Carey (1988) did not present information on
the survey design.
The median occupational tenure by age and gender,
ethnicity, and employment status are presented in Tables
15-158, 15-159, and 15-160, respectively. The median
occupational tenure of the working population (109.1
million people) 16 years of age and older in January of
1987, was 6.6 years (Table 15-158). Table 15-158 also
shows that median occupational tenure increased from 1.9
years for workers 16-24 years old to 21.9 years for workers
70 years and older. The median occupational tenure for
men 16 years and older was higher (7.9 years) than for
women of the same age group (5.4 years). Table
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-11
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
15-159 indicates that whites had longer occupational tenure
(6.7 years) than blacks (5.8 years), and Hispanics (4.5
years). Full-time workers had more occupational tenure
than part-time workers 7.2 years and 3.1 years, respectively
(Table 15-160).
Table 15-161 presents the median occupational
tenure among major occupational groups. The median
tenure ranged from 4.1 years for service workers to 10.4
years for people employed in farming, forestry, and fishing.
In addition, median occupational tenure among detailed
occupations ranged from 24.8 years for barbers to 1.5 years
for food counter and fountain workers (Appendix Table
15A-7).
The strength of an individual's attachment to a
specific occupation has been attributed to the individual's
investment in education (Carey, 1988). Carey (1988)
reported the median occupational tenure for the surveyed
working population by age and educational level. Workers
with 5 or more years of college had the highest median
occupational tenure of 10.1 years. Workers that were 65
years and older with 5 or more years of college had the
highest occupational tenure level of 3 3.8 years. The median
occupational tenure was 10.6 years for self-employed
workers and 6.2 years for wage and salary workers (Carey,
1988).
A limitation associated with this study is that the
survey design employed in the data collection was not
presented. Therefore, the validity and accuracy of the data
set cannot be determined. Another limitation is that only
median values were reported in the study. An advantage of
this study is that occupational tenure (years spent in a
specific occupation) was obtained for various age groups by
gender, ethnicity, employment status, and educational level.
Another advantage of this study is that the data were based
on a survey population which appears to represent the
general U.S. population.
Carey (1990) - Occupational Tenure, Employer
Tenure, and Occupational Mobility - Carey (1990)
conducted another study that was similar in scope to the
study of Carey (1988). The January 1987 Current
Population Study (CPS) was used. This study provided data
on occupational mobility and employer tenure in addition to
occupational tenure. Occupational tenure was defined in
Carey (1988) as the "the cumulative number of years a
person worked in his or her current occupation, regardless
of number of employees, interruptions in employment, or
time spent in other locations." Employer tenure was defined
as "the length of time a worker has been with the same
employer," while occupational
mobility was defined as "the number of workers who change
from one occupation to another" (Carey, 1990).
Occupational mobility was measured by asking individuals
who were employed in both January 1986 and January 1987
if they were doing the same kind of work in each of these
months (Carey, 1990). Carey (1990) further analyzed the
occupational mobility data and obtained information on
entry and exit rates for occupations. These rates were
defined as "the percentage of persons employed in an
occupation who had voluntarily entered it from another
occupation" and an exit rate was defined as "the percentage
of persons employed in an occupation who had voluntarily
left for a new occupation" (Carey, 1990).
Table 15-162 shows the voluntary occupational
mobility rates in January 1987 for workers 16 years and
older. For all workers, the overall voluntary occupational
mobility rate was 5.3 percent. These data also show that
younger workers left occupations at a higher rate than older
workers. Carey (1990) reported that 10 million of the
100.1 million individuals employed in January 1986 and in
January 1987 had changed occupations during that period,
resulting in an overall mobility rate of 9.9 percent.
Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations had
the highest entry rate of 5.3 percent, followed by
administrative support (including clerical) at 4.9 percent.
Sales had the highest exit rate of 5.3 percent and service
had the second highest exit rate of 4.8 percent (Carey,
1990). In January 1987, the median employer tenure for all
workers was 4.2 years. The median employee tenure was
12.4 years for those workers that were 65 years of age and
older (Carey, 1990).
Because the study was conducted by Carey (1990) in
a manner similar to that of the previous study (Carey,
1988), the same advantages and disadvantages associated
with Carey (1988) also apply to this data set.
15.3. POPULATION MOBILITY
15.3.1. Background
An assessment of population mobility can assist in
determining the length of time a household is exposed in a
particular location. For example, the duration of exposure
to site-specific contamination, such as a polluted stream
from which a family fishes or contaminated soil on which
children play or vegetables are grown, will be directly
related to the period of time residents live near the
contaminated site.
Information regarding population mobility is
compiled and published by the U.S. Bureau of the Census
(BOC). Banks, insurance companies, credit card
Page
15-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
companies, real estate and housing associations use
residence history information. However, usually this
information is confidential. Information compiled by the
BOC provides information about population mobility;
however, it is difficult to determine the average residence
time of a homeowner or apartment dweller from this
information. Census data provide representations of a
cross-section of the population at specific points in time, but
the surveys are not designed to follow individual families
through time. The most current BOC information about
annual geographical mobility and mobility by State is
summarized in Appendix 15B. Figure 15-1 graphically
displays the distribution of movers by type of move.
Available information was provided by the Oxford
Development Corporation, the National Association of
Realtors (NAR), and the BOC. According to Oxford
Development Corporation, a property management firm, the
typical residence time for an apartment dweller for their
corporation has been estimated to range from 18 to 30
months (S. Cameron Hendricks, Sales Department, Oxford
Development Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD, personal
communication with P. Wood (Versar) August 10, 1992).
15.3.2. Key Population Mobility Studies
Israeli and Nelson (1992) - Distribution and
Expected Time of Residence for U.S. Households - In risk
assessments, the average current residence time (time since
moving into current residence) has often been used as a
substitute for the average total residence time (time between
moving into and out of a residence) (Israeli and Nelson,
1992). Israeli and Nelson (1992) have estimated
distributions of expected time of residence for U.S.
households. Distributions and averages for both current and
total residence times were calculated for several housing
categories using the 1985 and 1987 BOC housing survey
data. The total residence time distribution was estimated
from current residence time data by modeling the moving
process (Israeli and Nelson, 1992). Israeli and Nelson
(1992) estimated the average total residence time for a
household to be approximately 4.6 years or 1/6 of the
expected life span (see Table 15-163). The maximal total
residence time that a given fraction of households will live
in the same residence is presented in Table 15-164. For
example, only 5 percent of the individuals in the "All
Households" category will live in the same residence for 23
years and 95 percent will move in less than 23 years.
The authors note that the data presented are for the
expected time a household will stay in the same residence.
The data do not predict the expected residence time for each
member of the household, which is generally expected to be
smaller (Israeli and Nelson, 1992). These values are more
realistic estimates for the individual total residence time,
than the average time a household has been living at its
current residence. The expected total residence time for a
household is consistently less than the average current
residence time. This is the result of greater weighting of
short residence time when calculating the average total
residence time than when calculating the average current
residence time (Israeli and Nelson, 1992). When averaging
total residence over a time interval, frequent movers may
appear several times, but when averaging current residence
times, each household appears only once (Israeli and
Nelson, 1992). According to Israeli and Nelson (1992), the
residence time distribution developed by the model is
skewed and the median values are considerably less than the
means (T), which are less than the average current
residence times.
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1993) - American
Housing Survey for the United States in 1991 - This
survey is a national sample of 55,000 interviews in which
collected data were presented owners, renters, Black
householders, and Hispanic householders. The data reflect
the number of years a unit has been occupied and represent
all occupied housing units that the residents' rented or
owned at the time of the survey.
The results of the survey pertaining to residence time
of owner/renter occupied units in the U.S. are presented in
Table 15-165. Using the data in Table 15-165, the
percentages of householders living in houses for specified
time ranges were determined and are presented in Table 15-
166. Based on the BOC data in Table 15-165, the 50th
percentile and the 90th percentile values were calculated for
the number of years lived in the householder's current
house. These values were calculated by apportioning the
total sample size (93,147 households) to the indicated
percentile associated with the applicable range of years
lived in the current home. Assuming an even distribution
within the appropriate range, the 50th and 90th percentile
values for years living in current home were determined to
be 9.1 and 32.7 years, respectively. These were then
rounded to 9 and 33 years. Based on the above data, the
range of 9 to 33 years is assumed to best represent a central
tendency estimate of length of residence and upper
percentile estimate of residence time, respectively.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-13
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chanter 15 - Activity Factors
Different County
Same State
18.5%
Different State
16.8%
Abroad
2.9%
Local Movers, Within
Same County
61.95%
Figure 15-1, Distribution of Individuals Moving by Type of Move: 1991-92,
Source: U.S Bureau of the Census, 1993
A limitation associated with the above analysis is
the assumption that there is an even distribution within the
different ranges. As a result, the 50th and 90th percentile
values may be biased.
Johnson and Capel (1992) - A Monte Carlo
Approach to Simulating Residential Occupancy Periods
and It's Application to the General U.S. Population -
Johnson and Capel developed a methodology to estimate
the distribution of the residential occupancy period (ROP)
in the national population. ROP denotes the time (years)
between a person moving into a residence and the time the
person moves out or dies. The methodology used a
Monte Carlo approach to simulate a distribution of ROP
for 500,000 persons using data on population, mobility,
and mortality.
The methodology consisted of six steps. The first
step defined the population of interest and categorized
them by location, gender, age, sex, and race. Next the
demographic groups were selected and the fraction of the
specified population that fell into each group was
developed using U.S, BOC data. A mobility table was
developed based on census data, which provided the
probability that a person with specified demographics did
not move during the previous year. The fifth step used
data on vital statistics published by the National Center
for Health Statistics and developed a mortality table
which provided the probability that individuals with
specific demographic characteristics would die during the
upcoming year. As a final step, a computer based
algorithm was used to apply a Monte Carlo approach to a
series of persons selected at random from the population
being analyzed.
Table 15-167 presents the results for residential
occupancy periods for the total population, by gender.
The estimated mean ROP for the total population was
11,7 years. The distribution was skewed (Johnson and
Capel, 1992): the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles were 4,
9, and 16 years, respectively. The 90th, 95th, and 99th
percentiles were 26, 33, and 47 years, respectively. The
mean ROP was 11.1 years for males and 12.3 years for
females, and the median value was 8 years for males and
9 years for females.
Page
15-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Descriptive statistics for subgroups defined by
current ages were also calculated. These data, presented by
gender, are shown in Table 15-168. The mean ROP
increases from age 3 to age 12 and there is a noticeable
decrease at age 24. However, there is a steady increase
from age 24 through age 81.
There are a few biases within this methodology that
have been noted by the authors. The probability of not
moving is estimated as a function only of gender and age.
The Monte Carlo process assumes that this probability is
independent of (1) the calendar year to which it is applied,
and (2) the past history of the person being simulated.
These assumptions, according to Johnson and Capel (1992),
are not entirely correct. They believe that extreme values
are a function of sample size and will, for the most part,
increase as the number of simulated persons increases.
15.3.3. Relevant Population Mobility Studies
National Association of Realtors (NAR) (1993) The
Home Buying and Selling Process - The NAR survey was
conducted by mailing a questionnaire to 15,000 home
buyers throughout the U.S. who purchased homes during
the second half of 1993. The survey was conducted in
December 1993 and 1,763 usable responses were received,
equaling a response rate of 12 percent (NAR, 1993). Of the
respondents, forty-one percent were first time buyers.
Home buyer names and addresses were obtained from
Dataman Information Services (DIS). DIS compiles
information on residential real estate transactions from more
than 600 counties throughout the United States using
courthouse deed records. Most of the 250 Metropolitan
Statistical Areas are also covered in the DIS data
compilation.
The home buyers were questioned on the length of
time they owned their previous home. Typical homebuyer
(41%) was found to have lived in their previous home
between 4 and 7 years (Table 15-169). The survey results
indicate that the average tenure of home buyers is 7.1 years
based on an overall residence history of the respondents
(NAR, 1993). In addition, the median length of residence
in respondents' previous homes was found to be 6 years (see
Table 15-170).
The distances the respondents moved to their new
homes were typically short distances. Data presented in
Table 15-171 indicate that the mean distances range from
230 miles for new home buyers and repeat buyers to 8 years
for first time buyers and existing home buyers. Seventeen
(17) percent of respondents purchased homes
over 100 miles from their previous homes and 49 percent
purchased homes less than 10 miles away.
Lehman (1994) - Homeowners Relocating at Faster
Pace - Lehman (1994) presents data gathered by the
Chicago Title and Trust Family Insurers. The data indicate
that, in 1993, average U.S. homeowners moved every 12
years. In 1992, homeowners moved every 13.4 years and
in 1991, every 14.3 years. Data from the U.S. Bureau of the
Census indicate that 7 percent of the owner population
moved in 1991. Based on this information, Lehman has
concluded that it would take 12 years for 100 percent of
owners to move. According to Lehman, Bill Harriett of the
U.S. Bureau of the Census has been said that 14 years is a
closer estimate for the time required for 100 percent of
home owners to move. An advantage of this study is that it
provides percentile data for the residential occupancy
period.
15.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
Assessors are commonly interested in a number of
specific types of time use data including time/frequencies
for bathing, showering, gardening, residence time, indoor
versus outdoor time, swimming, occupational tenure, and
population mobility. Recommendations for each of these
are discussed below. The confidence recommendations for
activity patterns is presented in Table 15-172.
15.4.1. Recommendations for Activity Patterns
Following are recommendations for selected
activities known to increase an individual's exposure to
certain chemicals. These activities are time spent indoors
versus outdoors and gardening, bathing and showering,
swimming, residential time spent indoors and outdoors, and
traveling inside a vehicle.
Time Spent Indoors Versus Outdoors and
Gardening - Assessors often require knowledge of time
individuals spend indoors versus outdoors. Ideally, this
issue would be addressed on a site-specific basis since the
times are likely to vary considerably depending on the
climate, residential setting (i.e., rural versus urban),
personal traits (i.e., age, health) and personal habits. The
following general recommendation is offered in the absence
of site-specific information. The key study by Robinson and
Thomas (1991) compares the time use values derived in the
GARB and National Studies; data are presented only for
persons 12 years and older. The time use values did not
differ significantly between the two studies and were
averaged to provide the following recommended values.
These values are applicable to
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-15
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
individuals 12 years and older. Approximately 21 hrs/day
are spent indoors; 1.5 hrs/day are spent outdoors, and 1.5
hrs/day are spent in a vehicle.
Activities can vary significantly with differences in
age. Special attention should be given to the activities of
populations under the age of 12 years. Timmer et al. (1985)
presented data on time spent in various activities for boys
and girls ages 3-11 years. The study focused on activities
performed indoors such as household work, personal care,
eating, sleeping, school, studying, attending church,
watching television, and engaging in household
conversations. The average times spent in each indoor
activity (and half the times spent in each activity which
could have occurred indoors or outdoors) were summed.
This procedure resulted in the following recommendations:
• Indoor activities accounted for about 78 percent of
the total time in weekdays and 70 percent total
time in weekend days. The corresponding times
spent indoors are 19 hrs/day for weekdays and 17
hrs/day on weekends.
• Outdoor activities accounted for about 22 percent
of children's time during weekdays and 30 percent
during the weekend. The corresponding times
spent outdoors are 5 hrs/day for weekdays and 7
hrs/day on weekends.
Assessors evaluating soil exposures are commonly
interested in data on gardening times and frequencies. No
data specific to time spent gardening could be found; thus,
no firm recommendation could be made. However, three
sets of data were found which indirectly relate to this issue
which the assessor can consider in deriving time estimates
for gardening:
• Robinson and Thomas (1991) estimated the time
spent in "other outdoor activities" (Table 15-8) as
1 hr/day. These data apply to populations 12 years
and older.
• Hill (1985) estimated that time spent in "house
work and/or yard work" (Table 15-153) as 2
hr/day. These data apply to adult populations.
• Tsang and Klepeis (1996) estimated that time
spent in the garden or other circumstances
working with soil for persons 18-64 years old
(Table 15-62) for the 90th, 95th, and 99th percentile
at 16, 40, and 200 hours/month, respectively.
U.S. EPA's Dermal Exposure Assessment
Document (1992) recommends, on the basis of judgement,
an event frequency for the adult gardener, working outside:
1 to 2 events/week during warmer months or about 40
events/year. An upper percentile value of 40 hours/month
is recommended based on Tsang and Klepeis (1996)
Baths and Showers - In the NHAPS study, 649 (~7
percent) of the total participants indicated either taking or
giving at least one bath in a day. Those 649 respondents
were subsequently asked the number of times they took or
gave a bath in one day. The majority, 459 of 649
respondents, recorded taking or giving one bath in a day.
These results are presented in Table 15-24. The
recommended bathing duration is 20 minutes. This is a
50th percentile value based on the NHAPS distribution
shown on Table 15-26; the reported 90th percentile value
is 45 minutes.
The recommended shower frequency of one shower
per day is based on the NHAPS data summarized in Table
15-19. This table showed that 3,594 of the 9,386 total
participants indicated taking at least one shower the
previous day. When asked the number of actual showers
taken the previous day, the reported results ranged from one
to ten showers; a majority (76 percent), of those 3,549
respondents, reported taking one shower the previous day.
The NHAPS data shown on Table 15-19, Table 15-24, and
Table 15-26 provide information grouped according to
gender, age, race, employment, education, day of the week,
seasonal conditions, and health conditions such as asthma,
angina, and bronchitis/emphysema.
Recommendations for showering duration are based
on the key study conducted by Tsang and Klepeis (1996).
A recommended value for average showering time is 10
minutes (Table 15-20) based on professional judgement.
This approximates the average showering value (8 minutes)
of James and Knuiman (1987) (Table 15-18). The
recommended 50th percentile value is 15 minutes, and the
95th percentile value is 35 minutes (Table 15-21).
Although these values are slightly higher than those of
James and Knuiman (1987), they are believed to be more
representative of U.S. households.
Swimming- Data for swimming frequency is taken
from the NHAPS Study (Tsang ad Klepeis, 1996). Of
9,386 participants, 653 (about 7 percent), answered yes to
Page
15-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
the question "in the past month, did you swim in a
freshwater pool?". The results to this question are
summarized in Table 15-65. The recorded number of times
respondents swam in the past month ranged from 1 to 60
with the greatest number of respondents, 147 (23 percent),
reporting they swam one time per month. Thus, the
recommended swimming frequency is one event/ month for
the general population. The recommended swimming
duration, 60 minutes per swimming event, is based on the
NHAPS distribution shown on Table 15-67. Sixty minutes
is based on the 50th percentile value; the 90th percentile
value is 180 minutes per swimming event (based on one
event/month); and the 99th percentile value is 181 minutes.
This value (181) indicates that more than 180 minutes were
spent.
In addition, users can obtain frequency and duration
data grouped according to gender, age, race, employment,
education, day of the week, and season. Frequency and
duration data is also available in Table 15-65 and Table 15-
67, for swimmer respondents reporting health conditions
such as asthma, angina, and bronchitis/ emphysema.
Residential Time Spent Indoors and Outdoors -
The recommendations for time spent indoors at one's
residence is 16.4 hours/day. This is based on the NHAPS
data summarized in Table 15-131 which records the 50th
percentile value of 985.0 minutes per day (16.4 hours/day);
and a 90th percentile value of 1,395 minutes per day (23.3
hours/day).
The recommended value for time spent outdoors at
one's residence is 2 hours per day based on Table 15-102
(generated by the NHAPS data). Values of 105 minutes per
day for the 50th percentile and 362 minutes per day for the
90th percentile are shown in Table 15-102.
Traveling Inside a Vehicle - The recommendation
for time spent in a vehicle is 1 hour and 20 minutes per day.
This recommendation is based on two studies and (1)
Robinson and Thomas (1991) and (2) The NHAPS data.
The Robinson and Thomas study evaluated two independent
studies, the GARB and the National Study. They
respectively reported mean durations for time spent in a
vehicle as 98 and 87 minutes per day which averages to 92
minutes per day or about 1.5 hours per day. The NHAPS
data, as summarized on Table 15-133, provide a 50th
percentile value of 70 minutes per day (or 1 hour and 10
minutes) and a 90th percentile value of 190 minutes per
day. Thus, the averaged value from these two studies is
about 1 hour and 20 minutes. NHAPS data is grouped
according to gender, race, age, employment status, census
region, day of the week, season, and health condition of
respondents.
15.4.2. Recommendations: Occupational Mobility
The median occupational tenure of the working
population (109.1 million people) ages 16 years of age and
older in January 1987 was 6.6 years (Carey, 1988). Since
the occupational tenure varies significantly according to age
it is recommended to use the age dependent values
presented in Carey's 1988 study (Table 15-158). When age
cannot be determined, it is recommended to use the median
tenure value of 6.6 years for working men and women 16
years and older. For persons 70 years and older, a tenure
value of 21.9 years is recommended for a working lifetime.
A value of 30.5 years and 18.8 years is recommended for
men and women, respectively. Part-time employment, race
and the position held are important to consider in
determining occupational tenure. The ratings indicating
confidence in the occupational mobility recommendations
are presented in Table 15-173. It should be noted that the
recommended values are not for use in evaluating job
tenure. These data can be used for determining time spent
in an occupation and not for time spent at a specific j ob site.
15.4.3. Recommendations: Population Mobility
There are three key studies from which the
population mobility recommendations were derived: Israeli
and Nelson (1992), U.S. Bureau of the Census (1993) - and
Johnson and Capel (1992). Each study used a unique
approach to estimate the length of time a person resides in
a household. The respective approaches were to (1)
average current and total residence time; (2) model current
residence time; and (3) determine the residential occupancy
period. A summary of the approaches used and values
recommended by each of these studies is presented in Table
15-174.
The three studies provide residence time estimates
that are very similar to the 9 year (50th percentile) and 30
year (95th percentile). Tables 15-163 and 15-164 show
residence times for different types of residences and are
recommended where assessors are interested in specific
types of residences. The ratings indicating confidence in the
population mobility recommendations is presented in Table
15-175.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-17
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
15.4.4. Summary of Recommended Activity Factors
Table 15-176 includes a summation of the
recommended activity pattern factors presented in this
section and the studies which provided data on the specific
activities. The type of activities include indoor activities,
outdoor activities, time inside a vehicle, taking a bath or
shower, swimming, working at a specific occupation, and
residing in a particular location.
15.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 15
AIHC. (1994) Exposure factors sourcebook.
Washington, DC. American Industrial Health
Council.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1987) Most occupational
exposures are voluntary. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Labor.
Carey, M. (1988) Occupational tenure in 1987: Many
workers have remained in their fields. Monthly Labor
Review. October 1988. 3-12.
Carey, M. (1990) Occupational tenure, employer tenure,
and occupational mobility. Occupational Outlook
Quarterly. Summer 1990: 55-60.
Hill, M.S. (1985) Patterns of time use. In: luster, F.T.;
Stafford, P.P., eds. Time, goods, and well-being. Ann
Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Survey Research
Center, Institute for Social Research, pp. 133-166.
Israeli, M; Nelson, C.B. (1992) Distribution and
expected time of residence for U. S. households. Risk
Anal. 12(l):65-72.
James, I.R.; Knuiman, M.W. (1987) An application of
Bayes methodology to the analysis of diary records
from a water use study. J. Am. Sta. Assoc.
82(399):705-711.
Johnson, T. and Capel, J. (1992) A monte carlo
approach to simulating residential occupancy periods
and its application to the general U.S. population.
Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality and
Standards.
Juster, F.T.; Hill, M.S.; Stafford, P.P.; Parsons, IE.
(1983) Study description. 1975-1981 time use
longitudinal panel study. Ann Arbor, MI: The
University of Michigan, Survey Research Center,
Institute for Social Research.
Juster, F.T. (1985) A note on recent changes in time use.
In: Juster, F.T.; Stafford, P.P.; eds. Time, goods, and
well-being. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan,
Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research.
pp. 313-330.
Lehman, H.J. (1994) Homeowners relocating at faster
pace. Virginia Homes Newspaper, Saturday, June 15,
P. El.
National Association of Realtors (NAR). (1993) The
homebuying and selling process: 1993. The Real
Estate Business Series. Washington, DC: NAR.
Palisade. (1992) @Risk users guide. Newfield, NY:
Palisade Corporation.
Robinson, J.P. (1977) Changes in Americans' use of
time: 1965-1975. A progress report. Cleveland, OH:
Cleveland State University, Communication Research
Center.
Robinson, J.P; Thomas, J. (1991) Time spent in
activities, locations, and microenvironments: a
California-National Comparison Project report. Las
Vegas, NV: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory.
Sell, J. (1989) The use of children's activity patterns in
the development of a strategy for soil sampling in
West Central Phoenix. The Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality, Phoenix, Arizona.
Sexton, K; Ryan, P.B. (1987) Assessment of human
exposure to air pollution: methods, measurements,
and models. In: Watson, A.; Bates, R.R.; Kennedy,
D., eds. Air pollution, the automobile and public
health: research opportunities for quantifying risk.
Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences
Press.
Spencer, G. (1989) Proj ections of the populations of the
United States by age, sex, and race: 1988 to 2080.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of the Census. Series, P-25, No. 1018.
Tarshis, B. (1981) The "Average American" book. New
York, NY: New American Library, p. 191.
Timmer, S.G.; Eccles, J.; O'Brien, K. (1985) How
children use time. In: Juster, F.T.; Stafford, P.P.; eds.
Time, goods, and well-being. Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan, Survey Research Center,
Institute for Social Research, pp. 353-380.
Tsang, A.M.; Klepeis, N.E. (1996) Results tables from a
detailed analysis of the National Human Activity
Pattern Survey (NHAPS) response. Draft Report
prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency by Lockheed Martin, Contract No. 68-W6-
001, Delivery Order No. 13.
Page
15-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1993) American Housing Wiley, J.A.; Robinson, IP.; Cheng, Y.; Piazza, T.; Stork,
Survey forthe United States in 1991. Washington, L.; Plasden, K. (1991) Study of children's activity
DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. patterns. California Environmental Protection
U. S. Bureau of the Census. (1993) Geographical Agency, Air Resources Board Research Division.
mobility: March 1991 to March 1992. Current Sacramento, CA.
population reports P.20-473.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Exposure factors handbook.
Washington, DC: Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment. EPA/600/08-89/043.
U.S. EPA. (1992) Dermal exposure assessment:
principles and applications. Washington, DC: Office
of Health and Environmental Assessment. EPA No.
600/8-91-01 IB. Interim Report.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15-19
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-1. Time Use Table Locator Guide
Percentile
Averages
Distribution
Distribution
Averages
Averages
Averages
Averages
Averages
Averages
Distribution
Averages
Averages
Distribution
Averages
Distribution
Averages
Average
Averages
Averages
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Averages
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Basis
Activity
Activity
Showering
Activity
Activity
Microenvironment
Microenvironment
Microenvironment
Activity
Activity
Activity by season
Microenvironment
Microenvironment
Microenvironment by
season
Microenvironment near
pollutant
Bathing and swimming
Activity by employment
Occupational Tenure by
race and gender
Occupational Tenure by
employment and gender
Occupational Tenure by
employment
Occupational Mobility by
age
Population Mobility by
locale
Residence Time by
region, setting
Residence Time by
region, setting
Residence Time by year
moved in
Residence Time by years
in current home
Residence Time by
gender
Residence Time by age
Residence Time by years
in previous house
Residence Time by tenure
in previous home
Relocation Distance
Population
Children 3- 17 yrs
Children and Teens
Adults
Adults 18-64 yrs
Adults 18-64 yrs
Adults 18-64 yrs
Children and Adult
Children and Adults
Infants and Children
Infants and Children
Infants and Children
Infants and Children
Infant and Children
Infants and Children
Infant and Children
Adults
Adults
Teens and Adults
Teens and Adults
Teens and Adults
Teens and Adults
All ages
All ages
All ages
All ages
All ages
All ages
All ages
All ages
All ages
All ages
Application
National
National
Foreign-Australia
National
Regional-CA
National/Regional-CA
Regional-California
National
Regional-California
Regional-California
Regional-California
Regional-California
Regional-California
Regional-California
Regional-California
Regional-National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
Studv
Timmeretal., 1985
Timmeretal., 1985
James and Knuiman, 1987
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
Robinson and Thomas, 1991
Robinson and Thomas, 1991
Robinson and Thomas, 1991
Robinson and Thomas, 1991
Robinson and Thomas, 1991
Wiley etal., 1991
Wiley etal., 1991
Wiley etal., 1991
Wiley etal., 1991
Wiley etal., 1991
Wiley etal., 1991
Wiley etal., 1991
USEPA, 1992
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
Robinson, 1977
Carey, 1988
Carey, 1988
Carey, 1988
Carey, 1990
Census, 1993
Israeli and Nelson, 1992
Israeli and Nelson, 1992
Census, 1993
Census, 1993
Johnson and Capel, 1992
Johnson and Capel, 1992
NAR, 1993
NAR, 1993
NAR, 1993
Table
15-2
15-3
15-4
15-24
15-5
15-5
15-6
15-7 to 15-10
15-7 to 15-10
15-11
15-12
15-13
15-14
15-15
15-16
15-17
15-18
15-22, 15-63
15-147
15-157
15-158
15-159
15-160
Figure 15-1
15-161
15-162
15-163
15-164
15-165
15-166
15-167
15-168
15-169
Page
15-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-2. Mean Time Spent (minutes) Performing Major Activities Grouped by Age, Sex and Type of Day
Activity
Age (3-11 years)
Duration of Time (mins/day)
Weekdays Weekends
Market Work
Household Work
Personal Care
Eating
Sleeping
School
Studying
Church
Visiting
Sports
Outdoors
Hobbies
Art Activities
Playing
TV
Reading
Household Conversations
Other Passive Leisure
NAa
Percent of Time Accounted for
by Activities Above
Boys
(n=118)
16
17
43
81
584
252
14
7
16
25
10
3
4
137
117
9
10
9
22
94%
Girls
(n=lll)
0
21
44
78
590
259
19
4
9
12
7
1
4
115
128
7
11
14
25
92%
Boys
(n=118)
7
32
42
78
625
-
4
53
23
33
30
3
4
177
181
12
14
16
20
93%
Girls
(n=lll)
4
43
50
84
619
-
9
61
37
23
23
4
4
166
122
10
9
17
29
89%
Age (12- 17 years)
Duration of Time (mins/day)
Weekdays Weekends
Boys
(n=77)
23
16
48
73
504
314
29
3
17
52
10
7
12
37
143
10
21
21
14
93%
Girls
(n=83)
21
40
71
65
478
342
37
7
25
37
10
4
6
13
108
13
30
14
17
92%
Boys
(n=77)
58
46
35
58
550
-
25
40
46
65
36
4
11
35
187
12
24
43
10
88%
Girls
(n=83)
25
89
76
75
612
-
25
36
53
26
19
7
9
24
140
19
30
33
4
89%
a NA = Unknown
Source: Timmer et al., 1985.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-21
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-3. Mean Time Spent (minutes) in Major Activities Grouped by Type of Day
for Five Different Age Groups
Time Duration (mins)
Weekday
Age (years)
Activities
Market Work
Personal Care
Household Work
Eating
Sleeping
School
Studying
Church
Visiting
Sports
Outdoor activities
Hobbies
Art Activities
Other Passive Leisure
Playing
TV
Reading
Being read to
NA
3-5
-
41
14
82
630
137
2
4
14
5
4
0
5
9
218
111
5
2
30
6-8
14
49
15
81
595
292
8
9
15
24
9
2
4
1
111
99
5
2
14
9-11
8
40
18
73
548
315
29
9
10
21
8
2
3
2
65
146
9
0
23
12-
14
14
56
27
69
473
344
33
9
21
40
7
4
3
6
31
142
10
0
25
15-17
28
60
34
67
499
314
33
3
20
46
11
6
12
4
14
108
12
0
7
3-5
-
47
17
81
634
-
1
55
10
3
8
1
4
6
267
122
4
3
52
Weekend
6-8
4
45
27
80
641
-
2
56
8
30
23
5
4
10
180
136
9
2
7
9-11
10
44
51
78
596
-
12
53
13
42
39
3
4
7
92
185
10
0
14
12-14
29
60
72
68
604
-
15
32
22
51
25
8
7
10
35
169
10
0
4
15-17
48
51
60
65
562
-
30
37
56
37
26
3
10
18
21
157
18
0
9
Significant
Effects3
A,S,AxS (F>M)
A,S, AxS (F>M)
A
A
A
A
A (Weekend only)
A,S (M>F)
A
A,S (M>F)
A,S, AxS (M>F)
A
A
A
a Effects are significant for weekdays and weekends, unless otherwise specified A = age effect, P<0.05, for both weekdays and weekend
activities; S = sex effect P<0.05, F>M, M>F = females spend more time than males, or vice versa; and AxS = age by sex interaction,
P<0.05.
Source: Timmeretal.
1985.
Page
15-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-4. Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Average
Shower duration (minutes)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
<20
Shower Duration for 2,550 Households
Cumulative frequency (percentage)
0.2
0.8
3.1
9.6
22.1
37.5
51.6
62.5
72.0
79.4
84.5
88.4
90.6
92.3
93.7
94.9
95.7
96.7
97.6
98.0
100.0
Source: Adapted from James and Knuiman, 1987.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-23
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-5. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by Total Sample
and Gender for the CARB and National Studies (age 18-64 years)
Time Duration (mins/day)
Activity Category3 Activity CARB National CARB
Codes (1987-88) (1985) (1987-88)
National
(1985)
Total Sample Men Women Men Women
nc= 1,359 n= 1,980 n = 639 n = 720 n = 921 n= 1,059
Paid Work 00-09 273
Household Work 10-19 102
Child Care 20-29 23
Obtaining Goods and 30-39 61
Services
Personal Needs and Care 40-49 642
Education and Training 50-59 22
Organizational Activities 60-69 12
Entertainment/Social 70-79 60
Activities
Recreation 80-89 43
Communication 90-99 202
252
118
25
55
642
19
17
62
50
196
346
68
12
48
630
25
11
57
53
192
200
137
36
73
655
20
13
55
31
214
323
79
11
44
636
21
12
64
69
197
190
155
43
62
645
16
20
62
43
194
a,b Time use for components of activity categories and codes are shown in Appendix Table 15A-6.
c n = total diary days.
Source: Robinson and Thomas, 1991
Table 15-6. Total Mean Time Spent at Three Major Locations Grouped by Total Sample and Gender
for the CARB and National Study (ages 18-64 years)
Location3 Code
CARB
(1987-88)
National
(1985)
Total Sample
nc=1359 nc=1980
At Home WC01-13
Away From Home WC2 1 -40
Travel WC51-61
Not Ascertained WC99
Total Time
892
430
116
2
1440
954
384
94
8
1440
CARB
(1987-88
Men
nc = 39
822
487
130
1
1440
)
Women
nc = 720
963
371
102
4
1440
National
(1985)
Men Women
nc = 921 nc=1059
886 1022
445 324
101 87
8 7
1440 1440
a,b Time use data for the 44 components of location and location codes are presented in Appendix Table 1 5 A-7.
c n = total diary days.
Source: Robinson and Thomas, 1991.
Page
15-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-7. Mean Time Spent at Three Locations for both CARB and
National Studies (ages 12 years and older)
Mean duration (mins/day)
Location Category CARB National
_ (n=1762)b _ S.E." _ (n = 2762)b _ S.E.
Indoor 1255C 28 1279C 21
Outdoor 86" 5 74d 4
In-Vehicle 9_8^ 4 87_^ 2
Total Time Spent 1440 1440
1 S.E. = Standard Error of Mean
b Weighted Number - National sample population was weighted to obtain a ratio of 46.5 males and 53.5 females, in equal
proportion for each day of the week, and for each quarter of the year.
c Difference between the mean values for the CARB and national studies is not statistically significant.
d Difference between the mean values for the CARB and national studies is statistically significant at the 0.05 level.
Source: Robinson and Thomas, 1991.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15-25
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-8. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Various Microenvironments Grouped by Total Population
and Gender (12 years and over) in the National and CARB Data
National Data
Mean Duration (mins/day) (standard error)3
Microenvironment
Autoplaces
Restaurant/bar
m-vehicle
In-Vehicle/other
Physical/outdoors
Physical/indoors
Work/study-residence
Work/study-other
Cooking
Other activities/kitchen
Chores/child
Shop/errand
Other/outdoors
Social/cultural
Leisure-eat/indoors
Sleep/indoors
N = 1284b
Men
5(1)
22(2)
92(3)
1(1)
24(3)
11(1)
17(2)
221 (10)
14(1)
54(3)
88(3)
23(2)
70(6)
71(4)
235 (8)
491 (14)
"Doer"c
Men
90
73
99
166
139
84
153
429
35
69
89
56
131
118
241
492
N = 1478b "Doer"
Women Women
1(0)
20(2)
82(3)
1(0)
11(2)
6(1)
15(2)
142 (7)
52(2)
90(4)
153(5)
38(2)
43(4)
75(4)
215 (7)
496(11)
35
79
94
69
101
57
150
384
67
102
154
74
97
110
224
497
N = 2762b
Total
3(0)
21(1)
87(2)
1(0)
17(2)
8(1)
16(1)
179 (6)
34(1)
73(2)
123 93)
31(1)
56(4)
73(3)
224(5)
494 (9)
"Doer"
Total
66
77
97
91
135
74
142
390
57
88
124
67
120
118
232
495
CARB Data
Mean Duration (mins/day) (standard error)"
Microenvironment
Autoplaces
Restaurant/bar
In-vehicle
In-Vehicle/other
Physical/outdoors
Physical/indoors
Work/study-residence
Work/study-other
Cooking
Other activities/kitchen
Chores/child
Shop/errand
Other/outdoors
Social/cultural
Leisure-eat/indoors
Sleep/indoors
N = 867b
Men
31(8)
45(4)
105 (7)
4(1)
25(3)
8(1)
14(3)
213(14)
12(1)
38(3)
66(4)
21(3)
95(9)
47(4)
223 (10)
492 (17)
"Doer"c
Men
142
106
119
79
131
63
126
398
43
65
75
61
153
112
240
499
N = 895b "Doer"
Women Women
9(2)
28(3)
85(4)
3(2)
8(1)
5(1)
11(2)
156(11)
42(2)
60(4)
134(6)
41(3)
44(4)
59(5)
251(10)
504(15)
50
86
100
106
86
70
120
383
65
82
140
78
82
114
263
506
N = 1762b
Total
20(4)
36(3)
95(4)
3(1)
17(2)
7(1)
13(2)
184(9)
27(1)
49(2)
100 (4)
31(2)
69(5)
53(3)
237(7)
498(12)
"Doer"
Total
108
102
111
94
107
68
131
450
55
74
109
70
117
112
250
501
a Standard error of the mean
b Weighted number
c Doer = Respondents who reported participating in each activity /location spent in microenvironments.
Source: Robinson and Thomas, 1991.
Page
15-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-9.
Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Various Microenvironments by Type
of Day for the California and National Surveys
(sample population ages 12 years and older)
Weekday
Microenvironment
1 Autoplaces
2 Restaurant/Bar
3 In- Vehicle/Internal Combustion
4 In- Vehicle/Other
5 Physical/Outdoors
6 Physical/Indoors
7 Work/Study-Residence
8 Work/Study-Other
9 Cooking
10 Other Activities/Kitchen
11 Chores/Child
12 Shop/Errand
13 Other/Outdoors
14 Social/Cultural
15 Leisure-Eat/Indoors
16 Sleep/Indoors
Mean Duration (standard error)"
CARB
(n=1259)c
21(5)
29(3)
90(5)
3(1)
14(2)
7(1)
14(2)
228(11)
27(2)
51(3)
99(5)
30(2)
67(6)
42(3)
230 (9)
490(14)
(mins/day)
NAT
(n=1973)c
3(1)
20(2)
85(2)
1(0)
15(2)
8(1)
16(2)
225 (8)
35(2)
73(3)
124 (4)
30(2)
51(4)
62(3)
211(6)
481(10)
Mean Duration for
(mins/day)
CARB
108
83
104
71
106
64
116
401
58
76
108
67
117
99
244
495
'Doer""
NAT
73
73
95
116
118
68
147
415
57
87
125
63
107
101
218
483
Weekend
Microenvironment
1 Autoplaces
2 Restaurant/Bar
3 In- Vehicle/Internal Combustion
4 In- Vehicle/Other
5 Physical/Outdoors
6 Physical/Indoors
7 Work/Study-Residence
8 Work/Study-Other
9 Cooking
10 Other Activities/Kitchen
11 Chores/Child
12 Shop/Errand
13 Other/Outdoors
14 Social/Cultural
15 Leisure-Eat/Indoors
16 Sleep/Indoors
1 Standard Error of Mean
b Doer = Respondent who reported
c Weighted Number
Mean Duration (standard error)"
CARB
(n=503)c
19(4)
55(6)
108 (8)
5(3)
23(3)
7(1)
10(2)
74(11)
27(2)
44(3)
103 (7)
35(4)
74(7)
79(7)
256(12)
520 (20)
(mins/day)
NAT
(n=789)c
3(1)
23(2)
91(6)
0(0)
23(4)
9(2)
15(3)
64(6)
34(2)
73(4)
120 (5)
35(3)
67(7)
99(6)
257(11)
525(17)
participating in each activity /location spent in
Mean Duration for
(mins/day)
CARB
82
127
125
130
134
72
155
328
60
71
114
81
126
140
273
521
microenvironments.
'Doer"b
NAT
62
84
100
30
132
80
165
361
55
90
121
75
132
141
268
525
Source: Robinson and Thomas, 1991.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-27
-------
oo
I
Table 15-10. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Various Microenvironments by Age Groups for the National and California
Microenvironment
Autoplaces
Restaurant/bar
In- vehicle/internal
combustion
In-vehicle/other
Physical/outdoors
Physical/indoors
Work/study-
residence
Work/study-other
Cooking
Other
activities/kitchen
Chores/child
Shop/errands
Other/outdoors
Social/cultural
Leisure-eat/indoors
Sleep/indoors
Surveys
National Data
Mean Duration (Standard Error]1
Age 12-17
years
N=340b
2(1)
9(2)
79(7)
0(0)
32(8)
15(3)
22(4)
159(14)
11(3)
53(4)
91(7)
26(4)
70(13)
87(10)
237(16)
548(31)
"Doer"0
73
60
88
12
130
87
82
354
40
64
92
68
129
120
242
551
Age 18-24 years
N=340
7(2)
28(3)
103 (8)
1(1)
17(4)
8(2)
19(6)
207 (20)
18(2)
42(3)
124 (9)
31(4)
34(4)
100(12)
181 (11)
511 (26)
"Doer"
137
70
109
160
110
76
185
391
39
55
125
65
84
141
189
512
Age 24-44 years
N=340
2(1)
25(3)
94(4)
1(0)
19(4)
7(1)
16(2)
220(11)
38(2)
70(4)
133 (6)
33(2)
48(6)
56(3)
200 (8)
479 (14)
"Doer"
43
86
101
80
164
71
181
422
57
86
134
66
105
94
208
480
Age 45-64
years
N=340
4(1)
19(2)
82(5)
1(1)
7(1)
7(2)
9(2)
180(13)
43(3)
90(6)
121 (6)
33(3)
60(7)
73(6)
238(11)
472 (15)
"Doer"
73
67
91
198
79
77
169
429
64
101
122
67
118
116
244
472
Age 65+ years
N=340
4(2)
20(5)
62(5)
1(1)
15(4)
7(1)
5(3)
35(6)
50(5)
108 (9)
119(7)
35(5)
82(13)
85(8)
303 (20)
507 (26)
"Doer"
57
74
80
277
81
51
297
341
65
119
121
69
140
122
312
509
Q
a a
^ TJ
-------
a g
45 J2
"t- S
l— 5
VO <*
vo ^
1=
I
Table 15-10. Mean Time Spent (minutes/ 'day) in Various Microenvironments by Age Groups (continued)
Microenvironment
Autoplaces
Restaurant/bar
In- vehicle/internal
combustion
In-vehicle/other
Physical/outdoors
Physical/indoors
Work/study-residence
Work/study-other
Cooking
Other activities/kitchen
Chores/child
Shop/errands
Other/outdoors
Social/cultural
Leisure-eat/indoors
Sleep/indoors
" Standard error.
CARB Data
Mean Duration (Standard Error]1
Age 12-17
years
N=183b
16(8)
16(4)
78(11)
1(0)
32(7)
20(4)
25(5)
196 (30)
3(1)
31(4)
72(11)
14(3)
58(8)
63 (14)
260 (27)
557 (44)
"Doer"0
124
44
89
19
110
65
76
339
19
51
77
50
78
109
270
560
Age 18-24
years
N=250
16(4)
40(8)
111(13)
3(1)
13(3)
5(2)
30(11)
201 (24)
14(2)
31(5)
79(8)
35(7)
80(15)
65(10)
211 (19)
506 (30)
"Doer"
71
98
122
60
88
77
161
344
40
55
85
71
130
110
234
510
b All N's are weighted number.
0 Doer = Respondents who reported participating in each activity /location spent
Source: Robinson and Thomas, 1991.
Age 24-44
years
N=749
25(9)
44(5)
98(5)
5(2)
17(3)
6(1)
7(2)
215(14)
32(2)
43(3)
1 10 (6)
33(4)
68(8)
50(5)
202 (9)
487 (17)
"Doer"
114
116
111
143
128
61
137
410
59
65
119
71
127
122
215
491
Age 45-64
years
N=406
20(5)
31(4)
100(11)
2(1)
14(3)
5(1)
10(3)
173 (20)
31(3)
62(6)
99(8)
32(3)
76(12)
50(5)
248(15)
485 (23)
"Doer"
94
82
117
56
123
77
139
429
68
91
109
77
134
107
261
491
Age 65+
years
N=158
9(2)
25(7)
63(8)
2(1)
15(4)
3(1)
5(3)
30(11)
41(7)
97(14)
123(15)
35(5)
55(7)
49(7)
386 (34)
502(31)
"Doer"
53
99
89
53
104
48
195
336
69
119
141
76
101
114
394
502
in microenvironments.
Q
I
ft ft
». ».
? •«
ft
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-11
Mean
Duration
Activity Category (mins/dav)
Work-related" 10
Household 53
Childcare < 1
Goods/Services 2 1
Personal Needs and Care0 794
Education" 110
Organizational Activities 4
Entertain/Social 1 5
Recreation 239
Communication/Passive 192
Leisure
Don't know/Not coded 2
All Activities' 1441
Mean Time (minutes/day) Children Spent in Ten Major
Activity Categories for All Respondents
Mean Median
Duration Duration
% for Doersb for Doer
Doing (mins/dav) (mins/dav)
25
86
< 1
26
100
35
4
17
92
93
4
39
61
83
81
794
316
111
87
260
205
41
30
40
30
60
770
335
105
60
240
180
15
" Includes eating at school or daycare, an activity not grouped under the "education activities"
b "Doers" indicate the respondents who reported participating in each activity category.
0 Personal care includes night sleepand daytime naps, eating, travel for personal care.
d Education includes student and other classes, homework, library, travel for education.
' Column total may not sum to 1440 due to rounding error
Source: Wilevetal., 1991.
Maximum
Duration
for Doers
(mins/dav)
405
602
290
450
1440
790
435
490
835
898
600
(codes 50-59,
Detailed Activity with
Highest Avg. Minutes
(code)
Eating at work/school/daycare (06)
Travel to household (199)
Other child care (27)
Errands (38)
Night sleep (45)
School classes (50)
Attend meetings (60)
Visiting with others (75)
Games (87)
TV use (91)
-
549).
Table 15-12. Mean Time Children Spent in Ten Major Activity Categories
Grouped by Age and Gender
Mean Duration (minutes/dav)
Activity
Category
Work-related
Household
Childcare
Goods/Services
Personal Needs and Care"
Education11
Organizational Activities
Entertainment/Social
Recreation
Communication/Passive
Leisure
Don't know/Not coded
All Activities0
Sample Sizes
Unweighted N's
0-2 yrs 3-5 yrs
4
33
0
20
914
60
1
3
217
187
1
1440
172
9
45
0
22
799
67
3
15
311
166
4
1441
151
Boys
6-8 yrs
14
55
0
19
736
171
7
5
236
195
1
1439
145
9- 11 yrs
12
65
1
14
690
138
6
34
229
250
1
1440
156
All
Ages
10
48
<1
19
792
106
4
13
250
197
2
1442
624
0-2 yrs
5
58
0
22
906
41
6
5
223
171
3
1440
141
3-5 yrs
12
44
0
25
816
95
1
16
255
173
1
1438
151
Girls
6-8 yrs
11
51
0
23
766
150
4
9
238
189
<1
1441
124
9- 11 yrs
10
76
4
22
701
176
6
36
194
213
3
1441
160
All
Ages
10
57
1
23
797
115
4
17
228
186
2
1440
576
" Personal needs and care includes night sleep and daytime naps, eating, travel for personal care.
b Education includes student and other classes, homework, library, travel for education.
c The column totals may differ from 1440 due to rounding error.
Source: Wilevetal., 1991.
Page
15-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table
15-13. Mean Time Children Spent in Ten Major Activity Categories
Grouped by Seasons and Regions
Mean Duration (minutes/day)
Activity Category
Work-related
Household
Childcare
Goods/Services
Personal Needs and
Care'
Education11
Organizational
Activities
Entertainment/Social
Recreation
Communication/Passi
ve Leisure
Don't know/Not
coded
All Activities0
Sample Sizes
(Unweighted)
Season
Winter
(Jan-Mar)
10
47
<1
19
799
124
3
14
221
203
<1
1442
318
Spring Summer
(Apr-June) (July-Sept)
10
58
1
17
774
137
5
12
243
180
2
6
53
<1
26
815
49
5
12
282
189
3
1439 1441
204
407
Fall
(Oct-Dec)
13
52
<1
23
789
131
3
22
211
195
<1
1441
271
All
Seasons
10
53
<1
21
794
110
4
15
239
192
2
1441
1200
So.
Coast
10
45
<1
20
799
109
2
17
230
206
1
1440
224
Region of California
Bay
Area
10
62
<1
21
785
115
6
10
241
190
1
1442
263
Rest of
State
8
55
1
23
794
109
6
16
249
175
3
1439
713
All
Regions
10
53
<1
21
794
110
4
15
239
192
2
1441
1200
" Personal needs and care includes night sleep and daytime naps, eating, travel for personal care.
B Education includes student and other classes, homework, library, travel for education.
0 The column totals may not be equal to 1440 due to rounding error.
Source: Wiley etal., 1991.
Table 15-14. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Major Location Categories for All Respondents (minutes/day)
Location Category
Home
School/Childcare
Friend's/Other's House
Stores, Restaurants, Shopping
Places
In-transit
Other Locations
Don't Know/Not Coded
All Locations
Mean
Duration
(mins)
1,078
109
80
24
69
79
<1
1.440
%
Doing
99
33
32
35
83
57
1
Mean Median
Duration Duration
for Doers for Doers
(mins) (mins)
1,086 1,110
330 325
251 144
69 50
83 60
139 105
37 30
Maximum
Duration for
Doers
(mins)
1,440
1,260
1,440
475
1,111
1,440
90
Detailed Location with Highest Avg.
Time
Home - bedroom
School or daycare facility
Friend's/other's house
Shopping mall
Traveling in car
Park, playground
-
- bedroom
Source: Wilevet al., 1991.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-31
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-15. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Location Categories Grouped by Age and Gender
Mean Duration (minutes/day)
Location Category
Home
School/Childcare
Friend's/Other's House
Stores, Restaurants,
Shopping Places
In-transit
Other Locations
Don't Know/Not Coded
All Locations"
Sample Sizes
(Unweighted)
0-2 yrs
1,157
86
67
21
54
54
<1
1,439
172
3-5 yrs
1,134
88
73
25
62
58
<1
1,440
151
Boys
6-8 yrs 9- 11 yrs
1,044 1,020
144 120
77 109
22 15
61 62
92 114
<1 <1
1,439 1,440
145 156
All
Boys 0-2 yrs
1,094 1,151
108 59
80 56
21 23
59 76
77 73
<1 <1
1,439 1,438
624 141
Girls
All
3-5 yrs 6-8 yrs 9- 11 yrs Girls
1,099 1,021 968 1,061
102 133 149 111
47 125 102 80
35 27 26 28
88 53 93 79
68 81 102 81
<1 <1 <1 <1
1,440 1,440 1,440 1,440
151 124 160 576
" The column totals may not sum to 1,440 due to rounding error.
Source: Wiley etal., 1991.
Table 15-16.
Mean Time Children Spent in Six Location Categories Grouped by Season and Region
Mean Duration (minutes/day)
Season Region of California
Location Category .... , _. ., _,, ... _ _ T^^J-AH
Winter Spring Summer Fall All So. Bay Rest of All
(Jan-Mar) (Apr-June) (July-Sept) (Oct-Dec) Seasons Coast Area State Regions
Home 1,
School/Childcare
Friend's/Other's House
Stores, Restaurants,
Shopping Places
In-transit
Other Locations
Don't Know/Not Coded
All Locations" 1,
Sample Sizes
(Unweighted N's)
" The column totals may not sum to
Source: Wiley etal., 1991.
091
119
69
22
75
63
<1
439
318
1,042 1,097
141 52
75 108
21 30
75 60
85 93
<1 <1
1,439 1,440
204 407
1,081 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078
124 109 113 103 108 109
69 80 73 86 86 80
24 24 26 23 23 24
65 69 71 73 63 69
76 79 79 76 81 79
<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
1,439 1,439 1,439 1,440 1,440 1,439
271 1,200 224 263 713 1,200
1,440 due to rounding error.
Page
15-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-17.
Potential
Exposures
Tobacco Smoke
Gasoline Fumes
Gas Oven Fumes
Sample Sizes
(Unweighted N's)
Mean Time Children Spent in Proximity to Three Potential Exposures Grouped by All Respondents, Age, and Gender
All
Children
77
2
11
1,166'
Mean Duration (minutes/day)
Boys
All
0-2 yrs 3-5 yrs 6-8 yrs 9-llyrs Boys 0-2 yrs
115 75 66 66 82 77
211421
10 15 12 11 12 12
168 148 144 150 610 140
Girls
All
3-5 yrs 6-8 yrs 9-llyrs Girls
68 71 74 73
1311
10 10 7 10
147 122 147 556
" Respondents with missing data were excluded.
Source: Wiley et al., 1991.
Table 15-18. Range of Recommended Defaults for Dermal Exposure Factors
Water Contact
Bathing
Central
Event time and 10 mill/event
frequency" 1 event/day
350 days/yr
Exposure 9 years
duration
" Bathing
Source: US
Upper
15 mill/event
1 event/day
350 days/yr
30 years
Soil Contact
Swimming
Central
0.5 hr/event
1 event/day
5 days/yr
9 years
Upper
1.0 hr/event
1 event/day
150 days/yr
30 years
Central Upper
40 events/yr 350 events/yr
9 years 30 years
event time is presented to be representative of baths as well as showers.
EPA 1992.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-33
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-19. Number of Times Taking a Shower at Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Times/Day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeasf
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Total N
3594
1720
1872
2
64
41
140
270
2650
429
2911
349
64
65
162
43
3269
277
17
31
439
1838
328
967
22
515
297
1042
772
576
392
828
756
1246
764
2481
1113
941
889
1003
761
3312
261
21
3481
91
22
3419
154
21
Note: * Signifies missing data; Dk= don't know;
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
0
2
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
2
*
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
*
*
i
i
*
2
*
*
*
2
2
*
*
i
i
*
2
*
*
N
1
2747
1259
1486
2
46
30
112
199
1983
377
2323
199
49
40
103
33
2521
190
13
23
330
1361
261
780
15
382
240
789
589
434
313
622
621
893
611
1889
858
732
674
735
606
2543
189
15
2653
77
17
2620
112
15
= sample size.
2
802
436
366
*
17
9
26
65
636
49
562
140
14
23
56
7
711
81
4
6
99
454
65
177
7
121
54
243
176
133
75
196
131
334
141
563
239
198
205
254
145
730
67
5
786
12
4
758
39
5
3
30
21
9
*
*
1
1
6
21
1
17
7
1
2
2
1
24
5
*
1
8
17
*
5
*
9
2
5
4
7
3
7
3
14
6
17
13
9
7
10
4
25
5
*
29
1
*
27
3
*
4 5
1 1
1 *
* 1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 1
* *
* 1
1 *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* 1
1 *
* *
* *
* *
* 1
* *
1 *
* *
* *
* *
1 *
* 1
1 1
* *
* *
* *
1 *
* 1
1 1
* *
* *
1 1
* *
* *
1 1
* *
* *
8
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
10 11:1-0+
1 4
* 1
1 3
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 3
* 1
* 4
* *
* *
* *
1 *
* *
* 4
1 *
* *
* *
* *
1 2
* *
* 2
* *
* *
* i
* i
i *
* i
* i
* *
* *
* 3
1 1
1 4
* *
* 1
1 *
* 2
* 1
1 4
* *
* *
1 4
* *
* *
1 4
* *
* *
DK
5
2
3
*
1
1
1
*
2
*
2
1
*
*
*
2
4
*
*
1
2
2
*
1
*
3
*
1
1
*
*
3
1
*
1
4
1
1
2
1
1
4
*
1
4
*
1
4
*
1
Page
15-34
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-20.
Times (minutes) Spent Taking Showers by the Number of Respondents
f otal N
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
A*§e
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
3594
1720
1872
2
64
41
140
270
2650
429
2911
349
64
65
162
43
3269
277
17
31
439
1838
328
967
22
515
297
1042
772
576
392
828
756
1246
764
2481
1113
941
889
1003
761
3312
261
21
3481
91
22
3419
154
21
NOTE: * - Missing data; DK = don't know
more than 60 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
*_*
47
13
34
*
6
1
1
2
16
21
38
5
*
*
1
3
43
1
*
3
4
10
4
27
10
8
12
12
2
7
11
26
3
34
13
12
14
11
10
38
4
5
36
7
4
40
3
4
0-10
1640
788
850
2
27
13
60
94
1238
208
1406
115
25
18
57
19
1526
98
5
11
163
875
160
431
11
190
93
451
377
297
232
374
385
490
391
1134
506
421
410
435
374
1526
108
6
1591
38
11
1566
66
8
N = sample size; Refused
10-20
1348
625
693
*
23
14
52
104
977
148
1070
120
25
29
60
14
1188
109
9
12
165
682
112
355
4
186
125
409
271
211
116
326
253
461
278
908
410
358
314
366
280
1222
89
7
1276
36
6
1258
54
6
Minutes/Shower
20-30
397
213
184
*
3
10
18
40
288
38
292
58
10
6
25
6
352
40
1
4
66
191
39
97
4
79
51
108
79
50
30
79
70
179
69
279
118
95
93
128
81
362
33
2
389
8
*
375
19
3
= Refused to answer.
30-40
72
35
37
*
1
1
3
13
50
4
39
20
1
3
8
1
61
10
*
1
17
32
4
19
21
6
23
14
5
15
16
35
6
46
26
18
21
29
4
65
7
*
70
1
1
67
5
*
A value of 61
40-50
52
25
27
*
*
*
2
9
37
4
31
11
2
4
4
*
42
8
2
*
10
20
5
16
13
7
17
6
4
11
9
26
6
38
14
15
14
17
6
44
8
*
51
1
*
47
5
*
50-60
51
14
37
*
2
2
4
7
33
3
26
16
*
4
5
*
44
7
*
*
12
20
3
*6
14
6
16
7
5
12
9
23
7
32
19
16
18
12
5
41
10
*
51
*
*
50
1
*
60-61
17
7
10
*
2
*
*
1
11
3
9
4
1
1
2
*
13
4
*
*
2
8
1
6
2
1
6
6
1
4
3
6
4
10
7
6
5
5
1
14
2
1
17
*
*
16
1
*
for number of minutes signifies that
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-35
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-21. Number of Minutes Spent Taking a Shower (minutes/shower)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) >64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Total
N
3547
1707
1838
40
139
268
2634
408
2873
344
64
65
161
3226
276
1828
324
940
289
1030
760
574
389
821
745
1220
761
2447
1100
929
875
992
751
3274
257
3445
84
3379
151
Percentiles
1
3
3
3
5
3
5
3
3
3
4
1
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
4
2
3
3
2
4
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
5 5
4 5
5 5
3 5
3 5
4 5
4 5
3 4
3 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
3 5
3 5
5 5
3 5
5 5
3 5
3 4
5 5
4 5
3 5
3 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
3 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
4 5
NOTE: A value of 61 for number of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
10
5
5
5
5
5
7
5
5
5
6
5
10
6
5
6
5
5
5
8
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
25
10
10
10
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
7
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
were spent.
50
15
15
15
10
15
15
15
10
13
20
15
15
15
15
15
15
12
15
15
15
12
10
10
15
10
15
10
15
15
15
15
15
12
15
15
15
15
15
15
75
20
20
20
17.5
20
25
20
20
20
30
20
30
25
20
22.5
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
N = doer sample
91
30
30
30
30
30
35
30
30
30
40
30
45
40
30
39
30
30
30
30
30
30
25
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
40
30
30
30
30
size.
95
35
30
40
50
40
45
30
30
30
60
40
60
45
30
45
30
30
40
40
40
30
30
30
32
30
40
30
35
40
40
40
40
30
32
50
35
30
35
40
98
50
45
60
60
60
60
45
45
45
60
48
60
60
45
60
45
45
60
60
60
45
40
45
50
45
60
45
48
60
60
60
45
40
45
60
50
40
50
48
99 100
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 60
60 60
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
60 61
61 61
60 61
60 60
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
48 61
60 61
60 61
60 61
45 45
60 61
60 61
Percentiles are the percentage
Page
15-36
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-22.
Time (minutes) Spent in the Shower Room Immediately After Showering by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Shower
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeasi
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
NOTE: * Signifies missinj
specified range of number oJ
Source: Tsang and Klepeis
Total N
3594
1720
1872
2
64
41
140
270
2650
429
2911
349
64
65
162
43
3269
277
17
31
439
1838
328
967
22
515
297
1042
772
576
392
828
756
1246
764
2481
1113
941
889
1003
761
3312
261
21
3481
91
22
3419
154
21
*_*
61
22
39
*
6
*
3
31
20
39
8
*
6
5
48
8
4
4
20
29
3
11
14
17
11
5
6
19
26
10
43
18
11
13
25
12
52
2
7
52
6
53
2
6
0-0
241
113
128
*
9
9
17
171
30
189
23
7
11
4
216
19
2
4
28
109
21
81
2
38
18
68
56
28
33
61
39
74
67
165
76
50
56
92
43
225
14
2
233
5
226
12
0-10
2561
1316
1243
2
37
31
110
206
1897
280
2074
254
45
41
118
29
2328
200
11
22
336
1332
223
655
15
390
193
733
536
426
283
603
536
885
537
1784
111
678
636
691
556
2374
178
9
2495
55
11
2446
104
11
10-20
509
207
302
*
7
14
29
388
68
430
42
9
6
19
470
35
1
48
267
55
138
1
51
48
160
118
86
46
116
118
171
104
342
167
138
125
138
108
465
42
2
486
22
482
26
20-30
138
46
92
*
3
1
10
99
22
110
17
2
3
4
2
130
8
*
*
14
71
13
39
1
15
16
37
33
19
18
20
29
58
31
88
50
36
37
39
26
123
15
*
132
5
131
*
30-40
24
19
*
*
*
*
3
19
2
20
*
*
3
*
23
*
*
3
12
5
*
3
*
6
8
*
6
10
20
13
5
2
19
5
*
24
*
*
23
*
40-50
28
24
*
1
*
2
18
6
23
3
*
1
*
26
2
*
*
4
11
9
*
4
6
7
4
4
8
15
16
12
9
8
5
6
24
3
1
27
*
27
*
50-60 61-61
27
6
21
*
*
1
23
1
21
2
1
2
*
23
4
*
*
2
16
6
*
2
1
13
5
3
8
4
8
19
8
4
9
7
7
26
1
*
27
*
*
26
*
5
1
4
*
*
*
*
1
*
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
7*
'*
*
5
*
1
1
2
*
*
*
*
3
2
4
2
1
1
4
1
*
5
*
*
*
*
' data. DK= respondents answered don't know. Refused = respondents refused to answer. N = doer sample size in
minutes spent. A value of 61 for number of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent.
1996 l s- F
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
15-37
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-23. Number of Minutes Spent in the Shower Room
Immediately After Showering (minutes/shower)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
3533
1698
1833
41
137
2619
2619
409
2872
341
64
62
156
3221
269
1818
323
938
283
1025
761
573
387
822
737
1220
754
2438
1095
930
876
978
749
3260
259
3429
88
3366
152
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NOTE: N = doer sample size. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
number of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
10
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
25
3
3
3
1
2
3
3
4
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
3
3
4
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.5
50
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
8.5
5
5
75 90
10 20
10 15
12 20
10 15
10 15
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 15
10 30
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
15 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
13 20
10 20
15 20
10 20
10 20
95
30
20
30
20
20
30
30
30
30
25
20
35
25
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
98
40
30
45
45
30
40
40
35
40
30
30
45
40
40
45
35
45
45
45
45
35
35
30
40
35
40
30
40
40
40
45
30
40
38
40
40
30
40
30
or equal to a given number of minutes. A value of
99 100
50 61
30 61
60 61
45 45
30 60
52 61
52 61
45 60
50 61
45 60
60 60
52 52
60 60
50 61
60 60
50 60
50 60
60 61
45 61
60 61
50 61
45 60
45 60
50 60
45 60
45 61
60 61
50 61
50 61
45 61
60 61
50 61
53 61
50 61
45 61
50 61
45 45
50 61
45 60
61 for
Page
15-38
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table
15-24. Number of Baths Given or Taken in One Day by Number of Respondents
Number of Baths/Day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Age (years)
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refusecf
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
NOTE: * Signifies missing data;
Source: Tsana and Kleceis. 1996
Total N
649
159
490
9
491
149
487
106
12
12
26
6
600
40
6
3
1
283
76
287
2
4
96
235
163
102
49
137
151
255
106
415
234
178
160
174
137
596
52
1
620
26
3
610
36
3
1
459
117
342
8
322
129
364
68
5
7
10
5
430
21
5
3
1
183
56
217
2
4
66
167
112
68
42
100
116
164
79
299
160
124
126
112
97
424
34
1
435
22
2
429
27
3
2
144
33
111
1
127
16
92
29
5
4
13
1
127
16
1
*
*
76
17
51
*
*
19
54
38
28
5
25
29
70
20
89
55
37
27
49
31
129
15
*
141
2
1
137
7
*
3
20
5
15
*
20
*
13
5
*
1
1
*
19
1
*
*
*
12
1
7
*
*
3
8
6
3
*
3
4
9
4
10
10
10
4
4
2
19
1
*
19
1
*
20
*
*
Dk= respondents answered don't know;
4
9
1
8
*
9
*
7
1
1
*
*
*
9
*
*
*
*
5
1
3
*
*
2
2
2
2
1
4
1
2
2
4
5
1
1
3
4
7
2
*
9
*
*
9
*
*
N =
5
4
*
4
*
4
*
2
*
*
*
2
*
2
2
*
*
*
*
i
3
*
*
2
*
2
*
*
1
*
3
*
2
2
3
*
1
*
4
*
*
4
*
*
4
*
*
sample size;
6
2
1
1
*
2
*
1
1
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
2
*
*
*
i
i
2
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
Refused
7 10 11 15
1113
1 * * 1
* 1 1 2
* * * *
1112
* * * 1
* * 1 2
1 1 * *
* * * 1
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
1113
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
1111
* * * *
* * * 2
* * * *
* * * *
* * * 1
1 * * *
* * 1 1
* 1 * *
* * * 1
* * 1 *
* 1 * *
1 * * 2
* * * 1
1112
* * * 1
* * * 1
1 * * *
* 1 * 2
* * 1 *
1113
* * * *
* * * *
1113
* * * *
* * * *
1112
* * * 1
* * * *
= respondents refused to answer.
DK
5
*
5
*
2
3
5
*
*
*
*
*
5
*
*
*
*
i
*
4
*
*
3
2
*
*
*
2
*
3
*
4
1
2
1
1
1
5
*
*
4
1
*
4
1
*
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
15-39
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-25. Total Time Spent Taking or Giving a Bath by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Bath
Total N
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
61-61
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Age (years)
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refusecf
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
649
159
490
9
491
149
487
106
12
12
26
6
600
40
6
1
283
76
287
2
4
96
235
163
102
49
137
151
255
106
415
234
178
160
174
137
596
52
1
620
26
610
36
3
18
4
14
2
6
10
11
4
16
1
4
1
12
5
9
2
12
6
16
1
14
1
15
2
1
153
48
105
2
105
46
124
16
2
2
8
1
136
15
1
1
58
26
69
15
57
45
18
18
43
42
42
26
90
63
44
39
43
27
144
9
147
6
150
3
237
59
178
4
174
59
185
35
6
6
2
224
10
2
1
107
26
104
2
35
85
53
44
18
36
67
87
47
161
76
63
60
62
52
218
19
226
10
1
218
17
2
128
23
105
111
16
97
19
5
1
120
6
2
1
64
15
48
16
51
32
20
8
31
26
55
16
84
44
33
27
34
34
114
14
124
1
119
9
27
8
19
22
5
16
8
1
1
1
26
1
12
5
10
3
13
4
2
6
16
2
11
16
26
25
2
26
1
29
4
25
24
19
9
27
1
12
1
16
6
5
11
2
7
14
5
23
6
11
7
4
28
28
26
3
36
7
29
31
24
9
33
3
19
2
15
7
11
8
9
6
21
4
23
13
9
6
14
33
35
35
1
21
6
15
18
11
6
*
1
18
3
13
3
3
11
4
11
10
17
21
21
NOTE: * Signifies missing data. Dk= respondents answered don't know. Refused = respondents refused to answer. N = doer sample size in a
specified range of number of minutes spent. A value of 61 for number of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996
Page
15-40
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-26. Number of Minutes Spent Giving and Taking the Bath(s) (minutes/bath)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Percentiles
N
631
155
476
485
139
476
102
12
12
25
584
39
279
75
275
89
229
159
102
49
132
149
246
104
403
228
173
154
171
133
580
51
606
23
595
34
NOTE: N = doer sample size. Percentiles are the percenta
of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsana and Klepeis. 1996
1
2
1
3
2
3
1
5
10
5
2
2
2
1
3
2
1
5
1
5
1
1
2
3
5
2
4
2
1
5
4
2
4
2
5
2
5
2
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
10
5
2
5
2
4
4
5
5
5
2
5
1
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
9
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
8
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
8
5
5
5
5
5
8
10
10
6
10
10
5
10
10
10
10
5
10
5
10
10
10
10
10
6
10
5
6
7
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
10
15
je of doers below or equal to a
25 50
15 20
10 15
15 20
15 20
10 15
10 20
15 22.5
15 20
15 27.5
10 20
15 20
10 20
15 20
10 20
10 20
15 20
12 20
10 20
15 20
10 15
10 15
10 20
15 20
11 20
15 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
15 20
12 20
15 20
15 20
10 15
10 20
15 20
75
30
30
30
30
20
30
40
27.5
30
45
30
30
30
30
30
35
30
30
30
25
30
30
35
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
90
45
45
45
60
40
45
60
30
40
61
45
60
45
35
60
60
45
45
45
40
45
30
60
45
45
60
45
45
60
45
45
60
45
40
45
45
given number of minutes.
95
60
60
60
60
60
60
61
40
61
61
60
61
60
40
60
61
60
60
60
45
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
61
60
45
60
45
98
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
40
61
61
61
61
61
60
61
61
61
61
60
60
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
60
61
60
A value of 61
99 100
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
40 40
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
60 60
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
60 61
60 60
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
60 60
61 61
60 60
for number
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-41
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-27.
Time Spent in the Bathroom Immediately After the Bath(s) by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Bath
Overall
Male
Female
Age (years)
18-64
>64
^hite
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hisnanic
No
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Fart lime
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
Hieh School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
tirtheasf
dwest
uth
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Yes
DK
Note: * Signifies missing data.
Total N
649
\!9o
491
149
487
106
12
12
26
6
600
I
1
000
2763
287
2
4
96
235
163
137
255
106
W
178
160
174
137
596
52
1
620
26
3
610
36
3
*_*
25
169
?,
16
22
2
*
*
*
1
25
*
*
*
*
f
18
*
1
10
6
4
8
9
3
187
38
9
5
24
1
*
23
2
*
22
3
*
0-0
85
67
721
12
59
14
2
4
1
76
I
*
35
41
*
*
11
35
17
i3
31
21
53
if
31
19
75
10
*
82
2
1
78
6
1
0-10
422
JAf
33*6
82
319
67
9
6
18
3
390
T
i
25°43
164
*
2
51
158
113
&
100
164
67
280
142
w
110
94
388
34
*
405
17
*
400
21
1
10-20
74
63
5\>
23
58
13
1
*
1
71
1
*
38°
35
1
1
12
22
18
o
!o
0
10
3*4*
io*
16
14
69
4
1
70
3
1
71
2
1
20-30
23
149
*
14
9
15
5
*
*
3
*
20
3
*
*
72
14
*
*
7
7
4
?
8
9
3
V6
7
6
2
21
2
*
22
1
*
21
2
*
30-40 40-50
7
6
*
4
3
4
3
*
*
*
*
7
*
*
*
*
2
4
*
*
1
3
3
*
*
*
5
*
3
3
4
*
*
7
*
*
6
*
1
6
1
*
Dk= respondents answered don't know. Refused = respondents refused to answer.
specified range of number of minutes spent.
Source: Tsana and Kleceis. 1996
A value of 6 1
6
i
*
5
1
4
2
*
*
*
*
6
*
*
*
*
i
4
1
*
*
3
2
i
*
1
4
1
4
2
2
1
5
1
*
6
*
*
5
1
*
N =
50-60
5
*
5
*
2
3
5
*
*
*
*
*
4
*
i
*
*
*
5
*
*
2
1
2
*
*
1
1
1
i
2
*
2
5
*
*
4
1
*
5
*
*
doer sample
61-61
2
*
2
*
2
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
i
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
2
*
1
i
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
size in
for number of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent.
Page
15-42
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-28. Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom Immediately After the Bath(s) (minutes/bath)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
NOTE: N = doer sample size. Percentiles are the percentaj
minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
Percentiles
N
624
153
471
484
133
465
104
12
12
26
575
40
277
75
269
86
229
159
100
47
129
146
246
103
398
226
175
152
165
132
572
51
597
24
588
33
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
;e of doers below or equal to a g
10
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
25
2
2
2
2
5
2
2
2
0
1
2
1
2
3
2
5
2
2
1.5
1
2
2
3
1
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
2
5
2
2
50 75
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
10 15
5 10
5 10
5 7.5
3 7.5
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
10 15
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
iven number of minutes.
90
20
12
20
15
30
18
20
10
10
25
20
22.5
15
15
25
30
15
15
19
15
20
15
20
20
18
20
20
20
15
15
20
15
20
15
20
30
95 98
30 45
20 30
30 45
25 40
35 55
30 45
30 40
20 20
15 15
25 61
30 40
25 61
20 30
25 35
35 58
35 61
30 40
30 45
25 30
20 30
30 30
25 50
30 45
20 30
30 40
30 45
30 58
30 40
20 30
20 45
30 45
30 30
30 45
30 55
30 45
40 45
99 100
55 61
35 45
60 61
50 61
60 60
58 61
45 45
20 20
15 15
61 61
50 61
61 61
30 45
40 40
60 61
61 61
45 58
60 60
37.5 45
30 30
30 60
60 60
55 61
45 58
50 61
60 61
61 61
45 60
45 50
55 60
58 61
45 45
58 61
55 55
58 61
45 45
A value of 61 for number of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-43
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 1 5-29. Total Time Spent Altogether in the Shower or Bathtub by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Bath
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
\1-\1
^
RlWhite
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hisnanic
Refused
Hisnanic
No
Yes
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Fart lime
Not Employed
Refused
Education
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Yes
DK
Note: * Signifies missing data
Total
N
4290
1934
2355
1
86
198
29839
3^2
74
78
180
53
3892
333
l\
ft
1181
32
775
386
1254
864
558
453
927
956
2881
1409
1124
1145
1165
856
3946
327
17
4151
114
25
4059
207
24
*_*
38
8
30
*
5
*
i
li
27?
*
*
2
2
31
5
!
I
*
6
10
12
2
4
7
Q
16
o
B
ft
4
35
2
1
34
3
1
34
2
2
0-0
5
1
4
*
1
*
*
*
3
4
*
*
*
*
4
1
*
*
*
*
*
2
1
*
i
i
*
3
3
\
*
5
*
*
5
*
*
3
2
*
0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40
1903 1577 548 46
872 735 234 19
1031 841 314 27
* 1 * *
26 36 12 *
35 84 50 2
64 107 66 3
78 96 46 5
1429 1051 303 32
271 203 71 4
1616 1248 4091 35
33 31 7 *
24 28 19 2
63 79 24 2
26 14 8 *
1744 1423 496 41
128 136 40 5
7 8 4 *
24 10 8 *
172 284 162 9
1002 707 190 20
190 147 44 4
524 429 146 13
15 10 6 *
200 317 175 10
132 147 66 7
574 476 138 14
414 331 93 6
308 168 53 7
275 138 23 2
436 328 106 11
1346 1038 336 30
557 539 212 16
504 417 137 14
499 417 149 9
495 420 176 14
405 323 86 9
1767 1445 502 38
128 128 43 8
8 4 3 *
1839 1529 530 45
52 41 14 1
12 7 4 *
1803 1502 517 42
86 71 28 4
14 4 3 *
DK = respondents answered "don't know". Refused =
specified range of number of minutes spent. A value of
40-50
65
24
41
*
1
13
?
Ą
44
1
3
4
2
56
8
*
1
147
*
26
8
14
7
3
14
\l
8
\l
11
53
11
1
62
2
1
58
6
1
50-60 70-80 80-90
67 3
24 1
43 2
* *
4 *
7 1
i !
11 2
1 *
2 *
2 *
1 *
62 3
5 *
* *
* *
22 3
252 *
* *
24 3
10 *
18 *
8 *
4 *
3 *
12 1
11 i
S 1
IS 1
12 *
65 3
2 *
* *
66 3
1 *
* *
63 3
4 *
* *
6
1
5
*
*
1
i
3
3
i
*
2
*
4
2
*
*
3
*
3
*
3
1
*
1
*
2
Lrti— '
*
1
1
5
1
*
6
*
*
5
1
*
respondents refused to answer.
"121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
90-
100
2
1
1
*
*
1
i
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
1
*
*
i
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
1
i
*
i
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
N =
100-
110
1
1
*
*
*
*
i
*
*
i
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
i
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
i
i
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
110-
120
21
10
11
*
*
4
?
Ą
16
4
*
*
1
*
18
2
i
1
1
7
1
4
2
2
6
156
I
2
19
2
*
21
*
*
19
2
*
121-
121
8
3
5
*
1
*
i
Ł
6
*
*
*
*
8
*
*
*
s
4
*
1
2
3
*
*
2
3
*
|
1
2
6
2
*
8
*
*
7
1
*
doer sample size in
120 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsang and Kleceis. 1996
Page
15-44
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-30. Total Number of Minutes Spent Altogether in the Shower or Bathtub (minutes/bath)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N
4252
1926
2325
198
263
239
2904
567
3425
446
74
78
178
3861
328
1974
395
1161
376
1242
862
554
449
920
947
1497
888
2858
1394
1116
1130
1154
852
3911
325
4117
111
4025
205
1
3
3
3
1
4
4
3
2
3
4
5
5
1
3
1
3
3
2
1
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
Note : A value of " 1 2 1 " for number of minutes signifies that more than
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsana and Klepeis. 1996.
2
4
4
4
5
5
4
4
3
4
4
5
5
3
4
3
4
3
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10 25
5 10
5 10
5 10
10 15
10 13
7 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
6 10
7 10
7 10
7 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 8
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
120 minutes were spent.
50
15
15
15
20
20
15
13.5
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
10
15
15
15
15
15
10
10
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
75
20
20
20
30
30
30
20
20
20
25
15
30
20
20
20
20
20
20
25
20
20
15
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
90 95
30 35
30 30
30 40
45 60
30 60
30 45
30 30
30 30
30 30
30 45
30 30
30 45
30 45
30 35
30 45
30 30
30 30
30 35
30 45
30 30
30 30
30 30
20 30
30 35
30 30
30 45
30 30
30 30
30 40
30 35
30 40
30 40
30 30
30 30
30 45
30 35
30 30
30 30
30 45
N = doer sample size. Perc
98
60
60
60
120
90
60
50
45
60
75
60
60
90
60
60
45
45
60
60
60
45
45
45
60
45
60
45
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
45
60
60
99 100
60 121
60 121
75 121
120 120
120 121
60 120
60 121
60 120
60 121
120 121
90 90
60 60
100 120
60 121
90 120
60 121
60 60
60 121
90 121
60 121
60 120
90 120
60 121
100 121
60 120
75 121
60 121
60 121
75 121
60 121
90 121
60 121
60 121
60 121
120 121
60 121
45 60
60 121
120 121
entiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-45
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-31. Time Spent in the Bathroom Immediately
Following a Shower or Bath by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Shower or Bath
Overall
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hisnanic
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Asthma
1
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Yes
DK
Note: * Signifies missing
answered "don't know".
Total N
4290
^Bl
86
198
265
239
2919
583
3452
78
180
53
3892
333
21
44
692
1985
400
III
1254
864
558
453
927
956
1513
894
2881
1409
1124
1145
1165
856
W
4151
114
25
4059
207
24
*_*
108
7?
*
12
2
5
1
53
35
80
2
7
95
8
*
5
8
36
8
17
8
7
20
27
41
20
79
29
34
26
8
101
99
3
9|
4
; data. A value of "
Refused =
0-0 0-10
348 2770
138 1357
210 1413
* *
8 38
59 123
33 198
17 165
184 1901
47 345
271 2235
49 276
8 1364
5 31
316 2504
28 227
1 10
3 29
111 479
122 1302
22 256
93 712
* 21
114 531
59 568
27 362
29 290
69 614
86 600
119 971
74 585
224 1889
124 881
77 726
99 756
112 740
60 548
306 2540
41 219
1 11
333 2687
13 68
2 15
3^5 2623
1 14
10-20
713
W
1
19
12
23
34
517
108
590
21
8
655
46
5
66
357
71
214
82
158
115
89
161
155
255
142
474
239
193
167
\I49
f
691
17
5
6|44
5
20-30
250
67
183
*
6
*
3
16
189
36
194
35
rt
2
227
21
2
17
120
32
20
30
46
31
31
49
57
93
51
153
97
65
70
66
49
2r>6
241
*
21346
*
30-40
20
15
*
*
1
1
1
14
3
15
*
*
19
1
*
*
3
10
2
3
4
2
1
3
5
8
4
15
5
7
4
1
28
20
*
*
19
*
40-50
32
284
*
1
1
*
3
25
2
29
*
*
32
*
*
*
4
16
5
I
\
8
2
2
13
7
10
19
13
8
12
?
32
*
*
Ą
*
50-60
35
269
*
1
*
1
2
26
5
24
9
*
*
32
2
1
3
14
2
i6
1
5
3
6
11
10
8
19
16
9
10
*
34
1
*
Ą
*
70-80 80-90 110-120 121-121
1 2
* *
1 2
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 1
* 1
1 2
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
i i
* *
* i
* *
* *
i i
* *
* i
* *
* *
I I
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 2
* *
1 1
* 1
* 1
* *
i i
* *
1 2
* *
* *
i 1
* *
121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent.
respondents refused to answer. N
7
6
*
*
*
1
*
5
1
7
*
*
*
*
*
6
*
1
1
3
2
i
J
*
1
1
1
5
*
5
2
3
1
f
7
*
*
\
*
4
3
*
1
*
*
*
3
*
4
*
*
*
*
*
4
*
*
*
*
3
*
i
*
2
1
*
*
2
1
1
*
2
2
1
*
*
3
I
4
*
*
3
*
DK= respondents
= doer sample size in a specified range or number of minutes spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis.
Page
15-46
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-32. Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom Immediately Following a Shower or Bath (minutes/bath)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/emphysema
Bronchitis/emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N
4182
1897
2284
196
260
238
2866
548
3372
438
74
76
176
3797
325
1949
392
1129
358
1220
847
550
446
907
929
1472
874
2802
1380
1090
1119
1129
844
3845
322
4052
108
3961
201
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
1
1
1
0
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent. N
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsana and Kleceis. 1996.
25
4
3
5
0
2
5
5
4
4
4
2
5
3
4
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
3.5
3
4
4
5
3
3
5
4
3
4
4.5
4
4
50
5
5
10
2
5
5
10
10
5
6
5
10
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
8
5
5
5
5
5
8
7
5
5
8
5
5
5
5.5
5
10
75 90
15 20
10 15
15 30
5 10
10 15
10 20
15 20
15 20
15 20
15 30
10 20
15 20
10 20
15 20
10 20
15 20
15 25
15 20
15 30
15 25
15 20
15 20
15 20
10 20
15 20
15 20
10 20
10 20
15 20
15 20
10 20
10 20
15 20
15 20
10 20
15 20
12.5 20
15 20
10 30
95 98
30 40
20 30
30 45
15 20
15 30
30 45
30 45
30 40
30 40
30 60
30 35
25 30
30 30
30 45
30 30
30 40
30 45
30 45
30 60
30 45
30 30
30 45
30 30
30 30
30 45
30 40
30 45
30 35
30 45
30 45
30 45
30 40
30 35
30 40
30 60
30 40
30 30
30 40
30 60
99 100
60 121
40 121
60 121
35 45
35 120
45 60
60 121
60 120
60 121
60 60
45 45
60 60
30 60
60 121
30 60
60 121
60 120
60 121
90 121
60 121
60 121
45 60
50 120
45 121
60 121
60 121
45 60
50 121
60 121
60 121
50 120
52 120
60 121
60 121
90 121
60 121
30 60
60 121
88 121
= doer sample size. Percentiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-47
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-33. Range of Number of Times Washing the Hands at Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Number of Times/Day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
12-17
18-64
>64
^hite
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hisnanic
No
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Fart lime
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
tirtheasf
dwest
uth
3St
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Yes
DK
Note: * Signifies missing data. N
Total N
4663
2163
2498
2
84
2392762
670
3774
463
77
96
193
60
4244
32467
46
21
1309
32
1021
399
1253
895
650
445
1048
1036
m
W067
M
1275
943
4287
341
35
4500
125
38
4424
203
36
*_*
38
16
22
*
8
*
A
8
21
6
1
*
1
9
27
I
9
4
18
4
13
2
12
2
9
fa
344
163
15
4
28
1
9
28
2
8
27
3
8
0-0
34
19
15
*
*
15
i
1
28
2
*
1
3
*
29
1
*
2|
4
*
26
*
4
3
*
1
6
ll
?i
10
9
6
32
2
*
34
*
*
33
1
*
1-2
311
218
92
1
1
14361
10
251
30
5
10
14
1
276
f
36
1
174
8
56
28
i
68
§
18
78
78
64
283
26
2
306
3
2
302
7
2
3-5
1692
975
716
1
25
125
il!
163
1377
149
29
39
78
20
1536
130
12
14
7^7
142
365
7
507
120
391
284
238
152
404
1103
589
507
406
443
336
1562
126
4
1652
32
8
1627
57
8
= doer sample size in a specified range or number of minutes
6-9
1106
487
619
*
15
71
184
902
120
19
16
42
7
1022
1
145
327
8
158
96
318
246
174
114
243
1
764
286
315
222
1024
77
5
1069
34
3
1040
61
5
spent.
10-19
892
286
606
*
11
1
179
740
85
12
15
31
9
823
&
86
334
5
74
88
298
197
96
195
186
599
2238
232
199
819
69
4
851
36
5
835
55
2
20-29
223
59
164
*
4
168
38
181
19
4
8
10
1
205
17
i
§
83
1
13
26
70
59
55
79
48
155
iS
65
43
207
16
*
218
5
*
213
10
*
30+
178
49
129
*
5
143
23
140
23
1
5
5
4
164
10
I?
52
1
12
24
47
48
27
20
38
66
36
W
\\
48
35
165
10
3
171
3
4
172
3
3
DK
189
54
135
*
15
10
I
64
134
29
6
2
9
9
162
17
if
90
5
44
35
57
28
10
30
B3
35
70
34
167
14
8
171
10
8
175
6
8
DK= respondents answered "don't
know". Refused = respondents refused to answer.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996
Page
15-48
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-34. Number of Minutes Spent (at home) Working or Being Near Food While Fried, Grilled, or Barbequed (minutes/day)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Percentiles
N
1055
485
570
35
82
82
747
96
848
115
18
16
48
960
84
506
95
252
96
318
208
135
83
198
248
399
210
662
393
267
296
299
193
960
92
1032
19
1005
47
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
2
0
5
0
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
0
1
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
5
2
2
2
2
0
2
3
3
2
5
0
5
5
2
2
3
2
3
2
5
3
2
5
3
4
2
2
3
2
2
3
3
2
2.5
2
2
0
2
3
10
5
5
5
2
2
4
5
5
5
5
0
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
25
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
5
12.5
15
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
7
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
15
10
10
120 minutes were spent.
50
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
10
20
30
20
20
20
15
20
22.5
20
20
20
15
15
20
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
30
20
30
20
30
75 90
30 105
30 90
30 120
30 45
30 60
45 60
40 120
30 60
30 105
30 61
20 121
45 121
60 90
30 90
60 121
45 121
40 90
30 90
52.5 121
30 120
35 121
30 90
30 60
30 90
30 121
40 90
30 60
30 90
30 120
30 60
45 120
30 90
30 121
30 90
60 121
30 95
30 121
30 90
60 121
N = doer sample size.
95
121
121
121
60
90
90
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
98
121
121
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
Percentiles are the percentage
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-49
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-35. Number of Minutes Spent (at home) Working or Being Near Open Flames Including Barbeque Flames (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) :> 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
479
252
227
14
29
28
372
31
407
31
5
8
22
436
36
262
44
99
27
130
92
95
55
124
112
149
94
284
195
142
115
137
85
443
35
461
15
461
16
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
10
2
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
10
2
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
3
5
1
1
2
0
0
1
1
2
1
0
5
10
3
1
3
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
0
1
2
1
1
1
1
0
2
2
1
1
3
1
2
1
3
10
2
2
2
0
0
2
3
4
2
2
5
10
5
2
5
2
4
3
3
3
2
5
2
3
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
3
3
2
3
2
2
2
5
25
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
5
10
5
20
11
5
10
11
10
5
10
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
10
12.5
Note: A value of '121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent.
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
50 75
20 60
20 60
20 30
10 30
15 30
22.5 42.5
20 60
17 30
20 45
20 30
40 121
22.5 60
30 60
20 42.5
60 90
20 60
15 52.5
20 40
20 60
20 60
30 90
20 40
20 40
15 30
20 45
20 60
20 60
15 30
30 60
20 60
20 60
20 45
20 40
20 45
30 120
20 45
15 60
20 45
37.5 106
90
121
121
121
121
90
60
121
120
121
60
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
N = doer sample size.
95 98
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 90
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
99
121
121
121
121
121
90
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
100
121
121
121
121
121
90
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
Percentiles are the percentage
Page
15-50
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-36. Number of Minutes Spent Working or Being Near Excessive Dust in the Air (minutes/day)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
5:>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N
679
341
338
22
50
52
513
38
556
66
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
1
7 20
15
29
611
57
368
66
122
52
199
140
82
76
138
145
227
169
471
208
154
193
193
139
606
73
662
15
637
41
Note: Avalueof "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
3
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
5
1
3
0
2
1
0
0
2
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
2
2
2
2
0
0.5
1
5
2
2
3
20
5
3
2
3
5
2
2
5
0
5
2
5
0
2
2
3
1
2
0
1
2
5
2
3
2
3
2
0
5
5
5
5
0
2
2
5
2
5
5
20
5
5
5
3
7
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
5
10
7
8
5
2
4
5
10
5
8
5
20
10
7
5
10
15
5
8
7
10
20
15
10
5
10
5
10
7
5
5
5
10
10
5
10
7
30
7
5
120 minutes were spent
25
30
30
30
5
15
5
30
35
30
20
60
60
20
30
30
37.5
20
30
35
30
60
30
37.5
20
30
30
30
30
30
30
20
30
30
30
30
30
60
30
30
N =
50 75
121 121
121 121
121 121
75 121
75 121
20 120
121 121
105.5 121
121 121
121 121
90 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
doer sample size
90 95
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
98
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
Percentiles are the percentage
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-51
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-37. Range of the Number of Times an Automobile or Motor Vehicle was Started in a Garage or Carport at
Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Times/day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Age(years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: "*" Signifies missing data; "DK'
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
Total N
2009
939
1070
20
111
150
145
1287
296
1763
110
46
24
55
11
1879
111
12
7
398
919
149
536
7
427
84
464
440
326
268
289
541
702
477
1383
626
567
518
525
399
1861
146
2
1959
48
2
1922
84
3
1-2
1321
588
733
13
68
93
86
840
221
1164
70
34
19
26
8
1239
68
9
5
241
610
93
372
5
262
59
336
304
201
159
213
360
430
318
903
418
396
336
313
276
1228
92
1
1288
33
*
1266
54
1
= respondent answered don't know; Refused
3-5
559
290
269
2
39
49
42
367
60
486
31
10
5
24
3
519
35
3
2
127
253
48
129
2
134
17
107
107
106
88
64
142
221
132
386
173
136
141
178
104
514
44
1
545
12
2
532
25
2
6-9
78
40
38
1
2
6
12
50
7
69
4
2
*
3
*
74
4
*
*
20
35
4
19
*
21
2
13
20
10
12
8
29
27
14
63
15
20
25
18
15
70
8
*
76
2
*
74
4
*
- the respondent refused to answer; N
10+
17
7
10
1
2
*
1
12
1
17
*
*
*
*
*
17
*
*
*
3
9
2
3
*
4
2
5
2
3
2
2
8
5
11
6
5
5
6
1
17
*
*
17
*
*
17
*
*
= doer sample
Dk
34
14
20
3
*
2
4
18
7
27
5
*
*
2
*
30
4
*
*
7
12
2
13
*
6
6
4
7
6
2
8
16
8
20
14
10
11
10
3
32
2
*
33
1
*
33
1
*
size.
Page
15-52
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-38. Range of the Number of Times Motor Vehicle Was Started with Garage Door Closed
at Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Times/day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: "*" Signifies missing data; "DK'
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
Total N
2009
939
1070
20
111
150
145
1287
296
1763
110
46
24
55
11
1879
111
12
7
398
919
149
536
7
427
84
464
440
326
268
289
541
702
477
1383
626
567
518
525
399
1861
146
2
1959
48
2
1922
84
3
None
1830
860
970
14
99
141
127
1184
265
1616
95
41
21
46
11
1714
97
12
7
360
840
137
488
5
387
74
429
399
299
242
270
500
628
432
1269
561
509
470
476
375
1696
132
2
1785
43
2
1747
80
3
= respondents answered don't know;
1-2
99
41
58
1
8
6
9
57
18
82
6
4
2
5
*
92
7
*
*
22
46
6
24
1
23
2
24
24
12
14
10
22
42
25
66
33
32
29
23
15
92
7
*
96
3
*
96
3
*
N = doer sample size;
3-5
26
15
11
*
2
*
4
18
2
22
2
*
*
2
*
23
3
*
*
5
13
2
5
1
6
2
8
6
3
5
4
8
9
21
5
9
3
11
3
23
3
*
26
*
*
26
*
*
Refused =
6-9
2
*
2
*
*
*
1
1
*
1
1
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
i
i
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
1
*
*
*
2
1
*
*
1
1
1
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
Dk
52
23
29
5
2
3
4
27
11
42
6
1
1
2
*
48
4
*
*
10
19
4
19
*
10
7
9
8
9
9
3
14
24
11
27
25
16
16
15
5
49
3
*
50
2
*
51
1
*
the respondent refused to answer.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-53
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-39. Number of Minutes Spent at a Gas Station or Auto Repair Shop (minutes/day)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
967
552
414
29
42
57
760
67
788
95
13
22
42
875
82
542
107
186
70
293
213
143
106
167
246
348
206
634
333
236
232
282
217
892
74
947
17
920
45
1
1
2
0
0
2
1
1
0
1
0
2
5
0
1
0
1
2
1
0
1
1
2
1
1
0
0
2
1
1
1
2
0
1
1
0
1
3
1
2
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
2
2
2
1
0
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
5
0
2
2
2
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
5
3
3
2
0
2
3
3
3
3
2
2
5
3
3
2
3
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
10
4
4
3
0
3
5
4
4
4
3
2
5
4
4
3
4
5
4
4.5
5
4
4
3
5
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
3
4
3
4
4
4
3
25
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
120 minutes were spent. N
50
6
7
5.5
5
5
5
5.5
10
7.5
5
5
5
10
6
8
7
10
10
10
8
8
5
7
5
8
6.5
8
7
5
6
7.5
10
5
7
5
6
10
7
5
75
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
10
12
15
10
10
10
10
10
30
15
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
15
Dercentiles
90 95
30 90
30 120
15 30
20 60
15 15
20 30
30 120
15 40
30 120
15 15
10 10
20 30
25 30
30 120
20 35
30 121
30 120
20 40
121 121
30 121
15 60
15 30
15 35
30 121
30 120
20 45
20 70
30 121
15 30
20 60
30 120
30 120
15 35
25 90
30 120
30 90
15 121
25 60
120 120
98
121
121
121
121
120
60
121
120
121
20
10
30
121
121
121
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
56
121
121
120
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
120 120
121 121
120 120
10 10
30 30
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
90 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
= doer sample size. Percentiles are the percentage
Page
15-54
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-40. Number of Minutes Spent at Home While the Windows Were Left Open (minutes/day)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N 1
1960 2
893 5
1067 2
99 0
159 3
101 2
1282 6
282 1
1558 2
208 3
47 10
44 1
80 2
1775 2
156 20
822 5
190 1
576 5
163 1
542 2
408 5
247 15
216 10
498 3
390 5
494 1
578 2
1285 3
675 2
308 1
661 10
680 10
311 3
1809 2
145 5
1902 3
49 1
1850 2
100 5
2
10
10
10
1
10
5
16
5
10
10
10
1
20
10
20
15
7
10
6
10
15
15
10
10
10
6
10
10
10
2
20
30
5
10
10
10
1
10
15
5
30
30
30
10
20
24
60
30
30
30
16
60
30
30
30
30
30
60
30
60
30
60
30
30
60
30
30
30
30
10
60
180
30
30
60
30
24
30
35
Note: Values of "180", "360", "600","840" and "961" for number of minutes si
than 16 hours, respectively, were spent. N = doer sample size. Percentiles are t
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
10
180
180
119
180
60
180
180
180
180
180
180
90
60
180
180
180
60
180
90
180
119
100
180
119
180
90
180
180
119
24
180
180
60
180
118
180
30
180
180
25 50
360 840
360 840
360 840
180 600
360 600
360 600
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 600
180 600
360 600
360 840
180 840
360 840
180 840
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 840
360 600
360 840
360 840
360 840
180 360
360 600
600 961
180 600
360 840
360 840
360 840
180 961
360 840
480 961
75
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
90
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
95
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
98
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
961
99 100
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
961 961
enify that 2-4 hours, 4-8 hours, 8-12 hours, 12- 16 hours, and more
ie percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-55
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-41. Number of Minutes the Outside Door Was Left Open While at Home (minutes/day)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
Percentiles
N
1170
505
665
68
109
79
718
180
968
100
23
22
45
1073
81
451
93
362
96
309
225
150
124
223
221
361
365
732
438
184
407
385
194
1072
97
1133
36
1105
63
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
2
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
5
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
2.5
1
1
0
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
0.5
2
2
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5 10
5 10
3 10
5 10
2 10
3 10
3 5
3 10
10 20
5 10
5.5 13
2 60
1 15
5 5
3 10
5 10
3 10
5 15
5 10
2 11
5 10
3 10
1 15
3 5
5 10
2 10
5 10
5 15
5 10
5 10
2 3
5 20
10 30
2 10
5 10
3 6
5 10
3 10
3 10
10 10
25
60
60
60
30
60
60
60
180
60
60
180
30
45
60
45
60
60
60
75
60
60
60
30
90
60
60
60
60
60
10
180
180
30
60
30
60
104.5
60
90
50
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
360
180
180
360
180
180
180
180
180
180
360
360
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
60
360
360
180
180
180
180
360
180
180
75
600
600
600
360
600
360
600
600
600
600
600
600
360
600
360
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
360
600
600
600
180
600
600
360
600
600
600
360
600
600
90
600
600
600
721
600
600
600
721
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
721
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
95
721
721
721
721
600
721
721
721
721
600
721
721
600
721
600
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
600
721
721
721
600
721
721
600
721
721
721
721
721
600
Note: Values of "180", "360", "600", and "721" for number of minutes signify that 2-4 hours, 4-8 hours, 8- 12 hours, and over
were spent. N = doer sample size. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
98
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
660.5
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
721
600
721
721
600
721
721
721
721
721
721
12 hours,
99 100
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
600 600
721 721
721 721
600 600
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
721 721
respectively,
Page
15-56
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 1 5-42. Number of Times an Outside Door Was Opened in the Home at Specified Daily Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Times/Day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeasi
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * Signifies missing data; "DK'
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
Total N
1187
511
676
19
68
109
79
730
182
979
103
23
22
46
14
1086
83
7
11
255
458
95
369
10
267
98
318
228
150
126
228
225
365
369
746
441
185
417
387
198
1087
99
1
1147
39
1
1121
64
2
1-2
192
80
112
6
13
15
11
112
35
155
22
1
3
8
3
179
11
*
2
40
79
14
58
1
42
21
48
44
21
16
37
44
59
52
116
76
19
73
72
28
175
16
1
183
8
1
179
12
1
= respondent answered don't know;
3-5
248
96
152
3
14
16
17
145
53
193
28
9
4
11
3
227
17
2
2
46
98
20
81
3
48
17
66
52
37
28
38
54
81
75
167
81
51
94
68
35
228
20
*
241
7
*
230
18
*
6-9
229
100
129
2
8
18
17
156
28
188
21
4
2
10
4
208
16
1
4
43
95
19
69
3
46
15
65
37
39
27
49
39
69
72
156
73
39
66
81
43
211
18
*
221
8
*
216
12
1
N = sample size; Refused
10-19
267
118
149
3
17
31
13
171
32
233
12
6
7
8
1
244
20
3
*
60
104
22
80
1
63
18
71
49
31
35
53
50
71
93
167
100
42
90
80
55
245
22
*
259
8
*
258
9
*
20+
196
93
103
1
13
23
17
123
19
168
14
2
4
8
*
180
15
1
*
53
72
18
52
1
54
20
54
34
19
15
38
33
66
59
106
90
27
73
66
30
179
17
*
192
4
*
186
10
*
DK
55
24
31
4
3
6
4
23
15
42
6
1
2
1
3
48
4
*
3
13
10
2
29
1
14
7
14
12
5
13
5
19
18
34
21
7
21
20
7
49
6
*
51
4
*
52
3
*
= respondent refused to answer.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-57
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-43. Number of Minutes Spent Running
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Walking, or Standing Alongside a Road with Heavy Traffic (minutes/day)
Percentiles
N
401
202
198
12
20
27
304
31
306
51
10
7
24
356
43
214
50
76
18
106
84
79
50
129
83
105
84
303
98
104
114
104
79
370
31
393
8
378
22
1 2
0 1
1 1
0 0
1 1
1 1
0 0
0 1
2 2
0 1
0 0
3 3
2 2
2 2
0 1
1 1
0 1
0 0.5
0 1
4 4
1 1
0 0
0 1
1 1
1 1
0 0
0 0
1 2
0 0
1 1
0 0
1 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 0
0 1
2 2
0 1
2 2
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
5
2
2
1
1
1.5
2
1
2
2
1
3
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
4
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
5
10
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
4
2
1
4
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
5
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
5
25
5
5
5
4
5
4
5
5
5
3
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5.5
6
5
5.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4.5
6
5
5
5
5
5
6.5
5
5
120 minutes were spent.
50
15
17.5
10
7.5
6
5
15
20
15
7
7.5
10
17.5
15
10
15
15
15
10
15
20
15
10
20
10
15
15
15
15
10
20
10
20
15
15
15
17.5
15
17.5
N =
75
30
45
30
30
12.5
30
30
45
30
30
15
45
40
30
30
30
30
30
15
60
40
30
20
50
20
30
30
30
30
20
60
30
35
30
30
30
30
30
30
90
60
120
60
60
25
60
90
60
110
50
17.5
121
60
90
60
120
90
60
30
121
120
60
52.5
120
60
90
60
60
121
60
120
60
120
60
120
90
60
60
121
doer sample size
95 98
121 121
121 121
120 121
60 60
60 90
90 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
20 20
121 121
60 120
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
110 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
90 121
90 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
120 121
121 121
110 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
90 90
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
20 20
121 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
Percentiles are the
Page
15-58
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 1 5-44. Number of Minutes Spent in a Car, Van, Truck, or Bus in Heavy Traffic (minutes/day)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/emphysema
Bronchitis/emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N 1
1197 1
534 1
663 1
33 4
63 1
52 3
889 1
139 3
959 1
133 2
20 5
24 5
55 1
1097 1
95 1
659 1
108 2
279 1
81 0
352 1
276 1
176 1
150 2
229 2
263 2
429 1
276 1
927 1
270 2
286 1
317 1
312 1
282 2
1108 1
89 2
1159 1
35 0
1130 2
64 1
2
2
2
2
4
2
3
2
3
2
3
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
0
2
1
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
4
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
3
4
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
2
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
25
10
10
10
10
10
9
10
15
10
10
11
12.5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
12.5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
120 minutes were spent
50
20
20
25
15
20
12.5
25
30
25
20
20
30
20
20
20
30
20
30
20
30
30
30
20
20
30
30
20
20
25
20
30
30
20
20
30
20
30
20
27.5
N =
75
60
60
60
30
45
27.5
60
60
60
40
30
60
60
60
90
60
48.5
60
40
60
60
60
60
60
45
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
45
60
60
60
70
60
51
90
120
120
120
60
60
90
120
121
120
90
45
90
120
120
121
120
121
120
121
120
120
120
97.5
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
121
120
121
120
120
doer sample size
95 98
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 121
120 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
52.5 60
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
Percentiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-59
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-45. Number of Minutes Spent in a Parking Garage or Indoor Parking Lot (minutes/day)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/emphysema
Bronchitis/emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N
294
138
156
8
15
20
229
18
208
34
15
7
28
251
39
171
23
58
13
58
54
72
50
53
59
92
90
208
86
67
78
85
64
263
30
291
2
281
12
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
2
3
1
0
1
1
2
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
3
0
2
2
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
2
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
0
1
1
1
1
2
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
3
1
2
5
1
1
1
0
1
0.5
2
0
2
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
5
1
0
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
3
1
2
10
2
2
2
0
2
1.5
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
2
3
2
5
2
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
5
25
3
4
3
2
3
2
5
3
3
5
2
3
4.5
3
5
3
5
4
5
3
4
4.5
5
5
3
3.5
4
3
5
3
3
5
4.5
3
4
4
3
3
5
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent.
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
50
5
5
5
3.5
5
7.5
5
5
5
5
10
5
10
5
10
5
5
10
10
9.5
5
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
7
5
5.5
5
5
5
7
5
46.5
5
5.5
75 90
10 30
15 60
10 20
5 10
10 45
15 45
10 30
15 45
10 30
15 20
60 120
15 121
20 60
10 30
30 121
10 30
10 30
20 40
10 30
30 90
15 40
10 15
10 12.5
10 30
10 30
10 30
15 45
10 30
15 30
10 20
15 60
15 30
10 30
10 30
10 30
10 30
90 90
10 30
10 60
N = doer sample size.
95 98
60 121
121 121
40 60
10 10
60 60
90.5 121
60 121
90 90
60 121
30 30
121 121
121 121
120 121
60 120
121 121
60 121
60 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
60 120
20 40
90 121
60 121
60 121
60 121
60 121
60 121
30 120
120 121
90 121
45 121
60 121
121 121
60 121
90 90
60 121
120 120
99 100
121 121
121 121
120 121
10 10
60 60
121 121
121 121
90 90
121 121
30 30
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
90 90
121 121
120 120
Percentiles are the
Page
15-60
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-46. Number of Minutes Spent Walking Outside to a Car in the Driveway or Outside Parking Areas (minutes/day)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Percentiles
N
3303
1511
1791
132
245
202
2303
373
2756
279
53
63
127
3029
235
1613
312
785
241
935
680
445
381
680
763
1149
711
2209
1094
855
890
903
655
3063
234
3219
72
3132
162
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
25
2
2
2
1.5
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
120 minutes were spent.
50
5
4
5
2
2
5
5
5
5
3
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
N =
75
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
90
20
20
20
15
15
20
20
15
20
10
15
30
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
15
15
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
15
20
15
20
15
20
20
doer sample size.
95 98
30 60
30 60
30 60
20 30
30 45
30 30
30 60
30 30
30 60
20 30
30 32
30 60
60 120
30 60
60 120
30 60
45 120
30 60
30 110
30 60
30 60
30 60
25 30
30 60
30 60
30 60
30 60
30 60
30 60
30 30
30 100
30 60
30 45
30 60
30 120
30 60
30 45
30 60
30 110
99 100
121 121
121 121
60 121
60 121
80 121
60 121
120 121
88 121
120 121
45 88
45 45
120 120
121 121
120 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
60 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
60 121
120 121
90 121
120 121
90 121
120 121
120 121
120 121
100 121
120 121
60 121
110 121
120 121
121 121
120 121
110 110
120 121
121 121
Percentiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-61
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-47. Number of Minutes Spent Running or Walking Outside Other Than to the Car (minutes/day)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (yeaars)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
5:>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
5:hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N
1273
605
668
82
149
110
772
143
1051
111
21
23
55
1156
99
517
112
300
97
287
234
153
138
265
286
412
310
843
430
312
403
396
162
1162
105
1240
25
1204
62
1
1
2
0
3
4
5
0
1
1
0
2
5
2
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
3
5
5
1
1
1
1
2
5
3
1
2
1
2
1
1
0
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
5
3
5
2
5
5
5
2
2
3
3
10
10
8
3
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
5
3
3
5
3
3
3
4
2
4
3
2
3
5
3
5
3
4
10
5
10
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
10
15
10
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5.5
5
5
5
10
10
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
25
15
20
15
30
30
15
15
15
15
15
15
20
20
15
20
15
15
15
15
15
15
20
15
20
15
15
15
15
20
10
20
20
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
120 minutes were spent
50 75
45 120
60 121
30 116
120 121
120 121
60 121
30 120
30 60
45 121
35 120
30 70
60 121
40 90
45 120
60 121
30 120
30 90
30 120
30 90
30 120
30 120
45 120
37.5 90
45 120
40 121
45 121
45 120
40 120
60 121
42.5 90
60 121
55 121
30 120
45 120
45 121
45 120
45 121
45 120
30 120
90
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
N = doer sample size
95 98
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 21
121 21
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 21
121 21
121 121
121 21
121 121
121 21
121 21
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
Percentiles are the
Page
15-62
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-48. Number of Hours Spent Working for Pay (hours/week)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Percentiles
N
4896
2466
2430
0
0
14
4625
181
3990
499
76
87
194
4494
341
4094
802
0
308
1598
1251
954
716
1096
1118
1675
1007
3306
1590
1306
1197
1343
1050
4579
302
4811
66
4699
182
1
0
0
0
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
12
18
6
*
*
1
15
0
10
18
7
0
15
12
8
30
0
*
1
12
15
16
10
14
12
12
9
10
12
10
15
3
14.5
12
9
12
0
12
6
25
33
40
28
*
*
9
35
5
32
35
36.5
30
32
33
32
40
10
*
21
32
30
40
35
32
32
35
30
33
33
32
35
33
32
34
30
34
20
33
30
50
40
40
40
*
*
18.5
40
21
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
20
*
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
75 90
50 60
53 61
43 55
* *
* *
24 26
50 60
40 50
50 60
46 60
50 61
50 60
48 60
50 60
50 60
50 60
30 38
* *
48 61
48 60
50 60
50 60
50 60
50 60
50 60
50 60
50 60
50 60
48 60
50 60
50 60
48 60
50 60
50 60
48 60
50 60
44 60
50 6
48 60
Note: * Signifies missing data. A value of "61" for number of hours signifies that more than 60 hours were spent. N =
are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of hours.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
95
61
61
60
*
*
31
61
61
61
61
61
61
60
61
61
61
40
*
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
98
61
61
61
*
*
31
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
*
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
doer sample size.
99 100
61 61
61 61
61 61
* *
* *
31 31
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
* *
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
Percentiles
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-63
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-49. Number of Hours Spent Working for Pay
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Between 6PM and 6AM (hours/week)
Percentiles
N 1
4894 0
2465 0
2429 0
0 0
0 0
14 0
4623 0
181 0
3989 0
499 0
75 0
87 0
194 0
4492 0
341 0
4092 0
802 0
0 0
308 0
1597 0
1251 0
953 0
716 0
1096 0
1118 0
1674 0
1006 0
3306 0
1588 0
1305 0
1197 0
1342 0
1050 0
4578 0
301 0
4809 0
66 0
4697 0
182 0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note: A Value of "61" for number of hours signifies that more than 60 hours
doers below or equal to a given number of hours.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
were spent.
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
4.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N = doer sample
75
8
10
5
0
0
20
8
0
8
10
12
7
15
8
13
8
6
0
11
8
9
8
7
7
10
7
10
8
7
8
8
9
7
8
8
8
7
8
10
size.
90
30
35
20
0
0
24
30
20
25
40
30
25
35
27
35
30
20
0
50
35
26
20
20
24
30
30
30
30
28
28
30
30
25
30
28
30
36
30
40
95
45
50
39
0
0
25
42
61
40
61
61
45
48
40
50
45
35
0
61
50
40
40
30
40
42
48
47
48
40
40
48
48
40
45
36
44
40
43
50
98
61
61
61
0
0
25
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
0
61
61
60
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
99 100
61 61
61 61
61 61
0 0
0 0
25 25
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
0 0
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
Percentiles are the percentage of
Page
15-64
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-50. Number of Hours Worked in a Week That Was Outdoors (hours/week)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N 1
4891 0
2463 0
2428 0
0 0
0 0
14 0
4621 0
181 0
3986 0
499 0
75 0
87 0
194 0
4489 0
341 0
4090 0
801 0
0 0
308 0
1594 0
1251 0
953 0
716 0
1094 0
1117 0
1674 0
1006 0
3305 0
1586 0
1305 0
1195 0
1341 0
1050 0
4576 0
300 0
4806 0
66 0
4694 0
182 0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NOTE: A value of "61" for number of hours signifies that more than 60 hours
doers below or equal to a given number of hours.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
were spent.
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N =
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
1
16
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
0
1
2
1
2
2
0
0
16.5
6
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
1
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
4
1
2
doer sample size
90 95
30 50
42 60
2 12
0 0
0 0
0 0
30 50
29 60
30 50
25 48
3 30
17 40
30 50
30 48
35 60
35 50
15 30
0 0
55 61
40 60
30 46
20 35
4 15
25 40
30 50
32 55
33 50
32 50
30 48
25 50
30 50
36 50
30 45
30 50
31 50
30 50
35 50
30 50
30 60
98
61
61
55
0
0
0
61
61
61
61
40
48
61
61
61
61
61
0
61
61
61
50
60
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
99 100
61 61
61 61
61 61
0 0
0 0
0 0
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
0 0
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
61 61
Percentiles are the percentage of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-65
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-51. Number of Times Floors Were Swept or Vacuumed at Specified Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Number of Times
Almost Every Day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeasf
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * Signifies missing data; DK
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
4663
2163
2498
2
84
263
348
326
2972
670
3774
463
77
96
193
60
4244
347
26
46
926
2017
379
1309
32
1021
399
1253
895
650
445
1048
1036
1601
978
3156
1507
1264
1181
1275
943
4287
341
35
4500
125
38
4424
203
36
921
415
505
1
16
96
115
82
524
88
641
167
11
26
68
8
799
106
8
8
290
291
82
256
2
314
110
269
130
64
34
236
156
376
153
631
290
268
217
251
185
821
95
5
892
21
8
871
45
5
= respondent answered don't know;
3-5/week
1108
520
588
0
11
74
107
83
723
110
879
115
15
29
61
9
988
107
3
10
267
486
82
263
10
285
91
302
223
132
75
230
249
403
226
765
343
309
286
312
201
1013
88
7
1080
23
5
1064
39
5
1-2/week
2178
976
1201
1
41
88
120
144
1420
365
1868
150
39
32
55
34
2035
110
11
22
342
1018
177
626
15
384
162
591
438
346
257
484
527
707
460
1458
720
557
560
596
465
2030
133
15
2098
63
17
2063
99
16
N = sample size; Refused
1-2/month
373
201
172
0
12
4
6
15
252
84
324
19
8
8
7
7
345
21
2
5
24
184
34
127
4
31
20
69
93
93
67
83
86
93
111
248
125
105
96
94
78
351
17
5
352
16
5
349
17
7
< Often Never
48
27
21
0
3
0
0
2
34
9
36
5
3
1
2
1
43
3
1
1
2
27
1
18
0
4
6
12
8
9
9
8
10
11
19
33
15
15
12
13
8
39
7
2
44
2
2
44
2
2
10
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
6
4
8
2
0
0
0
0
9
0
1
0
0
2
0
8
0
0
2
3
2
3
0
2
2
2
4
5
5
2
3
1
4
10
0
0
10
0
0
9
1
0
DK
25
19
6
0
1
1
0
0
13
10
18
5
1
0
0
1
25
0
0
0
1
9
3
11
1
3
8
7
1
3
3
5
6
9
5
16
9
8
7
8
2
23
1
1
24
0
1
24
0
1
= respondent refused to answer.
Page
15-66
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-52. Number of Days Since the Floor Area in the Home Was Swept or Vacuumed by the Number of Respondents
Number of Days since That Area Was Swept- vacuumed
Total 0
N
Overall 9386 8112
Gender
Male 4294 3688
Female 5088 4421
Refused 4 3
Age (years)
* 187 180
1-4 499 67
5-11 703 393
12-17 589 533
18-64 6059 5592
>64 1349 1347
Race
White 7591 6586
Black 945 825
Asian 157 138
Some Others 182 141
Hispanic 385 300
Refused 126 122
Hispanic
No 8534 7421
Yes 702 549
Dk 47 42
Refused 103 100
Employment
* 1773 974
Full Time 4096 3826
Part Time 802 741
Not Employed 2644 2502
Refused 71 69
Education
* 1968 1162
< High School 834 793
High School Graduate 2612 2447
< College 1801 1681
College Graduate 1 247 1155
Post Graduate 924 874
Census Region
Northeast 2075 1793
Midwest 2102 1826
South 3243 2805
West 1966 1688
Day of Week
Weekday 6316 5487
Weekend 3070 2625
Season
Winter 2524 2144
Spring 2438 2112
Summer 2536 2187
Fall 1888 1669
Asthma
No 8629 7455
Yes 694 596
Dk 63 61
Angina
No 9061 7793
Yes 250 246
Dk 75 73
Bronchitis/emphysema
No 8882 7645
Yes 433 397
Dk 71 70
Swept-
Vacuumed
Yes'day
550
245
304
1
1
199
121
30
198
1
398
72
5
21
52
2
460
88
1
1
349
96
28
77
0
353
24
76
55
28
14
129
108
193
120
366
184
162
121
167
100
502
48
0
547
2
1
536
13
1
1
278
136
142
0
0
93
70
12
102
1
232
18
6
7
15
0
248
29
1
0
175
64
10
29
0
175
13
39
25
19
7
65
59
87
67
160
118
79
90
68
41
262
15
1
277
1
0
268
10
0
2
189
100
89
0
3
54
50
6
76
0
152
17
2
9
9
0
170
17
1
1
112
50
8
18
1
114
2
26
18
17
12
35
47
75
32
125
64
61
48
41
39
171
17
1
189
0
0
182
7
0
Note: * Signifies missing data; DK = respondents answered don't know;
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
3
85
35
50
0
1
24
23
3
34
0
72
7
2
2
2
0
80
5
0
0
50
21
6
8
0
50
1
9
10
10
5
18
21
26
20
57
28
27
19
26
13
80
5
0
83
1
1
84
1
0
4
63
37
26
0
0
19
22
0
22
0
55
3
1
1
2
1
57
4
1
1
41
18
2
2
0
41
0
7
6
5
4
4
17
27
15
51
12
17
19
19
8
59
4
0
63
0
0
61
2
0
5 6
31 17
19 8
12 9
0 0
0 0
17 9
8 2
0 1
6 5
0 0
29 14
1 2
0 0
0 0
0 1
1 0
29 15
2 2
0 0
0 0
25 12
6 4
0 0
0 1
0 0
25 12
0 0
1 2
0 1
3 1
2 1
9 9
7 2
8 3
7 3
18 13
13 4
7 3
9 7
12 3
3 4
30 13
1 4
0 0
31 17
0 0
0 0
31 17
0 0
0 0
N= sample size; Refused =
7
26
10
16
0
0
7
4
2
13
0
24
0
1
0
1
0
24
2
0
0
13
6
4
3
0
13
0
0
3
7
3
6
6
8
6
15
11
13
4
3
6
22
4
0
26
0
0
25
1
0
8
2
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
10
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
14
5
3
2
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
2
1
4
1
1
2
2
0
5
0
0
5
0
0
5
0
0
>2
Weeks Dk
16 11
7 5
9 6
0 0
1 1
6 1
2 5
2 0
5 4
0 0
13 8
0 0
1 1
1 0
1 2
0 0
14 8
1 3
1 0
0 0
9 7
4 0
1 1
1 3
1 0
10 7
0 1
2 2
2 0
1 1
1 0
5 2
2 2
5 4
4 3
11 6
5 5
5 5
5 2
4 3
2 1
16 11
0 0
0 0
16 11
0 0
0 0
15 10
1 1
0 0
respondent refused to answer.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-67
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-53. Numberof Loads of Laundry Washed in a Washing Machine at Home by the Number of Respondents
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Total N
1762
678
1083
1
30
109
141
127
1161
194
1511
112
22
31
68
18
1615
126
6
15
369
734
160
482
17
413
133
508
321
212
175
367
406
628
361
1172
590
458
465
482
357
1615
140
7
1710
40
12
1658
96
8
Number of Loads/Day
1
582
219
363
*
9
29
38
39
385
82
513
27
7
8
18
9
536
38
*
8
102
259
58
158
5
118
44
175
105
83
57
111
125
205
141
418
164
154
154
158
116
548
31
3
564
14
4
544
36
2
2
604
241
363
*
14
36
55
52
376
71
519
41
4
12
24
4
556
42
2
4
143
244
53
158
6
160
44
166
101
68
65
146
123
228
107
409
195
159
159
166
120
545
56
3
592
9
3
572
28
4
3
303
120
183
*
2
24
28
22
209
18
254
23
3
5
15
3
271
26
4
2
71
128
23
79
2
77
22
85
61
32
26
57
76
110
60
194
109
73
87
85
58
274
28
1
294
7
2
285
16
2
Note: * Signifies missing data; "DK" = respondent answered don't know;
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996
4
123
41
82
*
3
12
8
10
80
10
101
11
5
1
5
*
115
8
*
*
29
42
10
41
1
32
10
35
25
11
10
23
42
39
19
62
61
31
28
38
26
105
18
*
113
8
2
112
11
*
5
55
17
38
*
1
5
6
1
35
7
48
4
*
1
2
*
50
5
*
*
12
20
8
15
*
12
4
18
9
8
4
13
14
17
11
29
26
14
10
11
20
50
5
*
54
1
*
53
2
*
6
27
8
19
*
*
2
2
1
22
*
23
1
*
1
2
*
24
3
*
*
5
10
3
8
1
6
3
8
3
4
7
5
6
9
17
10
6
10
8
3
27
*
*
26
1
*
26
1
*
7
11
*
10
1
*
*
1
*
9
1
11
*
*
*
*
*
11
*
*
*
1
5
*
5
*
1
2
3
2
*
3
2
3
6
*
7
4
3
3
4
1
11
*
*
11
*
*
10
1
*
8 9
12 1
* 1
12 *
* *
* *
* *
* 1
1 *
11 *
* *
12 1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
12 1
* *
* *
* *
i i
4 *
1 *
6 *
* *
1 1
* *
4 *
5 *
1 *
1 *
1 *
6 1
4 *
1 *
7 1
5 *
4 1
2 *
3 *
3 *
12 1
* *
* *
12 1
* *
* *
12 1
* *
* *
10 >10
5 1
1 *
4 1
* *
* *
1 *
1 *
* *
3 1
* *
3 *
1 *
* *
* *
1 *
* 1
4 *
1 *
* *
* 1
2 *
2 *
* *
1 1
* *
2 *
* *
* *
2 1
* *
1 *
* *
* 1
3 *
2 *
1 1
4 *
3 1
1 *
1 *
* *
5 1
* *
* *
5 1
* *
* *
5 1
* *
* *
DK
38
30
8
*
1
*
1
1
30
5
26
4
3
3
1
1
35
3
*
*
2
20
4
10
2
3
4
14
7
5
5
7
10
10
11
26
12
9
11
8
10
36
2
*
37
*
1
37
1
*
N= sample size; Refused = respondent refused to answer.
Page
15-68
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 1 5-54. Number of Times Using a Dishwasher at Specified Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * Signifies missing data; "DK"
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996
2635
1235
1399
1
35
145
211
206
1718
320
2267
163
54
45
84
22
2444
164
11
16
552
1191
204
678
10
593
124
582
560
446
330
538
514
953
630
1768
867
711
664
721
539
2439
189
7
2570
60
5
2533
93
9
Number of Times/Week
* Almost Every Day
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
= respondent answered don't know;
557
259
298
*
4
9
14
27
438
65
504
19
7
9
13
5
524
27
2
4
49
276
48
181
3
55
29
153
144
105
71
133
116
200
108
378
179
144
122
157
134
521
35
1
538
19
*
540
16
1
3-5/Week
678
282
396
*
13
4
8
33
512
108
603
32
8
8
15
12
635
32
2
9
45
359
70
200
4
51
27
173
181
134
112
144
130
251
153
466
212
175
181
185
137
622
54
2
664
11
3
646
27
5
1-2/Week
529
247
282
*
11
3
15
31
397
72
487
19
7
1
12
3
504
21
2
2
46
298
46
136
3
55
26
114
117
126
91
95
110
169
155
341
188
149
132
134
114
492
35
2
512
16
1
504
23
2
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-55. Number of Times Washing Dishes by Hand at Specified Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
3626
1554
2071
1
65
1
103
228
2642
587
2928
385
61
67
147
38
3322
258
21
25
328
1765
349
1165
19
386
354
1106
796
591
393
832
811
1214
769
2474
1152
985
902
987
752
3345
263
18
3501
105
20
3438
169
19
Note: * Signifies missing data; "DK"
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
Almost Every
2600
982
1618
*
51
*
12
57
1979
501
2114
261
48
44
108
25
2383
185
16
16
71
1282
270
965
12
101
298
856
606
445
294
636
569
840
555
1759
841
691
648
705
556
2407
179
14
2499
86
15
2459
126
15
= respondent answered don't know;
Number of Times/Week
Day 3-5/Week
490
264
225
1
6
*
14
45
379
46
391
61
6
9
17
6
454
32
*
4
57
284
44
104
1
65
26
140
116
86
57
90
114
175
111
335
155
138
117
132
103
455
33
2
475
11
4
460
27
3
1-2/Week
326
183
143
*
2
1
33
69
201
20
257
40
3
9
12
5
296
25
3
2
102
145
17
60
2
107
15
74
57
47
26
60
81
124
61
236
90
90
85
92
59
290
34
2
321
5
*
314
11
1
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 1 5-56. Number of Times for Washing Clothes in a Washing Machine at Specified Frequencies by the Number of Respondents
Number of Times/Week
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
>fo
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Total N
4663
2163
2498
2
84
263
348
326
2972
670
3774
463
77
96
193
60
4244
347
26
46
926
2017
379
1309
32
1021
399
1253
895
650
445
1048
1036
1601
978
3156
1507
1264
1181
1275
943
4287
341
35
4500
125
38
4424
203
36
Note: * Signifies missing data; "DK" =
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996
*
404
212
191
1
3
261
101
1
31
7
316
39
4
16
29
*
342
59
2
1
366
21
6
10
1
367
3
14
3
12
5
84
88
147
85
257
147
121
122
102
59
371
32
1
403
*
1
397
7
*
Almost Every Day
566
211
355
*
6
*
2
22
489
47
499
33
1
10
19
4
528
31
3
4
23
305
64
170
4
33
61
218
126
78
50
119
108
229
110
407
159
157
135
163
111
522
42
2
555
8
3
549
15
2
3-5 /Day
1033
458
575
*
11
*
4
29
832
157
883
72
12
15
41
10
950
69
6
8
32
569
101
326
5
37
88
367
261
171
109
216
229
376
212
697
336
273
259
280
221
951
79
3
993
37
3
979
51
3
1-2/week
1827
811
1015
1
47
*
16
83
1328
353
1445
207
39
36
77
23
1674
130
10
13
97
929
166
628
7
129
178
548
432
321
219
454
408
557
408
1217
610
472
464
484
407
1700
118
9
1759
58
10
1724
92
11
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-57. Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Sand or Gravel in a Day by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Day
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refusedused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
DK
Bronchitis/Emphyseme
No
Yes
Note: "*" = Signifies missin
minutes spent. A value of " 1
Source: Tsang and Klepeis,
Total N
700
352
347
1
3
216
200
41
237
3
568
68
5
16
41
2
619
77
3
1
461
149
29
60
1
461
22
73
66
54
24
124
128
273
175
445
255
107
240
262
91
638
61
1
699
1
679
21
*-* 0-0
41 348
18 189
23 158
* 1
1 *
13 115
7 96
1 23
18 112
1 2
34 274
4 42
* 2
2 9
* 19
2
36 309
5 36
* 2
* 1
22 234
9 73
2 10
7 31
1 *
22 234
5 9
4 39
2 34
4 26
4 6
8 60
6 69
17 133
10 86
35 216
6 132
10 44
8 113
12 146
11 45
38 319
3 28
* 1
40 348
1 *
41 339
* 9
0-10
42
20
22
*
*
15
11
1
15
*
37
5
*
*
*
*
41
1
*
*
27
7
4
4
*
27
*
4
6
3
2
8
8
18
8
27
15
9
21
5
7
39
3
*
42
*
41
1
10-20 20-30 30-40
34 57
13 25
21 32
* *
1 *
9 15
12 14
2 4
10 24
* *
30 49
3 2
* 1
* *
1 5
* *
29 49
4 8
1 *
* *
24 33
7 16
1 2
2 6
* *
24 33
* 3
1 8
2 6
3 6
4 1
5 7
6 14
12 25
11 11
22 40
12 17
6 11
14 22
9 20
5 4
34 51
* 6
* *
34 57
* *
34 54
* 3
4
*
4
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
4
*
*
*
2
1
1
*
*
2
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
3
1
3
1
1
1
2
*
4
*
*
4
*
4
*
40-50 50-60
12 66
7 32
5 34
* *
* *
3 15
5 25
* 3
4 23
* *
9 57
1 4
* 1
* 1
2 3
* *
10 59
2 7
* *
* *
8 43
3 17
* 4
1 2
* *
8 43
* 1
* 6
2 6
2 7
* 3
4 16
2 11
3 30
3 9
10 37
2 29
2 8
3 25
5 25
2 8
10 57
2 9
* *
12 66
* *
12 62
* 4
70-80
2
*
2
*
*
1
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
1
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2
2
*
2
*
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
2
*
80-90
9
7
2
*
*
5
2
*
2
*
8
*
*
*
i
*
7
2
*
*
7
2
*
*
*
7
*
1
*
*
1
1
2
3
3
6
3
1
2
5
1
9
*
*
9
*
9
*
90-100
2
1
1
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2
*
2
*
*
*
2
*
2
*
*
2
*
2
*
110-120
27
10
17
*
*
7
6
3
11
*
21
3
*
*
3
*
23
4
*
*
16
6
2
3
*
16
2
2
4
*
3
6
3
6
12
17
10
4
12
9
2
22
5
*
27
*
26
1
121
56
30
26
*
1
16
20
3
16
*
44
4
1
3
4
*
49
7
*
*
41
8
3
4
*
41
2
7
4
2
*
9
7
21
19
28
28
9
19
22
6
51
5
*
56
*
53
3
gdata. "DK" = Don't know. Refused = refused to answer. N = Doer sample size in specified range of number of
21" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent.
1996.
Page
15-72
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-58. Number of Minutes Spent Playing in Sand or Gravel (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Bronch/emphys
Bronch/emphys
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
N
659
334
324
203
193
40
219
2
534
64
5
15
39
583
72
140
27
53
17
69
64
50
20
116
122
256
165
410
249
97
232
250
80
600
58
659
638
21
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
15
0
1.5
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
30
75 90
45 120
45 120
60 120
30 120
60 121
45 120
45 120
0 0
50 120
15 120
60 121
60 121
60 121
45 120
60 120
45 105
60 121
30 120
60 121
30 121
37.5 120
30 60
60 120
60 120
30 60
45 120
60 121
40 120
60 121
45 120
52.5 120
60 120
30 105
45 120
60 120
45 120
45 120
60 121
95 98
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
0 0
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
0 0
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
= doer sample size. Percentiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-73
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-59. Number of Minutes Spent Playing in Outdoors on Sand, Gravel, Dirt, or Grass
When Fill Dirt Was Present by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Day
Total N
0-0 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 70-80 80-90 110-120
121
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Einpl
loyment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Anngina
No
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
700
352
347
3
216
200
41
237
568
68
5
16
41
2
619
77
3
1
461
149
29
60
1
461
22
73
66
54
24
124
128
273
175
445
255
107
240
262
91
638
61
699
1
679
21
53
26
27
11
15
3
23
40
*
45
29
11
4
29
6
4
6
12
23
12
39
14
14
10
17
12
48
53
52
380
183
196
118
103
19
138
2
317
33
2
10
17
345
32
3
240
91
17
32
240
9
44
38
35
14
70
77
153
235
145
51
134
143
52
354
25
380
368
12
51
22
29
14
14
3
19
40
*
1
5
42
9
32
8
8
32
*
7
7
3
2
13
6
17
15
34
17
6
17
19
9
47
4
51
51
29
18
11
10
21
*
2
4
21
20
20
*
2
4
3
12
21
6
10
12
1
25
4
29
28
1
48
33
15
13
15
7
13
38
6
2
1
44
35
8
2
35
3
3
4
10
20
13
34
14
20
19
4
41
48
46
2
1
1
60
24
36
18
17
4
20
48
*
1
4
54
40
12
2
40
2
7
1
18
17
18
38
22
21
25
7
50
10
60
57
1
1
21
16
5
15
17
18
18
2
2
11
6
10
11
2
10
19
2
21
21
43
21
22
16
17
38
1
38
35
1
35
2
3
2
6
4
13
20
24
19
12
13
15
3
40
43
42
Note: "*" Signifies missing data. "DK"k = Respondents answered don't know. Refused = Respondents refused to answer. N = Doer sample size
in specified range of number of minutes spent. A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-74
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-60. Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Sand, Gravel, Dirt, or Grass When Fill Dirt Was Present (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
N
647
326
320
205
185
38
214
2
528
60
5
16
36
574
69
138
25
52
17
67
62
51
18
118
116
250
163
406
241
93
230
245
79
590
56
646
627
20
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. N
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
0
0
0
30
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
75 90
30 100
30 120
30 60
30 120
30 120
30 60
15 60
0 0
30 120
30 74
30 121
20 40
60 120
30 90
30 120
15 60
10 60
10 60
60 121
10 60
15 60
15 30
0 60
30 60
20 60
30 90
60 121
30 88
30 120
45 121
30 105
30 90
10 60
30 110
60 60
30 100
30 120
37.5 60
95 98
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
120 121
0 0
121 121
120 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
60 121
60 121
121 121
88 120
60 121
60 121
120 120
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
90.5 121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
121 121
0 0
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
= doer sample size. Percentiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-75
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-61. Range of the Time Spent Working in a Garden or Other Circumstances in a Month by the Number of Respondents
Hours/Month
Total *-* 0-0 0-24
N
Overall 4663 91 2928 1312
Gender
Male 2163 38 1309 628
Female 2498 53 1618 683
Refused 2*1 1
Age (years)
* 84 11 51 17
1-4 263 7 189 55
5-11 348 7 225 100
12-17 326 5 236 75
18-64 2972 37 1813 900
>64 670 24 414 165
Race
White 3774 59 2303 1128
Black 463 9 351 77
Asian 77 1 50 25
Some Others 96 2 64 23
Hispanic 193 6 126 50
Refused 60 14 34 9
Hispanic
No 4244 65 2669 1206
Yes 347 11 218 94
DK 26 1 18 5
Refused 46 14 23 7
Employment
* 926 19 638 230
Full Time 2017 18 1235 600
Part Time 379 4 234 120
Not Employed 1309 39 808 354
Refused 32 11 13 8
Education
* 1021 34 699 246
< High School 399 18 263 86
High School 1253 25 770 355
Graduate 895 11 545 265
< College 650 1 406 200
College Graduate 445 2 245 160
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast 1048 17 714 259
Midwest 1036 23 687 273
South 1601 35 989 446
West 978 16 538 334
Day of Week
"Weekday 3156 62 1982 890
Weekend 1507 29 946 422
Season
Winter 1264 9 1038 171
Spring 1181 29 614 434
Summer 1275 39 690 421
Fall 943 14 586 286
Asthma
No 4287 70 2697 1206
Yes 341 6 216 101
DK 35 15 15 5
Angina
No 4500 74 2825 1277
Yes 125 4 86 29
DK 38 13 17 6
Bronchitis/emphysema
No 4424 72 2766 1265
Yes 203 5 146 43
DK 36 14 16 4
24-48
145
77
68
*
*
4
9
6
97
29
127
9
1
2
5
1
135
9
*
1
20
68
9
48
*
22
11
41
33
19
19
24
19
64
38
96
49
20
50
56
19
135
10
*
143
1
1
140
5
*
48-72
81
41
40
*
2
3
4
1
52
19
69
8
*
2
1
1
73
6
1
1
8
35
3
35
*
8
9
22
18
12
12
12
18
26
25
54
27
9
20
33
19
77
4
*
77
3
1
77
2
2
72-96
28
16
12
*
2
2
*
*
16
8
22
3
*
1
2
*
25
3
*
*
2
12
2
12
*
3
4
9
6
3
3
4
5
11
8
18
10
5
8
12
3
27
1
*
28
*
*
27
1
*
96-
120
23
9
14
*
1
2
*
1
16
3
21
*
*
*
1
1
20
3
*
*
3
9
4
7
*
3
4
7
3
5
1
8
3
7
5
15
8
3
7
9
4
23
*
*
21
2
*
22
1
*
Note: * Signifies missing data. DK = respondents answered don't know. Refused
specified range of number of minutes spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
120-
144
1
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
144-
168
10
8
2
*
*
1
*
*
7
2
7
2
*
1
*
*
8
1
1
*
1
7
2
*
*
1
1
5
1
1
1
3
*
4
3
8
2
2
4
2
2
10
*
*
10
*
*
10
*
*
= respondents
168- 192-
192 216
5 12
4 10
1 2
* *
* *
* *
1 *
1 1
1 8
2 3
4 11
1 *
* *
* 1
* *
* *
5 12
* *
* *
* *
2 1
1 10
* *
2 1
* *
2 1
* 1
2 8
* 2
1 *
* *
* 2
* 3
4 3
1 4
3 6
2 6
2 2
1 4
1 3
1 3
5 12
* *
* *
5 12
* *
* *
5 12
* *
* *
216-
240
8
8
*
*
*
*
*
*
8
*
7
1
*
*
*
*
8
*
*
*
*
8
*
*
*
*
*
4
4
*
*
1
*
6
1
7
1
*
5
3
*
6
2
*
8
*
*
8
*
*
refused to answer.
240-
264
3
2
1
*
*
*
*
*
3
*
3
*
*
*
*
*
3
*
*
*
*
2
*
1
*
*
*
*
3
*
*
*
3
*
*
2
1
*
2
1
*
3
*
*
3
*
*
3
*
*
264-
288
1
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
288- 312-
312 336
1 14
* 11
1 3
* *
* *
* *
* 1
* *
* 13
1 *
1 10
* 2
* *
* *
* 2
* *
1 12
* 2
* *
* *
* i
* 11
* i
i i
* *
* i
* 2
1 4
* 4
* 2
* 1
* 3
* 2
1 4
* 5
1 11
* 3
1 2
* 3
* 4
* 5
1 13
* 1
* *
1 14
* *
* *
1 14
* *
* *
N = doer sample size in
Page
15-76
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-62. Number of Hours Spent Working with Soil in a Garden or Other Circumstances Working (hours/month)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Grad
Education < College
Education College Grad.
Education Post Grad.
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Percentiles
N
4572
2125
2445
256
341
321
2935
646
3715
454
76
94
187
4179
336
1999
375
1270
381
1228
884
649
443
1031
1013
1566
962
3094
1478
1255
1152
1236
929
4217
335
4426
121
4352
198
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5 10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note: * Signifies missing data. DK = respondents answered don't know. Refused =
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsana and Klepeis. 1996.
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
3
3
2
1
2
1
3
3
3
0
1.5
2
2
3
2
4
3
3
2
3.5
4
3
5
1
2
3
5
3
3
0
5
5
3
3
2
3
2
3
1
90
15
20
12
7
10
5
16
25
16
8
6
15
12
15
15
20
12
20
16
20
20
16
20
10
10
18
20
15
15
4
20
25
10
15
12
15
7
15
7
respondents refused to answer.
95 98
40 88
50 150
30 60
20 60
20 50
10 40
40 90
60 90
40 88
30 60
15 24
60 150
25 90
40 80
32 90
45 144
32 90
45 64
60 120
50 120
40 90
40 70
40 61
30 90
30 60
40 90
50 90
40 80
40 90
12 50
45 110
50 96
30 88
40 90
30 60
40 88
24 60
40 88
24 60
99 100
160 320
230 320
90 320
120 150
60 320
60 200
200 320
160 300
160 320
160 320
40 40
200 200
320 320
180 320
120 320
240 320
120 320
100 320
160 320
200 320
240 320
100 320
90 320
120 320
120 320
180 320
200 320
160 320
150 320
90 320
200 320
160 320
180 320
160 320
80 320
160 320
110 120
180 320
80 100
N = doer sample size.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-77
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-63. Range of Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Grass in a Day by the Number of Respondents
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School
Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
Total
N
700
352
347
1
3
216
200
41
237
3
568
68
5
16
41
2
619
77
3
1
461
149
29
60
1
461
22
73
66
54
24
124
128
273
175
445
255
107
240
262
91
638
61
1
699
1
679
21
*_*
43
25
18
*
*
10
15
2
16
*
36
3
*
*
4
*
38
5
*
*
27
8
2
5
1
27
2
4
2
3
5
5
8
21
9
33
10
12
9
12
10
38
5
*
43
*
43
*
0-0
79
35
44
*
*
24
24
5
26
*
65
4
*
4
5
1
65
13
*
1
54
16
5
4
*
54
2
8
7
5
3
14
7
22
36
55
24
22
23
20
14
73
6
*
79
*
76
3
0-10 10-20
49 49
23 25
26 24
* *
1 1
19 21
10 10
1 2
18 15
* *
40 39
6 7
1 *
* 1
2 2
* *
44 42
5 7
* *
* *
31 34
12 10
1 1
5 4
* *
31 34
1 1
9 4
4 6
3 4
1 *
10 4
10 10
20 25
9 10
35 32
14 17
6 6
16 13
20 18
7 12
46 44
3 5
* *
49 48
* 1
49 47
* 2
20-30
85
41
44
*
*
25
19
8
32
1
58
14
3
1
9
*
73
11
1
*
52
21
6
6
*
52
4
6
13
6
4
13
15
30
27
55
30
15
28
36
6
78
7
*
85
*
83
2
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes. Refusec
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
Minutes/Day
30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70
7 11 125 1
3 5 64 *
4 6 61 1
* * * *
* * * *
1 4 35 *
2 3 38 1
* 1 8 *
4 3 44 *
* * * *
7 9 98 1
* 1 15 *
* * * *
* * 4 *
* * g *
* 1 * *
6 11 110 1
1 * 14 *
* * 1 *
* * * *
3 8 81 1
3 3 25 *
* * 4 *
1 * 15 *
* * * *
3 8 81 1
* * 3 *
1 1 9 *
2 * 20 *
1 1 10 *
* 1 2 *
* 3 26 *
1 3 23 *
5 4 52 1
1 1 24 *
3 7 82 *
4 4 43 1
2 * 15 *
1 5 49 *
2 5 48 1
2 1 13 *
7 9 114 1
* 2 10 *
* * 1 *
7 11 125 1
* * * *
7 11 120 1
* * 5 *
70-80
1
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
80-90
21
12
9
*
*
8
8
1
4
*
17
2
*
1
1
*
18
3
*
*
17
2
2
*
*
17
*
3
*
*
i
2
4
11
4
15
6
5
7
7
2
18
3
*
21
*
20
1
120 minutes were spent. N = doer sample size.
= respondent refused to answer.
90-
100
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
100-
110
2
1
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
2
*
1
1
*
i
i
*
2
*
*
2
*
2
*
110- 121-
120 121
66 160
33 84
33 75
* 1
* 1
18 49
20 49
8 5
20 54
* 2
56 139
5 11
* 1
2 3
3 6
* *
62 146
4 13
* 1
* *
46 104
13 36
3 5
4 15
* *
46 104
3 5
6 22
3 9
6 15
2 5
10 36
15 31
23 57
18 36
38 87
28 73
5 19
26 61
29 63
6 17
60 146
6 14
* *
66 160
* *
65 153
1 7
Percentiles are the
Page
15-78
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-64. Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Grass (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
N
657
327
329
206
185
39
221
3
532
65
5
16
37
581
72
141
27
55
20
69
64
51
19
119
120
252
166
412
245
95
231
250
81
600
56
656
636
21
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NOTE: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
3
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
1
0
0
7.5
1
0
0
1
0
1
1.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
20
20
15
15
30
30
20
30
20
20
30
10
30
20
10
20
15
23
30
15
17.5
30
25
30
30
20
10
15
30
4
30
30
10
20
22.5
20
20
30
120 minutes were spent. N
50
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
121
60
58
30
60
60
60
35
60
60
60
60
60
46.5
60
60
60
60
60
45
60
60
30
60
60
35
60
60
60
60
60
75 90
120 121
121 121
120 121
120 121
121 121
120 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
90 121
30 121
120 121
110 121
121 121
100 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
120.5 121
121 121
60 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
120 121
120 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
120 121
120.5 121
120 121
120 121
121 121
= doer sample size.
95 98
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
Percentiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-79
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-65.
Number of Times Swimming in a Month in Freshwater Swimming Pool by the Number of Respondents
Times/Month
Total N
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 1 5-65. Number of Times Swimming in a Month in Freshwater Swimming Pool by the Number of Respondents (continued)
Times/Month
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
•Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema
No
Yes
DK
18 20
2 25
* 10
2 15
* *
* *
* 2
* 3
1 4
* 15
1 1
2 19
* 3
* 1
* *
* 1
* 1
2 23
* 1
* *
* 1
1 9
* 8
* *
1 7
* 1
1 11
* 1
* 6
* 3
* 2
1 2
* 7
* 4
2 7
* 7
1 18
1 7
1 3
* 8
1 10
* 4
2 21
* 3
* 1
2 24
* *
* 1
2 22
* 2
* 1
23
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
24
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
25
9
4
5
*
*
*
2
*
7
*
9
*
*
*
*
*
9
*
*
*
2
5
1
1
*
2
*
1
4
2
*
2
1
4
2
7
2
*
2
7
*
9
*
*
9
*
*
9
*
*
26
2
2
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
i
i
i
i
*
i
*
i
i
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
Note: * Signifies missing data; "DK" = respondent answered don't know;
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996
28 29
1 1
1 *
* 1
* *
* *
* 1
* *
* *
1 *
* *
1 1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 1
* *
* *
* *
* 1
1 *
* *
* *
* *
* 1
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 *
* *
* *
1 1
* *
1 *
* 1
1 *
* *
* 1
* *
1 1
* *
* *
1 1
* *
* *
1 1
* *
* *
30 31
26 2
10 2
16 *
* *
* *
2 *
5 *
2 *
15 2
2 *
19 2
3 *
* *
* *
3 *
1 *
20 2
6 *
* *
* *
9 *
10 2
1 *
6 *
* *
9 *
1 *
4 *
4 *
3 2
5 *
2 1
4 *
9 1
11 *
19 *
7 2
* 1
3 *
21 1
2 *
23 2
2 *
1 *
26 2
* *
* *
23 2
3 *
* *
N= sample size; Refused
32 40
1 2
1 1
* 1
* *
* *
1 *
* *
* *
* 2
* *
1 2
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 2
* *
* *
* *
1 *
* 2
* *
* *
* *
1 *
* *
* *
* *
* 2
* *
* 1
* *
* i
i *
i i
* i
* *
* *
1 2
* *
1 2
* *
* *
1 2
* *
* *
1 2
* *
* *
42 45 50
2 1
1 *
1 1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 1
1 *
2 *
* *
* *
* *
* 1
* *
2 *
* 1
* *
* *
* *
1 1
* *
1 *
* *
* *
* *
i *
* i
i *
* *
i *
i *
* *
* i
* i
2 *
1 *
1 *
* 1
* *
2 1
* *
* *
1 1
1 *
* *
2 1
* *
* *
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
i
*
i
*
*
1
*
*
*
i
*
1
*
*
i
*
*
60 DK
2 5
* 4
2 1
* *
* *
* *
* *
1 1
* 3
1 1
2 5
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
2 4
* 1
* *
* *
1 1
* 2
* *
1 1
* 1
1 1
* *
1 1
* 2
* 1
* *
* 1
* *
1 4
1 *
2 4
* 1
* *
1 2
1 3
* *
2 5
* *
* *
2 5
* *
* *
2 4
* 1
* *
= respondent refused to answer.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
15-81
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-66. Rang
e of the Average Amount of Time Actually
Spent in the Water by Swimmers by the Number of Respondents
Minutes/Month
Total
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
"Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
N
653
300
352
1
8
63
100
84
360
38
555
30
13
12
35
8
591
55
2
5
243
240
43
122
5
257
16
112
104
93
71
136
130
235
152
445
208
62
174
363
54
590
56
7
639
8
6
621
26
6
*_s
13
5
7
1
1
3
5
1
3
*
7
3
*
*
1
2
11
1
*
1
9
3
*
1
*
9
*
1
2
1
*
2
3
8
*
11
2
2
3
7
1
12
1
*
13
*
*
13
*
*
0-10 10-20
62 75
31 38
31 37
* *
2 1
5 12
3 2
3 7
45 50
4 3
53 67
1 1
1 1
1 2
5 4
1 *
57 67
5 8
* *
* *
11 20
31 29
3 10
16 16
1 *
13 22
4 2
12 10
15 16
8 15
10 10
12 17
10 17
20 19
20 22
45 52
17 23
6 6
21 24
29 36
6 9
52 71
9 3
1 1
60 73
* 2
2 *
56 72
5 3
1 *
20-30 30-40
120 20
60 6
60 14
* *
2 *
12 1
12 5
10 2
75 8
9 4
105 18
4 *
3 1
1 *
4 1
3 *
108 19
10 1
* *
2 *
34 8
51 4
12 1
21 7
2 *
35 8
3 *
16 5
27 2
21 2
18 3
28 5
27 4
37 6
28 5
82 14
38 6
10 5
37 7
64 6
9 2
114 19
4 *
2 1
118 19
1 1
1 *
115 19
4 1
1 *
40-50
39
17
22
*
*
4
4
6
22
3
36
*
*
*
2
1
35
3
*
1
13
14
3
8
1
15
*
8
4
6
6
9
8
15
7
23
16
3
12
20
4
33
5
1
37
1
1
37
1
1
50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90
131 8 2 31
55 3 * 18
76 5 2 13
* * * *
* * * *
8 * * 2
25 * * 7
15 * 1 8
74 8 * 13
9*11
109 8 2 24
8 * * 5
4 * * !
3 * * *
7 * * 1
* * * *
120 8 2 29
10 * * 2
1 * * *
* * * *
48 * 1 16
51 3 * 8
21*5
30 4 1 2
* * * *
50 * 1 17
31*1
26 1 1 5
20 3 * 4
17 1 * 1
15 2 * 3
20 3 1 4
24 1 * 6
56 * * 13
31 4 1 8
87 7 2 19
44 1 * 12
14 * * 3
32 * 2 6
77 6 * 20
82*2
117 8 2 26
14 * * 5
* * * *
130 8 2 30
1 * * 1
* * * *
123 7 2 31
7 * * *
1 1 * *
90-
100
2
1
1
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
2
*
*
*
*
*
2
*
*
*
i
*
*
i
*
i
*
i
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
2
1
1
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
Note: * Signifies missing data. DK = respondents answered don't know. Ref = respondents refused to answer.
specified range of number of minutes spent. Values of 120, 150, and 180 for number of minutes signify that 2
respectively, were spent.
110-
120
68
28
40
*
2
7
16
14
26
3
59
1
1
2
4
1
62
5
*
1
37
21
2
7
1
39
*
11
6
10
2
13
17
26
12
46
22
7
13
44
4
64
3
1
66
1
1
67
*
1
150-
150
10
6
4
*
*
1
2
4
3
*
9
1
*
*
*
*
9
1
*
*
7
3
*
*
*
7
*
*
i
2
*
3
1
4
2
8
2
1
3
6
*
9
1
*
10
*
*
10
*
*
ISO-
ISO
32
17
15
*
*
3
11
6
12
*
26
1
*
1
4
*
28
4
*
*
19
10
*
3
*
20
*
5
2
4
1
9
7
12
4
22
10
1
6
23
2
26
6
*
32
*
*
30
2
*
181-
181
40
15
25
*
*
5
8
6
20
1
30
5
1
2
2
*
34
5
1
*
19
12
4
5
*
20
2
10
2
5
1
10
5
18
7
27
13
3
7
25
5
35
5
*
39
*
1
37
3
*
N = doer sample size in
hours, 2.5 hours, and 3 hours,
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
Page
15-82
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-67. Number of Minutes Spent Swimming in a Month in Freshwater Swimming Pool (minutes/month)
Category
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Percentiles
N
640
295
345
60
95
83
357
38
548
27
13
12
34
580
54
237
43
121
16
111
102
92
71
134
127
227
152
434
206
60
171
356
53
578
55
626
8
608
26
1
2
3
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
10
4
2
3
2
3
3
2
2
1
3
3
2
5
4
5
2
2
2
4
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
15
3
2
2
3
4
3
3
3
5
3
5
3
10
4
2
3
3
5
4
2
2
1
5
3
3
10
8
5
3
3
3
5
3
4
3
10
3
3
3
15
3
2
5
10
8
10
7.5
20
15
5
8
10
15
4
2
5
10
5
5
5
8
1
8
5
10
10
10
10
5
5
8
10
5
5
10
10
10
4
10
15
10
5
10
15
10
15
15
30
20
10
10
15
30
20
15
10
15
15
10
15
10
2
10
10
15
10
15
15
15
10
10
15
12.5
10
15
10
15
10
15
15
15
5
25 50
30 60
30 45
30 60
20 42.5
45 60
40 60
20 45
30 40
30 45
60 60
30 60
25 60
20 60
30 60
30 52.5
20 45
20 30
20 45
12.5 30
30 60
20 30
22.5 42.5
20 30
30 45
30 45
30 60
20 45
30 60
30 60
30 52.5
20 40
30 60
20 45
30 55
30 60
30 60
25 42.5
30 60
15 42.5
75
90
90
90
120
120
120
60
60
90
150
60
150
120
90
120
60
90
60
60.5
90
60
60.5
60
120
90
120
61
90
90
90
60
120
70
90
120
90
75
90
60
90 95
180 181
180 181
180 181
180 181
180 181
180 181
120 181
120 120
180 181
181 181
120 181
181 181
180 181
180 181
180 181
150 181
120 181
120 180
181 181
180 181
120 120
150 181
70 120
180 181
150 180
180 181
120 180
180 181
180 181
120 180.5
120 180
180 181
180 181
180 181
180 181
180 181
120 120
180 181
181 181
98
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
180
181
180
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
120
181
181
99 100
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
181 181
120 120
181 181
181 181
Note: A Value of 181 for number of minutes signifies that more than 180 minutes were spent. N = doer sample size. Percentiles are the
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsana and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-83
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-68. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Working in a Main Job
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Percentiles
N Mean
3259 475.909
1733 492.305
1526 457.288
80 472.375
3 16.667
10 150.4
38 293.158
2993 484.822
135 366.148
2630 477.536
343 466.551
57 464.053
56 477.41 1
125 465.88
48 492.083
2980 475.393
221 481.493
12 529.583
46 468.522
47 257.915
2679 504.35
395 364.587
112 270.946
26 513.577
108 343.037
217 473.502
Education High School Graduate 1045 482.03
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
795 475.585
627 484.526
467 483.041
721 475.964
755 477.008
1142 478.231
641 470.415
2788 487.858
471 405.18
864 475.784
791 472.972
910 477.185
694 477.739
3042 477.013
195 453.354
22 523.182
3192 475.735
44 472.068
23 507.391
3120 476.547
116 446.991
23 535.217
Stdev
179.067
186.996
167.74
183.298
11.547
185.796
180.681
173.083
208.656
179.01
175.989
177.305
181.661
185.322
191.623
179.214
174.32
146.226
201.347
202.833
164.818
159.361
216.024
155.456
211.879
216.729
180.638
174.025
159.816
169.574
180.84
182.167
176.739
177.801
166.167
229.526
172.828
195.425
179.907
165.961
176.967
204.227
216.952
178.389
200.68
230.296
178.194
189.381
226.256
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
3.1367
4.4919
4.294
20.4933
6.6667
58.754
29.3103
3.1638
17.9582
3.4906
9.5025
23.4846
24.2754
16.5757
27.6584
3.2829
11.726
42.2117
29.687
29.5863
3.1843
8.0183
20.4123
30.4875
20.3881
14.7125
5.5879
6.172
6.3824
7.847
6.7348
6.6297
5.23
7.0227
3.147
10.576
5.8797
6.9485
5.9639
6.2998
3.2086
14.625
46.2542
3.1574
30.2536
48.02
3.1902
17.5836
47.1777
Min
1
1
2
5
10
2
5
1
5
1
5
5
45
2
50
1
2
295
10
2
1
5
4
170
2
4
1
2
5
1
1
2
1
5
i
2
5
1
1
2
1
5
170
1
10
80
1
5
170
Max
1440
1440
1440
940
30
550
840
1440
990
1440
1037
870
855
840
957
1440
1106
757
860
840
1440
945
990
840
860
1440
1440
1440
1005
945
1440
1440
1440
1080
1440
1440
1440
1440
1215
1005
1440
1440
1215
1440
990
1215
1440
985
1215
5 25
120 395
120 417
120 390
117.5 377.5
10 10
2 10
15 185
140 420
30 185
120 400
105 390
45 390
75 415
95 360
120 410
120 395
150 405
295 425
115 350
5 65
180 450
80 250
9 82.5
225 440
10 176.5
85 360
120 405
140 409
120 424
125 400
120 405
120 395
105 405
120 390
155 425
30 245
150 390
75 390
120 400
130 405
120 400
45 345
225 430
120 395
60 386
170 430
120 400
30 367.5
225 430
50
500
510
485
482.5
10
67.5
269
505
395
500
490
493
510
485
507.5
500
505
554
497.5
245
510
365
245
510
342.5
485
500
495
510
510
495
495
505
500
505
415
495
495
500
510
500
480
500
500
500
500
500
480
500
75
570
595
543
560
30
264
390
570
500
570
550
553
570
580
575
570
580
610
585
390
582
480
377.5
570
510
568
565
563
570
590
570
570
570
570
570
555
570
570
565
570
570
550
565
570
572.5
565
570
557.5
600
90
660
690
620
672.5
30
447.5
510
660
600
660
655
660
680
720
810
660
670
710
780
540
675
540
600
778
610
710
670
648
645
660
669
660
660
657
660
670
660
670
670
645
660
668
780
660
679
780
660
644
860
95 98
740 840
770 890
690 785
850 900
30 30
550 550
675 840
745 840
660 840
735 845
735 880
750 780
765 780
750 825
840 957
740 850
740 825
757 757
818 860
625 840
750 855
600 675
675 795
790 840
675 840
795 940
765 890
750 825
720 765
730 810
740 890
750 825
735 840
730 850
740 840
770 870
735 835
765 850
750 890
720 780
740 840
793 855
860 1215
740 840
730 990
860 1215
740 840
720 800
875 1215
99
930
955
850
940
30
550
840
930
940
933
990
870
855
840
957
940
840
757
860
840
950
795
870
840
840
1080
979
905
815
860
950
940
900
880
930
960
900
915
979
840
930
979
1215
930
990
1215
930
855
1215
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Page
15-84
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-69. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Food Preparation
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
4278
1342
2936
94
24
60
131
3173
796
3584
377
62
66
132
57
3960
254
20
44
210
1988
419
1626
35
291
450
Education High School Graduate 1449
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
954
659
475
953
956
1452
917
2995
1283
1174
1038
1147
919
3948
300
30
4091
149
38
4024
216
38
Mean
52.35
37.77
59.02
52
56.46
25.17
21.7
52.07
60.5
51.62
57.03
54
50.59
58.76
53.14
51.84
58.99
54.95
58.61
27.17
45.46
53.85
63.62
53.54
31.71
61.26
58.84
51.99
46.2
46.04
52.3
53.23
53.35
49.91
50.05
57.72
50.62
54.39
51.34
53.54
52.02
57.14
47.63
52.18
56.81
53.97
52.01
56.91
62.39
Stdev
52.877
42.133
55.872
43.217
60.37
29.688
37.69
52.872
54.669
53.259
52.289
41.822
53.237
49.73
49.297
52.603
56.694
53.2
53.296
40.549
46.66
55.413
57.743
66.78
42.621
53.232
56.665
52.238
48.078
48.686
53.178
51.814
53.471
52.72
49.979
58.762
48.626
54.484
54.194
54.535
53.176
49.443
44.812
52.97
48.238
60.417
53.092
46.683
61.703
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
0.8084
1.1501
1.0311
4.4575
12.3229
3.8327
3.293
0.9386
1.9377
0.8896
2.693
5.3115
6.553
4.3285
6.5295
0.8359
3.5573
11.8959
8.0346
2.7981
1.0465
2.7071
1.432
11.2879
2.4985
2.5094
1.4886
1.6913
1.8728
2.2339
1.7226
1.6758
1.4032
1.741
0.9132
1.6405
1.4192
1.6911
1.6002
1.7989
0.8463
2.8546
8.1815
0.8282
3.9518
9.8009
0.837
3.1764
10.0096
Min Max
1
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
6
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
555
480
555
215
240
120
385
555
525
555
390
210
295
315
210
555
420
240
210
385
480
520
555
340
385
555
520
525
515
375
480
520
555
515
555
420
480
525
555
520
555
272
195
555
340
240
555
240
240
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
8
5
0
5
5
5
9
9
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
5
5
-)
25 50
20 35
13 30
25 45
20 40
22.5 30
5 11
5 10
20 35
25 45
19 35
20 40
20 50
15 33.5
23.5 52.5
20 40
20 35
20 45
25 45
27.5 37.5
5 15
15 30
20 40
29 45
20 30
5 15
30 45
22 45
20 34.5
15 30
15 30
20 40
20 35
15.5 35
15 31
19 35
20 40
18 35
20 38.5
20 35
20 37
20 35
20.5 45
10 32.5
20 35
25 45
10 32.5
20 35
20 45
20 42.5
Percentiles
75 90
65 115
50 80
75 120
60 110
75 150
30 60
30 55
65 110
80 120
65 110
75 120
70 105
70 115
79.5 110
60 120
65 111
75 120
60 112.5
80 150
30 60
60 90
65 105
90 125
60 120
37 75
90 120
75 120
65 110
60 100
60 95
60 110
65 120
70 120
60 105
60 105
75 130
65 110
70 120
60 110
67 120
65 110
75 120
60 117.5
65 115
80 120
60 120
65 110
85 120
90 150
95
150
105
155
150
180
107
70
145
150
145
150
130
150
135
180
145
155
180
180
90
130
125
170
195
120
150
155
150
125
135
140
150
150
135
132
180
135
150
137
155
145
160
120
150
135
240
145
150
240
98 99
210 265
150 210
224 272
195 215
240 240
120 120
90 90
210 265
240 270
210 265
210 240
175 210
210 295
225 285
195 210
205 255
240 315
240 240
210 210
120 180
180 240
205 255
240 275
340 340
155 195
197 225
240 310
210 245
180 224
200 270
205 255
210 265
195 245
225 265
180 240
240 300
195 240
224 265
208 300
200 265
210 265
199 240
195 195
210 265
180 210
240 240
210 265
198 210
240 240
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-85
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-70. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Food Cleanup
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Percentiles
N Mean Stdev
1143 32.9948 40.379
204 27.4951 20.398
939 34.1896 43.44
24 31.0417 28.013
5 41.6 48.04
9 28.4444 21.634
28 26.75 20.573
808 31.3317 27.053
269 38.8067 67.357
976 32.9652 41.685
82 33.2805 28.602
11 27.0909 22.047
17 29.7059 34.797
42 35.6429 39.899
15 34 28.234
1057 32.7351 40.353
68 38.9265 44.877
6 24.1667 9.704
12 26.6667 18.257
39 28.1538 25.77
432 28.4236 22.686
134 28.903 21.322
528 38.2254 53.763
10 28 21.884
59 27.2542 22.695
135 41.8593 58.603
Education High School Graduate 445 33.3483 45.827
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
259 33.5907 30.026
142 27.7254 21.846
103 28.9029 34.476
295 32.6169 28.347
252 28.4643 22.677
343 35.9242 52.496
253 33.9763 46.539
782 32.1957 43.579
361 34.7258 32.371
303 33.1188 51.809
245 30.2939 26.108
293 33.157 29.932
302 34.904 45.406
1047 32.7708 40.408
91 35.956 40.996
5 26 20.736
1092 32.9661 40.95
45 32.3111 22.926
6 43.3333 41.793
1065 31.77 28.195
71 50.8592 118.417
7 38.1429 41.119
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
1.1944
1.4282
1.4176
5.7182
21.4839
7.2113
3.8879
0.9517
4.1068
1.3343
3.1585
6.6476
8.4396
6.1565
7.2899
1.2412
5.4422
3.9616
5.2705
4.1265
1.0915
1.842
2.3398
6.9202
2.9546
5.0437
2.1724
1.8657
1.8333
3.397
1.6504
1.4285
2.8345
2.9259
1.5584
1.7037
2.9763
1.668
1.7487
2.6128
1.2488
4.2975
9.2736
1.2392
3.4175
17.062
0.864
14.0535
15.5417
Min
1
1
1
10
3
1
2
1
1
1
5
3
5
3
5
1
3
10
5
1
2
3
1
10
1
2
1
5
i
3
3
1
1
3
1
5
1
2
2
1
1
2
10
1
5
10
1
3
2
Max
825
180
825
120
120
75
90
330
825
825
180
75
150
255
90
825
270
35
60
120
255
150
825
60
120
570
825
255
180
330
270
210
825
570
825
270
825
250
270
570
825
255
60
825
120
120
330
825
120
5
8
10
5
10
3
1
5
10
5
8
10
3
5
10
5
5
10
10
5
2
8
10
5
10
3
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
10
10
8
8
8
10
5
8
6
8
10
8
5
10
8
5
2
25
15
15
15
15
15
12.5
15
15
15
15
15
10
15
10
15
15
15
12.5
15
15
15
15
10
10
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
10
15
15
10
15
15
10
50
30
25
30
30
30
20
30
30
30
30
15
15
30
30
30
30
27.5
25 3
15
25
25
30
17.5
20
30
30
30
22.5
25
30
30
30
27
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
20
30
30
30
30
29
30
75
35
30
35
30
30
30
30
40
35
30
30
30
40
60
35
40
30
2.5
30
30
30
45
55
30
45
30
45
30
30
40
30
40
30
30
40
30
30
40
40
35
40
30
35
45
60
35
35
60
90
60
50
60
60
75
60
60
60
60
65
60
60
50
90
60
60
35
60
65
50
60
60
60
60
85
60
60
50
50
60
50
65
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
120
60
70
120
95
85
60
90
105
75
65
80
105
84
90
75
150
60
90
85
120
35
60
90
60
60
105
60
75
120
90
85
60
60
90
60
90
75
75
90
85
65
90
90
85
90
60
85
60
120
80
105
120
98 99
120 135
80 85
120 150
120 120
75 75
90 90
120 120
130 270
120 130
120 180
75 75
150 150
255 255
90 90
120 130
255 270
35 35
60 60
120 120
90 120
95 100
120 250
60 60
90 120
180 270
120 120
105 150
90 120
60 120
120 120
85 120
120 180
120 255
120 120
120 180
120 120
105 120
120 135
120 180
120 120
250 255
60 60
120 150
120 120
120 120
120 120
570 825
120 120
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Page
15-86
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-71
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race Whrte
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Cleaning House
Percentiles
N Mean
1910 114.798
351 100.353
1559 118.051
45 136.2
11 74.091
49 42.633
67 78.746
1307 115.55
431 125.132
1614 115.85
139 108.712
32 97.656
26 80.5
73 99.781
26 179.615
1740 114.153
134 110.134
14 136.071
22 180.682
128 64.453
673 100.944
195 119.415
901 129.566
13 235
161 81.379
234 135.731
665 121.899
432 108.343
247 101.097
171 126.105
454 116.969
406 114.086
636 114.36
414 113.79
1287 108.319
623 128.185
464 105.554
445 114.202
546 109.908
455 130.677
1764 114.32
133 114.699
13 180.769
1826 113.702
70 120.371
14 230
1791 113.894
100 118.11
19 182.632
Stdev
111.683
110.445
111.737
114.124
69.42
35.19
79.357
111.597
118.341
111.348
106.826
101.091
58.059
110.669
176.878
109.99
115.754
131.591
177.33
66.811
99.87
115.568
118.009
218.908
98.129
121.618
118.814
100.456
96.605
118.897
117.268
111.049
112.921
104.234
108.542
116.861
98.348
109.757
113.686
122.137
110.119
117.523
214.533
110.563
103.11
210.868
111.025
104.363
179.253
Stderr Min
2.5555 1
5.8951 1
2.8299 1
17.0127 10
20.9308 10
5.0271 1
9.695 1
3.0868 1
5.7003 3
2.7716 1
9.0609 1
17.8705 15
11.3864 5
12.9528 5
34.6886 10
2.6368 1
9.9996 5
35.1691 10
37.8069 10
5.9053 1
3.8497 1
8.276 1
3.9314 3
60.7142 10
7.7337 1
7.9504 3
4.6074 2
4.8332 1
6.1468 1
9.0923 5
5.5037 2
5.5113 1
4.4776 1
5.1228 5
3.0256 1
4.682 1
4.5657 1
5.203 3
4.8653 1
5.7259 1
2.6219 1
10.1905 5
59.5007 10
2.5874 1
12.324 5
56.3569 10
2.6234 1
10.4363 5
41.1234 5
Max
810
810
790
480
270
180
300
810
790
790
490
425
210
548
810
790
658
510
810
300
655
660
790
810
810
715
790
570
525
655
790
720
810
720
790
810
810
720
690
790
790
690
810
790
394
810
790
480
810
5 25
10 30
10 30
15 40
10 55
10 40
5 20
5 20
15 30
10 45
10 35
5 30
15 30
10 35
10 30
20 30
10 30
10 34
10 30
20 45
5 22.5
10 30
15 45
15 50
10 120
5 28
10 50
15 40
10 30
15 30
15 45
10 30
10 30
10 30
15 40
10 30
15 45
10 30
15 30
10 30
15 45
10 30
10 33
10 45
14 30
5 30
10 120
10 30
7.5 32.5
5 50
50
80
60
90
105
60
30
55
85
90
85
80
60
60
60
135
80
60
92.5
138
45
60
85
95
180
45
115
90
85
60
90
90
80
80
82.5
70
90
75
75
71
90
82.5
64
120
80
90
210
80
90
150
Note: A"*" Signifres missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
75
150
120
160
180
90
53
105
150
170
155
135
127.5
115
120
240
150
135
210
240
77.5
120
175
180
255
100
180
160
149
127
180
164
150
150
160
150
180
150
165
135
180
150
150
240
150
190
255
150
180
240
90
255
240
255
297
90
90
240
270
250
255
270
265
185
210
390
255
240
240
340
180
240
265
285
450
225
297
270
240
240
280
240
240
270
240
240
290
240
240
245
300
255
270
340
255
262.5
480
255
262.5
340
95
335
310
340
320
270
120
240
350
340
330
358
345
190
345
465
330
360
510
390
240
310
390
360
810
265
390
360
315
315
390
330
325
360
330
315
370
285
340
365
390
330
390
810
330
320
810
340
297.5
810
98
465
400
465
480
270
180
285
435
540
435
480
425
210
470
810
435
480
510
810
270
410
480
480
810
300
540
484
420
390
495
480
475
435
400
465
435
360
465
465
480
450
470
810
465
370
810
450
467.5
810
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumul
= maximum number of minutes.
99
525
495
540
480
270
180
300
510
570
540
484
425
210
548
810
525
548
510
810
285
480
540
570
810
375
560
610
470
465
540
655
495
525
470
540
525
465
525
548
560
525
480
810
525
394
810
540
475
810
itive
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-87
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-72. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Cleaning
Category
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/emphysema
Bronchitis/emphysema
Bronchitis/emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
No
Yes
DK
Refused
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
*
< High School
Percentiles
N
692
417
275
13
4
12
20
479
164
621
30
6
12
14
9
652
26
5
9
38
315
52
280
7
46
96
High School Graduate 237
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
DK
142
99
72
144
155
218
175
420
272
128
252
205
107
640
47
5
665
18
9
661
26
5
Mean
145.9
160.8
123.2
210.5
138.3
104.6
142.3
147.4
139.9
146.4
134.2
65
163.5
128.2
206.7
145.6
115.3
218
216.7
132.1
147.7
135.1
145.1
252.9
136.8
146
154.2
146.7
137.3
134.3
135.2
131
158.7
151.8
132.5
166.6
149.5
151.3
133
153.4
147.3
109.1
312
143.6
144.7
318.9
146.2
104.8
312
Stdev
121.42
131.68
99.98
157.91
116.84
62.921
96.274
125.22
112.13
122.18
99.049
27.568
97.091
82.593
213.95
121.19
76.402
103.05
206.64
88.152
123.2
103.74
122.82
216.41
115.99
124.59
126.38
119.87
124.43
103.25
113.42
111.34
117.58
138.65
109.32
135.66
135.12
116.12
104.23
144.65
121.44
87.096
230.04
118.92
96.703
213.67
120.68
85.282
230.04
Stderr
4.616
6.448
6.029
43.796
58.421
18.164
21.527
5.721
8.756
4.903
18.084
11.255
28.028
22.074
71.317
4.746
14.984
46.087
68.88
14.3
6.942
14.387
7.34
81.794
17.101
12.716
8.209
10.059
12.505
12.168
9.451
8.943
7.964
10.481
5.334
8.225
11.943
7.315
7.28
13.984
4.8
12.704
102.879
4.611
22.793
71.223
4.694
16.725
102.879
Min Max
2 720
10 720
2 635
30 600
30 285
30 210
30 385
2 690
2 720
2 720
2 405
30 90
39 380
30 300
30 600
2 720
10 300
120 380
60 600
30 385
4 690
2 470
2 720
15 600
2 600
2 510
5 720
4 655
10 555
10 495
5 600
4 655
2 635
2 720
4 660
2 720
4 600
5 690
5 635
2 720
2 720
5 510
60 600
2 720
30 330
10 600
2 720
5 375
60 600
5 25
25 60
30 60
10 60
30 112
30 45
30 58
32.5 75
15 60
30 60
25 60
10 60
30 30
39 90
30 65
30 60
25 60
25 60
120 140
60 60
30 60
30 60
15 60
20 60
15 120
30 60
10 60
30 60
30 60
15 60
30 60
15 60
15 60
30 70
25 60
20 60
30 60
15 59.5
30 70
20 60
15 60
27.5 60
15 60
60 120
25 60
30 60
10 120
30 60
10 60
60 120
50 75
120 180
120 200
90 160
140 250
119 231.5
80 165
127 157.5
120 180
120 172.5
120 180
117.5 190
77.5 85
157.5 187.5
105 180
120 300
120 180
116.5 145
210 240
120 300
115 165
120 180
112.5 180
120 180
120 465
112.5 165
119.5 180
120 180
120 185
95 175
120 165
110 185
95 150
120 195
120 180
105 175
120 227.5
102.5 225
120 180
120 180
120 180
120 180
90 135
300 480
120 180
135 165
325 480
120 180
90 135
300 480
90
300
345
268
395
285
190
300
310
300
305
262.5
90
290
255
600
300
240
380
600
255
300
300
310
600
285
330
310
270
325
290
300
270
330
355
285
345
345
300
270
360
307.5
210
600
300
330
600
300
225
600
95
405
480
330
600
285
210
372.5
435
350
410
330
90
380
300
600
405
255
380
600
360
435
325
412.5
600
360
465
415
375
475
345
330
360
415
475
360
495
465
410
325
480
400
240
600
385
330
600
395
300
600
98 99
510 570
533 600
390 465
600 600
285 285
210 210
385 385
520 570
480 510
510 560
405 405
90 90
380 380
300 300
600 600
510 560
300 300
380 380
600 600
385 385
530 560
325 470
480 655
600 600
600 600
480 510
520 660
560 570
533 555
465 495
510 555
510 560
510 520
530 690
475 530
533 635
510 520
510 530
475 555
655 660
510 560
510 510
600 600
510 560
330 330
600 600
510 560
375 375
600 600
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-88
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-73. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Clothes Care
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema DK
Percentiles
N Mean Stdev
893 79.479 73.355
117 72.248 67.028
776 80.57 74.241
10 59.5 34.757
4 70 94.251
11 39 33.856
21 37.476 39.447
702 80.474 74.354
145 85.455 73.545
737 80.096 73.392
99 68.636 65.289
7 107.857 48.807
10 62.4 39.09
33 92.879 78.01
7 100.714 166.018
836 78.248 72.306
51 91.176 71.178
3 118.333 62.517
3 185 251.942
34 43.412 46.313
402 73.443 73.706
116 80.724 68.545
336 89.804 75.166
5 87.4 74.725
43 47.488 48.217
102 86.51 60.048
337 85.19 82.249
193 85.87 78.466
127 67.756 56.995
91 68.374 64.714
222 76.905 67.875
201 78.448 75.998
304 81.839 75.654
166 79.849 73.398
607 75.853 72.909
286 87.175 73.832
254 82.291 80.245
213 86.103 79.325
259 76.722 68.328
167 71.03 60.463
829 79.534 74.024
62 79.855 65.269
2 45 21.213
867 79.516 73.48
22 81.591 75.756
4 60 24.495
834 78.45 73.617
58 94.621 68.927
1 60 0
Stderr
2.455
6.197
2.665
10.991
47.126
10.208
8.608
2.806
6.108
2.703
6.562
18.447
12.361
13.58
62.749
2.501
9.967
36.094
145.459
7.943
3.676
6.364
4.101
33.418
7.353
5.946
4.48
5.648
5.058
6.784
4.555
5.36
4.339
5.697
2.959
4.366
5.035
5.435
4.246
4.679
2.571
8.289
15
2.496
16.151
12.247
2.549
9.051
0
Min
2
5
2
15
5
2
3
2
2
2
5
60
18
5
15
2
5
55
20
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
2
2
5
5
2
2
5
2
2
5
2
2
2
3
2
5
30
2
5
30
2
5
60
Max
535
360
535
120
210
92
150
535
375
535
300
210
120
265
475
535
265
180
475
210
535
335
475
180
210
265
535
475
260
360
535
475
450
405
475
535
475
450
535
300
535
375
60
535
335
90
535
335
60
5
10
7
10
15
5
2
5
10
10
10
5
60
18
5
15
10
5
55
20
3
5
10
10
0
5
15
10
5
10
5
10
5
10
5
5
10
7
10
8
5
10
10
30
10
10
30
8
15
60
25
30
20
30
25
17.5
5
10
28
30
30
15
80
21
20
20
30
20
55
20
10
20
30
35
45
10
38
30
21
20
20
30
20
30
20
25
30
23
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
45
25
60
60
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
50 75
60 118
60 90
60 120
60 90
32.5 122.5
30 60
20 60
60 120
60 120
60 118
45 110
90 120
65 90
90 150
45 60
60 115
90 150
120 180
60 475
30 60
60 100
67.5 117.5
60 120
60 150
30 60
65 120
60 120
60 120
60 90
60 90
60 120
60 115
60 115
60 120
60 105
65 120
60 120
60 120
60 115
60 105
60 118
66.5 120
45 60
60 120
60 120
60 75
60 115
77.5 120
60 60
90
175
150
180
105
210
90
80
180
180
175
165
210
120
210
475
165
190
180
475
92
155
180
185
180
92
175
180
190
150
145
150
170
170
180
160
180
190
180
154
150
180
154
60
178
155
90
170
190
60
95
210
210
225
120
210
92
120
210
245
223
210
210
120
225
475
210
225
180
475
150
223
225
235
180
150
210
240
240
190
210
200
210
235
223
210
223
225
240
190
195
225
180
60
210
195
90
210
240
60
98
300
300
300
120
210
92
150
300
300
300
240
210
120
265
475
300
225
180
475
210
300
240
300
180
210
240
375
300
225
245
245
265
330
300
300
300
330
335
240
240
300
200
60
300
335
90
300
300
60
99
375
335
375
120
210
92
150
360
375
375
300
210
120
265
475
360
265
180
475
210
360
330
375
180
210
245
445
375
225
360
300
420
375
360
375
335
445
375
360
300
360
375
60
375
335
90
375
335
60
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
15-89
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-74. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Car Repair/Maintenance
Percentiles
Category
Population Group
Mean
Stdev
Stderr Min Max
25
75
95
99
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
;e (years)
;e (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Male
Female
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
145
110
35
1
1
1
8
114
20
112
19
10
o
10
77
12
46
13
17
50
31
20
14
28
31
45
41
79
66
49
39
35
79
137
8
139
5
1
140
5
123.407
135.582
85.143
60
150
300
106.875
130.342
83.5
139.607
85.789
10
43.333
58
123.617
98.8
232.5
130.5
122.091
123.167
124.13
120
185.882
111.52
138.226
93.25
103.429
130.75
149.839
106.778
116.659
108.519
141.227
130.673
136.667
121.514
86.727
117.657
221.875
125.712
51
165
122.279
155
147.198
152.737
122.441
163.837
156.511
68.347
158.66
93.516
7.071
42.387
51.595
144.993
153.362
321.734
156.87
150.192
138.769
146.952
139.523
224.418
128.261
169.231
99.344
97.566
163.729
173.193
131.409
132.206
125.914
168.477
167.715
156.042
137.704
87.502
139.579
235.553
149.156
72.921
*
145.67
203.347
57.925
14.659
15.283
14.992
21.454
5
17.304
21.063
12.573
48.497
227.5
49.607
17.116
40.059
21.667
38.697
54.429
18.139
30.395
22.214
26.076
30.942
31.106
19.589
20.647
14.166
20.738
23.959
24.987
23.276
18.655
11.925
83.281
12.651
32.611
*
12.311
90.94
5
5
5
60
150
300
20
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
15
5
5
5
10
5
8
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
15
5
5
165
5
5
700
700
690
60
150
300
505
700
300
700
300
15
120
120
700
520
460
505
700
495
690
505
670
690
700
300
300
690
670
700
505
690
700
690
700
505
300
700
670
700
180
165
700
460
5
5
60
150
300
20
10
5
20
5
8
10
15
5
5
10
10
5
10
10
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
8
5
15
165
5
30
30
15
60
150
300
30
30
30
5
10
13
30
30
5
40
30
30
30
15
30
30
45
15
45
30
45
30
10
30
30
30
15
165
60
85
45
60
150
300
45
77.5
70
90
60
10
32.5
45
80
45
233
52.5
60
72.5
90
60
90
67.5
85
45
75
60
90
60
60
60
82.5
60
85
60
70
60
150
75
20
165
30 67.5
10 30
150
170
120
60
150
300
90
165
120
175
95
15
60
120
150
120
460
300
300
180
60
150
300
505
300
150
300
300
15
120
120
300
320
460
150 402.5
165 300
150 270
120 300
120 300
220
120
180
135
120
200
120
120
120
150
150
165
150
150
120
120
365
150
35
165
135
270
555
495
505
270
60
150
300
505
520
240
520
300
15
120
120
495
520
460
505
520
495
480
505
670
350
600
300
300
520
600
300
460
350
555
600
555
480
270
495
670
505
180
165
500
460
670
600
690
60
150
300
505
670
300
670
300
15
120
120
670
520
460
505
670
495
690
505
670
585
700
300
300
690
670
700
505
480
670
690
700
505
300
600
670
670
180
165
670
460
690
670
690
60
150
300
505
690
300
690
300
15
120
120
690
520
460
505
700
495
690
505
670
690
700
300
300
690
670
700
505
690
700
690
700
505
300
690
670
690
180
165
690
460
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers.
Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers
below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-90
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-75. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Repairs
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Percentiles
N Mean Stdev
288 184.816 184.111
200 205.045 187.704
88 138.841 167.784
1 540 *
3 66.667 55.076
14 119.5 103.383
221 198.471 192.928
49 141.878 146.868
264 186.367 184.944
13 150.385 207.961
3 321.667 89.489
3 173.667 165.228
4 127.5 122.848
1 75 *
278 184.917 184.467
9 160.556 180.666
1 375 *
17 110.176 97.439
140 199.993 206.025
27 167.963 153.74
102 183.314 169.14
2 61 83.439
18 110.722 94.558
23 214.348 215.017
Education High School Graduate 90 194.4 196.472
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
64 202.156 200.764
54 169 154.537
39 172.923 174.213
55 166.164 181.344
77 188.909 170.219
89 202.281 212.332
67 172.224 161.66
188 178.213 171.94
100 197.23 205.392
62 167.097 172.076
65 203.123 216.629
95 180.442 182.013
66 189.727 164.551
264 180.33 183.699
24 234.167 185.283
281 179.687 175.258
6 448.333 369.995
1 45 *
276 184.681 185.591
12 187.917 152.591
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
10.849
13.273
17.886
*
31.798
27.63
12.978
20.981
11.382
57.678
51.667
95.395
61.424
*
11.064
60.222
*
23.632
17.412
29.587
16.747
59
22.287
44.834
20.71
25.095
21.03
27.896
24.452
19.398
22.507
19.75
12.54
20.539
21.854
26.87
18.674
20.255
11.306
37.821
10.455
151.05
*
11.171
44.049
Min
2
2
3
540
10
15
2
2
2
10
270
45
10
75
2
10
375
10
5
5
2
2
10
15
3
2
5
2
3
10
2
2
2
3
3
5
2
2
2
5
2
90
45
2
5
Max
1080
1080
900
540
120
345
1080
526
1080
750
425
360
290
75
1080
575
375
345
1080
490
670
120
345
900
840
1080
525
690
840
780
1080
750
780
1080
600
900
1080
600
1080
670
900
1080
45
1080
405
5
10
10
5
540
10
15
10
10
10
10
270
45
10
75
10
10
375
10
8.5
10
10
2
10
30
5
10
10
7
5
15
10
7
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
90
45
10
5
25
36.5
60
17.5
540
10
30
45
30
36.5
30
270
45
35
75
35
60
375
30
60
25
30
2
30
45
30
32.5
60
38
30
60
30
60
42.5
32.5
15
45
60
55
36.5
45
30
100
45
36.5
45
50
120
150
72.5
540
70
90
120
75
120
90
270
116
105
75
120
60
375
90
120
120
120
61
90
120
132.5
130
97.5
120
75
120
120
120
110
145
90
120
120
120
120
210
120
410
45
120
165
75
300
327.5
192.5
540
120
180
325
209
300
120
425
360
220
75
300
210
375
180
297.5
302
315
120
180
360
300
355
270
270
210
315
315
243
300
296.5
300
300
290
330
288.5
352.5
295
600
45
299
350
90
425
460
360
540
120
285
434
390
430
390
425
360
290
75
425
575
375
285
470
390
420
120
285
480
447
420
425
420
415
420
480
340
430
420
445
480
390
420
420
480
420
1080
45
430
360
95
525
555
425
540
120
345
570
480
525
750
425
360
290
75
525
575
375
345
600
434
480
120
345
490
575
480
490
600
525
460
570
526
490
585
490
670
510
435
525
510
490
1080
45
526
405
98 99
690 840
680 810
750 900
540 540
120 120
345 345
750 840
526 526
670 840
750 750
425 425
360 360
290 290
75 75
690 840
575 575
375 375
345 345
840 900
490 490
526 600
120 120
345 345
900 900
780 840
600 1080
510 525
690 690
600 840
670 780
900 1080
690 750
600 750
870 990
540 600
840 900
750 1080
600 600
690 840
670 670
670 780
1080 1080
45 45
690 840
405 405
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-91
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-76. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Plant Care
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Percentiles
N Mean Stdev
254 103.602 108.761
84 146.274 145.969
170 82.518 76.759
4 51.25 24.622
5 121 120.955
3 51 61.262
157 100.49 104.921
85 112.647 118.439
233 102.124 106.695
8 81.25 90.149
3 140 45.826
2 137.5 187.383
6 164.167 209.796
2 95 49.497
244 102.971 106.161
7 149.286 195.521
1 60 *
2 42.5 24.749
8 94.75 103.657
94 94.436 111.848
25 112.2 104.812
124 108.387 108.655
3 145 99.875
9 86.444 100.113
30 92.333 108.753
Education High School Graduate 93 87.656 95.248
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
47 118.298 112.855
35 139 107.818
40 104.75 131.036
55 116.055 116.677
41 101.659 109.248
77 82.078 76.081
81 116.593 126.602
170 104.559 105.561
84 101.667 115.595
15 135.333 170.592
96 124.323 108.656
111 89.82 100.882
32 74.375 87.894
239 105 108.541
15 81.333 113.68
240 103.083 107.762
13 120.769 130.286
1 5 *
248 105.202 109.525
6 37.5 24.238
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
6.824
15.926
5.887
12.311
54.093
35.369
8.374
12.846
6.99
31.872
26.458
132.5
85.649
35
6.796
73.9
*
17.5
36.648
11.536
20.962
9.758
57.663
33.371
19.855
9.877
16.462
18.225
20.719
15.733
17.062
8.67
14.067
8.096
12.612
44.047
11.09
9.575
15.538
7.021
29.352
6.956
36.135
*
6.955
9.895
Min
3
10
3
15
35
3
5
5
3
15
90
5
15
60
3
15
60
25
3
5
15
5
60
3
10
5
5
15
15
3
5
5
10
3
5
5
5
3
5
3
5
3
15
5
3
5
Max
630
630
630
70
330
120
570
630
630
280
180
270
565
130
630
565
60
60
330
630
485
630
255
330
475
565
630
485
630
485
630
475
630
630
630
565
570
630
480
630
450
630
485
5
630
60
5
10
15
10
15
35
3
10
10
10
15
90
5
15
60
10
15
60
25
3
10
15
10
60
3
10
10
10
15
15
10
30
10
14
14
10
5
15
10
10
10
5
10
15
5
10
5
25
30
32.5
30
37.5
60
3
30
35
30
15
90
5
15
60
30
15
60
25
32.5
30
30
40
60
30
15
30
50
55
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
45
30
25
30
15
30
55
5
30
15
50
60
105
60
60
60
30
60
75
60
50
150
138
90
95
60
60
60
42.5
60
60
90
72.5
120
60
60
60
90
120
60
70
60
60
75
60
60
60
90
60
47.5
60
55
60
60
5
60
42.5
75
130
195
120
65
120
120
135
135
120
112.5
180
270
210
130
132.5
210
60
60
120
120
150
127.5
255
120
120
120
150
195
120
150
120
120
150
130
127.5
175
150
120
102.5
135
90
125
135
5
135
60
90
225
380
180
70
330
120
225
240
225
280
180
270
565
130
225
565
60
60
330
195
210
240
255
330
170
180
240
280
217.5
250
195
175
240
225
240
485
270
190
135
235
175
225
270
5
235
60
95 98
300 480
480 570
210 270
70 70
330 330
120 120
300 475
280 630
300 480
280 280
180 180
270 270
565 565
130 130
280 480
565 565
60 60
60 60
330 330
325 570
270 485
270 480
255 255
330 330
420 475
255 480
240 630
325 485
420 630
420 480
270 630
225 300
330 570
280 480
325 570
565 565
330 475
225 420
195 480
300 485
450 450
290 480
485 485
5 5
300 485
60 60
99
570
630
325
70
330
120
565
630
570
280
180
270
565
130
570
565
60
60
330
630
485
565
255
330
475
565
630
485
630
485
630
475
630
565
630
565
570
630
480
570
450
570
485
5
570
60
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Page
15-92
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-77. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Animal Care
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
Bronchtis/emphysema DK
Percentiles
N Mean Stdev
764 48.168 65.029
282 57.291 81.786
482 42.83 52.182
13 37.462 38.606
9 59.222 44.291
27 47.296 43.1
49 55.204 68.276
530 45.928 66.581
136 54.824 64.527
696 47.757 62.011
26 37.577 39.832
5 30.4 21.87
12 100 193.567
17 37.765 44.992
8 73.75 58.478
712 47.81 61.479
39 50.872 112.78
6 50 77.071
7 67.857 62.039
86 51.221 56.803
376 44.918 71.458
60 48.883 56.285
233 52.459 59.357
9 38.889 53.897
98 52.347 57.02
63 51.492 68.122
231 52.913 75.819
150 40.593 49.247
121 51.273 79.213
101 38.713 40.069
171 39.789 44.88
181 49.773 58.716
247 51.389 75.022
165 50.267 72.551
527 46.602 66.468
237 51.65 61.703
221 44.62 66.372
201 52.99 60.351
216 51.426 76.405
126 41.111 45.413
705 48.401 65.505
57 45.386 60.468
2 45 21.213
734 47.834 64.308
27 58.704 85.601
3 35 22.913
718 48.357 65.56
43 45.395 58.522
3 42.667 15.535
Stderr
2.3527
4.8703
2.3768
10.7074
14.7637
8.2946
9.7537
2.8921
5.5331
2.3505
7.8117
9.7806
55.878
10.9123
20.675
2.304
18.0593
31.4643
23.4485
6.1252
3.6852
7.2664
3.8886
17.9656
5.7599
8.5825
4.9885
4.021
7.2012
3.987
3.432
4.3644
4.7736
5.6481
2.8954
4.0081
4.4647
4.2568
5.1987
4.0457
2.4671
8.0091
15
2.3737
16.474
13.2288
2.4467
8.9245
8.9691
Min Max
1 760
1 760
1 450
2 135
3 140
2 179
3 308
1 760
1 383
1 760
1 145
10 60
5 690
5 180
5 180
1 760
2 690
10 205
5 180
2 308
1 760
3 230
1 383
5 180
2 308
1 383
1 760
1 280
1 690
1 240
1 273
1 330
1 760
1 690
1 760
1 383
1 690
1 340
1 760
1 280
1 760
1 330
30 60
1 760
2 340
15 60
1 760
2 330
30 60
5
5
5
3
-)
3
8
5
3
5
4
1
10
5
5
5
4
3
10
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
3
5
3
4
5
3
4
5
4
5
5
3
4
5
30
5
3
15
4
5
30
25
10
15
10
5
30
15
10
10
15
10
10
15
17.5
15
32.5
10
10
10
20
15
10
12.5
15
20
15
15
10
10
15
12
10
14
15
10
10
15
10
15
15
10
10
10
30
10
15
15
10
10
30
50
30
30
28.5
30
60
38
25
30
30
30
25
20
30
30
55
30
20
15
60
30
25
20
30
30
30
30
30
20
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
25
30
30
25
30
30
45
30
30
30
30
30
38
75
60
65
60
55
90
65
90
60
60
60
45
47
65
35
115
60
35
45
120
70
60
60
60
30
70
60
70
55
60
57
60
60
60
60
60
60
55
60
64
60
60
55
60
60
60
60
60
55
60
90
120
120
105
80
140
120
175
109
135
120
120
60
205
120
180
120
120
205
180
120
90
152.5
120
180
140
120
120
97.5
110
80
90
120
120
120
115
120
95
120
120
110
120
105
60
120
135
60
120
90
60
95
155
180
140
135
140
150
180
150
180
155
120
60
690
180
180
151
180
205
180
175
145
176.5
180
180
180
225
165
155
135
105
120
180
165
155
155
180
160
175
165
135
155
195
60
155
330
60
160
150
60
98
230
308
187
135
140
179
308
230
340
240
145
60
690
180
180
230
690
205
180
240
240
205
273
180
240
273
245
205
340
150
205
240
308
210
195
273
225
240
240
180
225
240
60
225
340
60
230
330
60
99
312
340
273
135
140
179
308
280
340
312
145
60
690
180
180
308
690
205
180
308
340
230
330
180
308
383
330
230
340
185
245
312
383
340
280
330
245
330
383
180
308
330
60
280
340
60
308
330
60
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-93
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-78. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Household Work
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
1322 68.6354
478 70.3661
844 67.6552
21 93.4286
15 57.1333
56 24.9464
84 39.4762
918 71.2353
228 78.114
1118 70.6977
102 46.1176
20 71.9
22 67.7727
43 65.6512
17 72.9412
1218 67.8342
81 80.5185
7 54.1429
16 75.8125
153 37.0196
555 70.0342
124 62.0726
482 78.3008
8 95.625
175 42.7086
96 82.5313
418 75.5574
290 71.3724
196 73.6173
147 58.7007
307 62.8632
318 70.8679
394 74.7056
303 64.2475
857 71.5496
465 63.2645
353 64.1558
327 82.844
391 62.1125
251 66.5857
1211 67.8423
103 75.6893
8 97.875
1269 68.2041
44 77.1364
9 87.8889
1247 67.8043
64 83.4844
1 1 76.4545
Stdev
98.697
101.833
96.923
113.994
85.7
30.134
51.785
101.54
106.158
98.015
65.201
76.619
190.288
118.419
108.744
93.324
159.202
74.627
113.469
52.694
103.005
86.315
105.529
110.014
64.901
114.62
105.946
100.836
104.18
81.662
91.306
98.179
106.703
95.504
106.351
82.596
91.547
118.992
97.341
77.867
98.123
104.033
120.21
99.025
86.104
116.368
97.936
111.726
107.17
Stderr
2.7145
4.6577
3.3362
24.8756
22.1277
4.0269
5.6502
3.3513
7.0305
2.9314
6.4558
17.1324
40.5695
18.0587
26.3742
2.674
17.6891
28.2062
28.3673
4.2601
4.3723
7.7513
4.8067
38.8959
4.906
11.6983
5.182
5.9213
7.4414
6.7354
5.2111
5.5056
5.3756
5.4866
3.6329
3.8303
4.8726
6.5803
4.9227
4.9149
2.8197
10.2507
42.5006
2.7798
12.9807
38.7895
2.7734
13.9658
32.3131
Min
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
5
1
1
2
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
5
1
1
5
Max
905
905
720
403
290
150
230
905
665
720
300
315
905
660
420
720
905
210
420
290
905
420
685
300
450
660
720
905
600
570
665
590
720
905
905
600
590
905
685
480
905
575
300
905
300
300
905
575
300
5 25
5 15
5 10
5 15
5 15
1 6
2 5
2 5
5 15
5 14.5
5 15
3 10
1.5 22.5
2 10
5 10
5 15
5 15
5 10
1 10
5 15
2 5
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 17.5
2 5
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
4 10
5 15
5 15
5 10
5 13
5 10
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 10
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 10
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
50 75
30 75
30 90
30 75
30 180
25 60
12.5 30
16.5 50
30 90
30 90
30 80
15 50
60 105
15 30
20 60
20 75
30 75
20 60
25 90
25 82.5
15 45
30 85
0 65
0 100
325 180
5 45
0 117.5
0 90
30 100
30 85
30 65
30 63
30 90
30 85
30 75
30 85
30 75
30 65
30 115
30 60
35 90
30 75
30 100
17.5 206.5
30 75
30 132.5
15 180
30 75
32.5 117.5
20 180
90
195
195
190
225
230
60
120
195
225
195
120
162.5
90
155
210
195
155
210
233
90
195
190
224
300
120
240
215
192.5
190
150
180
180
215
180
210
170
195
240
160
180
190
210
300
190
220
300
190
220
233
95
255
265
255
300
290
90
150
265
295
265
210
260
155
270
420
255
360
210
420
150
265
240
270
300
192
328
270
270
330
210
255
270
296
240
295
225
240
305
255
230
255
240
300
255
240
300
255
265
300
98
360
375
360
403
290
120
210
375
420
375
255
315
905
660
420
358
665
210
420
225
375
400
420
300
233
420
420
330
400
315
360
375
380
330
380
296
345
420
400
292
360
400
300
375
300
300
360
480
300
99
480
480
496
403
290
150
230
540
480
480
260
315
905
660
420
420
905
210
420
230
540
403
575
300
300
660
540
375
585
420
400
570
600
420
570
403
480
585
570
345
480
480
300
496
300
300
480
575
300
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Page
15-94
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-79. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Indoor Playing
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema DK
Percentiles
N
188
65
123
3
11
11
4
149
10
153
13
5
7
8
2
172
15
1
26
74
20
68
27
16
59
33
37
16
46
40
64
38
128
60
49
36
47
56
174
13
1
184
3
1
177
10
1
Mean
105
117
99.5
127
130
93.6
82.5
103
124
110
95
71
108
68.4
64
107
88.1
110
108
102
124
102
108
89.4
102
112
125
72.5
110
111
100
102
99.4
118
130
85.7
92.7
107
107
88.5
110
104
210
110
107
80.1
110
Stdev Stderr Min
82.7
97.1
73.8
47.3
80.2
64.3
45
86
76.4
84.3
84.8
56.8
96.5
46.4
65.1
83.9
71.4
*
69.9
95
74
76
68.6
58.8
83.6
97.7
96.1
40.4
94.4
75.8
73
92.2
71
13
99.2
55.7
77
82.7
84.1
66.4
*
80.7
167
*
83.5
72.5
*
6.03 2
12 10
6.65 2
27.3 90
24.2 15
19.4 30
22.5 30
7.05 2
24.2 20
6.82 2
23.5 15
25.4 10
36.5 30
16.4 42
46 18
6.4 2
18.4 42
* 110
13.7 15
11 2
16.6 30
9.21 15
13.2 15
14.7 20
10.9 2
17 10
15.8 15
10.1 10
13.9 2
12 15
9.13 10
15 10
6.27 2
13.3 15
14.2 18
9.28 2
11.2 10
11 10
6.38 2
18.4 20
* 110
5.95 2
96.4 60
* 110
6.27 2
22.9 10
* 110
Max
510
510
420
180
270
195
120
510
270
510
255
150
300
180
110
510
300
110
270
510
340
420
270
220
435
510
420
150
420
340
435
510
435
510
420
270
435
510
510
245
110
510
390
110
510
245
110
5 25
20 55
20 60
20 55
90 90
15 60
30 30
30 45
20 55
20 75
20 60
15 30
10 30
30 55
42 45
18 18
20 60
42 45
110 110
30 55
15 45
36 60
30 60
30 55
20 52.5
20 55
20 55
15 60
10 37.5
20 60
17.5 50
30 52.5
18 60
20 55
30 60
20 60
20 45
30 45
15 60
20 55
20 30
110 110
20 55
60 60
110 110
20 60
10 30
110 110
50
90
90
76
110
115
60
90
76
100
90
60
60
60
50
64
90
60
110
105
70
120
85
110
60
75
90
105
65
75
95
87.5
60
90
90
105
77.5
60
90
90
75
110
90
180
110
90
60
110
75
127.5
135
120
180
180
175
120
120
150
130
180
105
175
67.5
110
132.5
100
110
160
125
165
120
160
125
135
120
155
102.5
120
175
127.5
120
120
150
180
112.5
120
127.5
130
120
110
122.5
390
110
130
76
110
90
190
255
190
180
255
180
120
190
248
190
220
150
300
180
110
190
180
110
195
195
200
180
195
180
180
190
270
120
245
193
180
180
180
245
300
155
180
195
190
180
110
190
390
110
190
208
110
95
270
300
225
180
270
195
120
292
270
270
255
150
300
180
110
270
300
110
255
300
280
245
255
220
340
300
390
150
375
256
225
300
245
382.5
375
180
195
255
270
245
110
270
390
110
270
245
110
98 99
390 435
435 510
340 375
180 180
270 270
195 195
120 120
420 435
270 270
390 435
255 255
150 150
300 300
180 180
110 110
390 435
300 300
110 110
270 270
435 510
340 340
390 420
270 270
220 220
375 435
510 510
420 420
150 150
420 420
340 340
270 435
510 510
300 340
420 510
420 420
270 270
435 435
270 510
390 435
245 245
110 110
375 435
390 390
110 110
390 435
245 245
110 110
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean
24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max =
maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-95
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-80. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Playing
Perc entiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
59
26
33
1
4
9
1
40
4
50
2
1
1
5
51
8
15
15
7
22
15
5
10
18
8
3
17
12
15
15
42
17
10
10
31
8
56
3
58
1
55
4
Mean
97.373
108.192
88.848
170
83.25
148.333
15
92.05
52.5
93.94
86.5
100
30
149
93.333
123.125
123.533
67.2
87.714
103.182
123.533
57
148.5
74.667
75.375
58.333
114.059
78.583
109.667
81.2
86.81
123.471
66.5
135.3
92.355
108
94.821
145
96.983
120
90.018
198.5
Stdev
95.372
94.783
96.425
*
89.66
144.265
*
86.358
15
90.208
37.477
*
*
164.864
89.747
130.218
124.379
30.887
54.129
110.136
124.379
6.708
150.482
45.169
35.492
24.664
103.26
32.354
109.536
107.674
79.211
126.007
46.251
114.735
94.966
115.681
91.447
173.853
96.158
*
87.056
157.509
Stderr
12.416
18.588
16.785
*
44.83
48.088
*
13.654
7.5
12.757
26.5
*
*
73.729
12.567
46.039
32.115
7.975
20.459
23.481
32.115
3
47.586
10.646
12.548
14.24
25.044
9.34
28.282
27.801
12.223
30.561
14.626
36.283
17.056
40.899
12.22
100.374
12.626
*
11.739
78.754
Min Max 5
5
15
5
170
15
5
15
20
30
5
60
100
30
20
5
20
5
20
30
25
5
45
30
20
30
30
15
30
30
5
5
25
5
45
5
25
5
30
5
120
5
60
435 15
360 15
435 5
170 170
210 15
360 5
15 15
435 27.5
60 30
420 15
113 60
100 100
30 30
435 20
420 15
435 20
360 5
135 20
194 30
435 30
360 5
60 45
435 30
194 20
120 30
75 30
360 15
150 30
420 30
435 5
360 15
435 25
150 5
435 45
420 15
360 25
435 15
345 30
435 15
120 120
435 15
420 60
25
45
60
45
170
20
55
15
52.5
45
45
60
100
30
60
45
60
15
45
60
45
15
60
60
45
45
30
60
60
30
20
30
45
30
60
45
30
45
30
45
120
45
90
50 75
60 110
75 135
60 100
170 170
54 146.5
60 280
15 15
65 102.5
60 60
60 100
86.5 113
100 100
30 30
110 120
60 100
90 115
60 210
60 85
60 110
60 105
60 210
60 60
95 135
60 95
75 106.5
70 75
70 120
65 97.5
60 135
60 105
60 100
60 120
60 105
108 165
60 100
67.5 142
60 107.5
60 345
60 105
120 120
60 100
157 307
90
210
280
150
170
210
360
15
142.5
60
202
113
100
30
435
194
435
345
113
194
150
345
60
427.5
150
120
75
345
113
280
165
165
420
135
302.5
210
360
194
345
210
120
170
420
95
360
345
420
170
210
360
15
307
60
345
113
100
30
435
345
435
360
135
194
420
360
60
435
194
120
75
360
150
420
435
280
435
150
435
345
360
360
345
360
120
345
420
98 99
420 435
360 360
435 435
170 170
210 210
360 360
15 15
435 435
60 60
390 420
113 113
100 100
30 30
435 435
360 420
435 435
360 360
135 135
194 194
435 435
360 360
60 60
435 435
194 194
120 120
75 75
360 360
150 150
420 420
435 435
360 360
435 435
150 150
435 435
420 420
360 360
420 435
345 345
420 435
120 120
360 435
420 420
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers.
Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers
below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-96
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-81. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent for Car Repair Services
Percen tiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
N Mean Stdev
259 33.7876 53.772
128 41.6953 65.45
131 26.0611 37.84
2 88 2.828
8 33.125 43.666
6 18.3333 20.897
13 31.3077 32.638
204 32.4853 52.731
26 44.8462 75.446
226 33.8451 51.028
19 49.3158 90.675
3 11.6667 11.547
5 11 8.944
6 12.5 6.124
247 34.6154 54.728
12 16.75 22.471
26 27.7692 33.586
137 31.8759 52.912
25 32.96 49.672
70 40.4714 62.833
1 5 *
28 28.4643 32.992
20 36.15 51.714
64 41.0781 62.959
68 36.2206 59.709
41 29.6829 54.536
38 24.2632 36.541
45 40.4889 58.498
66 34.6364 56.367
88 34.8182 60.547
60 26.3167 33.054
176 36.0227 57.142
83 29.0482 45.78
70 19.4857 27.784
70 36.5286 48.821
79 41.5316 66.665
40 38.725 64.266
238 34.7731 55.08
21 22.619 34.735
253 32.6324 51.888
6 82.5 102.896
247 33.0607 52.903
12 48.75 70.522
Stderr
3.3413
5.7851
3.3061
2
15.438
8.531
9.0521
3.6919
14.796
3.3943
20.802
6.6667
4
2.5
3.4822
6.4867
6.5868
4.5206
9.9344
7.51
*
6.2349
11.564
7.8698
7.2407
8.5171
5.9277
8.7204
6.9383
6.4543
4.2673
4.3072
5.025
3.3208
5.8352
7.5004
10.161
3.5703
7.5799
3.2622
42.007
3.3661
20.358
Min
1
1
2
86
5
5
3
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
1
5
3
1
5
1
5
3
5
2
1
1
5
9
9
1
4
1
1
1
2
9
9
1
5
1
10
1
5
Max
358
358
180
90
115
60
95
280
358
280
358
25
25
20
358
86
115
280
180
358
5
115
180
280
358
270
195
270
280
358
175
358
245
180
245
358
280
358
150
358
245
358
245
5
5
4
5
86
5
5
3
5
2
5
I
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
4
5
5
5
5
2
4
5
5
5
3
5
5
3
2
5
5
5
4
5
5
10
5
5
25 50
5 10
5 15
5 10
86 88
5 12.5
5 12.5
5 10
5 10
10 15
5 10
5 10
5 5
5 5
5 15
5 10
5 12.5
5 10
5 10
7 15
10 15
5 5
5 12.5
10 15
5 15
5 15
5 10
5 10
5 15
5 10
5 10
5 12.5
5 15
5 10
5 10
5 15
5 15
5 12.5
5 10
5 15
5 10
15 22.5
5 10
5 15
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample si
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
75
30
45
30
90
55
15
55
30
50
35
44
25
15
35
15
50
30
30
35
5
52.5
45
47.5
37.5
25
20
60
35
30
30
30
30
20
50
30
39.5
35
15
30
180
30
77.5
90
90
120
65
90
115
60
79
85
105
90
180
25
20
90
20
90
85
105
103
5
90
117.5
105
90
60
70
105
70
95
80
101
79
60
105
160
90.5
90
35
90
245
90
95
95
180
180
105
90
115
60
95
180
180
175
358
25
20
180
86
95
175
180
180
5
95
177.5
180
180
160
95
180
180
180
95.5
180
95
60
150
180
222.5
180
90
160
245
175
245
98
195
270
180
90
115
60
95
195
358
195
358
25
20
245
86
115
265
180
245
5
115
180
265
180
270
195
270
265
245
115
265
195
90
180
270
280
245
150
180
245
195
245
99
270
280
180
90
115
60
95
265
358
265
358
25
20
270
86
115
270
180
358
5
115
180
280
358
270
195
270
280
358
175
280
245
180
245
358
280
270
150
270
245
270
245
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-97
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-82. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Washing,
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N Mean
6029 23.9338
2785 23.4154
3242 24.3816
2 20
110 25.9182
318 29.2673
407 26.5184
411 22.4088
4154 22.7939
629 27.7424
4794 23.1558
664 28.7816
110 24.4727
119 28.6471
269 23.8364
73 22.7945
5476 23.8088
465 25.7312
30 23.8
58 21.3966
1116 25.9758
2975 22.0733
518 22.3996
1378 26.9354
42 21.9048
1245 25.3888
440 30.6
Education High School Graduate 1634 23.7699
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
1228 22.8575
844 22.5936
638 20.7618
1356 23.3274
1303 22.9294
2136 25.2116
1234 23.4489
4184 22.9441
1845 26.1783
1688 24.6226
1584 26.3295
1636 21.8264
1121 22.587
5559 23.9538
437 24.2288
33 16.6667
5866 23.9529
125 25.176
38 16.8947
5749 23.8629
249 26.49
31 16.5484
Stdev
25.5661
28.8168
22.4026
14.1421
30.4752
16.5524
35.9626
14.6309
21.6279
43.1415
26.1288
24.2016
17.5493
27.4768
19.8318
20.46
25.0872
31.6942
15.0319
18.5708
25.169
21.4639
17.1137
34.8572
15.8865
24.2988
46.38
20.0081
19.6959
32.3617
18.4597
21.7583
27.432
21.6627
32.6116
25.7284
25.0567
20.295
38.468
15.5411
20.8871
26.1095
18.3575
8.7202
25.8029
15.6613
8.5481
25.8064
20.7475
8.0616
Stderr
0.3293
0.5461
0.3935
10
2.9057
0.9282
1.7826
0.7217
0.3356
1.7202
0.3774
0.9392
1.6733
2.5188
1.2092
2.3947
0.339
1.4698
2.7444
2.4385
0.7534
0.3935
0.7519
0.939
2.4513
0.6887
2.2111
0.495
0.5621
1.1139
0.7308
0.5909
0.76
0.4687
0.9284
0.3978
0.5833
0.494
0.9665
0.3842
0.6238
0.3502
0.8782
1.518
0.3369
1.4008
1.3867
0.3404
1.3148
1.4479
Min
1
1
1
10
3
5
2
1
1
1
1
3
5
3
1
3
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
i
3
5
1
1
5
Max
705
705
555
30
300
125
690
90
555
705
705
270
90
240
210
105
705
570
60
105
690
555
135
705
90
690
570
270
255
705
240
360
570
300
705
705
555
300
705
150
340
705
145
30
705
100
35
705
150
30
5
5
5
5
10
5
10
7
5
5
5
5
5
5
8
5
5
5
5
10
5
7
5
5
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
etc.
25
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
10
10
12
10
15
15
15
10
10
10
15
15
10
15
10
10
10
10
15
15
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
15
10
13
10
10
10
15
10
10
15
10
10
15
10
50
20
15
20
20
20
30
20
18
15
20
15
20
20
25
20
15
20
20
17.5
15
20
15
15
20
15
20
20
20
15
15
15
15
15
20
15
15
20
20
20
15
15
20
20
15
20
25
15
20
20
15
Percentiles
75 90
30 45
30 45
30 45
30 30
30 41.5
30 50
30 45
30 42
30 45
30 45
30 45
35 60
30 47.5
30 50
30 45
30 60
30 45
30 45
30 50
25 30
30 45
30 45
30 45
30 50
30 30
30 45
30 50
30 45
30 45
30 40
30 45
30 45
30 45
30 45
30 45
30 45
30 50
30 45
30 45
30 40
30 45
30 45
30 45
25 30
30 45
30 45
25 30
30 45
30 60
25 30
95
60
55
60
30
60
60
60
50
60
65
60
65
60
60
60
75
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
45
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
55
60
60
60
30
60
60
30
60
60
30
98 99
75 90
65 90
80 90
30 30
60 80
75 85
60 75
60 60
75 90
90 120
70 90
90 105
85 90
100 150
75 90
90 105
75 90
75 90
60 60
80 105
60 75
65 85
70 90
90 120
90 90
60 80
90 240
75 90
75 90
75 110
65 85
75 90
70 85
85 105
65 85
65 90
90 100
75 90
90 125
60 75
75 90
75 90
90 95
30 30
75 90
60 75
35 35
75 90
95 105
30 30
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Page
15-98
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-83. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Sleeping/Napping
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N Mean
9362 526.287
4283 523.333
5075 528.685
4 645
185 502.281
499 732.363
702 625.058
588 563.719
6041 496.93
1347 517.084
7576 523.598
940 541.303
156 537.09
181 528.823
383 537.966
126 523.421
8514 525.205
700 540.053
45 527.467
103 521.592
1771 636.604
4085 487.152
798 502.764
2638 520.277
70 513.671
1966 625.586
832 515.445
Education High School Graduate 2604 505.367
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
1791 496.616
1245 492.516
924 486.737
2068 523.129
2096 520.846
3234 529.019
1964 530.918
6303 511.13
3059 557.517
2514 534.911
2431 526.839
2533 527.653
1884 512.228
8608 525.05
692 540.061
62 544.194
9039 526.754
249 513.743
74 511.392
8860 526.549
432 521.713
70 521.243
Stdev
134.435
135.183
133.743
123.693
125.424
124.328
100.656
110.83
123.019
117.477
129.545
162.726
118.072
142.25
148.886
143.695
133.218
147.143
139.269
138.874
128.545
118.9
117.416
125.549
136.491
133.976
135.697
123.006
119.862
117.558
110.394
133.703
127.642
135.651
139.966
131.826
134.392
134.719
130.49
139.46
131.14
133.571
143.571
140.992
134.235
137.698
146.297
134.267
138.459
131.857
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
1.3894
2.0656
1.8774
61.8466
9.2214
5.5657
3.799
4.5706
1.5828
3.2009
1.4883
5.3076
9.4533
10.5734
7.6077
12.8014
1.4438
5.5615
20.7609
13.6837
3.0545
1.8603
4.1565
2.4444
16.3138
3.0216
4.7045
2.4105
2.8323
3.3317
3.6317
2.9401
2.788
2.3854
3.1583
1.6605
2.4299
2.6869
2.6466
2.771
3.0213
1.4397
5.4577
17.906
1.4119
8.7263
17.0067
1.4264
6.6616
15.7599
Min
30
30
30
540
195
270
120
150
30
30
30
60
300
60
60
180
30
60
195
240
120
30
60
30
210
120
30
30
60
75
105
55
30
30
60
30
30
55
30
30
60
30
30
300
30
60
30
30
80
210
Max
1430
1295
1430
780
908
1320
1110
1015
1420
1430
1430
1415
920
905
1125
1140
1430
1125
842
930
1320
1420
1005
1430
930
1420
1317
1430
1350
1404
1295
1420
1215
1430
1404
1430
1420
1404
1175
1430
1420
1430
1404
1035
1420
1430
930
1430
1110
930
5
345
330
350
540
330
540
480
395
330
345
350
315
345
300
315
330
345
320
345
330
440
325
330
345
320
420
300
330
315
330
345
345
330
345
345
330
360
355
345
330
330
345
330
330
345
300
300
345
300
300
25
445
435
450
540
420
655
570
484
420
450
445
424
467.5
420
450
420
445
450
420
420
555
420
435
450
420
540
435
420
420
420
420
435
440
450
449.5
420
480
450
445
435
430
445
450
465
445
445
420
445
420
450
50
510
510
510
630
480
720
630
550
480
510
510
530
540
525
540
510
510
540
515
510
630
480
495
510
490
628
510
495
480
480
480
510
510
510
510
495
540
520
510
510
505
510
537.5
535
510
510
510
510
510
510
Percentiles
75 90
600 690
600 690
600 690
750 780
555 655
810 900
680 725
630 705
555 630
570 660
600 690
630 737.5
600 690
630 720
630 720
600 720
600 690
630 720
659 690
590 720
705 802
540 628
570 645
590 660
570 696.5
699 790
585 670
570 659
565 630
540 629
540 615
600 690
598 690
600 699
600 690
570 670
630 720
600 700
600 690
600 699
570 660
600 690
617.5 715
600 720
600 690
595 660
600 720
600 690
600 705
600 690
95
760
765
750
780
745
930
780
750
705
720
750
822.5
735
769
765
780
750
98 99
850 925
860 925
840 925
780 780
865 900
1005 1110
840 875
810 900
780 868
780 860
840 900
940 1020
840 870
810 842
870 930
870 930
855 925
777.5 842.5 915
710
780
860
685
720
720
780
855
750
720
690
690
660
760
745
765
769
745
780
780
750
765
735
750
780
780
760
735
780
760
765
745
842 842
865 870
930 975
770 840
780 860
800 885
900 930
926 975
860 900
780 840
779 845
775 900
725 800
860 930
840 870
855 925
862 940
840 920
870 925
870 930
840 900
840 930
840 900
840 915
900 945
930 1035
855 925
795 845
840 930
850 924
840 930
840 930
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-99
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-84. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Attending Full Time School
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
884
468
416
7
56
297
271
247
6
665
92
33
29
58
7
771
103
4
6
608
49
89
135
3
666
14
54
100
24
26
186
200
322
176
858
26
302
287
125
170
784
96
4
875
4
5
851
27
6
Mean
358.537
369.301
346.428
232.143
365.036
387.811
392.28
292.194
203.333
362.913
351.793
346.303
337.828
345.259
285
359.565
353.107
315.5
348.333
386.497
206.551
304.652
325.274
270
384.985
267.071
238.481
303.35
238.417
302.808
351.597
358.07
373.879
338.335
363.66
189.5
375.113
353.359
332.448
357.018
357.969
362.958
363.75
358.57
382.5
333.6
359.132
340.111
357.167
Stdev
130.347
123.186
137.1
148.123
199.152
98.013
84.986
154.58
147.366
128.548
129.647
156.009
148.115
124.048
157.03
130.825
126.354
167.773
140.594
107.308
133.583
134.791
161.049
147.224
107.925
129.31
141.148
170.598
145.897
144.149
127.019
123.934
139.7
120.469
126.018
158.415
118.518
133.705
142.088
132.833
130.658
127.895
162.551
130.546
87.702
140.481
130.435
132.683
121.491
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
4.384
5.6943
6.7219
55.9853
26.6128
5.6873
5.1625
9.8357
60.1618
4.9849
13.5166
24.1576
27.5043
16.2883
59.3517
4.7116
12.4501
83.8863
57.3973
4.3519
19.0833
14.2879
13.8609
85
4.182
34.5595
19.2079
17.0598
29.781
28.2699
9.3135
8.7634
7.7852
9.0807
4.3022
31.0677
6.8199
7.8924
12.7088
10.1878
4.6663
13.0533
81.2756
4.4133
43.8511
62.8248
4.4713
25.5349
49.5987
Min Max
1 840
20 840
1 710
10 495
20 710
60 645
10 605
1 840
75 480
1 825
40 710
90 840
58 553
30 565
60 440
1 840
30 630
65 416
150 445
10 710
5 502
25 695
1 840
185 440
10 710
5 415
58 785
1 840
25 565
10 535
60 825
5 645
10 840
1 630
1 840
15 465
5 695
10 840
40 630
1 785
1 840
20 695
120 450
1 840
255 455
120 460
1 840
30 605
120 440
5 25
95 300
120 320
75 262.5
10 180
30 172.5
170 360
200 375
60 180
75 120
107 310
70 286.5
120 225
70 212
85 260
60 150
100 300
85 269
65 221
150 185
165 361
15 115
90 210
60 215
185 185
160 360
5 175
60 125
60 185
30 135
95 210
120 268
87.5 307.5
60 330
120 262.5
120 310
20 60
150 330
90 290
70 217
120 285
95 295
95 334
120 280
95 300
255 330
120 270
95 300
60 305
120 350
50 75
390 435
390 435
385 430
210 320
427.5 530
390 435
405 435
289 400
152.5 240
392 435
387.5 432.5
365 435
360 445
377.5 430
290 440
390 435
385 425
391 410
435 440
400 440
180 305
295 395
340 420
440 440
400 440
310 357
212 330
272.5 415
200 360
300 461
375 420
392.5 425
405 450
375 410
390 435
120 300
395 440
390 430
375 425
380 430
390 435
390 427.5
442.5 447.5
390 435
410 435
378 440
390 435
365 435
396.5 440
90
483
485
480
495
595
485
460
480
480
485
465
500
502
480
440
483
483
415
445
485
430
480
500
440
485
385
400
525.5
430
500
483
470
500
465
485
460
495
475
470
510
485
475
450
483
455
460
485
450
440
95
550
555
535
495
628
555
485
535
480
550
526
565
540
510
440
550
510
415
445
550
461
500
605
440
550
415
480
613.5
460
502
520
527.5 5
565
540
550
465
550
500
550
565
550
540
450
550
455
460
550
460
440
98
600
595
600
495
665
600
510
645
480
600
645
840
553
510
440
600
595
415
445
595
502
585
785
440
595
415
480
760
565
535
600
77.5
625
555
600
465
612
570
600
605
595
645
450
600
455
460
600
605
440
99
640
645
628
495
710
630
555
785
480
630
710
840
553
565
440
645
600
415
445
625
502
695
825
440
625
415
785
832.5
565
535
785
602
645
600
640
465
640
710
600
645
630
695
450
640
455
460
640
605
440
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
Page
15-100
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-85. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Active Sports
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean Stdev
1384
753
629
2
23
105
247
215
642
152
1139
109
30
35
59
12
1250
120
4
10
561
375
87
352
9
610
86
233
178
165
112
333
254
479
318
902
482
316
423
425
220
1266
105
13
1343
33
8
1331
43
10
Note: A "*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
123.994 112.825
136.781 120.777
108.628 100.648
142.5 38.891
108.696 78.628
115.848 98.855
148.87 126.627
137.46 124.516
120.315 110.376
88.007 80.207
125.994 116.168
113.431 96.788
89.933 79.214
135.371 112.206
116.288 91.326
120 86.576
124.471 113.469
121.2 110.791
113.75 57.5
102 72.119
137.073 120.838
117.579 107.304
116.207 87.553
112.537 109.99
99.444 77.235
137.702 121.227
101.047 99.745
116.794 116.802
115.781 100.276
116.218 97.925
106.446 97.879
131.967 129.1
116.882 101.859
119.476 108.664
128.132 108.811
115.47 97.84
139.946 135.196
115.589 115.201
130.775 105.017
129.541 115.123
112.314 118.325
122.461 109.594
144.829 145.828
105 110.416
125.491 113.589
72.091 73.998
86.875 41.139
124.101 113.19
130 112.663
84 39.847
Stderr
3.0328
4.4014
4.0131
27.5
16.395
9.6472
8.0571
8.4919
4.3562
6.5056
3.4421
9.2706
14.4625
18.9663
11.8897
24.9924
3.2094
10.1138
28.75
22.8059
5.1018
5.5412
9.3867
5.8625
25.7451
4.9083
10.7558
7.652
7.516
7.6235
9.2487
7.0746
6.3912
4.965
6.1018
3.2577
6.158
6.4806
5.1061
5.5843
7.9775
3.0801
14.2314
30.6239
3.0995
12.8815
14.5448
3.1026
17.181
12.6007
Mm
1
1
1
115
5
10
2
5
1
1
1
5
5
15
1
40
1
1
60
40
2
5
1
1
30
-)
10
1
1
1
5
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
30
1
5
40
1
10
40
" don't know" . Refused = Refused data
Stderr = standard error. Min
Max
1130
1130
1065
170
290
630
975
1065
1130
380
1130
440
310
553
520
300
1130
630
185
290
1065
1130
450
600
280
1065
570
1130
525
600
375
1130
570
975
625
650
1130
1065
650
625
1130
1130
1065
450
1130
330
155
1130
553
155
N =
5
15
20
15
115
30
30
20
15
15
15
15
10
10
20
15
40
15
15
60
40
20
20
15
10
30
20
15
20
15
15
10
15
18
15
25
15
20
15
30
15
15
15
15
30
15
5
40
15
30
40
25
50
60
38
115
40
45
60
60
45
30
50
45
30
60
45
60
45
50
67.5
60
60
45
60
30
45
60
30
45
45
50
40
60
45
45
55
45
59
45
60
45
43
45
60
60
50
30
60
50
45
60
doer sample s
= minimum number of minutes.
Max
50 75
90 165
105 180
75 150
142.5 170
90 155
90 159
120 188
110 180
90 160
60 120
90 165
86 150
60 145
105 195
115 145
95 130
90 165
90 147.5
105 160
82.5 105
110 180
90 155
95 160
70 150
90 120
110 180
60 135
85 150
90 160
90 150
60 142.5
100 170
90 150
90 160
92.5 175
90 150
100 180
85 155
105 175
95 178
77.5 143.5
90 162
110 180
60 90
90 165
50 60
75 115
90 165
110 165
75 105
90
267
285
240
170
220
250
320
265
250
220
270
240
215
270
240
290
270
240
185
215
285
240
235
270
280
285
225
240
270
250
270
275
255
265
295
240
300
240
270
290
240
266
300
165
270
180
155
267
270
147.5
95
330
375
300
170
225
330
390
375
330
285
340
332
235
330
305
300
330
335
185
290
370
305
285
330
280
370
270
300
340
310
330
345
315
330
330
300
380
305
330
375
290
330
390
450
332
275
155
330
340
155
98 99
435 525
500 558
370 435
170 170
290 290
345 390
510 558
470 520
450 525
315 330
452 530
430 435
310 310
553 553
345 520
300 300
435 515
520 553
185 185
290 290
452 558
380 525
355 450
475 520
280 280
470 558
510 570
420 530
418 475
380 450
360 375
485 558
430 440
410 462
500 525
395 485
500 565
370 475
435 515
462 530
460 565
430 515
553 565
450 450
440 525
330 330
155 155
435 520
553 553
155 155
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-101
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-86. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Recreation
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
253 211.23
140 231.78
112 183.67
1 420
2 337.5
13 166.54
21 206.14
27 155.07
158 223.61
32 211.06
225 209.77
16 233.88
3 203.33
2 327.5
4 77.5
3 308.33
238 211.8
12 175.5
3 308.33
60 177.1
104 210.74
19 205.26
68 244.44
2 187.5
64 176.73
22 259.41
59 238.2
54 218.09
31 224.71
23 157.61
52 189.6
54 212.09
84 217.26
63 220.29
129 197.21
124 225.81
31 196.61
75 198.85
102 228.16
45 203.53
232 208.24
19 250.21
2 187.5
245 206.82
6 399.17
2 187.5
238 212.24
13 196.31
2 187.5
Note: A "*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied '
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard devi
Stdev
185.48
207.41
150.15
*
201.53
177.06
156.17
128.28
192.97
206.59
182.74
231.3
262.22
130.82
53.929
209.42
187.07
149.06
209.42
150.02
153.37
204.04
245.03
10.607
145.32
177.97
228.99
172.21
193.06
178.18
160.88
228.41
175.27
179.71
195.32
174.26
165.52
161.67
204.18
193.83
187.69
166.64
10.607
184.85
151.21
10.607
189.23
122.22
10.607
don't know
Stderr Min
11.661 5
17.529 5
14.188 5
* 420
142.5 195
49.109 15
34.078 30
24.687 5
15.352 5
36.521 5
12.183 5
57.825 5
151.39 30
92.5 235
26.964 20
120.91 180
12.126 5
43.029 15
120.91 180
19.368 5
15.039 5
46.81 30
29.715 5
7.5 180
18.165 5
37.943 5
29.812 15
23.434 5
34.675 20
37.153 5
22.31 5
31.083 5
19.123 5
22.642 10
17.197 5
15.649 5
29.728 5
18.668 5
20.217 5
28.895 5
12.323 5
38.23 15
7.5 180
11.81 5
61.731 285
7.5 180
12.266 5
33.896 5
7.5 180
Max
1440
1440
645
420
480
630
585
465
1440
735
1440
690
505
420
150
550
1440
511
550
630
670
690
1440
195
630
600
1440
690
690
735
690
1440
645
690
1440
690
585
690
1440
735
1440
570
195
1440
690
195
1440
370
195
' . Refused = Refused data
5
20
17.5
20
420
195
15
60
5
30
5
20
5
30
235
20
180
20
15
180
12.5
30
30
15
180
15
30
20
25
30
10
30
20
15
30
15
20
5
25
30
20
20
15
180
20
285
180
20
5
180
25 50
60 165
67.5 177
60 150
420 420
195 337.5
30 130
90 165
60 135
80 172.5
30 171
60 165
42.5 150
30 75
235 327.5
42.5 70
180 195
60 165
70 150
180 195
60 147.5
82.5 180
60 150
60 179.5
180 187.5
60 152.5
105 247.5
90 175
65 172.5
60 150
50 80
60 162.5
60 177.5
62.5 150
75 165
60 150
85 180
60 165
75 180
75 179.5
60 120
60 159
80 255
180 187.5
60 160
310 345
180 187.5
60 165
117 160
180 187.5
N = doer sample size.
75
300
330
255
420
480
180
245
225
310
375
300
450
505
420
112.5
550
300
255
550
230
294
180
375
195
225
380
310
345
325
200
231.5
280
347.5
280
275
310
280
270
325
330
294
350
195
288
420
195
300
310
195
Mean =
90
480
502.5
380
420
480
370
360
420
505
495
460
585
505
420
150
550
480
340
550
395
419
570
525
195
370
525
511
460
505
370
370
419
495
545
465
480
440
465
459
505
480
525
195
480
690
195
495
340
195
Mean 2
95
574
600
525
420
480
630
574
420
585
600
570
690
505
420
150
550
585
511
550
519.5
511
690
690
195
465
600
670
550
645
480
574
600
525
585
525
600
550
545
585
574
585
570
195
570
690
195
585
370
195
98
670
690
585
420
480
630
585
465
690
735
670
690
505
420
150
550
690
511
550
585
600
690
735
195
585
600
690
570
690
735
670
735
600
690
670
690
585
670
690
735
690
570
195
670
690
195
690
370
195
99
690
735
630
420
480
630
585
465
690
735
690
690
505
420
150
550
690
511
550
630
645
690
1440
195
630
600
1440
690
690
735
690
1440
645
690
735
690
585
690
690
735
690
570
195
690
690
195
690
370
195
4-hour cumulative
ation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-102
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 1 5-87. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Exercise
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/EMphysema DK
N
564
262
302
10
11
26
35
407
75
480
34
10
14
19
7
516
38
3
7
72
300
50
139
3
83
21
124
104
110
122
130
101
177
156
426
138
150
140
192
82
523
37
4
553
7
4
542
17
5
Mean
77.429
84.676
71.142
76.5
127.273
132.5
67.829
77.572
54.853
78.015
74.706
46.3
80.214
63
128.571
76.872
76.553
65
128.571
99.014
72.663
85.98
72.683
113.333
101.976
58.238
81.048
80.856
73.627
60.861
88.423
63.564
75.311
79.647
73.096
90.804
67.387
74.871
93.188
63.268
76.625
78.243
175
77.259
27.286
188.75
77.098
64.588
157
Stdev Stderr
70.438 2.966
75.778 4.6816
64.927 3.7361
74.014 23.405
187.18 56.437
126.31 24.772
41.589 7.0298
63.597 3.1524
44.455 5.1332
71.517 3.2643
44.67 7.6608
25.038 7.9177
73.944 19.762
60.658 13.916
130.47 49.313
70.111 3.0865
59.516 9.6548
69.462 40.104
130.47 49.313
111.6 13.153
55.618 3.2111
83.568 11.818
63.36 5.3742
135.77 78.387
110.97 12.18
66.062 14.416
63.037 5.6609
70.181 6.8818
62.548 5.9637
38.368 3.4737
77.649 6.8102
44.33 4.411
71.62 5.3833
75.331 6.0313
63.872 3.0946
86.574 7.3697
49.859 4.071
55.395 4.6817
91.294 6.5886
63.277 6.9878
70.247 3.0717
51.454 8.459
167.03 83.517
69.366 2.9497
19.576 7.3992
150.35 75.177
69.465 2.9838
60.635 14.706
149.57 66.888
Note: A "*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard devi
Mm
4
5
4
15
15
15
15
4
6
4
15
15
30
15
30
4
15
20
30
15
5
10
4
30
15
10
4
15
5
5
10
10
5
4
4
6
8
10
5
4
4
20
10
4
6
60
4
10
15
Max
670
670
525
270
670
525
180
480
195
670
250
95
275
265
360
670
265
145
360
670
460
420
480
270
670
300
298
480
460
240
450
300
525
670
670
525
285
360
670
460
670
275
360
670
60
360
670
275
360
= Refused data
5
15
20
15
15
15
25
20
20
10
15
15
15
30
15
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
10
15
20
20
15
15
15
15
20
15
15
15
17.5
20
15
15
20
10
15
6
60
15
10
15
25
30
30
30
30
30
60
30
30
25
30
45
30
30
30
55
30
30
20
55
30
30
30
30
30
30
28
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
45
35
30
10
62.5
30
30
60
N = doer sample
50
60
60
60
60
60
90
60
60
40
60
60
41.5
47.5
45
60
60
60
30
60
60
60
60
60
40
60
30
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
62.5
45
60
65
165
60
25
167.5
60
50
80
size.
Percentiles
75 90
100 150
117 165
90 125
90 187.5
150 160
180 275
100 120
100 145
70 120
100 150
105 120
60 82.5
90 179
60 160
270 360
99 145
110 160
145 145
270 360
120 180
90 130
92 167.5
90 135
270 270
120 205
60 90
115 179
112.5 150
98 130
80 110
120 200
89 115
90 150
104 130
90 130
120 200
90 127.5
90 147.5
120 180
75 120
100 150
100 120
315 360
100 145
45 60
315 360
100 145
63 120
270 360
Mean = Mean 2
95
195
205
175
270
670
450
150
185
150
194
130
95
275
265
360
193
250
145
360
275
179.5
300
195
270
275
165
205
170
180
127
240
120
185
183
180
265
175
181
250
135
185
200
360
193
60
360
185
275
360
98 99
275 420
285 450
265 360
270 270
670 670
525 525
180 180
265 300
193 195
285 450
250 250
95 95
275 275
265 265
360 360
275 420
265 265
145 145
360 360
525 670
240 291
390 420
240 265
270 270
525 670
300 300
250 265
240 420
285 297
165 185
297 420
170 215
298 480
270 460
240 298
420 460
212.5 240
220 298
450 525
300 460
265 420
275 275
360 360
265 420
60 60
360 360
265 420
275 275
360 360
4-hour cumulative
ation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-103
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-88. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Food Preparation3
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
4278
1341
2937
94
24
60
131
3173
796
3584
377
62
66
132
57
3960
254
20
44
210
1988
420
1625
35
291
450
1449
954
659
475
952
956
1453
917
2995
1283
1173
1038
1148
919
3948
300
30
4091
149
38
4024
216
38
Mean
52.37
37.8106
59.0177
52
56.4583
25.1667
21.7023
52.0905
60.5025
51.6205
57.0265
54
50.5909
59.2121
53.1404
51.848
59.2244
54.95
58.6136
27.1667
45.4874
53.8643
63.6357
53.5429
31.7079
61.2556
58.8392
52.0073
46.2018
46.1621
52.312
53.2333
53.3944
49.9073
50.0571
57.7693
50.6206
54.3892
51.3972
53.5375
52.0433
57.1433
47.6333
52.1936
56.8054
53.9737
52.0318
56.9074
62.3947
Stdev
52.8802
42.1779
55.862
43.2171
60.3699
29.6877
37.6902
52.8766
54.669
53.2589
52.2893
41.8224
53.2368
49.7947
49.297
52.6035
56.7225
53.2002
53.2957
40.5487
46.6734
55.3474
57.7587
66.7803
42.6211
53.2321
56.6653
52.2377
48.0775
48.7374
53.2054
51.8139
53.4621
52.7204
49.979
58.7687
48.6464
54.484
54.1854
54.5349
53.1805
49.4425
44.8119
52.9733
48.2377
60.4168
53.0963
46.6833
61.7031
Stderr
0.8085
1.1518
1.0308
4.4575
12.3229
3.8327
3.293
0.9387
1.9377
0.8896
2.693
5.3115
6.553
4.3341
6.5295
0.8359
3.5591
11.8959
8.0346
2.7981
1.0468
2.7007
1.4328
11.2879
2.4985
2.5094
1.4886
1.6913
1.8728
2.2362
1.7244
1.6758
1.4025
1.741
0.9132
1.6407
1.4204
1.6911
1.5992
1.7989
0.8464
2.8546
8.1815
0.8282
3.9518
9.8009
0.837
3.1764
10.0096
Mm
1
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
6
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
Max 5
555 5
480 5
555 5
215 5
240 5
120 2
385 2
555 5
525 5
555 5
390 5
210 5
295 5
315 5
210 5
555 5
420 5
240 8
210 5
385 2
480 5
520 5
555 5
340 2
385 2
555 5
520 5
525 5
515 5
375 5
480 5
520 5
555 5
515 5
555 5
420 5
480 5
525 5
555 5
520 5
555 5
272 5
195 5
555 5
340 5
240 2
555 5
240 5
240 2
25 50
20 35
13 30
25 45
20 40
22.5 30
5 11
5 10
20 35
25 45
19 35
20 40
20 50
15 33.5
23.5 55
20 40
20 35
20 45
25 45
27.5 37.5
5 15
15 30
20 40
29 45
20 30
5 15
30 45
22 45
20 34.5
15 30
15 30
20 40
20 35
16 35
15 31
19 35
20 40
18 35
20 38.5
20 35
20 37
20 35
20.5 45
10 32.5
20 35
25 45
10 32.5
20 35
20 45
20 42.5
75
65
50
60
75
30
30
65
80
65
75
70
70
80
60
65
75
60
80
30
60
65
90
60
37
90
75
65
60
60
61
65
70
60
60
75
65
70
60
67
65
75
60
65
80
60
65
85
90
90
115
80
110
150
60
55
110
120
110
120
105
115
110
120
111
120
112.5
150
60
90
105
125
120
75
120
120
110
100
96
110
120
120
105
105
130
110
120
110
120
110
120
117.5
115
120
120
110
120
150
95
150
105
150
180
107
70
145
150
145
150
130
150
135
180
145
155
180
180
90
130
125
170
195
120
150
155
150
125
135
140
150
150
135
132
180
135
150
137
155
145
160
120
150
135
240
145
150
240
98 99
210 265
150 210
195 215
240 240
120 120
90 90
210 265
240 270
210 265
210 240
175 210
210 295
225 285
195 210
205 255
240 315
240 240
210 210
120 180
180 240
205 255
240 275
340 340
155 195
197 225
240 310
210 245
180 224
200 270
205 255
210 265
195 245
225 265
180 240
240 300
195 240
224 265
208 300
200 265
210 265
199 240
195 195
210 265
180 210
240 240
210 265
198 210
240 240
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
given number of minutes.
Page
15-104
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-89. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Doing Dishes/Laundry3
Category Population Group N
All 1865
Gender Male 324
Gender Female 1541
Age (years) * 32
Age (years) 1-4 10
Age (years) 5-11 20
Age (years) 12-17 47
Age (years) 18-64 1371
Age (years) > 64 385
Race White 1560
Race Black 170
Race Asian 19
Race Some Others 25
Race Hispanic 71
Race Refused 20
Hispanic No 1732
Hispanic Yes 112
Hispanic DK 7
Hispanic Refused 14
Employment * 73
Employment Full Time 776
Employment Part Time 214
Employment Not Employed 789
Employment Refused 1 3
Education * 99
Education < High School 216
Education High School Graduate 683
Education < College 422
Education College Graduate 262
Education Post Graduate 183
Census Region Northeast 471
Census Region Midwest 405
Census Region South 602
Census Region West 387
Day Of Week Weekday 1270
Day Of Week Weekend 595
Season Winter 503
Season Spring 438
Season Summer 510
Season Fall 414
Asthma No 1712
Asthma Yes 147
Asthma DK 6
Angina No 1790
Angina Yes 66
Angina DK 9
Bronchitis/Emphysema No 1 746
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes 112
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK 7
Mean
61.7882
46.1142
65.0837
43.75
49.3
34.25
32.6809
63.2356
63.4416
62.2173
57.8471
56.7368
45.96
69.0141
60.75
61.3077
68.2589
75.7143
62.5
35.3288
56.9549
63.7243
68.5234
58.2308
37.5253
69.7824
67.3616
64.3033
51.4466
53.6831
59.5223
60.3235
65.8156
59.814
59.5402
66.5866
65.3479
62.7763
61.7294
56.4903
61.9533
60.8912
36.6667
62.0788
54.7576
55.5556
60.5063
82.7143
46.7143
Stdev
68.894
50.179
71.793
46.49
66.545
28.799
30.603
67.104
79.738
69.493
60.026
51.705
41.361
75.626
104.217
68.206
71.468
66.548
122.266
37.364
63.42
64.791
76.296
59.448
38.655
69.956
76.746
72.277
49.386
60.208
60.067
68.244
75.076
69.562
68.798
68.909
79.461
67.751
62.801
63.125
69.64
60.62
41.793
69.212
62.985
44.19
65.326
109.505
51.403
Stderr
1.5953
2.7877
1.8289
8.2183
21.0434
6.4395
4.4639
1.8123
4.0638
1.7595
4.6038
11.862
8.2721
8.9752
23.3037
1.6389
6.7531
25.1526
32.677
4.3732
2.2766
4.429
2.7162
16.4878
3.885
4.7599
2.9366
3.5184
3.0511
4.4507
2.7677
3.3911
3.0599
3.536
1.9305
2.825
3.543
3.2373
2.7809
3.1024
1.6831
4.9999
17.062
1.6359
7.7529
14.7301
1.5634
10.3473
19.4284
Min
1
1
1
10
3
1
2
1
1
1
5
3
5
3
5
1
3
10
5
1
2
2
1
10
1
2
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
2
1
5
i
2
2
1
1
2
10
1
5
10
1
3
2
Max
825
360
825
225
210
92
150
565
825
825
390
210
150
325
475
825
325
180
475
210
565
340
825
180
210
570
825
475
260
360
565
480
825
570
825
565
825
450
565
570
825
375
120
825
335
120
565
825
120
5 25
10 20
10 15
10 20
10 15
3 5
1.5 15
5 10
10 20
9 20
10 20
5 17
3 15
10 15
5 20
7.5 15
10 20
5 20
10 15
5 15
3 15
10 20
10 15
10 25
10 10
3 10
10 26.5
10 20
10 20
10 15
5 15
10 20
5 15
10 20
10 15
9 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
10 20
8 15
10 20
10 20
10 10
10 20
9 25
10 30
10 20
5 20
2 10
50
30
30
35
30
22.5
30
20
30
35
30
30
30
30
35
30
30
30
55
25
20
30
30
40
30
30
45
40
30
30
30
35
30
35
30
30
40
30
35
40
30
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
57.5
30
Percentiles
75 90
80 150
60 120
90 150
55 90
55 165
58 82.5
45 65
90 150
80 135
85 147.5
75 150
90 120
80 120
105 200
60 127.5
80 140
103 180
150 180
35 120
50 80
70 125
90 151
90 158
100 150
55 90
90 151
90 150
85 155
70 120
60 120
75 135
75 150
90 150
70 150
75 137.5
90 150
90 150
75 150
90 140
65 130
85 150
76 151
30 120
85 150
60 120
90 120
80 140
103 170
120 120
95
190
135
200
150
210
91
90
198
195
190
180
210
120
225
305
180
225
180
475
120
180
205
210
180
120
195
205
210
158
190
180
198
210
210
190
210
210
190
180
195
195
180
120
190
200
120
190
240
120
98
255
210
270
225
210
92
150
245
285
270
235
210
150
275
475
250
270
180
475
150
240
240
285
180
180
245
285
285
200
245
210
240
270
270
245
275
300
285
240
230
270
250
120
255
315
120
250
360
120
99
335
260
340
225
210
92
150
335
375
335
240
210
150
325
475
335
275
180
475
210
335
275
375
180
210
315
405
360
225
330
285
285
360
345
330
340
360
335
270
270
335
255
120
335
335
120
325
570
120
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
a Includes food cleanup, clothes care.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-105
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-90
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Housekeeping3
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age > 64
Race Whrte
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
1943 118.833
370 109.419
1573 121.047
47 146.043
11 74.091
54 42.852
72 78.111
1316 120.422
443 128.217
1649 119.056
137 116.555
32 98.75
26 82.423
71 112.648
28 189.286
1771 117.443
134 121.657
15 146.867
23 191.087
138 65.565
673 106.579
193 124.72
925 132.681
14 236.786
171 82.164
246 140.736
677 125.078
433 112.898
245 107.302
171 130.813
464 119.235
413 117.855
648 119.912
418 117.679
1316 113.21
627 130.635
470 111.4
451 122.621
563 111.803
459 131.344
1789 118.529
140 115.664
14 189.286
1853 117.731
75 122.88
15 234.667
1816 118.073
107 118.701
20 188.5
Stdev
113.369
116.541
112.533
121.3
69.42
34.096
75.546
113.654
118.925
112.184
109.394
100.467
56.436
129.335
176.198
110.586
129.578
127.912
180.296
68.838
102.376
117.48
119.442
208.221
96.944
125.356
120.495
100.145
102.244
117.998
116.368
112.595
116.159
106.559
111.913
115.567
100.617
114.024
114.5
122.391
112.075
115.811
208.565
112.346
103.762
204
112.929
102.942
176.435
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard devr
ation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
2.5719
6.0587
2.8374
17.6935
20.9308
4.6399
8.9031
3.133
5.6503
2.7626
9.3462
17.7602
11.0681
15.3492
33.2983
2.6278
11.1939
33.0268
37.5944
5.8599
3.9463
8.4564
3.9272
55.6495
7.4135
7.9924
4.631
4.8127
6.5321
9.0236
5.4022
5.5405
4.5631
5.212
3.085
4.6153
4.6411
5.3692
4.8256
5.7127
2.6497
9.7878
55.7414
2.6099
11.9814
52.6725
2.65
9.9518
39.452
Refused =
Mm
1
1
1
10
10
1
1
1
3
1
1
15
5
5
10
1
5
10
10
1
1
1
3
10
1
3
2
1
1
5
2
1
1
5
i
i
i
3
1
1
1
5
10
1
5
10
i
5
5
Max
810
810
790
480
270
180
300
810
790
790
490
425
210
660
810
790
660
510
810
375
655
660
790
810
810
715
790
570
585
655
790
715
810
720
790
810
810
720
690
790
790
690
810
790
394
810
790
480
810
Refused data. N
5
10
10
15
10
10
5
5
15
10
10
5
15
15
8
20
10
10
10
20
5
10
15
15
10
5
10
15
10
15
15
10
10
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
10
10
13
5
10
10
10
7.5
25
40
30
45
45
40
20
27.5
40
55
40
30
30
40
30
52.5
40
35
30
45
25
30
45
55
120
30
60
45
40
30
60
35
34
40
40
30
55
45
40
30
45
40
36.5
45
40
30
120
40
30
85
50 75
90 165
60 150
90 165
115 240
60 90
30 53
60 105
90 165
90 180
90 165
90 150
60 127.5
60 115
60 135
147.5 247.5
90 165
85 135
120 210
150 255
45 80
70 145
90 180
105 180
182.5 300
45 105
120 180
90 175
90 150
60 150
90 180
90 165
88 165
90 165
90 165
75 150
90 180
85 160
90 180
75 135
90 180
90 165
67 150
122.5 255
90 160
90 210
240 300
90 160
90 180
155 240
= doer sample size. Mean =
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
90
270
270
270
300
90
80
210
270
270
265
300
265
185
270
420
265
270
240
390
180
240
270
295
430
220
300
270
240
240
280
245
255
285
255
255
290
240
270
255
300
270
277.5
340
265
270
480
270
255
320
95
345
360
345
375
270
120
240
360
345
340
358
345
190
465
465
335
470
510
420
240
325
390
370
810
270
400
375
320
328
390
330
345
370
340
330
370
290
360
365
390
345
377.5
810
345
320
810
355
290
575
98 99
465 540
425 560
465 540
480 480
270 270
150 180
285 300
465 525
540 570
465 540
480 484
425 425
210 210
518 660
810 810
425 525
540 658
510 510
810 810
285 300
413 490
480 540
484 600
810 810
300 375
540 660
490 610
420 470
405 465
495 540
480 655
480 525
435 540
420 470
470 550
435 525
390 480
465 540
465 610
480 560
465 540
470 480
810 810
465 540
370 394
810 810
465 540
465 470
810 810
Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
a Includes cleaning house, other repairs, and household work.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-106
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-91. Statistics for 24- Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Bathing (a)
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean Stdev
6416 26.0842 29.6711
2930 24.2416 31.0251
3484 27.6372 28.4021
2 20 14.1421
114 29.0088 38.9855
330 29.9727 19.4226
438 25.7511 35.3164
444 23.1216 18.7078
4383 25.4312 27.1553
707 29.9123 44.502
5117 25.0233 28.5494
707 31.4851 31.5524
112 28.1786 29.7661
122 30.2213 27.2726
280 28.7786 39.2648
78 27.5769 40.3235
5835 25.8833 28.5411
486 28.751 40.5582
33 25.7576 16.7724
62 24.2581 37.2268
1189 26.1329 26.4288
3095 24.1499 25.0984
558 24.7616 23.2468
1528 30.3161 39.9341
46 30.4348 45.176
1330 25.6759 26.4094
474 33.3122 53.0129
1758 25.822 23.5699
1288 26.4099 27.0338
897 25.3813 34.8197
669 22.7788 23.0661
1444 25.0478 24.2512
1402 24.602 30.2958
2266 27.4086 26.0895
1304 26.5238 38.8092
4427 25.2896 30.2913
1989 27.8527 28.1689
1796 26.858 26.9167
1645 28.5854 41.0512
1744 23.9295 20.7343
1231 24.6653 25.5885
5912 26.0658 30.0373
468 26.5427 22.9543
36 23.1389 44.0728
6243 26.0042 29.0175
131 31.145 49.5427
42 22.1905 40.9153
6112 26.0545 29.857
268 27.2463 22.162
36 22.4722 44.0859
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
0.3704
0.5732
0.4812
10
3.6513
1.0692
1.6875
0.8878
0.4102
1.6737
0.3991
1.1866
2.8126
2.4691
2.3465
4.5657
0.3736
1.8398
2.9197
4.7278
0.7665
0.4511
0.9841
1.0216
6.6608
0.7242
2.435
0.5621
0.7533
1.1626
0.8918
0.6382
0.8091
0.5481
1.0747
0.4553
0.6316
0.6351
1.0121
0.4965
0.7293
0.3907
1.0611
7.3455
0.3673
4.3286
6.3134
0.3819
1.3538
7.3477
Refused
Min Max
1 705
1 705
1 555
10 30
2 300
1 170
1 690
1 210
1 555
1 705
1 705
1 295
5 270
1 240
2 546
3 275
1 705
2 570
5 65
3 275
1 690
1 555
1 295
1 705
3 275
1 690
1 570
1 270
1 255
1 705
1 257
1 360
1 570
1 300
1 705
1 705
1 555
1 546
1 705
1 270
1 340
1 705
1 210
3 275
1 705
5 546
3 275
1 705
1 150
3 275
= Refused data. N
5
5
5
5
10
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
8
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
25
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
15
10
10
15
15
10
15
10
10
10
10
15
15
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
15
11
15
10
10
10
15
10
10
15
10
10
13
10
50
20
20
20
20
20
30
20
18
20
20
20
79
20
27.5
20
15
20
20
20
15
20
15
20
20
15
20
20.5
20
20
15
15
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
19.5
17
20
20
15
20
25
15
20
20
15
= doer sample size.
Min = minimum number of minutes
Max
75
30
30
30
30
30
31
30
30
30
30
30
40
30
35
31.5
30
30
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
33
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
25
30
30
25
30
30
22.5
Mean =
90
50
45
60
30
60
54.5
45
45
50
60
45
60
60
50
54.5
60
50
50
55
30
45
45
46
60
55
45
60
50
55
50
45
50
45
55
48
45
60
50
60
45
50
50
46
30
50
50
30
50
60
30
Mean 2
95
60
60
75
30
60
60
60
60
60
85
60
80
75
60
62.5
100
60
60
65
60
60
60
60
85
105
60
85
60
75
65
60
60
60
65
60
60
68
60
70
60
60
60
60
30
60
60
30
60
60
30
98
90
75
105
30
105
85
60
65
90
120
90
120
90
100
90
195
90
90
65
105
75
85
90
120
275
75
110
90
105
105
85
90
85
100
90
90
100
90
115
80
95
90
100
275
90
105
275
90
95
275
99
120
100
135
30
275
90
75
90
120
150
115
170
90
150
155
275
120
140
65
275
90
110
110
155
275
90
300
120
150
135
100
105
115
135
133
115
130
110
150
100
120
120
120
275
120
131
275
120
131
275
4-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
a Includes baby and child care, personal care serv
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
ces, washing and personal hygiene (bathing
, showering, etc.)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-107
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-92. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Yardwork/Maintenance (a)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
1414 147.69
804 174.84
610 111.91
20 181.85
12 93.167
26 96.154
54 116
1015 150.22
287 149.3
1249 151.52
77 114.53
13 140
26 117.23
37 102.11
12 177.08
1331 148.69
65 106.17
8 248.75
10 203.5
92 106.82
664 146.73
121 134.51
526 157.76
11 211.55
105 113.47
160 158.46
465 151.39
305 152.84
211 145.36
168 142.2
291 140.5
314 145.1
438 152.69
371 149.63
878 140.86
536 158.88
289 139.35
438 162.23
458 137.92
229 149.97
1311 146.95
98 149.27
5 312
1360 145.34
42 192.62
12 257.08
1352 148.48
57 114.65
5 312
Note: A "*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard devi
Stdev
148.216
160.191
121.979
170.345
80.805
85.532
116.758
154.486
133.834
150.205
127.124
150.111
110.647
113.508
190.793
147.962
127.4
206.48
200.056
101.779
155.488
130.79
147.022
198.724
113.854
164.764
146.985
157.011
138.849
147.773
139.641
143.219
156.36
149.345
140.753
159.193
151.711
150.477
140.291
153.398
147.084
155.758
230.043
145.05
203.363
216.716
148.534
121.376
230.043
' don't know" .
ation. Stderr = standard error
Stderr
3.942
5.649
4.939
38.09
23.326
16.774
15.889
4.849
7.9
4.25
14.487
41.633
21.7
18.661
55.077
4.056
15.802
73.002
63.263
10.611
6.034
11.89
6.41
59.918
11.111
13.026
6.816
8.99
9.559
11.401
8.186
8.082
7.471
7.754
4.75
6.876
8.924
7.19
6.555
10.137
4.062
15.734
102.879
3.933
31.38
62.56
4.04
16.077
102.879
Refused =
Min Max
1 1080
2 1080
1 900
5 600
5 285
5 330
3 505
1 1080
2 810
1 1080
2 750
5 425
5 380
5 565
30 600
1 1080
5 575
5 585
60 600
3 505
1 1080
2 554
2 810
2 600
2 600
2 900
3 840
2 1080
1 625
2 690
3 840
2 780
2 1080
1 750
1 810
2 1080
1 690
3 900
2 1080
2 720
1 1080
5 670
60 600
1 900
5 1080
5 600
1 1080
5 460
60 600
Refused data
5
5
10
5
10
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
30
5
5
5
60
5
5
5
10
2
5
7.5
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
60
5
15
5
5
5
60
25
45
60
30
60
30
39
30
35
60
45
20
15
30
20
60
45
20
90
60
31.5
35
30
60
60
33
45
50
45
40
30
40
55
45
40
40
50
30
60
40
40
45
30
120
45
60
52.5
45
30
120
N = doer sample
50 75
100 205
120 249.5
75 145
116 240
82.5 132.5
60 120
90 150
100 210
120 205
105 210
65 165
85 210
88 178
60 120
97.5 215
105 209
60 120
190 420
120 300
77 147.5
90 202.5
90 200
120 220
120 375
79 150
111 210
110 210
95 210
105 225
90 180
90 200
95 195
111 205
104 210
92.5 190
116.5 225
75 195
120 220
90 180
97 210
100 200
90 210
300 480
100 200
142.5 255
232.5 472.5
105 205
60 135
300 480
size. Mean =
90
360
415
277.5
467.5
178
210
285
360
330
360
285
360
290
255
510
360
255
585
555
240
360
317
370
465
285
412.5
345
360
330
340
330
360
375
350
345
380
360
360
310
390
355
445
600
355
465
510
360
340
600
Mean 2
95
470
510
360
570
285
300
385
480
420
480
355
425
360
300
600
465
300
585
600
330
490
390
480
600
360
492.5
460
473
465
470
450
445
480
480
460
510
480
480
440
480
465
480
600
465
485
600
470
375
600
98
570
600
465
600
285
330
450
585
525
575
405
425
380
565
600
570
565
585
600
450
575
490
595
600
450
595
575
600
525
570
525
560
585
575
560
600
565
570
555
600
570
670
600
570
99
655
670
510
600
285
330
505
670
630
660
750
425
380
565
600
660
575
585
600
505
690
495
655
600
505
810
690
630
533
630
600
655
635
690
625
690
600
700
630
655
635
670
600
655
1080 1080
600
570
405
600
600
660
460
600
4-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
a Includes car repair services, other repairs services
arts.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
outdoor cleaning, car repair maintenance
other repairs, plant care, other household work, domestic crafts
domest
c
Page
15-108
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-93. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Sports/Exercise (a)
Percen tiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
1852 116.322
958 130.669
892 100.854
2 142.5
32 102.031
114 118.982
262 153.496
237 134.717
992 109.692
215 82.051
1541 117.524
135 110.4
37 85.432
47 124.702
74 108.892
18 130
1678 116.451
151 115.583
7 92.857
16 120
606 138.658
644 102.315
125 115.272
465 107.239
12 102.917
663 139.46
103 96.243
341 109.276
265 110.068
258 105.717
222 87.149
437 126.865
341 105.889
627 112.774
447 118.951
1264 107.154
588 136.029
448 104.094
533 123.452
579 125.988
292 102.901
1699 114.927
137 132.131
16 129.063
1801 117.3
40 68
11 131.818
1782 116.226
56 119.429
14 116.071
Stdev
107.947
117.216
94.795
38.891
79.32
109.17
130.58
122.228
100.801
75.995
110.622
93.06
73.897
106.397
89.177
111.698
108.276
106.428
62.773
110
123.665
94.146
91.33
104.105
87.917
123.813
97.046
106.483
94.836
92.204
79.704
122.905
94.38
104.846
105.629
94.026
130.966
104.108
100.904
114.358
110.416
105.239
134.238
134.786
108.373
70.942
116.023
107.987
108.516
108.187
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard devi
ation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
2.5084
3.7871
3.174
27.5
14.022
10.2247
8.0673
7.9396
3.2004
5.1828
2.818
8.0094
12.1486
15.5196
10.3667
26.3275
2.6432
8.661
23.726
27.5
5.0235
3.7099
8.1688
4.8277
25.3794
4.8085
9.5622
5.7664
5.8257
5.7404
5.3494
5.8793
5.111
4.1872
4.9961
2.6447
5.401
4.9187
4.3706
4.7525
6.4616
2.5532
11.4687
33.6966
2.5537
11.217
34.9823
2.5581
14.501
28.9143
Refused =
Mm
1
1
1
115
5
10
0
5
1
1
1
5
5
15
1
30
1
1
20
30
2
5
1
1
30
2
10
1
1
1
5
1
5
1
4
1
1
1
5
1
4
1
1
10
1
5
40
1
10
15
Max
1130
1130
1065
170
290
670
975
1065
1130
380
1130
440
310
553
520
420
1130
630
185
420
1065
1130
450
600
280
1065
570
1130
525
600
375
1130
570
975
670
670
1130
1065
650
670
1130
1130
1065
450
1130
330
420
1130
553
420
Refused data. N
5 25
17 45
20 55
15 35
115 115
15 40
25 45
20 60
15 60
20 45
10 30
20 45
15 45
10 30
30 40
15 45
30 60
17 45
15 45
20 30
30 60
20 60
20 45
15 45
10 31
30 40
20 60
15 30
15 40
17 45
20 45
15 30
15 50
20 40
15 45
22 48
15 45
20 51.5
15 40
25 60
15 45
15 40
17 45
15 60
10 60
20 45
5.5 30
40 60
17 45
20 42.5
15 60
= doer sample s
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
50
85
97.5
65
143
80
90
120
110
75
60
85
85
60
85
90
82.5
85
90
75
70
110
67.5
90
70
75
110
60
75
80
70
60
95
75
80
85
75
90
70
90
90
60
85
90
60
89
47.5
90
85
75
85
ze.
75
150
175
130
170
137.5
159
200
179
145
110
150
150
95
180
145
140
150
145
145
122.5
180
130
160
135
130
180
135
150
145
130
105
165
135
150
160
140
180
130
162
160
127.5
150
165
152.5
150
60
155
150
172.5
140
90
253
270
230
170
225
250
330
265
240
195
255
220
210
270
225
300
253
240
185
290
285
225
220
250
270
285
210
235
240
240
208
270
240
250
250
235
297
230
267
283
225
250
265
420
254
172.5
270
250
270
270
95
316
355
285
170
270
330
415
360
300
270
320
340
235
325
270
420
316
325
185
420
375
280
300
310
280
383
270
285
305
297
290
338
280
313
325
285
380
280
330
360
275
310
390
450
316
235
420
315
340
420
98 99
420 515
475 558
370 435
170 170
290 290
390 630
525 580
470 520
405 510
310 316
435 525
430 435
310 310
553 553
345 520
420 420
430 510
415 553
185 185
420 420
470 580
360 405
420 420
462 515
280 280
510 580
305 510
405 485
418 475
343 450
355 360
470 558
430 438
410 462
475 525
375 485
462 558
360 420
420 500
470 545
460 565
420 510
553 565
450 450
430 515
330 330
420 420
430 515
410 553
420 420
Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
a Includes active sports, exercise, hobbies.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-109
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-94. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Eating or Drinking
Percen tiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
8627
3979
4644
4
157
492
680
538
5464
1296
7049
808
148
168
345
109
7861
639
41
86
1695
3684
715
2472
61
1867
758
Education High School Graduate 2363
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
1612
1160
867
1916
1928
2960
1823
5813
2814
2332
2222
2352
1721
7937
635
55
8318
243
66
8169
397
61
Mean
74.8821
75.8316
74.0814
60
75.3248
93.4837
68.5412
55.8587
71.8673
91.7014
77.0058
59.9047
80.4054
66.0417
68.7043
74.2477
75.5599
68.2754
60.4146
68.9186
72.2083
70.6097
72.2112
83.9498
71.0492
70.85
72.3206
74.8565
73.9237
78.4991
82.8166
78.2766
75.8117
71.3916
75.9989
71.2069
82.4741
76.0931
76.3096
73.4787
73.3161
75.2016
71.3732
69.2909
74.5795
85.0288
75.6667
74.6605
80.6599
66.9508
Stdev
54.8419
56.2313
53.6353
21.2132
50.1255
52.8671
38.9518
34.9903
55.1199
62.6665
55.6564
46.5954
47.8283
52.0928
51.8926
60.8473
55.2306
50.1994
37.1039
55.4732
44.9086
55.0998
55.4476
59.1281
60.9843
45.3955
57.4352
57.1005
56.5324
55.4196
59.6871
59.1627
51.3702
55.0903
52.9755
52.0446
59.5052
56.4379
55.207
53.2506
54.2737
54.8093
55.0353
56.5874
54.4372
63.5335
67.304
54.3234
65.2442
47.7188
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
0.5904
0.8914
0.7871
10.6066
4.0005
2.3834
1.4937
1.5085
0.7457
1.7407
0.6629
1.6392
3.9315
4.019
2.7938
5.8281
0.6229
1.9859
5.7947
5.9818
1.0908
0.9078
2.0736
1.1892
7.8082
1.0506
2.0861
1.1746
1.408
1.6272
2.0271
1.3516
1.1699
1.0126
1.2407
0.6826
1.1217
1.1687
1.1712
1.098
1.3083
0.6152
2.184
7.6302
0.5969
4.0757
8.2845
0.601
3.2745
6.1098
Min Max
1 900
1 900
2 640
30 75
10 315
2 345
5 255
2 210
1 900
5 750
1 900
2 505
2 305
7 525
2 435
8 410
1 900
2 435
5 150
8 410
2 345
1 900
2 509
2 750
8 385
2 375
2 460
1 900
2 525
1 640
2 750
1 750
1 435
2 900
2 500
1 900
2 630
2 640
1 630
1 750
2 900
1 900
2 460
8 335
1 900
2 500
5 435
1 900
2 460
8 230
5
15
15
15
30
15
20
15
10
15
20
15
15
15
15
12
20
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
25 50
35 60
39 60
34 60
45 67.5
30 65
60 90
40 65
30 50
30 60
50 80
40 64
30 50
45 72.5
30 59.5
30 60
30 60
35 60
30 60
30 55
30 60
40 65
30 60
30 60
45 75
30 55
38 60
30 60
35 60
30 60
40 65
40 70
37 65
40 64
30 60
35 60
33 60
40 70
15 38.5 65
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
35 60
35 60
30 60
35 60
30 60
30 60
35 60
45 75
30 60
35 60
30 60
30 60
75
96
96
98
75
100
120
90
75
90
120
100
75
106.5
83
90
90
100
90
90
90
90
90
90
110
90
90
90
96
90
105
110
102.5
100
90
100
90
110
95.5
100
95
95
100
90
90
95
115
90
95
110
90
90
140
140
140
75
145
160
120
105
135
165
145
119
150
120
125
130
140
120
120
115
133
1 5
1 5
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 5
140
145
145
150
145
140
135
150
130
150
140
145
135
140
140
133
120
140
160
150
140
150
120
95
175
180
170
75
150
190
142.5
125
170
200
180
140
160
135
165
180
175
155
130
155
150
165
170
185
145
150
180
175
175
180
185
180
175
165
180
165
190
175
178
170
175
175
170
210
175
180
195
170
180
155
98 99
215 270
210 270
225 270
75 75
195 285
225 270
165 195
150 170
220 270
270 295
225 270
200 225
200 200
190 200
195 225
290 315
220 270
195 225
150 150
210 410
195 210
225 270
230 260
235 285
235 385
190 210
230 315
220 270
230 275
220 265
240 270
240 285
210 255
210 270
210 240
210 250
240 297
240 275
220 275
210 260
210 232
215 270
225 285
215 335
210 265
285 330
215 435
210 260
285 360
215 230
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Page
15-110
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-95. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at an Auto Repair Shop/Gas Station
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
153
105
48
3
4
5
7
118
16
130
12
5
3
3
148
5
16
84
16
35
2
18
16
51
32
19
17
29
48
43
33
121
32
28
44
52
29
145
8
149
4
146
7
Mean
190.693
241.476
79.604
161.667
40
22
153.857
223.847
58.125
195.538
149.667
173
15
350
188.926
243
84.188
283.571
104.188
65.914
17.5
95.056
327.188
233.353
253.469
72.895
49
247.31
230.896
165.721
115
204.645
137.938
177.143
189.636
171.692
239.448
191.29
179.875
191.047
177.5
189.048
225
Stdev
234.506
250.274
144.512
115.578
50.166
21.679
205.069
249.335
96.889
237.537
203.31
231.236
10
330.114
233.749
279.701
146.714
263.755
147.369
94.745
17.678
153.879
301.181
243.089
252.8
126.321
73.388
257.069
251.622
211.591
198.907
244.861
184.175
258.088
223.267
223.809
251.391
235.288
234.838
235.262
235.744
234.959
239.948
Stderr
18.959
24.424
20.858
66.729
25.083
9.695
77.509
22.953
24 222
20.833
58.691
103.412
5.774
190.591
19.214
125.086
36.678
28.778
36.842
16.015
12.5
36.27
75.295
34.039
44.689
28.98
17.799
47.737
36.318
32.267
34.625
22.26
32.558
48.774
33.659
31.037
46.682
19.54
83.028
19.273
117.872
19.445
90.692
Min
1
2
1
90
10
5
3
1
1
2
5
5
15
1
15
3
3
5
1
5
3
5
9
9
1
5
9
1
3
5
1
9
2
2
1
5
1
5
1
5
1
5
Max 5
930 5
930 5
595 3
295 90
115 10
60 5
505 3
930 5
OCO -)
j Jo 2.
930 5
565 2
525 5
25 5
675 15
930 5
675 15
505 3
930 5
390 5
432 2
30 5
505 3
930 5
748 5
700 5
508 1
235 5
930 3
700 5
675 5
675 5
930 5
540 3
930 5
645 5
680 3
748 8
930 5
600 5
930 5
510 5
930 5
555 5
25 50
15 60
15 115
10 15
90 100
12.5 17.5
15 15
5 55
15 75
i c ori
1 J ZU
15 60
6.5 75
15 25
5 15
15 360
15 60
15 150
12.5 17.5
17.5 230
12.5 17.5
15 30
5 17.5
10 17.5
60 278
20 120
15 157
5 20
10 15
30 120
17.5 74.5
15 50
10 15
15 60
15 40
15 30
15 79.5
10 30
35 95
15 60
5 37.5
15 60
10 97.5
15 57.5
5 95
75
360
495
70
295
67.5
15
390
480
A'J ^
H-Z. J
390
229
295
25
675
369.5
360
69.5
540
187.5
90
30
79
615
480
517.5
90
35
432
510
358
100
390
200
355
384.5
347.5
445
360
374.5
360
345
360
510
90
565
600
295
295
115
60
505
600
587.5
495
525
25
675
565
675
390
630
359
160
30
390
675
565
595
295
225
600
600
555
505
595
505
595
565
540
605
565
600
585
510
585
555
95
645
675
485
295
115
60
505
675
358
645
565
525
25
675
630
675
505
680
390
358
30
505
930
675
680
508
235
748
680
595
645
675
510
700
600
675
695
645
600
645
510
645
555
98 99
695 748
700 748
595 595
295 295
115 115
60 60
505 505
700 748
358 358
700 748
565 565
525 525
25 25
675 675
700 748
675 675
505 505
748 930
390 390
432 432
30 30
505 505
930 930
695 748
700 700
508 508
235 235
930 930
700 700
675 675
675 675
700 748
540 540
930 930
645 645
675 680
748 748
700 748
600 600
700 748
510 510
700 748
555 555
Note: A " *" Signifies missing data. Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard
deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-111
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-96. Statistics for 24- Hour Cumulative Numbr of Minutes Spent Indoors at a Gym/Health Club
Perc entiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
364
176
188
6
5
28
39
254
32
307
30
10
11
4
2
345
17
2
72
176
40
75
1
81
9
61
71
81
61
83
62
118
101
281
83
127
85
81
71
333
28
3
357
4
3
352
10
2
Mean
129.651
147.193
113.229
202.5
156
105.286
165.385
123.134
141.375
134.261
117.7
75.2
112.909
83.75
57.5
132.017
90.118
57.5
139.625
131.193
129.25
117.867
40
136.877
110.556
128.475
145.634
121.975
115.639
140.53
127
125.669
126.99
121.26
158.06
139.795
141.459
109.864
119.944
132.39
100.071
101.667
130.499
90
81.667
130.696
97.3
107.5
Stdev
104.343
115.554
89.876
227.854
29.875
69.537
122.056
98.827
114.216
109.36
75.418
36.484
69.077
42.696
3.536
105.901
58.765
3.536
103.274
112.511
92.836
91.345
*
99.66
97.706
110.005
129.073
99.467
76.916
107.244
88.661
107.038
108.452
96.577
123.652
108.258
115.229
87.411
98.963
106.796
69.387
55.752
104.98
47.61
65.256
104.843
92.848
67.175
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
5.4691
8.7102
6.5549
93.0211
13.3604
13.1413
19.5447
6.2009
20.1907
6.2415
13.7693
11.5372
20.8276
21.3478
2.5
5.7015
14.2527
2.5
12.171
8.4808
14.6787
10.5477
*
11.0733
32.5688
14.0847
15.3181
11.0519
9.8481
11.7716
11.26
9.8537
10.7914
5.7613
13.5726
9.6063
12.4983
9.7123
11.7447
5.8524
13.113
32.1887
5.5561
23.8048
37.6755
5.5882
29.361
47.5
Min
5
5
5
30
105
5
15
5
10
5
5
30
25
40
55
5
5
55
5
5
25
5
40
5
10
5
5
15
10
20
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
20
5
5
60
5
60
30
5
10
60
Max
686
686
660
560
180
325
660
686
533
686
320
145
270
140
60
686
255
60
660
686
420
533
40
660
300
660
600
686
415
660
440
660
686
686
660
686
600
525
660
686
330
165
686
160
155
686
330
155
5 25
30 60
30 77.5
30 60
30 55
105 160
30 58
30 90
30 60
30 60
30 65
10 60
30 54
25 65
40 52.5
55 55
30 65
5 60
55 55
30 76
30 60
35 60
25 60
40 40
30 75
10 30
25 75
35 65
30 60
40 60
40 70
25 60
15 60
50 60
0 60
0 77
5 75
0 65
0 60
0 56
0 62
5 60
0 60
0 62
0 60
0 30
0 61
10 45
60 60
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
50
110
120
92.5
75
160
82.5
138
100
103
110
115
60
90
77.5
57.5
110
90
57.5
120
110
95
90
40
120
80
105
110
98
90
120
113
105
92
98
120
120
102
90
98
110
86
80
110
70
60
110
76.5
108
75 90
155 240
175 285
135 200
420 560
175 180
141 165
206 330
150 210
173 292
164 255
145 235
95 133
153 179
115 140
60 60
160 240
115 140
60 60
165 265
150 240
168 285
145 230
40 40
164 215
165 300
145 210
170 285
135 220
145 225
170 240
170 285
150 240
135 225
145 210
180 285
177 240
164 285
130 160
150 215
160 255
118 210
165 165
155 240
120 160
155 155
158 240
120 245
155 155
95
320
360
279
560
180
270
440
295
340
330
285
145
270
140
60
325
255
60
330
330
325
285
40
325
300
310
533
285
265
330
300
330
292
295
415
330
340
310
295
325
230
165
325
160
155
320
330
155
98 99
525 600
533 660
420 560
560 560
180 180
325 325
660 660
475 600
533 533
533 600
320 320
145 145
270 270
140 140
60 60
533 600
255 255
60 60
440 660
560 660
420 420
475 533
40 40
440 660
300 300
525 660
560 600
420 686
320 415
600 660
340 440
533 540
525 560
475 560
600 660
533 660
560 600
440 525
420 660
533 600
330 330
165 165
525 600
160 160
155 155
525 600
330 330
155 155
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-112
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-97. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at the Laundromat
Category
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
5-11
18-64
>64
White
Black
Hispanic
No
Yes
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Note: A "*" Signifies missing data. N = doer sample size
standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis,
1996.
N
40
9
31
3
33
4
31
6
3
37
3
3
20
4
13
3
6
17
6
7
1
6
8
18
8
25
15
11
12
12
5
37
3
40
35
5
Mean
Mean
99.275
150.222
84.484
80.667
101.182
97.5
102.161
75.667
116.667
97.865
116.667
80.667
97.6
127.5
97.462
80.667
95
101.353
91.5
126.429
2
168.667
94
85.944
82.5
103.32
92.533
86.455
85.583
118.667
113.8
95.459
146.333
99.275
92.314
148
Stdev
85.209
146.822
51.822
17.926
91.724
63.574
93.832
50.306
30.551
88.241
30.551
17.926
104.739
91.879
60.852
17.926
53.292
64.434
56.387
168.219
*
166.465
60.328
61.82
52.915
100.663
52.697
57.98
71.678
125.78
48.422
83.88
106.514
85.209
84.343
83.262
Stderr
13.4727
48.9407
9.3075
10.3494
15.967
31.7871
16.8527
20.5372
17.6383
14.5068
17.6383
10.3494
23.4203
45.9393
16.8772
10.3494
21.7562
15.6275
23.0199
63.5808
*
67.9591
21.3291
14.5711
18.7083
20.1326
13.6063
17.4816
20.6916
36.3096
21.655
13.7897
61.4962
13.4727
14.2565
37.2357
Min
2
2
5
60
2
5
2
5
90
2
90
60
2
75
5
60
5
5
10
5
2
45
5
2
5
2
10
2
5
5
34
2
59
2
2
30
Max 5
500 5
500 2
265 5
92 60
500 5
150 5
500 5
130 5
150 90
500 5
150 90
92 60
500 4
265 75
210 5
92 60
150 5
265 5
155 10
500 5
2 2
500 45
210 5
265 2
150 5
500 5
210 10
210 2
265 5
500 5
155 34
500 5
265 59
500 5
500 5
265 30
25 50
54.5 91
115 120
50 80
60 90
50 90
60 118
50 90
34 85
90 110
50 90
90 110
60 90
42 83.5
77.5 85
45 115
60 90
60 113
59 90
34 115
45 70
2 2
75 126
57.5 93.5
50 76
35 100
50 90
60 92
45 80
35 73.5
55 101
115 115
50 90
59 115
54.5 91
50 90
140 150
Percentiles
75 90
120 153
150 500
115 137
92 92
120 155
135 150
120 155
115 130
150 150
120 155
150 150
92 92
115 143
178 265
137 150
92 92
130 150
120 210
120 155
110 500
2 2
140 500
118 210
115 155
118 150
115 155
130 150
120 140
120 130
113 137
150 155
120 150
265 265
120 153
115 130
155 265
= Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation
= maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
95
238
500
155
92
265
150
265
130
150
265
150
92
328
265
210
92
150
265
155
500
2
500
210
265
150
265
210
210
265
500
155
210
265
238
210
265
98 99
500 500
500 500
265 265
92 92
500 500
150 150
500 500
130 130
150 150
500 500
150 150
92 92
500 500
265 265
210 210
92 92
150 150
265 265
155 155
500 500
2 2
500 500
210 210
265 265
150 150
500 500
210 210
210 210
265 265
500 500
155 155
500 500
265 265
500 500
500 500
265 265
Stderr =
or equal to a given number of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-113
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-98. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at Work (non-specific)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
137 393.949
96 435.271
41 297.195
4 568.75
2 200
4 33.75
2 207.5
121 409.678
4 293.75
113 397.903
13 379.231
1 405
9 314.778
1 840
121 388.702
12 361.083
2 585
2 717.5
8 118.75
97 440.732
21 341.19
9 250.556
2 425
11 234.091
12 460.417
50 409.6
29 368.897
22 405.682
13 443.692
22 405.545
26 418.577
58 379.707
31 391.71
121 401.843
16 334.25
42 390.81
34 361.324
41 400.902
20 441.75
124 393.218
13 400.923
133 397.677
3 266.667
1 280
131 397.13
5 333.4
1 280
Stdev
242.649
243.979
212.415
394.723
70.711
11.087
166.17
230.934
289.464
235.199
286.501
*
266.161
*
242.092
242.06
35.355
173.241
113.916
237.56
188.235
218.567
586.899
266.306
181.727
273.717
237.58
184.225
218.128
193.817
250.898
233.179
289.538
242.472
243.28
241.456
236.996
262.9
219.411
237.29
300.15
243.291
255.799
*
242.048
299.365
*
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
20.731
24.901
33.174
197.362
50
5.543
117.5
20.994
144.732
22.126
79.461
*
88.72
*
22.008
69.877
25
122.5
40.275
24.121
41.076
72.856
415
80.294
52.46
38.709
44.117
39.277
60.498
41.322
49.205
30.618
52.003
22.043
60.82
37.257
40.644
41.058
49.062
21.309
83.247
21.096
147.686
*
21.148
133.88
*
Min
5
10
5
90
150
20
90
5
10
5
10
405
30
840
5
30
560
595
20
10
30
5
10
20
115
5
10
90
10
15
10
5
10
5
13
10
10
5
10
5
10
5
90
280
5
10
280
Max
979
979
780
940
250
45
325
979
610
979
850
405
793
840
979
793
610
840
325
979
795
630
840
840
795
979
850
815
793
765
940
979
960
979
795
960
840
979
793
960
979
979
560
280
979
619
280
5
15
20
15
90
150
20
90
15
10
15
10
405
30
840
15
30
560
595
20
15
115
5
10
20
115
15
10
150
10
90
13
10
20
15
13
30
30
13
12.5
20
10
15
90
280
20
10
280
25 50
180 440
245 473
90 280
248 623
150 200
25 35
90 208
240 450
50 278
210 450
85 405
405 405
95 245
840 840
180 405
138 370
560 585
595 718
35 67.5
300 480
240 330
95 150
10 425
40 150
330 495
150 463
160 405
240 375
360 500
320 398
180 473
150 420
90 405
210 450
97.5 340
175 405
150 360
210 450
285 490
180 440
240 320
190 440
90 150
280 280
180 440
13 460
280 280
75
555
598
495
890
250
42.5
325
560
538
555
510
405
440
840
550
510
610
840
200
585
435
360
840
325
558
619
510
540
585
540
610
540
630
560
495
550
525
570
620
553
590
555
560
280
555
565
280
90
662
765
550
940
250
45
325
660
610
660
810
405
793
840
660
660
610
840
325
690
590
630
840
610
615
735
660
595
630
660
690
619
795
660
690
660
660
690
661
660
793
662
560
280
662
619
280
95
810
840
590
940
250
45
325
793
610
780
850
405
793
840
795
793
610
840
325
815
610
630
840
840
795
98 99
940 960
960 979
780 780
940 940
250 250
45 45
325 325
850 960
610 610
940 960
850 850
405 405
793 793
840 840
940 960
793 793
610 610
840 840
325 325
960 979
795 795
630 630
840 840
840 840
795 795
940 969.5 979
765
645
793
662
780
810
850
810
795
765
815
810
727.5
795
979
810
560
280
810
619
280
850 850
815 815
793 793
765 765
940 940
815 979
960 960
940 960
795 795
960 960
840 840
979 979
793 793
850 940
979 979
940 960
560 560
280 280
940 960
619 619
280 280
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-114
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-99. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at the Dry Cleaners
Category
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Percentiles
Population Group N Mean Stdev Stderr Mm Max 5 25 50 75 90 95 98 99
34 82.029 151.651 26.008 2 515 5 5 10 90 325 500 515 515
Male 11 105.545 166.006 50.053 2 515 2 5 10 103 325 515 515 515
Female 23 70.783 146.839 30.618 5 500 5 5 10 35 300 485 500 500
* 1 485 * * 485 485 485 485 485 485 485 485 485 485
1-4 2 20 21.213 15 5 35 5 5 20 35 35 35 35 35
18-64 28 61.036 120.923 22.852 2 515 5 5 10 55 300 325 515 515
>64 3 185 273.359 157.824 10 500 10 10 45 500 500 500 500 500
White 25 70.72 143.744 28.749 2 515 5 5 10 35 300 485 515 515
Black 7 131.429 198.95 75.196 5 500 5 10 20 325 500 500 500 500
Some Others 1 10 * * 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Hispanic 1 91 * * 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
No 31 83.806 158.483 28.464 2 515 5 5 10 45 325 500 515 515
Yes 3 63.667 46.479 26.835 10 91 10 10 90 91 91 91 91 91
* 2 20 21.213 15 5 35 5 5 20 35 35 35 35 35
Full Time 25 83.12 151.81 30.362 2 515 5 5 10 90 325 485 515 515
Part Time 1 500 * * 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500
NotEmployed 6 28.5 33.934 13.853 5 91 5 10 10 45 91 91 91 91
* 2 20 21.213 15 5 35 5 5 20 35 35 35 35 35
< High School 4 234 209.191 104.595 45 500 45 68 196 400 500 500 500 500
High School Graduate 8 84.125 165.008 58.339 5 485 5 13 17.5 62 485 485 485 485
< College 6 146.333 220.347 89.956 5 515 5 10 11.5 325 515 515 515 515
College Graduate 12 13.5 24.247 6.999 2 90 2 5 5 10 10 90 90 90
Post Graduate 2 50 63.64 45 5 95 5 5 50 95 95 95 95 95
Northeast 8 110 187.293 66.218 5 485 5 5 10 180 485 485 485 485
Midwest 10 19.1 30.101 9.519 5 103 5 5 7.5 20 61.5 103 103 103
South 8 197 211.975 74.945 15 515 15 30 93 400 515 515 515 515
West 8 17.75 29.359 10.38 2 90 2 5 10 10 90 90 90 90
Weekday 23 93.957 172.77 36.025 2 515 5 5 10 90 485 500 515 515
Weekend 11 57.091 95.985 28.941 5 325 5 5 10 95 103 325 325 325
Winter 12 74.583 158.092 45.637 5 485 5 5 10 13 325 485 485 485
Spring 4 44.5 41.685 20.843 10 103 10 15 32.5 74 103 103 103 103
Summer 8 20.25 32.012 11.318 2 95 2 5 5 23 95 95 95 95
Fall 10 155.4 205.739 65.061 5 515 5 13 55 300 507.5 515 515 515
No 32 86.688 155.244 27.443 2 515 5 5 11.5 91 325 500 515 515
Yes 2 7.5 3.536 2.5 5 10 5 5 7.5 10 10 10 10 10
No 33 83.909 153.599 26.738 2 515 5 5 10 90 325 500 515 515
Yes 1 20 * * 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
No 33 84.061 153.532 26.726 2 515 5 5 10 90 325 500 515 515
Yes 1 15 * * 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Note: A "*" Signifies missing data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard
error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-115
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-100. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a Bar/Nightclub/Bowling Alley
Percen tiles
Category
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
*
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
No
Yes
DK
Refused
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
DK
N
352
213
139
4
4
8
313
23
297
25
8
7
10
5
327
20
2
3
12
223
43
70
4
13
28
117
95
55
44
83
88
91
90
192
160
93
83
99
77
331
18
3
345
5
2
333
17
2
Mean
175.818
174.319
178.115
158.75
98.75
151.25
180.192
141.217
173.623
205.44
169.875
197.286
121.3
246.6
177.131
144.9
142.5
261
133.75
182.439
201.233
146.3
176.25
146.538
218.036
177.778
205.274
141.764
131.364
179.337
169.818
175.714
178.544
167.458
185.85
182.667
186.12
160.313
176.377
176.308
169.444
160
176.98
82
210
177.273
148.588
165
Stdev
132.206
133.151
131.191
98.011
57.5
77.678
136.706
85.243
132.592
126.551
153.311
187.607
52.326
127.153
134.457
85.08
31.82
171.852
73.55
138.308
155.454
97.375
115.136
84.172
170.225
130.078
152.829
92.766
90.209
137.039
126.238
132.028
135.533
133.473
130.378
131.674
147.597
130.672
117.154
133.715
108.978
124.9
132.759
47.249
127.279
133.27
108.499
190.919
Stderr
7.047
9.123
11.127
49.006
28.75
27.463
7.727
17.774
7.694
25.31
54.204
70.909
16.547
56.864
7.435
19.024
22.5
99.219
21.232
9.262
23.706
11.639
57.568
23.345
32.17
12.026
15.68
12.509
13.599
15.042
13.457
13.84
14.286
9.633
10.307
13.654
16.201
13.133
13.351
7.35
25.686
72.111
7.148
21.131
90
7.303
26.315
135
Mm Max 5 25
3
5
3
75
45
50
3
5
3
50
5
70
5
73
3
5
120
73
45
5
5
3
45
45
60
3
5
10
30
5
5
3
5
5
3
5
5
3
15
3
60
60
3
5
120
3
50
30
870 30 90
870 30 90
630 30 95
300 75 98
170 45 53
270 50 80
870 30 90
328 30 75
870 30 90
540 60 120
479 5 38
615 70 110
198 5 105
410 73 180
870 30 90
440 38 110
165 120 120
410 73 73
270 45 60
870 30 90
615 45 90
479 30 73
300 45 83
300 45 60
870 75 120
630 25 90
650 30 105
417 20 75
400 30 60
650 45 89
615 30 90
870 35 90
605 30 85
650 30 80
870 45 108
650 40 87
870 30 90
630 30 75
615 30 100
870 30 90
530 60 105
300 60 60
870 30 90
120 5 75
300 120 120
870 30 90
530 50 110
300 30 30
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
50 75
150 222.5
140 220
150 225
130 220
90 145
160 205
150 225
135 180
140 220
180 240
175 225
135 185
117.5 160
270 300
150 225
120 160
142.5 165
300 410
135 177.5
150 228
150 270
122.5 180
180 270
150 185
174.5 235
150 225
180 240
120 205
110 177.5
140 240
147.5 211.5
148 225
152.5 225
120 210
165 228
150 240
140 230
120 189
165 220
150 225
135 210
120 300
150 225
90 120
210 300
150 225
120 175
165 300
90
328
340
300
300
170
270
370
240
328
417
479
615
179
410
340
221.5
165
410
225
340
455
255
300
270
420
360
462
265
265
328
299
270
407
340
321.5
410
380
285
299
340
270
300
340
120
300
340
210
300
95
487
479
530
300
170
270
498
325
487
498
479
615
198
410
489
342.5
165
410
270
525
520
328
300
300
568
489
590
340
290
489
487
462
479
520
474.5
455
498
530
410
487
530
300
487
120
300
487
530
300
98 99
570 615
568 615
600 605
300 300
170 170
270 270
590 615
328 328
590 630
540 540
479 479
615 615
198 198
410 410
590 615
440 440
165 165
410 410
270 270
600 630
615 615
462 479
300 300
300 300
870 870
540 570
615 650
410 417
400 400
630 650
568 615
570 870
590 605
590 605
568 630
560 650
570 870
605 630
600 615
590 615
530 530
300 300
590 615
120 120
300 300
590 615
530 530
300 300
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
a given number of minutes.
Page
15-116
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-101. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a Restaurant
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
2059
986
1073
30
61
84
122
1503
259
1747
148
37
30
78
19
1911
129
5
14
263
1063
208
515
10
299
132
590
431
359
248
409
504
680
466
1291
768
524
559
556
420
1903
150
6
1998
50
11
1945
104
10
Mean
94.539
87.498
101.01
126.13
62.705
56.69
69.836
101.21
83.583
91.658
102.82
81.297
145.17
123
123.84
92.945
116.7
76
114.5
62.251
105.48
122.61
76.33
135
72.177
134.77
99.439
94.935
89.515
95.012
94.379
96.895
92.666
94.863
97.338
89.833
97.735
91.642
95.121
93.636
94.081
96.267
196.33
94.926
68.98
140.27
93.746
96.077
232.8
Stdev
119.93
114.17
124.69
138.22
47.701
38.144
78.361
131.22
83.517
114.69
141.28
78.948
194.83
156.78
127.64
117.6
147.95
134.32
134.74
57.907
142.37
144.83
61.418
133.52
79.595
171.84
136.32
114.88
104.13
109.37
113.64
120.86
125.1
116.88
128.83
103.16
125.69
109.7
123.03
121.74
117.41
143.56
220.89
120.73
53.608
171.27
117.67
130.13
288.24
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr Mm
2.643 1
3.6358 1
3.8065 1
25.2349 15
6.1075 4
4.1618 5
7.0945 2
3.3846 1
5.1895 3
2.744 1
11.613 3
12.979 15
35.5705 5
17.7518 10
29.2833 20
2.6901 1
13.0261 1
60.0708 5
36.0117 30
3.5707 2
4.3668 1
10.0423 1
2.7064 3
42.223 30
4.6031 1
14.9567 5
5.612 3
5.5338 1
5.4957 1
6.9452 3
5.619 2
5.3833 1
4.7972 2
5.4145 1
3.5855 1
3.7224 1
5.491 3
4.6399 2
5.2177 1
5.9401 1
2.6915 1
11.7219 4
90.1782 30
2.701 1
7.5813 3
51.6393 30
2.668 1
12.7602 5
91.1492 10
Max
925
900
925
495
330
180
455
925
750
925
805
480
765
700
480
925
765
315
480
455
925
805
490
425
548
925
910
770
765
765
765
805
910
925
925
770
875
925
910
900
910
925
480
925
340
480
910
925
875
5
10
10
10
30
10
10
10
10
19
10
5
18
10
15
20
10
15
5
30
10
10
5
15
30
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
10
10
10
30
10
15
30
10
15
10
25
30
30
40
45
35
30
30
30
45
30
30
30
45
40
30
30
40
10
30
30
35
32.5
40
60
30
30
35
35
35
40
35
30
30
30
30
36
35
35
30
30
35
30
30
30
45
30
30
30
30
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
50
60
60
60
60
55
45
45
60
60
60
60
60
82.5
60
70
60
60
10
60
45
60
65
60
82.5
50
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
45.5
79
60
60
70
60
60
79
Percentiles
75 90
95 185
90 160
105 230
150 397.5
85 115
85 120
65 165
105 211
90 150
95 175
95 295
90 135
120 432.5
110 375
210 330
95 180
115 360
40 315
90 330
80 120
105 235
122.5 320
90 145
135 377.5
85 130
151.5 375
90 202.5
105 180
100 165
115 180
100 210
105 190
90 194.5
110 175
93 210
105 155
105 178
95 180
94 210
95 185
100 180
90 237.5
480 480
100 190
90 105
120 480
97 180
90 235
480 677.5
95
351
305
380
490
120
120
250
400
215
320
430
200
750
585
480
330
435
315
480
140
485
441
195
425
250
535
435
340
295
260
330
340
365
375
377
280
351
360
360
325
330
485
480
355
120
480
335
360
875
98 99
548 660
550 660
540 670
495 495
130 330
140 180
325 360
570 675
315 520
535 640
555 735
480 480
765 765
660 700
480 480
542 645
660 700
315 315
480 480
273 330
630 735
595 660
260 315
425 425
360 480
700 750
645 680
550 640
490 570
560 675
507 585
560 675
550 650
535 640
555 700
510 620
595 685
505 555
555 675
540 653
545 653
590 670
480 480
550 660
286 340
480 480
548 653
500 620
875 875
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-117
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-102
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at School
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race Whrte
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
1224
581
643
18
43
302
287
550
24
928
131
39
36
76
14
1082
127
5
10
616
275
138
190
5
679
24
114
173
93
141
261
290
427
246
1179
45
392
353
207
272
1095
124
5
1209
9
6
1175
42
7
Mean
343.35
358.599
329.572
314.056
288.465
396.308
402.551
295.422
187.708
348.525
339.809
332.385
363.583
294.039
279.714
344.924
333.016
293
329.5
390.294
331.269
280.891
258.674
166
388.943
233.333
186.649
281.41
300.43
373.525
345.724
334.445
354.037
332.78
346.838
251.978
369.298
355.057
316.763
310.996
342.779
350.669
287
344.629
205.778
292.167
344.826
306.714
315.429
Stdev
179.099
167.7
187.875
230.927
217.621
109.216
125.512
207.294
187.012
180.458
169.282
179.918
155.557
175.697
221.268
179.58
173.803
244.672
180.053
130.206
222.021
174.844
199.529
179.074
132.842
179.648
193.608
209.872
208.704
193.443
181.522
176.652
178.547
180.277
177.477
198.543
164.363
165.488
196.364
195.332
179.195
178.785
190.676
178.874
169.545
178.908
178.845
188.249
163.691
Note: A"*" Signifres missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
5.119
6.957
7.409
54.43
33.187
6.285
7.409
8.839
38.174
5.924
14.79
28.81
25.926
20.154
59.136
5.459
15.423
109.42
56.938
5.246
13.388
14.884
14.475
80.084
5.098
36.67
18.133
15.956
21.642
16.291
11.236
10.373
8.641
11.494
5.169
29.597
8.302
8.808
13.648
11.844
5.415
16.055
85.273
5.144
56.515
73.039
5.217
29.047
61.869
Min Max
1 995
1 995
1 855
5 713
5 665
5 665
15 855
1 995
2 585
1 995
2 855
5 840
10 820
2 565
5 681
1 995
2 820
3 562
5 625
5 855
1 995
1 800
1 855
5 440
5 855
1 540
1 785
1 995
1 755
1 683
1 995
1 730
1 855
1 820
1 995
20 820
1 855
1 855
2 995
1 855
1 995
1 855
5 445
1 995
15 510
5 480
1 995
3 632
5 440
5
10
30
5
5
10
170
120
5
3
10
15
20
105
10
5
10
15
3
5
115
5
10
5
5
100
2
4
5
5
15
11
10
10
15
10
40
20
12
10
5
10
10
5
10
15
5
10
10
5
25
210
255
180
165
60
365
383
104
45
212.5
230
190
272.5
142.5
60
210
200
65
200
365
115
160
60
5
360
30
20
120
115
250
210
180
235
195
222
105
285
250
125
120
200
250
180
210
90
180
212
120
180
50
395
400
390
247.5
269
403
420
300
120
400
390
365
366
362.5
260
395
390
415
350
410
405
285
262.5
180
410
297.5
107.5
255
320
442
385
390
415
377.5
395
180
405
400
365
365
390
401.5
365
395
180
324
395
377.5
378
75 90
454 540
450 540
455 540
520 625
500 580
445 535
450 500
460 552.5
327.5 480
458 545
445 510
450 560
457.5 502
432 495
440 625
455 540
445 500
420 562
445 537.5
450 525
510 575
412 480
410 527.5
200 440
450 525
373.5 460
295 480
425 550
470 540
510 575
455 535
440 530
462 540
440 555
455 540
360 555
457 545
455 535
445 557
445 540
455 540
445 535
440 445
455 540
275 510
440 480
455 540
444 465
440 440
95
585
600
582
713
595
565
565
612
510
600
580
580
598
525
681
598
565
562
625
570
625
537
572
440
580
465
580
640
580
615
620
585
575
595
585
632
600
575
585
595
585
605
445
595
510
480
595
580
440
98 99
660 723
690 778
640 683
713 713
665 665
625 640
710 778
683 785
585 585
665 723
624 645
840 840
820 820
540 565
681 681
665 730
600 630
562 562
625 625
640 665
690 755
660 683
778 840
440 440
640 710
540 540
645 690
820 855
730 755
655 680
710 855
645 683
640 755
681 713
655 723
820 820
680 710
636 713
640 723
660 778
660 723
645 800
445 445
660 723
510 510
480 480
660 730
632 632
440 440
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
Page
15-118
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-103. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a Plant/Factory /Warehouse
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
383 450.896
271 460.458
112 427.759
6 405.667
1 20
2 107.5
4 108
353 463.683
17 347.765
322 451.789
32 466.438
3 263.333
6 585.333
15 385.8
5 440.4
350 454.137
26 419.615
2 425
5 397
7 95.286
333 481.417
23 359.87
19 179.316
1 30
13 184
38 491.237
190 465.374
85 450.494
43 463.163
14 357.5
71 449.423
113 462.035
136 465.912
63 400.159
319 476.445
64 323.547
89 468.157
91 445.198
127 440.646
76 454.632
364 452.948
17 412.353
2 405
375 453.928
5 231
3 438.333
362 450.235
19 468.316
2 405
Stdev
204.367
205.102
201.609
304.05
*
123.744
136.404
196.321
210.909
201.135
172.559
378.462
156.91
231.348
387.419
202.78
213.155
162.635
314.833
113.83
185.222
170.619
221.341
*
234.182
195.919
188.699
199.674
206.51
255.702
207.98
196.506
199.315
221.13
190.875
222.63
188.472
212.648
210.285
204.721
203.838
187.025
530.33
202.31
168.389
379.418
204.588
175.293
530.33
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error
Stderr
10.443
12.459
19.05
124.13
*
87.5
68.202
10.449
51.153
11.209
30.504
218.51
64.058
59.734
173.26
10.839
41.803
115
140.8
43.024
10.15
35.577
50.779
*
64.95
31.782
13.69
21.658
31.492
68.339
24.683
18.486
17.091
27.86
10.687
27.829
19.978
22.292
18.66
23.483
10.684
45.36
375
10.447
75.306
219.06
10.753
40.215
375
Min Max
2 997
2 997
5 820
30 780
20 20
20 195
10 307
5 997
2 705
5 890
2 750
30 700
310 780
5 765
30 997
2 997
5 765
310 540
30 780
10 307
5 997
40 585
2 705
30 30
10 780
2 855
5 997
15 870
5 840
10 700
5 890
2 997
5 870
10 760
5 997
2 820
10 997
10 870
2 890
5 760
2 997
20 580
30 780
2 997
60 475
30 780
2 997
50 720
30 780
5
30
30
15
30
20
20
10
30
2
30
30
30
310
5
30
30
15
310
30
10
50
45
2
30
10
5
30
40
60
10
15
30
20
30
30
10
30
30
15
30
30
20
30
30
60
30
30
50
30
25 50
350 510
365 515
314.5 510
120 414.5
20 20
20 107.5
20 57.5
385 520
180 450
355 517.5
382.5 497.5
30 60
565 591
230 435
115 520
365 512.5
240 482.5
310 425
115 520
20 30
440 525
240 390
25 60
30 30
20 85
435 525
380 520
375 510
405 520
90 355
300 510
405 520
382 522.5
185 490
435 525
107.5 357.5
360 520
270 505
370 510
352.5 520
355 512.5
340 495
30 405
360 515
90 230
30 505
350 510
375 510
30 405
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
75
568
575
555
675
20
195
196
570
495
568
550
700
675
515
540
570
550
540
540
195
580
505
295
30
270
600
565
565
600
550
565
570
570
550
580
507.5
565
570
560
591
570
540
780
570
300
780
565
568
780
90
670
675
600
780
20
195
307
670
550
650
675
700
780
760
997
666.5
675
540
780
307
675
527
640
30
510
705
667.5
635
670
675
675
640
670
675
675
560
660
675
645
675
675
550
780
670
475
780
663
690
780
95
705
720
675
780
20
195
307
705
705
690
720
700
780
765
997
700
760
540
780
307
720
535
705
30
780
765
705
680
690
700
725
700
720
690
710
620
690
760
700
690
705
580
780
705
475
780
700
720
780
98
770
780
705
780
20
195
307
770
705
770
750
700
780
765
997
770
765
540
780
307
780
585
705
30
780
855
760
820
840
700
780
770
840
710
770
780
780
840
765
720
770
580
780
770
475
780
770
720
780
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumul
= maximum number of minutes.
99
855
870
720
780
20
195
307
855
705
840
750
700
780
765
997
855
765
540
780
307
855
585
705
30
780
855
890
870
840
700
890
820
855
760
855
820
997
870
855
760
855
580
780
855
475
780
855
720
780
ative
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-119
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-104. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors on a Sidewalk,
Street, or in the Neighborhood
Percentiles
Category
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
No
Yes
DK
Refused
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
DK
N
896
409
487
15
30
75
74
580
122
727
87
11
18
42
11
807
79
1
9
176
384
74
255
7
198
56
223
172
138
109
202
193
298
203
642
254
210
242
276
168
832
57
7
857
33
6
855
34
7
Mean
85.785
108.775
66.476
72.533
54.8
110.813
52.554
94.279
59.418
85.735
89.184
88.727
80.556
71.357
122.909
87.482
67.797
2
100.778
79.182
102.221
74.446
69.996
45.143
74.914
131.232
100.233
77.186
76.275
78.229
89.134
87.855
79.943
89.059
86.684
83.512
73.548
97.913
83.989
86.56
86.108
85.596
48.857
86.177
81.727
52
84.837
117.735
46.286
Stdev
133.828
168.11
91.863
69.418
52.731
116.76
74.776
153.933
61.519
136.504
132.669
114.01
105.981
110.769
117.699
136.129
110.301
*
115.933
96.345
169.534
113.86
94.045
36.64
92.253
247.289
146.92
128.752
106.589
121.311
132.343
153.329
125.46
127.909
143.938
104.207
144.308
137.243
123.086
131.855
129.455
193.133
27.973
134.897
117.393
29.257
132.316
176.429
27.482
Stderr Min
4.4709 1
8.3125 1
4.1627 1
17.9236 1
9.6274 1
13.4823 1
8.6925 1
6.3917 1
5.5696 1
5.0627 1
14.2236 1
34.3752 2
24.98 10
17.092 1
35.4876 2
4.792 1
12.4098 1
* 2
38.6443 2
7.2622 1
8.6515 1
13.2359 1
5.8893 1
13.8485 2
6.5561 1
33.0454 1
9.8385 1
9.8173 1
9.0734 1
11.6195 1
9.3116 1
11.0369 1
7.2677 1
8.9775 1
5.6808 1
6.5385 1
9.9582 1
8.8223 1
7.4089 1
10.1729 1
4.488 1
25.5811 1
10.5727 2
4.608 1
20.4356 1
11.9443 2
4.5251 1
30.2574 3
10.3871 2
Max
1440
1440
580
290
235
540
435
1440
380
1440
565
405
420
525
310
1440
615
2
310
540
1440
795
615
90
540
1440
795
675
600
710
735
1440
710
795
1440
565
1440
795
690
710
795
1440
90
1440
465
90
1440
735
90
5
2
3
1
1
2
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
3
1
1
2
2
1
5
1
3
5
3
2
2
1
2
2
1
4
4
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
8
2
25 50
15 40
20 45
15 35
40 55
10 42.5
20 65
15 30
15 40
20 40
15 41
10 35
30 45
20 40
20 40
40 60
15 45
15 30
2 2
40 60
15 45
15 40.5
15 42.5
15 40
4 40
15 40.5
15 40
20 45
10 30
20 45
20 45
15 45
15 30
15 35
20 45
15 40
25 45
15 33
25 45
15 45
15 40
15 40
15 35
30 60
15 40
17 45
40 60
15 40
30 45
32 40
75
90
120
75
90
78
178
60
82.5
75
90
120
120
75
75
290
90
62
2
90
110
75
86
85
90
90
118
95
75
70
60
90
85
75
105
80
90
60
120
90
90
90
90
60
90
60
60
85
120
60
90 95
223 405
330 525
152 255
120 290
125 158
240 410
125 200
277.5 480
120 190
215 405
324 426
149 405
240 420
135 290
300 310
225 410
140 300
2 2
310 310
200 260
330 525
180 255
152 270
90 90
185 240
465 710
275 480
180 435
205 310
200 330
235 410
240 355
185 420
210 300
223 426
220 310
160 270
240 435
200 420
240 405
225 418
180 235
90 90
223 410
250 380
90 90
225 405
215 690
90 90
98 99
565 615
615 710
435 465
290 290
235 235
465 540
338 435
600 690
235 270
570 675
540 565
405 405
420 420
525 525
310 310
565 600
525 615
2 2
310 310
435 465
600 710
390 795
380 485
90 90
435 465
735 1440
600 680
570 600
485 565
560 570
530 570
565 600
532 680
570 615
585 680
440 480
560 710
570 675
525 580
600 615
565 600
260 1440
90 90
565 615
465 465
90 90
560 600
735 735
90 90
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
a given number of minutes.
Page
15-120
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-105. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors in a Parking Lot
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
226 70.721
106 100.34
120 44.558
3 135
11 39.818
5 62
12 93.75
182 69.984
13 74.462
180 72.122
18 102.444
3 21.667
5 50
17 25.706
3 135
196 69.26
25 42.92
2 465
3 135
26 55.577
117 83.325
37 75.378
43 37.093
3 135
33 69.697
16 73.25
83 83
49 75.898
23 48.783
22 35.5
56 57.357
48 73.438
75 57.92
47 104.298
154 64.851
72 83.278
45 50.533
57 82.912
75 72.027
49 73.082
204 62.98
18 149.722
4 110
217 69.263
5 99.6
4 113.75
211 65.555
11 142.364
4 146.25
Stdev
126.651
167.159
64.826
195
38.449
63.699
90.81
132.655
127.9
128.299
167.776
7.638
46.098
39.365
195
114.078
103.34
629.325
195
59.88
155.119
114.734
46.8
195
85.644
176.778
124.358
162.674
107.169
54.472
82.622
118.574
106.421
189.916
136.686
101.675
64.702
131.245
146.21
133.165
109.369
238.456
166.883
127.076
83.056
164.792
114.21
265.976
160.799
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
8.425
16.236
5.918
112.58
11.593
28.487
26.214
9.833
35.473
9.563
39.545
4.41
20.616
9.547
112.58
8.148
20.668
445
112.58
11.743
14.341
18.862
7.137
112.58
14.909
44.194
13.65
23.239
22.346
11.613
11.041
17.115
12.288
27.702
11.014
11.982
9.645
17.384
16.883
19.024
7.657
56.205
83.442
8.626
37.144
82.396
7.863
80.195
80.399
Min
1
1
1
15
5
5
5
1
1
1
2
15
5
1
15
1
1
20
15
5
1
1
1
15
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
15
1
35
15
1
1
15
Max
910
910
295
360
110
170
248
910
465
910
580
30
115
165
360
720
510
910
360
238
910
465
210
360
360
720
580
910
510
185
495
550
720
910
910
465
309
495
910
720
720
910
360
910
238
360
720
910
360
5 25
2 10
5 15
1 5
15 15
5 10
5 30
5 17.5
2 10
1 10
2 10
2 6
15 15
5 10
1 10
15 15
2 10
1 5
20 20
15 15
5 15
2 10
1 5
1 10
15 15
5 15
2 7.5
5 10
2 10
2 5
1 5
1 12.5
5 10
2 7
5 10
2 7
5 15
5 15
1 10
2 10
1 10
2 10
1 15
15 22.5
2 10
35 40
15 22.5
2 10
1 10
15 22.5
50 75
20 60
30 110
20 46.5
30 360
20 90
45 60
52 163
20 60
25 60
20.5 64
27.5 130
20 30
45 75
10 20
30 360
24 67.5
10 20
465 910
30 360
30 90
20 60
21 90
20 60
30 360
30 90
22.5 32.5
25 90
20 60
10 30
15 30
27.5 75
25 62.5
20 50
20 90
20 43
35 113
30 63
20 90
20 60
20 75
20 60
45 145
32.5 198
20 60
75 110
40 205
20 60
40 180
105 270
90
190
315
167.5
360
90
170
238
190
180
205
495
30
115
60
360
190
75
910
360
145
240
180
90
360
180
165
215
210
130
115
135
248
185
450
180
240
130
240
205
205
180
580
360
185
238
360
180
240
360
95
309
495
187.5
360
110
170
248
309
465
302
580
30
115
165
360
295
165
910
360
170
495
450
134
360
248
720
315
450
135
180
180
315
238
510
450
309
180
465
315
295
248
910
360
309
238
360
295
910
360
98
510
580
248
360
110
170
248
550
465
510
580
30
115
165
360
495
510
910
360
238
580
465
210
360
360
720
495
910
510
185
295
550
360
910
550
360
309
495
580
720
495
910
360
510
238
360
495
910
360
99
580
720
285
360
110
170
248
720
465
720
580
30
115
165
360
580
510
910
360
238
720
465
210
360
360
720
580
910
510
185
495
550
720
910
720
465
309
495
910
720
510
910
360
580
238
360
550
910
360
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-121
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-106. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a Service Station or Gas Station
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N Mean
191 50.597
90 73.522
101 30.168
1 86
3 6.667
3 66.667
11 7.818
157 54.185
16 47.813
170 50.941
11 80.727
1 5
3 16.667
5 10.2
1 10
179 53.056
12 13.917
16 18.813
110 55.827
26 34.731
38 40.237
1 790
18 17.833
16 103
46 85.739
58 41.759
30 36.633
23 10
33 59.697
48 28.563
68 49.882
42 69.786
122 58.402
69 36.797
56 37.536
54 80.13
51 46.51
30 28.767
174 53.517
16 15.75
1 100
184 46.788
7 150.714
181 47.122
10 113.5
Stdev
125.489
149.969
94.915
*
2.887
98.277
4.513
135.636
69.497
124.015
191.433
*
20.207
7.596
*
129.15
23.008
43.196
136.782
71.829
76.973
*
40.712
164.12
162.855
121.08
111.641
6.396
149.173
77.552
133.967
135.545
145.085
79.004
100.602
157.514
137.689
58.93
130.777
25.736
*
120.622
206.81
123.971
142.946
Stderr
9.0801
15.8082
9.4444
*
1.6667
56.7401
1.3606
10.8249
17.3744
9.5115
57.7192
*
11.6667
3.3971
*
9.6531
6.6418
10.799
13.0417
14.0868
12.4867
*
9.5958
41.03
24.0116
15.8986
20.3828
1.3337
25.9677
11.1936
16.2459
20.9151
13.1354
9.5109
13.4435
21.4349
19.2804
10.7591
9.9141
6.434
*
8.8923
78.1667
9.2147
45.2036
Min Max 5
1
1
2
86
5
5
1
-)
5
2
4
5
5
1
10
-)
1
1
2
3
4
790
1
5
3
2
2
5
-)
2
1
4
0
1
2
1
-)
3
1
-)
100
1
10
1
5
790 5
645 5
790 5
86 86
10 5
180 5
15 1
790 5
240 5
790 5
645 4
5 5
40 5
20 1
10 10
790 5
86 1
180 1
645 5
355 5
380 5
790 790
180 1
520 5
645 5
790 4
570 4
30 5
600 3
510 5
790 5
520 5
790 5
390 4
600 4
645 5
790 5
295 5
790 5
110 2
100 100
790 5
510 10
790 5
380 5
25
5
5
5
86
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
790
5
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
100
5
15
5
10
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
50
10
10
10
86
5
15
5
10
18
10
5
5
5
10
10
10
7.5
7.5
10
10
10
790
7.5
15
10
13
6.5
10
10
10
10
13
10
10
10
10
10
8.5
10
7.5
100
10
20
10
58
75
20
30
15
86
10
180
10
15
55
20
44
5
40
15
10
20
10
12.5
15
25
20
790
15
140
85
20
15
10
20
15
15
40
20
15
15
60
15
15
20
15
100
15
380
15
140
90
105
325
44
86
10
180
15
110
180
107.5
140
5
40
20
10
130
15
15
99
100
140
790
15
365
380
60
30
20
105
60
130
270
130
88
60
380
35
93
130
20
100
88
510
85
367.5
95 98
365 570
495 600
105 180
86 86
10 10
180 180
15 15
390 570
240 240
365 520
645 645
5 5
40 40
20 20
10 10
380 570
86 86
180 180
495 570
130 355
240 380
790 790
180 180
520 520
495 645
110 510
270 570
20 30
570 600
110 510
295 645
390 520
495 600
240 380
270 355
510 570
365 520
130 295
380 570
110 110
100 100
295 570
510 510
295 570
380 380
99
645
645
510
86
10
180
15
645
240
600
645
5
40
20
10
645
86
180
600
355
380
790
180
520
645
790
570
30
600
510
790
520
645
390
600
645
790
295
645
110
100
645
510
645
380
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
a given number of minutes.
Page
15-122
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-107. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a Construction Site
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education *
Education < High School
N
143
130
13
1
2
1
133
6
125
10
2
3
3
129
9
2
3
3
127
6
7
4
12
Education High School Graduate 68
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
41
14
4
28
30
57
28
121
22
34
33
46
30
137
6
139
4
140
3
Mean
437.098
461.531
192.769
510
240
10
444.549
396.667
430.872
430.1
492.5
501.667
618.333
426.202
496.111
577.5
635
163.333
456.803
495.833
146.571
250
500.833
482.162
417.683
372.357
92.5
481.714
343.967
474.018
417.107
455.116
338
418.5
412.242
477.739
423.2
437.161
435.667
439.108
367.25
433.257
616.333
Stdev
242.073
232.511
202.794
*
254.558
*
243.017
188.75
247.432
233.307
60.104
170.318
166.458
247.087
166.429
180.312
156.125
223.681
236.198
171.389
162.79
251.794
227.035
228.976
241.023
247.278
137.265
238.306
231.025
248.301
226.287
238.494
243.022
268.44
223.533
221.422
264.183
243.531
225.957
242.331
256.288
240.003
328.664
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
are the percentage of doers below or equal to
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
20.243
20.393
56.245
*
180
*
21.072
77.057
22.131
73.778
42.5
98.333
96.105
21.755
55.476
127.5
90.139
129.142
20.959
69.969
61.529
125.897
65.539
27.767
37.641
66.088
68.632
45.036
42.179
32.888
42.764
21.681
51.813
46.037
38.912
32.647
48.233
20.806
92.247
20.554
128.144
20.284
189.755
Min Max
1 1190
1 1190
5 630
510 510
60 420
10 10
1 1190
60 560
5 1190
1 630
450 535
305 600
510 810
1 1190
240 765
450 705
510 810
10 420
1 1190
155 600
5 430
10 510
60 930
5 1190
1 745
15 660
5 295
5 985
5 810
1 1190
15 930
5 1190
1 705
1 1190
10 810
10 985
5 930
1 1190
60 690
1 1190
10 570
1 1190
354 985
5 25
10 240
10 300
5 60
510 510
60 60
10 10
10 240
60 300
10 240
1 170
450 450
305 305
510 510
10 180
240 410
450 450
510 510
10 10
15 285
155 510
5 6
10 35
60 375
20 395
10 170
15 120
5 7.5
6 357.5
10 120
10 410
60 235
15 285
5 60
5 155
60 230
60 325
6 135
10 240
60 354
10 240
10 182
10 240
354 354
50
510
522.5
135
510
240
10
520
460
510
550
492.5
600
535
510
505
577.5
585
60
520
555
60
240
525
522.5
520
440
35
532.5
342
535
500
525
407.5
505
490
515
532.5
510
440
510
444.5
510
510
75
600
600
165
510
420
10
600
540
600
585
535
600
810
600
600
705
810
420
605
600
300
465
592.5
592.5
615
585
177.5
650
525
615
570
600
525
570
570
630
585
600
630
600
552.5
600
985
90
675
688.5
535
510
420
10
687
560
687
615
535
600
810
665
765
705
810
420
690
600
430
510
735
720
645
643
295
695
637.5
720
630
687
600
645
635
705
700
675
690
687
570
670
985
95
740
745
630
510
420
10
745
560
740
630
535
600
810
735
765
705
810
420
745
600
430
510
930
780
687
660
295
740
660
765
656
745
645
695
740
745
780
745
690
745
570
737.5
985
98 99
930 985
930 985
630 630
510 510
420 420
10 10
930 985
560 560
930 985
630 630
535 535
600 600
810 810
930 985
765 765
705 705
810 810
420 420
930 985
600 600
430 430
510 510
930 930
985 1190
745 745
660 660
295 295
985 985
810 810
780 1190
930 930
930 985
705 705
1190 1190
810 810
985 985
930 930
930 985
690 690
930 985
570 570
810 930
985 985
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles
a given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-123
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-108. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors on School Grounds/Playground
Percentiles
Category
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Population Group
Male
Female
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
DK
N Mean Stdev
259 98.386 110.056
0.136 118.007 126.395
123 76.691 83.861
2 275 374.767
9 85 61.084
64 88.016 95.638
76 78.658 88.179
101 119.812 127.563
7 65 47.258
208 98.212 106.512
23 128.435 157.54
6 59 66.076
7 70 59.652
15 83.733 102.972
225 102.613 113.686
32 71.219 79.899
2 57.5 31.82
143 80.161 88.031
48 130.271 127.162
24 129.708 158.934
42 95.429 94.776
2 322.5 307.591
162 86.593 94.553
11 124.818 171.918
33 113.636 110.669
19 129.842 147.389
19 122.105 149.938
15 102.933 98.093
66 105.955 115.248
53 86.057 109.203
82 85.463 92.353
58 119.31 125.638
205 87.02 105.524
54 141.537 117.065
53 72.189 101.951
88 108.614 96.502
65 116.446 137.897
53 85.453 96.241
237 100.941 113.236
22 70.864 61.977
254 99.118 110.809
5 61.2 53.383
248 100.565 111.621
10 52.7 45.363
1 15 0
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
6.839
10.84
7.562
265
20.36
11.96
10.12
12.69
17.86
7.385
32.85
26.98
22.55
26.59
7.579
14.12
22.5
7.362
18.35
32.44
14.62
217.5
7.429
51.84
19.27
33.81
34.4
25.33
14.19
15
10.2
16.5
7.37
15.93
14
10.29
17.1
13.22
7.355
13.21
6.953
23.87
7.088
14.35
0
Min
1
1
1
10
10
5
3
1
5
1
5
10
10
1
3
1
35
3
1
3
1
105
3
1
3
5
5
1
5
3
1
1
1
10
1
5
5
5
1
5
1
1
1
9
15
Max
690
690
570
540
175
625
570
690
150
690
570
179
180
370
690
370
80
625
555
690
440
540
625
540
555
510
690
360
690
540
570
625
625
690
555
540
690
540
690
179
690
130
690
160
15
5 25
5 30
10 35
5 20
10 10
10 30
10 30
5 25
5 30
5 30
9 30
5 25
10 10
10 10
1 10
9 30
1 12.5
35 35
9 25
10 40
10 35
5 30
105 105
10 27
1 5
5 30
5 33
5 50
1 30
10 30
5 20
5 30
10 30
5 25
25 67
3 20
10 45
10 30
5 20
5 30
10 15
5 30
1 15
5 30
9 22
15 15
50
70
85
51
275
65
60
55
85
60
70
67
35
60
30
70
32.5
57.5
55
85
85
80
323
60
45
90
70
85
75
85
50
60
85
55
113
35
85
75
55
70
45
68.5
70
71
44
15
75
120
148.5
120
540
140
120
105
165
95
125
170
85
105
120
125
110
80
115
180
143.5
120
540
120
180
160
210
125
125
150
115
115
160
115
180
85
147.5
135
120
120
145
120
90
125
60
15
90
208
255
180
540
175
170
165
240
150
190
300
179
180
228
210
150
80
160
300
228
180
540
170
345
240
440
235
235
190
190
180
235
180
290
130
215
270
180
215
160
208
130
210
125
15
95
300
370
225
540
175
220
225
360
150
281
540
179
180
370
300
228
80
215
360
510
235
540
220
540
290
510
690
360
281
290
255
440
240
345
315
255
360
235
315
165
300
130
300
160
15
98 99
540 570
555 625
270 440
540 540
175 175
315 625
370 570
540 555
150 150
510 555
570 570
179 179
180 180
370 370
540 570
370 370
80 80
315 570
555 555
690 690
440 440
540 540
370 570
540 540
555 555
510 510
690 690
360 360
540 690
510 540
360 570
555 625
540 555
440 690
440 7555
510 540
625 690
345 540
540 570
179 179
540 570
130 130
540 570
160 160
15 15
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-124
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-109. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-110. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a Pool/River/Lake
Perc entiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
283
152
131
6
14
29
97
187
25
246
12
4
5
12
4
259
20
4
66
119
26
69
3
73
18
69
62
37
24
61
41
111
70
165
118
30
77
151
25
262
17
4
272
8
3
266
14
3
Mean
209.555
229.829
186.031
175
250.571
175.448
128.318
224.492
194.2
201.565
380.583
265
237
161
243.75
208.923
210.9
243.75
176.879
210.748
217.038
238.884
141.667
172.932
267.611
213.217
233.258
230.919
172.708
220.689
219.22
182.198
237.571
188.77
238.619
173.167
206.468
219.709
201.4
209.004
238.824
121.25
205.897
359.375
141.667
210.974
197.143
141.667
Stdev
185.668
202.702
161.293
156.971
177.508
117.875
94.389
203.822
161.757
182.298
231.89
247.083
129.933
131.699
208.621
187.792
160.142
208.621
131.256
176.089
199.926
236.16
52.52
129.988
159.382
224.126
192.408
187.271
196.977
172.373
257.201
161.288
181.838
179.894
190.432
181.68
163.551
196.809
189.663
188.208
161.966
59.214
185.199
178.774
52.52
189.082
131.54
52.52
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
11.037
16.441
14.092
64.083
47.441
21.889
20.124
14.905
32.351
11.623
66.941
123.54
58.108
38.018
104.31
11.669
35.809
104.31
16.156
16.142
39.209
28.43
30.322
15.214
37.567
26.982
24.436
30.787
40.208
22.07
40.168
15.309
21.734
14.005
17.531
33.17
18.638
16.016
37.933
11.628
39.282
29.607
11.229
63.206
30.322
11.593
35.156
30.322
Min Max
5 1440
10 1440
5 645
60 480
90 630
25 390
40 420
5 1440
20 525
5 1440
20 690
30 505
70 435
20 390
90 550
5 1440
20 540
90 550
25 630
10 900
20 670
5 1440
90 195
20 630
40 600
10 1440
5 690
14 645
20 900
30 900
10 1440
5 670
25 690
10 1440
5 900
20 630
15 690
5 1440
20 670
5 1440
15 570
60 195
5 1440
60 690
90 195
5 1440
15 440
90 195
5
25
30
20
60
90
30
58
20
30
25
20
30
70
20
90
25
28.5
90
40
20
30
20
90
30
40
20
30
20
25
30
20
20
40
30
20
20
30
26
45
25
15
60
25
60
90
25
15
90
25
60
82.5
60
85
130
60
60
60
60
60
177.5
52.5
220
52.5
115
60
87.5
115
70
65
60
65
90
70
145
60
65
70
45
60
60
60
90
60
75
40
80
65
70
60
105
75
60
287.5
90
60
90
90
50
150
174
135
115
167.5
145
82.5
150
115
145
450
262.5
225
112.5
1675
150
155
1675
142.5
150
120
145
140
140
247.5
145
150
173
112.5
180
120
118
180
187.5
102.5
180
155
105
150
225
115
145
340
140
150
172.5
140
75 90
296 480
305 510
280 440
195 480
370 560
293 365
210 225
320 511
277 480
285 440
562.5 615
477.5 505
235 435
265 375
372 5 550
295 480
337.5 450.5
372 5 550
235 370
298 510
320 570
370 510
195 195
225 370
375 525
285 511
360 550
400 505
240 370
325 390
280 480
280 420
300 547.5
350 555
270 492.5
288 480
300 445
310 510
295 480
350 525
167.5 195
290.5 480
435 690
195 195
296 480
300 370
195 195
95
570
600
550
480
630
375
235
615
510
560
690
505
435
390
550
585
525.5
550
420
600
580
630
195
420
600
670
580
630
480
510
600
525
615
630
585
555
580
510
580
570
195
570
690
195
580
440
195
98 99
670 690
690 900
630 630
480 480
630 630
390 390
420 420
690 900
525 525
670 690
690 690
505 505
435 435
390 390
550 550
670 690
540 540
550 550
560 630
645 670
670 670
690 1440
195 195
560 630
600 600
690 1440
615 690
645 645
900 900
670 900
1440 1440
630 645
690 690
615 670
690 690
630 630
670 690
630 900
670 670
670 690
570 570
195 195
645 690
690 690
195 195
670 690
440 440
195 195
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
given number of minutes.
Page
15-126
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-111. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a Restaurant/Picnic
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N Mean
64 81.016
31 111.839
33 52.061
6 57.5
5 112.8
6 60
46 84.804
1 15
54 76
4 57.75
1 75
2 97.5
2 20
1 540
60 81.833
4 68.75
17 74.647
37 70.838
4 42
6 187.833
18 70.667
1 540
11 56.182
10 108.6
11 68.636
13 70.308
19 88.105
15 102.6
16 48.563
14 85.357
35 51.2
29 117
8 79.375
14 138.429
28 71
14 44.571
61 82.131
3 58.333
63 82.222
1 5
63 81.667
1 40
Stdev
114.7
148.921
57.66
61.38
202.59
55.408
116.85
*
105.032
83.108
*
31.82
14.142
*
117.521
66.63
114.206
67.86
32.031
272.841
112.076
*
84.536
164.611
59.544
53.494
116.181
140.685
47.25
138.737
52.665
154.21
75.187
172.811
105.063
52.2
117.182
40.723
115.211
*
115.502
*
Note: A " *" Signifies missing data. Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max =
given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
14.337
26.747
10.037
25.058
90.601
22.62
17.229
*
14.293
41.554
*
22.5
10
*
15.172
33.315
27.699
11.156
16.016
111.387
26.416
*
25.489
52.055
17.953
14.836
26.654
36.325
11.812
37.079
8.902
28.636
26.583
46.186
19.855
13.951
15.004
23.511
14.515
*
14.552
*
Min
3
5
3
5
5
5
3
15
3
5
75
75
10
540
3
10
5
3
3
5
3
540
3
5
10
6
3
3
5
10
3
5
10
5
3
5
3
30
3
5
3
40
Max 5
540 5
540 5
210 3
160 5
473 5
150 5
540 5
15 15
540 5
180 5
75 75
120 75
30 10
540 540
540 5
160 10
473 5
270 5
75 3
540 5
473 3
540 540
270 3
540 5
210 10
180 6
473 3
540 3
140 5
540 10
180 3
540 5
210 10
540 5
540 3
165 5
540 5
105 30
540 5
5 5
540 5
40 40
25
12.5
20
8
15
6
30
10
15
15
5.5
75
75
10
540
12.5
20
15
15
16.5
7
6
540
10
7
20
15
10
15
8.5
15
15
10
20
30
7.5
10
10
30
15
5
10
40
50 75
30 107.5
60 150
30 80
30 105
20 60
35 105
50 120
15 15
30 105
23 110
75 75
20 30
540 540
30 107.5
52.5 117.5
30 105
55 120
45 67.5
17.5 540
30 105
540 540
20 60
30 150
55 110
75 80
60 120
45 165
30 92.5
30 75
30 75
60 135
52.5 135
65 180
35 100
20 60
30 110
40 105
30 110
5 5
30 110
40 40
90
165
270
135
160
473
150
180
15
165
180
75
30
540
172.5
160
160
165
75
540
160
540
165
352.5
120
140
270
210
120
160
150
473
210
473
150
150
165
105
165
5
165
40
95
270
540
180
160
473
150
270
15
270
180
75
30
540
371.5
160
473
210
75
540
473
540
270
540
210
180
473
540
140
540
165
540
210
540
160
165
270
105
270
5
270
40
98
540
540
210
160
473
150
540
15
473
180
75
30
540
540
160
473
270
75
540
473
540
270
540
210
180
473
540
140
540
180
540
210
540
540
165
540
105
540
5
540
40
99
540
540
210
160
473
150
540
15
540
180
75
30
540
540
160
473
270
75
540
473
540
270
540
210
180
473
540
140
540
180
540
210
540
540
165
540
105
540
5
540
40
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard
maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-127
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Category
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
E mployment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Bronchitis/Emphysema
Table 15-1 12
Population Group
Male
Female
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Some Others
Hispanic
No
Yes
Refused
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors at a Farm
N
128
86
42
1
3
7
9
91
17
120
4
o
0
123
4
1
19
73
11
24
1
20
12
50
25
12
9
11
42
57
18
78
50
32
40
43
13
120
8
127
1
125
3
Mean
252.703
305.186
145.238
510
121.667
111.286
157.778
296.67
133.824
260.217
58.75
165
277.5
252.61
297.5
85
134.947
314.781
283
152.917
20
137.2
305
314.54
186.6
290.417
229.444
238.182
202.31
279.702
293.667
276.859
215.02
205.25
224.4
276.093
379.231
256.983
188.5
253.039
210
256.208
106.667
Stdev
232.537
251.432
137.207
*
52.52
76.952
85.416
252.209
134.182
236.226
30.923
21.213
222.739
234.762
189.143
*
77.658
258.07
183.589
183.977
*
76.255
211.058
280.31
165.994
242.903
246.062
299.143
196.644
239.345
242.324
243.801
210.635
207.666
213.304
247.758
264.904
235.209
188.481
233.426
*
233.892
95.699
Stderr
20.554
27.113
21.171
*
30.322
29.085
28.472
26.439
32.544
21.564
15.462
15
157.5
21.168
94.571
*
17.816
30.205
55.354
37.554
*
17.051
60.927
39.642
33.199
70.12
82.021
90.195
30.343
31.702
57.116
27.605
29.788
36.711
33.726
37.783
73.471
21.472
66.638
20.713
*
20.92
55.252
Min
5
5
5
510
70
25
29
5
5
5
25
150
120
5
120
85
25
5
45
5
20
25
30
5
5
30
5
5
15
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
15
5
5
5
210
5
5
Max 5
955 20
955 29
600 20
510 510
175 70
264 25
265 29
955 20
495 5
955 20
85 25
180 150
435 120
955 20
485 120
85 85
265 25
955 20
525 45
825 5
20 20
265 27
635 30
955 20
555 15
615 30
780 5
955 5
780 20
933 25
855 5
955 15
855 25
955 22
825 25
933 20
780 15
955 21
500 5
955 20
210 210
955 22
195 5
25 50
75 176.5
90 230
50 105
510 510
70 120
50 100
90 175
80 230
50 85
75 180
32.5 62.5
150 165
120 277.5
70 178
135 292.. 5
85 85
86 120
85 240
150 230
35 90
20 20
88 120
97.5 325
85 215
60 155
67.5 202.5
80 150
30 100
654 125
85 195
120 220
85 180
60 120
77.5 120
60 152.5
70 230
200 280
75 180
700 110
75 175
210 210
75 178
5 120
Percentiles
75 90
427.5 600
500 660
210 265
510 510
175 175
130 264
265 265
500 635
160 360
472.5 607.5
85 85
180 180
435 435
420 600
460 485
85 85
180 264
525 660
490 495
205 280
20 20
180 262
492.5 510
525 745
255 482
530 600
210 780
490 520
265 510
482 635
525 615
485 615
290 525
245 495
342.5 525
435 660
600 730
427.5 607.5
321.5 500
435 600
210 210
435 600
195 195
95
730
780
482
510
175
264
265
780
495
745
85
180
435
730
485
85
265
780
525
495
20
264.5
635
855
525
615
780
955
635
760
855
780
700
540
625
760
780
745
500
730
210
730
195
98 99
855 933
933 955
600 600
510 510
175 175
264 264
256 265
933 955
495 495
855 933
85 85
180 180
435 435
855 933
485 485
85 85
265 265
933 955
525 525
825 825
20 20
265 265
635 635
944 955
355 555
615 615
780 780
955 955
780 780
825 933
855 855
933 955
792.5 855
955 955
825 825
933 933
780 780
855 933
500 500
855 933
210 210
855 933
195 195
Note: A " *" Signifies missing data. Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard
deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-128
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-113. Statistics for 24- Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Kitchen
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N Mean Stdev Stderr
7063 92.646 94.207 1.121
2988 74.998 80.79 1.478
4072 105.636 101.03 1.5832
3 40 31.225 18.028
144 102.688 110.82 9.235
335 73.719 54.382 2.9712
477 60.468 52.988 2.4262
396 55.02 58.111 2.9202
4531 90.313 90.893 1.3503
1180 131.388 119.55 3.4802
5827 95.076 95.151 1.2465
641 79.376 91.989 3.6333
113 89.363 95.45 8.9792
119 69.059 60.786 5.5722
266 84.203 77.297 4.7394
97 90.33 113.55 11.53
6458 93.422 94.778 1.1794
497 83.889 82.921 3.7195
32 82.25 71.901 12.71
76 88.421 118.56 13.6
1200 62.348 55.431 1.6001
2965 77.748 77.466 1.4227
608 97.699 94.046 3.8141
2239 126.929 115.78 2.4468
51 106.373 168.46 23.589
1346 63.922 62.315 1.6985
678 108.114 102.88 3.9511
Education High School Graduate 2043 107.208 102.33 2.264
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
1348 94.359 101.17 2.7555
933 91.874 92.098 3.0152
715 88.227 87.661 3.2783
1645 99.632 99.739 2.4591
1601 96.066 93.567 2.3384
2383 86.253 87.055 1.7833
1434 91.441 99.061 2.6159
4849 90.068 92.218 1.3243
2214 98.294 98.207 2.0871
1938 96.575 100.32 2.2787
1780 89.02 90.187 2.1376
1890 89.316 90.984 2.0928
1455 96.177 94.494 2.4773
6510 92.448 93.602 1.1601
503 94.038 96.001 4.2805
50 104.44 143.73 20.326
6798 91.625 93.03 1.1283
207 122.469 111.41 7.7437
58 105.948 138.38 18.17
6671 91.827 92.587 1.1336
338 104.784 113.39 6.1676
54 117.889 142.41 19.38
Min
1
1
1
15
5
5
1
1
1
3
1
2
5
2
1
5
i
i
5
5
i
i
i
i
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
4
2
1
1
2
Max
1320
840
1320
75
840
392
690
450
1320
825
840
1320
690
315
585
880
1320
675
300
880
690
840
755
1320
880
880
775
840
1320
840
770
840
833
880
1320
1320
840
1320
840
880
770
1320
785
880
1320
657
880
1320
825
880
5
10
10
10
15
15
15
10
5
10
15
10
10
10
7
10
7
10
10
10
7
10
10
10
12
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
25
30
30
35
15
30
30
30
15
30
49
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
35
30
30
30
30
45
30
30
34
35
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
45
30
30
30
30
50
60
55
75
30
70
60
50
36
60
100
65
60
75
55
60
60
60
60
60
60
50
60
70
95
48
50
80
75
60
60
60
70
65
60
60
60
65.5
65
60
60
65
60
60
60
60
100
60
60
71
76
75
120
90
145
75
130
100
75
65
120
172
120
100
115
90
110
90
120
110
112.5
90
85
100
133.5
175
130
85
150
150
120
120
113
130
125
115
119
119
135
120
120
120
125
120
120
120
120
155
135
120
135
160
90
205
155
230
75
215
140
120
125
200
275
210
175
150
150
190
190
210
180
185
190
125
165
213
270
210
130
230
235
210
200
190
210
213
190
195
195
220
210
195
195
210
205
210
195
200
255
240
200
225
240
95
270
215
295
75
260
180
150
155
260
360
273
230
220
195
240
275
270
240
240
240
152.5
225
270
342
250
165
295
300
280
261
260
300
270
245
255
255
280
285
255
255
275
270
270
240
265
360
240
265
300
275
98
365
300
395
75
485
225
180
240
345
490
380
275
265
210
305
480
370
315
300
480
212.5
300
405
470
840
235
405
415
380
330
380
390
355
330
380
360
390
390
350
362
375
365
345
712.5
360
415
545
360
480
545
99
460
392
475
75
540
240
235
340
420
620
465
380
650
315
360
880
460
415
300
880
260
376
445
545
880
285
545
500
450
410
405
465
450
420
480
450
480
485
420
430
470
450
450
880
450
620
880
445
657
880
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-129
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-1 14. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N Mean
6661 35.0237
3006 32.689
3653 36.9491
2 27.5
122 43.8689
328 35.939
490 30.9673
445 29.0517
4486 34.4884
790 42.1975
5338 34.3164
711 36.8678
117 33.5556
134 47.306
283 38.6396
78 34.6026
6067 34.5332
498 39.2309
33 44.4242
63 44.0794
1240 31.9645
3130 33.4086
583 35.5232
1661 40.1854
47 34.6809
1386 32.1717
522 40.8736
Education High School Graduate 1857 35.832
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
1305 36.0797
913 34.9912
678 32.1475
1497 34.3287
1465 35.7802
2340 35.0739
1359 34.8874
4613 33.9035
2048 37.5469
1853 37.0232
1747 36.6474
1772 32.7788
1289 33.0349
6132 34.9204
493 35.2495
36 49.5278
6473 34.5801
145 51.9103
43 44.8605
6327 34.8211
296 36.8378
38 54.6316
Stdev
48.796
50.366
47.399
3.536
67.007
46.499
38.609
32.934
46.067
69.431
48.628
39.559
41.449
69.649
61.494
49.182
45.887
68.582
72.269
95.224
39.652
44.827
43.932
61.587
54.835
42.788
64.533
50.155
44.121
54.071
42.82
51.244
54.521
42.003
50.399
46.663
53.214
50.658
50.536
44.543
49.108
48.833
38.157
121.114
46.79
88.284
111.216
48.073
47.481
122.723
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know"
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
0.5979
0.9186
0.7842
2.5
6.0665
2.5675
1.7442
1.5612
0.6878
2.4703
0.6656
1.4836
3.8319
6.0167
3.6554
5.5687
0.5891
3.0733
12.58
11.997
1.1261
0.8012
1.8195
1.5111
7.9986
1.1493
2.8245
1.1639
1.2214
1.7895
1.6445
1.3244
1.4245
0.8683
1.3671
0.687
1.1759
1.1768
1.2091
1.0582
1.3678
0.6236
1.7185
20.186
0.5816
7.3316
16.96
0.6044
2.7598
19.908
Min
1
1
1
25
-)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
3
1
1
5
3
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
3
1
1
3
Max
870
870
665
30
530
600
535
547
665
870
870
460
375
535
546
360
705
870
422
665
600
595
430
870
360
665
870
600
540
705
460
600
870
510
705
870
600
665
870
570
540
870
410
665
870
600
665
870
600
665
Percentiles
5 25
5 15
5 15
5 15
25 25
5 15
10 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 10
5 15
5 15
10 15
5 10
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 11
5 15
5 15
5 10
5 15
7 20
5 10
5 15
5 15
5 10
50
25
20.5
30
27.5
30
30
27
20
25
30
25
30
25
30
24
20
25
25
30
20
30
25
29
30
25
25
30
25
25
20
22
25
25
30
25
25
30
30
30
25
20
25
30
17.5
25
30
15
25
30
17.5
75
40
35
45
30
45
40
35
35
40
45
40
45
40
45
45
35
40
45
45
35
35
40
45
45
30
35
45
40
45
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
45
42
45
38
35
40
45
30
40
45
30
40
43.5
30
90
60
60
70
30
85
60
52.5
60
60
75
60
70
60
95
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
75
55
60
70
63
70
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
65
65
60
60
60
60
65
60
60
75
50
60
60
110
95
90
75
90
30
120
75
60
65
90
120
85
98
90
120
80
135
90
90
120
150
70
80
90
110
75
70
100
90
95
90
75
80
90
90
90
85
90
90
90
80
90
90
90
360
90
185
110
90
90
360
98 99
137 255
150 300
135 240
30 30
300 360
125 270
100 200
90 100
135 250
240 360
135 255
135 186
110 210
315 422
270 425
165 360
135 240
270 425
422 422
360 665
100 180
123 240
140 270
210 340
360 360
110 200
240 350
135 270
150 225
150 340
110 300
140 335
145 315
135 214
140 250
135 240
150 300
150 270
135 240
135 210
140 303
135 255
140 220
665 665
135 240
546 570
665 665
135 255
180 250
665 665
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Page
15-130
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-115. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Bedroom
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
9151
4157
4990
4
184
488
689
577
5891
1322
7403
923
153
174
378
120
8326
684
43
98
1736
3992
777
2578
68
1925
807
2549
1740
1223
907
2037
2045
3156
1913
6169
2982
2475
2365
2461
1850
8420
671
60
8836
244
71
8660
423
68
Mean
563.12
549.648
574.274
648.75
525.065
741.988
669.144
636.189
532.699
550.8
553.424
612.33
612.261
590.713
602.577
555.842
560.878
597.402
542.279
523.439
679.52
513.454
551.613
566.409
513.971
668.265
554.809
534.057
539.07
526.025
525.192
561.515
552.402
570.023
564.897
552.611
584.861
576
558.956
566.114
547.23
560.814
593.846
543.117
564.211
535.545
522.113
563.08
570.102
524.765
Stdev
184.644
182.976
185.332
122.772
193.498
167.051
162.888
210.883
172.964
171.997
175.912
219.9
187.417
200.214
214.353
198.564
182.574
206.333
169.881
180.194
185.535
157.599
169.425
191.218
209.558
188.751
180.581
176.208
176.123
164.899
160.567
185.273
179.232
186.38
186.373
174.489
202.361
183.782
176.729
195.229
179.924
182.769
201.517
218.404
183.935
203.888
193.937
184.244
192.041
186.701
Stderr Min
1.9302 3
2.8379 3
2.6236 5
61.386 540
14.265 15
7.562 30
6.2055 35
8.7792 15
2.2535 3
4.7305 15
2.0445 3
7.2381 15
15.152 25
15.178 15
11.025 25
18.126 30
2.0009 3
7.8893 15
25.907 135
18.202 30
4.453 15
2.4943 3
6.0781 15
3.7661 5
25.413 30
4.302 15
6.3567 5
3.4901 3
4.2222 5
4.7152 15
5.3315 3
4.105 5
3.9634 3
3.3177 10
4.2611 5
2.2216 3
3.7057 3
3.6942 5
3.6341 15
3.9354 3
4.1832 3
1.9918 3
7.7795 30
28.196 30
1.9568 3
13.053 20
23.016 30
1.9799 3
9.3373 15
22.641 30
Max
1440
1440
1440
785
1440
1440
1440
1375
1440
1440
1440
1440
1285
1405
1440
1405
1440
1440
1002
1295
1440
1440
1335
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1404
1355
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1295
1440
1440
1295
1440
1440
1295
5
300
285
312
540
195
489
435
165
295
315
300
300
345
300
265
285
300
300
300
255
390
283
330
300
210
360
300
285
282
300
315
300
280
300
305
325
223
305
315
285
270
300
300
223
300
215
180
300
294
240
25 50
460 540
450 540
470 555
545 635
420 513
635 740
600 665
542 645
440 520
475 540
455 540
480 597
510 600
464 580
480 587.5
440 534
460 540
480 585
420 555
415 515
590 675
435 510
455 540
478 540
420 497.5
575 663
450 540
447 520
450 530
445 515
445 510
457 540
450 540
465 552
460 540
450 539
480 570
475 555
455 540
455 545
450 537.5
460 540
475 580
423 540
460 540
450 522.5
420 540
460 540
450 555
420 540
75
660
640
660
752.5
600
840
740
750
610
610
640
725
705
700
720
630
650
713
660
600
785
585
630
650
585
780
630
607
615
600
600
655
643
660
660
635
690
660
655
660
630
655
690
605
660
612.5
600
660
660
600
90
780
780
790
785
720
930
840
875
723
735
760
895
830
830
865
762.5
780
840
756
735
892
680
750
780
725
885
775
720
735
713
690
781
765
790
793
760
825
805
770
810
750
780
835
760
785
770
690
780
795
700
95
880
860
900
785
860
990
915
970
820
840
850
990
950
960
958
875
870
958
830
795
960
765
835
905
795
960
860
835
825
785
780
885
860
900
875
855
920
900
855
900
850
870
946
982.5
880
840
820
880
900
820
98 99
1005 1141
980 1095
1030 1185
785 785
950 1295
1095 1200
1065 1140
1040 1210
975 1110
1000 1140
975 1105
1160 1323
1005 1245
1050 1152
1095 1213
1290 1295
1000 1140
1095 1200
1002 1002
930 1295
1065 1170
890 1000
1005 1100
1095 1223
1200 1440
1060 1170
1015 1160
975 1151
1005 1135
965 1070
950 1095
1020 1139
965 1035
1055 1155
995 1152
975 1130
1055 1170
1035 1148
960 1095
1030 1190
960 1100
1000 1140
1060 1327
1275 1295
1005 1140
1135 1230
990 1295
1005 1141
1055 1110
930 1295
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-131
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-116. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Garage
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
193
120
73
1
4
6
12
130
40
165
12
1
6
8
1
174
17
2
21
85
17
70
22
14
63
48
25
21
23
42
60
68
116
77
51
59
51
32
184
9
187
6
185
8
Mean
117.782
144.058
74.589
20
83.5
63.333
80.833
134.508
88.55
109.509
205
5
186.333
120
120
116.615
128.588
127.5
79.714
145.259
50.118
112.271
76.545
188.929
127.286
121.583
118.2
75.857
137.174
131.381
103.683
115.265
128.664
101.39
115.608
136.763
101.078
112.875
118.598
101.111
118.219
104.167
114.146
201.875
Stdev
144.451
162.612
94.322
*
47.459
63.377
78.383
165.117
84.108
127.523
219.483
*
308.416
164.859
*
138.452
207.294
10.607
67.545
175.17
51.967
127.392
67.572
195.036
159.283
147.764
145.773
88.067
159.451
166.398
128.598
139.682
158.968
118.416
161.848
163.341
121.329
110.217
146.349
102.585
146.174
78.639
142.947
163.64
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr Min
10.398 1
14.844 2
11.04 1
* 20
23.729 15
25.874 10
22.627 10
14.482 1
13.299 5
9.928 1
63.359 5
* 5
125.91 10
58.287 15
* 120
10.496 1
50.276 5
7.5 120
14.74 10
19 1
12.604 5
15.226 5
14.406 10
52.126 5
20.068 2
21.328 5
29.155 5
19.218 1
33.248 5
25.676 10
16.602 2
16.939 1
14.76 1
13.495 2
22.663 2
21.265 5
16.989 1
19.484 5
10.789 1
34.195 5
10.689 1
32.104 10
10.51 1
57.856 15
Max 5
790 5
790 10
530 5
20 20
120 15
165 10
240 10
790 5
300 7.5
690 5
570 5
5 5
790 10
510 15
120 120
690 5
790 5
135 120
240 15
790 5
194 5
690 5
240 10
675 5
690 5
790 10
480 5
300 2
510 15
690 20
570 5
790 5
790 5
675 10
690 5
790 10
530 5
480 10
790 5
270 5
790 5
220 10
790 5
450 15
25 50
20 60
30 93.5
15 30
20 20
52 99.5
25 30
20 50.5
20 67.5
25 60
20 60
37.5 90
5 5
18 30
22.5 60
120 120
20 60
20 60
120 127.5
25 51
20 65
15 30
30 75
20 50.5
30 120
25 60
30 60
20 60
10 30
30 60
40 87.5
12.5 52.5
20 72.5
25 60
20 60
15 50
30 90
20 60
25 85
25 60
15 60
20 60
25 110
20 60
60 177.5
75
150
182.5
120
20
115
120
147.5
180
142.5
135
405
5
240
135
120
155
110
135
120
180
60
135
120
235
165
140
120
120
195
120
127.5
152.5
165
120
150
165
120
157.5
150
180
150
150
135
337.5
90
296
315
180
20
120
165
185
360
227.5
240
530
5
790
510
120
296
510
135
165
405
135
255
165
510
300
296
405
195
460
260
283
300
315
240
240
315
260
240
300
270
300
220
260
450
95
480
518
240
20
120
165
240
526
270
315
570
5
790
510
120
460
790
135
185
530
194
450
185
675
530
450
460
260
510
665
427.5
315
510
300
526
570
450
315
480
270
480
220
480
450
98
665
675
450
20
120
165
240
675
300
526
570
5
790
510
120
570
790
135
240
675
194
480
240
675
665
790
480
300
510
690
480
530
665
526
665
675
460
480
665
270
665
220
665
450
99
690
690
530
20
120
165
240
690
300
675
570
5
790
510
120
675
790
135
240
790
194
690
240
675
690
790
480
300
510
690
570
790
690
675
690
790
530
480
690
270
690
220
690
450
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
given number of minutes.
Page
15-132
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-117. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in the Basement
Perc entiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
274
132
141
1
3
8
25
26
170
42
248
15
2
3
1
5
263
6
1
4
57
107
22
85
3
65
15
Education High School Graduate 78
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
48
39
29
90
123
35
26
178
96
80
65
79
50
253
20
1
269
3
2
265
8
1
Mean Stdev
142.15 162.882
160.386 180.747
125.66 143.283
60 *
171.667 122.712
94.75 55.695
135.4 145.945
97.462 113.063
151.271 172.66
143.833 173.502
133.75 154.08
183.8 165.472
135 106.066
468.667 455.654
30 *
263.2 173.071
139.046 161.666
185 197.332
185 *
271.25 198.762
115.561 124.205
149.075 178.633
115 114.808
157.953 176.347
151.667 110.265
129.492 133.447
169.867 203.464
159.385 188.681
160.583 184.204
146.744 150.808
73.138 66.272
115.611 118.744
129.024 146.939
187.971 205.847
234.423 247.688
135.331 159.404
154.792 169.263
144.475 147.022
174.215 196.783
142.367 180.698
96.4 83.08
143.126 164.183
124.65 150.961
245 *
141.409 163.736
201.667 122.1
152.5 130.815
138.996 160.98
233.75 214.172
245 *
Stderr
9.84
15.732
12.067
*
70.848
19.691
29.189
22.173
13.242
26.772
9.784
42.725
75
263.072
*
77.4
9.969
80.561
*
99.381
16.451
17.269
24.477
19.128
63.661
16.552
52.534
21.364
26.588
24.149
12.306
12.517
13.249
34.794
48.576
11.948
17.275
16.438
24.408
20.33
11.749
10.322
33.756
*
9.983
70.494
92.5
9.889
75.721
*
Mm
1
1
-)
60
30
28
15
1
1
5
1
12
60
20
30
60
1
15
185
60
1
1
10
5
30
1
5
5
2
10
1
5
2
10
1
1
5
5
1
1
5
1
1
245
1
65
60
1
20
245
Max
931
931
810
60
245
180
705
515
810
931
810
515
210
931
30
540
931
555
185
540
705
810
535
931
245
705
605
810
931
555
245
555
765
931
810
810
931
630
931
765
332
931
510
245
931
300
245
931
605
245
5
10
10
10
60
30
28
15
10
5
10
10
12
60
20
30
60
10
15
185
60
12
5
25
10
30
15
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
28
1
10
10
13.5
5
5
10
10
5.5
245
10
65
60
10
20
245
25
30
40
30
60
30
47.5
60
30
30
40
30
40
60
20
30
231
30
30
185
150
40
30
60
35
30
45
30
40
25
30
30
40
30
45
30
30
50
30
60
30
30
35
16
245
30
65
60
30
67.5
245
50
90
90
75
60
240
90
105
60
90
90
90
150
135
455
30
240
90
150
185
242.5
90
75
77.5
120
180
90
90
90
120
70
60
72.5
90
110
165
82.5
97.5
90
105
85
60
90
72.5
245
90
240
152.5
90
180
245
75
180
202.5
175
60
245
137.5
140
150
210
170
167.5
270
210
931
30
245
180
210
185
392.5
150
210
150
210
245
160
255
195
202.5
210
100
150
180
255
325
180
190
220.5
210
150
145
180
177.5
245
180
300
245
180
375
245
90 95
330 535
490 565
265 420
60 60
245 245
180 180
270 420
240 275
410 555
330 455
315 510
450 515
210 210
931 931
30 30
540 540
330 510
555 555
185 185
540 540
240 420
450 540
185 290
330 600
245 245
270 420
565 605
420 720
400 600
450 510
210 210
250 400
270 510
450 720
705 720
315 535
450 540
315 480
490 555
455 605
240 255
330 540
382.5 510
245 245
330 535
300 300
245 245
330 515
605 605
245 245
98 99
705 765
720 765
705 720
60 60
245 245
180 180
705 705
515 515
720 765
931 931
705 720
515 515
210 210
931 931
30 30
540 540
705 765
555 555
185 185
540 540
515 705
720 765
535 535
720 931
245 245
535 705
605 605
765 810
931 931
555 555
245 245
540 555
605 630
931 931
810 810
720 765
600 931
610 630
810 931
720 765
301 332
705 765
510 510
245 245
705 765
300 300
245 245
705 765
605 605
245 245
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
or equal to a
given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-133
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-118. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Utility Room or Laundry Room
Group Name
All
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day Of Week
Day Of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/emphysema
Bronchitis/emphysema
Group Code
Male
Female
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
No
Yes
DK
Refused
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
*
< High School
N
458
70
388
6
3
3
8
362
76
400
35
4
6
10
3
435
20
1
2
12
206
51
187
0
17
51
High School Graduate 1 63
< College
College Gradutae
Post Graduate
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weekday
Weekend
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
No
Yes
No
Yes
DK
No
Yes
107
60
60
105
116
151
86
322
136
145
89
132
92
432
26
440
16
0
428
30
Mean
73.218
78.443
72.276
65.833
75
105.667
55.5
73.58
72.592
69.243
100.514
82.5
86.667
95.9
170
72.069
81.7
55
247.5
76.75
69.184
72.216
77.679
76
72
71.765
71.583
77.234
74.033
71.267
80.933
64.948
72.695
75.872
68.643
84.051
75.248
81.888
69.25
67.326
73.764
64.154
72.134
103.125
72.5
73.276
72.4
Stdev Stderr Mm Max 5
71.872
95.687
66.796
34.412
116.94
168.423
77.107
73.87
58.092
65.801
103.238
37.749
27.869
78.827
3.358
11.437
3.391
14.049
67.515
97.239
27.261
3.882
6.664
3.29
17.45
18.875
11.377
24.927
264.15 152.507
69.87
62.982
*
321.734
107.831
78.438
62.506
63.835
104.652
90.881
49.445
71.583
71.721
77.252
79.857
84.595
63.307
69.541
69.9
66.724
82.05
80.989
83.016
60.815
58.613
73.182
44.791
70.217
109.877
17.678
73.484
43.498
3.35
14.083
*
227.5
31.128
5.465
8.753
4.668
74
22.042
6.924
5.607
6.934
9.973
10.31
8.256
5.878
5.659
7.537
3.718
7.036
6.726
8.8
5.293
6.111
3.521
8.784
3.347
27.469
12.5
3.552
7.942
1
1
2
25
5
2
1
0
9
2
1
30
60
4
15
1
4
55
20
1
0
2
5
0
1
15
2
o
5
5
2
0
1
4
1
5
1
5
2
3
1
10
1
5
60
1
10
510 5
510 5
510 5
120 25
210 5
300 2
240 1
510 5
345 10
510 5
510 5
120 30
120 60
225 4
475 15
510 5
225 4.5
55 55
475 20
300 1
510 5
225 5
475 10
150 2
300 1
245 20
510 6
475 5
510 10
360 5
510 5
475 5
510 10
405 5
510 5
510 10
510 5
510 10
360 5
345 10
510 5
200 10
510 5
360 5
85 60
510 5
200 15
25 50
25 60
20 60
28 60
40 60
5 10
2 15
17 33
20 60
30 60
25 60
20 60
60 90
65 78
20 105
15 20
25 60
40 60
55 55
20 248
4 23
20 60
15 55
30 60
2 76
10 35
30 60
30 60
20 60
27 60
18 60
25 60
15 60
30 60
30 60
23 60
30 60
17 60
30 60
25 60
22 60
25 60
25 60
25 60
30 60
60 73
24 60
45 60
Percentiles
75 90
100 150
90 167.5
105 150
90 120
210 210
300 300
52.5 240
105 150
90 150
90 150
135 240
120 120
120 217.5
475 475
90 150
120 182.5
55 55
475 475
135 240
90 135
120 150
115 150
150 150
90 240
90 120
90 140
120 155
97.5 154
90 155
120 180
90 135
90 150
115 150
90 140
120 180
90 165
100 180
120 135
90 125
105 150
90 120
100 150
138 345
85 85
105 150
90 125
95
200
345
190
120
210
300
240
195
180
180
300
120
225
475
190
218
55
475
300
203
180
180
150
300
180
180
200
190
263
225
155
210
180
180
240
215
240
155
180
200
130
185
360
85
200
150
98 99
300 360
360 510
240 330
120 120
210 210
300 300
240 240
325 405
245 345
258 352.5
510 510
120 120
225 225
475 475
300 360
225 225
55 55
475 475
300 300
360 405
225 225
245 345
150 150
300 300
195 245
325 405
225 240
203 510
360 360
345 360
215 240
245 330
360 405
240 345
360 405
360 475
405 510
240 325
245 345
325 360
200 200
270 360
360 360
85 85
325 360
200 200
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Page
15-134
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15- 11 9.
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Outdoor Pool or Spa
Perc entiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
85
34
51
0
9
15
5
44
10
75
5
1
-)
2
78
5
9
29
27
0
26
1
30
8
Education High School Graduate 1 5
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
17
9
6
23
16
23
23
56
29
10
24
47
4
73
11
1
84
1
78
6
1
Mean
115.318
113.676
116.412
60
85.556
164.2
97
117.614
78.9
120.893
66
105
112.5
37.5
116.821
123
37.5
128.207
111.889
237.5
98.962
15
124.433
109.375
150
80.529
120.556
81.667
135.348
64.625
114.696
131.174
114.464
116.966
118.9
97.417
124.511
105.75
109.89
160.455
15
116.512
15
115.731
126.667
15
Stdev
103.713
106.758
102.691
63.64
86.329
103.969
53.805
112.718
85.318
107.723
59.729
*
53.033
31.82
104.631
108.374
31.82
96.956
102.499
300.52
94.835
*
97.486
155.367
130.516
66.66
107.308
42.032
113.518
63.636
78.499
129.262
106.726
99.452
159.415
74.622
104.25
107.481
105.481
82.355
*
103.746
*
101.786
137.792
*
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsana and Klepeis. 1996.
or equal to a
Stderr
11.249
18.309
14.38
45
28.776
26.845
24.062
16.993
26.98
12.439
26.711
*
37.5
22.5
11.847
48.466
22.5
18.004
19.726
212.5
18.599
*
17.798
54.93
33.699
16.167
35.769
17.159
23.67
15.909
16.368
26.953
14.262
18.468
50.412
15.232
15.206
53.741
12.346
24.831
*
11.32
*
11.525
56.253
*
Min
1
5
1
15
15
25
40
4
1
1
10
105
75
15
1
30
15
15
4
25
1
15
15
5
1
4
15
30
1
4
15
15
1
10
4
10
1
30
1
85
15
1
15
1
15
15
Max
450
450
450
105
255
450
180
450
258
450
150
105
150
60
450
300
60
450
390
450
360
15
450
450
390
240
297
135
450
255
390
450
450
360
450
360
450
258
450
360
15
450
15
450
360
15
5
15
10
15
15
15
25
40
15
1
15
10
105
75
15
10
30
15
20
10
25
5
15
15
5
1
4
15
30
10
4
20
25
5
20
4
30
15
30
10
85
15
15
15
10
15
15
25 50
34 90
45 75
30 90
15 60
30 60
105 140
60 100
32 82.5
20 52.5
34 90
20 45
105 105
75 112.5
15 37.5
34 90
60 75
15 37.5
60 105
30 90
25 237.5
30 67.5
15 15
60 105
15 37.5
45 105
30 75
30 85
60 67.5
40 100
25 52.5
60 105
30 75
30 90
45 85
20 30
52.5 80
40 90
30 67.5
30 75
90 150
15 15
37 90
15 15
40 90
25 67.5
15 15
75
150
150
178
105
75
185
105
155
90
180
105
105
150
60
160
150
60
178
150
450
130
15
178
157.5
240
90
180
130
225
82.5
150
195
155
150
135
120
185
181.5
140
225
15
155
15
150
225
15
90 95
255 360
258 360
240 360
105 105
255 255
300 450
180 180
297 360
226.5 258
258 360
150 150
105 105
150 150
60 60
255 360
300 300
60 60
255 300
297 360
450 450
240 258
15 15
250 300
450 450
360 390
225 240
297 297
135 135
245 297
135 255
185 210
360 360
255 390
297 360
405 450
180 195
255 300
258 258
255 360
225 360
15 15
255 360
15 15
255 360
360 360
15 15
98 99
450 450
450 450
390 450
105 105
255 255
450 450
180 180
450 450
258 258
450 450
150 150
105 105
150 150
60 60
450 450
300 300
60 60
450 450
390 390
450 450
360 360
15 15
450 450
450 450
390 390
240 240
297 297
135 135
450 450
255 255
390 390
450 450
450 450
360 360
450 450
360 360
450 450
258 258
450 450
360 360
15 15
450 450
15 15
450 450
360 360
15 15
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-135
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-120. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home in the Yard or Other Areas Outside the House
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
2308
1198
1107
3
27
151
271
157
1301
401
1966
173
21
37
83
28
2122
153
10
23
581
807
166
739
15
615
236
Education High School Graduate 618
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
381
251
207
473
456
832
547
1453
855
399
787
796
326
2129
166
13
2228
63
17
2191
105
12
Mean
137.587
158.448
114.887
183.333
167.37
135.311
150.594
113.153
136.382
141.125
139.037
128.416
101.19
183.541
106.108
152.321
137.711
125
213.8
176.739
137.501
131.087
126.145
146.097
198
136.348
161.017
144.706
128.843
122.968
127.126
137.67
138.853
136.472
138.155
126.919
155.716
112.19
149.738
143.681
124.457
137.746
131.566
188.462
136.521
158.683
199.118
138.793
104.438
207.5
Stdev
144.112
160.016
120.869
60.277
164.484
111.483
135.111
117.746
147.923
155.213
145.534
144.607
88.485
161.858
96.781
151.049
144.33
134.265
192.232
156.551
125.562
150.703
134.084
149.672
239.029
125.656
186.469
144.929
141.194
135.802
149.975
132.769
155.656
146.655
139.946
131.579
161.693
135.967
139.245
155.886
130.523
144.41
136.006
192.141
141.088
216.341
191.305
144.994
111.282
192.23
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
Stderr
2.9997
4.6231
3.6328
34.801
31.6549
9.0723
8.2074
9.3972
4.1011
7.751
3.2823
10.9943
19.3091
26.6094
10.6231
28.5455
3.1332
10.8547
60.7892
32.6431
5.2092
5.305
10.407
5.5058
61.7171
5.0669
12.1381
5.8299
7.2336
8.5717
10.424
6.1047
7.2893
5.0843
5.9837
3.4519
5.5298
6.8068
4.9635
5.5252
7.229
3.1297
10.5561
53.2904
2.989
27.2564
46.3983
3.0976
10.86
55.4919
Min Max
1 1290
1 1290
1 1065
120 240
2 600
5 630
2 1250
2 660
1 1080
1 1290
1 1290
1 1250
12 360
2 750
2 610
5 600
1 1290
1 750
3 585
5 600
2 1250
1 1080
1 1080
1 1290
5 660
2 1250
2 1290
1 840
1 1080
1 750
1 1065
1 750
2 1290
1 1080
1 750
1 1250
1 1290
1 1080
1 915
1 1290
1 720
1 1290
1 670
5 600
1 1290
2 1080
5 600
1 1290
1 553
5 600
5
10
10
5
120
5
25
20
5
5
10
10
5
15
3
5
5
10
5
3
5
15
5
10
10
5
15
10
5
5
10
5
10
10
10
5
5
10
5
10
10
10
10
10
5
10
5
5
10
5
5
25
40
60
30
120
60
60
60
30
30
45
40
30
35
84
35
60
40
30
60
60
60
30
30
45
30
60
45
40
35
30
30
45
45
35
36
35
45
30
60
45
35
40
30
60
41
30
35
45
30
60
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
50 75
90 180
120 198
75 150
190 240
120 230
90 180
120 190
80 150
90 180
90 180
90 180
95 180
90 125
120 270
75 145
97.5 210
90 180
85 150
145 380
160 240
110 180
80 175
77.5 180
100 185
120 465
105 180
105 195
100 195
85 175
75 160
78 150
90 185
90 180
90 180
90 180
90 165
110 210
60 140
120 195
99 180
87.5 160
90 180
90 165
90 300
90 180
75 180
120 325
90 180
60 145
140 330
90
320
360
285
240
395
305
310
240
330
302
330
270
210
380
240
360
320
270
503
360
300
307
300
360
600
300
390
360
300
300
320
317
300
310
330
300
360
300
338
330
300
315
345
480
315
420
480
320
270
480
95
420
500
360
240
600
345
405
405
435
465
435
390
240
553
270
510
420
435
585
510
370
450
360
465
660
370
510
479
400
390
435
420
440
420
460
395
475
380
430
450
380
420
450
600
420
485
600
430
360
600
98 99
570 660
627 730
450 560
240 240
600 600
450 480
553 570
462 610
570 715
598 660
570 670
462 745
360 360
750 750
330 610
600 600
570 670
575 630
585 585
600 600
480 570
600 745
450 485
585 655
660 660
480 570
765 915
555 660
585 720
575 690
570 630
532 600
575 690
570 730
570 630
553 610
630 745
540 690
555 660
610 715
510 655
570 690
553 610
600 600
570 660
1065 1080
600 600
570 690
415 475
600 600
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Page
15-136
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-121
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling in a Car
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
6560 87.4261
2852 90.7398
3706 84.9069
2 30
120 94.025
297 63.0101
449 64.6325
393 64.8346
4489 93.8278
812 83.5283
5337 87.6283
640 86.8063
117 78.7607
121 87.6942
265 90.0717
80 82.4
5987 87.4657
477 88.543
29 63.8966
67 86.1194
1124 64.2482
3134 93.5568
632 90.0506
1629 90.3603
41 97.1707
1260 66.531
434 86.0115
1805 91.8476
1335 93.2427
992 95.6683
734 91.5395
1412 85.8343
1492 89.0992
2251 88.2625
1405 85.9089
4427 83.9248
2133 94.6929
1703 83.4692
1735 88.589
1767 88.0266
1355 90.1269
6063 87.4143
463 88.2419
34 78.4118
6368 87.54
154 82.1753
38 89.6053
6224 87.5517
300 85.5833
36 81.0556
Stdev
88.186
97.337
80.374
14.142
90.218
56.758
81.08
70.974
92.302
79.436
89.72
74.343
66.315
84.48
101.474
73.314
87.603
97.206
73.131
78.361
72.331
92.167
81.969
90.224
83.994
72.305
82.143
91.088
94.302
95.468
82.009
83.847
86.623
89.347
92.167
85.023
94.018
82.128
91.537
86.471
93.173
88.032
92.088
57.362
88.695
68.568
72.877
88.855
76.155
63.142
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
1.0888
1.8227
1.3203
10
8.2358
3.2934
3.8264
3.5802
1.3776
2.7877
1.2281
2.9387
6.1309
7.68
6.2335
8.1967
1.1322
4.4507
13.5801
9.5733
2.1575
1.6464
3.2605
2.2354
13.1176
2.0369
3.943
2.144
2.581
3.0311
3.027
2.2314
2.2426
1.8832
2.4589
1.2779
2.0357
1.9902
2.1976
2.0571
2.5312
1.1306
4.2797
9.8376
1.1115
5.5254
11.8221
1.1263
4.3968
10.5237
Min
1
1
1
20
7
-)
1
1
1
4
1
1
5
3
2
5
1
9
5
5
1
9
2
1
10
1
5
1
2
4
4
1
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
10
1
8
10
1
1
5
Max
1280
1280
878
40
593
390
900
630
1280
780
1280
690
360
540
825
420
1280
825
325
420
900
1280
878
780
330
900
620
870
1280
840
905
780
825
900
1280
905
1280
870
905
900
1280
1280
870
239
1280
365
360
1280
505
239
5
10
10
10
20
10
10
5
9
13
10
10
10
20
10
15
12
10
10
6
14
5
15
10
10
15
6
10
10
10
14
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
25
34
30
35
20
37.5
25
20
20
40
30
31
35
35
30
35
30
35
30
20
30
20
40
40
35
0
1
5
8
6
40
40
33
35
34
30
30
35
30
30
35
35
34
34
30
34
30
35
34
35
30
50 75
63 110
63 115
63.5 110
30 40
71.5 120
45 80
40 85
41 80
70 120
60 110
64 110
65 115
60 95
60 120
65 100
60 120
65 110
60 103
40 60
60 120
45 81
70 120
70 116.5
60 115
75 120
45 85
60 115
65 115
70 120
73 120
75 115
60 110
65 112.5
65 115
60 110
60 105
70 120
60 105
60 110
65 115
70 115
63 110
64 110
71 100
63.5 110
60 115
73.5 120
62 110
68.5 109
71 120
90
175
185
165
40
180
135
145
136
184
165
175
180
135
180
165
167.5
175
180
187
180
136
180
175
195
220
145
165
190
180
185
175
170
180
175
175
165
190
165
180
170
170
175
165
160
175
162
180
175
185
175
95
240
254
220
40
222.5
180
175
185
250
225
240
240
225
250
235
229.5
240
240
200
239
180
242
230
250
290
186.5
210
255
250
250
235
240
250
235
235
225
265
230
250
235
240
240
245
220
240
214
239
240
237.5
220
98 99
345 450
360 526
335 420
40 40
435 450
235 270
310 345
300 380
360 495
315 405
360 460
305 330
320 330
330 345
465 620
315 420
345 440
388 595
325 325
315 420
270 345
360 490
330 384
365 465
330 330
270 350
360 455
385 465
380 460
370 580
330 380
330 410
360 465
338 490
345 435
330 440
360 455
350 425
380 480
330 450
335 545
350 450
345 505
239 239
350 450
285 320
360 360
350 450
305 435
239 239
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-137
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-122. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling in a Truck (Pick-up/Van)
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
1172
760
412
13
41
89
80
859
90
1022
68
3
20
48
11
1069
87
5
11
205
642
97
217
11
230
119
392
238
127
66
170
268
491
243
796
376
322
300
323
227
1092
72
8
1142
20
10
1128
35
9
Mean
85.3
91.097
74.607
110.769
80.829
47.607
66.763
91.42
79
84.717
91.294
138.333
67.2
92.792
88.182
85.112
89.103
58
85.909
60.176
93.288
89.351
83.032
96.364
64.043
90.471
87.594
91.992
85.228
112.439
85.365
91.209
87.279
74.741
80.083
96.346
78.543
92.477
86.133
84.216
85.288
83.639
101.875
84.868
93.4
118.5
85.469
77.8
93.333
Stdev
95.867
105.368
74.197
129.178
154.295
44.208
71.084
97.968
82.42
96.222
98.465
63.311
48.46
99.31
110.754
95.567
100.75
36.187
111.643
86.416
101.354
88.958
85.775
114.26
86.936
81.711
94.724
111.776
74.586
117.975
104.161
94.43
100.099
81.299
90.569
105.493
91.604
100.164
99.255
90.861
93.452
125.252
129.668
95.219
116.003
128.583
96.579
60.527
123.92
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know"
of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min =
Stderr
2.8003
3.8221
3.6554
35.8274
24.0969
4.6861
7.9475
3.3426
8.6878
3.0099
11.9406
36.5529
10.836
14.3341
33.3935
2.9229
10.8015
16.1833
33.6615
6.0355
4.0001
9.0323
5.8228
34.4508
5.7324
7.4904
4.7843
7.2454
6.6184
14.5217
7.9888
5.7682
4.5174
5.2153
3.2101
5.4404
5.1049
5.783
5.5227
6.0306
2.828
14.7611
45.8446
2.8177
25.939
40.6615
2.8756
10.2308
41.3068
Min
1
1
1
10
1
1
5
0
10
1
6
90
5
5
10
1
5
20
10
1
4
2
5
10
1
5
2
4
5
10
2
1
4
5
1
-)
1
1
2
5
1
5
10
1
5
10
1
5
10
Max
955
955
510
450
955
240
352
750
453
955
453
210
165
440
390
955
630
97
390
955
750
460
655
390
955
453
675
750
370
650
695
750
955
478
750
955
955
695
750
675
750
955
390
955
555
390
955
240
390
Refused = Refused data. N =
minimum number of minutes
5 25
10 30
10 30
10 25
10 35
10 15
7 15
5.5 15
10 30
12 30
10 30
14 27.5
90 90
7.5 25
10 27.5
10 30
10 30
5 29
20 20
10 30
7 15
10 30
6 30
10 30
10 30
7 15
14 35
10 30
10 30
15 30
10 35
10 20
10 30
10 30
10 23
10 30
12 30
10 29
10 30
10 30
10 30
10 30
10 20
10 20
10 30
7.5 37.5
10 30
10 30
5 30
10 20
50 75
60 110
60 115
55 95
60 90
35 70
30 65
37 93.5
60 115
48.5 105
60 110
62.5 105.5
115 210
62.5 102.5
60 120
60 65
60 110
60 115
68 85
35 65
30 75
60 120
60 120
60 110
35 170
35 85
60 120
60 115
60 110
60 110
80 135
50 110
60 118.5
60 111
52 90
55 101
60.5 120
51 95
60 120
60 110
60 105
60 110
46 115
60 127.5
60 110
70 103
60 190
60 110
60 120
60 65
90
180
190
165
300
206
110
180
189
185
180
220
210
137
224
190
180
210
97
190
146
192
190
180
190
160
195
185
190
180
220
186
205
180
160
170
192
170
208
180
165
184
170
390
180
140.5
340
180
165
390
95
240
265
220
450
210
130
222.5
260
265
235
295
210
154.5
330
390
240
230
97
390
185
270
270
235
390
206
280
255
290
230
412
260
245
235
235
230
280
220
267.5
233
265
240
235
390
235
350.5
390
240
220
390
98 99
395 478
450 620
300 355
450 450
955 955
180 240
265 352
440 555
390 453
390 510
450 453
210 210
165 165
440 440
390 390
390 478
440 630
97 97
390 390
240 265
450 555
450 460
300 355
390 390
245 352
295 450
450 510
555 655
345 355
445 650
445 630
390 460
445 595
395 440
375 510
430 460
355 445
442.5 549
430 595
395 465
412 478
395 955
390 390
395 475
555 555
390 390
412 478
240 240
390 390
doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number
Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-138
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-123. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a Motorcycle, Moped, or Scooter
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Not Employed
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
32
29
3
2
1
28
1
31
1
31
1
3
23
6
3
3
15
6
4
1
6
12
6
8
21
11
5
12
8
7
30
2
31
1
31
1
Mean
100.125
104.276
60
42.5
180
103.893
30
101.516
57
102.387
30
88.333
62.783
249.167
88.333
305
95.667
45.833
70.5
32
24.167
191.583
67.167
44.625
71.333
155.091
124
121.833
55.875
96.429
85.1
325.5
102.387
30
101.516
57
Stdev
152.222
158.322
74.666
53.033
*
160.69
*
154.532
*
154.191
*
87.797
100.105
251.663
87.797
247.538
170.645
49.54
51.423
*
8.01
216.501
66.764
44.654
110.425
205.865
230.011
153.631
52.267
184.249
134.187
296.278
154.191
*
154.532
*
Stderr
26.909
29.4
43.108
37.5
*
30.367
*
27.755
*
27.693
*
50.69
20.873
102.741
50.69
142.916
44.06
20.224
25.712
*
3.27
62.499
27.256
15.788
24.097
62.071
102.864
44.349
18.479
69.639
24.499
209.5
27.693
*
27.755
*
Min Max
1 535
1 535
5 145
5 80
180 180
1 535
30 30
1 535
57 57
1 535
30 30
5 180
1 485
10 535
5 180
30 510
1 535
10 145
20 142
32 32
10 30
1 535
5 180
5 142
5 510
1 535
5 535
1 485
20 180
5 510
1 510
116 535
1 535
30 30
1 535
57 57
5
5
5
5
5
180
5
30
5
57
5
30
5
5
10
5
30
1
10
20
32
10
1
5
5
5
1
5
1
20
5
5
116
5
30
5
57
25
25
25
5
5
180
25
30
25
57
25
30
5
25
30
5
30
25
20
37.5
32
20
28
32
15
25
20
20
28
30
5
25
116
25
30
25
57
50 75
31 98
2 80
0 145
425 80
1 0 180
1 90.5
0 30
30 116
57 57
32 116
30 30
80 180
30 57
205 510
80 180
375 510
30 57
32.5 35
60 103.5
32 32
27.5 30
68.5 430
35 116
30 60
32 65
30 375
25 35
43.5 143.5
33.5 60
0 80
0 65
325 5 535
2 116
0 30
0 116
57 57
90
375
485
145
80
180
485
30
375
57
375
30
180
142
535
180
510
485
145
142
32
30
510
180
142
145
485
535
375
180
510
211.5
535
375
30
375
57
95
510
510
145
80
180
510
30
510
57
510
30
180
145
535
180
510
535
145
142
32
30
535
180
142
180
535
535
485
180
510
485
535
510
30
510
57
98 99
535 535
535 535
145 145
80 80
180 180
535 535
30 30
535 535
57 57
535 535
30 30
180 180
485 485
535 535
180 180
510 510
535 535
145 145
142 142
32 32
30 30
535 535
180 180
142 142
510 510
535 535
535 535
485 485
180 180
510 510
510 510
535 535
535 535
30 30
535 535
57 57
Note: A "*" Signifies missing data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard
error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-139
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-124. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling in Other Trucks
Percen tiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
124
80
44
1
4
9
7
96
9
110
8
1
1
3
1
113
9
1
1
18
79
6
19
2
21
10
48
24
10
11
28
36
42
18
82
42
36
29
38
21
116
7
1
120
3
1
116
7
1
Mean
135.121
174.888
62.818
35
79
37.875
116.857
153.24
71.5
1440
46.125
40
95
246.333
35
133.673
170
85
35
79.278
168.468
96
75.105
20
70.333
389
156.958
116.25
53
48.545
119.179
189.194
100.595
132.333
134.793
135.762
126.444
199.793
87.447
146.952
133.69
173.143
35
138.725
24.333
35
135.612
141.286
35
Stdev Stderr
235.635 21.16
283.085 31.65
57.438 8.659
* *
26.47 13.235
28.002 9.9
83.071 31.398
263.424 26.886
57.887 20.466
242.807 23.151
36.314 12.839
* *
* *
366.947 211.86
* *
240.595 22.633
200.709 66.903
* *
* *
63.15 14.885
286.399 32.222
103.894 42.415
57.278 13.14
21.213 15
62.607 13.662
505.656 159.9
257.81 37.212
124.385 25.39
53.24 16.836
55.111 16.617
237.794 44.939
318.577 53.096
151.868 23.434
194.344 45.807
197.96 21.861
298.573 46.071
219.584 36.597
350.125 65.017
125.316 20.329
213.871 46.67
238.543 22.148
210.169 79.436
* *
238.702 21.79
13.65 7.881
* *
242.76 22.54
83.38 31.515
* *
Min
1
1
1
35
46
10
10
1
18
1
10
40
95
29
35
1
29
85
35
10
1
2
10
5
5
5
1
29
10
1
2
1
1
10
1
1
5
i
2
1
1
32
35
1
15
35
1
18
35
Max
1440
1440
270
35
105
95
250
1440
186
1440
100
40
95
670
35
1440
670
85
35
250
1440
255
186
35
250
1440
1080
600
180
186
1080
1440
750
670
795
1440
1080
1440
750
735
1440
610
35
1440
40
35
1440
250
35
5
5
5
5
35
46
10
10
5
18
5
10
40
95
29
35
5
29
85
35
10
5
2
10
5
10
5
5
32
10
1
5
5
5
10
5
5
10
5
5
15
5
32
35
5
15
35
5
18
35
25
25
27
20
35
58
18.5
60
22.5
25
25
15
40
95
29
35
20
41
85
35
35
20
5
25
5
25
25
19
42.5
15
15
27.5
17
77
35
25
18
26
15
32
30
21
35
35
25
15
35
23.5
60
35
50 75
48 107.5
60 139
45 90
35 35
82.5 100
30 50.5
90 195
45 117
60 99
60 120
32.5 82
40 40
95 95
40 670
35 35
45 100
105 180
85 85
35 35
65 95
45 114
55 180
75 120
20 35
60 95
45 750
52.5 130
77.5 120
30 90
30 78
45.5 90
45 197.5
55 114
67.5 105
60 120
45 75
53 92.5
35 180
60 95
74 120
48 104
60 250
35 35
60 112
18 40
35 35
45 101.5
180 195
35 35
90
270
640
145
35
105
95
250
600
186
412.5
100
40
95
670
35
270
670
85
35
195
670
255
180
35
138
1117.5
610
255
135
103
180
600
186
610
555
250
270
795
195
600
270
610
35
412.5
40
35
555
250
35
95
690
772.5
180
35
105
95
250
750
186
735
100
40
95
670
35
735
670
85
35
250
795
255
186
35
195
1440
690
270
180
186
795
960
205
670
670
960
670
960
255
600
735
610
35
712.5
40
35
735
250
35
98 99
960 1080
1080 1440
270 270
35 35
105 105
95 95
250 250
1080 1440
186 186
960 1080
100 100
40 40
95 95
670 670
35 35
960 1080
670 670
85 85
35 35
250 250
1080 1440
255 255
186 186
35 35
250 250
1440 1440
1080 1080
600 600
180 180
186 186
1080 1080
1440 1440
750 750
670 670
750 795
1440 1440
1080 1080
1440 1440
750 750
735 735
960 1080
610 610
35 35
960 1080
40 40
35 35
960 1080
250 250
35 35
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles
are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-140
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-125. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a Bus
Percen tiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
469
219
250
14
5
133
143
147
27
311
101
15
14
24
4
415
46
2
6
274
95
34
61
5
295
25
57
38
30
24
145
102
142
80
426
43
158
140
94
77
413
50
6
459
4
6
442
19
8
Mean
74.648
77.251
72.368
145
56
48.383
59.413
96.639
131.963
70.071
85.178
58
107.143
65.542
168
72.839
83.913
47.5
137.833
54.018
122.579
83.265
80.262
167.4
55.302
120.4
111.579
108.842
84.633
110.458
77.062
69.676
71.718
81.813
70.61
114.651
78.285
61.636
86.617
76.234
76.448
55.36
111.5
73.373
168.75
109.5
74.814
58.158
104.625
Stdev Stderr
93.532 4.3189
104.119 7.0357
83.306 5.2688
167.177 44.68
40.218 17.986
29.431 2.552
46.343 3.8754
128.354 10.587
144.641 27.836
89.462 5.0729
92.396 9.1937
58.487 15.101
176.48 47.166
71.515 14.598
196.195 98.098
86.077 4.2253
138.922 20.483
10.607 7.5
159.631 65.169
39.364 2.3781
168.8 17.319
79.298 13.6
69.212 8.8617
169.916 75.989
44.964 2.6179
124.272 24.854
116.718 15.46
133.431 21.645
128.087 23.385
199.236 40.669
75.41 6.2624
103.283 10.227
82.846 6.9523
124.342 13.902
84.646 4.1011
152.229 23.215
98.116 7.8057
53.541 4.525
116.695 12.036
107.505 12.251
96.792 4.7628
39.329 5.562
161.48 65.924
91.312 4.2621
182.683 91.341
162.362 66.284
94.281 4.4845
39.881 9.1493
137.907 48.757
Min
2
5
2
10
15
5
7
2
10
2
5
5
20
15
10
2
7
40
10
5
5
2
5
10
5
10
10
10
2
5
7
2
5
5
2
10
5
2
5
5
2
5
10
2
20
10
2
10
10
Max
945
945
640
605
120
140
370
945
570
945
570
175
690
370
435
945
690
55
435
370
945
468
460
435
435
570
501
640
690
945
435
945
570
690
690
945
690
460
945
640
945
195
435
945
435
435
945
155
435
5
10
10
15
10
15
10
10
10
20
10
15
5
20
20
10
10
15
40
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
30
20
20
5
10
15
10
10
12.5
10
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
10
10
10
10
25
30
30
30
60
30
25
30
30
45
0
5
0
0
0
21
30
30
40
32
29
30
40
30
32
29
45
45
40
30
29
30
30
30
30
30
45
30
30
30
30
30
0
• 2
0
0
0
0
30
28.5
50 75
55 90
55 90
55 90
100 140
55 60
43 67
54 75
60 110
73 130
54 80
60 110
20 120
42.5 100
42.5 87
113.5 315
55 90
37.5 85
47.5 55
77.5 195
49.5 70
60 120
60 100
65 120
165 195
49 70
90 135
73 120
75 120
60 90
60 101.5
60 95
55 85
50 80
41.5 90
50 85
90 120
58 90
50 75
60 95
50 80
55 90
47.5 71
46 100
55 90
110 277.5
41 100
55 90
55 65
67.5 100
90
125
135
120
435
120
90
110
180
435
120
140
155
225
90
435
125
145
55
435
100
405
135
135
435
100
195
225
195
130
125
135
120
135
127.5
120
180
125
120
155
125
125
115
435
125
435
435
125
125
435
95
180
180
175
605
120
110
135
405
460
147
185
175
690
120
435
165
370
55
435
120
570
185
165
435
120
405
435
605
300
460
180
125
180
297.5
165
300
180
137.5
225
175
180
135
435
179
435
435
180
155
435
98 99
435 570
460 570
420 501
605 605
120 120
120 122
179 225
640 690
570 570
405 501
460 468
175 175
690 690
370 370
435 435
420 468
690 690
55 55
435 435
150 179
690 945
468 468
205 460
435 435
155 225
570 570
468 501
640 640
690 690
945 945
435 435
175 468
460 501
640 690
435 501
945 945
435 605
205 225
435 945
570 640
435 570
165 195
435 435
420 570
435 435
435 435
435 570
155 155
435 435
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles
are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-141
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-126. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Walking
Percen tiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
1639
755
883
1
38
58
155
223
944
221
1289
175
36
30
88
21
1467
144
10
18
431
561
153
482
12
472
138
Education High School Graduate 366
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
288
210
165
507
321
423
388
1182
457
412
459
475
293
1504
120
15
1578
44
17
1553
67
19
Mean Stdev
29.6718 41.617
32.4781 48.2611
27.2831 34.8259
20 *
29.5263 23.7416
24.3276 26.3268
18.2129 21.0263
25.8341 32.3753
31.8252 44.9705
33.81 49.3278
29.5912 43.6801
34.8114 39.7274
26.5556 24.6535
23.7667 21.2192
23.0795 21.1058
33.1905 32.9555
29.8718 41.0288
26.8403 48.7064
30.2 28.8359
35.7222 34.7847
22.768 28.0141
30.9519 43.7734
26.8693 37.1231
35.5249 49.4109
18.4167 13.4601
22.6737 27.6375
42.7174 71.9429
29.2596 41.5618
32.5313 39.3063
29.7667 38.813
34.5818 44.6107
34.9172 45.2549
29.271 46.8743
24.9976 37.6654
28.2448 35.029
29.2902 39.1911
30.6586 47.3511
32.3034 47.7062
28.854 41.54
26.6084 31.325
32.2184 46.6936
29.6011 41.9939
29.7417 38.3451
36.2 27.8162
29.5076 41.4718
29 36.0633
46.6471 63.1456
29.7173 42.1023
26.9851 31.8774
35.4211 31.3658
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
1.028
1.7564
1.172
*
3.8514
3.4569
1.6889
2.168
1.4637
3.3181
1.2166
3.0031
4.1089
3.8741
2.2499
7.1915
1.0712
4.0589
9.1187
8.1988
1.3494
1.8481
3.0012
2.2506
3.8856
1.2721
6.1242
2.1725
2.3161
2.6784
3.4729
2.0098
2.6163
1.8314
1.7783
1.1399
2.215
2.3503
1.9389
1.4373
2.7279
1.0828
3.5004
7.1821
1.044
5.4367
15.3151
1.0684
3.8944
7.1958
Min Max
1 540
1 540
1 360
20 20
1 100
1 160
1 170
1 190
1 410
1 540
1 540
1 250
1 100
1 60
1 100
4 150
1 410
1 540
2 80
8 150
1 190
1 365
1 295
1 540
5 55
1 190
1 540
1 410
1 295
1 300
1 360
1 365
1 540
1 410
1 285
1 540
1 410
1 365
1 540
1 270
1 410
1 540
1 250
5 90
1 540
2 150
5 270
1 540
1 165
3 110
5
2
2
2
20
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
8
2
2
2
8
2
2
2
2
5
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
2
4
5
2
2
3
25
6
7
6
20
10
10
5
6
6
10
6
10
10
6
5.5
15
6
5.5
10
15
5
7
5
10
10
5
7
5
9.5
8
10
10
6
5
8
7
5
6
6
6
8
6
5
10
6
6
10
6
5
10
50
16
20
15
20
25
15
10
15
18.5
20
15
20
20
17
15
20
16
15
17.5
25
13
16
15
20
16.5
13
20
18
20
18.5
20
20
15
10
15
18
15
20
16
15
20
16
15
30
16
14.5
30
16
16
30
75
39
40
35
20
40
35
25
30
40
45
35
50
30
43
37
40
40
35
55
55
30
40
35
50
20
30
50
35
45
40
45
45
31
30
40
40
35
38.5
35
35
45
35.5
40
60
38
36
60
38
40
60
90
65
70
60
20
60
60
40
60
70
73
65
75
60
60
50
65
65
60
77.5
65
55
70
60
75
30
55
115
65
75
60
80
75
60
60
60
65
60
75
60
60
61
65
70
75
65
60
90
65
60
90
95
95
100
94
20
80
60
60
100
110
95
100
125
78
60
60
65
100
70
80
150
65
100
92
120
55
65
145
100
100
90
95
107
105
80
90
92
120
120
90
85
105
95
117.5
90
95
115
270
95
90
110
98 99
151 190
170 270
140 171
20 20
100 100
70 160
65 100
135 151
171 250
155 180
160 225
160 194
100 100
60 60
92 100
150 150
155 194
100 135
80 80
150 150
131 151
180 250
135 165
150 250
55 55
130 151
360 365
150 240
160 180
140 225
180 200
170 250
160 180
135 171
140 180
145 180
171 200
180 250
146 180
123 160
155 295
152 190
135 150
90 90
151 190
150 150
270 270
151 194
130 165
110 110
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Page
15-142
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-127. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a Bicycle/Skateboard/Rollerskate
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
115
82
33
2
2
18
33
53
7
98
7
2
4
3
1
106
8
1
52
27
7
27
2
56
3
18
18
11
9
20
24
26
45
83
32
20
46
34
15
95
18
2
114
1
109
5
1
Mean
45.1217
43.2073
49.8788
15
20
40.2778
31.9697
53.2264
74
46.7245
41.1429
6
47.5
33.3333
20
45.8679
38.375
20
33.8462
56.8519
40.8571
55.4815
55
33.3929
98.3333
41.5556
42.9444
89.8182
57.2222
42.05
39.125
64.6923
38.3778
44.5783
46.5313
38.6
34.7826
61.7059
47.9333
48.5368
29.3333
25
45.3421
20
45.1284
50
20
Stdev
53.35
56.113
46.228
7.071
14.142
52.985
27.929
62.916
67.295
56.914
21.737
1.414
23.629
25.166
*
55.172
23.323
*
38.258
76.863
24.768
54.258
49.497
36.945
77.835
49.048
35.049
111.308
38.415
35.057
47.505
87.03
32.614
56.02
46.508
44.951
35.036
72.243
55.663
57.246
24 22
7.071
53.533
*
53.909
49.624
*
Stderr
4.9749
6.1966
8.0472
5
10
12.4886
4.8618
8.6422
25.4353
5.7492
8.2156
1
11.8145
14.5297
*
5.3587
8.2461
*
5.3054
14.7923
9.3616
10.442
35
4.937
44.9382
11.5606
8.261
33.5605
12.8049
7.839
9.6969
17.0681
4.8619
6.149
8.2215
10.0513
5.1657
12.3896
14.3721
5.8733
5.7086
5
5.0138
*
5.1636
22.1923
*
Min Max
1 400
1 400
5 205
10 20
10 30
1 195
2 115
5 400
23 205
1 400
5 65
5 7
30 80
10 60
20 20
1 400
10 80
20 20
1 195
5 400
10 90
5 205
20 90
1 195
25 180
5 205
5 120
15 400
5 110
5 102
2 180
1 400
5 151
5 400
1 195
1 205
5 195
2 400
2 180
1 400
5 90
20 30
1 400
20 20
1 400
5 115
20 20
5
5
5
5
10
10
1
5
5
23
5
5
5
30
10
20
5
10
20
2
5
10
5
20
2
25
5
5
15
5
5
5
2
5
5
2
3.5
5
5
2
5
5
20
5
20
5
5
20
25
11
10
15
10
10
10
10
20
25
11
25
5
30
10
20
10
23.5
20
10
15
30
20
20
10
25
15
20
25
20
10
10
15
18
15
10
12.5
10
20
10
15
7
20
11
20
15
10
20
50 75
30 60
27.5 50
45 60
20 30
15 55
25 45
30 65
35 110
30 60
50 60
6 7
40 65
30 60
20 20
30 60
30 55
20 20
20 47.5
30 60
35 46
30 90
55 90
20 45
90 180
30 46
30 60
53 90
60 90
32.5 77.5
18.5 57.5
32.5 75
30 50
30 60
32.5 75
27.5 47.5
22.5 46
42.5 90
20 75
30 60
32.5 40
25 30
30 60
20 20
30 60
30 90
20 20
90
102
90
105
30
151
65
105
205
110
65
7
80
60
20
105
80
20
65
115
90
165
90
65
180
100
115
165
110
95
90
195
80
90
110
75
80
115
151
110
60
30
102
20
102
115
20
95
151
120
165
30
195
102
165
205
165
65
7
80
60
20
151
80
20
115
120
90
180
90
115
180
205
120
400
110
101
165
205
115
151
120
147.5
90
165
180
165
90
30
151
20
151
115
20
98 99
195 205
195 400
205 205
30 30
195 195
115 115
180 400
205 205
205 400
65 65
7 7
80 80
60 60
20 20
195 205
80 80
20 20
151 195
400 400
90 90
205 205
90 90
151 195
180 180
205 205
120 120
400 400
110 110
102 102
180 180
400 400
151 151
205 400
195 195
205 205
195 195
400 400
180 180
205 400
90 90
30 30
195 205
20 20
195 205
115 115
20 20
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-143
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-128. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Waiting on a Bus, Train, etc. Stop
Perc entiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
151
61
90
9
32
50
54
11
115
21
3
1
10
1
136
13
1
1
79
31
15
26
87
6
25
9
16
8
63
27
39
77
128
23
55
43
28
25
139
10
2
151
145
6
Mean
18.702
16.3443
20.3
21
8
12.5
13.78
25.5
27.2727
18.2522
17.4762
10
15
29.8
15
18.0956
25.2308
20
15
13.1646
24.9355
31.6667
20.6154
12.931
32.5
23.56
28.333
33.8125
14.875
20.4921
17.4074
19.8205
13.1818
17.7891
23.7826
19.9273
17.186
24
12.68
18.7698
20
7.5
18.702
18.6552
19.8333
Stdev
18.7513
17.9934
19.1818
5.6569
9.8995
10.7283
11.4843
25.616
13.484
17.9501
11.9901
5
*
35.8137
*
17.1036
32.4427
*
*
11.3707
24.8125
31.5179
12.7061
10.9723
11.726
24.5749
19.2029
31.1239
8.3741
23.43
13.1244
16.6684
11.3458
18.9656
17.0026
15.5693
20.6574
25.4675
9.8815
18.7788
20.5372
3.5355
18.7513
18.969
13.5561
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know"
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error
Stderr
1.526
2.3038
2.02319
4
7
1.8965
1.6241
3.4859
4.0656
1.6739
2.6164
2.8868
*
11.3253
*
1.4666
8.998
*
*
1.2793
4.4565
8.1379
2.4919
1.1763
4.7871
4.915
6.401
7.781
2.9607
2.9519
2.5258
2.6691
2.4189
1.6763
3.5453
2.0994
3.1502
4.8129
1.9763
1.5928
6.4944
2.5
1.526
1.5753
5.5342
Min Max
1 128
1 120
1 128
17 25
1 15
2 45
1 74
1 128
5 45
1 128
1 45
5 15
15 15
5 120
15 15
1 128
1 120
20 20
15 15
1 75
1 128
5 120
5 45
1 75
15 45
5 120
10 60
5 128
1 30
1 128
3 60
4 75
1 45
1 128
5 65
1 75
1 120
5 128
1 45
1 128
4 65
5 10
1 128
1 128
9 45
5
4
4
4
17
1
2
3
5
5
4
3
5
15
5
15
4
1
20
15
2
5
5
5
3
15
5
10
5
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
2
4
5
4
3
4
5
4
4
9
25
7
5
10
17
1
5
5
10
20
5
10
5
15
10
15
6
10
20
15
5
10
10
10
5
25
10
10
10
40.5
6
5
10
5
5.5
10
10
5
10
5
10
5
5
7
6
10
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
50 75
15 20
11 20
15 30
21 25
8 15
10 15
10 20
15 30
30 40
15 22
15 23
10 15
15 15
16.5 20
15 15
15 22.5
i ^ on
1 J ZU
20 20
15 15
10 15
15 30
17 45
20 30
10 15
32.5 45
15 30
20 45
30 37.5
15 18.5
15 22
15 20
15 28
10 15
15 20
20 35
15 25
10 20
15 32.5
10 15
15 20
12 30
7.5 10
15 20
15 20
16 23
90
40
30
42.5
15
20
23
60
45
40
35
15
15
92.5
15
40
6C
J
20
15
23
45
67
40
23
45
45
60
65
30
40
35
45
30
35
45
43
33
45
20
40
55
10
40
40
45
95
45
45
60
15
43
30
67
45
45
40
15
15
120
15
45
i on
1ZU
20
15
35
65
120
45
30
45
67
60
128
30
65
35
65
30
45
60
60
45
67
35
45
65
10
45
45
45
98 99
67 120
65 120
75 128
15 15
45 45
52.5 75
120 128
45 45
67 75
45 45
15 15
15 15
120 120
15 15
67 75
i on i on
1ZU 1ZU
20 20
15 15
45 75
128 128
120 120
45 45
45 75
45 45
120 120
60 60
128 128
30 30
120 128
60 60
75 75
45 45
75 120
65 65
65 75
120 120
128 128
45 45
75 120
65 65
10 10
67 120
75 120
45 45
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes. Percentiles
are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-144
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-129. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on a Train/Subway/Rapid Transit
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean Stdev Stderr
116 97.767 136.346 12.659
62 91.613 119.437 15.168
54 104.833 154.349 21.004
8 191.875 256.82 90.8
2 92.5 38.891 27.5
3 166.667 271.401 156.693
2 100 56.569 40
92 84.967 106.533 11.107
9 122.667 219.531 73.177
64 89.5 139.691 17.461
26 131.385 168.356 33.017
3 79.667 17.039 9.838
4 71.25 47.675 23.838
16 88.625 98.922 24.731
3 85 56.347 32.532
89 101.281 149.687 15.867
22 86.955 85.561 18.242
2 79.5 34.648 24.5
3 85 56.347 32.532
7 126.429 163.598 61.834
76 98.526 128.056 14.689
10 61.7 46.375 14.665
21 101.714 186.201 40.632
2 107.5 123.744 87.5
10 122 140.024 44.279
6 181.833 311.76 127.275
30 89.433 109.191 19.935
26 125.692 189.64 37.192
24 66.5 50.332 10.274
20 74.15 59.415 13.286
72 111.847 134.554 15.857
14 64.214 109.483 29.261
15 75.733 121.139 31.278
15 83.533 179.444 46.332
96 101.604 127.189 12.981
20 79.35 176.643 39.499
26 138.192 196.327 38.503
29 77.276 89.479 16.616
37 106.081 140.735 23.137
24 65.917 82.217 16.782
106 94.151 122.865 11.934
7 146.571 294.036 111.135
3 111.667 87.797 50.69
112 96.527 137.946 13.035
4 132.5 82.916 41.458
112 98.179 138.009 13.041
1 10 * *
3 111.667 87.797 50.69
Min
1
5
1
20
65
5
60
1
10
1
5
60
30
5
20
1
5
55
20
5
1
5
1
20
5
1
1
10
5
10
10
2
1
5
1
2
5
2
5
1
1
1
20
1
20
1
10
20
Max
810
720
810
810
120
480
140
720
690
720
810
90
140
415
120
810
415
104
120
480
720
160
810
195
480
810
480
720
180
240
810
380
480
720
720
810
810
480
690
380
720
810
195
810
195
810
10
195
5
5
10
2
20
65
5
60
5
10
5
10
60
30
5
20
5
10
55
20
5
5
5
10
20
5
1
2
10
10
12.5
20
2
1
5
10
3.5
10
5
10
1
5
1
20
5
20
5
10
20
25
27.5
24
30
55
65
5
60
30
10
22
35
60
42.5
20
20
25
40
55
20
15
30
15
10
20
20
5
30
20
24.5
30
49
10
10
10
30
7.5
30
25
30
15
30
10
20
27.5
70
30
10
20
50
60
60
60
117.5
92.5
15
100
60
24
55
117.5
89
57.5
70
115
60
70
79.5
115
65
60
57.5
55
107.5
92.5
70
60
60
55
60
62.5
22.5
30
30
60
32.5
79.5
60
60
42.5
60
30
120
60
157.5
60
10
120
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
75
120
120
120
180
120
480
140
104.5
120
74
135
90
100
112.5
120
120
120
104
120
140
120
89
90
195
140
135
120
120
102.5
97
122.5
50
90
75
120
60
130
105
120
82.5
120
90
195
117.5
195
120
10
195
90
189
180
195
810
120
480
140
175
690
195
195
90
140
165
120
195
130
104
120
480
189
125
165
195
337.5
810
177.5
380
125
164.5
189
240
160
120
195
120
240
135
195
160
180
810
195
175
195
180
10
195
95
415
240
480
810
120
480
140
240
690
380
480
90
140
415
120
480
165
104
120
480
380
160
415
195
480
810
415
690
175
214.5
415
380
480
720
415
465
720
175
480
180
380
810
195
415
195
415
10
195
98
690
480
690
810
120
480
140
480
690
690
810
90
140
415
120
720
415
104
120
480
690
160
810
195
480
810
480
720
180
240
690
380
480
720
690
810
810
480
690
380
480
810
195
690
195
690
10
195
99
720
720
810
810
120
480
140
720
690
720
810
90
140
415
120
810
415
104
120
480
720
160
810
195
480
810
480
720
180
240
810
380
480
720
720
810
810
480
690
380
690
810
195
720
195
720
10
195
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-145
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-130. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling on an Airplane
Perc entiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
N
53
28
25
3
3
42
5
44
7
1
1
51
2
3
33
3
13
1
4
4
9
13
15
8
17
17
9
10
37
16
17
14
17
5
51
2
51
2
51
2
Mean
234
241.25
225.88
175
113.333
226.429
405.4
241.068
199.286
60
340
234.745
215
113.333
212.424
510
259.385
150
122.5
111.25
253.889
293.846
194.8
305
254.706
235.118
212.778
216
258.919
176.375
216.294
191.786
230.882
423
224.843
467.5
233.725
241
231.608
295
Stdev
203.736
230.979
172.581
145.688
118.568
193.962
292.392
215.555
134.364
*
*
206.224
176.777
118.568
194.008
375.899
168.387
*
98.531
179.647
191.046
170.784
113.998
375.129
234.81
234.348
103.565
181.702
192.755
222.825
172.818
160.547
222.171
294.398
201.484
123.744
207.562
65.054
206.7
120.208
Stderr
27.985
43.651
34.516
84.113
68.455
29.929
130.762
32.496
50.785
*
*
28.877
125
68.455
33.773
217.025
46.702
*
49.265
89.823
63.682
47.367
29.434
132.628
56.95
56.838
34.522
57.459
31.689
55.706
41.914
42.908
53.884
131.659
28.213
87.5
29.064
46
28.944
85
Min
10
15
10
15
15
10
195
10
15
60
340
10
90
15
15
150
10
150
15
10
15
20
45
20
15
15
15
10
15
10
20
15
10
180
10
380
10
195
10
210
Max 5
900 15
900 20
660 15
300 15
245 15
900 20
900 195
900 15
435 15
60 60
340 340
900 15
340 90
245 15
900 20
900 150
660 10
150 150
245 15
380 10
660 15
555 20
480 45
900 20
900 15
900 15
340 15
555 10
900 15
900 10
660 20
555 15
900 10
900 180
900 15
555 380
900 15
287 195
900 15
380 210
25
70
65
110
15
15
60
210
65
110
60
340
60
90
15
60
150
195
150
47.5
12.5
195
180
90
45
70
60
150
45
150
37.5
60
90
60
240
60
380
60
195
60
210
50
210
210
210
210
80
202.5
287
210
210
60
340
210
215
80
180
480
225
150
115
27.5
270
300
210
137.5
245
195
255
202.5
230
95
210
150
245
285
210
467.5
210
241
210
295
75
300
292.5
300
300
245
300
435
300
255
60
340
300
340
245
285
900
300
150
197.5
210
285
435
255
577.5
380
287
270
240
305
262.5
275
230
300
510
287
555
300
287
300
380
90 95
480 660
555 900
480 510
300 300
245 245
480 555
900 900
510 660
435 435
60 60
340 340
480 660
340 340
245 245
480 555
900 900
435 660
150 150
245 245
380 380
660 660
510 555
287 480
900 900
510 900
660 900
340 340
517.5 555
510 660
360 900
480 660
435 555
480 900
900 900
480 660
555 555
480 660
287 287
480 660
380 380
98 99
900 900
900 900
660 660
300 300
245 245
900 900
900 900
900 900
435 435
60 60
340 340
900 900
340 340
245 245
900 900
900 900
660 660
150 150
245 245
380 380
660 660
555 555
480 480
900 900
900 900
900 900
340 340
555 555
900 900
900 900
660 660
555 555
900 900
900 900
900 900
555 555
900 900
287 287
900 900
380 380
Note: A " *" Signifies missing data. Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard
deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-146
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-131. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors in a Residence (all rooms)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
9343
4269
5070
4
187
498
700
588
6022
1348
7556
941
157
181
382
126
8498
696
46
103
1768
4068
797
2639
71
1963
829
2602
1788
1240
921
2068
2087
3230
1958
6286
3057
2513
2424
2522
1884
8591
689
63
9019
249
75
8840
432
71
Mean
1001.39
945.9
1048.07
1060
1001.07
1211.64
1005.13
969.5
947.91
1174.64
999.36
1015.95
983.52
996.09
1009.4
1019.69
1000.38
1009.84
1097.87
984.08
1053.3
881.03
982.44
1158.03
995.08
1044.47
1093.37
1008.1
974.34
939.49
943.67
1003.4
1001.73
999
1002.84
965.69
1074.81
1034.92
977.88
980.52
1014.84
999.12
1027.42
1025.68
997.77
1125.47
1024.08
997.66
1070.48
1045.48
Stdev
275.143
273.498
267.864
135.647
279.866
218.745
222.335
241.776
273.033
229.344
275.678
272.54
254.689
268.283
281.75
276.578
275.436
270.816
286.655
269.485
248.46
259.166
243.085
233.775
268.059
251.888
278.592
279.281
272.599
275.004
274.27
278.441
280.646
270.19
273.992
272.596
265.676
278.237
267 '.177
273.962
277.47
274.377
284.437
264.342
274.112
281.353
285.059
274.78
273.759
273.047
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
2.8465
4.1859
3.7619
67.8233
20.4658
9.8022
8.4035
9.9707
3.5184
6.2466
3.1714
8.8845
20.3264
19.9413
14.4156
24.6396
2.9879
10.2653
42.265
26.5531
5.909
4.0634
8.6105
4.5507
31.8128
5.6852
9.6759
5.4751
6.4468
7.8096
9.0375
6.1229
6.1432
4.7541
6.192
3.4382
4.8051
5.5503
5.4267
5.4553
6.3926
2.9602
10.8362
33.3039
2.8863
17.83
32.9158
2.9225
13.1712
32.4047
Mm
8
8
30
900
265
270
190
95
8
60
8
190
30
10
55
270
8
55
401
270
95
8
255
60
445
95
150
30
10
30
8
30
8
10
30
30
8
30
10
8
30
8
190
445
8
180
150
8
205
445
Max
1440
1440
1440
1200
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
1440
5
575
540
620
900
565
795
686
585
540
760
570
600
600
604
555
575
575
585
645
565
675
515
600
735
575
660
630
565
570
528
540
570
565
585
575
567
615
590
580
555
589
576
555
630
575
660
560
575
585
565
25
795
750
840
950
799
1065
845
811.5
750
1030
795
815
810
805
810
840
795
810
835
810
870
715
820
1015
810
855
870
803
775
745
750
795
790
800
800
770
895
825
780
785
805
795
825
840
795
925
840
795
867.5
845
50 75
985 1235
900 1160
1050 1280
1070 1170
955 1230
1260 1410
975 1165
950 1155
900 1165
1210 1375
980 1235
1000 1245
930 1180
975 1198
1004.5 1250
975 1255
980 1235
1000 1230
1172.5 1355
950 1200
1030 1255
835 1045.5
970 1170
1190 1350
940 1255
1020 1254
1130 1345
995 1245
930 1205
885 1165
900 1155
980 1245
989 1250
970 1228
1000 1230
911 1190
1105 1290
1015 1285
955 1185
960 1201
997 1260
980 1230
1025 1260
960 1315
975 1230
1185 1380
975 1305
975 1230
1110 1292.5
975 1320
90 95
1395 1440
1350 1430
1420 1440
1200 1200
1440 1440
1440 1440
1334 1412.5
1310 1405
1350 1428
1440 1440
1395 1440
1410 1440
1355 1420
1380 1440
1410 1440
1440 1440
1395 1440
1405 1440
1440 1440
1375 1440
1413 1440
1290 1385
1320 1380
1440 1440
1440 1440
1410 1440
1440 1440
1400 1440
1371 1436
1335 1427.5
1350 1410
1405 1440
1390 1440
1400 1440
1390 1440
1380 1440
1420 1440
1432 1440
1370 1435
1365 1440
1405 1440
1393 1440
1430 1440
1410 1440
1391 1440
1440 1440
1425 1440
1395 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
98 99
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1200 1200
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
1440 1440
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes. Percentiles
are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-147
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-132
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors (outside the residence)
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
3124
1533
1588
3
40
201
353
219
1809
502
2622
255
34
53
125
35
2857
222
15
30
774
1110
240
978
22
825
306
Education High School Graduate 837
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
527
355
274
635
639
1120
730
1933
1191
548
1034
1098
444
2869
236
19
3023
76
25
2968
139
17
Mean
154.03
174.908
133.524
340
163.95
195.652
187.564
135.26
144.244
156.448
156.787
141.557
115.765
167
117.28
187.143
153.812
146.405
191.533
212.5
175.762
141.308
134.663
156.052
152.727
174.105
171.941
153.633
143.362
126.868
130.504
147.967
156.028
158.577
150.579
141.157
174.924
113.96
171.915
168.309
126.525
154.516
145.835
182.421
153.218
172.855
195
154.884
129.353
206.765
Stdev Stderr
158.302
173.671
138.801
140
179.615
163.732
158.575
137.031
155.13
168.259
160.173
153.169
135.554
149.049
128.886
163.771
158.38
154.069
178.278
165.335
156.127
159.947
140.78
159.151
209.828
156.184
188.396
154.781
157.106
142.575
150.996
143.678
169.151
165.201
149.63
148.958
170.399
138.121
159.391
168.2
140.747
159.172
145.523
181.024
156.257
222.319
170.434
158.787
142.494
179.765
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know"
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
2.8322
4.4356
3.4831
80.829
28.3996
11.5488
8.4401
9.2597
3.6473
7.5098
3.1281
9.5918
23.2474
20.4735
11.5279
27.6824
2.9631
10.3405
46.0312
30.186
5.6119
4.8008
9.0873
5.0891
44.7355
5.4376
10.7699
5.35
6.8436
7.5671
9.122
5.7017
6.6915
4.9363
5.5381
3.388
4.9375
5.9002
4.9568
5.076
6.6796
2.9717
9.4727
41.5298
2.842
25.5017
34.0869
2.9146
12.0862
43.5994
Min Max
1 1290
1 1290
1 1065
240 500
2 720
3 715
4 1250
1 720
1 1080
1 1290
1 1290
1 1250
1 480
3 750
1 720
5 600
1 1290
1 750
15 585
5 600
1 1250
1 1080
1 1080
1 1290
5 660
1 1250
1 1290
1 840
1 1080
1 750
1 1065
1 750
1 1290
1 1080
1 855
1 1250
1 1290
1 1080
1 990
1 1290
1 960
1 1290
1 885
1 600
1 1290
2 1080
5 600
1 1290
1 855
5 600
5 25
5 40
10 60
5 30
240 240
3.5 40
30 75
20 80
5 35
5 30
5 36
5 45
5 30
5 20
5 60
5 30
5 60
5 40
5 30
15 40
5 60
15 60
5 30
5 30
5 40
5 15
15 60
7 45
5 35
5 30
5 30
5 30
5 35
5 45
5 40
5 36
5 31
10 50
5 25
10 60
5 50
5 30
5 40
5 45
1 60
5 40
5 30
5 60
5 40
5 30
5 60
50
105
120
90
280
107.5
135
150
100
90
110
105
95
60
130
70
170
105
112.5
140
180
125
85
90
115
60
125
120
105
90
80
75
105
102
110
105
90
120
60
120
120
75
105
105
120
105
68.5
150
105
75
170
75
210
240
190
500
212.5
270
265
190
199
210
215
195
150
238
150
240
210
200
380
345
245
195
182.5
220
125
240
240
215
195
170
180
215
210
210
213
190
260
150
240
235
162.5
210
190
300
210
252.5
300
210
175
300
90
362
420
325
500
430
430
365
300
360
375
375
330
360
320
270
450
362
345
420
457.5
380
358.5
332.5
375
555
380
405
380
360
300
325
345
360
390
360
345
400
280
390
400
313
365
360
480
360
465
465
367
327
480
95
480
540
415
500
600
535
479
452
470
485
485
420
450
475
355
510
480
480
585
510
480
490
422.5
480
600
480
510
480
465
415
465
450
500
495
465
452
500
380
495
510
420
480
450
600
479
660
480
480
415
600
98 99
610 715
680 745
525 610
500 500
720 720
625 699
600 720
545 610
600 715
645 735
625 720
535 645
480 480
553 750
590 610
600 600
610 720
640 690
585 585
600 600
610 705
660 745
485 525
610 701
660 660
610 699
765 855
598 701
615 720
615 690
570 660
575 610
655 750
640 745
575 660
598 698
660 745
540 690
645 730
630 715
575 655
615 720
575 610
600 600
610 707
1065 1080
600 600
615 715
553 735
600 600
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Page
15-148
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-133. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling Inside a Vehicle
Perc entiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
7743
3603
4138
o
144
335
571
500
5286
907
6288
766
133
144
319
93
7050
578
34
81
1388
3732
720
1849
54
1550
561
Education High School Graduate 2166
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
1556
1108
802
1662
1759
2704
1618
5289
2454
2037
2032
2090
1584
7152
544
47
7516
172
55
7349
342
52
Mean
97.278
103.696
91.721
30
117.035
68.116
71.033
81.53
104.011
90.87
97.248
98.723
83.414
96.181
101.734
93.591
97.149
100.043
73
98.914
73.609
105.816
98.763
96.561
120.296
76.39
100.822
101.605
103.215
104.532
101.938
98.585
101.229
96.051
93.689
94.437
103.399
94.31
99.612
97.792
97.419
97.262
97.241
100
97.288
93.07
108.945
97.559
90.971
98.942
Stdev
104.938
119.736
89.756
14.142
129.103
75.531
77.62
79.8
111.1
93.881
107.173
91.337
74.929
93.965
110.376
90.073
104.847
109.048
68.279
95.273
77.782
116.18
94.999
99.534
108.615
78.923
120.246
107.594
110.128
109.485
108.688
106.64
114.641
97.72
103.717
101.435
111.892
101.375
110.464
103.76
103.714
104.554
110.792
95.192
105.235
93.142
99.695
106.055
79.287
93.767
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
Stderr
1.1926
1.9948
1.3953
10
10.7586
4.1267
3.2483
3.5687
1.5281
3.1173
1.3515
3.3001
6.4972
7.8304
6.1799
9.3401
1.2487
4.5358
11.7098
10.5859
2.0878
1.9018
3.5404
2.3147
14.7807
2.0047
5.0768
2.3118
2.7919
3.2891
3.8379
2.6158
2.7334
1.8792
2.5785
1.3948
2.2587
2.2461
2.4505
2.2696
2.6059
1.2363
4.7502
13.8852
1.2139
7.102
13.4429
1.2371
4.2873
13.0031
Mm
1
1
1
20
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
9
5
3
-)
10
1
2
5
10
1
4
-)
1
10
1
5
1
2
4
4
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
10
1
8
10
1
2
5
Max
1440
1440
995
40
810
955
900
790
1440
900
1440
810
540
690
825
480
1440
825
325
480
955
1440
960
995
480
955
1440
1210
1280
1215
1357
1215
1440
955
1280
1215
1440
1080
1440
1357
1280
1440
955
480
1440
615
480
1440
505
480
5 25
12 40
10 40
12 40
20 20
20 40
10 30
10 25
10 30
15 43
10 35
10 40
15 45
20 35
10 40
20 41
15 30
10 40
15 40
6 25
15 30
10 30
16 45
10 45
10 37
20 35
10 30
15 40
12 40
15 40
15 45
20 45
15 40
10 40
13 40
10 35
10 40
13 40
10 35
12 40
10 40
14 40
10 40
17 40
10 30
11 40
15 30
20 35
10 40
15 40
10 30
50 75
70 120
70 120
70 115
30 40
80 142.5
47 85
51 90
60 100
75 120
60 120
70 120
75 120
70 105
69.5 127.5
70 120
65 120
70 120
70 120
60 97
65 130
55 90
75 124
75 120
65 120
88 190
60 95
70 120
70 120
75 120
75 125
75.5 120
70 120
70 120
70 120
65 115
66 115
75 125
65 116
70 120
70 120
70 120
70 120
65 116.5
75 120
70 120
65 120
75 150
70 120
70 115
73.5 145
90
190
205
180
40
210
150
140
165.5
200
190
190
195
150
180
190
205
190
190
175
220
150
198
195
200
290
155
180
210
195
200
195
190
205
190
180
180
205
190
200
190
180
190
180
220
190
185
235
190
195
195
95
270
295
240
40
435
200
171
232.5
285
258
270
265
210
250
335
255
270
285
200
255
195
290
260
275
330
201
265
286
285
280
270
275
290
250
260
260
280
270
275
260
265
270
255
239
270
280
360
270
240
239
98 99
425 570
478 655
385 465
40 40
593 660
245 270
275 360
345 405
450 620
400 460
425 595
390 485
330 360
345 540
465 620
420 480
420 566
480 630
325 325
420 480
275 382
475 660
380 470
420 526
390 480
302.5 385
460 620
445 570
460 630
450 675
365 480
425 570
435 595
420 558
420 540
435 575
420 540
425 544
440 546
415 558
420 620
425 570
460 705
480 480
425 570
420 540
390 480
425 580
325 460
390 480
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
or equal to a given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-149
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-134. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors Near a Vehicle
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
2825
1388
1436
1
51
102
230
313
1787
342
2275
278
51
50
136
35
2552
230
13
30
632
1169
254
751
19
702
222
Education High School Graduate 702
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
537
367
295
749
586
836
654
2018
807
703
791
819
512
2596
205
24
2726
76
23
2684
115
26
Mean
79.828
111.21
49.541
20
64.373
45.99
55.909
40.879
96.365
57.55
81.787
78.374
42.431
73.06
55.066
124.4
79.761
68.091
185.31
129.83
46.989
114.86
67.118
56.792
96.947
47.098
105.76
113.18
87.927
70.905
55.186
75.734
77.445
86.447
78.19
84.241
68.793
70.91
80.542
84.178
84.01
80.366
75.088
62.083
79.57
92.434
68.696
79.404
93.843
61.615
Stdev
143.82
184.96
75.947
*
90.949
59.489
86.475
55.718
169.13
85.255
148.41
130.69
61.693
113.02
100.19
186.88
142.98
125.96
321.29
198.28
68.827
193.04
114.34
84.927
185.76
70.151
193.65
185.75
157.3
117.85
86.872
130.56
141.21
160.31
138.28
155.61
108.2
141.83
135.48
150.3
148.27
143.21
157.15
78.548
144.32
139.38
91.209
142.84
175.36
72.201
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
or equal to a
Stderr
2.7059
4.9645
2.0042
*
12.7354
5.8903
5.702
3.1494
4.0009
4.61
3.1116
7.838
8.6387
15.9836
8.591
31.5887
2.8303
8.3058
89.1098
36.2
2.7378
5.646
7.174
3.099
42.616
2.6477
12.9967
7.0107
6.7878
6.1515
5.0579
4.7705
5.8332
5.5443
5.4072
3.4639
3.8088
5.3492
4.817
5.2519
6.5525
2.8107
10.9756
16.0335
2.7642
15.9879
19.0183
2.7572
16.3523
14.1598
Min Max
1 1440
1 1440
1 790
20 20
1 510
1 420
1 540
1 435
1 1440
1 560
1 1440
1 645
1 405
1 535
1 600
4 810
1 1440
1 765
2 985
10 810
1 540
1 1440
1 795
1 690
5 790
1 540
1 1440
1 1410
1 985
1 660
1 710
1 985
1 1440
1 1410
1 985
1 1440
1 705
1 1440
1 810
1 985
1 930
1 1410
1 1440
5 360
1 1440
1 570
5 360
1 1440
1 985
5 360
5
9
3
2
20
4
2
2
3
2
4
2
2
2
2
2
10
2
2
2
10
2
2
2
2
5
2
4
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
2
3
10
2
2
7
25
10
11
10
20
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
20
10
10
10
20
10
10
10
10
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
17.5
10
10
20
10
10
27
50 75
30 65
30.5 90
25 60
20 20
40 65
30 60
20 60
21 45
30 75
30 60
30 68
30 70
28 60
40 60
25 54.5
40 120
30 65
30 60
25 100
40 98
23 55
30 90
30 63
30 60
30 90
24 55
30 90
35 90
30 70
30 68
30 60
30 70
30 60
30 61.5
30 65
30 65
30 65
26 60
30 74
30 70
30 70
30 65
30 65
35 67.5
30 65
35 91
40 75
30 65
30 90
40 75
90
200
430
120
20
125
105
170
100
325
120
210
190
85
167.5
110
360
200
147.5
705
435
120
485
165
130
360
120
365
455
240
170
120
179
210
240
180
215
180
160
215
210
225
205
160
98
196
354
98
197
225
110
95
465
570
180
20
290
160
215
160
539
205
480
435
120
420
170
565
457
410
985
585
180
570
280
210
790
180
540
555
540
325
200
375
390
525
435
515
310
365
435
510
510
475
309
225
465
465
330
465
465
180
98 99
600 675
675 735
290 420
20 20
360 510
192 245
360 465
220 260
645 720
450 510
600 695
580 600
150 405
492.5 535
525 600
810 810
600 665
565 615
985 985
810 810
265 360
690 740
510 600
360 465
790 790
265 360
720 735
665 740
635 705
565 600
362 560
570 665
560 645
643 710
570 615
625 705
465 540
570 643
570 645
615 705
600 690
600 675
580 690
360 360
600 687
535 570
360 360
600 665
735 985
360 360
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
given number of minutes.
Page
15-150
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-135. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors Other Than
Near a Residence or Vehicle Such as Parks, Golf Courses, or Farms
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N Mean
1383 200.153
789 223.482
593 168.742
1 420
19 183.368
54 164.648
159 171.34
175 156.903
858 219.425
118 181.932
1186 202.615
81 185.84
20 169.45
30 187.5
57 158.298
9 380
1267 202.593
103 163.942
4 67.5
9 330
383 163.846
555 228.526
126 202.556
309 191.469
10 254
429 163.949
83 264.482
Education High School Graduate 313 228.613
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
250 217.984
185 207.27
123 163.642
279 196.824
309 196.702
468 198.432
327 208.716
851 183.982
532 226.019
241 175.676
412 185.806
508 224.996
222 196.5
1283 196.564
93 244.344
7 270.714
1352 199.038
25 238.64
6 290.833
1326 199.761
51 206.431
6 233.333
Stdev
202.665
208.727
189.993
*
160.349
177.34
177.947
174.411
215.094
180.158
203.396
195.119
189.122
161.849
203.27
250.637
203.353
185.155
59.231
259.459
176.805
219.372
211.673
189.268
240.899
175.476
255.463
228.235
202.991
190.178
173.04
208.372
211.59
195.071
200.465
197.931
207.598
192.682
174.522
220.748
213.598
196.894
263.314
274.415
202.274
205.994
275.979
200.843
239.756
294.035
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
5.45
7.431
7.802
*
36.787
24.133
14.112
13.184
7.343
16.585
5.906
21.68
42.289
29.549
26.924
83.546
5.713
18.244
29.616
86.486
9.034
9.312
18.857
10.767
76.179
8.472
28.041
12.901
12.838
13.982
15.603
12.475
12.037
9.017
11.086
6.785
9
12.412
8.598
9.794
14.336
5.497
27.304
103.719
5.501
41.199
112.668
5.516
33.573
120.039
Mm
1
1
1
420
10
1
5
5
1
5
1
1
10
10
1
30
1
1
10
30
1
1
3
1
30
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
5
30
1
1
30
1
5
15
Max
1440
1440
1440
420
540
980
1210
1065
1440
900
1440
765
665
560
1305
810
1440
1305
145
810
1210
1305
1440
1440
810
1210
1305
1440
1440
930
900
1305
1440
933
1440
1440
1440
1065
980
1440
1130
1440
1440
810
1440
730
810
1440
1100
810
5 25
10 60
20 60
10 40
420 420
10 60
10 60
15 55
10 45
10 60
20 55
14 60
5 40
10 32.5
10 60
5 30
30 195
10 60
10 30
10 22.5
30 140
10 51
14 60
10 60
10 50
30 105
10 55
30 60
10 60
10 60
20 60
10 45
10 60
10 50
15 60
15 60
10 45
20 68.5
10 35
15 60
15 60
10 35
10 60
15 60
30 60
10 60
5 60
30 140
10 60
10 50
15 30
50
130
150
105
420
140
120
115
100
150
112.5
134.5
108
95
120
110
435
130
115
57.5
210
110
150
125
125
167.5
115
180
160
152.5
128
90
130
120
120
150
119
155
93
130
150
120
125
150
195
130
210
202.5
130
110
167.5
75
276
315
238
420
220
175
221
210
310
280
280
240
230
270
228
540
280
228
112.5
510
215
335
280
275
280
210
480
310
330
285
240
265
270
285
285
240
320
253
240
305
280
270
350
450
270
340
360
275
305
210
90
510
540
420
420
510
370
405
385
540
480
510
540
477.5
437.5
370
810
510
400
145
810
385
545
510
480
675
385
555
570
510
505
385
480
510
510
525
490
525
450
473
540
540
495
530
810
510
465
810
500
540
810
95
600
635
540
420
540
560
574
570
635
570
615
585
585
535
435
810
615
511
145
810
560
645
580
565
810
560
600
690
555
600
480
590
635
600
580
585
630
585
555
630
600
600
810
810
600
690
810
600
700
810
98 99
748 915
765 900
700 930
420 420
540 540
630 980
660 725
735 915
780 933
600 735
750 930
690 765
665 665
560 560
555 1305
810 810
748 915
555 555
145 145
810 810
665 915
825 955
690 700
690 735
810 810
665 840
1100 1305
855 990
715 765
690 795
735 780
900 1130
740 900
748 825
725 855
735 900
810 915
750 810
665 740
840 990
780 900
730 855
1100 1440
810 810
740 915
730 730
810 810
735 900
930 1100
810 810
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-151
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-136. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in an Office or Factory
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
1975
1012
963
49
12
14
19
1749
132
1612
191
42
28
74
28
1805
138
7
25
43
1535
164
213
20
80
104
631
462
415
283
465
439
666
405
1759
216
531
470
550
424
1845
114
16
1931
26
18
1873
86
16
Mean
393.972
410.816
376.271
438.918
31.583
100.929
145.421
418.971
145.848
387.646
413.911
428.024
480.893
394.459
482.893
393.453
393.645
262.571
470.04
121.279
455.571
293.03
77.643
449.15
225.1
329.548
396.876
393.108
437.231
396.883
399.075
389.31
408.637
369.052
406.795
289.551
390.716
385.198
393.524
408.358
394.976
371.693
437
395.718
265.462
392.333
395.611
356.43
403.875
Stdev
230.763
233.454
226.676
232.58
25.639
155.126
181.118
218.445
193.973
231.968
218
216.759
200.859
237.847
246.079
229.593
238.608
242.131
258.753
177.984
200.299
196.95
122.957
184.813
248.547
264.402
228.074
228.826
205.198
232.151
226.243
229.075
228.181
240.375
225.173
249.076
231.677
240.678
224.454
226.578
230.383
231.336
272.067
229.668
246.766
282.64
229.961
236.119
289.456
Stderr Min
5.1926 1
7.3386 1
7.3045 1
33.2257 10
7.4013 5
41.4593 2
41.5512 1
5.2233 1
16.8832 1
5.7776 1
15.7739 1
33.4466 10
37.9588 40
27.6492 1
46.5046 30
5.404 1
20.3116 1
91.5168 1
51.7505 17
27.1423 1
5.1124 1
15.3792 1
8.4249 1
41.3256 30
27.7884 1
25.9267 2
9.0795 1
10.6459 1
10.0728 1
13.7999 2
10.4918 1
10.9331 1
8.8418 1
11.9443 1
5.3689 1
16.9475 1
10.0539 1
11.1016 1
9.5708 1
11.0036 1
5.3635 1
21.6666 3
68.0168 5
5.2265 1
48.3947 5
66.619 5
5.3135 1
25.4614 5
72.3641 5
Max 5
1440 9
1440 10
855 5
900 20
90 5
580 2
625 1
1440 10
705 3
1440 6
1037 10
780 30
795 75
840 5
997 30
1440 10
840 5
610 1
860 30
685 2
1440 15
750 10
705 3
675 60
860 3
930 5
997 10
1440 5
900 10
860 5
930 10
997 8
1440 10
900 5
997 10
1440 3
997 10
1440 5
1037 9
840 10
1440 8
840 10
860 5
1440 10
650 9
860 5
1440 8
800 10
860 5
25
180
225
120
299
12.5
10
10
273
10
150
268
285
347.5
230
373
180
180
12
311
10
400
95
10
334
15
50.5
210
210
325
175
215
180
225
95
237
30
180
120
200
238.5
185
120
232.5
195
15
30
195
75
30
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know". Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample s
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error. Min = minimum number of minutes. Max
50
485
495
480
500
25
32.5
50
500
40
480
485
491.5
540
492.5
532.5
483
497.5
245
525
40
510
342.5
30
522.5
105
388.5
492
480
510
480
485
480
497.5
470
495
282.5
480
480
482.5
500
490
462.5
520
490
175
490
490
427.5
490
75
550
565
540
555
44.5
178
240
555
205
550
540
553
582.5
560
607.5
550
560
540
615
178
570
480
90
550
470
552.5
550
540
570
565
550
550
555
550
555
495
550
553
540
566.5
550
540
587.5
550
490
550
550
540
582.5
90
630
645
600
675
60
195
510
630
495
628
635
660
715
645
818
630
644
610
810
307
644
525
215
645
607.5
640
615
615
640
640
625
630
630
630
630
600
625
630
613.5
640
630
630
780
630
630
780
630
620
780
95
675
710
645
780
90
580
625
680
540
675
720
745
780
720
860
675
675
610
818
580
700
555
305
675
675
705
675
660
690
675
675
670
675
675
675
670
675
695
675
675
675
675
860
675
645
860
675
660
860
98 99
765 818
780 855
710 750
900 900
90 90
580 580
625 625
765 818
640 675
750 800
803 900
780 780
795 795
765 840
997 997
755 810
765 795
610 610
860 860
685 685
775 837
585 615
570 640
675 675
780 860
765 855
760 800
770 820
750 800
780 818
765 840
750 800
760 840
760 800
755 810
800 900
755 835
775 837
753 810
750 770
760 810
800 837
860 860
760 811
650 650
860 860
760 818
720 800
860 860
ze. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
= maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-152
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-137. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Mai
s, Grocery Stores, or Other Stores
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
2697
1020
1677
50
110
129
140
1871
397
2234
237
37
52
110
27
2476
188
12
21
372
1170
285
854
16
420
206
792
583
411
285
622
601
871
603
1721
976
683
679
759
576
2480
208
9
2607
74
16
2553
130
14
Mean
114.975
120.159
111.822
139.44
90.036
77.674
88.714
125.927
88.572
111.563
123
158.892
150.231
133.145
124.741
114.387
126.074
49.417
122.429
86.946
136.797
134.123
91.198
98.938
88.262
128.937
126.295
129.849
117.876
78.182
110.201
108.243
127.922
107.909
117.451
110.61
111.71
115.844
113.138
120.243
116.246
101.111
85.111
115.981
90.838
62.688
115.736
104.754
71.143
Stdev
140.961
157.143
130.088
137.586
77.887
68.035
101.361
156.815
88.477
139.443
152.318
151.725
146.737
138.309
131.136
141.819
133.15
37.689
138.488
86.322
176.691
147.732
87.218
110.033
91.922
155.722
158.884
149.53
144.142
95.665
134.942
133.098
155.825
130.742
148.879
125.747
134
142.21
147.47
138.948
142.351
124.977
79.634
142.101
103.912
68.084
141.704
131.336
66.864
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
2.7143
4.9203
3.1766
19.4576
7.4263
5.9901
8.5666
3.6253
4.4405
2.9502
9.8941
24.9434
20.3488
13.1872
25.2372
2.8501
9.711
10.8798
30.2206
4.4756
5.1656
8.7509
2.9846
27.5083
4.4853
10.8497
5.6457
6.1929
7.11
5.6667
5.4107
5.4292
5.2799
5.3242
3.5887
4.0251
5.1274
5.4575
5.3528
5.7895
2.8585
8.6656
26.5447
2.7831
12.0795
17.021
2.8045
11.5189
17.8701
Min
1
1
1
15
5
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
5
1
10
1
1
2
10
1
1
2
1
10
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
33
1
2
2
1
5
20
Max
1080
840
1080
660
420
320
530
1080
655
1080
800
600
660
720
515
1080
720
122
515
660
1080
540
585
357
660
1080
960
800
720
630
755
840
1080
840
1080
840
840
720
1080
840
1080
600
290
1080
630
290
1080
613
290
5 25
10 30
5 30
10 30
20 45
10 40
5 30
5 20
10 30
10 30
10 30
10 25
14 50
50 75
60 135
60 130
60 135
92.5 180
65 105
60 110
45 123.5
60 150
60 120
60 130
60 135
105 220
14 65 102.5 180
10 35
10 30
10 30
10 30
2 17.5
20 33
5 30
10 30
6 30
10 30
10 31.5
5 29
10 30
5 30
10 30
10 30
10 25
5 30
10 30
10 30
10 30
10 30
5 30
10 30
10 30
5 30
10 30
10 30
5 30
33 55
10 30
15 37
2 30
10 30
10 25
20 35
90 195
60 207
60 131.5
90 172.5
47.5 69.5
60 180
60 120
60 150
65 186
60 120
52.5 115
60 120
75 150
60 150
70 165
60 135
50 90
60 130
60 130
60 155
60 120
60 135
65 135
60 135
60 130
60 125
60 160
60 135
60 120
58 60
60 135
64 105
55 60
60 135
60 135
56.5 70
90
285
375
255
338.5
210
180
222.5
360
180
265
370
410
280
310
300
285
270
105
290
206
480
400
195
290
210
330
365
345
290
160
280
250
320
255
320
255
255
300
300
295
287.5
245
290
290
150
110
285
192.5
110
95
482
530
400
420
250
225
317.5
525
255
495
480
480
588
450
380
495
450
122
380
255
562
480
255
357
262.5
500
524
510
515
250
465
440
520
430
510
380
420
500
510
480
495
420
290
495
190
290
481
505
290
98 99
570 640
609 658
550 600
565 660
359 360
255 280
384 413
600 658
400 470
570 640
600 613
600 600
600 660
535 540
515 515
570 640
540 610
122 122
515 515
360 384
640 690
520 540
360 420
357 357
384 420
570 605
600 660
563 651
600 640
450 555
563 600
560 645
600 660
550 600
586 650
560 608
568 660
588 645
570 610
550 640
575 640
545 550
290 290
570 640
510 630
290 290
570 640
575 609
290 290
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-153
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-138. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Schools
Churches, Hospitals
and Public Buildings
Percentile
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
2932 274.332
1234 285.147
1698 266.472
50 268.96
98 233
391 351.202
355 366.338
1653 267.707
385 151.091
2310 268.239
332 303.473
61 295
57 314.684
141 283.936
31 257.774
2654 271.293
240 306.388
13 279.385
25 286.6
821 343.484
1029 300.3
293 251.324
775 176.406
14 212.857
917 340.328
166 172.602
617 207.29
520 247.492
351 261.581
361 319.114
645 272.747
686 275.394
1036 278.387
565 267.418
2091 309.844
841 186.039
847 296.587
805 276.761
667 254.115
613 262.39
2689 273.193
229 287.974
14 270
2836 277.127
78 176.423
18 258.278
2794 276.999
121 212.562
17 275.765
Stdev
205.942
206.713
205.082
221.042
235.787
149.578
161.247
221.203
128.639
204.323
207.071
199.398
203.549
229.828
192.517
203.551
230.835
230.736
175.367
171.113
239.785
199.326
148.414
147.736
172.613
138.026
199.027
213.609
214.287
236.166
211.594
207.157
201.004
207.214
212.577
156.873
201.244
204.618
209.724
207.33
207.301
191.578
171.24
206.396
172.803
165 599
207.348
166.349
163.401
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know"
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error
Stderr
3.8033
5.8845
4.9769
31.2601
23.8181
7.5645
8.5581
5.4407
6.556
4.2512
11.3645
25.5302
26.9607
19.355
34.5771
3.9511
14.9003
63.9946
35.0734
5.9719
7.4751
11.6447
5.3312
39.484
5.7002
10.7129
8.0125
9.3674
11.4378
12.4298
8.3315
7.9093
6.2449
8.7176
4.6488
5.4094
6.9148
7.2118
8.1205
8.374
3.9977
12.6598
45.7658
3.8757
19.5661
39 0321
3.9227
15.1226
39.6306
Min Max
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
5 1030
1 1440
5 665
1 935
1 1440
5 710
1 1440
1 1440
5 900
10 967
2 1440
5 681
1 1440
1 1440
35 760
5 625
1 1440
1 1440
1 1030
1 855
5 440
1 1440
1 735
1 1440
1 1000
1 1005
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1015
1 1005
1 1440
1 855
5 565
1 1440
5 890
3 565
1 1440
10 662
5 565
5
20
30
20
30
5
70
60
15
21
20
35
30
30
11
5
20
20
35
55
55
15
20
15
5
45
27
15
15
15
30
25
30
20
15
15
40
30
30
20
14
20
25
5
20
28
20
30
5
25
95
110
90
100
60
245
260
87
60
90
135
135
135
100
120
94
110
65
145
190
90
85
60
120
190
70
60
85
85
110
90
88
110
100
115
85
120
110
80
75
94
120
145
100
60
145
95
90
145
50
221
255
200
192.5
150
389
415
190
115
210
285
240
360
237
240
215
287.5
235
255
393
215
200
121
190
390
123.5
135
165
180
290
215
239
230
200
340
140
285
220
180
210
217
275
280
230
120
270
228
145
305
75
430
425
430
400
390
440
446
450
195
429
440
425
455
430
430
425
444.5
420
440
441
510
387
250
305
440
235
295
420
450
510
420
425
440
420
460
230
444
420
420
425
430
435
430
430
195
378
430
375
415
90
540
540
540
590
545
535
502
570
340
540
540
535
525
525
495
540
567.5
562
495
520
610
525
400
430
525
375
510
552.5
560
615
545
540
535
555
565
385
545
535
550
540
540
533
445
540
480
480
540
445
440
95
615
620
610
625
595
562
605
655
435
612
630
565
598
630
625
612
695
760
565
570
685
610
475
440
580
465
585
640
625
683
630
615
600
620
632
525
615
600
630
615
615
605
565
615
575
565
615
490
565
98 99
725 805
745 840
713 800
871.5 1030
900 1440
625 645
710 805
760 855
525 615
705 765
775 1000
840 900
820 967
840 940
681 681
712 800
840 940
760 760
625 625
645 713
775 900
800 880
570 641
440 440
645 713
525 640
690 785
760 855
750 800
765 900
735 855
745 850
690 778
712 820
750 855
640 735
710 770
725 840
738 890
712 778
725 820
645 800
565 565
725 805
625 890
565 565
726 840
605 630
565 565
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-154
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-139. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Bars/Nightclubs, Bowling Alleys, and Restaurants
Percentiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N
2296
1127
1169
32
61
88
127
1718
270
1945
167
42
36
83
23
2131
141
7
17
273
1215
236
559
13
309
155
665
498
395
274
462
561
748
525
1407
889
584
615
622
475
2124
163
9
2229
54
13
2171
114
11
Mean
111.735
109.497
113.892
138.094
62.705
58.602
76.614
121.371
92.207
108.84
121.88
103.976
159.333
130.205
155.913
110.53
127.319
95
140.353
65.85
125.765
144.729
88.642
158.077
76.006
154.155
119.502
121.321
101.096
107.091
115.771
113.688
105.619
114.81
112.164
111.055
116.783
108.416
110.543
111.385
111.768
107.301
184.222
112.481
71.463
151
111.178
109.807
241.636
Stdev
131.368
129.654
133.019
151.816
47.701
39.746
82.038
142.223
90.483
127.174
147.847
104.151
196.721
161.594
135.696
129.679
153.659
115.109
147.503
61.078
151.364
157.886
77.231
127.157
81.68
175.537
145.414
137.839
109.709
117.52
127.168
132.476
133.036
131.486
138.508
119.269
135.982
124.727
132.965
132.104
129.918
145.813
186.348
132.361
52.513
162.726
129.886
134.998
274.085
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a
Source: Tsans and Klepeis. 1996.
Stderr
2.7416
3.8621
3.8905
26.8376
6.1075
4.2369
7.2797
3.4313
5.5066
2.8836
11.4408
16.0709
32.7868
17.7373
28.2945
2.8092
12.9404
43.507
35.7748
3.6966
4.3424
10.2775
3.2665
35.267
4.6466
14.0995
5.6389
6.1767
5.5201
7.0997
5.9164
5.5932
4.8643
5.7385
3.6926
4.0001
5.627
5.0295
5.3314
6.0614
2.819
11.4209
62.1159
2.8035
7.1461
45.132
2.7876
12.6437
82.6397
Min Max
1 925
1 900
2 925
15 610
4 330
5 180
2 455
1 925
3 750
1 925
5 805
5 497
5 765
5 813
20 480
1 925
1 813
5 315
30 480
2 455
1 925
1 813
3 610
30 425
1 548
5 925
3 910
2 775
1 765
3 765
2 765
1 813
2 910
1 925
1 925
2 870
3 875
2 925
1 910
1 900
1 910
4 925
30 480
1 925
3 340
30 480
1 910
5 925
10 875
5 25
10 40
10 35
10 45
30 47.5
10 35
10 30
10 30
10 40
20 45
10 40
10 30
30 40
10 52.5
15 40
30 60
10 40
15 40
5 10
30 40
10 30
10 40
10 47.5
15 45
30 70
10 30
15 40
10 45
10 40
15 40
15 40
15 45
10 40
13 35
10 37
10 35
10 45
15 40
15 41
10 35
10 35
10 40
10 30
30 60
10 40
15 45
30 35
10 40
15 43
10 30
50
60
60
60
65
55
45
50
65
62.5
60
60
62.5
90
65
88
60
70
40
70
50
63
80
60
105
55
90
60
75
60
65
70
65
60
70
60
70
68.5
65
60
60
60
57
88
60
60
88
60
65
88
75
120
120
120
150
85
85
90
135
100
120
153
120
137.5
143
270
120
120
165
210
85
135
180
115
240
90
209
120
135
120
120
120
120
110
130
120
120
120
120
120
125
120
118
300
120
90
120
120
120
480
90
255
240
270
315
115
120
220
285
177.5
240
300
200
495
360
330
245
360
315
410
120
300
385
180
330
165
388
290
270
225
220
270
250
240
245
270
235
265
240
260
265
255
265
480
260
120
480
255
235
480
95
405
377
424
495
120
137
270
462
255
388
490
240
750
485
410
395
440
315
480
182
500
520
240
425
255
545
485
440
330
330
380
410
390
417
430
351
440
395
390
355
390
485
480
410
120
480
400
375
875
98 99
568 660
560 660
570 645
610 610
130 330
170 180
325 360
600 680
358 520
560 645
555 735
497 497
765 765
700 813
480 480
560 650
700 765
315 315
480 480
273 330
640 735
615 745
315 388
425 425
330 455
700 870
630 680
610 675
507 570
560 675
560 650
570 675
555 650
590 640
595 675
535 630
595 735
542 585
605 660
550 770
568 660
560 670
480 480
570 660
232 340
480 480
560 660
530 620
875 875
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-155
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-140. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Outdoors
Such as Auto Repair Shops, Laundromats, Gyms, and at Work (non-specific)
Percentiles
Group Name Group Code
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
N Mean
1214 225.747
612 260.322
602 190.598
21 264.524
27 92.296
59 134.678
76 164.368
903 250.29
128 152.813
996 226.348
118 228.102
25 194.68
23 211.217
42 250.19
10 146.5
1133 224.325
68 230.088
5 483.2
8 229.375
162 140.031
652 276.345
132 240.909
259 145.347
9 194.444
186 148.097
88 301.966
324 249.086
251 266.996
217 202.014
148 191.764
275 218.171
254 250.689
401 223.691
284 213.68
900 224.954
314 228.019
347 241.715
321 220.343
294 224.418
252 212.194
1123 225.742
84 228.5
7 193.571
1178 225.259
28 227.75
8 290.625
1166 226.724
41 198.829
7 220.714
Stdev
231.111
239.586
216.774
273.733
74.852
186.691
159.542
243.45
159.777
228.881
256.391
196.484
236.332
229.16
246.555
231.063
215.421
240.867
310.592
158.915
250.945
227.902
173.086
278.752
168.067
251.244
243.136
256.435
217.284
198.819
216.166
241.492
239.929
222.324
232.145
228.476
239.749
220.658
244.957
214.928
229.228
259.329
201.406
231.28
218.573
269.171
232.003
213.198
197.261
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know".
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error.
Stderr
6.633
9.685
8.835
59.733
14.405
24.305
18.301
8.101
14.122
7.252
23.603
39.297
49.279
35.36
77.967
6.865
26.124
107.719
109.811
12.486
9.828
19.836
10.755
92.917
12.323
26.783
13.508
16.186
14.75
16.343
13.035
15.153
11.981
13.193
7.738
12.894
12.87
12.316
14.286
13.539
6.84
28.295
76.124
6.739
41.306
95.166
6.794
33.296
74.558
Min
1
1
1
15
10
5
1
1
2
1
2
5
5
5
15
1
5
55
30
1
2
5
1
15
1
5
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
15
1
5
15
1
5
15
Max
1440
1040
1440
940
270
910
660
1440
770
1440
1430
600
800
793
840
1440
793
623
840
910
1430
1440
1150
840
910
930
1150
1440
1005
870
990
1005
1440
960
1430
1440
1440
1005
1040
990
1440
979
510
1440
770
780
1440
780
510
5 25
10 56
10 60
10 45
30 75
15 25
5 30
5 45
10 60
12 45
10 58.5
5 45
25 58
10 25
15 60
15 55
10 55
15 61.5
55 560
30 42.5
10 30
10 60
15 67.5
5 40
15 40
5 30
15 60
10 53.5
10 60
5 55
10 60
10 60
10 55
10 47
10 60
10 58.5
8 52
10 60
10 54
5 45
15 55.5
10 55
10 59.5
15 60
10 55
12 62.5
15 67.5
10 58
10 45
15 60
50
120
160
105
100
65
80
130
135
95
120
120
90
115
165
67.5
120
127.5
568
67.5
103.5
162.5
170
90
75
109.5
265
126
155
110
105
120
150
120
120
120
120
155
115
115
120
125
100
80
120
135
217.5
120
95
155
75
370
460
260
420
160
145
208
450
202.5
370
358
300
405
420
105
360
398
610
372.5
170
508
360
160
150
177
487.5
435
480
295
262.5
360
460
360
305
367.5
376
390
390
360
327.5
370
351
450
360
425
480
370
330
450
90
568
605
535
560
180
325
450
600
420
580
525
525
515
600
495
565
545
623
840
325
619
510
432
840
330
670
595
600
570
535
544
600
560
585
565
580
585
550
595
540
565
660
510
570
560
780
570
550
510
95
670
695
600
840
250
720
550
690
510
665
720
530
680
675
840
670
660
623
840
505
700
620
540
840
520
780
690
710
645
590
660
695
635
675
672.5
665
660
630
760
660
660
793
510
670
600
780
670
565
510
98 99
800 910
815 930
720 855
940 940
270 270
855 910
600 660
815 945
600 610
780 910
990 1150
600 600
800 800
793 793
840 840
810 930
790 793
623 623
840 840
660 855
815 945
815 1005
704 770
840 840
720 855
815 930
815 979
800 990
760 855
700 793
765 855
815 940
815 979
793 850
815 942.5
720 815
897 960
730 815
855 979
710 793
780 897
910 979
510 510
810 930
770 770
780 780
810 930
780 780
510 510
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsan2 and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-156
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-141. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent with Smokers Present
Percen tiles
Category Population Group
All
Gender Male
Gender Female
Gender Refused
Age (years) *
Age (years) 1 -4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 1 8-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Race Refused
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Hispanic DK
Hispanic Refused
Employment *
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Employment Refused
Education *
Education < High School
N
4005
1967
2035
3
54
155
224
256
2976
340
3279
395
48
79
165
39
3666
288
18
33
624
2042
381
935
23
704
377
Education High School Graduate 1315
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day Of Week Weekday
Day Of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Asthma DK
Angina No
Angina Yes
Angina DK
Bronchitis/Emphysema No
Bronchitis/Emphysema Yes
Bronchitis/Emphysema DK
829
473
307
932
938
1409
726
2661
1344
1046
1034
1059
866
3687
298
20
3892
87
26
3749
236
20
Mean
381.494
411.359
352.771
283.333
386.259
366.561
318.071
245.77
403.067
342.694
389.219
359.977
262.063
420.671
292.624
393.538
384.913
336.191
369.833
403.364
301.723
405.894
378.013
383.833
341.957
308.635
497.719
425.682
388.807
325.871
282.518
369.46
384.067
404.028
349.883
374.746
394.854
374.159
384.762
385.134
381.999
378.806
416.862
350
380.923
404.31
390.577
378.662
431.157
326.25
Stdev
300.479
313
285.139
188.171
305.371
324.464
314.016
243.61
299.434
292.209
303.032
287.96
209.928
339.247
250.208
325.254
301.22
280.874
371.484
322.819
295.529
296.349
291.098
308.691
254.245
292.801
317.756
301.711
295.753
272.694
257.117
287.677
304.829
308.501
291.992
296.185
308.482
304.183
301.561
300.394
295.104
298.378
323.967
304.324
299.475
345.105
300.394
298.576
326.848
291.068
Note: A"*" Signifies missing data. "DK" = The respondent replied "don't know"
number of minutes for doers. Stdev = standard deviation. Stderr = standard error
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below
Source: Tsana and Klepeis, 1996.
or equal to a
Stderr
4.748
7.057
6.321
108.641
41.556
26.062
20.981
15.226
5.489
15.847
5.292
14.489
30.3
38.168
19.479
52.082
4.975
16.551
87.56
56.195
11.831
6.558
14.913
10.095
53.014
11.035
16.365
8.32
10.272
12.538
14.674
9.423
9.953
8.219
10.837
5.742
8.415
9.405
9.378
9.231
10.028
4.914
18.767
68.049
4.8
36.999
58.912
4.876
21.276
65.085
Min Max
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
105 480
5 1440
5 1440
1 1440
1 1260
2 1440
5 1440
1 1440
2 1440
5 800
10 1328
5 1095
25 1110
1 1440
1 1440
15 1440
25 1110
1 1440
2 1440
5 1440
3 1440
25 925
1 1440
2 1440
3 1440
5 1435
2 1140
3 1205
2 1440
2 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
1 1440
2 1440
2 1440
2 1440
1 1440
5 1440
25 995
1 1440
2 1380
25 995
1 1440
5 1380
10 995
5
30
30
29
105
25
0
5
0
0
0
0
-)
0
0
15
30
30
20
15
30
15
30
30
30
30
15
40
30
30
30
20
30
29
30
30
30
30
25
30
30
0
0
0
275
0
0
30
30
30
17.5
25 50
120 319
135 355
105 285
105 265
105 370
90 273
105 190
60 165
134.5 355
100 240
120 330
118 300
64 212.5
135 310
75 220
115 290
120 324
115 252
90 220
120 325
75 190
135 364.5
135 325
120 310
120 325
87.5 205
225 465
155 390
135 330
90 240
60 200
120 314
120 319.5
130 345
110 274
120 315
120 321.5
115 295
120 320
120 330
120 324
120 315
135 342.5
60 290
120 320
120 270
115 342.5
120 315
150 362.5
85 222.5
75
595
638
545
480
555
570
475
360
625
540
610
538
412.5
655
475
655
600
512
600
655
450
625
585
600
450
465
775
650
600
499
430
565
600
630
541
578
625
590
610
591
590
591
652
540
595
703
670
590
680
540
90
815
855
780
480
780
825
775
595
830
797.5
825
775
560
885
660
865
822
760
760
840
735
835
805
825
715
741
905
840
810
735
665
800
825
840
800
810
833
815
810
840
810
810
870
795
815
910
780
810
892
755
95
925
965
870
480
995
1010
1050
774
930
880
930
905
630
1140
800
1040
930
850
1440
1040
900
925
915
930
885
900
990
928
930
860
810
892
930
943
900
915
940
925
900
940
915
915
1015
902.5
920
1015
790
915
980
887.5
98 99
1060 1170
1105 1217
995 1110
480 480
995 1440
1140 1305
1210 1250
864 1020
1047 1150
1015 1205
1060 1190
1080 1160
800 800
1305 1328
845 945
1110 1110
1060 1170
1010 1260
1440 1440
1110 1110
1140 1230
1005 1110
1080 1245
1110 1290
925 925
1095 1217
1120 1369
1060 1202
1050 1155
990 1035
900 983
990 1095
1080 1140
1090 1205
1045 1180
1045 1150
1110 1260
1080 1170
1105 1215
1040 1130
1030 1150
1050 1170
1202 1335
995 995
1060 1170
1320 1380
995 995
1060 1170
1205 1260
995 995
Refused = Refused data. N = doer sample size. Mean = Mean 24-hour cumulative
Min = minimum number of minutes. Max = maximum number of minutes.
given number of minutes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-157
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-142 Range of Time (minutes) Spent Smoking Based on the Number of Respondents
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Total N
9386
4294
5088
4
187
499
703
589
6059
1349
7591
945
157
182
385
126
8534
702
47
103
1773
4096
802
2644
71
1968
834
2612
1801
1247
924
2075
2102
3243
1966
6316
3070
2524
2438
2536
1888
8629
694
63
9061
250
75
8882
433
71
Number of Minutes
*_*
5381
2327
3053
1
133
344
479
333
3083
1009
4312
550
109
103
220
87
4868
414
29
70
1149
2054
421
1709
48
1264
457
1297
972
774
617
1143
1164
1834
1240
3655
1726
1478
1404
1477
1022
4942
396
43
5169
63
49
5133
197
51
0-60
628
280
348
*
10
29
40
75
412
62
496
66
12
10
39
5
573
48
3
4
143
286
51
145
3
153
34
160
114
88
79
150
145
206
127
430
198
180
154
165
129
580
42
6
610
13
5
593
30
5
60-
120
444
184
259
1
6
23
38
31
305
41
368
41
3
8
17
7
396
38
4
6
91
203
42
105
3
98
28
115
87
70
46
108
110
137
89
301
143
113
120
116
95
419
24
1
430
11
3
423
20
1
120-
180
338
167
171
*
2
14
32
30
225
35
261
37
7
9
21
3
295
38
2
3
74
140
36
87
1
81
23
94
76
42
22
66
75
116
81
227
111
91
82
88
77
308
29
1
331
5
2
311
24
3
180-
240
285
141
144
*
3
8
23
20
196
35
233
26
5
5
13
3
267
16
*
2
50
141
25
67
2
56
16
86
62
38
27
73
65
106
41
188
97
81
73
71
60
264
20
1
273
11
1
267
17
1
240-
300
258
119
138
1
2
10
10
22
195
19
208
29
3
7
9
2
238
18
1
1
39
124
32
61
2
49
15
92
50
32
20
61
69
76
52
164
94
65
73
64
56
237
20
1
252
5
1
246
11
1
300-
360
242
114
128
*
4
7
9
15
187
20
208
18
2
3
9
2
226
14
*
2
29
126
27
56
4
38
23
84
56
24
17
63
37
92
50
146
96
68
61
64
49
223
17
2
235
5
2
224
16
2
360-
420
236
128
108
*
3
8
6
13
192
14
186
31
5
2
10
2
213
21
1
1
26
134
17
58
1
30
38
69
49
32
18
54
63
85
34
171
65
53
61
68
54
216
20
*
233
2
1
219
17
*
420-
480
192
92
99
1
6
7
12
7
143
17
154
23
3
3
8
1
181
10
*
1
28
96
23
43
2
31
15
71
44
23
8
52
42
58
40
127
65
39
50
61
42
175
16
1
187
5
*
182
10
*
480-
540
228
101
127
*
4
8
6
13
184
13
173
33
3
5
12
2
202
23
1
2
27
134
28
38
1
30
20
93
52
20
13
56
55
87
30
169
59
60
58
52
58
213
13
2
223
4
1
215
11
2
540-
600
186
92
94
*
3
7
11
5
148
12
160
15
2
4
5
*
173
11
2
*
22
109
12
43
*
27
26
64
35
22
12
40
51
60
35
128
58
48
40
57
41
172
13
1
184
*
2
177
7
2
600-
660
185
89
96
*
3
5
6
3
154
14
149
22
1
4
6
3
168
13
1
3
14
110
16
44
1
18
12
76
44
21
14
38
41
76
30
116
69
41
61
45
38
173
12
*
181
4
*
174
11
*
Page
15-158
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-142 Range of Time (minutes) Spent Smoking Based on the Number of Respondents (continued)
Number of Minutes
660-
720
Overall 149
Gender
Male 84
Female 65
Refused *
Age (years)
* 2
1-4 3
5-11 7
12-17 7
18-64 119
>64 11
Race
White 135
Black 7
Asian *
Some Others 3
Hispanic 3
Refused 1
Hispanic
No 141
Yes 5
DK 1
Refused 2
Employment
* 16
Full Time 83
Part Time 18
Not Employed 3 1
Refused 1
Education
* 19
< High School 15
High School Graduate 60
< College 36
College Graduate 1 1
Post Graduate 8
Census Region
Northeast 37
Midwest 36
South 52
West 24
Day of Week
Weekday 95
Weekend 54
Season
Winter 30
Spring 41
Summer 38
Fall 40
Asthma
No 134
Yes 15
DK *
Angina
No 141
Yes 4
DK 4
Bronchitis/emphysema
No 139
Yes 10
DK *
720-
780
135
76
59
*
1
5
2
3
114
10
118
10
*
2
3
2
127
6
1
1
10
82
11
32
*
12
24
64
22
9
4
34
28
63
10
84
51
47
36
23
29
124
9
2
130
3
2
128
5
2
Note: * = Missing Data; DK =Don'tknow;N
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996.
780-
840
162
87
75
*
1
6
5
5
129
16
139
8
2
6
6
1
149
11
*
2
16
82
16
48
*
18
34
62
29
12
7
34
36
60
32
103
59
46
44
45
27
150
11
1
157
4
1
150
12
*
840-
900
105
66
39
*
1
3
2
3
91
5
90
9
*
2
2
2
96
8
*
1
8
72
6
18
1
10
16
45
18
10
6
23
29
37
16
63
42
26
29
31
19
92
13
*
103
2
*
91
14
*
900-
960
83
48
35
*
*
2
*
1
72
8
74
6
*
2
1
*
81
2
*
*
3
50
10
19
1
3
16
33
23
6
2
20
15
37
11
55
28
21
10
33
19
77
6
*
82
1
*
75
8
*
960-
1020
53
37
17
*
2
3
1
1
44
2
49
3
*
*
*
1
52
1
*
*
5
34
2
12
*
7
7
17
12
8
2
10
13
21
9
38
15
11
14
13
15
47
5
1
48
4
1
48
4
1
= Number of Respondents; Refused
1020-
1080
27
18
9
*
*
2
5
*
18
2
21
5
*
*
*
1
25
1
*
1
7
10
2
8
*
8
6
6
5
1
1
2
11
11
3
17
10
7
5
11
4
24
3
*
26
1
*
25
2
*
1080-
1140
21
14
7
*
*
2
2
*
17
*
16
2
*
1
1
1
19
1
*
1
4
11
3
3
*
4
2
5
6
4
*
4
8
6
3
12
9
6
5
5
5
20
1
*
20
1
*
20
1
*
1140-
1200
12
9
3
*
*
1
2
*
9
*
11
1
*
*
*
*
12
*
*
*
3
5
*
4
*
3
1
5
3
*
*
2
1
7
2
8
4
4
4
2
2
9
3
*
12
*
*
11
1
*
1200-
1260
12
6
6
*
*
*
3
2
5
2
11
*
*
1
*
*
11
1
*
*
5
2
2
3
*
5
1
3
2
*
1
2
2
5
3
8
4
1
5
3
3
9
3
*
12
*
*
9
3
*
1260-
1320
3
3
*
*
*
i
*
*
2
*
2
*
*
1
*
*
2
1
*
*
1
*
*
2
*
1
*
1
1
*
*
*
i
*
2
2
1
2
1
*
*
3
*
*
2
1
*
3
*
*
1320- 1380-
1380 1440
6 15
3 10
3 5
* *
* 1
* 1
* 2
* *
5 10
1 1
3 14
2 1
* *
1 *
* *
* *
6 13
* 1
* 1
* *
* 3
2 6
1 1
3 5
* *
* 3
2 3
2 8
2 1
* *
* *
1 2
1 4
4 7
* 2
1 8
5 7
1 5
2 5
2 2
1 3
5 13
1 2
* *
5 15
1 *
* *
4 15
2 *
* *
= Respondent Refused to Answer.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-159
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-143 Number of Minutes Spent Smoking (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
N
9386
4294
5088
499
703
589
6059
1349
7591
945
157
182
385
8534
702
4096
802
2644
834
2612
1801
1247
924
2075
2102
3243
1966
6316
3070
2524
2438
2536
1888
8629
694
9061
250
8882
433
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note: N = Doer Sample Size; Percentiles are the Percentage of Doers below
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
75
240
310
180
75
82
130
345
10
250
225
60
255
175
243
175
360
295
144.5
420
390
288
135
60
259
255
275
140
225
260
210
240
235
285
240
270
240
125
235
405
90
615
685
545
455
370
377
675
340
630
540
375
680
481
625
518
687
630
555
790
710
630
480
380
610
630
655
510
595
651
600
626
600
630
610
668
615
615
605
810
95
795
840
725
735
625
542
830
622
805
715
494
815
652
800
680
835
793
768
880
840
805
660
595
775
810
810
710
780
810
790
785
810
791
790
855
795
835
785
900
98 99 100
930 1035 1440
983 1095 1440
870 960 1440
975 1095 1440
975 1140 1440
810 864 1260
950 1045 1440
825 910 1440
940 1035 1440
910 1071 1440
565 790 800
1140 1305 1328
813 845 1095
940 1035 1440
850 920 1440
945 1005 1440
930 1054 1440
915 1045 1440
1004 1105 1440
956 1060 1440
945 1045 1435
860 970 1140
795 860 1205
915 990 1440
945 1054 1440
950 1060 1440
885 990 1440
925 1015 1440
950 1080 1440
930 1034 1440
920 1060 1440
940 1020 1440
945 1020 1440
928 1020 1440
1020 1170 1440
930 1034 1440
1007.5 1125 1380
928 1020 1440
1040 1205 1380
or Equal to a Given Number of Minutes.
Page
15-160
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-144 Range of Time Spent Smoking Cigars or Pipe Tobacco by the Number of Respondents
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Age (years)
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Some Others
Hispanic
Hispanic
No
Yes
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
Angina
No
Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
Total N
62
58
4
1
1
46
14
53
5
1
3
57
5
2
39
3
17
1
2
2
24
18
10
6
20
19
12
11
40
22
16
19
19
8
59
3
60
2
60
2
Number of Minutes per Dav
*_*
5
5
*
*
1
3
1
3
1
1
*
5
*
1
2
*
1
1
1
*
2
2
*
*
3
*
1
1
3
2
*
3
1
1
5
*
5
*
4
1
0-3
10
8
2
*
*
10
*
8
2
*
*
9
1
*
7
3
*
*
*
*
4
4
2
*
1
4
3
2
7
3
3
4
1
2
8
2
10
*
10
*
3-6
8
7
1
1
*
4
3
7
1
*
*
8
*
1
4
*
3
*
1
*
4
*
2
1
4
4
*
*
5
3
5
1
1
1
8
*
8
*
8
*
6-9 9-12 12-15
6 1
6 1
* *
* *
* *
6 1
* *
4 1
1 *
* *
i *
5 *
1 1
* *
5 1
* *
1 *
* *
* *
* *
3 *
* 1
2 *
1 *
* 1
2 *
2 *
2 *
2 1
4 *
1 *
1 *
4 1
* *
6 1
* *
6 1
* *
6 1
* *
Note: * Signifies missing data; Refused = respondents refused to answer; N = doer sample size in specified rang
A value of "61" for number of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
2
2
*
*
*
1
1
1
*
*
1
1
1
*
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
*
1
1
*
*
2
1
*
i
*
2
*
2
*
2
*
15-18 18-61
9
9
*
*
*
5
4
9
*
*
*
9
*
*
4
*
5
*
*
*
3
4
1
1
1
4
1
3
7
2
3
2
2
2
8
1
8
1
8
1
21
20
1
*
*
16
5
20
*
*
1
20
1
*
15
*
6
*
*
1
8
7
3
2
10
4
4
3
15
6
3
8
8
2
21
*
20
1
21
*
;e of number of minutes spent.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-161
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-145 Number of Minutes Spent Smoking Cigars or Pipe Tobacco (minutes/day)
Category
Percentiles
Population Group
10
25
50
75
90
95
98
99 100
Overall
Gender
Gender
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Age (years)
Race
Race
Race
Race
Hispanic
Hispanic
Employment
Employment
Employment
Education
Education
Education
Education
Education
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Census Region
Day of Week
Day of Week
Season
Season
Season
Season
Asthma
Asthma
Angina
Angina
Bronchitis/emphysema
Bronchitis/emphysema
57 2 3 3 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Male 53 3 5 10 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Female 4 2 2 2 2 2.5 9 38 61 61 61 61 61
5-11 1 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
12-17 00000 00000000
18-64 43 2 2 3 10 15 45 61 61 61 61 61 61
>64 13 15 15 15 20 45 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
White 50 2 2.5 3 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Black 4 10 10 10 10 10 15 25 30 30 30 30 30
Some Others 00000 00000000
Hispanic 3 30 30 30 30 30 45 61 61 61 61 61 61
No 52 2 3 3 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Yes 5 10 10 10 10 30 40 45 61 61 61 61 61
Full Time 37 2 2 3 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Part Time 3 3 3 3 3 3 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Not Employed 16 15 15 15 20 37.5 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
< High School 2 45 45 45 45 45 53 61 61 61 61 61 61
High School Graduate 22 2 2 10 10 15 45 61 61 61 61 61 61
< College 16 3 3 3 3 25 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
College Graduate 10 5 5 5 7.5 20 30 61 61 61 61 61 61
Post Graduate 6 20 20 20 20 30 52.5 61 61 61 61 61 61
Northeast 17 10 10 10 20 20 61 61 61 61 61 61 61
Midwest 19 2 2 2 3 15 30 60 61 61 61 61 61
South 11 10 10 10 10 10 45 61 61 61 61 61 61
West 10 10 10 10 10 30 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Weekday 37 2 2 3 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Weekend 20 3 3 6.5 10 20 37.5 61 61 61 61 61 61
Winter 16 3 3 3 10 15 25 60 61 61 61 61 61
Spring 16 2 2 2 5 15 60.5 61 61 61 61 61 61
Summer 18 10 10 10 20 30 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Fall 7 3 3 3 3 10 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
No 54 2 3 10 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Yes 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 60 60 60 60 60 60
No 55 2 3 3 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Yes 2 60 60 60 60 60 60.5 61 61 61 61 61 61
No 56 2 3 3 10 20 60 61 61 61 61 61 61
Yes 1 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Note: A value of "61" for number of minutes signifies that more than 60 minutes were spent; N = doer sample size. Percentiles are the percentage of
doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis. 1996.
Page
15-162
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Aian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing Data; DK =
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996
15-146 Range of Numbers of Ci;
Total N
4663
2163
2498
2
84
263
348
326
2972
670
3774
463
77
96
193
60
4244
347
26
46
926
2017
379
1309
32
1021
399
1253
895
650
445
1048
1036
1601
978
3156
1507
1264
1181
1275
943
4287
341
35
4500
125
38
4424
203
36
Don't Know;
jarettes Smoked Based on the Number of Respondents
Number of Cigarettes Smoked by Respondent on the Day Before the Survey
*
530
278
251
1
2
263
258
1
5
1
413
53
5
22
37
*
452
75
2
1
526
1
*
3
*
526
3
1
*
*
*
112
110
193
115
341
189
163
148
142
77
480
48
2
526
2
2
519
11
*
None
3288
1467
1820
1
72
*
88
315
2232
581
2664
319
71
55
133
46
3010
225
18
35
388
1510
307
1058
25
473
279
899
696
547
394
747
746
1079
716
2239
1049
883
819
906
680
3023
239
26
3161
99
28
3138
120
30
1-2
45
24
21
*
1
*
*
*
42
2
30
7
*
1
7
*
33
11
*
1
*
34
5
6
*
*
1
16
11
11
6
4
11
17
13
28
17
16
13
7
9
40
5
*
45
*
*
43
2
*
N= Number of Respndents;
3-5
92
38
54
*
1
*
1
1
76
13
63
18
*
4
5
2
79
10
2
1
2
55
7
28
*
4
9
44
19
10
6
12
25
37
18
66
26
23
22
20
27
85
6
1
88
3
1
80
11
1
Refused =
6-9
88
32
56
*
*
*
*
3
75
10
63
22
*
1
2
*
79
7
2
*
3
51
6
28
*
3
12
35
20
13
5
19
19
34
16
61
27
21
14
32
21
80
8
*
85
3
*
81
6
1
10-14
182
81
101
*
2
*
*
2
156
22
156
17
*
5
2
2
173
7
1
1
2
100
23
57
*
4
27
73
44
26
8
49
29
76
28
116
66
50
45
47
40
171
10
1
175
5
2
170
11
1
15-24
315
167
148
*
3
*
1
3
276
32
272
22
1
6
7
7
297
12
1
5
3
193
22
92
5
8
42
138
75
32
20
78
73
108
56
217
98
71
94
89
61
292
18
5
304
8
3
284
28
3
25-35
56
30
26
*
1
*
*
*
54
1
54
1
*
1
*
*
56
*
*
*
*
37
4
14
1
*
8
23
18
5
2
10
13
29
4
38
18
18
14
12
12
51
5
*
52
3
1
48
8
*
36+
57
43
14
*
1
*
*
*
51
5
52
1
*
1
*
3
55
*
*
2
*
34
3
20
*
1
16
23
9
5
3
16
8
24
9
43
14
14
10
17
16
56
1
*
54
2
1
52
5
*
DK
10
3
7
*
1
*
*
1
5
3
7
3
*
*
*
*
10
*
*
*
2
2
2
3
1
2
2
1
3
1
1
1
2
4
3
7
3
5
2
3
*
9
1
*
10
*
*
9
1
*
Respondent Refused to Answer
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-163
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-147 Range of Number of Cigarettes Smoked by Other People Based on Number of Respondents
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Total N
4723
2131
2590
2
103
236
355
263
3087
679
3817
482
80
86
192
66
4290
355
21
57
847
2079
423
1335
39
947
435
1359
906
597
479
1027
1066
1642
988
3160
1563
1260
1257
1261
945
4342
353
28
4561
125
37
4458
230
35
Note: * = Missing Data; DK =Don't know; N =
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996.
Number of Cigarettes Smoked By Others
*
898
468
428
2
11
236
355
263
32
1
675
119
21
29
50
4
796
95
4
3
845
*
21
30
2
897
*
*
1
*
*
201
196
320
181
596
302
266
270
240
122
802
95
1
894
1
3
875
21
2
None
3209
1403
1806
*
82
*
*
*
2506
621
2616
309
57
51
120
56
2928
223
11
47
2
1740
336
1098
33
44
336
1097
748
536
448
690
726
1090
703
2178
1031
841
821
863
684
2989
196
24
3068
110
31
3016
163
30
1-2
55
21
34
*
*
*
*
*
46
9
42
7
1
*
5
*
49
5
1
*
*
28
6
21
*
*
6
25
10
9
5
14
15
17
9
33
22
17
14
13
11
52
3
*
53
2
*
53
2
*
Number of Respondents; Refused
3-5
108
35
73
*
2
*
*
*
97
9
89
8
*
*
9
2
91
15
*
2
*
64
15
28
1
1
18
38
29
15
7
29
28
36
15
76
32
23
35
25
25
97
10
1
104
3
1
99
8
1
6-9
78
39
39
*
*
*
*
*
74
4
70
6
*
1
1
*
73
3
1
1
*
50
4
24
*
*
9
40
22
5
2
18
13
33
14
54
24
19
22
18
19
69
9
*
78
*
*
75
3
*
10-14
122
61
61
*
*
*
*
*
116
6
106
9
1
3
3
*
114
7
1
*
*
73
14
35
*
*
17
47
36
17
5
14
27
58
23
77
45
29
27
35
31
117
5
*
121
1
*
115
7
*
15-24
121
46
75
*
3
*
*
*
109
9
107
9
*
1
1
3
118
1
*
2
*
59
11
48
3
4
16
62
22
11
6
32
25
44
20
69
52
34
32
30
25
104
16
1
116
4
1
108
12
1
25-35
19
11
8
*
*
*
*
*
16
3
18
1
*
*
*
*
19
*
*
*
*
9
1
9
*
*
4
9
5
*
1
3
4
7
5
12
7
7
4
3
5
15
4
*
19
*
*
17
2
*
36+
28
12
16
*
1
*
*
*
24
3
24
2
*
1
1
*
25
1
2
*
*
10
3
15
*
*
10
9
9
*
*
4
7
15
2
14
14
6
10
6
6
22
6
*
26
2
*
23
5
*
DK
85
35
50
*
4
*
*
*
67
14
70
12
*
*
2
1
77
5
1
2
*
46
12
27
*
1
19
32
24
4
5
22
25
22
16
51
34
18
22
28
17
75
9
1
82
2
1
77
7
1
= Respondent Refused to Answer.
Page
15-164
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-148 Range of the Number of Cigarettes Smoked While at Home Based on the Number of Respondents
Total N
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing Data; DK =Don't
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
4723
2131
2590
2
103
236
355
263
3087
679
3817
482
80
86
192
66
4290
355
21
57
847
2079
423
1335
39
947
435
1359
906
597
479
1027
1066
1642
988
3160
1563
1260
1257
1261
945
4342
353
28
4561
125
37
4458
230
35
Know;
*
516
277
237
2
8
236
268
2
1
1
391
61
13
17
32
2
451
64
*
1
514
1
*
1
*
514
*
*
2
*
*
121
102
177
116
336
180
153
152
139
72
470
46
*
515
*
1
501
15
*
None
3358
1463
1895
*
83
*
86
248
2352
589
2700
345
65
58
140
50
3045
252
18
43
322
1598
346
1060
32
406
309
989
701
524
429
721
764
1159
714
2277
1081
873
901
896
688
3100
234
24
3225
104
29
3179
149
30
Number of Cigarettes Smoked by Respondent at Home
1-2
51
24
27
*
*
*
*
*
47
4
30
10
*
1
8
2
41
8
*
2
*
33
4
14
*
1
5
21
17
6
1
11
12
16
12
32
19
18
7
10
16
45
5
1
49
1
1
46
4
1
N= Number of Respondents;
3-5
193
86
107
*
2
*
*
6
170
15
152
27
2
3
3
6
182
4
1
6
5
122
17
47
2
9
20
78
51
20
15
39
52
62
40
129
64
53
51
44
45
176
15
2
188
2
3
179
12
2
Refused =
6-9
126
53
73
*
4
*
*
2
110
10
103
20
*
1
2
*
121
5
*
*
1
88
10
27
*
3
17
64
25
11
6
22
32
51
21
87
39
39
22
33
32
112
14
*
123
3
*
121
5
*
10-14
224
91
133
*
1
*
1
3
193
26
208
9
*
2
3
2
210
10
2
2
3
117
27
76
1
6
32
98
56
19
13
50
53
81
40
134
90
59
55
64
46
208
16
*
217
5
2
210
14
*
15-24
180
98
82
*
2
*
*
1
150
27
164
6
*
3
4
3
167
11
*
2
1
87
12
78
2
4
26
84
39
13
14
46
33
63
38
118
62
42
54
53
31
165
15
*
173
7
*
159
20
1
25-35
23
11
12
*
1
*
*
1
21
0
22
1
*
*
*
*
23
*
*
*
1
11
3
7
1
2
7
7
4
2
1
8
5
8
2
14
9
10
1
7
5
20
3
*
23
*
*
21
2
*
36+
29
17
12
*
*
*
*
*
26
3
28
*
*
1
*
*
29
*
*
*
*
10
3
16
*
*
12
11
5
1
*
5
7
14
3
18
11
6
6
10
7
25
4
*
26
3
*
20
9
*
DK
23
11
12
*
2
*
*
*
17
4
19
3
*
*
*
1
21
1
*
1
*
12
1
9
1
2
7
7
6
1
*
4
6
11
2
15
8
7
8
5
3
21
1
1
22
*
1
22
*
1
Respondent Refused to Answer
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-165
-------
I
Table 15-149. Differences in Time Use (hours/week!) Grouped by Sex, Employment Status, and Marital Status
for the Surveys Conducted in 1965 and 1975
Employed Men
Urban Data
1965
Sleep
Work for Pay
Family Care
Personal Care
Free Time
Organizations
Media
Social Life
Recreation
Other Leisure
Total Time
(Free)
1975
Sleep
Work for Pay
Family Care
Personal Care
Free Time
Organizations
Media
Social Life
Recreation
Other Leisure
Total Time
(Free)
Married
(N=448)
53.1
51.3
9.0
20.9
33.7
2.6
17.1
7.2
1.4
5.4
168.0
(33.7)
(N=245)
53.4
47.4
9.7
21.4
36.1
3.7
18.9
6.4
1.3
5.8
168.0
(36.1)
Single
(N=73)
50.6
51.4
7.7
22.2
36.1
3.6
13.9
10.4
1.3
6.9
168.0
(36.1)
(N=87)
54.1
40.0
9.0
20.0
44.9
4.8
18.5
8.9
4.1
8.6
168.0
(44.9)
Employed Women
Married
(N=190)
53.8
38.4
28.8
20.3
26.7
1.4
10.7
7.9
0.6
6.1
168.0
(26.7)
(N=117)
55.1
30.1
24.9
26.2
31.7
1.1
15.6
6.6
0.8
6.5
168.0
(31.7)
Single
(N=152)
52.6
39.8
20.6
21.7
33.3
3.7
11.1
9.6
0.5
8.4
168.0
(33.3)
(N=108)
54.3
38.8
16.6
21.9
36.4
4.4
14.5
8.9
0.5
8.1
168.0
(36.4)
Housewives
Married
(N=341)
53.9
0.5
50.0
22.6
41.0
3.4
15.3
12.6
0.6
9.1
168.0
(41.0)
(N=141)
56.8
1.1
44.3
21.4
44.4
4.8
20.4
10.1
0.7
8.4
168.0
(44.4)
Single
(N=14)
58.8
1.6
45.7
23.0
38.9
3.4
19.1
10.2
1.1
5.1
168.0
(38.9)
(N=28)
58.6
0.0
42.8
19.2
47.4
3.0
27.2
9.1
0.4
7.7
168.0
(47.4)
Total
(N=1218)
53.3
33.0
25.4
21.5
34.8
2.8
14.7
9.4
0.9
7.0
168.0
(34.8)
(N=726)
54.7
32.5
20.5
21.8
38.5
3.8
18.2
7.8
1.3
7.4
168.0
(38.5)
" Data weighted to ensure equal days of the week.
Source: Robinson, 1977.
so
Q
ft
a a
^ TJ
-------
Q
I
XI
I
I
Table 15-150. Time Use (hours/week) Differences by Age for the Surveys Conducted in 1965 and 1975
Mean Duration (hrs/wk)
Age Group (years)
18-25
Activity
Sleep
Work for Pay
Family Care
Personal Care
Free Time
Organizations
Media
Social Life
Recreation
Other Leisure
Total Time
Free Time
1965
(N=200)
54.2
32.6
21.2
20.9
39.1
4.8
13.8
11.3
0.9
8.3
168.0
(39.1)
1975
(N=149)
55.4
27.0
15.3
20.3
50.0
8.4
18.5
10.7
2.6
9.8
168.0
(50.0)
1 Data weighted to ensure equal days
Source: Robinson, 1977.
25-35
1965
(N=321)
52.5
29.2
30.4
20.3
35.6
3.0
14.6
10.3
1.2
6.5
168.0
(35.6)
of the week.
1975
(N=234)
53.9
33.4
21.6
20.8
38.4
4.2
17.2
8.7
1.3
7.0
168.0
(38.4)
36-45
1965
(N=306)
53.1
33.1
25.4
22.5
33.8
3.0
14.5
8.4
0.8
7.1
168.0
(33.8)
1975
(N=150)
54.7
34.4
20.4
21.1
37.3
3.3
18.3
7.8
1.0
6.9
168.0
(37.3)
46-55
1965
(N=252)
53.9
33.4
24.9
22.4
33.4
2.0
15.3
8.6
0.6
6.9
168.0
(33.4)
1975
(N=141)
55.4
31.0
23.2
23.1
35.2
3.1
18.8
5.4
1.3
6.6
168.0
(35.2)
56-65
1965
(N=156)
53.6
35.9
20.4
20.9
37.1
2.9
17.4
8.1
1.1
7.6
168.0
(37.1)
1975
(N=lll)
56.0
20.4
23.2
26.6
41.8
3.2
22.6
6.2
1.3
8.5
168.0
(41.8)
X X
rs PI
». ».
? •«
ft
-------
S s~
>Q X
1 1
so
Table 15-151. Time Use (hours/weekf Differences by Education for the Surveys Conducted in 1965 and 1975
Mean duration (hours/week)
Age Group (in years)
0-8
Activity
Sleep
Work for Pay
Family Care
Personal Care
Free Time
Organizations
Media
Social Life
Recreation
Other Leisure
Total Time
Free Time
1965
(N=171)
54.9
31.6
24.7
20.8
35.9
1.8
19.3
7.7
0.9
6.3
168.0
(36.0)
1975
(N=75)
57.0
30.0
18.7
22.9
39.4
3.0
18.0
8.4
1.3
8.7
168.0
(39.4)
9-11
1965
(N=220)
52.3
33.1
25.4
20.9
36.1
1.5
16.5
9.8
1.4
7.0
168.0
(36.2)
1975
(N=l 14)
53.7
32.0
21.7
22.0
38.6
2.2
20.7
7.9
0.7
7.1
168.0
(38.6)
12
1965
(N=452)
53.0
30.9
28.9
21.1
34.1
2.5
14.2
9.5
0.7
7.2
168.0
(34.1)
1975
(N=319)
55.5
26.9
23.5
22.1
40.0
3.7
19.0
8.5
1.3
7.5
168.0
(40.0)
13-15
1965
(N=195)
53.6
34.4
21.7
21.7
36.5
5.8
13.3
9.0
1.1
7.4
168.0
(36.6)
1975
(N=137)
53.6
27.5
18.9
10.5
47.5
9.1
19.7
7.7
2.0
9.0
168.0
(47.5)
16+
1965
(N=191)
53.6
34.5
21.2
22.7
35.9
4.7
12.5
10.2
0.9
7.7
168.0
(36.0)
1975
(N=144)
54.8
38.0
16.8
22.3
36.1
4.1
16.2
8.1
1.3
6.4
168.0
(36.1)
a Data weighted to ensure equal days of the week.
Source: Robinson, 1977.
Q
a a
^ TJ
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-152. Time Use (hours/week)" Differences by Race for the Surveys Conducted in 1965 and
1975
Mean duration (hours/week)
White
Activity Category
Sleep
Work for Pay
Family Care
Personal Care
Free Time
Organizations
Media
Social Life
Recreation
Other Leisure
Total Time
Free Time
1965
(N = 1030)
53.4
31.9
26.0
21.8
34.9
2.8
14.8
9.3
1.1
6.9
168.0
(34.9)
1975
(N = 680)
54.5
30.0
21.1
22.1
40.3
4.4
18.7
8.2
1.5
7.5
168.0
(40.3)
Black
1965
(N = 103)
50.9
36.6
23.6
20.0
36.9
3.0
15.7
9.1
0.6
8.4
168.0
(36.8)
1975
(N = 77)
54.8
30.0
17.6
21.0
44.6
4.9
19.6
9.8
0.4
9.9
168.0
(44.6)
" Data weighted to ensure equal days of the week.
Source: Robinson, 1977.
Table 15-153. Mean Time Spent (hours/week)" in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by Regions
Activity
Activity Actegtory
Market Work
House/yard work
Child care
Services/shop
Personal care
Education
Organizations
Social entertainment
Active leisure
Passive leisure
Total Time
West North Central
N=200 N=304
23.44
14.64
2.50
5.22
79.23
2.94
3.42
8.26
5.94
22.47
168.00
" Weighted for day of week, panel loss (not defined
rounding.
b N = surveyed population.
0 S.D. = standard deviation.
Source: Hill. 1985.
29.02
14.17
2.82
5.64
76.62
1.43
2.97
8.42
5.28
21.71
168.00
in report),
Northeast
N=185
27.34
14.29
2.32
4.92
78.11
0.95
2.45
8.98
4.77
23.94
168.00
South
N=286
24.21
15.44
2.66
4.72
79.38
1.45
2.68
8.22
5.86
23.47
168.00
and correspondence to Census. Data may
Totalb
N=975
Mean S.D
26.15
14.66
2.62
5.15
78.24
1.65
2.88
8.43
5.49
22.80
168.00
not add to totals shown due to
°
23.83
12.09
5.14
5.40
12.70
6.34
5.40
8.17
7.81
13.35
0.09
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-169
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-154. Total Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Ten Major Activity Categories Grouped by Type of Day
Activity Category
Market Work
House/Yardwork
Child Care
Services/Shopping
Personal Care
Education
Organizations
Social Entertainment
Active Leisure
Passive Leisure
Total Time
Weekday
[Na=8311
288.0 (257. 7)b
126.3(119.3)
26.6 (50.9)
48.7(58.7)
639.2(114.8)
16.4(64.4)
21.1 (49.7)
54.9 (69.2)
37.9(71.11)
181.1 (121.9)
1,440
Time Duration (mins/day)
Saturday
[N = 8311
97.9(211.9)
160.5(157.2)
19.4(51.5)
64.4(92.5)
706.8(169.8)
5.4(38.1)
18.4(75.2)
1,114.1 (156.0)
61.4(126.5)
191.8(161.6)
1,440
Sunday
[N = 8311
58.0(164.8)
124.5(133.3)
24.8(61.9)
21.6(49.9)
734.3(156.5)
7.3 (48.0)
58.5(104.5)
110.0(151.2)
64.5 (120.6)
236.5(167.1)
1,440
a N = Number of respondents.
b ( ) = Numbers in parentheses are standard deviations.
Source: Hill, 1985.
Table 15-155. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) in Ten Major Activity Categories During Four Waves of Interviews"
Activity Category
Market work
House/yard work
Child care
Services/shop
Personal care
Education
Organizations
Social entertainment
Active leisure
Passive leisure
Total Time
Fall
(Nov. 1, 1975)"
N=861
Wave 1
222.94
133.16
25.50
48.98
652.95
22.79
25.30
63.87
42.71
210.75
1440.00
Winter
(Feb. 28, 1976)"
Wave 2
226.53
135.58
22.44
44.09
678.14
12.57
22.55
67.11
47.46
183.48
1440.00
Spring
(June 1, 1976)"
N=861
Wave 3
210.44
143.10
25.51
44.61
688.27
2.87
23.21
83.90
46.19
171.85
1440.00
Summer
(Sept. 21, 1976)"
N=861
Wave 4
230.92
119.95
21.07
47.75
674.85
10.76
29.91
72.24
42.30
190.19
1440.00
Range of Standard
Deviations
272-287
129-156
49-58
76-79
143-181
32-93
68-87
102-127
96-105
144-162
__
" Weighted for day of week, panel loss (not defined in report), and correspondence to Census.
b Dates by which 50% of the interviews for each wave were taken.
Source: Hill. 1985.
Page
15-170
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-156. Mean Time Spent (hours/week) in Ten Major
Activity Categories Grouped by Gender"
Time duration (hours/week)
Activity Category
Market work
House/yard
Child care
Services/shop
Personal care
Education
Organizations
Social entertainment
Active leisure
Passive leisure
Total time
Men
n= 140
35.8
8.5
1.2
3.9
77.3
2.3
2.5
7.9
5.9
22.8
168.1
(23.6)b
(9.0)
(2.5)
(4.5)
(13.0)
(7.7)
(5.5)
(8.3)
(8.2)
(14.1)
Women
n = 561
17.9
20.0
3.9
6.3
79.0
1.1
3.2
8.9
5.2
22.7
168.1
Men and Women
(20.7)
(11.9)
(6.4)
(5.9)
(12.4)
(4.8)
(5.3)
(8.0)
(7.4)
(12.7)
n = 971
26.2
14.7
2.6
5.2
78.2
1.7
2.9
8.4
5.5
22.8
168.1
(23.8)
(12.1)
(5.2)
(5.4)
(12.7)
(6.4)
(5.4)
(8.2)
(7.8)
(13.3)
" Detailed components of activities (87) are presented in Table 1A-4.
b ( ) = Numbers in parentheses are standard deviations.
Source: Hill, 1985.
Table
Location
Residential Yards
School Playgrounds
Parks and Recreation Areas
Commercial
Industrial
Institutional
Streets
Alleys
Parking Lots
Vacant Lots/Canals/Fields
15-157. Percent Responses of Children's "Play" (activities) Locations in Maryvale, Arizona"
Preschool
n = 211
143"
0
42
2
0
1
3
1
0
1
Percent Responses
Primary Grades (K-3) Intermediate Grades (4-6)
n = 45 n = 66
124" 132"
53 52
53 33
24 27
0 2
2 0
24 41
2 9
9 9
7 8
Ranking of Children's "Play"
Locations0
Residential (Own and Others)
Parks and Recreation Areas
Street/Path/Alley
Natural/Vacant Areas
School
Institutional
Commercial
Parking Lots
Child Built Places
Water
Industrial
" Survey was conducted in Maryvale (West Central Phoenix), Arizona.
b Percentages greater than 100, because many children played in more than one location.
0 Ranking of children's activity locations were obtained from other literature sources.
Source: Sell, 1989.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-171
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-158. Occupational Tenure of Employed Individuals3 by Age and Sex
Aae Group (years)
16-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70 and older
Total
a Working population =
Source: Carey, 1988.
All Workers
1.9
4.4
6.9
9.0
10.7
13.3
15.2
17.7
19.4
20.1
21.9
6.6
109.1 million persons
Median Tenure (years)
Men
2.0
4.6
7.6
10.4
13.8
17.5
20.0
21.9
23.9
26.9
30.5
7.9
Women
1.9
4.1
6.0
7.0
8.0
10.0
10.8
12.4
14.5
15.6
18.8
5.4
Table 15-159. Occupational Tenure for Employed Individuals1 Grouped by Sex and Race
Race
White
Black
Hispanic
1 Working population =
Source: Carey, 1988.
All Individuals
6.7
5.8
4.5
109.1 million persons.
Median Tenure (Years)
Men
8.3
5.8
5.1
Women
5.4
5.8
3.7
Table 15-160. Occupational Tenure for Employed Individuals3 Grouped by Sex and Employment Status
Employment Status All Individuals
Full-Time 7.2
Part-Time 3.1
Median Tenure (Years)
Men
8.4
2.4
Women
5.9
3.6
a Working population = 109.9 million persons.
Source: Carey, 1988.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15-172 August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-161. Occupational Tenure of Employed Individuals3 Grouped by Major Occupational Groups and Age
Median Tenure (years)
Occupational Group
Executive, Administrative, and Managerial
Professional Specialty
Technicians and Related Support
Sales Occupations
Administrative Support, including Clerical
Service Occupations
Precision Production, Craft, and Repair
Operators, Fabricators, and Laborers
Farming, Forestry, and Fishing
a Working population =109.1 million persons.
b Includes all workers 16 years and older
Source: Carey, 1988.
Age Group
Totalb
8.4
9.6
6.9
5.1
5.4
4.1
9.3
5.5
10.4
16-24
2.4
2.0
2 2
1.7
2.1
1.7
2.6
1.7
2.9
25-34
5.6
5.7
5.7
4.7
5.0
4.4
7.1
4.6
7.9
35-44
10.1
12.0
10.9
7.7
7.6
6.9
13.5
9.1
13.5
45-54
15.1
18.2
17.7
10.5
10.9
9.0
19.9
13.7
20.7
55-64
17.9
25.6
20.8
15.5
14.6
10.6
25.7
18.1
30.5
65+
26.3
36.2
22.2
21.6
15.4
10.4
30.1
14.7
39.8
Table
Age Group (years)
16-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
64 and older
Total, age 16 and older
a Working population =
b Occupational mobility
occupation.
Source: Carey, 1990.
15-162. Voluntary Occupational Mobility Rates for Workers3 Age 16 Years and Older
Occupational Mobility Rate
(Percent)
12.7
6.6
4.0
1.9
1.0
0.3
5.3
109.1 million persons.
rate = percentage of persons employed in an occupation who had voluntarily entered it from another
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-173
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-163. Values and
Their Standard Errors for Average Total Residence Time, T,
Average total residence
time S.D. Average current residence
Households T (years) ST TCR (years)
All households
Renters
Owners
Farms
Urban
Rural
Northeast region
Midwest region
South region
West region
4. 55 ±0.60
2.35±0.14
11.36±3.87
17.31±13.81
4.19±0.53
7.80±1.17
7.37±0.88
5.11±0.68
3.96±0.47
3.49±0.57
aValues of the average current residence time, TCR,
Source: Israeli and Nelson, 1992.
8.68
4.02
13.72
18.69
8.17
11.28
11.48
9.37
8.03
6.84
are given for comparison.
10.56±0.10
4.62±0.08
13.96±0.12
18.75±0.38
10.07±0.10
12.06±0.23
12.64±0.12
11.15±0.10
10.12±0.08
8.44±0.11
for Each Group in Survey3
Households (percent)
1985
100.0
36.5
63.5
2.1
74.9
25.1
21.2
25.0
34.0
19.8
1987
100.0
36.0
64.0
1.9
74.5
25.5
20.9
24.5
34.4
20.2
Table 15-164. Total Residence Time, t (years), Corresponding to Selected Values of R(t)a by Housing Category
R(t) =
All households
Renters
Owners
Farms
Urban
Rural
Northeast region
Midwest region
South region
West region
0.05
23.1
8.0
41.4
58.4
21.7
32.3
34.4
25.7
20.7
17.1
a R(t) = fraction of households living
Source: Israeli and Nelson, 1992.
0.1
12.9
5.2
32.0
48.3
10.9
21.7
22.3
15.0
10.8
8.9
0.25
3.7
2.6
17.1
26.7
3.4
9.1
7.5
4.3
3.0
2.9
0.5
1.4
1.2
5.2
10.0
1.4
3.3
2.8
1.6
1.2
1.2
0.75
0.5
0.5
1.4
2.4
0.5
1.2
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.4
in the same residence for t years or more.
Page
15-174
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-165. Residence
Year household moved into unit
1990-1994
1985-1989
1980-1984
1975-1979
1970-1974
1960-1969
1950-1959
1940-1949
1939 or earlier
Time of Owner/Renter Occupied Units
Total occupied units (numbers in thousands)
24,534
27,054
10,613
9,369
6,233
7,933
4,754
1,772
885
Total 93,147
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993.
Table 1 5- 1 66. Percent of Householders Living
Years lived in current home
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
> 55
in Houses for Specified Ranges of Time
Percent of total households
26.34
29.04
11.39
10.06
6.69
8.52
5.1
1.9
0.95
Total3 99.99
a Total
Source:
does not equal 100 due to rounding errors.
Adapted from U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-175
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-167. Descriptive Statistics for Residential Occupancy Period
Residential occupancy period (years)
Statistic
Mean
5th percentile
10th percentile
25th percentile
50th percentile
75th percentile
90th percentile
95th percentile
98th percentile
99th percentile
99. 5th percentile
99. 8th percentile
99.9th percentile
Second largest value
Largest value
a = Number of simulated persons
Source: Johnson and Capel, 1992.
Both genders
Na= 500,000
11.7
2
2
3
9
16
26
33
41
47
51
55
59
75
87
Males only
N = 244,274
11.1
2
2
4
8
15
24
31
39
44
48
53
56
73
73
Females only
N = 255,726
12.3
2
2
5
9
17
28
35
43
49
53
58
61
75
87
Table 15-168. Descriptive Statistics for Both Genders by Current Age
Residential occupancy period (years)
Current
age, years
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
63
66
69
72
75
78
81
84
87
90
All ages
Percentile
Mean
6.5
8.0
8.9
9.3
9.1
8.2
6.0
5.2
6.0
7.3
8.7
10.4
12.0
13.5
15.3
16.6
17.4
18.3
19.1
19.7
20.2
20.7
21.2
21.6
21.5
21.4
21.2
20.3
20.6
18.9
11.7
25
3
4
5
5
5
4
2
2
3
3
4
5
5
6
7
8
9
9
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
12
11
11
10
8
4
50
5
7
8
9
8
7
4
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
20
20
19
20
19
18
15
9
75
8
10
12
13
12
11
8
6
8
9
11
13
15
18
20
22
24
25
26
27
27
28
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
27
16
90
13
15
16
16
16
16
13
11
12
14
17
21
24
27
31
32
33
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
37
39
40
26
95
17
18
18
18
18
19
17
15
16
19
23
28
31
35
38
39
39
40
41
40
41
41
42
43
43
44
45
44
46
47
33
99
22
22
22
23
23
23
23
25
27
32
39
47
48
49
52
52
50
50
51
51
51
50
50
53
53
53
55
56
57
56
47
Source: Johnson and Capel, 1992.
Page
15-176
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-169. Summary of Residence Time of Recent Home Buyers (1993)
Number of years lived in previous house
1 year or less
2-3
4-7
8-9
10 years or more
Percent of Respondents
2
16
40
10
32
Source: NAR, 1993
Table 15-170. Tenure in Previous Home (Percentage Distribution)
Percent
One year or less
2-3 Years
4-7 Years
8-9 Years
10 or More Years
Total
Median
1987
5
25
36
10
24
100
6
1989
8
15
22
11
34
100
6
1991
4
21
37
9
29
100
6
1993
2
16
40
10
32
100
6
Source: NAR, 1993
Table 15-171. Number of Miles Moved (Percentage Distribution)
Miles
Less than 5 miles
5 to 9 miles
10 to 19 miles
20 to 34 miles
35 to 50 miles
51 to 100 miles
Over 100 miles
Total
Median
Mean
All Buyers
29
20
18
9
2
5
17
100
9
200
First-Time
Buyer
33
25
20
11
2
2
6
100
8
110
Repeat Buyer
Percent
27
16
17
8
2
6
24
100
11
270
New Home
Buyer
23
18
20
12
2
6
19
100
11
230
Existing Home
Buyer
31
20
17
9
3
4
16
100
8
190
Source: NAR, 1993
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-177
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations
Considerations
TIME SPENT INDOORS VS.
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
OUTDOORS
The studies received high level of peer review.
The studies are widely available to the public.
The reproducibility of these studies is left to question. Evidence has shown that
activities have tended to shift over the past decade since the studies were published,
due to economic conditions and technological developments, etc. Thus, it is assumed
there would be differences in reproducing these results. However, if data were
reanalyzed in the same manner the results are expected to be the same.
The study focused on general activity patterns. One study delineated between indoor
and outdoor use of time but in many cases the locations were specified. Thus, any
assumptions were made about the indoor or outdoor location where event took place.
The studies focused on the U.S. population and California.
One study analyzed data from a two primary studies. Data from the remaining study
was collected to via questionnaires and interviews.
The studies were published in 1985 (data was collected 1981-1982), 1987, 1991 (data
was collected 1987-1990) and 1992.
In one study, households were sampled 4 times during 3 month intervals from
February to December, 1981. Robinson's data was based on 1) the CARB Study
where data was collected October 1987 to August 1988; and 2) the National Study
where data was collected January through December 1985.
The approach used to collect data was direct and included questionnaires or
interviews. Responses where based on diaries and 'mailback' surveys based on what
the person planned to do the following day (the "tomorrow approach"). A 24 hour
diary was used in another study.
The study sizes ranged from 922 to 5,000 depending on the sub-group considered.
Timmer focused on activities of children. Robinson studies activities of both children
and adults. The studies are representative of the US population and California State.
Variability was characterized by age, gender, and day of the week; location of
activities and various age categories for children. There was no mention of race and
no socio-economic characterizations made.
Biases noted were sampled during time when children were in school (activities
during vacation time are not represented); activities in the 1980's may different than
they are now;
Measurement or recording error may occur since the diaries were based on recall (in
most cases a 24 hour recall).
Two
Difficult to compare due to varying categories of activities and the unique age
distributions found within each study.
Rating
High
High
Medium
High
High
High
Medium
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
High
Not
Ranked
Medium
Page
15-178
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations (continued)
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
TIME SPENT IN A VEHICLE
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
The study received high level of peer review.
The study is widely available to the public.
The reproducibility of these studies is left to question. Evidence has shown that
activities have tended to shift over the past decade since the studies were published,
due to economic conditions, technological developments, etc. Thus, it is assumed
there would be differences in reproducing these results.
Focus on factor of interest The study focused specifically focused on time spent in vehicle.
Data pertinent to US
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data
collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
The studies focused on the U.S. population and California.
Robinson's study analyzed data from two primary studies, thus it secondary data.
The studies were published in 1985 (data was collected 1981-1982), 1987, 1991 (data
was collected 1987-1990) and 1992.
In one study, households were sampled 4 times during 3 month intervals from
February to December, 1981. Robinson's data was based on 1) the Wiley et al.
(1991) Study where data was collected October 1987 to August 1988; and 2) the
National Study where data was collected January through December 1985.
The approach used to collect primary data was based on diary entries recorded the
previous day with follow-up telephone interviews. Another study collected time diary
data via mailback of questionnaires, telephone interviews. 'Mailback' surveys were
based on the "tomorrow approach" where person knew they were to record in diaries
in advance.
The study sizes ranged from 922 to 5,000 depending on the sub-group considered.
Representativeness of the The studies are representative of the US population and California State.
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
Variability was characterized by age, gender, and day of the week. There was no
mention of race and no socio-economic characterizations made.
Both studies lacked time distributions and were based on short-term data. Wiley et al.
(1991) data was based recall, is limited to California's population, and only
considered English speaking households.
Measurement or recording error may occur when diaries were based on 24 hr recall.
One secondary study analyzing two primary studies
Similar activity patterns were found in both studies.
High
High
Medium
High
High
High
Medium
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-179
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations (continued)
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
TIME SPENT SHOWERING
Study Elements
• Level of peer review The study received high level of peer review.
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
Currently, raw data are available to only EPA. It is not known when data will be
publicly available.
Results are reproducible.
The study focused specifically focused on time spent showering.
The study focused on the U.S. general population.
The study was based on primary data.
The study was published in 1996.
The data were collected between October 1992 and September 1994.
The study used a valid methodology and approach which, in addition to 24-hour
diaries, collected information on temporal conditions and demographic data such as
geographic location and socioeconomic status for various U.S. subgroups.
Study consisted of 9,386 total participants..
The data were representative of the U.S. population.
The study provides a distribution on showering duration.
The study includes distributions for showering duration. Study is based on short-term
data.
High
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Measurement or recording error may occur because diaries are based on 24-hour recall. Medium
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
One; the study was a national study.
Recommendation is based on only one study but it is a widely accepted study and
average value is comparable to a second key study.
Low
High
High
Page
15-180
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table
Considerations
TIME SPENT BATHING
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of
the population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations (continued)
Rationale
The study received high level of peer review.
Currently, raw data are available to only EPA. It is not known when data will be
publicly available.
Results can be reproduced or methodology can be followed and evaluated provided
comparable economic and social conditions exists.
The survey collected information on duration and frequency of selected activities and
time spent in selected micro-environments.
The data represents the U.S. population.
The study was based on primary data.
The study was published in 1996.
The data were collected between October 1992 and September 1994.
The study used a valid methodology and approach which, in addition to 24-hour
diaries, collected information on temporal conditions and demographic data such as
geographic location and socioeconomic status for various U.S. subgroups. Responses
were weighted according to this demographic data.
The study consisted of 9,386 total participants.
The studies were based on the U.S. population.
The study provided data that varied across geographic region, race, gender,
employment status, educational level, day of the week, seasonal conditions, and
medical conditions of respondent..
The study includes distributions for bathing duration. Study is based on short-term
data.
Measurement or recording error may occur because diaries were based on 24-hour
recall.
One; the study was based on one, primary, national study.
Recommendation was based on only one study.
Rating
High
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Not
Ranked
High
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-181
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table
Considerations
15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations (continued)
Rationale
Rating
SHOWER AND BATHING FREQUENCY
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
The study received high level of peer review.
Currently, raw data is available to only EPA. It is not known when data will be
publicly available.
Results can be reproduced or methodology can be followed and evaluated provided
comparable economic and social conditions exists.
The survey collected information on duration and frequency of selected activities and
time spent in selected micro-environments.
The data represents the U.S. population
The study was based on primary data.
The study was published in 1996.
The data were collected between October 1992 and September 1994.
The study used a valid methodology and approach which, in addition to 24-hour
diaries, collected information on temporal conditions and demographic data such as
geographic location and socioeconomic status for various U.S. subgroups. Responses
were weighted according to this demographic data.
The study consisted of 9,386 total participants
Studies were based on the U.S. population.
The study provided data that varied across geographic region, race, gender,
employment status, educational level, day of the week, seasonal conditions, and
medical conditions of respondent..
Study is based on short term data..
Measurement or recording error may occur because diaries were based on 24-hour
recall.
One; the study was based on one, primary, national study.
Recommendation was based on only one study.
High
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Not
Ranked
High
Page
15-182
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table
Considerations
TIME SPENT SWIMMING
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations (continued)
Rationale
Study received high level of peer review.
Currently, raw data is available to only EPA. It is not known when data will be
publicly available.
Results can be reproduced or methodology can be followed and evaluated provided
comparable economic and social conditions exists.
The survey collected information on duration and frequency of selected activities and
time spent in selected micro-environments.
The data represents the U.S. population
The study was based on primary data.
The study was published in 1996.
The data were collected between October 1992 and September 1994.
The study used a valid methodology and approach which, in addition to 24-hour
diaries, collected information on temporal conditions and demographic data such as
geographic location and socioeconomic status for various U.S. subgroups. Responses
were weighted according to this demographic data.
The study consisted of 9,386 total participants
Studies were based on the U.S. population.
The study provided data that varied across geographic region, race, gender,
employment status, educational level, day of the week, seasonal conditions, and
medical conditions of respondent..
The study includes distributions for swimming duration. Study is based on short term
data.
Measurement or recording error may occur because diaries were based on 24-hour
recall.
One; the study was based on one, primary, national study.
Recommendation was based on only one study.
Rating
High
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Not
Ranked
High
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-183
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table
Considerations
15-172. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations (continued)
Rationale
Rating
RESIDENTIAL TIME SPENT INDOORS AND OUTDOORS
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of
the population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
The study received high level of peer review.
Currently, raw data is available to only EPA. It is not known when data will be
publicly available.
Results can be reproduced or methodology can be followed and evaluated provided
comparable economic and social conditions exists.
The survey collected information on duration and frequency of selected activities and
time spent in selected micro-environments.
The data represents the U.S. population
The study was based on primary data.
The study was published in 1996.
Data were collected between October 1992 and September 1994.
The study used a valid methodology and approach which, in addition to 24-hour
diaries, collected information on temporal conditions and demographic data such as
geographic location and socioeconomic status for various U.S. subgroups. Responses
were weighted according to this demographic data.
The study consisted of 9,386 total participants
The studies were based on the U.S. population.
The study provided data that varied across geographic region, race, gender,
employment status, educational level, day of the week, seasonal conditions, and
medical conditions of respondent..
The study includes distribitions for time spent indoors and outdoors at ones residence.
Study is based on short term data.
Measurement or recording error may occur because diaries were based on 24-hour
recall.
One; the study was based on one, primary, national study.
Recommendation was based on only one study.
High
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Not
Ranked
High
Page
15-184
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-173. Confidence in Occupational Mobility Recommendations
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of
the population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
The studies received high level of peer review
The studies are widely available to the public.
If the data were re-collected in the same fashion, it is questionable whether the results
would be the same based on changes in the economy that have occurred since study
was conducted (more than 10 years ago). If the same data were analyzed according to
the design of the study then it is expected the results would be the same.
Occupational tenure was the focus of both key studies.
The data represents the U.S. population.
The two studies are secondary data sources since they are based on supplemental data
to the January 1987 Current Population Study (a U.S. Census publication).
The studies were published in 1988 (data was collection in 1987) and 1990 (data
collected from 1986-1987).
The studies are based on census data, which is collected over a period of years. One
study analyzed data for January 1987. The remaining study based data between a
January 1986 and January 1987 time frame.
The studies used a valid methodologies and approaches.
The study size for one is 109 Million; the remaining study's sample size was 100.1
Million.
The data are representative of the U.S. population.
The studies provided averaged data according to gender, race, and education; age
averages and percentiles were provided.
Much of the original study data is not available. Only median values are reported.
There is no apparent error in measurement
Two
Difficult to compare between the number of years worked on a job and entry verses
exit rate of various occupations. One set of data was recorded in number of years.
The other set of data was recorded as a percent motility rate and grouped by age.
Rating
High
High
Medium
High
High
Medium
Medium
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
High
Medium
Not
Ranked
High
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-185
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-174. Recommendations for Population Mobility
Study
Israeli and Nelson, 1992
US Bureau of the Census, 1 993
Johnson and Capel, 1992
Value
' 4.6,yr,(averge)
1/6 a person's lifetime
; (70 yr)=lL7 (modeled) .
9yr(50thpercentile)
33yr(9Qthpercehtile)
26 yr (90th percentile)
33 yr (95th percentile)
47 yr (99th peroentile)
12 Ąr (mean) • • •
. Method
Average of current and total residence
times
: •
Current residence time ,
.. Residential occupancy period
Table 15-175. Confidence in Population Mobility Recommendations
Considerations
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of interest
• Data pertinent to US
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
• Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study
design (high rating is
desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
The studies received high levels of peer review and appear in publications.
The studies are widely available to the public.
Results can be reproduced or methodology can be followed and evaluated.
The Census data provided length of time at current. Two of the studies used
modeling to estimate total time.
The data is based on the U.S. population
Two studies based results on modeled data and one based results on interviews.
The reports were published in 1992 (based on data collected in 1985-1987) and 1993
(based on data collected from 1939 and 1994 (projected) .
The collection period was based on data collected over several years.
There are some concerns regarding the validity of approach. Data does not account
for each member of the household, values are more realistic estimates for the
individual's total residence time, than the average time a household has been living at
its current residence. The moving process was modeled. In another study data was
assumed to have an even distribution within the different ranges which may bias the
50th and 90th percentiles.
The study size ranged from 15,000 to 500, 000.
Studies were based on the U.S. population.
Variability across several geographic regions was noted. Type of ownership was also
addressed. One study provided data grouped by race.
Mentioned above in validity of approach section.
There is no apparent error in measurement.
Three
The studies produced very similar results.
Rating
High
High
High
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
High
High
Medium
Not
Ranked
High
High
High
Medium
Page
15-186
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 15 - Activity Factors
Table 15-176. Summary of Recommended Values for Activity Factors
Type
Value
Study
Indoor Activities
Outdoor Activities
Time Spent Inside Vehicle
Taking Baths
Taking Showers
Occupational Tenure
Population Mobility
Swimming
Residential
Indoors
Outdoors
Children (ages 3-111
•19 hr/day (weekdays)
17 hr/day (weekends)
Adults (ages 12 and older)
21 hr/day • ' •
Children
5 hr/day (weekdays)
7 hr/day (weekends)
Adults .
1.5 hr/day
1.3 'hr/day; • '.
20 minutes/event
10 min/day shower duration
1 shower event/day •
6.6 yrs (16 years and older)
Average:. 9 yr
95th percentile: 30 yr
1 event/month . • .
60 minutes/event
16.4 hr/day
2 hr/day
.Timmer et al., 1985 -Key study .
Timmeret al., 1985-Key study
Robinson and Thomas, 1991 - Key study.
Timmeret al., 1985 -Key study
Timmer et al.,. 1985 -Key study
Robinson and Thomas, 1991 - Key study
Robinson and Thomas, 1991 - Key study
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996 - Key study
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996 - Key study
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996-Key study
'•Tsangand'Klepeis, 1996-Key study .
Carey, 1988 - Relevant study . , . .
US Bureau of the Census, 1993 - Key
study • • ,;'
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996 - Key study
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996 - Key study
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15-187
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
APPENDIX ISA
ACTIVITY PATTERNS CODES AND OCCUPATIONAL TENURE DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15A-1
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries
WORK AND OTHER INCOME-PRODUCING ACTIVITIES
Paid Work
01 - Normal work: activities at the main job including work brought home, travel that is part of the job, and overtime;
"working," "at work"
Work at home; work activities for pay done in the home when home is the main workplace (include travel as
above)
02 - Job search; looking for work, including visits to employment agencies, phone calls to prospective employers,
answering want ads
Unemployment benefits; applying for or collecting unemployment compensation
Welfare, food stamps; applying for or collecting welfare, food stamps
05 - Second job; paid work activities that are not part of the main job (use this code only when R* clearly indicates
a second job or "other" job); paid work for those not having main job; garage sales, rental properly
06 - Lunch at the workplace; lunch eaten at work, cafeteria, lunchroom when "where" = work (lunch at a restaurant,
code 44; lunch at home, code 43)
Eating, smoking, drinking coffee as a secondary activity while working (at workplace)
07 - Before and/or after work at the workplace; activities at the workplace before starting or after stopping work;
include "conversations," other work. Do not code secondary activities with this primary activity
Other work-related
08 - Coffee breaks and other breaks at the workplace; unscheduled breaks and other nonwork during work hours at
the workplace; "took a break"; "had coffee" (as a primary activity). Do not code secondary activities with this
primary activity
09 - Travel; to and from the workplace when R's travel to and from work were both interrupted by stops; waiting for
related travel
Travel to and from the workplace, including time spent awaiting transportation
HOUSEHOLD ACTIVITIES
Indoor
10 - Meal preparation: cooking, fixing lunches
Serving food, setting table, putting groceries away, unloading car after grocery shopping
11 - Doing dishes, rinsing dishes, loading dishwasher
Meal cleanup, clearing table, unloading dishwasher
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15A-3
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
HOUSEHOLD ACTIVITIES (continued)
Indoor (continued)
12 - Miscellaneous, "worked around house." NA if indoor or outdoor - Routine indoor cleaning and chores, picking
up, dusting, making beds, washing windows, vacuuming, "cleaning," "fall/spring cleaning," "housework"
14 - Laundry and clothes care - wash
Laundry and clothes care - iron, fold, mending, putting away clothes ("Sewing" code 84)
16 - Repairs indoors; fixing, repairing appliances
Repairs indoors; fixing, repairing furniture
Repairs indoors; fixing, repairing furnace, plumbing, painting a room
17 - Care of houseplants
19 - Other indoor, NA whether cleaning or repair; "did things in house"
Outdoor
13 - Routine outdoor cleaning and chores; yard work, raking leaves, mowing grass, garbage removal, snow shoveling,
putting on storm windows, cleaning garage, cutting wood
16 - Repair, maintenance, exterior; fixing repairs outdoors, painting the house, fixing the roof, repairing the driveway
(patching)
Home improvements: additions to and remodeling done to the house, garage; new roof
Improvement to grounds around house; repaved driveway
17 - Gardening; flower or vegetable gardening; spading, weeding, composting, picking, worked in garden"
19 - Other outdoor; "worked outside," "puttering in garage
MISCELLANEOUS HOUSEHOLD CHORES
16 - Car care; necessary repairs and routine care to cars; tune up
Car maintenance; changed oil, changed tires, washed cars; "worked on car" except when clearly as a hobby -
(code 83)
17 - Pet care; care of household pets including activities with pets; playing with the dog; walking the dog; (caring for
pets of relatives, friends, code 42)
(continued on the following page)
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15A-4 August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
MISCELLANEOUS HOUSEHOLD CHORES (continued)
19 - Household paperwork; paying bills, balancing the checkbook, making lists, getting the mail, working on the
budget
Other household chores; (no travel), picking up things at home, e.g., "picked up deposit slips" (relate travel to
purpose)
CHILD CARE
Child Care for Children of Household
20 - Baby care; care to children aged 4 and under
21 - Child care; care to children aged 5*-17
Child care; mixed ages or NA ages of children
22 - Helping/teaching children leam, fix, make things; helping son bake cookies; helping daughter fix bike
Help with homework or supervising homework
23 - Giving children orders or instructions; asking them to help; telling the*i*n to behave
Disciplining child; yelling at kids, spanking children; correcting children's behavior
Reading to child
Conversations with household children only; listening to children
24 - Indoor playing; other indoor activities with children (including games ("playing") unless obviously outdoor
games)
25 - Outdoor playing; outdoor activities with children including sports, walks, biking with, other outdoor games
Coaching/leading outdoor, nonorganizational activities
26 - Medical care at home or outside home; activities associated with children's health; "took son to doctor," "gave
daughter medicine"
Other Child Care
27 - Babysitting (unpaid) or child care outside R's home or for children not residing in HH
Coordinating or facilitating child's social or instructional nonschool activities; (travel related, code 29)
Other child care, including phone conversations relating to child care other than medical
29 - Travel related to child's social and instructional nonschool activities
Other travel related to child care activities; waiting for related travel
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15A-5
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
OBTAINING GOODS AND SERVICES
Goods (include phone calls to obtain goods)
30 - Groceries; supermarket, shopping for food
All other shopping for goods; including for clothing, small appliances; at drugstores, hardware stores, department
stores, "downtown" or "uptown," "shopping," "shopping center," buying gas, "window shopping"
31 - Durable household goods; shopping for large appliances, cars, furniture
House, apartment: activities connected to buying, selling, renting, looking for house, apartment, including phone
calls; showing house, including traveling around looking at real estate property (for own use)
Services (include phone conversations to obtain services)
32 - Personal care; beauty, barber shop; hairdressers
33 - Medical care for self; visits to doctor, dentist, optometrist, including making appointments
34 - Financial services; activities related to taking care of financial business; going to the bank, paying utility bills (not
by mail), going to accountant, tax office, loan agency, insurance office
Other government services: post office, driver's license, sporting licenses, marriage licenses, police station
35 - Auto services; repair and other auto services including waiting for such services
Clothes repair and cleaning; cleaners, laundromat, tailor
Appliance repair: including furnace, water heater, electric or battery operated appliances; including watching
repair person
Household repair services: including furniture; other repair services NA type; including watching repair person
37 - Other professional services; lawyer, counseling (therapy)
Picking up food at a takeout place - no travel
Other services, "going to the dump"
38 - Errands; "running errands," NA whether for goods or services; borrowing goods
39 - Related travel; travel related to obtaining goods and services and/or household activities except 31; waiting for
related travel
(continued on the following page)
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15A-6 August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
PERSONAL NEEDS AND CARE
Care to Self
40 - Washing, showering, bathing
Dressing; getting ready, packing and unpacking clothes, personal hygiene, going to the bathroom
41 - Medical care at home to self
43 - Meals at home; including coffee, drinking, smoking, food from a restaurant eaten at home, "breakfast," "lunch"
44 - Meals away from home; eaten at a friend's home (including coffee, drinking, smoking)
Meals away from home, except at workplace (06) or at friend's home (44); eating at restaurants, out for coffee
45 - Night sleep; longest sleep for day; (may occur during day for night shift workers) including "in bed," but not
asleep
46 - Naps and resting; rest periods, "dozing," "laying down" (relaxing code 98)
48 - Sex, making out
Personal, private; "none of your business"
Affection between household members; giving and getting hugs, kisses, sitting on laps
Help and Care to Others
41 - Medical care to adults in household (HH)
42 - Nonmedical care to adults in HH; routine nonmedical care to adults in household; "got my wife up," "ran a bath
for my husband"
Help and care to relatives not living in HH; helping care for, providing for needs of relatives; (except travel)
helping move, bringing food, assisting in emergencies, doing housework for relatives; visiting when sick
Help and care to neighbors, friends
Help and care to others, NA relationship to respondent
Other Personal and Helping
48 - Other personal; watching personal care activities
49 - Travel (helping); travel related to code 42, including travel that is the helping activity; waiting for related travel
Other personal travel; travel related to other personal care activities; waiting for related travel; travel, NA purpose
of trip - e.g., "went to Memphis" (no further explanation given)
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15A-7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL TRAINING
50 - Student (full-time); attending classes, school if full-time student; includes day care, nursery school for children
not in school
51 - Other classes, courses, lectures, academic or professional; R not a full-time student or NA whether a student;
being tutored
54 - Homework, studying, research, reading, related to classes or profession, except for current job (code 07); "went
to the library"
56 - Other education
59 - Other school-related travel; travel related to education coded above; waiting for related travel; travel to school
not originating from home
ORGANIZATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Volunteer, Helping Organizations: hospital volunteer group, United Fund, Red Cross, Big Brother/Sister
63 - Attending meetings of volunteer, helping organizations
Officer work; work as an officer of volunteer, helping organizations; R must indicate he/she is an officer to be
coded here
Fund raising activities as a member of volunteer helping organization, collecting money, planning a collection
Direct help to individuals or groups as a member of volunteer helping organizations; visiting, bringing food,
driving
Other activities as a member of volunteer helping organizations, including social events and meals
Religious Practice
65 - Attending services of a church or synagogue, including participating in the service; ushering, singing in choir,
leading youth group, going to church, funerals
Individual practice; religious practice carried out as an individual or in a small group; praying, meditating, Bible
study group (not a church), visiting graves
Religious Groups
64 - Meetings: religious helping groups; attending meetings of helping - oriented church groups -ladies aid circle,
missionary society, Knights of Columbus
Other activities; religious helping groups; other activities as a member of groups listed above, including social
activities and meals
(continued on the following page)
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15A-8 _ August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
ORGANIZATIONAL ACTIVITIES (continued)
Religious Groups (continued)
Meetings: other church groups; attending meetings of church group, not primarily helping-oriented, or NA if
helping-oriented
Other activities, other church groups; other activities as a member of church groups that are not helping-oriented
or NA if helping, including social activities and meals; choir practice; Bible class
Professional/Union Organizations: State Education Association; AFL-CIO; Teamsters
60 - Meetings; professional/union; attending meetings of professional or union groups
Other activities, professional/union; other activities as a member of professional or union group including social
activities and meals
Child/Youth/Family Organizations: PTA, PTO; Boy/Girl Scouts; Little Leagues; YMCA/YWCA; school volunteer
67 - Meetings, family organizations; attending meetings of child/youth/family *-oriented organizations
Other activities, family organizations; other activities as a member of child/youth/family-oriented organizations
including social activities and meals
Fraternal Organizations: Moose, VFW, Kiwanis, Lions, Civitan, Chamber of Commerce, Shriners, American Legion
66 - Meetings, fraternal organizations; attending meetings of fraternal organizations
Other activities, fraternal organizations; other activities as a member of fraternal organizations including social
activities and helping activities and meals
Political Party and Civic Participation: Citizens' groups, Young Democrats, Young Republicans, radical political
groups, civic duties
62 - Meetings, political/citizen organizations; attending meetings of a political party or citizen group, including city
council
Other activities, political/citizen organizations; other participation in political party and citizens' groups, including
social activities, voting, jury duty, helping with elections, and meals
Special Interest/Identity Organizations (including groups based on sex, race, national origin); NOW; NAACP;
Polish-American Society; neighborhood, block organizations; CR groups; senior citizens; Weight Watchers
61 - Meetings: identify organizations; attending meetings of special interest, identity organizations
Other activities, identity organizations; other activities as a member of a special interest, identity organization,
including social activities and meals
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 199 7 15A-9
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
ORGANIZATIONAL ACTIVITIES (continued)
Other Miscellaneous Organizations, do not fit above
68 - Other organizations; any activities as a member of an organization not fitting into above categories; (meetings
and other activities included here)
Travel Related to Organizational Activities
69 - Travel related to organizational activities as a member of a volunteer (helping) organization (code 63); including
travel that is the helping activity, waiting for related travel
Travel (other organization-related); travel related to all other organization activities; waiting for related travel
ENTERTAINMENT/SOCIAL ACTIVITIES
Attending Spectacles, Events
70 - Sports; attending sports events - football, basketball, hockey, etc.
71 - Miscellaneous spectacles, events: circus, fairs, rock concerts, accidents
72 - Movies; "went to the show"
73 - Theater, opera, concert, ballet
74 - Museums, art galleries, exhibitions, zoos
Socializing
75 - Visiting with others; socializing with people other than R's own HH members either at R's home or another home
(visiting on the phone, code 96); talking/chatting in the context of receiving a visit or paying a visit
76 - Party; reception, weddings
77 - At bar; cocktail lounge, nightclub; socializing or hoping to socialize at bar, lounge
Dancing
78 - Other events; other events or socializing, do not fit above
79 - Related travel; waiting for related travel
(continued on the following page)
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15A-10 August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
SPORTS AND ACTIVE LEISURE
Active Sports
80 - Football, basketball, baseball, volleyball, hockey, soccer, field hockey
Tennis, squash, racquetball, paddleball
Golf, miniature golf
Swimming, waterskiing
Skiing, ice skating, sledding, roller skating
Bowling; pool, ping-pong, pinball
Frisbee, catch
Exercises, yoga (gymnastics - code 86)
Judo, boxing, wrestling
Out of Doors
81 - Hunting
Fishing
Boating, sailing, canoeing
Camping, at the beach
Snowmobiling, dune-buggies
Gliding, ballooning, flying
Excursions, pleasure drives (no destination), rides with the family
Picnicking
Walking, Biking
82 - Walking for pleasure
Hiking
Jogging, running
Bicycling
Motorcycling
Horseback riding
Hobbies
83 - Photography
Working on cars - not necessarily related to their running; customizing, painting
Working on or repairing leisure time equipment (repairing the boat, "sorting out fishing tackle")
Collections, scrapbooks
Carpentry and woodworking (as a hobby)
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15A-11
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
SPORTS AND ACTIVE LEISURE (continued)
Domestic Crafts
84 - Preserving foodstuffs (canning, pickling)
Knitting, needlework, weaving, crocheting (including classes), crewel, embroidery, quilting, quilling, macrame
Sewing
Care of animals/livestock when R is not a farmer (pets, code 17; "farmer", code 01, work)
Art and Literature
85 - Sculpture, painting, potting, drawing
Literature, poetry, writing (not letters), writing a diary
Music/Theater/Dance
86 - Playing a musical instrument (include practicing), whistling
Singing
Acting (rehearsal for play)
Nonsocial dancing (ballet, modern dance, body movement)
Gymnastics (lessons - code 88)
Games
87 - Playing card games (bridge, poker)
Playing board games (Monopoly, Yahtzee, etc.), bingo, dominoes
Playing social games (scavenger hunts), "played games" - NA kind
Puzzles
Classes/Lessons for Active Leisure Activity
88 - Lessons in sports activities: swimming, golf, tennis, skating, roller skating
Lessons in gymnastics, dance, judo, body movement
Lessons in music, singing, instruments
Other lessons, not listed above
Travel
89 - Related travel; travel related to sports and active leisure; waiting for related travel: vacation travel
(continued on the following page)
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15A-12 August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
PASSIVE LEISURE
90 - Radio
91 - TV
92 - Records, tapes, "listening to music," listening to others playing a musical instrument
93 - Reading books (current job related, code 07; professionally or class related, code 54)
94 - Reading magazines, reviews, pamphlets
Reading NA what; or other
95 - Reading newspapers
96 - Phone conversations - not coded elsewhere, including all visiting by phone
Other talking/conversations; face-to-face conversations, not coded elsewhere (if children in HH only, code 23);
visiting other than 75
Conversations with HH members only - adults only or children and adults
Arguing or fighting with people other than HH members only, household and nonhousehold members, or NA
Arguing or fighting with HH members only
97 - Letters (reading or writing); reading mail
98 - Relaxing
Thinking, planning; reflecting
"doing nothing," "sat"; just sat;
Other passive leisure, smoking dope, pestering, teasing, joking around, messing around; laughing
99 - Related travel: waiting for related travel
MISSING DATA CODES
Activities of others reported - R's activity not specified
NA activities; a time gap of greater than 10 minutes.
EXAMPLES OF ACTIVITIES IN "OTHER" CATEGORIES
Other Work Related
07 - Foster parent activities
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-13
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
EXAMPLES OF ACTIVITIES IN "OTHER" CATEGORIES (continued)
Other Household
19 - Typing
Wrapping presents
Checked refrigerator for shopping list
Unpacked gifts from shower
Packing/unpacking car
" Settled in" after trip
Hooked up boat to car
Showed wife car (R was fixing)
Packing to move
Moved boxes
Looking/searching for things at home (inside or out)
Other Child Care
27 - Waited for son to get hair cut
Picked up nephew at sister's house
"Played with kids" (R's children from previous marriage not living with R)
Called babysitter
Other Services
37 - Left clothing at Goodwill
Unloaded furniture (just purchased)
Returned books (at library)
Brought clothes in from car (after laundromat)
Delivered some stuff to a friend
Waited for father to pick up meat
Waited for stores to open
Put away things from swap meet
Sat in car waiting for rain to stop before shopping
Waiting for others while they are shopping
Showing mom what I bought
Other Personal
48 - Waiting to hear from daughter
Stopped at home, NA what for
Getting hysterical
Breaking up a fight (not child care related)
Waited for wife to get up
(continued on the following page)
Page
15A-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
EXAMPLES OF ACTIVITIES IN "OTHER" CATEGORIES (continued)
Other Personal (continued)
Waiting for dinner at brother's house
Waiting for plane (meeting someone at airport)
Laughing
Crying
Moaning - head hurt
Watching personal care activities ("watched dad shave")
Other Education
56 - Watched a film
In discussion group
Other Organization
68 - Attending "Club House coffee klatch"
Waited for church activities to begin
"Meeting" NA kind
Cleanup after banquet
Checked into swap meet - selling and looking
Other Social Entertainment
78 - Waiting for movies, other events
Opening presents (at a party)
Looking at gifts
Decorating for party
Tour of a home (friends or otherwise)
Waiting for date
Preparing for a shower (baby shower)
Unloaded uniforms (for parade)
Other Active Leisure
88 - Fed birds, bird watching
Astrology
Swinging
At park
Showing slides
Showing sketches
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
ISA-IS
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-1. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used for Adult Time Diaries (continued)
EXAMPLES OF ACTIVITIES IN "OTHER" CATEGORIES (continued)
Other Active Leisure (continued)
Recording music
Hung around airport (NA reason)
Picked up fishing gear
Inspecting motorcycle
Arranging flowers
Work on model airplane
Picked asparagus
Picked up Softball equipment
Registered to play golf
Toured a village or lodge (coded 81)
Other Passive Leisure
98 - Lying in sun
Listening to birds
Looking at slides
Stopped at excavating place
Looking at pictures
Walked around outside
Waiting for a call
Watched plane leave
Girl watching/boy watching
Watching boats
Wasted time
In and out of house
Home movies
* R = Respondent
HH = Household.
Source: luster etal., 1983.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15A-16 August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
00-49
00-09
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10-19
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20-29
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Table 15A-2.
NON-FREE TIME
PAID WORK
(not used)
Main Job
Unemployment
Travel during work
(not used)
Second job
Eating
Before/after work
Breaks
Travel to/from work
HOUSEHOLD WORK
Food Preparation
Meal Cleanup
Cleaning House
Outdoor Cleaning
Clothes Care
Differences in Average Time Spent in Different
and National Studies (minutes per day for age
California
1987-88
(1359)
224
1
8
-
3
6
1
2
28
29
10
21
9
7
Car Repair/Maintenance (by R) 5
Other Repairs (by R)
Plant Care
Animal Care
Other Household
CHILD CARE
Baby Care
Child Care
Helping/Teaching
Talking/Reading
Indoor Playing
Outdoor Playing
Medical care - Care
Other Child Care
(At Dry Cleaners)
Travel, Child care
8
3
3
7
3
7
2
1
2
2
*
2
*
4
National
1985
(1980)
211
1
NR
-
3
8
2
2
25
36
11
24
7
11
5
6
5
5
8
8
5
1
1
3
1
1
1
NR
4
50-59
50-99
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60-69
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70-79
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
Activities Between California
18-64 years)
Free Time
California
1987-88
(1359)
National
1985
(1980)
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Students' Classes
Other Classes
(not used)
(not used)
Homework
Library
Other Education
(not used)
(not used)
Travel, Education
9
1
-
-
8
*
1
-
-
3
5
3
-
-
7
1
1
-
-
2
ORGANIZATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Professional/Union
Special Interest
Political/Civic
Volunteer/Helping
Religious Groups
Religious Practice
Fraternal
Child/Youth/Family
Other Organizations
Travel Organizations
0
*
0
1
1
5
0
1
2
2
1
1
*
1
2
7
*
*
1
4
ENTERTAINMENT/ SOCIAL ACTIVITIES
Sports Events
Entertainment Events
Movies
Theatre
Museums
Visiting
Parties
Bars/Lounges
Other Social
Travel, Events/Social
2
5
2
1
1
26
6
4
*
13
2
1
3
1
*
25
7
6
1
16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-17
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 1 5 A-2. Differences in Average Time Spent in Different Activities Between California
and National Studies (minutes per day for age 1 8-64 years) (continued)
00-49
30-39
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40-49
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
NR =
* =
Source:
NON-FREE TIME
OBTAINING GOODS AND
SERVICES
Everyday Shopping
Durable/House Shop
Personal Services
Medical Appointments
Gov't/Financial Service
Car Repair services
Other Repair services
Other Services
Errands
Travel, Goods and Services
PERSONAL NEEDS AND
CARE
Washing, Etc.
Medical Care
Help and Care
Meals At Home
Meals Out
Night Sleep
Naps/Day Sleep
Dressing, Etc.
NA Activity
Travel, Personal Care/NA
California
1987-88
(1359)
8
19
1
2
3
2
*
2
*
24
21
3
3
44
27
480
16
24
2
22
National
1985
(1980)
5
20
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
20
25
1
4
50
20
469
16
32
12
13
Not Recorded in National Survey
Less than 0.5 Min. per day
Robinson and Thomas, 1991.
50-59
80-89
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90-99
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
Free Time
RECREATION
Active Sports
Outdoor
Walking/Hiking
Hobbies
Domestic Crafts
Art
Music/Drama/Dance
Games
Computer Use/Other
Travel, Recreation
COMMUNICATION
Radio
TV
Records/Tapes
Read Books
Reading Magazines/Other
Reading Newspaper
Conversations
Writing
Think, Relax
Travel, Communication
Total Travel
(Codes 09, 29, 39, 49, 59,
69, 79, 89, 99)
California
1987-88
(1359)
15
3
5
1
3
*
3
5
3
5
1
130
3
4
16
11
15
8
9
5
108
National
1985
(1980)
13
7
4
1
6
1
2
7
3
6
3
126
1
7
10
9
25
9
6
*
90
Page
15A-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-3. Time Spent in Various Microenvironments
Men
Mean duration
Women
Total"
Code Description N = 639
California
N = 914
National
N = 720
California
N= 1059
National
N= 1980
California
N= 1359
National
AT HOME
Kitchen
Living Room
Dining Room
Bathroom
Bedroom
Study
Garage
Basement
Utility Room
Pool, Spa
Yard
Room to Room
Other NR Room
Total at home
46
181
18
27
481
8
14
<0.5
1
1
33
9
3
822
AWAY FROM HOME
Office
Plant
Grocery Store
Shopping Mall
School
Other Public Places
Hospital
Restaurant
Bar-Night Club
Church
Indoor Gym
Other's Home
Auto Repair
Playground
Hotel-Motel
Dry Cleaners
Beauty Parlor
Other Locations
Other Indoor
Other Outdoor
Total away
from home
78
73
12
30
25
18
9
35
15
7
4
60
18
16
7
<0.5
<0.5
3
17
60
487
56
136
10
27
478
10
5
4
0
NR
160C
888
261
18
13
NR
22
8
NR
42
NR
27
NR
NR
NR
NR
41
NR
445
98
98
22
38
534
6
6
<0.5
3
1
21
34
4
963
94
12
14
40
29
10
24
25
5
5
4
61
4
8
8
1
4
1
7
13
371
135
180
18
43
531
7
1
6
5
NRb
116
1022
155
33
11
NR
18
11
NR
45
NR
16
NR
NR
NR
NR
24
NR
324
72
189
19
33
508
7
19
<0.5
2
1
27
21
3
892
86
42
13
35
27
14
17
30
10
6
4
61
11
12
8
1
2
2
12
37
430
104
158
15
38
521
8
2
5
4
NRb
37
40
22
954
193
30
15
12
3
23
10
NR
43
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
24
6
383
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-19
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15 A-3. Time Spent in Various Microenvironments (continued)
Code Description
TRAVEL
Car
Van/Truck
Walking
Bus Stop
Bus
Rapid Train
Other Travel
Airplane
Bicycle
Motorcycle
Other or Missing
Total travel
Men
N = 639 N = 914
California National
76
30 86
10
<0.5
6
1
2
1 15
1
2
1
130 101
Mean duration
Women
N = 720 N=1059
California National
77
11 77
8
1
2
..
1
<0.5 10
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
102 87
N= 1980
California
76
20
9
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
116
Total"
N= 1359
National
__
88
2
-
3
1
<0.5
1
NR
NR
NR
94
Not ascertained 1
Total Time Outdoors
9
70
Totals do not necessarily reflect exact averages presented for each gender. Totals were revised, but revisions for each gender were not provided.
NR = Not Reported
Is total mean duration for those categories; breakdowns per category were not reported.
Source: Robinson and Thomas, 1991.
Note: Percent at home
Percent away from home
Percent in travel
National
men
women
total
men
women
total
men
women
total
62
71
67
31
23
27
7
6
7
California
men
women
total
men
women
total
men
women
total
57
67
62
34
26
30
9
7
8
Page
15A-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-4. Major Time Use Activity
Activity code
01-09
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-99
Categories"
Activity
Market work
House/yard work
Child care
Services/shopping
Personal care
Education
Organizations
Social entertainment
Active leisure
Passive leisure
* Appendix Table 14A-3 presents a detailed explanation of the coding and activities.
Source: Hill, 1985.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-21
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-5
Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) for 87 Activities Grouped by Day of the Week
Weekday
N=831
Activity
01 -Normal Work
02-Unemployment Acts
05-Second Job
06-Lunch At Work
07-Before/After Work
08-Coffee Breaks
09-Travel: To/From Work
10-Meal Preparation
11 -Meal Cleanup
12-Indoor Cleaning
13-Outdoor Cleaning
14-Laundry
16-Rep airs/Maintenance
17-Garden/Pet Care
19-Other Household
20-Baby Care
21 -Child Care
22-Helping/Teaching
23-Reading/Talking
24-Indoor Playing
25-Outdoor Playing
26-Medical Care-Child
27-Babysitting/Other
29-Travel: Child Care
30-Everyday Shopping
31 -Durable/House Shop
32-Personal Care Services
33-Medical Appointments
34-Gov't/Financial Services
35-Repair Services
37-Other Services
38-Errands
39-Travel: Goods/Services
40- Washing/Dressing
41-Medical Care R/HH Adults
42-Help & Care
43-Meals At Home
44-Meals Out
45-Night Sleep
46-Naps/Resting
48-N.A. Activities
49-Travel: Personal
50-Students' Classes
51 -Other Classes
Mean
240.54
0.98
3.76
10.00
3.51
5.05
24.03
42.18
12.48
26.37
7.48
13.35
9.61
8.52
6.26
6.29
6.26
1.36
2.47
1.75
0.73
0.64
2.93
4.18
19.73
0.58
1.93
3.43
1.90
1.33
1.13
0.74
17.93
44.03
0.77
8.43
53.45
19.55
468.49
22.07
7.52
14.87
6.33
2.65
Std. Dev.
219.10
9.43
25.04
15.81
10.05
11.53
30.37
46.59
19.25
43.84
25.45
30.39
35.43
25.15
20.62
22.91
16.34
8.28
8.65
8.72
6.33
7.42
14.56
10.97
30.28
4.83
10.04
14.49
6.07
7.14
7.17
8.03
23.58
29.82
6.19
28.17
35.57
31.20
79.42
43.92
22.32
27.76
33.79
17.92
Saturday
N=831
Mean
82.43
0.00
2.84
1.82
1.45
1.59
7.74
40.37
12.07
38.88
15.71
11.48
17.36
14.75
9.82
5.89
5.38
0.23
1.71
0.90
1.23
0.16
2.16
1.71
33.52
1.46
3.42
0.60
0.66
1.25
1.55
0.35
21.61
44.25
1.29
12.19
57.86
31.13
498.40
30.67
11.72
19.33
0.96
0.40
Std. Dev.
184.41
0.00
32.64
7.88
9.79
7.32
22.00
59.82
22.96
80.39
58.00
31.04
72.50
49.17
37.58
30.72
21.58
3.64
10.84
7.82
13.03
2.79
19.11
8.72
61.38
14.04
18.94
6.63
4.34
10.24
9.57
5.27
36.35
41.20
15.90
52.58
49.25
56.03
115.55
74.98
41.61
50.42
18.17
11.52
Sunday
N=831
Mean
46.74
0.00
2.65
1.43
1.66
0.93
4.60
42.38
13.97
21.73
9.01
7.79
13.56
8.47
7.60
6.26
7.09
0.76
1.53
2.45
0.91
0.44
3.28
2.08
10.13
1.65
0.02
0.00
0.03
0.52
0.72
0.04
8.45
47.54
1.45
14.32
61.84
25.95
528.86
27.56
8.18
18.58
0.96
0.27
Std. Dev.
139.71
0.00
27.30
8.29
13.76
8.52
17.55
57.42
25.85
48.70
39.39
25.43
62.12
37.54
32.17
33.78
23.15
6.52
9.97
15.11
10.30
7.20
24.89
10.56
30.18
17.92
0.69
0.00
0.43
5.61
4.34
1.04
21.64
40.15
29.18
55.13
49.27
47.60
115.84
66.01
35.79
46.36
20.07
5.63
Page
15A-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-5. Mean Time Spent (minutes/day) for 87 Activities Grouped by Day of the Week (continued)
Weekday
N=831
Activity
54-Homework
56-Other Education
59-Travel: Education
60-Professional/Union Orgs.
61 -Identity Organizations
62-Political/Citizen Orgs
63-Volunteer/Helping Orgs
64-Religious Groups
65-Religious Practice
66-Fraternal Organizations
67-Child/Family Organizations
68-Other Organizations
69-Traves: Organizations
70- Sport Events
71-Miscellaneous Events
72-Movies
73-Theater
74-Museums
75-Visiting w/Others
76-Parties
77-Bars/Lounges
78-Other Events
79-Travel: Events/Social
80- Active Sports
81 -Outdoors
82-Walking/Biking
83-Hobbies
84-Domestic Crafts
85-Art/Literature
86-Music/Drama/Dance
87-Games
88-Classes/Other
89-Travel: Active Leisure
90-Radio
91-TV
92-Records/Tapes
93-Reading Books
94-Reading Magazines/N.A.
95-Reading Newspapers
96-Conversations
97-Letters
98-Other Passive Leisure
99-Travel: Passive Leisure
Mean
4.56
0.53
2.29
0.51
1.53
0.14
1.08
2.96
4.98
0.85
1.70
3.91
3.41
2.22
0.32
1.65
0.69
0.19
33.14
2.81
3.62
1.39
8.90
5.30
5.11
2.08
1.78
11.18
0.99
0.45
5.06
2.65
3.31
2.89
113.01
2.58
4.41
13.72
12.03
18.68
2.83
9.72
1.26
Std. Dev.
24.35
5.91
10.36
7.27
11.19
1.25
10.08
17.33
19.92
9.28
11.69
22.85
9.83
13.45
4.89
11.03
7.13
3.32
51.69
16.49
18.07
11.55
16.19
19.60
33.00
9.70
11.73
37.03
10.84
4.91
22.91
15.83
14.77
12.19
103.89
20.26
18.09
31.73
22.65
28.59
12.23
25.02
5.44
Saturday
N=831
Mean
3.48
0.15
0.35
0.13
1.24
0.07
0.02
3.05
7.13
1.73
1.04
1.31
2.66
6.29
1.94
4.74
2.66
0.90
56.78
12.63
7.23
1.33
19.55
9.23
11.58
5.87
3.20
8.67
0.86
0.83
10.14
2.56
8.50
3.53
118.99
2.40
2.76
16.33
12.19
15.45
1.61
17.24
1.32
Std. Dev.
27.98
2.75
4.26
3.64
35.63
1.91
0.45
27.73
30.12
27.71
17.83
20.28
12.22
42.05
19.90
27.04
27.79
13.62
95.61
56.11
35.09
15.52
43.38
43.69
55.07
36.38
32.43
40.49
13.59
8.83
45.11
29.92
48.72
23.42
131.24
16.09
17.85
46.24
34.96
35.27
10.80
57.21
6.80
Sunday
N=831
Mean
5.40
0.45
0.21
0.44
0.48
0.19
0.41
8.59
34.05
0.31
0.26
1.71
12.07
3.44
1.96
3.35
0.77
0.72
69.65
7.16
3.91
1.00
18.02
11.39
15.52
5.92
4.10
6.41
1.13
0.63
7.89
3.37
8.19
2.88
149.67
2.03
5.23
17.18
26.01
14.57
1.96
15.28
1.72
Std. Dev.
38.68
9.85
3.14
8.34
7.58
5.55
7.09
33.31
62.06
6.67
7.63
17.52
37.64
27.78
19.75
22.65
10.37
11.17
114.58
39.02
26.95
10.80
34.45
48.66
62.68
32.28
31.55
34.82
15.07
8.32
40.45
23.60
38.11
18.50
141.43
16.08
30.13
51.01
44.47
34.60
12.59
47.86
9.87
Source: Hill, 1985.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-23
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-6. Weighted Mean Hours Per Week by Gender: 87 Activities and 10 Subtotals
Activity
01 - Normal work
02 - Unemployment acts
05 - Second job
06 - Lunch at work 1.08
07 - Before/after work
08 - Coffee breaks 0.57
09 - Travel: to/from work
10 - Meal preparation
1 1 - Meal cleanup
12 - Indoor cleaning
13 - Outdoor cleaning
14 - Laundry
16 - Repairs/maintenance
17 - Gardening/pet care
19 - Other household
20 - Baby care
21 - Child care
22 - Helping/teaching
23 - Reading/talking
24 - Indoor playing 0.13
25 - Outdoor playing
26 - Medical care - child
27 - Babysitting/other
29 - Travel: child care
30 - Everyday shopping
31 - Durables/house shopping
32 - Personal care services
33 - Medical appointments
34 - Govt/fmancial services
35 - Repair services 0.1 1
37 - Other services 0.11
38 - Errands
39 - Travel: goods/services
Men
N=410
Mean Std. dev.
29.78
0.14
0.73
1.43
0.51
1.05
2.98
1.57
0.33
0.85
1.59
0.13
2.14
0.94
0.92
0.24
0.24
0.07
0.07
0.69
0.06
0.01
0.14
0.23
1.45
0.19
0.06
0.15
0.15
0.45
0.61
0.04
1.60
Women
N=561 N=971
Mean
20.41
1.06
3.20
0.65
1.27
0.36
2.87
2.61
0.83
2.01
3.59
0.72
4.29
2.78
2.42
1.20
0.78
0.61
0.35
0.18
0.37
0.09
0.78
0.67
2.18
1.39
0.42
0.75
0.44
0.17
0.13
0.41
2.02
Std. dev.
14.99
0.08
0.17
1.21
0.23
1.03
1.45
7.25
2.30
5.03
0.56
2.44
0.68
1.00
0.72
0.90
0.99
0.15
0.30
0.82
0.12
0.09
0.64
0.50
2.78
0.08
0.35
0.37
0.19
0.78
0.61
0.06
2.14
Mean
17.62
0.75
1.62
0.85
0.69
0.46
2.17
5.04
2.19
5.05
1.59
3.34
3.43
2.19
1.84
3.04
2.11
0.76
0.86
0.16
0.72
0.67
2.58
1.21
3.25
0.51
1.14
1.63
0.61
0.14
0.12
0.68
2.17
Men and women
Std. dev.
21.82
0.11
0.43
1.33
0.36
1.04
2.16
4.63
1.39
3.10
1.03
1.38
1.35
0.97
0.81
0.60
0.64
0.11
0.19
0.76
0.09
0.05
0.41
0.38
2.17
0.13
0.22
0.27
0.17
0.65
0.61
0.05
1.89
20.33
0.90
2.49
1.01
2.63
4.98
1.97
4.46
2.75
2.75
3.92
2.48
2.13
2.40
1.68
0.70
0.68
0.58
0.50
1.98
1.00
2.89
1.01
0.90
1.31
0.54
0.57
2.12
(Continued on the following page)
Page
15A-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-6. Weighted Mean Hours Per Week by Gender: 87 Activities and 10 Subtotals (continued)
Activity
40 - Washing/dressing
41 - Medical care - adults
42 - Help and care
43 - Meals at home
44 - Meals out
45 - Night sleep
46 - Naps/resting 2.94
48 - N.A. activities
49 - Travel: personal
50 - Students' classes
5 1 - Other classes
54 - Homework
56 - Other education
59 - Travel: education
60 - Professional/union
organizations
61 - Identity organizations
62 - Political/citizen
organizations
63 - Volunteer/helping
organizations
64 - Religious groups
65 - Religious practice
66 - Fraternal organizations
67 - Child/family organizations
68 - Other organizations
69 - Travel: organizations
70 - Sports events
71 - Miscellaneous events
72 - Movies
73 - Theatre
74 - Museums
75 - Visiting with others
76 - Parties
77 - Bars/lounges 0.71
78 - Other events 0.12
79 - Travel: events/social
Men
N=410
Mean Std.
4.33
0.09
1.02
6.59
2.72
55.76
5.18
1.77
2.06
0.92
0.23
0.76
0.11
0.29
0.04
0.14
0.01
0.02
0.38
0.89
0.16
0.10
0.34
0.43
0.30
0.07
0.31
0.13
0.04
4.24
0.64
2.21
0.72
1.40
Women Men and women
N=561 N=971
dev. Mean Std. dev. Mean Std. dev.
2.39
0.67
2.84
3.87
3.48
8.43
3.19
6.12
2.59
4.00
1.68
3.48
0.86
1.07
0.46
0.97
0.08
0.32
1.82
2.05
1.17
0.88
2.40
1.04
1.31
0.52
1.25
0.93
0.37
5.72
2.05
0.46
0.18
1.82
5.43
0.18
1.30
6.32
2.24
56.74
4.70
1.99
1.61
0.38
0.15
0.38
0.02
0.16
0.04
0.18
0.02
0.14
0.41
1.31
0.05
0.21
0.32
0.52
0.26
0.08
0.26
0.06
0.03
5.84
0.44
2.09
1.18
1.26
3.24
1.00
3.04
3.53
2.73
8.49
3.08
5.70
2.51
2.51
1.05
1.87
0.22
1.06
0.62
1.55
0.15
1.05
1.61
2.97
0.66
1.33
1.53
1.02
1.28
0.59
1.13
0.48
0.35
6.42
1.65
0.57
0.15
1.67
4.92
0.14
1.17
6.44
2.46
56.29
4.93
1.89
1.82
0.63
0.18
0.56
0.06
0.22
0.04
0.16
0.01
0.09
0.40
1.12
0.10
0.16
0.32
0.48
0.28
0.07
0.28
0.09
0.03
5.10
0.53
2.15
0.99
1.32
2.93
0.86
2.95
3.69
3.10
8.47
5.89
2.56
3.29
1.38
2.74
0.61
1.07
0.55
1.31
0.12
0.80
1.71
1.60
0.93
1.15
1.98
1.03
1.29
0.56
1.19
0.72
0.36
6.16
1.84
1.74
(Continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-25
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-6. Weighted Mean Hours Per Week by Gender: 87 Activities and 10 Subtotals (continued)
Activity
80 - Active sports
81 - Outdoors
82 - Walking/biking
83 - Hobbies
84 - Domestic crafts
85 - Art/literature 0.05
86 - Music/drama/dance
87 - Games
88 - Classes/other
89 - Travel: active leisure
90 - Radio
91 -TV
92 - Records/tapes
93 - Reading books
94 - Reading magazines/N.A.
95 - Reading newspapers
96 - Conversations
97 - Letters
98 - Other passive leisure
99 - Travel: passive leisure
Men
N=410
Mean Std.
1.05
1.49
0.52
0.69
0.30
0.45
0.06
0.60
0.41
0.76
0.39
14.75
0.46
0.37
1.32
1.86
1.61
0.20
1.68
0.18
Women
dev.
2.62
4.59
1.31
3.88
1.59
0.13
0.49
2.00
1.75
1.91
1.40
12.14
2.35
1.52
2.81
2.72
2.19
1.06
3.53
0.49
N=561
Mean Std.
0.50
0.48
0.23
0.06
2.00
1.03
0.07
0.99
0.28
0.43
0.39
13.95
0.33
0.56
1.97
1.47
2.18
0.31
1.41
0.13
dev.
1.68
1.67
0.98
0.43
4.72
0.09
0.47
3.16
1.50
1.43
1.55
10.67
2.13
1.83
3.67
2.27
2.74
1.12
3.32
0.49
Men and women
N=971
Mean Std.
0.76
0.94
0.36
0.35
1.21
0.81
0.07
0.81
0.34
0.58
0.39
14.32
0.39
0.47
1.67
1.65
1.91
0.26
1.53
0.15
dev.
2.18
3.39
1.16
2.67
3.93
0.48
2.69
1.62
1.68
1.49
11.38
2.23
1.70
3.32
2.49
2.52
1.10
3.42
0.49
Source: Hill, 1985.
Page
15A-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure
Median years of
Occupation occupational tenure
Barbers 24.8
F aimers, except horticultural 21.1
Railroad conductors and yardmasters 18.4
Clergy 15.8
Dentists 15.7
Telephone line installers and repairers 15.0
Millwrights 14.8
Locomotive operating occupations 14.8
Managers; farmers, except horticultural 14.4
Telephone installers and repairers 14.3
Airplane pilots and navigators 14.0
Supervisors: police and detectives 13.8
Grader, dozer, and scraper operators 13.3
Tailors 13.3
Civil engineers 13.0
Crane and tower operators 12.9
Supervisors, n.e.c. 12.9
Teachers, secondary school 12.5
Teachers, elementary school 12.4
Dental laboratory and medical applicance technicians 12.3
Separating, filtering, and clarifying machine oeprators 12.1
Tool and die makers 12.0
Lathe and turning machine operators 11.9
Machinists 11.9
Pharmacists 11.8
Stationary engineers 11.7
Mechanical engineers 11.4
Chemists, except biochemists 11.1
Inspectors, testers, and graders 11.0
Electricians 11.0
Operating engineers 11.0
Radiologic technicians 10.9
Electrical power installers and repairers 10.8
Supervisors; mechanics and repairers 10.7
Heavy equipment mechanics 10.7
Bus, truck, and stationary engine mechanics 10.7
Physicians 10.7
Construction inspectors 10.7
Cabinet makers and bench carpenters 10.6
Industrial machinery repairers 10.6
Automobile body and related repairers 10.4
(Continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15A-
•27
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure (continued)
Occupation
Median years of
occupational tenure
Electrical and electronic engineers
Plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters
Licensed practical nurses
Brickmasons and stonemasons
Truck drivers, heavy
Tile setters, hard and soft
Lawyers
Supervisors: production occupations
Administrators, education and related fields
Engineers, n.e.c.
Excavating and loading machine operators
Firefighting occupations
Aircraft engine mechanics
Police and detectives, public service
Counselors, educational and vocational
Architects
Stuctural metal workers
Aerospace engineers
Miscellaneous aterial moving equipment operators
Dental hygienists
Automobile mechanics
Registered nurses
Speech therapists
Binding and twisting machine operators
Managers and administrators, n.e.c.
Personnel and labor relations managers
Office machine repairer
Electronic repairers, commercial and industrial equipment
Welders and cutters
Punching and stamping press machine operators
Sheet metal workers
Administrators and officials, public administraion
Hairdressers and cosmetologists
Industrial engineers
Librarians
Inspectors and compliance officers, except construction
Upholsterers
Payroll and timekeeping clerks
Furnace, kiln, and oven operators, except food
Surveying and mapping technicians
Chemical engineers
10.4
10.4
10.3
10.2
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
9.7
9.7
9.6
9.6
9.6
9.4
9.4
9.3
9.3
9.3
9.3
9.1
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
8.9
8.9
8.9
8.9
(continued on the following page)
Page
15A-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure (continued)
Occupation
Median years of
occupational tenure
Sheriffs, bailiffs, and other law enforcement officers
Concrete and terrazzo finishers
Sales representatives, mining, manufacturing, and wholesale
Supervisors: general office
Specified mechanics and repairers, n.e.c.
Stenographers
Typesetters and compositors
Financial managers
Psychologists
Teachers: special education
Statistical clerks
Designers
Water and Sewage Treatment plant operators
Printing machine operators
Heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration mechanics
Supervisors; distribution, scheduling, and adjusting clerks
Insurance sales occupations
Carpenters
Public transportation attendants
Drafting occupations
Butchers and meatcutters
Miscellaneous electrical and electronic equipment repairers
Dressmakers
Musicians and composers
Supervisors and proprietors; sales occupations
Painters, Sculptors, craft-artists, and artist printmakers
Mechanics and repairers, not specified
Engineering technicians, n.e.c.
Clinical laboratory technologists and technicians
Purchasing managers
Purchasing agents and buyers, n.e.c.
Photographers
Chemical technicians
Managers; properties and real estate
Accountants and auditors
Religious workers, n.e.c.
Secretaries
Social workers
Operations and systems researchers and analysts
Postal clerks, except mail carriers
Managers; marketing, advertising, and public relations
8.6
8.6
8.6
8.6
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.3
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-29
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure (continued)
Occupation
Median years of
occupational tenure
Farm workers
Managers; medicine and health
Data processing equipment repairers
Bookkeepers, accounting and auditing clerks
Grinding, abrading, buffing, and polishing machine operators
Management related occupations, n.e.c.
Supervisors; cleaning and building service workers
Management analysts
Science technicians, n.e.c.
Mail carriers, postal service
Knitting, looping, taping, and weaving machine operators
Electrical and electronic technicians
Painting and paint spraying machine operators
Postsecondary teachers, subject not specified
Crossing guards
Inhalation therapists
Carpet installers
Computer systems analysts and scientists
Other financial officers
Industrial truck and tractor equipment operators
Textile sewing machine operators
Correctional institution officers
Teachers, prekindergarten and kindergarten
Supervisors; financial records processing
Miscellaneous Textile machine operators
Production inspectors, checkers, and examiners
Actors and directors
Health technologists and technicians, n.e.c.
Miscellaneous machine operators, n.e.c.
Private household cleaners, and servants
Buyers, wholesale and retail trade, excluding farm products
Real estate sales occupations
Electrical and electronic equipment assemblers
Bus drivers
Editors and reporters
Laundering and dry cleaning machine operators
Meter readers
Painters, construction and maintenance
Driver-sales workers
Teachers, n.e.c.
Order clerks
Physicians' assistants
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.1
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.2
6.2
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.8
5.8
(continued on the following page)
Page
15A-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure (continued)
Occupation
Median years of
occupational tenure
Billing clerks
Drywall installers
Construction trades, n.e.c.
Telephone operators
Authors
Nursing aides, orderlies, and attendants
Dental assistants
Timber cutting and logging occupations
Molding and casting machine operators
Miscellaneous hand-working occupations
Production coordinators
Public relations specialists
Personnel clerks, except payroll and bookkeeping
Assemblers
Securities and financial services sales occupations
Salesworkers, furniture and home furnishings
Insurance adjusters, examiners, and investigators
Pressing machine operators
Roofers
Graders and sorters, except agricultural
Supervisors; related agricultural occupations
Typists
Supervisors; motor vehicle operators
Personnel, training, and labor relations specialists
Legal assistants
Physical therapists
Advertising and related sales occupations
Records clerks
Economists
Technicians, n.e.c.
Expediters
Sales occupations, other business services
Computer operators
Computer programmers
Investigators and adjusters, except insurance
Underwriters
Salesworkers, parts
Artists, performers, and related workers, n.e.c.
Teachers' aides
Maids and housemen
Sawing machine operators
Machine operators, not specified
Weighers, measurers, and checkers
5.8
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.1
5.0
5.0
4.9
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.6
4.6
4.6
4.5
4.5
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
15A-31
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure (continued)
Occupation
Median years of
occupational tenure
Traffic, shipping, and receiving clerks
Salesworkers, hardware and building supplies
Biological technicians
Athletes
Bill and account collectors
Taxicab drivers and chauffeurs
Slicing and cutting machine operators
Administrative support occupations, n.e.c.
Mixing and blending machine operators
Waiters and waitresses
Janitors and cleaners
Production helpers
General office clerks
Machine feeders and offbearers
Interviewers
Bartenders
Eligibility clerks, social welfare
Bank tellers
Cooks, except short-order
Health aides, except nursing
Laborers, except construction
Welfare service aides
Salesworkers, motor vehicles and boats
Cost and rate clerks
Construction laborers
Hand packers and packagers
Transportation ticket and reservation agents
Animal caretakers, except farm
Photographic process machine operators
Freight, stock, and material movers, hand, n.e.c.
Data-entry keyers
Bakers
Dispatchers
Guards and police, except public service
Packaging and filling machine operators
Receptionists
Library clerks
Truckdrivers, light
Salesworkers, radio, television, hi-fi, and appliances
Salesworkers, apparel
Sales counter clerks
Salesworkers, other commodities
4.5
4.5
4.4
4.4
4.4
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.2
4.2
4.1
4.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.1
(continued on the following page)
Page
15A-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix ISA
Table 15A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational Tenure (continued)
Median years of
Occupation occupational tenure
Small engine repairers 3.1
Supervisors, food preparation and service occupations 3.0
Health record technologists and technicians 2.9
Helpers, construction trades 2.9
Attendants, amusement and recreation facilities 2.8
Street and door-to-door salesworkers 2.7
Child-care workers, private household 2.7
Child-care workers, except private household 2.7
Information clerks, n.e.c. 2.7
Hotel clerks 2.7
Personal service occupations, n.e.c. 2.7
Salesworkers, shoes 2.6
Garage and service station related occupations 2.6
Short-order cooks 2.5
File clerks 2.5
Cashiers 2.4
Mail clerks, except postal service 2.3
Miscellaneous food preparation occupations 2.3
News vendors 2.3
Vehicle washers and equipment cleaners 2.3
Messengers 2.3
Kitchen workers, food preparation 2.1
Stock handlers and baggers 1.9
Waiters and waitresses assistants 1.7
Food counter, fountain, and related occupations 1.5
a n.e.c. - not elsewhere classified
Source: Carey, 1988.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 15A-33
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix 15B
APPENDIX 15B
ACTIVITY PATTERNS CODES AND OCCUPATIONAL TENURE DATA
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix 15B
Table 15B-1. Annual Geographical Mobility Rates, by Type of Movement for
Selected 1-Year Periods: 1960-1992 (numbers in thousands)
Residing in the United States at beginning of period
Mobility
period
NUMBER
1991-92
1990-91
1989-90
1988-89
1987-88
1986-87
1985-86
1984-85
1983-84
1982-83
1981-82
1980-81
1970-71
1960-61
PERCENT
1991-92
1990-91
1989-90
1988-89
1987-88
1986-87
1985-86
1984-85
1983-84
1982-83
1981-82
1980-81
1970-71
1960-61
Total
movers
42,800
41,539
43,381
42,620
42,174
43,693
43,237
46,470
39,379
37,408
38,127
38,200
37,705
36,533
17.3
17.0
17.9
17.8
17.8
18.6
18.6
20.2
17.3
16.6
17.0
17.2
18.7
20.6
Total
41,545
40,154
41,821
41,153
40,974
42,551
42,037
45,043
38,300
36,430
37,039
36,887
36,161
35,535
16.8
16.4
17.3
17.2
17.3
18.1
18.0
19.6
16.8
16.1
16.6
16.6
17.9
20.0
Different
house,
same
county
26,587
25,151
25,726
26,123
26,201
27,196
26,401
30,126
23,659
22,858
23,081
23,097
23,018
24,289
10.7
10.3
10.6
10.9
11.0
11.6
11.3
13.1
10.4
10.1
10.3
10.4
11.4
13.7
Total
14,957
15,003
16,094
15,030
14,772
15,355
15,636
14,917
14,641
13,572
13,959
13,789
13,143
11,246
6.0
6.1
6.6
6.3
6.2
6.5
6.7
6.5
6.4
6.0
6.2
6.2
6.5
6.3
Different County
Same Different
State State
7,853
7,881
8,061
7,949
7,727
8,762
8,665
7,995
8,198
7,403
7,330
7,614
6,197
5,493
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.7
3.7
3.5
3.6
3.3
3.3
3.4
3.1
3.1
7,105
7,122
8,033
7,081
7,046
6,593
6,791
6,921
6,444
6,169
6,628
6,175
6,946
5,753
2.9
2.9
3.3
3.0
3.0
2.8
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.7
3.0
2.8
3.4
3.2
Different
Region
3,285
3,384
3,761
3,258
3,098
3,546
3,778
3,647
3,540
3,192
3,679
3,363
3,936
3,097
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.4
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.5
2.0
1.7
Residing
outside the
United States
at the
beginning of
period
1,255
1,385
1,560
1,467
1,200
1,142
1,200
1,427
1,079
978
1,088
1,313
1,544
988
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.6
Source:
U.S. Bureau of Census, 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
15B-3
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix 15B
Table 15B-2. Mobility of the Resident Population by State: 1980
Percent distribution -
residence in 1975"
Region, division,
and state
United States
Northeast
New England
Maine
New Hampshire
Vermont
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
Connecticut
Middle Atlantic
New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Midwest
East North Central
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Michigan
Wisconsin
West North Central
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas
Persons
5 years
old, and
overb
1980
(1,000)
210,323
46,052
11,594
1,047
857
476
5,398
891
2,925
34,458
16,432
6,904
11,122
54,513
38,623
10,015
5,074
10,593
8,582
4,360
15,890
3,770
2,693
4,564
598
633
1,448
2,184
Same
house
in
1980
as
1975
53.6
61.7
59.1
56.9
51.6
54.4
61.0
60.5
59.0
62.6
61.5
61.5
65.0
55.4
56.0
56.7
54.8
55.5
56.4
56.2
53.9
55.6
55.6
54.0
51.7
52.9
53.1
50.2
Different
house,
same
county
25.1
22.3
23.4
24.0
22.8
23.9
22.7
23.9
24.4
21.9
22.6
20.0
22.0
26.4
27.4
27.9
27.5
28.5
26.2
25.5
24.0
22.8
25.0
24.1
23.1
23.2
24.4
25.1
Different
county,
same
state
9.8
8.0
6.7
7.5
6.2
6.5
7.6
5.0
5.5
8.4
9.3
8.6
7.1
10.2
9.6
9.0
9.6
8.1
11.3
11.0
11.8
13.3
10.9
11.8
11.4
12.1
11.0
10.7
Different
county,
different
state
9.7
6.1
9.2
10.8
18.5
14.3
7.0
8.7
9.3
5.0
3.8
7.8
5.2
7.0
6.0
5.7
7.6
6.1
5.1
6.7
9.4
7.3
7.9
9.4
12.7
11.1
10.5
12.6
(Continued on the following page)
Page
15B-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix 15B
Table 15B-2. Mobility of the Resident Population by State: 1980 (continued)
Percent distribution -
residence in 1975"
Region, division,
and state
Persons
5 years
old, and
over"
1980
(1,000)
Same
house
in
1980
as
1975
Different
house,
same
county
Different
county,
same
state
Different
county,
different
state
South
South Atlantic
Delaware
Maryland
District of Columbia
Virginia
West Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
East South Central
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
West South Central
Arkansas
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
West
Mountain
Montana
Idaho
Wyoming
Colorado
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Nevada
69,880
34,498
555
3,947
603
4,99i
1,806
5,476
2,884
5,052
9,183
13,556
3,379
4,269
3,601
2,307
21,826
2,113
3,847
2,793
13,074
39,879
10,386
722
852
425
2,676
1,188
2,506
1,272
745
52.4
52.7
57.0
55.5
58.2
51.0
60.9
56.9
57.5
52.5
46.2
56.0
54.4
54.2
57.6
59.0
49.6
53.1
57.0
47.6
47.3
43.8
42.7
47.3
44.4
38.4
39.8
50.3
41.9
45.8
34.8
24.1
22.4
26.3
21.9
22.7
17.9
23.4
23.5
22.3
22.8
23.7
25.9
27.2
27.2
25.3
22.5
25.6
24.8
24.3
24.9
26.2
28.3
25.1
24.5
24.7
23.6
22.7
23.2
27.1
27.8
27.4
10.0
9.7
2.0
10.3
NA
15.0
6.6
8.9
7.7
12.2
7.8
7.9
8.6
7.4
7.4
8.6
11.8
9.1
9.2
12.3
12.9
11.0
9.1
12.3
9.5
8.6
14.8
7.2
5.0
8.4
3.6
12.0
13.6
13.3
10.4
16.3
13.9
8.6
9.8
11.5
11.5
19.6
9.5
9.0
10.6
8.9
9.2
11.0
12.4
8.4
13.7
11.0
13.4
21.1
15.0
20.0
28.3
20.6
17.4
23.9
16.0
31.5
(continued on the following page)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
15B-5
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix 15B
Table 15B-2. Mobility of the Resident Population by State: 1980 (continued)
Percent distribution -
residence in 1975*
Region, division,
and state
Persons
5 years
old, and
overb
1980
(1,000)
Same
house
in
1980
as
1975
Different
house,
same
county
Different
county,
same
state
Different
county,
different
state
Pacific 29,493 44.2 29.4 11.6 10.7
Washington 3,825 43.7 27.7 10.1 16.2
Oregon 2,437 41.4 26.6 13.4 16.9
California 21,980 44.6 30.2 12.1 8.5
Alaska 363 32.2 27.6 8.7 29.1
Hawaii 888 49.3 25.2 2.8 16.9
" Survey assessed changes in residence between 1975 and 1980.
b Includes persons residing abroad in 1975.
NA = not applicable.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract, 1984.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
15B-6 August 1997
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
16. CONSUMER PRODUCTS 1
16.1. BACKGROUND 1
16.2. KEY CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE STUDIES 1
16.3. RELEVANT CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE STUDY 4
16.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 5
16.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 16 5
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
16. CONSUMER PRODUCTS
16.1. BACKGROUND
Consumer products may contain toxic or potentially
toxic chemical constituents to which humans may be
exposed as a result of their use. For example, methylene
chloride and other solvents and carriers are common in
consumer products and may have human health concerns.
Potential pathways of exposure to consumer products or
chemicals released from consumer products during use
occur via ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact.
Exposure assessments that address consumer products
involve characterization of these potential exposure
pathways and calculating exposure or dose (based on
exposure pathway) of chemical substances released during
use of consumer products. In order to estimate specific-
pathway exposure for consumer products or their
components, the following information is needed: amount
of product used; concentration of product in each type of
activity; percent weight of chemical present in product;
duration and frequency of use or activity; and for dermal
exposure, the amount of solution on skin after exposure
(Hakkmen et al, 1991; U.S. EPA, 1987).
This chapter presents information on the amount of
product used, frequency of use, and duration of use for
various consumer products typically found in consumer
households. All tables that present information for these
consumer products are located at the end of this chapter.
U.S. EPA (1987) has complied a comprehensive list of
consumer products found in typical American households.
This list of consumer products is presented in Table 16-1.
It should be noted that this chapter does not provide an
exhaustive treatment of all consumer products, but rather
provides some background and data that can be utilized in
an exposure assessment. Also, the data presented may not
capture information needed to assess the highly exposed
population (e.g., consumers who use commercial/ industrial
strength products at home). The studies presented in the
following sections represent readily available surveys for
which data were collected on the frequency and duration of
use and amount of use of cleaning products, painting
products, household solvent products, cosmetic and other
personal care products, household equipment, pesticides,
and tobacco. The studies have been classified as either key
or relevant based on their applicability to exposure
assessment needs.
The reader is also referred to a document developed
by the U.S. EPA, Office of Toxic Substances: Standard
Scenarios for Estimating Exposure to Chemical
Substances During Use of Consumer Products - Volumes
I and II (U.S. EPA, 1986). This document presents data
and supporting information required to assess consumer
exposure to constituents in household cleaners and
components of adhesives. Information presented includes
a description of standard scenarios selected to represent
upper bound exposures for each product. Values are also
presented for parameters that are needed to estimate
exposure for defined exposure routes and pathways
assumed for each scenario.
An additional reference is the Simmons Market
Research Bureau (SMRB)," Simmons Study of Media and
Markets." This document provides an example of
marketing data that are available that may be useful in
assessing exposure to selected products. The reports are
published annually. Data are collected on the buying habits
of the U.S. populations over the past 12 months. This
information is collected for over 1,000 consumer products.
Data are presented on frequency of use, total number of
buyers in each use category, and selected demographics.
The consumer product data are presented according to the
"buyer" and not necessarily according to the "user" (actively
exposed person). It may be necessary to adjust the data to
reflect potential uses in a household. The reports are
available for purchase from the Simmons Market Research
Bureau, (212) 916-8970. Appendix Table 16A-1 presents
a list of product categories in SMRB for which information
is available.
16.2. KEY CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE STUDIES
Westat (1987a) - Household Solvent Products: A
National Usage Survey - Westat (1987a) conducted a
nationwide survey to determine consumer exposure to
common household products believed to contain methylene
chloride or its substitutes (trichloroethane,
trichloroethylene, carbon tetrachloride, perchloroethylene,
and 1,1,1,2,2,2- trichlorotrifluoroethane). The survey
methodology was comprised of three phases. In the first
phase, the sample population was generated by using a
random digit dialing (RDD) procedure. Using this
procedure, telephone numbers of households were randomly
selected by utilizing an unbiased, equal probability of
selection method, known as the "Waksberg Method"
(Westat, 1987a). After the respondents in the selected
households (18 years and older) agreed to participate in the
survey, the second phase was initiated. It involved a
mailout of questionnaires and product pictures to each
respondent. In the third phase, a telephone follow-up call
was made to those respondents who did not respond to the
mailed questionnaire within a 4-week period. The same
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-1
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
questionnaire was administered over the telephone to
participants who did not respond to the mailed
questionnaire. Of the 6,700 individuals contacted for the
survey, 4,920 individuals either responded to the mailed
questionnaire or to a telephone interview (a response rate of
73 percent). Survey questions included how often the
products were used in the last 12 months; when they were
last used; how much time was spent using a product (per
occasion or year), and the time the respondent remained in
the room after use; how much of a product was used per
occasion or year; and what protective measures were used
(Westat, 1987 a).
Thirty-two categories of common household
products were included in the survey and are presented in
Table 16-2. Tables 16-2, 16-3, 16-4, and 16-5 provide
means, medians, and percentile rankings for the following
variables: frequency of use, exposure time, amount of use,
and time exposed after use.
An advantage of this study is that the random digit
dialing procedure (Waksberg Method) used in identifying
participants for this survey enabled a diverse selection of a
representative, unbiased, sample of the U.S. population
(Westat 1987a). Also, empirical data generated from this
study will provide more accurate calculations of human
exposure to consumer household products than estimates
previously used. However, a limitation associated with this
study is that the data generated were based on recall
behavior. Another limitation is that extrapolation of these
data to long-term use patterns may be difficult.
Abt (1992) - Methylene Chloride Consumer Use
Study Survey Findings - As part of a plan to assess the
effectiveness of labeling of consumer products containing
methylene chloride, Abt conducted a telephone survey of
nearly five thousand households (Abt, 1992). The survey
was conducted in April and May of 1991. Three classes of
products were of concern: paint strippers, non-automotive
spray paint, and adhesive removers. The survey paralleled
a 1986 consumer use survey sponsored jointly by Abt and
the U.S. EPA. Results of the survey were the following
(Abt, 1992):
• Compared to the 1986 findings, a significantly
smaller proportion of current survey
respondents used a paint stripper, spray paint,
or adhesive remover.
• The proportion of the population who used the
three products recently (within the past year)
decreased substantially.
• Those who used the products reported a
significantly longer time since their last use.
• For all three products, the reported amount used
per year was significantly higher in the current
survey.
The survey was conducted to estimate the percent of
the U.S. adult population using paint remover, adhesive
remover, and non-automotive spray paint. In addition, an
estimate of the population using these products containing
methylene chloride was determined. A survey question-
naire was developed to collect product usage data and
demographic data. The survey sample was generated using
a RDD technique.
A total of 4,997 product screener interviews were
conducted for the product interview sections; the number of
respondents were: 381 for paint strippers, 58 for adhesive
removers, and 791 for non-automotive spray paint. Survey
responses were weighted to allow estimation at the level of
the total U.S. population (Abt, 1992). A follow-up mail
survey was also conducted using a short questionnaire.
Respondents who had used the product in the past year or
had purchased the product in the past 2 years and still had
the container were asked to respond to the questionnaire
(Abt, 1992). Of the mail questionnaires (527) sent out, 259
were returned. The questionnaire responses included 67 on
paint strippers, 6 on adhesive removers, and 186 on non-
automotive spray paint. Results of the survey are presented
in Tables 16-6 through 16-11 (N's are unweighted). Data
are presented for recent users. Recent users were defined
as persons who have used the product within the last year of
the survey or who have purchased the product in the past 2
years.
An advantage of this survey is that the survey
population was large and the survey responses were
weighted to represent the U.S. population. In addition, the
survey was designed to collect data for frequency of product
use and amount of product used by gender. A limitation of
the survey is that the data were generated based on recall
behavior. Extrapolation of these data to accurately reflect
long-term use patterns may be difficult.
Westat (1987b) - National Usage Survey of
Household Cleaning Products - Westat (1987b) collected
usage data from a nationwide survey to assess the
magnitude of exposure of consumers to various products
used when performing certain household cleaning tasks.
The survey was conducted between the middle of
November, 1985 to the middle of January, 1986.
Page
16-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Telephone interviews were conducted with 193 households.
According to Westat (1987b), the resulting response rate
for this survey was 78 percent. The Waksberg method
discussed previously in the Westat (1987a) study was also
used in randomly selecting telephone numbers employed in
the Westat (1987b) survey. The survey was designed to
obtain information on cleaning activities performed in the
interior of the home during the previous year. The person
who did the majority of the cleaning in the kitchen and
bathroom areas of each household was interviewed. Of
those respondents, the primary cleaner was female in 160
households (83 percent) and male in 30 households (16
percent); the sex of the respondents in three remaining
households was not ascertained (Westat, 1987b). Data
obtained from the survey included the frequency of
performing 14 different cleaning tasks; the amount of time
(duration) spent at each task; the cleaning product most
frequently used; the type of product (liquid, powder, aerosol
or spray pump) used; and the protective measures taken
during cleaning such as wearing rubber gloves or having a
window open or an exhaust fan on (Westat, 1987b).
The survey data are presented in Tables 16-12
through 16-16. Table 16-12 presents the mean and median
total exposure time of use for each cleaning task and the
product type preferred for each task. The percentile
rankings for the total time exposed to the products used for
14 cleaning tasks are presented in Table 16-13. The mean
and percentile rankings of the frequency in performing each
task are presented in Table 16-14. Table 16-15 shows the
mean and percentile rankings for exposure time per event
of performing household tasks. The mean and percentile
rankings for total number of hours spent per year using the
top 10 product groups are presented in Table 16-16.
Westat (1987b) randomly selected a subset of 30
respondents from the original survey and reinterviewed
them during the first two weeks of March, 1986 as a
reliability check on the recall data obtained from the
original phone survey. Frequency and duration data for 3 of
the original 14 cleaning tasks were obtained from the
reinterviews. In a second effort to validate the phone
survey, 50 respondents of the original phone survey
participated in a four-week diary study (between February
and March, 1986) of 8 of the 14 cleaning tasks originally
studied. The diary approach assessed the validity of using
a one-time telephone survey to determine usual cleaning
behavior (Westat, 1987b). The data (i.e., frequency and
duration) obtained from the reinterviews and the diary
approach were lower than the data from the original
telephone survey. The data from the reinterviews and the
diary approach were more consistent with each other.
Westat (1987b) attributed the significant differences in the
data obtained from these surveys to seasonal changes rather
than methodological problems.
A limitation of this survey is evident from the
reliability and validity check of the data conducted by
Westat (1987b). The data obtained from the telephone
survey may reflect heavier seasonal cleaning because the
survey was conducted during the holidays (November
through January). Therefore, usage data obtained in this
study may be biased and may represent upper bound
estimates. Another limitation of this study is the small size
of the sample population. An advantage of this survey is
that the RDD procedure (Waksberg Method) used provides
unbiased results of sample selection and reduces the
number of unproductive calls. Another advantage of this
study is that it provides empirical data on frequency and
duration of consumer use, thereby eliminating best
judgment or guesswork.
Westat (1987c) - National Household Survey of
Interior Painters - Westat (1987c) conducted a study
between November, 1985 and January, 1986 to obtain
usage information to estimate the magnitude of exposure of
consumers to different types of painting and painting related
products used while painting the interior of the home.
Seven-hundred and seventy-seven households were
sampled to determine whether any household member had
painted the interior of the home during the last 12 months
prior to the survey date. Of the sampled households, 208
households (27 percent) had a household member who had
painted during the last 12 months. Based on the households
with primary painters, the response rate was 90 percent
(Westat, 1987c). The person in each household who did
most of the interior painting during the last 12 months was
interviewed over the telephone. The RDD procedure
(Waksberg Method) previously described in Westat
(1987a) was used to generate sample blocks of telephone
numbers in this survey. Questions were asked on frequency
and time spent for interior painting activities; the amount of
paint used; and protective measures used (i.e., wearing
gloves, hats, and masks or keeping a window open)
(Westat, 1987c). Fifty-three percent of the primary painters
in the households interviewed were male, 46 percent were
female, and the sex of the remaining 1 percent was not
ascertained. Three types of painting products were used in
this study; latex paint, oil-based paint, and wood stains and
varnishes. Of the respondents, 94.7 percent used latex
paint, 16.8 percent used oil-based paint, and 20.2 percent
used wood stains and varnishes.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-3
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Data generated from this survey are summarized in
Tables 16-17, 16-18, and 16-19. Table 16-17 presents the
mean, standard duration, and percentile rankings for the
total exposure time for painting activity by paint type.
Table 16-18 presents the mean and standard exposure time
for the painting activity per occasion for each paint type. A
"painting occasion" is defined as a time period from start to
cleanup (Westat 1987c). Table 16-18 also presents the
frequency and percentile rankings of painting occasions per
year. Table 16-19 presents the total amount of paint used
by interior painters.
In addition, 30 respondents from the original survey
were reinterviewed in April 1986, as a reliability check on
the recall data obtained from the original painting survey.
There were no significant differences between the data
obtained from the reinterviews and the original painting
survey (Westat, 1987c).
An advantage of this survey, based on the reliability
check conducted by Westat (1987c), is the stability in the
painting data obtained. Another advantage of this survey is
that the response rate was high (90 percent), therefore,
minimizing non-response bias. Also, the Waksberg Method
employed provides an unbiased equal probability method of
RDD. A limitation of the survey is the data are based on
12-month recall and may not accurately reflect long-term
use patterns.
Tsang and Klepeis (1996) - National Human
Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) - The U.S. EPA collected
information for the general population on the duration and
frequency of selected activities and the time spent in
selected microenvironments via 24-hour diaries. Over
9000 individuals from 48 contiguous states participated in
NHAPS. The survey was conducted between October 1992
and September 1994. Individuals were interviewed to
categorize their 24-hour routines (diaries) and/or answer
follow-up exposure questions that were related to exposure
events. Data were collected based on selected
socioeconomic (gender, age, race, education, etc.) and
geographic (census region, state, etc.) factors and
time/season (day of week, month) (Tsang and Klepeis,
1996).
Data were collected for a maximum of 82 possible
microenvironments and 91 different activities (Tsang and
Klepeis, 1996). Respondents were also asked exposure-
related follow up questions, mostly on air and water
exposure pathways, on specific pollutant sources (paint,
glue, etc.), or prolonged background activities (tobacco
smoke, gas heaters, etc.) (Tsang and Klepeis, 1996).
As part of the survey, data were also collected on
duration and frequency of use of selected consumer
products. These data are presented in Tables 16-20 through
16-34. Distribution data are presented for selected
percentiles (where possible). Other data are presented in
ranges of time spent in an activity (e.g., working with or
near a product being used) or ranges for the number of
times an activity involving a consumer product was
performed. Tables 16-20 through 16-34 provide duration
and/or frequency data for the following categories: selected
cosmetics and personal care items; household cleaners and
other household products; household equipment; pesticides;
and tobacco products.
The advantages of NHAPS is that the data were
collected for a large number of individuals and are
representative of the U.S. general population. In addition,
frequency distributions of time spent and frequency of
occurrence data for activities and locations are provided,
when possible. Also, data on 9,386 different respondents
are grouped by various socioeconomic, geographic,
time/seasonal factors. A disadvantage of NHAPS is that
means cannot be calculated for consumers who spent more
than 60 or 120 minutes (depending on the activity) in an
activity using a consumer product. Therefore, a good
estimate of the high consumer activities cannot be captured.
16.3. RELEVANT CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE
STUDY
CTFA (1983) - Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance
Association, Inc. - Summary of Results of Surveys of the
Amount and Frequency of Use of Cosmetic Products by
Women - The Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance
Association Inc. (CTFA, 1983), a major manufacturer and
a market research bureau, conducted surveys to obtain
information on frequency of use of various cosmetic
products. Three surveys were conducted to collect data on
the frequency of use of various cosmetic products and
selected baby products. In the first of these three surveys
CTFA (1983) conducted a one-week prospective survey of
47 female employees and relatives of employees between
the ages of 13 and 61 years. In the second survey, a
cosmetic manufacturer conducted a retrospective survey of
1,129 of its customers. The third survey was conducted by
a market research bureau which sampled 19,035 female
consumers nationwide over a 9-1/2 month period. Of the
19,035 females interviewed, responses from only 9,684
females were tabulated (CTFA, 1983). The third survey
was designed to reflect the sociodemographic (i.e., age,
income, etc) characteristics of the entire U.S. population.
Page
16-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
The respondents in all three surveys were asked to record
the number of times they used the various products in a
given time period, i.e., a week, a day, a month, or a year
(CTFA, 1983).
To obtain the average frequency of use for each
cosmetic product, responses were averaged for each
product in each survey. Thus, the averages were calculated
by adding the reported number of uses per given time
period for each product, dividing by the total number of
respondents in the survey, and then dividing again by the
number of days in the given time period (CTFA, 1983).
The average frequency of use of cosmetic products was
determined for both "users" and "non-users." The frequency
of use of baby products was determined among "users" only.
The upper 90th percentile frequency of use values were
determined by eliminating the top ten percent most extreme
frequencies of use. Therefore, the highest remaining
frequency of use was recorded as the upper 90th percentile
value (CTFA, 1983). Table 16-34 presents the amount of
product used per application (grams) and the average and
90th percentile frequency of use per day for baby products
and various cosmetic products for all the surveys.
An advantage of the frequency data obtained from
the third survey (market research bureau) is that the sample
population was more likely to be representative of the U.S.
population. Another advantage of the third dataset is that
the survey was conducted over a longer period of time when
compared with the other two frequency datasets. Also, the
study provided empirical data which will be useful in
generating more accurate estimates of consumer exposure
to cosmetic products. In contrast to the large market
research bureau survey, the CTFA employee survey is very
small and both that survey and the cosmetic company
survey are likely to be biased toward high end users.
Therefore, data from these two surveys should be used with
caution.
16.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
Due to the large range and variation among
consumer products and their exposure pathways, it is not
feasible to specify recommended exposure values as has
been done in other chapters of this handbook. The user is
referred to the contents and references in the chapter to
derive appropriate exposure factors. Table 16-35
summarizes the key and relevant studies in this chapter. In
order to estimate consumer exposure to household products,
several types of information are needed for the exposure
equation. The information needed includes frequency and
duration of use, amount of product used, percent weight of
the chemical of concern found in the product, and for
dermal exposure, the amount of the solution on the skin
after exposure. The studies of Westat (1987a, b, and c),
(Abt, 1992), and Tsang and Klepeis (1996) provide
information on amount, duration, and frequency of use of
household products. The frequency and duration of use and
amount of product used for some household and other
consumer products can be obtained from Tables 16-2
through 16-34. Exposure to chemicals present in common
household products can be estimated by utilizing data
presented in these tables and the appropriate exposure
equation. It should be noted that if these data are used to
model indoor air concentrations, the values for time of use,
time exposed after use, and frequency in the indoor air,
should be the same values used in the dose equation for
frequency and contact time for a given individual.
16.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 16
Abt. (1992) Methylene chloride consumer products use
survey findings. Prepared by Abt Associates, Inc. for
the U.S. Consumer Product Safely Commission,
Bethesda, MD.
Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association (CTFA).
(1983). Summary of the results of surveys of the
amount and frequency of use of cosmetic products by
women. Prepared by Environ Corporation,
Washington, DC for CFFA Inc., Washington, DC.
Hakkmen, P.J.; Kellmg, C.K.; Callender, J.C. (1991)
Exposure assessment of consumer products: Human
body weights and total body surface areas to use; and
sources of data for specific products. Veterinary and
Human Toxicology l(33):61-65.
Tsang, A.M.; Klepeis, N.E. (1996) Results tables from a
detailed analysis of the National Human Activity
Pattern Survey (NHAPS) response. Draft Report
prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency by Lockheed Martin, Contract No. 68-W6-
001, Delivery Order No. 13.
U.S. EPA. (1986) Standard scenarios for estimating
exposure to chemical substances during use of
consumer products. Prepared by Versar, Inc. For the
Office of Toxic Substances, Contract No. 68-02-
3968.
U. S. EPA. (1987) Methods for assessing exposure to
chemical substances - Volume 7 - Methods for
assessing consumer exposure to chemical
substances. Washington, DC: Office of Toxic
Substances. EPA Report No. 560/5-85-007.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-5
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Westat. (1987a) Household solvent products - a national Westat. (1987b) National usage survey of household
usage survey. Under Subcontract to Battelle cleaning products. Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Columbus Div., Washington DC. Prepared for U.S. Protection Agency, Office of Toxic Substances and
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances,
Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA. PB88- Washington, DC.
132881. Westat. (1987c) National household survey of interior
painters. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Toxic Substances and Office of
Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Washington DC.
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
16-6 August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-1. Consumer Products Found in the Typical U.S. Household"
Consumer Product Category
Consumer Product
Cosmetics Hygiene Products
Household Furnishings
Garment Conditioning Products
Household Maintenance Products
Adhesive bandages
Bath additives (liquid)
Bath additives (powder)
Cologne/perfume/aftershave
Contact lens solutions
Deodorant/antiperspirant (aerosol)
Deodorant/antiperspirant (wax and liquid)
Depilatories
Facial makeup
Fingernail cosmetics
Hair coloring/tinting products
Hair conditioning products
Hairsprays (aerosol)
Lip products
Mouthwash/breath freshener
Sanitary napkins and pads
Shampoo
Shaving creams (aerosols)
Skin creams (non-drug)
Skin oils (non-drug)
Soap (toilet bar)
Sunscreen/suntan products
Talc/body powder (non-drug)
Toothpaste
Waterless skin cleaners
Carpeting
Draperies/curtains
Rugs (area)
Shower curtains
Vinyl upholstery, furniture
Anti-static spray (aerosol)
Leather treatment (liquid and wax)
Shoe polish
Spray starch (aerosol)
Suede cleaner/polish (liquid and aerosol)
Textile water-proofing (aerosol)
Adhesive (general) (liquid)
Bleach (household) (liquid)
Bleach (see laundry)
Candles
Cat box litter
Charcoal briquets
Charcoal lighter fluid
Drain cleaner (liquid and powder)
Dishwasher detergent (powder)
Dishwashing liquid
Fabric dye (DIY)b
Fabric rinse/softener (liquid)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-1. Consumer Products Found in the Typical U.S. Household" (continued)
Consumer Product Category
Consumer Product
Household Maintenance Products
(continued)
Home Building/Improvement Products (DIY)b
Fabric rinse/softener (powder)
Fertilizer (garden) (liquid)
Fertilizer (garden) (powder)
Fire extinguishers (aerosol)
Floor polish/wax (liquid)
Food packaging and packaged food
Furniture polish (liquid)
Furniture polish (aerosol)
General cleaner/disinfectant (liquid)
General cleaner (powder)
General cleaner/disinfectant (aerosol and pump)
General spot/stain remover (liquid)
General spot/stain remover (aerosol and pump)
Herbicide (garden-patio) (Liquid and aerosol)
Insecticide (home and garden) (powder)
Insecticide (home and garden) (aerosol and pump)
Insect repellent (liquid and aerosol)
Laundry detergent/bleach (liquid)
Laundry detergent (powder)
Laundry pre-wash/soak (powder)
Laundry pre-wash/soak (liquid)
Laundry pre-wash/soak (aerosol and pump)
Lubricant oil (liquid)
Lubricant (aerosol)
Matches
Metal polish
Oven cleaner (aerosol)
Pesticide (home) (solid)
Pesticide (pet dip) (liquid)
Pesticide (pet) (powder)
Pesticide (pet) (aerosol)
Pesticide (pet) (collar)
Petroleum fuels (home( (liquid and aerosol)
Rug cleaner/shampoo (liquid and aerosol)
Rug deodorizer/freshener (powder)
Room deodorizer (solid)
Room deodorizer (aerosol)
Scouring pad
Toilet bowl cleaner
Toiler bowl deodorant (solid)
Water-treating chemicals (swimming pools)
Adhesives, specialty (liquid)
Ceiling tile
Caulks/sealers/fillers
Dry wall/wall board
Flooring (vinyl)
House Paint (interior) (liquid)
House Paint and Stain (exterior) (liquid)
Insulation (solid)
Insulation (foam)
Page
16-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-1. Consumer Products Found in the Typical U.S. Household" (continued)
Consumer Product Category
Consumer Product
Home Building/Improvement Products (DIY)b
(Continued)
Automobile-related Products
Personal Materials
Paint/vamish removers
Paint thinner/brush cleaners
Patching/ceiling plaster
Roofing
Refmishing products (polyurethane, varnishes, etc.)
Spray paints (home) (aerosol)
Wall paneling
Wall paper
Wall paper glue
Antifreeze
Car polish/wax
Fuel/lubricant additives
Gasoline/diesel fuel
Interior upholstery/components, synthetic
Motor oil
Radiator flush/cleaner
Automotive touch-up paint (aerosol)
Windshield washer solvents
Clothes/shoes
Diapers/vinyl pants
Jewelry
Printed material (colorprint, newsprint, photographs)
Sheets/towels
Toys (intended to be placed in mouths)
" A subjective listing based on consumer use profiles.
b DIY = Do It Yourself.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1987.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-9
-------
I
I
I
Table 16-2. Frequency of Use for Household Solvent Products (users-only)
Percentile Rankings for Frequency of Use/Year
Products
Spray Shoe Polish
Water Repellents/Protectors
Spot Removers
Solvent- Type Cleaning Fluids or Degreasers
Wood Floor and Paneling Cleaners
Typewriter Correction Fluid
Adhesives
Adhesive Removers
Silicone Lubricants
Other Lubricants (excluding Automotive)
Specialized Electronic Cleaners (for TVs, Etc.)
Latex Paint
Oil Paint
Wood Stains, Varnishes, and Finishes
Paint Removers/Strippers
Paint Thinners
Aerosol Spray Paint
Primers and Special Primers
Aerosol Rust Removers
Outdoor Water Repellents (for Wood or Cement)
Glass Frostings, Window Tints, and Artificial Snow
Engine Degreasers
Carburetor Cleaners
Aerosol Spray Paints for Cars
Auto Spray Primers
Spray Lubricant for Cars
Transmission Cleaners
Battery Terminal Protectors
Brake Quieters Cleaners
Gasket Remover
Tire/Hubcap Cleaners
Ignition and Wire Dryers
NA = Not Available
Source: Westat. 1987a
Mean
10.28
3.50
15.59
16.46
8.48
40.00
8.89
4.22
10.32
10.66
13.41
3.93
5.66
4.21
3.68
6.78
4.22
3.43
6.17
2.07
2.78
4.18
3.77
4.50
6.42
10.31
2.28
3.95
3.00
2.50
11.18
3.01
Std. dev.
20.10
11.70
43.34
44.12
20.89
74.78
26.20
12.30
25.44
25.46
38.16
20.81
23.10
12.19
9.10
22.10
15.59
8.76
9.82
3.71
21.96
13.72
7.10
9.71
33.89
30.71
3.55
24.33
6.06
4.39
18.67
5.71
Mm.
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.03
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.03
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
NA
1.00
NA
NA
1.00
1.00
5
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.10
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
10
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
2.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
0.23
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
25
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
NA
4.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
50
4.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
2.00
12.00
3.00
1.00
3.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
3.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
4.00
2.00
75
8.00
3.00
10.00
12.00
6.00
40.00
6.00
3.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
4.00
3.00
4.00
3.00
4.00
4.00
3.00
6.00
2.00
1.00
3.25
3.00
4.00
3.75
6.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
12.00
3.00
90
24.30
6.00
40.00
46.00
24.00
100.00
15.00
6.00
20.00
20.00
24.00
6.00
6.00
7.00
6.00
12.00
6.10
6.00
15.00
3.00
2.00
6.70
6.00
10.00
10.00
20.00
3.00
4.00
6.00
5.00
30.00
5.00
95
52.00
10.00
52.00
52.00
50.00
200.00
28.00
16.80
46.35
50.00
52.00
10.00
12.00
12.00
11.80
23.00
12.00
10.00
24.45
5.90
2.00
12.00
12.00
15.00
15.00
40.00
9.00
6.55
10.40
6.50
50.00
9.70
99
111.26
35.70
300.00
300.00
56.00
365.00
100.00
100.00
150.00
100.00
224.50
30.00
139.20
50.80
44.56
100.00
31.05
50.06
50.90
12.00
27.20
41.70
47.28
60.00
139.00
105.60
NA
41.30
NA
NA
77.00
44.52
Max.
156.00
300.00
365.00
365.00
350.00
520.00
500.00
100.00
300.00
420.00
400.00
800.00
300.00
250.00
100.00
352.00
365.00
104.00
80.00
52.00
365.00
300.00
100.00
100.00
500.00
365.00
26.00
365.00
52.00
30.00
200.00
60.00
s
I
1=
-------
Table 16-3. Exposure Time of Use for Household Solvent Products (users-only)
Percentile Rankings for Duration of Use (minutes)
Products
Spray Shoe Polish
Water Repellents/Protectors
Spot Removers
Solvent- Type Cleaning Fluids or
Degreasers
Wood Floor and Paneling Cleaners
Typewriter Correction Fluid
Adhesives
Adhesive Removers
Silicone Lubricants
Other Lubricants (excluding
Automotive)
Specialized Electronic Cleaners
(for TVs, Etc.)
Latex Paint
Oil Paint
Wood Stains, Varnishes, and Finishes
Paint Removers/Strippers
Paint Thinners
Aerosol Spray Paint
Primers and Special Primers
Aerosol Rust Removers
Outdoor Water Repellents
(for Wood or Cement)
Glass Frostings, Window Tints, and
Artificial Snow
Engine Degreasers,
Carburetor Cleaners
Aerosol Spray Paints for Cars
Auto Spray Primers
Spray Lubricant for Cars
Transmission Cleaners
Battery Terminal Protectors
Brake Quieters/Cleaners
Gasket Remover
Tire/Hubcap Cleaners
Ignition and Wire Dryers
NA = Not Available
Source: Westat. 1987a
Mean
(mins)
7.49
14.46
10.68
29.48
74.04
7.62
15.58
121.20
10.42
8.12
9.47
295.08
194.12
117.17
125.27
39.43
39.54
91.29
18.57
104.94
29.45
29.29
13.57
42.77
51.45
9.90
27.90
9.61
23.38
23.57
22.66
7.24
Std. dev.
9.60
24.10
22.36
97.49
128.43
29.66
81.80
171.63
29.47
32.20
45.35
476.11
345.68
193.05
286.59
114.85
87.79
175.05
48.54
115.36
48.16
48.14
23.00
71.39
86.11
35.62
61.44
18.15
36.32
27.18
23.94
8.48
Mm.
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.17
0.03
0.07
0.33
0.08
0.02
1
0.03
0.08
0.03
0.03
1.00
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
1.00
0.51
0.74
0.38
0.08
0.17
0.24
0.05
0.05
0.14
0.95
0.08
0.19
0.22
0.03
NA
0.04
NA
NA
0.71
0.02
5
0.25
0.50
0.08
1.00
5.00
0.03
0.08
1.45
0.08
0.05
0.08
22.50
15.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
0.17
5.00
2.00
2.00
0.33
1.00
2.00
0.08
0.35
0.08
0.50
0.50
3.00
0.08
10
0.50
1.40
0.25
2.00
10.00
0.03
0.33
3.00
0.17
0.08
0.17
30.00
30.00
10.00
5.00
2.00
5.00
5.00
0.25
15.00
3.00
5.00
1.00
3.00
5.00
0.17
1.80
0.23
1.00
2.00
5.00
0.47
25
2.00
3.00
2.00
5.00
20.00
0.17
1.00
15.00
0.50
0.50
0.50
90.00
60.00
30.00
20.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
2.00
30.00
5.00
10.00
3.00
10.00
10.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
6.25
10.00
1.50
50
5.00
10.00
5.00
15.00
30.00
1.00
4.25
60.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
180.00
12.00
60.00
60.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
5.00
60.00
15.00
15.00
7.00
20.00
27.50
5.00
15.00
5.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
5.00
75
10.00
15.00
10.00
30.00
90.00
2.00
10.00
120.00
10.00
5.00
5.00
360.00
240.00
120.00
120.00
30.00
45.00
120.00
20.00
120.00
30.00
30.00
15.00
60.00
60.00
10.00
30.00
10.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
10.00
90
18.00
30.00
30.00
60.00
147.00
10.00
30.00
246.00
20.00
15.00
20.00
480.00
480.00
140.00
240.00
60.00
60.00
240.00
60.00
240.00
60.00
60.00
30.00
120.00
120.00
15.00
60.00
20.00
49.50
60.00
60.00
15.00
95
30.00
60.00
30.00
120.00
240.00
32.00
60.00
480.00
45.00
30.00
30.00
810.00
579.00
360.00
420.00
180.00
120.00
360.00
60.00
300.00
96.00
120.00
45.00
145.00
180.00
30.00
60.00
30.00
120.00
60.00
60.00
25.50
99
60.00
120.00
120.00
300.00
480.00
120.00
180.00
960.00
180.00
90.00
93.60
2880.00
1702.80
720.00
1200.00
480.00
300.00
981.60
130.20
480.00
268.80
180.00
120.00
360.00
529.20
120.00
NA
120.00
NA
NA
120.00
48.60
Max.
60.00
480.00
360.00
1800.00
2700.00
480.00
2880.00
960.00
360.00
900.00
900.00
5760.00
5760.00
280.00
4320.00
2400.00
1800.00
1920.00
720.00
960.00
360.00
900.00
300.00
900.00
600.00
720.00
450.00
180.00
240.00
180.00
240.00
60.00
I
-------
I
I
I
&
Table 16-4. Amount of Products Used for Household Solvent Products (users-only)
Percentile Rankings for Amount of Products Used (ounces/yr)
Products
Spray Shoe Polish
Water Repellents/Protectors
Spot Removers
Solvent- Type Cleaning Fluids or
Degreasers
Wood Floor and Paneling Cleaners
Typewriter Correction Fluid
Adhesives
Adhesive Removers
Silicone Lubricants
Other Lubricants (excluding
Automotive)
Specialized Electronic Cleaners
(for TVs, Etc.)
Latex Paint
Oil Paint
Wood Stains, Varnishes, and
Finishes
Paint Removers/Strippers
Paint Thinners
Aerosol Spray Paint
Primers and Special Primers
Aerosol Rust Removers
Outdoor Water Repellents
(for Wood or Cement)
Glass Frostings, Window Tints, and
Artificial Snow
Engine Degreasers
Carburetor Cleaners
Aerosol Spray Paints for Cars
Auto Spray Primers
Spray Lubricant for Cars
Transmission Cleaners
Battery Terminal Protectors
Brake Quieters/Cleaners
Gasket Remover
Tire/Hubcap Cleaners
lanition and Wire Dryers
NA = Not Available
Source: Westat. 1987a
Mean
(ounces/vr)
9.90
11.38
26.32
58.30
28.41
4.14
7.49
34.46
12.50
9.93
9.48
371.27
168.92
65.06
63.73
69.45
30.75
68.39
18.21
148.71
13.82
46.95
22.00
44.95
70.37
18.63
35.71
16.49
11.72
13.25
31.58
9.02
Std.
dev
17.90
22.00
90.10
226.97
57.23
13.72
55.90
96.60
27.85
44.18
55.26
543.86
367.82
174.01
144.33
190.55
52.84
171.21
81.37
280.65
14.91
135.17
50.60
89.78
274.56
54.74
62.93
87.84
13.25
22.35
80.39
14.59
Min.
0.04
0.04
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.25
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.12
0.64
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.09
0.01
1.00
0.04
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.08
2.00
0.12
0.50
0.50
0.12
0.13
1
0.20
0.47
0.24
0.50
0.80
0.02
0.02
0.29
0.20
0.18
0.05
4.00
0.33
1.09
1.50
0.45
0.75
0.09
0.25
0.37
1.40
1.56
0.50
0.14
0.77
0.40
NA
0.13
NA
NA
0.50
0.32
5
0.63
0.98
0.60
2.00
2.45
0.06
0.05
1.22
0.69
0.30
0.13
12.92
4.00
4.00
4.00
3.10
2.01
1.30
1.00
3.63
2.38
4.00
1.50
1.50
3.00
0.96
3.75
0.58
1.00
1.00
1.82
1.09
10
1.00
1.43
1.00
3.00
3.50
0.12
0.12
2.80
1.00
0.52
0.25
32.00
8.00
4.00
8.00
4.00
3.25
3.23
1.43
8.00
3.25
6.00
3.00
3.00
4.00
1.00
4.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
3.00
1.50
25
2.00
2.75
2.00
6.50
7.00
0.30
0.35
6.00
2.25
1.00
0.52
64.00
25.20
8.00
16.00
8.00
7.00
8.00
2.75
16.00
6.00
12.00
5.22
6.12
9.00
2.75
8.00
2.00
3.02
3.75
6.00
3.00
50
4.50
6.00
5.50
16.00
14.00
0.94
1.00
10.88
4.50
2.25
2.00
256.00
64.00
16.00
32.00
20.48
13.00
16.00
8.00
64.00
12.00
16.00
12.00
16.00
16.00
6.00
15.00
4.00
8.00
7.75
12.00
6.00
75
10.00
12.00
16.00
32.00
30.00
2.40
3.00
32.00
12.00
8.00
6.00
384.00
148.48
64.00
64.00
64.00
32.00
60.00
13.00
128.00
14.00
36.00
16.00
48.00
48.00
15.50
32.00
8.00
14.25
16.00
28.00
10.75
90
24.00
24.00
48.00
96.00
64.00
8.00
8.00
64.00
24.00
18.00
12.65
857.60
384.00
128.00
128.00
128.00
65.00
128.00
32.00
448.00
28.00
80.00
39.00
100.80
128.00
36.00
77.00
15.00
32.00
24.00
64.00
16.00
95
36.00
33.00
119.20
192.00
96.00
18.00
20.00
138.70
41.20
32.00
24.00
1280.00
640.00
256.00
256.00
256.00
104.00
256.00
42.60
640.00
33.00
160.00
75.00
156.00
222.00
64.00
140.00
24.60
38.60
58.40
96.00
20.55
99
99.36
121.84
384.00
845.00
204.40
67.44
128.00
665.60
192.00
128.00
109.84
2560.00
1532.16
768.00
512.00
640.00
240.00
867.75
199.80
979.20
98.40
480.00
212.00
557.76
1167.36
240.00
NA
627.00
NA
NA
443.52
113.04
Max.
180.00
450.00
1600.00
5120.00
1144.00
181.80
1280.00
1024.00
312.00
1280.00
1024.00
6400.00
5120.00
3840.00
2560.00
3200.00
1053.00
1920.00
1280.00
3200.00
120.00
2560.00
672.00
900.00
3840.00
864.00
360.00
1050.00
78.00
160.00
960.00
120.00
Q
I
I
I
ri
-------
Table 16-5. Time Exposed After Duration of Use for Household Solvent Products (users-only)
Products
Spray Shoe Polish
Water Repellents/Protectors
Spot Removers
Solvent- Type Cleaning Fluids or Degreasers
Wood Floor and Paneling Cleaners
Typewriter Correction Fluid
Adhesives
Adhesive Removers
Silicone Lubricants
Other Lubricants (excluding Automotive)
Specialized Electronic Cleaners
(for TVs, Etc.)
Latex Paint
Oil Paint
Wood Stains, Varnishes, and Finishes
Paint Removers/Strippers
Paint Thinners
Aerosol Spray Paint
Primers and Special Primers
Aerosol Rust Removers
Outdoor Water Repellents
(for Wood or Cement)
Glass Frostings, Window Tints, and Artificial
Snow
Engine Degreasers
Carburetor Cleaners
Aerosol Spray Paints for Cars
Auto Spray Primers
Spray Lubricant for Cars
Transmission Cleaners
Battery Terminal Protectors
Brake Quieters/Cleaners
Gasket Remover
Tire/Hubcap Cleaners
Ignition and Wire Dryers
NA = Not Available
Source: Westat. 1987a
Mean
(mins)
31.40
37.95
43.65
33.29
96.75
124.70
68.88
94.12
30.77
47.45
117.24
91.38
44.56
48.33
31.38
32.86
12.70
22.28
15.06
8.33
137.87
4.52
7.51
10.71
11.37
4.54
5.29
3.25
10.27
27.56
1.51
6.39
Percentile Rankings for Time Exposed After Duration of Use (minutes)
Std.
dev.
80.50
1 1 1 .40
106.97
90.39
192.88
153.46
163.72
157.69
107.39
127.11
154.38
254.61
155.19
156.44
103.07
105.62
62.80
65.57
47.58
43.25
243.21
24.39
68.50
45.53
45.08
30.67
29.50
17.27
30.02
58.54
20.43
31.63
Min.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
5.00
30.00
1.00
1.75
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
50
5.00
3.00
5, .00
3.00
30.00
60.00
10.00
20.00
0.00
2.00
60.00
5.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
60.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
75
20.00
20.00
30.00
28.75
120.00
180.00
60.00
120.00
10.00
30.00
180.00
60.00
30.00
30.00
20.00
15.00
1.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
180.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
12.50
0.00
0.00
90
120.00
120.00
120.00
60.00
240.00
360.00
180.00
360.00
60.00
120.00
300.00
240.00
120.00
120.00
60.00
60.00
30.00
60.00
60.00
5.00
360.00
0.00
0.10
17.50
20.00
2.00
5.00
2.90
30.00
120.00
0.00
0.10
95
120.00
240.00
240.00
180.00
480.00
480.00
360.00
480.00
180.00
240.00
480.00
480.00
240.00
240.00
180.00
180.00
60.00
120.00
60.00
58.50
480.00
15.50
30.00
60.00
77.25
15.00
22.50
15.00
120.00
180.00
0.00
30.00
99
480.00
480.00
480.00
480.00
1062.00
600.00
720.00
720.00
480.00
485.40
720.00
1440.00
480.00
694.00
541.20
480.00
260.50
319.20
190.20
309.60
1440.00
120.00
120.60
282.00
360.00
70.20
NA
120.00
NA
NA
30.00
216.60
Max.
720.00
1800.00
1440.00
1440.00
1440.00
1800.00
2100.00
720.00
1440.00
1440.00
1440.00
2880.00
2880.00
2880.00
1440.00
1440.00
1440.00
720.00
600.00
420.00
1800.00
360.00
1800.00
480.00
360.00
420.00
240.00
180.00
120.00
240.00
480.00
240.00
I
ft
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-6. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for Adhesive Removers
Mean
Standard deviation
Minimum Value
1st Percentile
5th Percentile
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
Median Value
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
95th Percentile
99th Percentile
Maximum Value
No. of Times
Used Within the
Last 12 Months
N=58
1.66
1.67
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
5.00
12.00
12.00
Minutes Minutes in Room
Using After Using"
N=52 N=51
172.87
304.50
5.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
29.50
120.00
240.00
480.00
1440.00
1440.00
1440.00
13.79
67.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
120.00
420.00
420.00
Minutes in
Room After
Using6
N=5
143.37
169.31
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
20.00
120.00
420.00
420.00
420.00
420.00
1440.00
Amount Used in Past
Year (Fluid oz.)
N=51
96.95
213.20
13.00
13.00
13.00
16.00
16.00
32.00
96.00
128.00
384.00
1280.00
1280.00
Amount per Use
(Fluid oz.)
N=51
81.84
210.44
5.20
5.20
6.50
10.67
16.00
26.00
64.00
128.00
192.00
1280.00
1280.00
" Includes those who did not spend anytime in the room after use.
b Includes only those who spent time in the room.
Source: Abt, 1992.
Table 16-7. Adhesive Remover Usage by Gender
Gender
Mean number of months since last time adhesive remover was used - includes all
respondents. (Unweighted N=240)
Mean number of uses of product in the past year.
Mean number of minutes spent with the product during last use.
Mean number of minutes spent in the room after last use of product. (Includes all
recent users)
Mean number of minutes spent in the room after last use of product. (Includes only
those who did not leave immediately)
Mean ounces of product used in the past year.
Mean ounces of product used per use in the past year.
Male
N=25
35.33
1.94
127.95
19.76
143.37
70.48
48.70
Female
N=33
43.89
1.30
233.43
0
0
139.71
130.36
Source: Abt, 1992.
Page
16-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-8. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for Spray Paint
Mean
Standard deviation
Minimum Value
1st Percentile
5th Percentile
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
Median Value
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
95th Percentile
99th Percentile
Maximum Value
No. of Times
Used Within the
Last 12 Months
N=775
8.23
31.98
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
4.00
11.00
20.00
104.00
365.00
Minutes Minutes in Room
Using After Using"
N=786 N=791
40.87
71.71
1.00
1.00
3.00
5.00
10.00
20.00
45.00
90.00
120.00
360.00
960.00
3.55
22.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
120.00
300.00
Minutes in Room
After Using6
N=35
65.06
70.02
1.00
1.00
1.00
10.00
15.00
30.00
60.00
120.00
120.00
300.00
300.00
Amount Used in
Past Year
(Fluid oz.)
N=778
83.92
175.32
13.00
13.00
13.00
13.00
13.00
26.00
65.00
156.00
260.00
1170.00
1664.00
Amount per Use
(Fluid oz.)
N=778
19.04
25.34
0.36
0.36
3.47
6.50
9.75
13.00
21.67
36.11
52.00
104.00
312.00
" Includes those who did not spend anytime in the room after use.
b Includes only those who spent time in the room.
Source: Abt, 1992.
Table 16-9. Spray Paint Usage by Gender
Gender
Mean number of months since last time spray paint was used - includes all
respondents. (Unweighted N=1724)
Mean number of uses of product in the past year.
Mean number of minutes spent with the product during last use.
Mean number of minutes spent in the room after last use of product. (Includes all
recent users)
Mean number of minutes spent in the room after last use of product. (Includes only
those who did not leave immediately)
Mean ounces of product used in the past year.
Mean ounces of product used per use in the past year.
Male
N=405
17.39
10.45
40.87
5.49
67.76
103.07
18.50
Female
N=386
26.46
4.63
40.88
0.40
34.69
59.99
19.92
Source: Abt, 1992.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-15
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-10. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for Paint Removers/Strippers
Mean
Standard deviation
Minimum Value
1st Percentile
5th Percentile
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
Median Value
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
95th Percentile
99th Percentile
Maximum Value
No. of Times
Used Within the
Last 12 Months
N=316
3.54
7.32
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
6.00
12.00
50.00
70.00
Minutes
Using
N=390
144.59
175.54
2.00
5.00
15.00
20.00
45.00
120.00
180.00
360.00
480.00
720.00
1440.00
Minutes in Room
After Using"
N=390
12.96
85.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
60.00
180.00
1440.00
Minutes in Room
After Using6
N=39
93.88
211.71
1.00
1.00
1.00
3.00
10.00
60.00
120.00
180.00
420.00
1440.00
1440.00
Amount Used in
Past Year
(Fluid oz.)
N=307
142.05
321.73
15.00
15.00
16.00
16.00
32.00
64.00
128.00
256.00
384.00
1920.00
3200.00
Amount per Use
(Fluid oz.)
N=307
64.84
157.50
0.35
2.67
8.00
10.67
16.00
32.00
64.00
128.00
192.00
320.00
2560.00
" Includes those who did not spend anytime in the room after use.
b Includes only those who spent time in the room.
Source: Abt, 1992.
Table 16-1 1. Paint Stripper Usage by Gender
Gender
Mean number of months since last time paint stripper was used - includes all
respondents. (Unweighted N=1724)
Mean number of uses of product in the past year.
Mean number of minutes spent with the product during last use.
Mean number of minutes spent in the room after last use of product. (Includes all
recent users)
Mean number of minutes spent in the room after last use of product. (Includes only
those who did not leave immediately)
Mean ounces of product used in the past year.
Mean ounces of product used per use in the past year.
Male
N=156
32.07
3.88
136.70
15.07
101.42
160.27
74.32
Female
N=162
47.63
3.01
156.85
9.80
80.15
114.05
50.29
Source: Abt, 1992.
Page
16-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-12. Total Exposure Time of Performing Task and Product Type
Used by Task for Household Cleaning Products
Mean (hrs/year) Median
Tasks (hrs/vear)
Clean Bathroom Sinks and Tubs 44 26
Clean Kitchen Sinks 41 18
Clean Inside of Cabinets 12 5
(such as kitchen)
Clean Outside of Cabinets 21 6
Wipe Off Kitchen Counters 92 55
Thoroughly Clean Counters 24 13
Clean Bathroom Floors 20 9
Clean Kitchen Floors 31 14
Clean Bathroom or Other Tilted or Ceramic Walls 16 9
Product Type
Used
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Percent of
Preference
29%
44%
16%
10%
1%
31%
61%
2%
4%
2%
68%
12%
2%
16%
2%
61%
8%
16%
13%
2%
67%
13%
2%
15%
3%
56%
21%
5%
17%
1%
70%
21%
2%
4%
3%
70%
27%
2%
1%
37%
18%
17%
25%
3%
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-17
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-12. Total Exposure Time of Performing Task and Product Type Used by
Task for Household Cleaning Products (continued)
Tasks
Clean Outside of Windows
Clean Inside of Windows
Clean Glass Surfaces Such as Mirrors & Tables
Clean Outside of Refrigerator and Other Appliances
Clean Spots or Dirt on Walls or Doors
Finishes
Mean (hrs/year) Median Product Type
(hrs/vear) Used
13 6 Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
18 6 Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
34 13 Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
27 13 Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
19 8 Liquid
Powder
Aerosol
Spray pump
Other
Percent of
Preference
27%
2%
6%
65%
24%
1%
8%
66%
2%
13%
1%
8%
76%
2%
48%
3%
7%
38%
4%
46%
15%
4%
30%
4%
Source: Westat 1987b.
Page
16-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-13. Percentile Rankings for Total Exposure Time in Performing Household Tasks
Percentile Rankings for Total Exposure Exposure Time Performing Task
(hrs/yr)
Tasks
Clean Bathroom Sinks and Tubs
Clean Kitchen Sinks
Clean Inside of Kitchen Cabinets
Clean Outside of Cabinets
Wipe Off Kitchen Counters
Thoroughly Clean Counters
Clean Bathroom Floors
Clean Kitchen Floors
Clean Bathroom or Other Tilted or Ceramic
Walls
Clean Outside of Windows
Clean Inside of Windows
Clean Glass Surfaces Such as Mirrors & Tables
Clean Outside Refrigerator and Other
Appliances
Clean Spots or Dirt on Walls or Doors
100th
365
547.5
208
780
912.5
547.5
365
730
208
468
273
1460
365
312
95th
121.67
121.67
48
78.66
456.25
94.43
71.49
96.98
52
32.6
72
104
95.29
78
90th
91.25
97.6
32.48
36
231.16
52
36.83
52
36
24
36
60.83
91.25
52
75th
52
60.83
12
17.33
91.25
26
26
26
26
11.5
19.5
26
30.42
24
50th
26
18.25
4.75
6
54.75
13
8.67
14
8.67
6
6
13
13
8
25th 10th
13 5.2
8.67 3.47
2 1
2 0.967
24.33 12.17
6 1.75
4.33 2
8.67 4.33
3 1
2 1.5
3 1.15
6 1.73
4.33 1.81
2 0.568
Oth
0.4
0.33
0.17
0.07
1.2
0.17
0.1
0.5
0.17
0.07
0.07
0.17
0.1
0.07
Source: Westat, 1987b.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-19
-------
I
I
Table 16-14. Mean Percentile Rankings for Frequency of Performing Household Tasks
Percentile Rankings
Tasks
Clean bathroom sinks and tubs
Clean kitchen sinks
Clean inside of cabinets such as those in the
kitchen
Clean outside of cabinets
Wipe off counters such as those in the
kitchen
Thoroughly clean counters
Clean bathroom floors
Clean kitchen floors
Clean bathroom or other tiled or ceramic
walls
Clean outside of windows
Clean inside of windows
Clean other glass surfaces such as mirrors
and tables
Clean outside of refrigerator and other
appliances
Clean spots or dirt on walls or doors
Mean
3 x/week
7 x/week
9 x/year
3 x/month
2 x/day
8 x/month
6 x/month
6 x/month
4 x/month
5 x/year
1 0 x/year
7 x/month
1 0 x/month
6 x/month
Oth
0.2 x/week
0 x/week
1 x/year
0.1 x/month
Ox/day
0.1 x/month
0.2 x/month
0.1 x/month
0.1 x/month
1 x/year
1 x/year
0.1 x/month
0.2 x/month
0.1 x/month
10th
1 x/week
1 x/week
1 x/year
0.1 x/month
0.4 x/day
0.8 x/month
1 x/month
1 x/month
0.2 x/month
1 x/year
1 x/year
1 x/month
1 x/month
0.2 x/month
25th
1 x/week
2 x/week
1 x/year
0.3 x/month
1 x/day
1 x/month
2 x/month
2 x/month
1 x/month
1 x/year
2 x/year
2 x/month
2 x/month
0.3 x/month
50th
2 x/week
7 x/week
2 x/year
1 x/month
1 x/day
4 x/month
4 x/month
4 x/month
2 x/month
2 x/year
4 x/year
4 x/month
4 x/month
1 x/month
75th
3.5 x/week
7 x/week
1 2 x/year
4 x/month
3 x/day
4 x/month
4 x/month
4 x/month
4 x/month
4 x/year
1 2 x/year
4 x/month
1 3 x/month
4 x/month
90th
7 x/week
1 5 x/week
1 2 x/year
4 x/month
4 x/day
30 x/month
1 3 x/month
1 3 x/month
9 x/month
1 2 x/year
24 x/year
1 7 x/month
30 x/month
1 3 x/month
95th
7 x/week
21 x/week
52 x/year
22 x/month
6 x/day
30 x/month
30 x/month
30 x/month
1 3 x/month
1 2 x/year
52 x/year
30 x/month
30 x/month
30 x/month
100th
42 x/week
28 x/week
1 56 x/year
30 x/month
1 6 x/day
183 x/month
30 x/month
30 x/month
30 x/month
1 56 x/year
1 56 x/year
61 x/month
61 x/month
152 x/month
Source: Westat, 1987b.
Q
I
I
I
ri
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
16-15. Mean and Percentile Rankings for Exposure Time Per Event of Performing Household Tasks
Tasks
Clean bathroom sinks and tubs
Clean kitchen sinks
Clean inside of cabinets such as those in the
kitchen
Clean outside of cabinets
Wipe off counters such as those in the kitchen
Thoroughly clean counters
Clean bathroom floors
Clean kitchen floors
Clean bathroom or other tiled or ceramic walls
Clean outside of windows
Clean inside of windows
Clean other glass surfaces such as mirrors and
tables
Clean outside of refrigerator and other
appliances
Clean spots or dirt on walls or doors
Mean
(minutes/event)
20
10
137
52
9
25
16
30
34
180
127
24
19
50
Percentile Rankings (minutes/event)
Oth
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
2
1
4
4
1
1
1
10th
5
2
24
5
2
5
5
10
5
30
20
5
4
5
25th
10
3
44
15
3
10
10
15
15
60
45
10
5
10
50th
15
5
120
30
5
15
15
20
30
120
90
15
10
20
75th
30
10
180
60
10
30
20
30
45
240
158
30
20
60
90th
45
15
240
120
15
60
30
60
60
420
300
60
30
120
95th
60
20
360
180
30
90
38
60
120
480
381
60
45
216
100th
90
480
2,880
330
120
180
60
180
240
1,200
1,200
180
240
960
Source: Westat, 1987b.
Table 16-16. Total Exposure Time for Ten Product Groups Most Frequently Used for Household Cleaning2
Products
Dish Detergents
Glass Cleaners
Floor Cleaners
Furniture Polish
Bathroom Tile Cleaners
Liquid Cleansers
Scouring Powders
Laundry Detergents
Rug Cleaners/Shampoos
All Purpose Cleaners
Mean
(hrs/yr)
107
67
52
32
47
68
78
66
12
64
The data in Table 16-15 above reflect for only the
Percentile Rankings of Total Exposure Time
(hrs/yr)
Oth
0.2
0.4
0.7
0.1
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.6
0.3
0.3
10th
6
3
4
0.3
2
2
9
8
0.3
4
25th
24
12
7
1
8
9
17
14
0.3
9
14 tasks included in the survey.
underestimate the hours of the use of the product group.
Source: Westat, 1987b.
For example,
50th
56
29
22
12
17
22
35
48
9
26
Therefore,
75th
134
62
52
36
48
52
92
103
26
77
90th
274
139
102
101
115
122
165
174
26
174
95th
486
260
414
215
287
215
281
202
26
262
100th
941
1,508
449
243
369
2,381
747
202
26
677
many of the durations reported in the table
use of dish detergents to wash dishes is not included.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-21
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-17. Total Exposure Time of Painting Activity of Interior Painters (hours)
Mean
Types of Paint (hrs) Std. dev.
Latex 12.2 11.28
Oil-based 10.68 15.56
Wood Stains and Varnishes 8.57 10.85
Percentile Rankings for Duration of Painting Activity
(hrs)
Min. 10 25 50 75 90 95 Max.
13 4 9 15 24 40 248
1 1.6 3 6 10 21.6 65.6 72
11 2 4 9.3 24 40 42
Source: Westat, 1987c.
Table 16-18. Exposure Time of Interior Painting Activity/Occasion (hours) and Frequency of Occasions Spent Painting Per Year
Types of Paint Duration of
Painting/Occasion
(hrs)
Mean Median
Latex 2.97 3
Oil-based 2.14 3
Wood Stains and 2.15 2
Varnishes
Frequency of
Occasions Spent
Painting/Year Percentile Rankings for Frequency of Occasions Spent Painting
Mean Std. dev. Min 10 25 50 75 90 95 Max.
4.16 5.54 112 3 4 9 10 62
5.06 11.98 111 2 4 8 26 72
4.02 4.89 111 2 4 9 20 20
Source: Westat, 1987c.
Table 16-19. Amount of Paint Used by Interior Painters
Median
Types of Paint (gallons)
Latex 3.0
Oil-based 2.0
Wood Stains and 0.75
Varnishes
Percentile Rankings for Amount of Paint Used
Mean Std. (gallons)
(gallons) dev.
Min 10 25 50 75 90 95 Max.
3.89 4.56 0.13 1 2 3 5 8 10 50
2.55 3.03 0.13 0.25 0.5 2 3 7 12 12
0.88 0.81 0.13 0.14 0.25 0.75 1 2 2 4.25
Source: Westat, 1987c.
Page
16-22
Exposure Factors Handboo
August 199
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-20. Number of Respondents Using Cologne, Perfume, Aftershave or Other Fragrances at Specified Daily Frequencies
Number of Times Used in a Dav
Population Group
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Age (Years)
*
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing Data; DK = Don't Know;
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
Total N
2223
912
1311
33
26
144
1735
285
1781
242
30
38
111
21
2012
182
11
18
157
1195
240
618
13
208
190
739
504
331
251
459
530
813
421
1480
743
604
588
568
463
2075
143
5
2161
52
10
2112
103
8
Refused =
1-2
2100
868
1232
31
24
133
1635
277
1684
233
30
35
98
20
1909
165
9
17
145
1125
228
591
11
194
177
704
480
308
237
434
502
766
398
1402
698
574
549
535
442
1959
136
5
2043
47
10
1994
98
8
3-5
113
44
69
1
2
9
93
8
91
7
*
3
11
1
95
15
2
1
10
67
11
23
2
12
13
32
21
21
14
21
25
46
21
71
42
26
36
31
20
106
7
*
108
5
*
108
5
*
Respondents Refused to Answer; N
6-9
4
*
4
1
*
*
3
*
4
*
*
*
*
*
4
*
*
*
*
2
*
2
*
*
*
2
*
2
*
3
1
*
*
3
1
1
1
2
*
4
*
*
4
*
*
4
*
*
= Number of Respondents.
10+
2
*
2
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
2
1
1
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
2
*
*
DK
4
*
4
*
*
1
3
*
2
1
*
*
1
*
3
1
*
*
1
1
*
2
*
1
*
1
2
*
*
1
2
*
1
4
*
2
1
*
1
4
*
*
4
*
*
4
*
*
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-23
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-21. Number of Respondents Using Any Aerosol Spray Product for Personal Care Item
Such as Deodorant or Hair Spray at Specified Daily Frequencies
Number of Times Used in a Dav
Population Group
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
0
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
0
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
0
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Total N
1491
528
962
1
27
40
75
103
1071
175
1232
131
24
22
73
9
1359
119
6
7
210
714
152
404
11
240
128
528
311
161
123
292
340
585
274
994
497
381
408
400
302
1387
100
4
1451
35
5
1411
74
6
Note: * = Missing Data; "DK" = Don't Know;
Source: Tsang And Klepeis, 1996.
1
1019
375
644
0
14
30
57
53
724
141
855
84
18
12
45
5
937
74
3
5
137
492
99
284
7
151
83
365
212
115
93
201
111
388
203
695
324
264
269
282
204
950
66
3
990
26
3
972
44
3
Refused =
2
352
125
226
1
8
9
14
31
263
27
285
32
5
8
19
3
316
32
2
2
52
171
35
92
2
61
37
121
77
34
22
70
85
148
49
220
132
86
104
86
76
327
24
1
344
7
1
322
29
1
3
57
14
43
0
1
0
1
12
39
4
47
5
0
1
4
0
49
7
1
0
11
24
7
14
1
14
2
23
7
8
3
8
14
23
12
35
22
15
12
21
9
53
4
0
55
1
1
55
1
1
4
22
4
18
0
2
0
1
4
15
0
17
3
0
0
1
1
20
2
0
0
4
11
0
6
1
6
1
7
3
1
4
8
4
8
2
17
5
5
9
5
3
20
2
0
22
0
0
22
0
0
5
17
3
14
0
1
1
1
1
13
0
8
5
0
0
4
0
13
4
0
0
3
5
5
4
0
4
1
5
6
1
0
1
3
8
5
12
5
4
9
2
2
15
2
0
17
0
0
17
0
0
Respondents Refused To Answer; N= Sample
6
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
Size
7
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
10
3
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
2
0
1
0
2
1
2
0
3
0
0
3
0
0
10+
10
2
8
0
0
0
0
1
8
1
10
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
1
4
4
1
0
2
2
1
4
1
0
1
3
4
2
7
3
4
1
1
4
10
0
0
9
1
0
9
0
1
DK
8
3
5
0
1
0
0
0
5
2
5
2
1
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
4
2
2
0
0
2
3
1
1
1
3
2
3
0
6
2
3
2
2
1
8
0
0
8
0
0
8
0
0
Page
16-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-22. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Being Near Freshly Applied Paints (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
N
276
145
131
7
12
20
212
20
241
16
3
2
12
257
17
145
31
61
13
74
72
42
30
60
70
90
56
222
54
67
74
76
59
257
19
270
6
265
11
1
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
20
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
45
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
20
10
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
45
0
0
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
1
1
1
3
5
0.5
1
0
2
0
20
10
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
2
0
3
2
0
1
1
1
0
2
1
0
2
1
1
1
45
1
0
10 25
2 15
2 10
3 15
3 5
15 20
3 8
2 11
2.5 17.5
4 15
1 2.5
20 20
10 10
1 3.5
3 15
1 6
3 10
1 30
2 30
1 5
5 20
2 12.5
1 6
4.5 15
5 25
2 10
2 10
3 12.5
2 15
5 15
3 15
2 10
2 13.5
5 20
2 15
2 10
2 12
45 60
3 15
2 5
50
60
48
120
15
45
45
60
90
60
10
30
20
27.5
60
45
60
60
120
45
120
105
60
30
120
55
47.5
75
60
45
60
30
90
120
60
45
60
121
60
45
120 minutes were spent; n =
75
121
121
121
121
120
75
121
121
121
90
60
30
120.5
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
90
121
121
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
60
30
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
doer sample size;
95
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
60
30
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
98
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
60
30
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
30 30
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
percentiles are the percentage
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-25
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-23. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Household Cleaning
Agents Such as Scouring Powders or Ammonia (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group N
Overall 905
Gender Male 278
Gender Female 627
Age (years) 1-4 21
Age (years) 5-11 26
Age (years) 12-17 41
Age (years) 18-64 672
Age (years) > 64 127
Race White 721
Race Black 112
Race Asian 16
Race Some Others 19
Race Hispanic 30
Hispanic No 838
Hispanic Yes 58
Employment Full Time 422
Employment Part Time 98
Employment Not Employed 296
Education < High School 76
Education High School Graduate 304
Education < College 204
Education College Graduate 114
Education Post Graduate 109
Census Region Northeast 207
Census Region Midwest 180
Census Region South 309
Census Region West 209
Day of Week Weekday 580
Day of Week Weekend 325
Season Winter 240
Season Spring 220
Season Summer 244
Season Fall 201
Asthma No 826
Asthma Yes 79
Angina No 868
Angina Yes 33
Bronchitis/emphysema No 843
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes 60
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
0
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
1
10
1
2
1
0
2
0
2
1
1
1
5
3
2.5
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
120 minutes
25
4
3
4
5
3
2
5
3
4
2
5
5
10
3
5
4
5
3
2
5
4.5
5
3
3
5
4
4
3
5
3
3
4
5
3
5
4
5
4
3.5
were spent
50
10
10
10
10
5
5
10
5
10
5
10
10
15
10
12.5
10
10
10
12.5
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
10
10
75
20
20
20
15
15
10
20
15
20
12
15
20
30
20
30
30
20
15
30
20
30
20
15
15
30
20
20
20
20
20
17.5
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
32.5
90
60
60
60
20
30
40
60
30
60
30
20
30
60
60
60
60
60
60
120
60
120
60
30
45
75
60
60
60
60
75
52.5
30
90
60
120
60
120
60
120.5
n = doer sample size;
95
121
121
120
30
30
60
121
60
121
90
30
60
90
121
120
121
121
120
121
120
121
90
60
120
121
120
121
121
90
121
104
60
121
120
121
121
121
120
121
98
121
121
121
121
30
60
121
120
121
121
30
60
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
30 30
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
30 30
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
percentiles are the percentage
Page
16-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-24. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities (at home or elsewhere) Working with
or Near Floorwax, Furniture Wax or Shoe Polish (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group N
Overall 325
Gender Male 96
Gender Female 229
Age (years) 1-4 13
Age (years) 5-11 21
Age (years) 12-17 15
Age (years) 18-64 238
Age (years) > 64 34
Race White 267
Race Black 32
Race Asian 1
Race Some Others 6
Race Hispanic 1 8
Hispanic No 291
Hispanic Yes 3 1
Employment Full Time 150
Employment Part Time 32
Employment Not Employed 92
Education < High School 26
Education High School Graduate 115
Education < College 70
Education College Graduate 29
Education Post Graduate 3 1
Census Region Northeast 77
Census Region Midwest 70
Census Region South 125
Census Region West 53
Day of Week Weekday 210
Day of Week Weekend 1 1 5
Season Winter 92
Season Spring 78
Season Summer 8 1
Season Fall 74
Asthma No 296
Asthma Yes 29
Angina No 312
Angina Yes 12
Bronchitis/emphysema No 302
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes 22
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
4
0
1
0
1
0
3
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
4
0
1
0
1
0.5
3
0
2
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
2
1
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
2
4
0
1
2
4
2
5
1
3
2
2
3
0
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
2
10
2
2
3
5
2
1
3
2
2
5
4
0
4
2
5
3
5
2
5
3
3
5
2
3
2
2
3
2
3
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
120 minutes
25
5
5
5
10
3
2
5
5
5
5
4
2
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
5
10
7
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
7
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
were spent;
50
10
11
10
15
5
10
15
10
10
15
4
22.5
12.5
10
10
15
15
10
10
12
15
30
10
10
10
10
15
10
10
13.5
15
15
10
10
15
10
10
10
10
75
30
30
30
20
10
25
30
20
30
30
4
60
30
30
30
30
30
20
15
30
30
60
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
15
30
30
30
12.5
30
15
90
60
121
60
60
35
45
120
35
60
60
4
121
120
60
90
121
60
60
60
120
75
121
60
60
90
120
120
120
60
121
60
120
60
60
121
60
30
90
20
n = doer sample size;
95
121
121
121
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
4
121
121
121
120
121
121
120
60
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
20
98
121
121
121
121
120
121
121
121
121
121
4
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
4 4
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
percentiles are the percentage
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-27
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-25. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Being Near Glue (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
N 1
294 0
151 0
143 0
6 0
36 2
34 0
207 0
10 0
241 0
28 0
4 10
7 1
12 5
260 0
27 3
150 0
24 1
46 0
11 0
69 0
66 0
37 0
32 0
55 0
71 0
98 0
70 0
228 0
66 0
85 0
74 0
66 0
69 0
266 0
28 0
290 0
3 1
283 0
11 1
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
10
1
5
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
10
1
5
0
5
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
10 25
1 5
2 5
1 5
0 30
5 5
2 5
1 5
0 0
1 5
2 5
10 12.5
1 3
5 5
1 5
5 5
1 5
3 10
0 2
0 1
1 5
1 5
1 5
1 5
1 5
2 5
1 5
1 5
1 5
1 5
2 5
2 5
1 10
1 5
1 5
1 5
1 5
1 1
1 5
1 2
50
15
15
15
30
12.5
10
20
3.5
15
12.5
17.5
30
27.5
15
30
20
27.5
10
5
20
27.5
15
15
20
15
15
15
15
15
15
10
20
15
15
17.5
15
121
15
30
120 minutes were spent; n
75
60
70
30
30
25
30
90
60
60
45
40
90
90
60
120
120
90
30
10
90
121
30
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
45
30
121
60
60
40
60
121
60
121
90
121
121
121
50
30
30
121
120.5
121
121
60
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
= doer sample size;
95
121
121
121
50
60
60
121
121
121
121
60
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
98
121
121
121
50
120
120
121
121
121
121
60
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99
121
121
121
50
120
120
121
121
121
121
60
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
percentiles are the percenta;
100
121
121
121
50
120
120
121
121
121
121
60
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
je of
Page
16-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-26. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Solvents, Fumes or Strong Smelling Chemicals (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group N
Overall 495
Gender Male 258
Gender Female 237
Age (years) 1-4 7
Age (years) 5-11 16
Age (years) 12-17 38
Age (years) 18-64 407
Age (years) > 64 21
Race White 413
Race Black 40
Race Asian 8
Race Some Others 8
Race Hispanic 23
Hispanic No 449
Hispanic Yes 41
Employment Full Time 299
Employment Part Time 44
Employment Not Employed 9 1
Education < High School 35
Education High School Graduate 138
Education < College 128
Education College Graduate 69
Education Post Graduate 60
Census Region Northeast 101
Census Region Midwest 122
Census Region South 165
Census Region West 107
Day of Week Weekday 362
Day of Week Weekend 133
Season Winter 128
Season Spring 127
Season Summer 149
Season Fall 91
Asthma No 445
Asthma Yes 50
Angina No 489
Angina Yes 6
Bronchitis/emphysema No 469
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes 26
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
Note: A Value of "121" for Number of Minutes Signifies That More than
Percentage of Doers below or Equal to a Given Number of Minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
5
2
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
10
2
2
1
0
2
0
2
0
2
3.5
5
2
0
2
0
2
2
0
2
2
2
1
1.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
0
2
2
25
5
5
5
1
5
5
5
2
5
9
10
2.5
5
5
5
10
5
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
5
5
50
20
30
15
5
5
10
30
5
20
60
37.5
5
30
20
20
30
22.5
10
15
30
30
30
27.5
20
30
20
20
30
15
20
20
21
30
20
15
20
15
20
17.5
120 Minutes Were Spent;
75
121
121
90
60
17.5
60
121
15
121
121
120.5
60
121
121
121
121
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
90
95
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
60
90
121
121
121
121
45
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
95
121
121
121
121
70
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
N = Doer Sample Size;
98
121
121
121
121
70
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
70 70
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
Percentiles Are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-29
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-27. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Stain or Spot Removers (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
N
109
42
67
3
3
7
87
9
88
9
2
3
7
97
12
62
8
25
6
34
22
16
16
21
25
38
25
75
34
26
30
37
16
100
9
109
105
4
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
3
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
25
2
3
2
0
3
5
2
2
2
5
5
0
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
1
3
3
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
2
2
2
2
0.5
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent;
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
50
5
5
5
0
5
15
5
3
5
5
7.5
2
5
5
3
5
5
4
20
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1.5
n =
75 90
15 60
60 121
10 20
3 3
5 5
35 60
15 60
15 121
15 60
6 121
10 10
3 3
30 35
15 60
22.5 35
15 120
12.5 20
15 60
30 60
10 120
15 20
12.5 60
15 20
10 121
15 60
15 60
25 60
15 120
15 60
15 60
15 32.5
20 121
15 60
15 60
6 121
15 60
15 60
8.5 15
95
121
121
30
3
5
60
121
121
121
121
10
3
35
121
121
121
20
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
60
120
60
121
60
120
121
121
121
120.5
121
121
121
15
98
121
121
60
3
5
60
121
121
121
121
10
3
35
121
121
121
20
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
120
120
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
15
99 100
121 121
121 121
120 120
3 3
5 5
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
10 10
3 3
35 35
121 121
121 121
121 121
20 20
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 120
120 120
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
15 15
doer sample size; percentiles are the
Page
16-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-28. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Gasoline or
Diesel-powered Equipment, Besides Automobiles (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
N
390
271
119
14
12
25
312
26
355
15
8
2
8
367
19
237
33
66
33
135
89
48
30
57
117
151
65
278
112
97
110
119
64
361
28
381
7
368
21
1
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
2
0
1
0
1
3
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
15
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
2
1
1
0
1
3
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
2
0
15
0
2
5
1
1
1
0
1
5
1
2
1
1
0
1
3
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
0
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
15
1
3
10
3
3
2
1
3
5
3
3
3
1
0
1
3
3
2
2
2
4
2
5
3
1
1.5
1
5
3
3
2
5
2
3
5
2
3
3
3
15
3
3
25
10
15
8
5
7.5
13
15
10
15
2
5
1
10
10
5
20
10
10
6
20
15
10
10
10
15
10
10
10
15
10
10
15
5
10
30
10
20
15
5
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent;
percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
50
60
60
30
22.5
25
35
60
25
60
15
11.5
23
105.5
60
30
90
45
30
60
90
60
60
30
60
90
60
45
60
45
60
60
60
30
60
120.5
60
45
60
45
75 90
121 121
121 121
120 121
120 121
50 60
120 121
121 121
90 121
121 121
121 121
17.5 90
45 45
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
120 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
n = doer sample size;
95
121
121
121
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
90
45
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
98
121
121
121
121
60
121
121
121
121
121
90
45
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
60 60
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
90 90
45 45
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
percentiles are the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-31
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-29. Number of Minutes Spent Using Any Microwave Oven (minutes/day)
Percentiles
Category Population Group N
Overall 2298
Gender Male 948
Gender Female 1350
Age (years) 5-11 62
Age (years) 12-17 141
Age (years) 18-64 1686
Age (years) > 64 375
Race White 1953
Race Black 182
Race Asian 38
Race Some Others 29
Race Hispanic 74
Hispanic No 2128
Hispanic Yes 139
Employment Full Time 1114
Employment Part Time 237
Employment Not Employed 734
Education < High School 190
Education High School Graduate 717
Education < College 518
Education College Graduate 347
Education Post Graduate 288
Census Region Northeast 420
Census Region Midwest 545
Census Region South 83 1
Census Region West 502
Day of Week Weekday 1567
Day of Week Weekend 731
Season Winter 657
Season Spring 577
Season Summer 565
Season Fall 499
Asthma No 2109
Asthma Yes 180
Angina No 2212
Angina Yes 72
Bronchitis/emphysema No 2164
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes 124
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note: A Value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than
of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
5
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
1
1
1.5
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1.5
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
25
3
2
3
1
2
3
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
3
120 minutes were spent;
50
5
5
5
2
3
5
5
5
3
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
5
5
n =
75
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
6
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
90
15
15
20
10
10
15
20
16
15
20
30
15
15
20
15
20
20
20
20
18
15
15
20
15
16
15
15
20
15
20
15
20
15
19
15
15
15
30
95
30
30
30
15
15
25
30
30
20
30
30
45
30
30
30
30
30
33
30
30
25
20
30
30
30
20
25
30
30
30
20
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
98
40
40
42.5
20
30
45
60
40
30
60
50
120
35
120
34
60
45
60
45
60
30
30
60
35
45
30
30
50
40
45
30
45
40
45
40
45
40
60
99 100
60 121
67 121
60 121
30 30
30 60
60 121
60 70
60 121
30 121
60 60
50 50
121 121
60 121
120 121
60 121
120 121
60 120
121 121
60 121
120 121
60 70
30 90
60 121
60 121
60 121
60 121
60 121
120 121
67 121
60 120
60 120
120 121
60 121
60 121
60 121
60 60
60 121
120 121
doer sample size; percentiles are the percentage
Page
16-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-30. Number of Respondents Using a Humidifier at Home
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing Data;
Source: Tsang and Klepeis
Total N
1047
455
591
1
16
111
88
83
629
120
879
93
18
20
30
7
978
60
5
4
279
416
88
256
8
303
86
251
188
119
100
273
326
302
146
698
349
320
257
269
201
948
92
7
1015
24
8
994
48
5
Almost
Every
Day
300
135
165
*
3
33
18
21
183
42
268
24
3
1
2
2
286
11
3
*
70
124
22
82
2
74
27
85
53
32
29
84
102
83
31
196
104
135
58
56
51
272
27
1
290
8
2
278
21
1
3-5 Times a
Week
121
53
68
*
1
16
10
7
77
10
98
10
2
3
7
1
109
11
*
1
32
43
14
29
3
36
15
27
16
17
10
26
37
42
16
83
38
46
23
27
25
110
9
2
116
4
1
117
3
1
Frequency
1-2 Times a
Week
107
48
59
*
3
7
12
5
70
10
79
15
1
4
8
*
95
12
*
0
25
44
9
29
*
27
14
28
17
13
8
28
32
31
16
70
37
34
29
20
24
95
10
2
103
3
1
102
4
1
1-2 Times a
Month
495
208
286
1
7
53
46
49
287
53
414
42
11
12
13
3
466
25
2
2
147
194
43
109
2
160
29
104
97
56
49
132
142
141
80
335
160
98
144
155
98
448
45
2
482
9
4
473
20
2
DK
24
11
13
*
2
2
2
1
12
5
20
2
1
*
*
1
22
1
*
1
5
11
*
7
1
6
1
7
5
1
4
3
13
5
3
14
10
7
3
11
3
23
1
*
24
*
*
24
*
*
DK= Don't Know; Refused = Respondent Refused to Answer; N = Number of Respondents
1996.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-33
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table
1 6-3 1 . Number of Respondents Indicating that Pesticides Were Applied by the Professional at Home
to Eradicate Insects, Rodents, or Other Pests at Specified Frequencies
Total N
Number of Times Over a 6-month Period
Pesticides Were Applied bv Professionals
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing Data;
Source: Tsang and Klepeis
1946
897
1048
1
33
113
150
143
1264
243
1532
231
24
38
100
21
1750
172
8
16
398
855
163
512
18
436
137
483
416
272
202
335
318
875
418
1303
643
466
449
584
447
1766
167
13
1880
53
13
1833
101
12
None
1057
498
558
1
17
60
84
90
660
146
856
107
13
24
45
12
960
83
5
9
229
463
84
272
9
246
80
265
218
137
111
201
202
404
250
702
355
247
240
324
246
969
80
8
1019
30
8
1004
46
7
1-2
562
248
314
*
8
35
37
40
387
55
429
78
10
8
33
4
499
56
3
4
111
252
50
145
4
122
31
140
131
87
51
85
84
298
95
374
188
129
128
172
133
509
50
3
549
10
3
524
36
2
DK= Don't know; Refused = Respondent Refused to Answer; N
1996.
3-5
134
64
70
*
4
11
10
5
89
15
98
20
1
4
10
1
121
12
*
1
24
59
14
35
2
27
11
26
28
25
17
2
17
63
34
91
43
29
30
40
35
121
13
*
131
3
*
127
7
*
6-9
150
64
86
*
4
6
18
6
97
19
117
17
*
2
11
3
130
18
*
2
30
60
12
46
2
35
10
38
29
20
18
22
13
86
29
105
45
46
43
34
27
129
19
2
141
7
2
140
8
2
10+
20
11
9
*
*
1
1
*
15
3
14
4
*
*
1
1
19
1
*
*
2
11
2
5
*
2
1
9
4
2
2
3
*
11
6
16
4
9
3
6
2
16
4
*
19
1
*
18
1
1
DK
23
12
11
*
*
*
*
2
16
5
18
5
*
*
*
*
21
2
*
*
2
10
1
9
1
4
4
5
6
1
3
4
2
13
4
15
8
6
5
8
4
22
1
*
21
2
*
20
3
*
= Number of Respondents
Page
16-34
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-32. Number of Respondents Reporting Pesticides Applied by the Consumer at Home
To Eradicate Insects, Rodents, or Other Pests at Specified Frequencies
Total N
Number of Times Over a 6-month
Period Pesticides Applied bv Resident
Overall
Gender
Male
Female
Refused
Age (years)
*
1-4
5-11
12-17
18-64
>64
Race
White
Black
Asian
Some Others
Hispanic
Refused
Hispanic
No
Yes
DK
Refused
Employment
*
Full Time
Part Time
Not Employed
Refused
Education
*
< High School
High School Graduate
< College
College Graduate
Post Graduate
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Day of Week
Weekday
Weekend
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Asthma
No
Yes
DK
Angina
No
Yes
DK
Bronchitis/emphysema
No
Yes
DK
Note: * = Missing Data;
Source: Tsang and Klepeis
1946
897
1048
1
33
113
150
143
1264
243
1532
231
24
38
100
21
1750
172
8
16
398
855
163
512
18
436
137
483
416
272
202
335
318
875
418
1303
643
466
449
584
447
1766
167
13
1880
53
13
1833
101
12
DK= Don't know; Refused =
1996.
None
721
318
403
*
13
46
50
45
473
94
574
81
4
11
41
10
647
66
2
6
139
298
67
209
8
157
44
184
157
97
82
112
108
363
138
485
236
190
170
204
157
643
73
5
696
21
4
675
41
5
1-2
754
367
386
1
12
46
70
64
477
85
600
77
15
12
42
8
677
67
3
7
176
342
66
163
7
189
50
196
158
97
64
131
145
316
162
503
251
153
192
233
176
695
54
5
731
19
4
715
35
4
Respondent Refused to Answer; N
3-5
286
135
151
*
3
15
24
21
192
31
227
36
3
11
9
*
258
26
1
1
59
131
20
76
*
62
19
53
63
53
36
56
35
119
76
186
100
75
51
89
71
261
25
*
276
8
2
272
14
*
6-9
73
31
42
*
1
3
1
5
48
15
55
10
1
1
5
1
63
10
*
*
9
37
4
23
*
10
4
21
18
9
11
12
12
30
19
44
29
18
15
21
19
70
3
*
70
3
0
72
1
*
10+
83
35
48
*
4
3
4
8
55
9
50
25
1
2
3
2
76
3
2
2
14
35
5
27
2
17
14
18
16
12
6
19
12
37
15
66
17
21
16
27
19
70
11
2
80
1
2
71
10
2
DK
29
11
18
*
*
*
1
*
19
9
26
2
*
1
*
*
29
*
*
*
1
12
1
14
1
1
6
11
4
4
3
5
6
10
8
19
10
9
5
10
5
27
1
1
27
1
1
28
*
1
= Number of Respondents
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-35
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-33. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working with or Near Pesticides, Including Bug Sprays or Bug Strips (minutes/day)
Category Population Group
Overall
Gender Male
Gender Female
Age (years) 1-4
Age (years) 5-11
Age (years) 12-17
Age (years) 18-64
Age (years) > 64
Race White
Race Black
Race Asian
Race Some Others
Race Hispanic
Hispanic No
Hispanic Yes
Employment Full Time
Employment Part Time
Employment Not Employed
Education < High School
Education High School Graduate
Education < College
Education College Graduate
Education Post Graduate
Census Region Northeast
Census Region Midwest
Census Region South
Census Region West
Day of Week Weekday
Day of Week Weekend
Season Winter
Season Spring
Season Summer
Season Fall
Asthma No
Asthma Yes
Angina No
Angina Yes
Bronchitis/emphysema No
Bronchitis/emphysema Yes
N
257
121
136
6
16
10
190
31
199
36
2
4
15
231
25
124
26
75
20
87
56
29
29
45
51
106
55
183
74
39
78
105
35
231
24
244
8
240
14
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
5 10
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
5
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
2
25
2
2
2
3
1.5
2
2
2
2
1
5
1.5
2
2
5
2
2
2
2.5
2
2
1
3
5
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
Note: A value of "121" for number of minutes signifies that more than 120 minutes were spent; n
Percentiles are the percentage of doers below or equal to a given number of minutes.
Source: Tsang and Klepeis, 1996.
Percentiles
50 75
10 60
10 90
0 35
10 15
7.5 30
2.5 40
10 88
5 15
10 60
3 20
7.5 10
6.5 10
20 121
10 60
20 121
10 120.5
5 60
5 30
22.5 105.5
10 45
10 89
10 90
10 30
10 88
10 121
5 30
10 45
10 60
10 30
5 90
10 60
10 60
10 60
10 60
5 90.5
10 60
5 75.5
10 60
5 30
90
121
121
121
20
121
121
121
60
121
121
10
10
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
95
121
121
121
20
121
121
121
121
121
121
10
10
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
98
121
121
121
20
121
121
121
121
121
121
10
10
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
121
99 100
121 121
121 121
121 121
20 20
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
10 10
10 10
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
121 121
= doer sample size.
Page
16-36
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-34. Amount and Frequency of Use of Various Cosmetic and Baby Products
Product Type
Baby Lotion - baby use
Baby Lotion - adult use
Baby Oil - baby use
Baby Oil - adult use
Baby Powder - baby use
Baby Powder - adult use
Baby Cream - baby use
Baby Cream - adult use
Baby Shampoo - baby use
Baby Shampoo - adult use
Bath Oils
Bath Tablets
Bath Salts
Bubble Baths
Bath Capsules
Bath Crystals
Eyebrow Pencil
Eyeliner
Eye Shadow
Eye Lotion
Eye Makeup Remover
Mascara
Under Eye Cover
Blusher & Rouge
Face Powders
Foundations
Leg and Body Paints
Lipstick & Lip Gloss
Makeup Bases
Makeup Fixatives
Sunscreen
Colognes & Toilet Water
Perfumes
Amount of
Product Pera
Application
(grams)
1.4
1.0
1.3
5.0
0.8
0.8
-
__
0.5
5.0
14.7
__
18.9
11.8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.011
0.085
0.265
-
-
0.13
-
3.18
0.65
0.23
Average Frequency
(per day)
ofUse
Upper 90th Percentile Frequency of Use
(per day)
Survey Type
CTFA
0.38
0.22
0.14
0.06
5.36
0.13
0.43
0.07
0.14
0.02
0.08
0.003
0.006
0.088
0.018
0.006
0.27
0.42
0.69
0.094
0.29
0.79
0.79
1.18
0.35
0.46
0.003
1.73
0.24
0.052
0.003
0.68
0.29
Cosmetic
Co.
1.0
0.19
1.2
0.13
1.5
0.22
1.3
0.10
—
—
0.19
0.008
0.013
0.13
0.019
-
0.49
0.68
0.78
0.34
0.45
0.87
-
1.24
0.67
0.78
0.011
1.23
0.64
0.12
-
0.85
0.26
Market
Research
Bureau
—
0.24d
-
__
0.35d
—
-
__
o.nf
—
0.22s
__
-
—
-
-
-
0.27
0.40
-
-
0.46
-
0.55
0.33
0.47
-
2.62
-
-
0.002
0.56
0.38
CTFA
0.57
0.86
0.14
0.29
8.43
0.57
0.43
0.14
0.14
0.866
0.29
0.146
0.146
0.43
0.296
0.296
1.0
1.43
1.43
0.43
1.0
1.29
0.29
2.0
1.29
1.0
0.146
4.0
0.86
0.14
0.146
1.71
0.86
Survey Type
Cosmetic
Co.
2.0
1.0
3.0
0.57
3.0
1.0
3.0
0.146
—
—
0.86
0.146
0.146
0.57
0.146
0.146
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
-
1.43
1.0
1.0
0.146
2.86
1.0
1.0
-
1.43
1.0
Market
Research
Bureau
—
1.0d
"
__
i.od
—
-
__
0.43f
—
1.0s
__
-
—
-
-
-
1.0
1.0
-
-
1.5
-
1.5
1.0
1.5
-
6.0
-
-
0.005
1.5
1.5
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
16-37
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-34. Amount and Frequency of Use of Various Cosmetic and Baby Products (continued)
Product Type
Powders
Sachets
Fragrance Lotion
Hair Conditioners
Hair Sprays
Hair Rinses
Shampoos
Tonics and Dressings
Wave Sets
Dentifrices
Mouthwashes
Breath Fresheners
Nail Basecoats
Cuticle Softeners
Nail Creams & Lotions
Nail Extenders
Nail Polish & Enamel
Nail Polish & Enamel
Remover
Nail Undercoats
Bath Soaps
Underarm Deodorants
Douches
Feminine Hygiene
Deodorants
Cleansing Products (cold
creams, cleansing lotions
liquids & pads)
Depilatories
Face, Body & Hand Preps
(excluding shaving preps)
Foot Powder & Sprays
Hormones
Moisturizers
Night Skin Care Products
Amount of
Product Pera
Application
(grams)
2.01
0.2
-
12.4
-
12.7
16.4
2.85
2.6
-
-
-
0.23
0.66
0.56
-
0.28
3.06
-
2.6
0.52
-
-
1.7
-
3.5
0.53
1.33
Average Frequency of Use
(per day)
CTFA
0.18
0.0061
0.0061
0.4
0.25
0.064
0.82
0.073
0.003h
1.62
0.42
0.052
0.052
0.040
0.070
0.003
0.16
0.088
0.049
1.53
1.01
0.013
0.021
0.63
0.0061
0.65
0.061
0.012
0.98
0.18
Survey Type
Cosmetic
Co.
0.39
0.034
-
0.40
0.55
0.18
0.59
0.021
0.040
0.67
0.62
0.43
0.13
0.10
0.14
0.013
0.20
0.19
0.12
0.95
0.80
0.089
0.084
0.80
0.051
0.079
0.028
0.88
0.50
Market
Research
Bureau
__
__
-
0.27
0.32
-
0.48
2.12
0.58
0.46
-
-
—
-
0.07
-
-
-
1.10
0.085
0.05
0.54
0.009
1.12
0.63
-
Upper 90th Percentile Frequency of Use
(per day)
CTFA
1.0
0.146
0.296
1.0
1.0
0.29
1.0
0.29
h
2.6
1.86
0.14
0.29
0.14
0.29
0.146
0.71
0.29
0.14
3.0
1.29
0.146
1.0"
1.71
0.016
2.0
0.576
0.576
2.0
1.0
Survey Type
Cosmetic
Co.
1.0
0.146
-
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.14e
0.14
2.0
1.14
1.0
0.29
0.29
0.43
0.146
0.43
0.43
0.29
1.43
1.29
0.29
0.29
2.0
0.14
0.29
0.146
1.71
1.0
Market
Research
Bureau
__
__
-
0.86
1.0
-
1.0
4.0
1.5
0.57
-
-
—
-
1.0
-
-
-
2.0
0.29
0.14
1.5
0.033
2.14
1.5
-
Page
16-38
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
Table 16-34. Amount and Frequency of Use of Various Cosmetic and Baby Products (continued)
Product Type
Amount of
Product Pera
Application
(g)
Average Frequency of Use
(per day)
Upper 90th Percentile Frequency of Use
(per day)
Survey Type
Survey Type
CTFA
Cosmetic
Co.
Market
Research
Bureau
CTFA
Cosmetic
Co.
Market
Research
Bureau
Paste Masks (mud packs) 3.7 0.027
Skin Lighteners
Skin Fresheners & Astringents 2.0 0.33
Wrinkle Smoothers (removers) 0.38 0.021
Facial Cream 0.55 0.0061
Permanent Wave 101 0.003
Hair Straighteners 0.156 0.0007
Hair Dye - 0.001
Hair Lighteners - 0.0003
Hair Bleaches - 0.0005
Hair Tints - 0.0001
Hair Rinse (coloring) - 0.0004
Shampoo (coloring) - 0.0005
Hair Color Spray
Shave Cream 1.73
0.20
0.024
0.56
0.15
0.001
0.005
0.14
d
i.o
1.0"
0.0061
0.0082
0.005"
0.004"
0.005"
0.02"
0.005"
0.02"
0.02"
0.43
0.14"
1.43
1.0
0.005
0.014
0.082
0.36
" Values reported are the averages of the responses reported by the twenty companies interviewed.
(—'s) indicate no data available.
b The averages shown for the Market Research Bureau are not true averages - this is due to the fact that in many cases the class of most frequent
users were indicated by "1 or more" also ranges were used in many cases, i.e., "10-12." The average, therefore, is underestimated slightly.
The " 1 or more" designation also skew the 90th percentile figures in many instances. The 90th percentile values may, in actuality, be
somewhat higher for many products.
0 Average usage among users only for baby products.
" Usage data reflected "entire household" use for both baby lotion and baby oil.
" Fewer than 10% of individuals surveyed used these products. Value listed is lowest frequency among individuals reporting usage. In the case
of wave sets, skin lighteners, and hair color spray, none of the individuals surveyed by the CTFA used this product during the period of the
study.
* Usage data reflected "entire household" use.
8 Usage data reflected total bath product usage.
h None of the individuals surveyed reported using this product.
Source: CTFA. 1983.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
16-39
-------
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
16-40 August 199 7
Table 16-35. Summary of Consumer Products Use Studies
Study Study Size Approach Relevant Population Comments
KEY STUDIES
Abt, 1992 4,997 product interviews; Direct - interviews and Adults Random digit dialing method used to select sample.
527 mailed questionnaires questionnaires Information on use of 3 products containing methyl chloride
was requested.
Westat, 1987a 4,920 individuals Direct - questionnaire 1 8+ yrs selected to be Waksberg Method (random digit dialing) used to select
representative of US sample. Respondents asked to recall use in past 2 months o
population 32 catagories of household products containing methyl
chloride.
Westat, 1987b 193 households Direct - telephone survey; 2 Adult household members Waksberg Method (random digit dialing) used to select
post-survey validation efforts: who do cleaning tasks in sample. Household use of cleaning products requested.
30 reinterviewed, then another household Phone survey during end of year holidays may reflect biasei
50 reeinterviewed usage data. Two validation resurveys conducted 3 months
after survey.
Westat, 1987c 777 households Direct - telephone survey; 1 Household members who do Waksberg Method (random digit dialing) used to select
post-survey validation effort painting tasks in household sample. Painting product use information in past 12 months
conducted with 30 was requested. One validation resurvey conducted 3 month
reinterviewed after survey.
Tsang and Klepeis, 1996 9,386 individuals Direct - interviews and Representative of U.S. National Human Activity Patterns Survey (NHAPS).
questionnaires general population Participants selected using random Dial Digit (RDD) and
Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI). 24-
hour diary data, and follow-up questions; nationally
representative; represent all seasons, age groups, and
genders.
RELEVANT STUDY
CTFA, 1983 Survey 1 : 47 women Survey 1: Direct - 1 wk Survey 1: 16-61 yr old Interviewees asked to recall their use of cosmetics and sorm
employees and relatives or prospective survey females baby products during a specific past time period. Surveys 1
employees Survey 2: Direct - prospective Survey 2: Customers of and 2 had small populations, but Survey 3 had large
Survey 2: 1,129 cosmetics survey cosmetic manufacturer population selected to be representative of U.S. population
purchasers Survey 3: Direct- 9.5 months. Survey 3: Market research
Survey 3: 19,035 females prospective survey company sampled female
consumers nationwide
^\ Volume III - Activity Factors
^ak Chapter 16 - Consumer Products
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix 16A
APPENDIX 16A
SIMMONS MARKET RESEARCH DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 16A-1
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Appendix 16A
Table 16A-1. Volumes Included in 1992 Simmons Study
The volumes included in the Media series are as follows:
Ml Publications: Total Audiences
M2 Publications: Qualitative Measurements And In-Home Audiences
M3 Publications: Duplication Of Audiences
M4 Multi-Media Audiences: Adults
M5 Multi-Media Audiences: Males
M6 Multi-Media Audiences: Females and Mothers
M7 Business To Business
M8 Multi-Media Reach and Frequency and Television Attentiveness & Special Events
The following volumes are included in the Product series:
PI Automobiles, cycles, Trucks & Vans
P2 Automotive Products & Services
P3 Travel
P4 Banking, Investments, Insurance, Credit Cards & Contributions, Memberships & Public Activities
P5 Games & Toys, Children's & Babies' Apparel & Specialty Products
P6 Computers, Books, Discs, Records, Tapes, Stereo, Telephones, TV & Video
P7 Appliances, Garden Care, Sewing & Photography
P8 Home Furnishings & Home Improvements
P9 Sports & Leisure
P10 Restaurants, Stores & Grocery Shopping
P11 Direct Mail & Other In-Home Shopping, Yellow Pages, Florist, Telegrams, Faxes & Greeting Cards
P12 Jewelry, Watches, Luggage, Writing Tools & Men's Apparel
P13 Women's Apparel
P14 Distilled Spirits, Mixed Drinks, Malt Beverages, Wine & Tobacco Products
P15 Coffee, Tea, Cocoa, Milk, Soft Drinks, Juices & Bottled Water
P16 Dairy Products, Desserts, Baking & Bread Products
P17 Cereals & Spreads, Rice, Pasta, Pizza, Mexican Foods, Fruits & Vegetables
P18 Soup, Meat, Fish, Poultry, Condiments & Dressings
P19 Chewing Gum, Candy, Cookies & Snacks
P20 Soap, Laundry, Paper Products & Kitchen Wraps
P21 Household Cleaners, Room Deodorizers, Pest Controls & Pet Foods
P22 Health Care Products & Remedies
P23 Oral Hygiene Products, Skin Care, Deodorants & Drug Stores
P24 Hair Care, Shaving Products & Fragrances
P25 Women's Beauty Aids, Cosmetics & Personal Products
P26 Relative Volume of Consumption
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 16A-3
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
17. RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
CHARACTERISTICS 1
17.1. INTRODUCTION 1
17.2. BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS 2
17.2.1. Key Volumes of Residence Studies 2
17.2.2. Volumes and Surface Areas of Rooms 4
17.2.3. Mechanical System Configurations 6
17.2.4. Type of Foundation 7
17.3. TRANSPORT RATES 8
17.3.1. Background 8
17.3.2. Air Exchange Rates 10
17.3.3. Infiltration Models 12
17.3.4. Deposition and Filtration 14
17.3.5. Interzonal Airflows 15
17.3.6. Water Uses 15
17.3.7. House Dust and Soil 19
17.4. SOURCES 20
17.4.1. Source Descriptions for Airborne
Contaminants 20
17.4.2. Source Descriptions for Waterborne
Contaminants 22
17.4.3. Soil and House Dust Sources 22
17.5. ADVANCED CONCEPTS 23
17.5.1. Uniform Mixing Assumption 23
17.5.2. Reversible Sinks 23
17.6 RECOMMENDATIONS 23
17.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 17 24
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
17. RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
CHARACTERISTICS
17.1. INTRODUCTION
Unlike previous chapters in this handbook which
focus on human behavior or characteristics that affect
exposure, this chapter focuses on residence characteristics.
Assessment of exposure in residential settings requires
information on the availability of the chemical(s) of concern
at the point of exposure, characteristics of the structure and
microenvironment that affect exposure, and human presence
within the residence. The purpose of this chapter is to
provide data that are available on residence characteristics
that affect exposure in an indoor environment. Source-
receptor relationships in residential exposure scenarios can
be complex due to interactions among sources, and
transport/transformation processes that result from
chemical-specific and building-specific factors. Figure 17-
1 illustrates the complex factors that must be considered
when conducting exposure assessments in a residential
setting. In addition to sources within the building,
chemicals of concern may enter the indoor environment
from outdoor air, soil, gas, water supply, tracked-in soil, and
industrial work clothes worn by the residents. Indoor
concentrations are affected by loss mechanisms, also
illustrated in Figure 17-1, involving chemical reactions,
deposition to and re-emission from surfaces, and transport
out of the building. Particle-bound
chemicals can enter indoor air through resuspension.
Indoor air concentrations of gas-phase organic chemicals
are affected by the presence of reversible sinks formed by
a wide range of indoor materials. In addition, the activity of
human receptors greatly affects their exposure as they move
from room to room, entering and leaving the exposure
scene.
Inhalation exposure assessments in residential and
other indoor settings are modeled by considering the
building as an assemblage of one or more well-mixed
zones. A zone is defined as one room, a group of
interconnected rooms, or an entire building. This
macroscopic level, well-mixed perspective forms the basis
for interpretation of measurement data as well as simulation
of hypothetical scenarios. Exposure assessment models on
a macroscopic level incorporate important physical factors
and processes. These well-mixed, macroscopic models
have been used to perform indoor air quality simulations
(Axley, 1989), as well as indoor air exposure assessments
(McKone, 1989; Ryan, 1991). Nazzaroff and Cass (1986)
and Wilkes et al. (1992) have used code-intensive computer
programs featuring finite difference or finite element
numerical techniques to model mass balance. A simplified
approach using desk top spreadsheet programs has been
used by Jennings et al. (1985).
Air In
Water In
Soil In
Concentration, C
Source
,„• Exposure, E for Occupant(s)
Decay
Resuspension
Removal
Reversible
Sinks
Out
Figure 17-1. Elements of Residential Exposure
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-1
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
In order to model mass balance of indoor
contaminants, the indoor air volume is represented as a
network of interconnected zones. Because conditions in a
given zone are determined by interactions with other
connecting zones, the multizone model is stated as a system
of simultaneous equations. The mathematical framework
for modeling indoor air has been reviewed by Sinden
(1978) and Sandberg (1984).
Indoor air quality models typically are not software
products that can be purchased as "off-the-shelf items.
Most existing software models are research tools that have
been developed for specific purposes and are being
continuously refined by researchers. Leading examples of
indoor air models implemented as software products are as
follows:
• CONTAM - developed at the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (MIST)
with support from U.S. EPA and the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) (Axley, 1988;
Grot, 1991; Walton, 1993);
• EXPOSURE - developed at the Indoor Air
Branch of U.S. EPA Air and Energy
Engineering Research Laboratory
(EPA/AEERL) (Sparks, 1988, 1991);
• MCCEM — the Multi-Chamber Consumer
Exposure Model developed for U.S EPA
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(EPA/OPPT) (GEOMET, 1989; Koontz and
Nagda, 1991); and
• THERdbASE - the Total Human Exposure
Relational Data Base and Advanced Simulation
Environment software developed by
researchers at the Harry Reid Center for
Environmental Studies at University Nevada,
Las Vegas (UNLV) (Pandian et al, 1993).
Section 17.2 of this chapter summarizes existing data
on building characteristics (volumes, surface areas,
mechanical systems, and types of foundations). Section
17.3 summarizes transport phenomena that affect chemical
transport (airflow, chemical-specific deposition and
filtration, and effects of water supply and soil tracking).
Section 17.4 provides information on various types of
indoor sources associated with airborne exposure,
waterbome sources, and soil/house dust sources. Section
17.5 summarizes advanced concepts.
17.2. BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS
17.2.1. Key Volumes of Residence Studies
Versar (1990) - Database on Perfluorocarbon
Tracer (PFT) Ventilation Measurements - A database of
time-averaged air exchange and interzonal airflow
measurements in more than 4,000 residences has been
compiled by Versar (1990) to allow researchers to access
these data (see Section 17.3.2). These data were collected
between 1982 and 1987. The residences that appear in this
database are not a random sample of U. S. homes; however,
they do represent a compilation of homes visited in about
100 different field studies, some of which involved random
sampling. In each study, the house volumes were directly
measured or estimated. The collective homes visited in
these field projects are not geographically balanced; a large
fraction of these homes are located in southern California.
Statistical weighting techniques were applied in developing
estimates of nationwide distributions (see Section 17.3.2) to
compensate for the geographic imbalance.
U.S. DOE (1995) -HousingCharacteristics 1993,
Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) -
Measurement surveys have not been conducted to directly
characterize the range and distribution of volumes for a
random sample of U.S. residences. Related data, however,
are regularly collected through the U.S. DOE's RECS (U.S.
DOE, 1995). In addition to collecting information on
energy use, this triennial survey collects data on housing
characteristics including direct measurements of total and
heated floor space for buildings visited by survey
specialists. For the most recent survey (1993), a multistage
probability sample of over 7,000 residences was surveyed,
representing 96 million residences nationwide. The survey
response rate was 81.2 percent. Volumes were estimated
from the RECS measurements by multiplying the heated
floor space area by an assumed ceiling height of 8 feet,
recognizing that this assumed height may not apply
universally to all homes.
Results for residential volume distributions from the
RECS (Thompson, 1995) are presented in Table 17-1.
Estimated parameters of residential volume distributions (in
cubic meters) from the PFT database (Versar, 1990) are
also summarized in Table 17-1, for comparison to the
RECS data. The arithmetic means from the two sources
are identical (369 cubic meters). The medians (50th
percentiles) are very similar: 310 cubic meters for the
RECS data, and 321 cubic meters for the PFT database.
Page
17-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Cumulative frequency distributions from the two sources
(Figure 17-2) also are quite similar, especially between the
50th and 75th percentiles.
Table 17-1. Summary of Residential Volume Distributions
in Cubic Meters3
Parameter
Arithmetic Mean
Standard Deviation
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
RECSMa(1)
369
258
147
209
310
476
672
PFT Database (2)
369
209
167
225
321
473
575
a In cubic meters
Sources: (1) Thompson, 1995; (2) Versar, 1990
The RECS also provides relationships between
average residential floor areas and factors such as housing
type, ownership, household size and structure age. The
predominant housing type—single-family detached homes—
also has the largest average volume (Table 17-2).
Multifamily units and mobile homes have volumes
averaging about half that of single-family detached homes,
with single-family attached homes about halfway between
these extremes. Within each category of housing type,
owner-occupied residences average about 50 percent
greater volume than rental units. The relationship of
residential volume to household size (Table 17-3) is of
particular interest for purposes of exposure assessment. For
example, one-person households would not include
children, and the data in the table indicate that multi-person
households occupy residences averaging about 50 percent
greater volume than residences occupied by one-person
households.
100 -
io -
BO -
L.
1
I
1
1
6
3
70 -
80 -
80 -
40 -
30 -
20 -
10 -
0
C
-****
-B-DOE arvey
0 /
/ f
?*'
/*/
- X
is' *
100 200
^^^^^^^
_,a/''
i/
/
300 400 500 600 700 30C 800 1000
Vc-Iune , cit.ic meters
Figure 17-2. Cumulative Frequency Distributions for Residential Volumes
from the PFT Data Base and the U. S. DOE's RECs.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August
1997
Pa^e
17-3
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table
17-2. Average Estimated Volumes of U.S. Residences, by Housing Type and Ownership
Ownership
Owner-Occupied
Housing Type
Single-Family
(Detached)
Single-Family
(Attached)
Multifamily
(2-4 units)
Multifamily
(5+ Units)
Mobile Home
All Types
Volume3
(m3)
471
406
362
241
221
441
Percent
of Total
53.1
4.6
1.6
1.7
4.6
65.4
3 Volumes calculated from floor areas assuming a ceiling
Source: Adapted from U.S. DOE, 1995.
Rental
Volume3
(m3)
323
291
216
183
170
233
Percent
of Total
8.5
2.9
6.7
15.2
1.2
34.6
All
Volume3
(m3)
451
362
243
190
210
369
Units
Percent
of Total
61.7
7.5
8.3
16.8
5.8
100.0
height of 8 feet.
Table 17-3. Residential Volumes in Relation to Household
Size and Year of Construction
Volume"
(m3) Percent of Total
Household Size
1 Person
2 Persons
3 Persons
4 Persons
5 Persons
6 or More Persons
All Sizes
Year of Construction
1939 or before
1940 to 1949
1950 to 1959
1960to 1969
1970to 1979
1980 to 1984
1985 to 1987
1988 to 1990
1991 to 1993
All Years
269
386
387
431
433
408
369
385
338
365
358
350
344
387
419
438
369
" Volumes calculated from floor areas assuming a ceiling
of 8 feet.
Source: U.S. DOE, 1995.
24.3
32.8
17.2
15.1
7.0
3.6
100.0
21.1
7.1
13.5
15.5
18.7
8.8
5.7
4.9
4.7
100.0
height
Data on year of construction indicate a slight
decrease in residential volumes between 1950 and 1984,
followed by an increasing trend over the next decade. A
ceiling height of 8 feet was assumed in estimating the
average volumes, whereas there may have been some time-
related trends in ceiling height.
Murray (1996) - Analysis of RECS and PFT
Databases. Using a database from the 1993 RECS and an
assumed ceiling height of 8 feet, Murray (1996) estimated
a mean residential volume of 382 m3 using RECS estimates
of heated floor space. This estimate is slightly different
from the mean of 369 m3 given in Table 17-1. Murray's
(1996) sensitivity analysis indicated that when a fixed
ceiling height of 8 feet was replaced with a randomly
varying height with a mean of 8 feet, there was little effect
on the standard deviation of the estimated distribution.
From a separate analysis of the PFT database, based on
1,751 individual household measure-ments, Murray (1996)
estimated an average volume of 369 m3, the same as
previously given in Table 17-1. In performing this analysis,
the author carefully reviewed the PFT database in an effort
to use each residence only once, for those residences
thought to have multiple PFT measurements.
17.2.2. Volumes and Surface Areas of Rooms
Room Volumes - Volumes of individual rooms are
dependent on the building size and configuration, but
summary data are not readily available. The exposure
assessor is advised to define specific rooms, or assemblies
of rooms, that best fit the scenario of interest. Most models
for predicting indoor-air concentrations specify airflows in
Page
17-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
cubic meters per hour and, correspondingly, express
volumes in cubic meters. A measurement in cubic feet can
be converted to cubic meters by multiplying the value in
cubic feet by 0.0283 mVft3. For example, a bedroom that is
9 feet wide by 12 feet long by 8 feet high has a volume of
864 cubic feet or 24.5 cubic meters. Similarly, a living
room with dimensions of 12 feet wide by 20 feet long by 8
feet high has a volume of 1920 cubic feet or 54.3 cubic
meters, and a bathroom with dimensions of 5 feet by 12 feet
by 8 feet has a volume of 480 cubic feet or 13.6 cubic
meters.
Murray (1996) analyzed the distribution of selected
residential zones (i.e., a series of connected rooms) using
the PFT database. The author analyzed the "kitchen zone"
and the "bedroom zone" for houses in the Los Angeles area
that were labeled in this manner by field researchers, and
"basement," "first floor," and "second floor" zones for
houses outside of Los Angeles for which the researchers
labeled individual floors as zones. The kitchen zone
surface area-to-volume, or loading ratio. Table 17-4
provides the basis for calculating loading ratios for typical-
sized rooms. Constant features in the examples are: a room
width of 12 feet and a ceiling height of 8 feet (typical for
residential buildings), or a ceiling height 12 feet (typical for
commercial buildings). The loading ratios for the 8-foot
ceiling height range from 0.98 m2m"3 to 2.18 m2m"3 for wall
area and from 0.36 m2m"3 to 0.44 m2m3 for floor area. In
companson, ASTM Standards 1333 (ASTM, 1990), for
large-chamber testing of formaldehyde levels from wood
products, specifies the following loading ratios: (1) 0.95
nAn"3 for testing plywood (assumes plywood or paneling on
all four walls of atypical size room); and (2) 0.43 m2m"3 for
testing particleboard (assumes that particleboard decking or
underlayment would be used as a substrate for the entire
floor of a structure).
Products and Materials - Table 17-5 presents
examples of assumed amounts of selected products and
materials used in constructing or finishing residential
Table 17-4. Dimensional Quantities for Residential Rooms
Nominal Dimensions
Eight Foot Ceiling
12'xl5'
12'xl2'
10'xl2'
9'xl2'
6'xl2'
4'xl2'
Twelve Foot Ceiling
12'xl5'
12'xl2'
10'xl2'
9'xl2'
6'xl2'
4'xl2'
Length
(m)
4.6
3.7
3.0
2.7
1.8
1.2
4.6
3.7
3.0
2.7
1.8
1.2
Width
(m)
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
Height
(m)
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
Volume
(m3)
41
33
27
24
16
11
61
49
41
37
24
16
Wall Area
(m2)
40
36
33
31
27
24
60
54
49
47
40
36
Floor Area
(m2)
17
13
11
10
7
4
17
13
11
10
7
4
Total Area
(m2)
74
62
55
51
40
32
94
80
71
67
54
44
contained the kitchen in addition to any of the following
associated spaces: utility room, dining room, living room
and family room. The bedroom zone contained all the
bedrooms plus any bathrooms and hallways associated with
the bedrooms. The following summary statistics (mean ±
standard deviation) were reported by Murray (1996) for the
volumes of the zones described above: 199 ± 115 m3 for
the kitchen zone, 128 ± 67 m3 for the bedroom zone, 205 ±
64 m3 for the basement, 233 ± 72 m3 for the first floor, and
233 ± 111 m3 for the second floor.
Surface Areas - The surface areas of floors are
commonly considered in relation to the room or house
volume, and their relative loadings are expressed as a
surfaces (Tucker, 1991). Products used for floor surfaces
include adhesive, varnish and wood stain; and materials
used for walls include paneling, painted gypsum board, and
wallpaper. Particleboard and chipboard are commonly used
for interior furnishings such as shelves or cabinets, but
could also be used for decking or underlayment. It should
be noted that numbers presented in Table 17-5 for surface
area are based on typical values for residences, and they are
presented as examples. In contrast to the concept of loading
ratios presented above (as a surface area), the numbers in
Table 17-5 also are not scaled to any particular residential
volume. In some cases, it may be preferable for the
exposure assessor to use professional judgment in
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-5
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
combination with the loading ratios given above. For
example, if the exposure scenario involves residential
carpeting, either as an indoor source or as an indoor sink,
then the ASTM loading ratio of 0.43 m2m'3 for floor
materials could be multiplied by an assumed residential
volume and assumed fractional coverage of carpeting to
derive an estimate of the surface area. More specifically, a
residence with a volume of 300 m3, a loading ratio of 0.43
m2m"3 and coverage of 80% would have i03 m of
carpeting. The estimates discussed here relate to
macroscopic surfaces; the true surface area for carpeting,
for example, would be considerably larger because of the
nature of its fibrous material.
Table 17-5. Examples of Products and Materials Associated with
Floor and Wall Surfaces in Residences
Material Sources
Silicone caulk
Floor adhesive
Floor wax
Wood stain
Polyurethane wood finish
Floor varnish or lacquer
Plywood paneling
Chipboard
Gypsum board
Wallpaper
Assumed Amount of
Surface Covered"
0.2m2
10.0m2
50.0m2
10.0m2
10.0m2
50.0m2
100.0 m2
100.0 m2
100.0 m2
100.0 m2
" Based on typical values for a residence.
Source: Adapted from Tucker, 1991.
Furnishings- Information on the relative abundance
of specific types of indoor furnishings, such as draperies or
upholstered furniture, was not readily available. The
exposure assessor is advised to rely on common sense and
professional judgment. For example, the number of beds in
a residence is usually related to household size, and
information has been provided (Table 17-3) on average
house volume in relation to household size.
17.2.3. Mechanical System Configurations
Mechanical systems for air movement in residences
can affect the migration and mixing of pollutants released
indoors and the rate of pollutant removal. Three types of
mechanical systems are: (1) systems associated with
heating and air conditioning (HAC); (2) systems whose
primary function is providing localized exhaust; and (3)
systems intended to increase the overall air exchange rate of
the residence.
Portable space heaters intended to serve a single
room, or a series of adjacent rooms, may or may not be
equipped with blowers that promote air movement and
mixing. Without a blower, these heaters still have the
ability to induce mixing through convective heat transfer.
If the heater is a source of combustion pollutants, as with
unvented gas or kerosene space heaters, then the
combination of convective heat transfer and thermal
buoyancy of combustion products will result in fairly rapid
dispersal of such pollutants. The pollutants will disperse
throughout the floor where the heater is located and to floors
above the heater, but will not disperse to floors below.
Central forced-air HAC systems are common in
many residences. Such systems, through a network of
supply/return ducts and registers, can achieve fairly
complete mixing within 20 to 30 minutes (Koontz et al,
1988). The air handler for such systems is commonly
equipped with a filter (see Figure 17-3) that can remove
particle-phase contaminants. Further removal of particles,
via deposition on various room surfaces (see Section
17.3.2), is accomplished through increased air movement
when the air handler is operating.
Figure 17-3 also distinguishes forced-air HAC
systems by the return layout in relation to supply registers.
The return layout shown in the upper portion of the figure
is the type most commonly found in residential settings. On
any floor of the residence, it is typical to find one or more
supply registers to individual rooms, with one or two
centralized return registers. With this layout, supply/return
imbalances can often occur in individual rooms, particularly
if the interior doors to rooms are closed. In comparison, the
supply/return layout shown in the lower portion of the figure
by design tends to achieve a balance in individual rooms or
zones. Airflow imbalances can also be caused by
inadvertent duct leakage to unconditioned spaces such as
attics, basements, and crawl spaces. Such imbalances
usually depressurize the house, thereby increasing the
likelihood of contaminant entry via soil-gas transport or
through spillage of combustion products from vented fossil-
fuel appliances such as fireplaces and gas/oil furnaces.
Mechanical devices such as kitchen fans, bathroom
fans, and clothes dryers are intended primarily to provide
localized removal of unwanted heat, moisture, or odors.
Operation of these devices tends to increase the air
exchange rate between the indoors and outdoors. Because
Page
17-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
€€ft*S*JK ffi!IfM LAY&j!
Figure 17-3. Configuration for Residential Forced-air Systems
local exhaust devices are designed to be near certain indoor
sources, their effective removal rate for locally generated
pollutants is greater than would be expected from the
dilution effect of increased air exchange. Operation of these
devices also tends to depressurize the house, because
replacement air usually is not provided to balance the
exhausted air.
An alternative approach to pollutant removal is one
which relies on an increase in air exchange to dilute
pollutants generated indoors. This approach can be
accomplished using heat recovery ventilators (HRVs) or
energy recovery ventilators (ERVs). Both types of
ventilators are designed to provide balanced supply and
exhaust airflows and are intended to recover most of the
energy that normally is lost when additional outdoor air is
introduced. Although ventilators can provide for more
rapid dilution of internally generated pollutants, they also
increase the rate at which outdoor pollutants are brought
into the house. A distinguishing feature of the two types is
that ERVs provide for recovery of latent heat (moisture) in
addition to sensible heat. Moreover, ERVs typically
recover latent heat using a moisture-transfer device such as
a desiccant wheel. It has been observed in some studies that
the transfer of moisture between outbound and inbound air
streams can result in some re-entrainment of indoor
pollutants that otherwise would have been exhausted from
the house (Andersson et al, 1993). Inadvertent air
communication between the supply and exhaust air streams
can have a similar effect.
Studies quantifying the effect of mechanical devices
on air exchange using tracer-gas measurements are
uncommon and typically provide only anecdotal data. The
common approach is for the expected increment in the air
exchange rate to be estimated from the rated airflow
capacity of the device(s). For example, if a device with a
rated capacity of 100 cubic feet per minute (cfrn), or 170
cubic meters per hour, is operated continuously in a house
with a volume of 400 cubic meters, then the expected
increment in the air exchange rate of the house would be
170 m'h"1 / 400 m3, or approximately 0.4 air changes per
hour.
17.2.4. Type of Foundation
The type of foundation of a residence is of interest in
residential exposure assessment. It provides some
indication of the number of stories and house configuration,
and provides an indication of the relative potential for soil-
gas transport. For example, such transport can occur
readily in homes with enclosed crawl spaces. Homes with
basements provide some resistance, but still have numerous
pathways for soil-gas entry. By comparison, homes with
crawl spaces open to the outside have significant
opportunities for dilution of soil gases prior to transport into
the house.
Lucas et al. (1992) - National Residential Radon
Survey - The National Resdental Radon Survey, sponsored
by the U.S. EPA, was conducted by Lucas et al. (1992) in
about 5,700 households nationwide. In addition to radon
measurements, information on a number of housing
characteristics was collected, including whether each house
had a basement. The estimated percentage (45.2 percent)
of homes in the U.S. having basements (Table 17-6) from
this survey is the same as found by the RECS (Table 17-7).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-6.
Percent of Residences with Basement, by
Census Region and EPA Region
Census Region
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
South
Midwest
South
Midwest
West
West
West
Source: Lucas et al
Tni=> Matir
EPA
Region
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
All Regions
, 1992.
\nal T? i=»dHi=»nti al
Percent of Residences
with Basements
93.4
55.9
67.9
19.3
73.5
4.1
75.3
68.5
10.3
11.5
45.2
basements. In the South and West regions, the predominant
foundation types are concrete slabs and enclosed crawl
spaces. Table 17-8 illustrates the four Census Regions.
17.3. TRANSPORT RATES
17.3.1. Background
Major air transport pathways for airborne substances
in residences include the following:
• Air exchange - Air leakage through windows,
doorways, intakes and exhausts, and
"adventitious openings" (i.e., cracks and seams)
that combine to form the leakage configuration
of the building envelope plus natural and
DaH™
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-7. Percent of Residences with Certain Foundation Types by Census Region
Percent of Residences"
Census Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
All Regions
• Percentage may add to more than
Source: U.S. DOE, 1995.
With
Basement
78.0
78.1
18.6
19.4
45.2
With
Enclosed Crawlspace
12.6
19.5
31.8
36.7
26.0
100 percent because more than one foundation type may apply
With Crawlspace
Open to Outside
2.8
5.6
11.0
8.1
7.5
to a given residence.
With
Concrete Slab
15.8
14.7
44.6
43.5
31.3
Table 17-8. States Associated with EPA Regions and Census Regions
US EPA Regions
Region 1
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region 2
New Jersey
New York
Region 3
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
US Bureau of Census Reg
Northeast Region
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
Rhode island
Vermont
Region 4
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region 5
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
'ions
Midwest Region
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
North Dakota
Ohio
South Dakota
Wisconsin
Region 6
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Region 7
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
Region 8
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
South Region
Alabama
Arkansas
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Mississippi
North Carolina
Oklahoma
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
West Virginia
Region 9
Arizona
California
Hawaii
Nevada
Region 10
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
West Region
Alaska
Arizona
California
Colorado
Hawaii
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
Oregon
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-9
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
than newer houses. They further observed that the post-
1980 houses did not show any trend in leakiness with age.
The position of the neutral pressure level (i.e., the
point where indoor-outdoor pressures are equal) depends on
the leakage configuration of the building envelope. The
stack effect arising from indoor-outdoor temperature
differences is also influenced by the partitioning of the
building interior. When there is free communication
between floors or stories, the building behaves as a single
volume affected by a generally rising current during the
heating season and a generally falling current during the
cooling season. When vertical communication is restricted,
each level essentially becomes an independent zone. As the
wind flows past a building, regions of positive and negative
pressure (relative to indoors) are created within the
building; positive pressures induce an influx of air, whereas
negative pressures induce an outflow. Wind effects and
stack effects combine to determine a net inflow or outflow.
The final element of indoor transport involves the
actions of mechanical ventilation systems that circulate
indoor air through the use of fans. Mechanical ventilation
systems may be connected to heating/cooling systems that,
depending on the type of building, recirculate thermally
treated indoor air or a mixture of fresh air and recirculated
air. Mechanical systems also may be solely dedicated to
exhausting air from a designated area, as with some kitchen
range hoods and bath exhausts, or to recirculating air in
designated areas as with a room fan. Local air circulation
also is influenced by the movement of people and the
operation of local heat sources.
17.3.2. Air Exchange Rates
Air exchange is the balanced flow into and out of a
building, and is composed of three processes: (1)
infiltration - air leakage through random cracks, interstices,
and other unintentional openings in the building envelope;
(2) natural ventilation - airflows through open windows,
doors, and other designed openings in the building
envelope; and (3) forced or mechanical ventilation -
controlled air movement driven by fans. For nearly all
indoor exposure scenarios, air exchange is treated as the
principal means of diluting indoor concentrations. The air
exchange rate is generally expressed in terms of air changes
per hour (ACH, with units of h"1), the ratio of the airflow
(m3 h"1) to the volume (m3).
No measurement surveys have been conducted to
directly evaluate the range and distribution of residential air
exchange rates. Although a significant number of air
exchange measurements have been carried out over the
years, there has been a diversity of protocols and study
objectives. Since the early 1980s, however, an inexpensive
perfluorocarbon tracer (PFT) technique has been used to
measure time-averaged air exchange and interzonal airflows
in thousands of occupied residences using essentially
similar protocols (Dietz et al, 1986). The PFT technique
utilizes miniature permeation tubes as tracer emitters and
passive samplers to collect the tracers. The passive
samplers are returned to the laboratory for analysis by gas
chromatography. These measurement results have been
compiled to allow various researchers to access the data
(Versar, 1990).
Nazaroff et al. (1988) - Prior to the Koontz and
Rector (1995) study, Nazaroff et al. (1988) aggregated the
data from two studies conducted earlier using tracer-gas
decay. At the time these studies were conducted, they were
the largest U.S. studies to include air exchange
measurements. The first (Grot and Clark, 1981) was
conducted in 255 dwellings occupied by low-income
families in 14 different cities. The geometric mean ±
standard deviation for the air exchange measurements in
these homes, with a median house age of 45 years, was 0.90
±2.13 ACH. The second study (Grimsrud et al., 1983)
involved 312 newer residences, with a median age of less
than 10 years. Based on measurements taken during the
heating season, the geometric mean ± standard deviation for
these homes was 0.53 ± 1.71 ACH. Based on an
aggregation of the two distributions with proportional
weighting by the respective number of houses studied,
Nazaroff et al. (1988) developed an overall distribution
with a geometric mean of 0.68 ACH and a geometric
standard deviation of 2.01.
Versar (1990) - Database of PFT Ventilation
Measurements - The residences included in the PFT
database do not constitute a random sample across the
United States. They represent a compilation of homes
visited in the course of about 100 separate field-research
projects by various organizations, some of which involved
random sampling and some of which involved judgmental
or fortuitous sampling. The larger projects in the PFT
database are summarized in Table 17-9, in terms of the
number of measurements (samples), states where, and
months when, samples were taken, and summary statistics
for their respective distributions of measured air exchange
rates. For selected projects (LBL, RTI, SOCAL), multiple
measurements were taken for the same house, usually
during different seasons. A large majority of the
Page
17-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-9. Summary of Major Projects Providing Air Exchange Measurements
in the PFT Database
Project Code
ADM
BSG
GSS
FLEMING
GEOMET1
GEOMET2
GEOMET3
LAMBERT 1
LAMBERT2
LAMBERT3
LAMBERT4
LBL1
LBL2
LBL3
LBL4
LBL5
LBL6
NAHB
NYSDH
PEI
PIERCE
RTI1
RTI2
RTI3
SOCAL1
SOCAL2
SOCAL3
UMINN
UWISC
" 1 = January, 2 =
State
CA
CA
AZ
NY
FL 1
MD
TX
ID
MT
OR
WA
OR
WA
ID
WA
WA
ID
MN
NY
MD
CT
CA
CA
NY
CA
CA
CA
MN
WI
February, etc.
Month(s)"
5-7
1,8-12
1-3,8-9
1-6,8-12
,6-8,10-12
1-6
1-3
2-3,10-11
1-3,11
1-3,10-12
1-3,10-12
1-4,10-12
1-4,10-12
1-5,11-12
1-4,11-12
2-4
3-4
1-5,9-12
1-2,4,12
3-4
1-3
2
7
1-4
3
7
1
1-4
2-5
Number of
Measurements
29
40
25
56
18
23
42
36
51
83
114
126
71
23
29
21
19
28
74
140
25
45
41
397
551
408
330
35
57
Mean Air
Exchange Rate
0.70
0.53
0.39
0.24
0.31
0.59
0.87
0.25
0.23
0.46
0.30
0.56
0.36
1.03
0.39
0.36
0.28
0.22
0.59
0.59
0.80
0.90
2.77
0.55
0.81
1.51
0.76
0.36
0.82
Percentiles
SDb
0.52
0.30
0.21
0.28
0.16
0.34
0.59
0.13
0.15
0.40
0.15
0.37
0.19
0.47
0.27
0.21
0.14
0.11
0.37
0.45
1.14
0.73
2.12
0.37
0.66
1.48
1.76
0.32
0.76
10th
0.29
0.21
0.16
0.05
0.15
0.12
0.33
0.10
0.10
0.19
0.14
0.28
0.18
0.37
0.14
0.13
0.11
0.11
0.28
0.15
0.20
0.38
0.79
0.26
0.29
0.35
0.26
0.17
0.22
25th
0.36
0.30
0.23
0.12
0.18
0.29
0.51
0.17
0.14
0.26
0.20
0.35
0.25
0.73
0.18
0.19
0.17
0.16
0.37
0.26
0.22
0.48
1.18
0.33
0.44
0.59
0.37
0.20
0.33
50th
0.48
0.40
0.33
0.22
0.25
0.65
0.71
0.23
0.19
0.38
0.30
0.45
0.32
0.99
0.36
0.30
0.26
0.20
0.50
0.49
0.38
0.78
2.31
0.44
0.66
1.08
0.48
0.28
0.55
75th
0.81
0.70
0.49
0.29
0.48
0.83
1.09
0.33
0.26
0.56
0.39
0.60
0.42
1.34
0.47
0.47
0.38
0.24
0.68
0.83
0.77
1.08
3.59
0.63
0.94
1.90
0.75
0.40
1.04
90th
1.75
0.90
0.77
0.37
0.60
0.92
1.58
0.49
0.38
0.80
0.50
1.02
0.52
1.76
0.63
0.62
0.55
0.38
1.07
1.20
2.35
1.52
5.89
0.94
1.43
3.11
1.11
0.56
1.87
b Standard deviation
Source: Adapted from Versar, 1990.
measurements are from the SOCAL project that was
conducted in Southern California. The means of the
respective studies generally range from 0.2 to 1.0 ACH,
with the exception of two California projects—RTI2 and
SOCAL2. Both projects involved measurements in
Southern California during a time of year (July) when
windows would likely be opened by many occupants.
Koontz and Rector (1995) - Estimation of
Distributions for Residential Air Exchange Rates - In
analyzing the composite data from various projects (2,971
measurements), Koontz and Rector (1995) assigned weights
to the results from each state to compensate for the
geographic imbalance in locations where PFT
measurements were taken. The results were weighted in
such a way that the resultant number of cases would
represent each state in proportion to its share of occupied
housing units, as determined from the 1990 U.S. Census of
Population and Housing.
Summary statistics from the Koontz and Rector
(1995) analysis are shown in Table 17-10, for the country
as a whole and by census regions. Based on the statistics
for all regions combined, the authors suggested that a 10th
percentile value of 0.18 ACH would be appropriate as a
conservative estimator for air exchange in residential
settings, and that the 50th percentile value of 0.45 ACH
would be appropriate as a typical air exchange rate. In
applying conservative or typical values of air exchange
rates, it is important to realize the limitations of the
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-11
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
underlying data base. Although the estimates are based on
thousands of measurements, the residences represented in
the database are not a random sample of the United States
housing stock. The sample population is not balanced in
terms of geography or time of year. Statistical techniques
were applied to compensate for some of these imbalances.
In addition, PFT measurements of air exchange rates
assume uniform mixing of the tracer within the building.
This is not always so easily achieved. Furthermore, the
degree of mixing can vary from day to day and house to
house because of the nature of the factors controlling mixing
(e.g., convective air monitoring driven by weather, and type
and operation of the heating system). The relative
placement of the PFT source and the sampler can also cause
variability and uncertainty. It should be noted that sampling
is typically done in a single location in a house which may
not represent the average from that house. In addition, very
high and very low values of air exchange rates based on
PFT measurements have greater uncertainties than those in
the middle of the distribution. Despite such limitations, the
estimates in Table 17-10 are believed to represent the best
available information on the distribution of air exchange
rates across United States residences throughout the year.
Murray and Burmaster (1995) - Residential Air
Exchange Rates in the United States: Empirical and
Estimated Parametric Distributions by Season and
and February were defined as winter, March, April and May
were defined as spring, and so on. The results of Murray
and Burmaster (1995) are summarized in Table 17-11.
Neglecting the summer results in the colder regions which
have only a few observations, the results indicate that the
highest air exchange rates occur in the warmest climate
region during the summer. As noted earlier (Section
17.3.2), many of the measurements in the warmer climate
region were from field studies conducted in Southern
California during a time of year (July) when windows would
tend to be open in that area. Data for this region in
particular should be used with caution since other areas
within this region tend to have very hot summers and
residences use air conditioners, resulting in lower air
exchange rates. The lowest rates generally occur in the
colder regions during the fall (Table 17-11).
17.3.3. Infiltration Models
A variety of mathematical models exist for prediction
of air infiltration rates in individual buildings. A number of
these models have been reviewed, for example, by
Liddament and Allen (1983), and by Persily and Linteris
(1984). Basic principles are concisely summarized in the
ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals (ASHRAE, 1993).
These models have a similar theoretical basis; all address
indoor-outdoor pressure differences that are maintained by
Table 17-10. Summary Statistics for Air Exchange Rates
(air changes per hour-ACH), by Region
Arithmetic Mean
Arithmetic Standard Deviation
Geometric Mean
Geometric Standard Deviation
10th Percentile
50th Percentile
90th Percentile
Maximum
West Region
0.66
0.87
0.47
2.11
0.20
0.43
1.25
23.32
North Central
Region
0.57
0.63
0.39
2.36
0.16
0.35
1.49
4.52
Northeast
Region
0.71
0.60
0.54
2.14
0.23
0.49
1.33
5.49
South Region
0.61
0.51
0.46
2.28
0.16
0.49
1.21
3.44
All Regions
0.63
0.65
0.46
2.25
0.18
0.45
1.26
23.32
Source: Koontz and Rector, 1995.
Climatic Region - Murray and Burmaster (1995) analyzed
the PFT database using 2,844 measurements (essentially the
same cases as analyzed by Koontz and Rector (1995), but
without the compensating weights). These authors
summarized distributions for subsets of the data defined by
climate region and season. The coldest region was defined
as having 7,000 or more heating degree days, the colder
region as 5,500-6,999 degree days, the warmer region as
2,500-5,499 degree days, and the warmest region as fewer
than 2,500 degree days. The months of December, January
the actions of wind and stack (temperature difference)
effects. The models generally incorporate a network of
airflows where nodes representing regions of different
pressure are interconnected by leakage paths. Individual
models differ in details such as the number of nodes they
Page
17-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-11. Distributions of Residential Air Exchange Rates3 by Climate Region and Season
Climate Region
Coldest
Colder
Warmer
Warmest
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Sample Size
161
254
5
47
428
43
2
23
96
165
34
37
454
589
488
18
Arithmetic
Mean
0.36
0.44
0.82
0.25
0.57
0.52
1.31
0.35
0.47
0.59
0.68
0.51
0.63
0.77
1.57
0.72
Standard
Deviation
0.28
0.31
0.69
0.12
0.43
0.91
0.18
0.40
0.43
0.50
0.25
0.52
0.62
1.56
1.43
Percentiles
10th
0.11
0.18
0.27
0.10
0.21
0.13
0.15
0.19
0.18
0.27
0.30
0.24
0.28
0.33
0.22
25th
0.18
0.24
0.41
0.15
0.30
0.21
0.22
0.26
0.28
0.36
0.30
0.34
0.42
0.58
0.25
50th
0.27
0.36
0.57
0.22
0.42
0.24
0.33
0.39
0.48
0.51
0.44
0.48
0.63
1.10
0.42
75th
0.48
0.53
1.08
0.34
0.69
0.39
0.41
0.58
0.82
0.83
0.60
0.78
0.92
1.98
0.46
90th
0.71
0.80
2.01
0.42
1.18
0.83
0.59
0.78
1.11
1.30
0.82
1.13
1.42
3.28
0.74
a In air changes per hour
Source: Murray and Burmaster. 1995.
can treat or the specifics of leakage paths (e.g., individual
components such as cracks around doors or windows versus
a combination of components such as an entire section of a
building). Such models are not easily applied by exposure
assessors, however, because the required inputs (e.g.,
inferred leakage areas, crack lengths) for the model are not
easy to gather.
Another approach for estimating air infiltration rates
is developing empirical models. Such models generally rely
on collection of infiltration measurements in a specific
building under a variety of weather conditions. The
relationship between the infiltration rate and weather
conditions can then be estimated through regression
analysis, and is usually stated in the following form:
A = a+b |T, - T0
where:
cU"
(Eqn. 17-1)
A = air infiltration rate (h"1)
Tj = indoor temperature (°C)
T0 = outdoor temperature (°C)
U = windspeed (ms"1)
n is an exponent with a value typically between 1 and 2
a, b and c are parameters to be estimated
Relatively good predictive accuracy usually can be
obtained for individual buildings through this approach.
However, exposure assessors often do not have the
information resources required to develop parameter
estimates for making such predictions.
A reasonable compromise between the theoretical
and empirical approaches has been developed in the model
specified by Dietz et al. (1986). The model, drawn from
correlation analysis of environmental measurements and air
infiltration data, is formulated as follows:
H
where:
A
L
C
AT
U
0.006AT + ^- UL5j (Eqn. 17-2)
= average air changes per hour or infiltration rate, h"1
= generalized house leakiness factor (1 < L < 5)
= terrain sheltering factor (1 < C < 10)
= indoor-outdoor temperature difference (C°)
= windspeed (ms"1)
The value of L is greater as house leakiness increases
and the value of C is greater as terrain sheltering (reflects
shielding of nearby wind barrier) increases. Although the
above model has not been extensively validated, it has
intuitive appeal and it is possible for the user to develop
reasonable estimates for L and C with limited guidance.
Historical data from various U.S. airports are available for
estimation of the temperature and windspeed parameters.
As an example application, consider a house that has central
values of 3 and 5 for L and C, respectively. Under
conditions where the indoor temperature is 20 °C (68 °F),
the outdoor temperature is 0 °C (32 ° F) and the windspeed
is 5 ms"1, the predicted infiltration rate for that house would
be 3 (0.006 x 20 + 0.03/5 x 51.5), or 0.56 air changes per
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
17-13
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
hour. This prediction applies under the condition that
exterior doors and windows are closed, and does not include
the contributions, if any, from mechanical systems (see
Section 17.2.3). Occupant behavior, such as opening
windows, can, of course, overwhelm the idealized effects of
temperature and wind speed.
17.3.4. Deposition and Filtration
Deposition refers to the removal of airborne
substances to available surfaces that occurs as a result of
gravitational settling and diffusion, as well as
electrophoresis and thermophoresis. Filtration is driven by
similar processes, but is confined to material through which
air passes. Filtration is usually a matter of design, whereas
deposition is a matter of fact.
17.3.4.1. Deposition
The deposition of particulate matter and reactive gas-
phase pollutants to indoor surfaces is often stated in terms
air exchange. Theoretical considerations specific to indoor
environments have been summarized in comprehensive
reviews by Nazaroff and Cass (1989) and Nazaroff et al.
(1993).
For airborne particles, deposition rates depend on
aerosol properties (size, shape, density) as well as room
factors (thermal gradients, turbulence, surface geometry).
The motions of larger particles are dominated by
gravitational settling; the motions of smaller particles are
subject to convection and diffusion. Consequently, larger
particles tend to accumulate more rapidly on floors and up-
facing surfaces while smaller particles may accumulate on
surfaces facing in any direction. Figure 17-4 illustrates the
general trend for particle deposition across the size range of
general concern for inhalation exposure (<10 ,um). The
current thought is that theoretical calculations of deposition
rates are likely to provide unsatisfactory results due to
knowledge gaps relating to near-surface air motions and
other sources of inhomogeneity (Nazaroff et al., 1993).
10-
0,001
0.01 0.1
Figure 17-4. Idealized Patterns of Particle Deposition Indoors
Source: Adapted from Nazaroff and Cass, 1989.
of a characteristic deposition velocity (m h"1) allied to the Wallace (1996) - Indoor Particles: A Review - In a
surface-to-volume ratio (m2 m3) of the building or room major review of indoor particles, Wallace (1996) cited
interior, forming a first order loss rate (h"1) similar to that of overall particle deposition rates for respirable (PM2 5),
Page
17-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
inhalable (PM10), and coarse (difference between PM10 and
PM25) size fractions determined from EPA's PTEAM study.
These values, listed in Table 17-12, were derived from
measurements conducted in nearly 200 residences.
Table 17-12. Deposition Rates for Indoor Particles
Size Fraction
PM2,
PM10
Coarse
Deposition Rate
0.39 h'1
0.65 h'1
l.Oh'1
Source: Adapted from Wallace, 1996.
Thatcher and Layton (1995) - Deposition,
Resuspension, and Penetration of Particles Within a
Residence - Thatcher and Layton (1995) evaluated removal
rates for indoor particles in four size ranges (1-5, 5-10, 10-
25, and >25 //m) in a study of one house occupied by a
family of four. These values are listed in Table 17-13. In
a subsequent evaluation of data collected in 100 Dutch
residences, Layton and Thatcher (1995) estimated settling
velocities of 2.7 m h"1 for lead-bearing particles captured in
total suspended particulate matter (TSP) samples.
Table 17-13. Particle Deposition During Normal Activities
Particle Size Range Particle Removal Rate
(h-1)
1-5
5-10
10-25
>25
Source: Adapted from Thatcher and Lavton,
0.5
1.4
2.4
4.1
1995.
17.3.4.2. Filtration
A variety of air cleaning techniques have been
applied to residential settings. Basic principles related to
residential-scale air cleaning technologies have been
summarized in conjunction with reporting early test results
(Qfferman et al., 1984). General engineering principles are
summarized in ASHRAE (1988). In addition to fibrous
filters integrated into central heating and air conditioning
systems, extended surface filters and High Efficiency
Particle Arrest (HEPA) filters as well as electrostatic
systems are available to increase removal efficiency. Free-
standing air cleaners (portable and/or console) are also
being used. Product-by-product test results reported by
Hanley et al. (1994); Shaughnessy et al. (1994); and
Offerman et al. (1984) exhibit considerable variability
across systems, ranging from ineffectual (< 1% efficiency)
to nearly complete removal.
17.3.5. Interzonal Airflows
Residential structures consist of a number of rooms
that may be connected horizontally, vertically, or both
horizontally and vertically. Before considering residential
structures as a detailed network of rooms, it is convenient to
divide them into one or more zones. At a minimum, each
floor is typically defined as a separate zone. For indoor air
exposure assessments, further divisions are sometimes
made within a floor, depending on (1) locations of specific
contaminant sources and (2) the presumed degree of air
communication among areas with and without sources.
Defining the airflow balance for a multiple-zone
exposure scenario rapidly increases the information
requirements as rooms or zones are added. As shown in
Figure 17-5, a single-zone system (considering the entire
building as a single well-mixed volume) requires only two
airflows to define air exchange. Further, because air
exchange is balanced flow (air does not "pile up" in the
building, nor is a vacuum formed), only one number (the air
exchange rate) is needed. With two zones, six airflows are
needed to accommodate interzonal airflows plus air
exchange; with three zones, twelve airflows are required.
In some cases, the complexity can be reduced using
judicious (if not convenient) assumptions. Interzonal
airflows connecting nonadjacent rooms can be set to zero,
for example, if flow pathways do not exist. Symmetry also
can be applied to the system by assuming that each flow
pair is balanced.
17.3.6. Water Uses
Among indoor water uses, showering, bathing and
handwashing of dishes or clothes provide the primary
opportunities for dermal exposure. Virtually all indoor
water uses will result in some volatilization of chemicals,
leading to inhalation exposure.
The exposure potential for a given situation will
depend on the source of water, the types and extents of
water uses, and the extent of volatilization of specific
chemicals. According to the results of the 1987 Annual
Housing Survey (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1992), 84.7
percent of all U. S. housing units receive water from a public
system or private company (as opposed to a well). Across
the four major regions defined by the U.S. Census Bureau
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-15
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
SYSTEM
TW3-ZQNE
SYSTEM
SYSTEM
N-Zone System Defined by N-(NM) Airflows
Figure 17-5. Air Flows for Multiple-zone Systems
(Northeast, South, Midwest, and West), the percentage
varies from 82.5 in the Midwest region to 93.2 in the West
region (the Northeast and South regions both are very close
to the national percentage).
The primary types of water use indoors can be
classified as showering/bathing, toilet use, clothes washing,
dishwashing, and faucet use (e.g., for drinking, cooking,
general cleaning, or washing hands). Substantial
information on water use has been collected in California
households by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California (MWD, 1991) and by the East Bay Municipal
Utility Distnct (EBMUD, 1992). An earlier study by the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (U.S.
DHUD, 1984) monitored water use in 200 households over
a 20-month period. The household selection process for
this study was not random; it involved volunteers from
water companies and engineering organizations, most of
which were located in large metropolitan areas. Nazaroff et
al. (1988) also assembled the results of several smaller
surveys, typically involving between 5 and 50 households
each.
A common feature of the various studies cited above
is that the results were all reported in gallons per capita per
day (gcd), or in units that could be easily converted to gcd.
Most studies also provided estimates by type of use—
shower/bath, toilet, laundry, dishwashing, and other (e.g.,
faucets). A summary of the various study results is
Page
17-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
provided in Table 17-14. There is generally about a
threefold variation across studies for total
Table 17-14. In-house Water Use Rates (gcd), by Study and Type of Use
Total, Shower
Study All Uses or Bath
MWD1 93 26
EBMUD2 67 20
U.S. DHUD3 40 15
Nazaroffetal., 1988 52 6
Study 1
Study 2
- Rural 46 1 1
- Urban 43 10
Study 3 42 9
Study 4 45 9
Study 5 70 21
Study 6 59 20
Study 7 40 10
Study 8 52-86 20-40
Mean Across Studies5 59 17
Median Across Studies5 53 15
1 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 1991.
2 East Bay Municipal Utility District, 1992.
3 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1984.
4 Results of eight separate studies.
Toilet
30
28
10
17
18
18
20
15
32
24
9
4-6
18
18
Laundry
20
9
13
11
14
11
7
11
7
8
11
20-30
13
11
5 The average value from each range reported in Study No. 8 was used to calculate the median across studies.
Dishwashing
5
4
2
18
3
4
4
4
7
4
5
8-10
6
4
Other
12
6
—
—
—
—
2
6
3
3
5
-
5
5
The mean and median for the
"Total, all Uses" column were obtained bv summing across the means and medians for individual tvpes of water use.
in-house water use as well as each type of use. Central
values for total use, were obtained by taking the mean and
median across the studies for each type of water use and
then summing these means/medians across uses. These
central values are shown at the bottom of the table. The
means and medians were summed across types of uses to
obtain the mean for all uses combined because only a subset
of the studies reported values for other uses.
The following sections provide a summary of the
water use characteristics for the primary types of water uses
indoors. To the extent found in the literature, each water
use is described in terms of the frequency of use; flowrate
during the use; quantity of water used during each
occurrence of the water use; and quantity used by an
average person. Table 17-15 summarizes the studies of
U.S. DHUD and the Power Authorities by locations and
number of households.
Table
U.S. DHUD Studies
Study 1
Study 2
Study 3
Study 4
Study 5
Study 6
Power Authority Studies
Study 1
Study 2
Study 3
Study 4
TOTAL
17-15. Summary of Selected HUD and Power Authority Water Use Studies
Number of Households
37
7
40
7
21
19
32
23
15
10
211
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Sacramento, CA
Walnut Creek, CA
Washington, DC
Sacramento, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Seattle, WA
Denver, CO
Aurora, CO
Fairfax, VA
Reference
a,b
a,c
a,c
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-17
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Sources:
" U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1984.
b Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 1991.
c East Bay Municipal Utility District, 1992.
Caution should be exercised when using the data
collected in these studies and shown here. The participants
in these studies are not a representative sample of the
general population. The participants consisted of
volunteers, mostly from large metropolitan areas.
Showering and Bathing Water Use Characteristics -
The HUD study (U.S. DHUD, 1984) monitored 162
households for shower duration. The individuals were also
subdivided by people who only shower or only bath. The
results are given in Table 17-16. The flowrates of various
types of shower heads were also evaluated in the study
(Table 17-17).
Toilet Water Use Characteristics - The HUD study
(U.S. DHUD, 1984) reported water volume per flush for
various types of toilets and monitored 162 households for
shower duration. The results of this study are shown in
Table 17-18. Since the HUD study was conducted prior to
1984, the newer (post 1984) conserving toilets that are
designed to use approximately 1.6 gallons per flush were
not tested.
The frequency of use for toilets in households was
examined in several studies (U.S. DHUD, 1984; Ligman,
et al, 1974; Siegrist, 1976). The observed mean
frequencies in these studies are given in Table 17-19.
Tables 17-20 through 17-24 present indoor water use
frequencies for dishwashers and clothes washers.
Table 17-16. Showering and Bathing Water Use Characteristics
Characteristic
Individuals who Shower only
Individuals who Bath only
Individuals who Shower and Bath
Mean Duration
10.4 minutes/shower
NA
NA
Mean Frequency
0.74 showers/day/person
0.41 baths/day/person
NA
Source: Adapted from U. S. DHUD, 1984.
| Source: Adapted from U.S. DHUD, 1984.
Table 17-17. Showering Characteristics for Various
Types of Shower Heads
Shower Head Type
Non-Conserving (> 3 gpm)
Low Flow (< 3 gpm)
Restrictor (< 3 gpm)
Zinplas"
Turboiector"
Mean Flow Rate (gpm)
3.4
1.9
2.1
1.8
1.3
" Types of low flow water fixtures.
Source: Adapted from U.S. DHUD, 1984.
Table 17-18.
Toilet Type
Non-Conserving
Bottles
Bags
Dams
Low-flush
Toilet Water Use Characteristics
Average Water Use (gallons/flush)
5.5
5.0
4.8
4.5
3.5
Page
17-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-19. Toilet Frequency Use Characteristics
Study
U.S. DHUD, 1984'
Ligman, et al., 1974 Rural, M-F
Ligman, et al., 1974 Rural, Sat-Sun
Ligman, et al., 1974 Urban, M-F
Ligman, et al., 1974 Urban, Sat-Sun
Siegrist, 1976
Unweighted Mean
Flush Frequency
(flushes/person/day)
4.2 flushes/household/day
3.6 flushes/person/day
3.8 flushes/person/day
3.6 flushes/person/day
3.1 flushes/person/day
2.3 flushes/person/day
3.43 flushes/person/dav
" The HUD value may in fact be flushes/household/day
Table 17-20. Dishwasher Frequency Use Characteristics
Study
Use Frequency
U.S. DHUD, 1984
Ligman, et al., 1974 Rural
Siegrist, 1976
Unweighted Mean
0.47 loads/person/day
1.3 loads/day
0.39 loads/person/day
0.92 loads/day
Table 17-21. Dishwasher Water Use Characteristics
Average Water Use
Brand
Maytag
Frigidaire
General Electric
Sears
Whirlpool
White/Westinghouse
Waste King
Kitchen Aid
Magic Chef
Unweighted Mean
(gallons/regular
cycle)
11.5
12
10.5
10
9.5
12
11.5
9.5
11.5
10.9
Cycle Duration
(minutes)
140°F
75
75
80
75
60
75
65
80
70
72.8
120°F
__
75
95
95
110
75
85
80
-
87.9
Source: Adapted from Consumer Reports, 1987.
Table 17-22. Clothes Washer Frequency Use Characteristics
Study
U.S. DHUD, 1984
Ligman, et al., 1974 Rural
Ligman, et al., 1974 Urban
Siegrist, 1976
Use Frequency
0.3 loads/person/day
0.34 loads/person/day
0.27 loads/person/day
0.31 loads/day
Table 17-23. Clothes Washer Water Use Characteristics
Brand
Maytag
Frigidaire
General Electric
Hotpoint
Sears
Whirlpool
White/Westinghouse
Kelvinator
Norge
Average Water Use
(gallons/regular cycle)
41
48
51
51
49
53
54
46
55
Cycle Duration
(minutes)
32
40
48
48
40
44
47
52
49
Source: Adapted from Consumer Reports, 1982.
Table 17-24. Range of Water Uses for Clothes Washers
Type of Clothes Washer
Conventional
Low Water
All Clothes Washers
Range of Water Use
27-59 gallons/load
16- 19 gallons/load
16-59 gallons/load
Source: Adapted from Consumer Reports, 1982.
17.3.7. House Dust and Soil
House dust is a complex mixture of biologically-
derived material (animal dander, fungal spores, etc.),
particulate matter deposited from the indoor aerosol, and
soil particles brought in by foot traffic. House dust may
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-19
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
contain VOCs (see, for example, Wolkoff and Wilkins,
1994; Hirvonen et al, 1995), pesticides from imported soil
particles as well as from direct applications indoors (see, for
example, Roberts et al., 1991), and trace metals derived
from outdoor sources (see, for example, Lay ton and
Thatcher, 1995). The indoor abundance of house dust
depends on the interplay of deposition from the airborne
state, resuspension due to various activities, direct
accumulation, and infiltration.
In the absence of indoor sources, indoor
concentrations of particulate matter are significantly lower
than outdoor levels. For some time, this observation
supported the idea that a significant fraction of the outdoor
aerosol is filtered out by the building envelope. More
recent data, however, have shown that deposition
(incompletely addressed in earlier studies) accounts for the
indoor-outdoor contrast, and outdoor particles smaller than
10 jwm aerodynamic diameter penetrate the building
envelope as completely as nonreactive gases (Wallace,
1996).
Roberts et al. (1991) - Development and Field
Testing of a High Volume Sampler for Pesticides and
Toxics in Dust - Dust loadings, reported by Roberts et al.
(1991) were also measured in conjunction with the Non-
Occupational Pesticide Exposure Study (NOPES). In this
study house dust was sampled from a representative grid
using a specially constructed high-volume surface sampler
(HVS2). The surface sampler collection efficiency was
verified in conformance with ASTM F608 (ASTM, 1989).
The data summarized in Table 17-25 were collected from
carpeted areas in volunteer households in Florida
encountered during the course of NOPES. Seven of the
nine sites were single-family detached homes, and two were
mobile homes. The authors noted that the two houses
exhibiting the highest dust loadings were only those homes
where a vacuum cleaner was not used for housekeeping.
Table 17-25. Total Dust Loading for Carpeted Areas
Household Total Dust Load
(g-m2)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Source:
10.8
4.2
0.3
2.2; 0.8
1.4; 4.3
0.8
6.6
33.7
812.7
Adapted from Roberts et al., 1991.
Fine Dust (<1 50 |im)
Load (g-m"2)
6.6
3.0
0.1
1.2; 0.3
1.0; 1.1
0.3
4.7
23.3
168.9
Residence - Relatively few studies have been conducted at
the level of detail needed to clarify the dynamics of indoor
aerosols. One intensive study of a California residence
(Thatcher and Lay ton, 1995), however, provides instructive
results. Using a model-based analysis for data collected
under controlled circumstances, the investigators verified
penetration of the outdoor aerosol and estimated rates for
particle deposition and resuspension (Table 17-26). The
investigators stressed that normal household activities are
a significant source of airborne particles larger than 5 ,um
During the study, they observed that just walking into and
out of a room could momentarily double the concentration.
The airborne abundance of submicrometer particles, on the
other hand, was unaffected by either cleaning or walking.
Table 17-26. Particle Deposition and Resuspension
During Normal Activities
Particle Size Range
(«m)
0.3-0.5
0.6-1
1-5
5-10
10-25
>25
Particle Deposition
Rate
Ch'1)
(not measured)
(not measured)
0.5
1.4
2.4
4.1
Source: Adapted from Thatcher and Lavton,
Particle Resuspension
Rate
Ch'1)
9.9 x 10'7
4.4 x 10"'
l.SxlO'5
8.3 x 10'5
3.8 x lO'4
3.4 xlO'5
1995.
Mass loading of floor surfaces (Table 17-27) was
measured in the study of Thatcher and Layton (1995) by
thoroughly cleaning the house and sampling accumulated
dust, after one week of normal habitation. Methodology,
validated under ASTM F608 (ASTM, 1989), showed fine
dust recovery efficiencies of 50 percent with new carpet and
72 percent for linoleum. Tracked areas showed consistently
higher accumulations than untracked areas, confirming the
importance of tracked-in material. Differences between
tracked areas upstairs and downstairs show that tracked-in
material is not readily transported upstairs. The consistency
of untracked carpeted areas throughout the house, suggests
that, in the absence of tracking, particle transport processes
are similar on both floors.
Thatcher and Layton (1995) - Deposition,
Resuspension and Penetration of Particles Within a
Page
17-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-27. Dust Mass Loading After One Week Without Vacuum
Cleaning
Location in Test House
Tracked area of downstairs carpet
Untracked area of downstairs carpet
Tracked area of linoleum
Untracked area of linoleum
Tracked area of upstairs carpet
Untracked area of upstairs carpet
Front doormat
Source: Adapted from Thatcher and Lavton,
Dust Loading (g-m"2)
2.20
0.58
0.08
0.06
1.08
0.60
43.34
1995.
on a similar form by combining an activity-specific rate
constant with an applicable dust mass.
17.4. SOURCES
Product- and chemical-specific mechanisms for
indoor sources can be described using simple emission
factors to represent instantaneous releases, as well as
constant releases over defined time periods; more complex
formulations may be required for time-varying sources.
Guidance documents for characterizing indoor sources
within the context of the exposure assessment process are
limited (see, for example, Jennings et al, 1987; Wolkoff,
1995). Fairly extensive guidance exists in the technical
literature, however, provided that the exposure assessor has
the means to define (or estimate) key mechanisms and
chemical-specific parameters. Basic concepts are
summarized below for the broad source categories that
relate to airborne contaminants, waterbome contaminants,
and for soil/house dust indoor sources.
17.4.1. Source Descriptions for Airborne
Contaminants
Table 17-28 summarizes simplified indoor source
descriptions for airborne chemicals for direct discharge
sources (e.g., combustion, pressurized propellant products),
as well as emanation sources (e.g., evaporation from "wet"
films, diffusion from porous media), and transport-related
sources (e.g., infiltration of outdoor air contaminants, soil
gas entry).
Direct-discharge sources can be approximated using
simple formulas that relate pollutant mass released to
characteristic process rates. Combustion sources, for
example, may be stated in terms of an emission factor, fuel
content (or heating value), and fuel consumption (or carrier
delivery) rate. Emission factors for combustion products of
general concern (e.g., CO, NOX) have been measured for a
number of combustion appliances using room-sized
chambers (see, for example, Relwani et al., 1986). Other
direct-discharge sources would include volatiles released
from water use and from pressurized consumer products.
Resuspension of house dust (see Section 17.3.7) would take
Table 17-28. Simplified Source Descriptions for Airborne Contaminants
Description
Components
Dimensions
Direct Discharge
Combustion
Volume
Discharge
Mass
Discharge
Diffusion Limited
Exponential
Transport
Infiltration
Interzonal
Soil Gas
EfHfMf g h-1
Ef = emission factor g J"1
Hf = fuel content J mol"1
Mf = fuel consumption rate mol h"1
QpCp_e gh->
Qp = volume delivery rate m3 h"1
Cp = concentration in carrier g m"3
e = transfer efficiency g g"1
= mass delivery rate g h"1
= weight fraction g g"1
= transfer efficiency g g"1
(Df6-1)(C3-C1)A1 gh-1
Df = diffusivity m2 h"1
6 ] = boundary layer thickness m
C3 = vapor pressure of surface g m"3
Cj = room concentration g m"3
Aj = area m2
Aj E0 e"kt g h"1
Aj = area m2
E0 = initial unit emission rate g h"1 m"2
k = emission decay factor h"1
t = time h
= air flow from zone j
= air concentration in zone j
Diffusion-limited sources (e.g., carpet backing,
furniture, flooring, dried paint) represent probably the
greatest challenge in source characterization for indoor air
quality. Vapor-phase organics dominate this group,
offering great complexity because (1) there is a fairly long
list of chemicals that could be of concern, (2) ubiquitous
consumer products, building materials, coatings, and
furnishings contain varying amounts of different chemicals,
(3) source dynamics may include nonlinear mechanisms,
and (4) for many of the chemicals, emitting as well as non-
emitting materials evident in realistic settings may promote
reversible and irreversible sink effects. Very detailed
descriptions for diffusion-limited sources can be constructed
to link specific properties of the chemical, the source
material, and the receiving environment to calculate
expected behavior (see, for example, Schwope et al., 1992;
Cussler, 1984). Validation to actual circumstances,
however, suffers practical shortfalls because many
parameters simply cannot be measured directly.
The exponential formulation listed in Table 17-28
was derived based on a series of papers generated during
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
17-21
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
the development of chamber testing methodology by EPA
(Dunn, 1987; Dunn and Tichenor, 1988; Dunn and Chen,
1993). This framework represents an empirical alternative
that works best when the results of chamber tests are
available. Estimates for the initial emission rate (E0) and
decay factor (ks) can be developed for hypothetical sources
from information on pollutant mass available for release
(M) and supporting assumptions.
Assuming that a critical time period (tc) coincides
with reduction of the emission rate to a critical level (Ec) or
with the release of a critical fraction of the total mass (Mc),
the decay factor can be estimated by solving either of these
relationships:
M
(Eqn. 17-3)
The critical time period can be derived from product-
specific considerations (e.g., equating drying time for a
paint to 90 percent emissions reduction). Given such an
estimate for 1^, the initial emission rate can be estimated by
integrating the emission formula to infinite time under the
assumption that all chemical mass is released:
The basis for the exponential source algorithm has
also been extended to the description of more complex
diffusion-limited sources. With these sources, diffusive or
evaporative transport at the interface may be much more
rapid than diffusive transport from within the source
material, so that the abundance at the source/air interface
becomes depleted, limiting the transfer rate to the air. Such
effects can prevail with skin formation in "wet" sources like
stains and paints (see, for example, Chang and Guo, 1992).
Similar emission profiles have been observed with the
emanation of formaldehyde from particleboard with "rapid"
decline as formaldehyde evaporates from surface sites of the
particleboard over the first few weeks. It is then followed
by a much slower decline over ensuing years as
formaldehyde diffuses from within the matrix to reach the
surface (see, for example, Zinn et al, 1990).
Transport-based sources bring contaminated air from
other areas into the airspace of concern. Examples include
infiltration of outdoor contaminants, and soil gas entry. Soil
gas entry is a particularly complex phenomenon, and is
frequently treated as a separate modeling issue (Little et al.,
1992; Sextro, 1994). Room-to-room migration of indoor
contaminants would also fall under this category, but this
concept is best considered using the multiple-zone model.
17.4.2. Source Descriptions for Waterborne
Contaminants
Residential water supplies may convey chemicals to
which occupants can be exposed through ingestion, dermal
contact, or inhalation. These chemicals may appear in the
form of contaminants (e.g., trichloroethylene) as well as
naturally-occurring byproducts of water system history (e.g.,
chloroform, radon). Among indoor water uses, showering,
bathing and handwashing of dishes or clothes provide the
primary opportunities for dermal exposure. The escape of
volatile chemicals to the gas phase associates water use
with inhalation exposure. The exposure potential for a given
situation will depend on the source of water, the types and
extents of water uses, and the extent of volatilization of
specific chemicals. Primary types of residential water use
(summarized in Section 17.3) include showering/bathing,
toilet use, clothes washing, dishwashing, and faucet use
(e.g., for drinking, cooking, general cleaning, or washing
hands).
Upper-bounding estimates of chemical release rates
from water use can be formulated as simple emission
factors by combining the concentration in the feed water (g
m"3) with the flow rate for the water use3 (fh h ), and
assuming that the chemical escapes to the gas phase. For
some chemicals, however, not all of the chemical escapes in
realistic situations due to diffusion-limited transport and
solubility factors. For inhalation exposure estimates, this
may not pose a problem because the bounding estimate
would overestimate emissions by no more than
approximately a factor of two. For multiple exposure
pathways, the chemical mass remaining in the water may be
kt E
M=fEoe sdt=—
0 S
(Eqn. 17-4)
of importance. Refined estimates of volatile emissions are
usually considered under two-resistance theory to
accommodate mass transport aspects of the water-air
system (see, for example, Little, 1992; Andelman, 1990;
McKone, 1987). Release rates are formulated as:
Page
17-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
C -
(Eqn. 17-5)
where:
S
Km
F.
Cw
C,
H
chemical release rate (g h"1)
dimensionless mass-transfer coefficient
water flow rate (m3 h"1)
concentration in feed water (g m"3)
concentration in air (g m"3)
dimensionless Henry's Law constant
Because the emission rate is dependent on the air
concentration, recursive techniques are required. The mass
transfer coefficient is a function of water use characteristics
(e.g., water droplet size spectrum, fall distance, water film)
and chemical properties (diffusion in gas and liquid phases).
Estimates of practical value are based on empirical tests to
incorporate system characteristics into a single parameter
(see, for example, Giardino et al, 1990). Once
characteristics of one chemical-water use system are known
(reference chemical, subscript r), the mass transfer
coefficient for another chemical (index chemical, subscript
i) delivered by the same system can be estimated using
formulations identified in the review by Little (1992):
(Eqn. 17-6)
where:
DL =
KL° =
K0 =
H =
liquid diffusivity (m2 s"1)
gas diffusivity (m2 s"1)
liquid-phase mass transfer coefficient
gas-phase mass transfer coefficient
dimensionless Henry's Law constant
17.4.3. Soil and House Dust Sources
The rate process descriptions compiled for soil and
house dust in Section 17.3 provide inputs for estimating
indoor emission rates (Sd, g h"1) in terms of dust mass
loading (Md, g m"2) combined with resuspension rates (Rd,
h"1) and floor area (Af, m2):
sd = Md Rd Af
(Eqn. 17-7)
Because house dust is a complex mixture, transfer of
particle-bound constituents to the gas phase may be of
concern for some exposure assessments. For emission
estimates, one would then need to consider particle mass
residing in each reservoir (dust deposit, airborne).
17.5. ADVANCED CONCEPTS
17.5.1. Uniform Mixing Assumption
Many exposure measurements are predicated on the
assumption of uniform mixing within a room or zone of a
house. Mage and Ott (1994) offers an extensive review of
the history of use and misuse of the concept. Experimental
work by Baughman et al. (1994) and Drescher et al. (1995)
indicates that, for an instantaneous release from a point
source in a room, fairly complete mixing is achieved within
10 minutes when convective flow is induced by solar
radiation. However, up to 100 minutes may be required for
complete mixing under quiescent (nearly isothermal)
conditions. While these experiments were conducted at
extremely low air exchange rates (< 0.1 ACH), based on the
results, attention is focused on mixing within a room.
The situation changes if a human invokes a point
source for a longer period and remains in the immediate
vicinity of that source. Personal exposure in the near
vicinity of a source can be much higher than the well-mixed
assumption would suggest. A series of experiments
conducted by GEOMET (1989) for the U.S. EPA involved
controlled point-source releases of carbon monoxide tracer
(CO), each for 30 minutes. "Breathing-zone" measurements
located within 0.4 m of the release point were ten times
higher than for other locations in the room during early
stages of mixing and transport.
Similar investigations conducted by Furtaw et al.
(1995) involved a series of experiments in a controlled-
environment room-sized chamber. Furtaw et al. (1995)
studied spatial concentration gradients around a continuous
point source simulated by sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer
with a human moving about the room. Average breathing-
zone concentrations when the subject was near the source
exceeded those several meters away by a factor that varied
inversely with the ventilation intensity in the room. At
typical room ventilation rates, the ratio of source-proximate
to slightly-removed concentration was on the order of 2:1.
17.5.2. Reversible Sinks
For some chemicals, the actions of reversible sinks
are of concern. For an initially "clean" condition in the sink
material, sorption effects can greatly deplete indoor
concentrations. However, once enough of the chemical has
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1997
Page
17-23
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
been adsorbed, the diffusion gradient will reverse, allowing
the chemical to escape. For persistent indoor sources, such
effects can serve to reduce indoor levels initially but once
the system equilibrates, the net effect on the average
concentration of the reversible sink is negligible. Over
suitably short time frames, this can also affect integrated
exposure. For indoor sources whose emission profile
declines with time (or ends abruptly), reversible sinks can
serve to extend the emissions period as the chemical
desorbs long after direct emissions are finished. Reversible
sink effects have been observed for a number of chemicals
in the presence of carpeting, wall coverings, and other
materials commonly found in residential environments.
Interactive sinks (and models of the processes) are
of a special importance; while sink effects can greatly
reduce indoor air concentrations, re-emission at lower rates
over longer time periods could greatly extend the exposure
period of concern. For completely reversible sinks, the
extended time could bring the cumulative exposure to levels
approaching the sink-free case. Recent publications (Axley
etal, 1993; Tichenoretal, 1991) show that first principles
provide useful guidance in postulating models and setting
assumptions for reversible/irreversible sink models.
Sorption/desorption can be described in terms of Langmuir
(monolayer) as well as Brunauer-Emmet-Teller (BET,
multilayer) adsorption.
17.6 RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 17-29 presents a summary of volume of
residence surveys and Table 17-30 presents a summary of
air exchange rates surveys. Table 17-31 presents the
recommended values. Tables 17-32 and 17-33 provide the
confidence in recommendations for house volume and air
exchange rates, respectively. Key studies or analyses
described in this chapter were used in selecting
recommended values for residential volume. The air
exchange rate data presented in the studies are extremely
limited. Therefore, studies have not been classified as key
or relevant studies. However, recommendations have been
provided for air exchange rates and the confidence
recommendation has been assigned a "low" overall rating.
Therefore, these values should be used with caution. Both
central and conservative values are provided. These two
parameters — volume and air exchange rate — can be used
by exposure assessors in modeling indoor-air
concentrations as one of the inputs to exposure estimation.
Other inputs to the modeling effort include rates of indoor
pollutant generation and losses to (and, in some cases, re-
emissions from) indoor sinks. Other things being equal
(i.e., holding constant the pollutant generation rate and
effect of indoor sinks), lower values for either the indoor
volume or the air exchange rate will result in higher indoor-
air concentrations. Thus, values near the lower end of the
distribution (e.g., 10th percentile) for either parameter are
appropriate in developing conservative estimates of
exposure.
For the volume of a residence, both key studies (U.S.
DOE (1995) and Versar (1990) PFT database) have the
same mean value — 369 m3 (see Table 17-1). This mean
value is recommended as a central estimate residential
volume. Intuitively, the 10th percentile of the distribution
from either study — 147 m3 for RECS survey or 167 m3 for
the PFT database — is too conservative a value, as both
these values are lower than the mean volume for multifamily
dwelling units (see Table 17-2). Instead, the 25th
percentile - 209 m3 for RECS survey or 225 m3 for PFT
database, averaging 217m3 across the two key studies — is
recommended (Table 17-1).
For the residential air exchange rate, the median
value of 0.45 air changes per hour (ACH) from the PFT
database (see Table 17-9) is recommended as a typical
value (Koontz and Rector, 1995). This median value is
very close to the geometric mean of the measurements in the
PFT database analyzed by Koontz and Rector (1995). The
arithmetic mean is not preferred because it is influenced
fairly heavily by extreme values at the upper tail of the
distribution. For a conservative value, the 10th percentile
for the PFT database — 0.18 ACH — is recommended
(Table 17-10).
There are some uncertainties in, or limitations on, the
distribution for volumes and air exchange rates that are
presented in this chapter. For example, the RECS used to
infer volume distributions used a nationwide probability
sample, but measured floor area rather than total volume.
By comparison, field studies contributing to the PFT data
base measured house volumes directly, but the aggregate
sampling frame for these studies is not statistically
representative of the national housing stock.
Although the PFT methodology is relatively simple
to implement, it is subject to errors and uncertainties. The
general performance of the sampling and analytical aspects
of the system are quite good. That is, laboratory analysis
will measure the correct time-weighted-average tracer
concentration to within a few percent (Dietz et al, 1986).
Nonetheless, significant errors can arise when conditions in
the measurement scene greatly deviate from idealizations
calling for constant, well-mixed conditions. Principal
concerns focus on the effects of naturally varying air
Page
17-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
exchange and the effects of temperature in the permeation
source.
Sherman (1989) carried out an error analysis of the
PFT methodology using mathematical models combined
with typical weather data to calculate how an ideal sampling
system would perform in a time-varying environment. He
found that for simple single-story (ranch) and two-story plus
basement (colonial) layouts, seasonal measurements would
underpredict seasonal average air exchange by 20 to 30
percent. Underprediction can occur because the PFT
methodology is measuring the effective ventilation (the
product of ventilation efficiency and air exchange), and the
temporal efficiency will generally be less than unity over
averaging periods of this length. Sherman (1989) also
noted, however, that while the bias could have an impact on
determining air exchange (absent knowledge of ventilation
efficiency) for calculating energy loads, the effective air
exchange term is directly relevant to determining average
indoor concentrations resulting from constant sources.
Leaderer et al. (1985) conducted a series of
experiments in a room-sized-environmental chamber to
evaluate the practical impacts of varying air exchange and
the temperature response of the permeation sources. The
negative bias anticipated in the measured (effective) versus
actual air exchange as conditions varied diumally between
0.4 and 1.5. ACH was evident but minor (3 to 6 percent),
most likely due to the mechanical mixing in the chamber
and the relatively short integration time (72 h). Similarly,
cycling temperature diumally over an 8°C range (holding
air exchange steady at 0.6 ACH) would cause
concentrations changes of about 20 percent as emissions
fluctuated. The investigators found, however, that using a
time-weighted average temperature to define the emission
rate reduced the temperature bias to essentially zero.
17.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 17
Andelman, J.B. (1990) Total exposure to volatile organic
compounds in potable water. In: Ram, N, et al., eds.
Significance and Treatment of Volatile Organic
Compounds in Water Supplies, pp 485-504, Lewis
Publishers, Chelsea, MI.
Andersson, B., K. Andersson, J. Sundell, and P.-A.
Zingmark. (1993) Mass transfer of contaminants in
rotary enthalpy heat exchangers. Indoor Air. 3: MS-
MS.
ASHRAE. (1988) ASHRAE Handbook: Equipment.
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers. Atlanta, GA.
ASHRAE. (1993) ASHRAE Handbook: Fundamentals.
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers. Atlanta, GA.
ASTM. (1989) Standard laboratory test method for
evaluation of carpet-embedded dirt removal
effectiveness of household vacuum cleaners.
Designation: F 608-89. American Society for Testing
and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
ASTM. (1990) Test method for determining
formaldehyde levels from wood products under
defined conditions using a large chamber. Standard E
1333 90. American Society for Testing and
Materials: Philadelphia.
Axley, J.W. (1988) Progress toward a general analytical
method for predicting indoor air pollution in
buildings: indoor air quality modeling phase III
report. NBSIR 88-3814. National Bureau of
Standards, Gaithersberg, MD.
Axley, J.W. (1989) Multi-zone dispersal analysis by
element assembly. Building and Environment.
24(2): 113-130.
Axley, J.W.; Lorenzetti, D. (1993) Sorption transport
models for indoor air quality analysis. In: Nagda, N.L.
Ed., Modeling of Indoor Air Quality and Exposure.
ASTM STP 1205. Philadelphia, PA: American
Society for Testing and Materials, pp. 105-127.
Baughman, A.V.; Gadgil, A.J.; Nazaroff, W.W. (1994)
Mixing of a point source pollutant by natural
convection flow within a room. Indoor Air. 4:114-
122.
Chang, J.C.S.; Guo, Z. (1992) Characterization of organic
emissions from a wood finishing product — wood
stain. Indoor Air. 2(3): 146-53.
Consumer Reports. (1982) Washing machines. Consumer
Reports Magazine. 47 (10).
Consumer Reports. (1987) Dishwashers. Consumer
Reports Magazine. 52(6).
Cussler, E.L. (1984) Diffusion. Cambridge University
Press, New York, NY.
Dietz, R.N.; Goodnch, R.W.; Cote, E.A.; Wieser, R.F.
(1986) Detailed description and performance of a
passive perfluorocarbon tracer system for building
ventilation and air exchange measurements. H.R.
Trechsel andP.L. Lagus, Eds. In: Measured Air
Leakage of Buildings. ASTM STP 904.
Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and
Materials, pp. 203-264.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-25
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Drescher, A.C.; Lobascio, C.; Gadgil, A.J.; Nazaroff,
W.W. (1995) Mixing of a Point-Source Indoor
Pollutant by Forced Convection. Indoor Air. 5:204-214.
Dunn, I.E. (1987) Models and statistical methods for
gaseous emission testing of finite sources in well-
mixed chambers. Atmospheric Environment.
(21)2:425-430.
Dunn, I.E.; Chen, T. (1993) Critical evaluation of the
diffusion hypothesis in the theory of porous media
volatile organic compounds (VOC) sources and sinks.
In: Nagda, N.L. Ed., Modeling of Indoor Air Quality
and Exposure. ASTMSTP1205. Philadelphia, PA.:
American Society for Testing and Materials, pp. 64-
80.
Dunn, I.E.; Tichenor, B.A. (1988) Compensating for sink
effects in emissions test chambers by mathematical
modeling. Atmospheric Environ., 22(5)885-894.
EBMUD. (1992) Urban water management plan. East
Bay Municipal Utility Water District, in written
communication to J.B. Andelman, July 1992.
Furtaw, E.J.; Pandian, M.D.; Nelson, D.R; Behar, J.V.
(1995) Modeling indoor air concentrations near
emission sources in perfectly mixed rooms.
Engineering Solutions to Indoor Air Quality
Problems. Presented at Sixth Conference of the
International Society for Environmental Epidemiology
and Fourth Conference of the International Society for
Exposure Analysis (Joint Conference), Research
Triangle Park, NC, September 1994.
GEOMET. (1989) Assessment of indoor air pollutant
exposure within building zones. Report Number IE-
2149, prepared for USEPA Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment under Contract No. 68-
02-4254, Task No. 235. Germantown, MD.:
GEOMET Technologies, Inc.
Giardino, N.J.; Gummerman, E.; Andelman, J.B.; Wilkes,
C.R.; Small, M.J. (1990) Real-time measurements of
trichloroethylene in domestic bathrooms using
contaminated water. Proceedings of the 5th
International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and
Climate, Toronto, 2:707-712.
Grimsrud, D.T.; Sherman, M.H.; Sondereggen, R.C.
(1983) Calculating infiltration: implications for a
construction quality standard. In: Proceedings of the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers Conference. Thermal
Performance of Exterior Envelopes of Buildings II.
ASHRAE SP38, Atlanta, GA, pp. 422-449.
Grot, R.A. (1991) User manual NBS/AVIS
CONTAM88. NISTIR 4585, Gaithersberg, MD:
National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Grot, R.A.; Clark, R.E. (1981) Air leakage characteristics
and weatherization techniques for low-income
housing. In: Proceedings of the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers Conference. Thermal Performance of
Exterior Envelopes of Buildings. ASHRAE SP28,
Atlanta, GA, pp. 178-194.
Hanley, J.T.; Ensor, D.S.; Smith, D.D.; Sparks, L.E.
(1994) Fractional aerosol filtration efficiency of in-
duct ventilation air cleaners. Indoor Air. 4(3): 179-
188.
Hirvonen, A.; Pasanen, P.; Tarhanen, J.; Ruuskanen, J.
(1995) Thermal desorption of organic compounds
associated with settled household dust. Indoor Air.
5:255-264.
Jennings, P.O.; Carpenter, C.E.; Knshnan, M.S. (1985)
Methods for assessing exposure to chemical
substances volume 12: methods for estimating the
concentration of chemical substances in indoor air.
EPA 560/5-85-016, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances,
Washington, DC.
Jennings, P.D.; Hammerstrom, K.A.; Adkins, L.C.;
Chambers, T.; Dixon, D.A. (1987) Methods for
assessing exposure to chemical substances volume 7:
methods for assessing consumer exposure to chemical
substances. EPA 560/5-85-007, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides and Toxic
Substances, Washington, DC.
Koontz, M.D.; Nagda, N.L. (1991) A multichamber
model for assessing consumer inhalation exposure.
Indoor Air. 1(4):593-605.
Koontz, M.D.; Rector, H.E. (1995) Estimation of
distributions for residential air Exchange rates, EPA
Contract No. 68-D9-0166, Work Assignment No. 3-
19, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC.
Koontz, M.D.; Rector, H.E.; Fortmann, R.C.; Nagda, N.L.
(1988) Preliminary experiments in a research house to
investigate contaminant migration in indoor air. EPA
560/5-88-004. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances,
Washington, DC.
Layton, D.W.; Thatcher, T.L. (1995) Movement of
outdoor particles to the indoor environment: An
analysis of the Amhem Lead Study. Paper No. 95-
Page
17-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
MP4.02. Annual Meeting of the Air and Waste
Management Association, San Antonio, TX.
Leaderer, B.P.; Schaap, L.; Dietz, R.N. (1985)
Evaluation of perfluorocarbon tracer technique for
determining infiltration rates in residences. Environ.
Sci. andTechnol. 19(12):1225-1232.
Liddament, M.; Allen, C. (1983) Validation and
comparison of mathematical models of air infiltration.
Technical Note AIC 11. Air Infiltration Centre, Great
Britain.
Ligman, K.; Hutzler, N.; Boyle, W.C. (1974) Household
wastewater characterization. J. Environ. Eng.
100:201-213.
Little, J.C. (1992) Applying the two-resistance theory to
contaminant volatilization in showers. Environ. Sci.
andTechnol. 26(7):1341-1349.
Little, J.C.; Daisey, J.M.; Nazaroff, W.W. (1992)
Transport of subsurface contaminants into buildings —
an exposure Pathway for Volatile Organics. Environ.
Sci. andTechnol. (26)11:2058-2066.
Lucas, R.M.; Grillo, R.B.; Perez-Michael, A.; Kemp, S.
(1992) National residential radon survey statistical
analysis — volume 2: summary of the questionnaire
data. RTI/5158/49-2F. Research Triangle Institute,
Research Triangle Park, NC.
Mage, D.T.; Ott, W.R. (1994) The correction for
nonuniform mixing in indoor environments. ASTM
Symposium on Methods for Characterizing Indoor
Sources and Sinks, Washington, DC.
McKone, T.E. (1987) Human exposure to volatile
organic compounds in household tap water: The
inhalation pathway. Environ. Sci. and Technol.
21(12):1194-1201.
McKone, T.E. (1989) Household exposure models.
Toxicol. Letters. 49:321-339.
MWD. (1991) Urban water use characteristics in the
metropolitan water district of southern California.
Draft Report. Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California, August 1991.
Murray, D.M. (1996) residential house and zone volumes
in the United States: Empirical and Estimated
Parametric Distributions. Submitted to Risk Analysis
in 1996.
Murray, D.M.; Burmaster, D.E. (1995) Residential air
exchange rates in the United States: Empirical and
Estimated Parametric Distribution by Season and
Climatic Region. Submitted to Risk Analysis in 1995.
Nazaroff, W.W.; Cass, G.R. (1986) Mathematical
modeling of chemically reactive pollutants in indoor
air. Environ. Sci. and Technol. 20:924-934.
Nazaroff, W.W.; Cass, G.R. (1989) Mass-transport
aspects of pollutant removal at indoor surfaces.
Environment International, 15:567-584.
Nazaroff, W.W.; Doyle, S.M.; Nero, A.V.; Sextro, R.G.
(1988). Radon entry via potable water. In: Nazaroff,
W.W. and Nero, A. V., Eds., Radon and Its Decay
Products in Indoor Air. John Wiley and Sons, NY.
pp. 131-157.
Nazaroff, W.W.; Gadgil, A.J.; Weschler, C.J. (1993)
Critique of the use of deposition velocity in modeling
indoor air quality. In: Nagda, N.L. Ed., Modeling of
Indoor Air Quality and Exposure, ASTM STP 1205,
American Society for Testing and Materials.
Philadelphia, PA, pp. 148-165.
Offerman, F.J.; Sextro, R.G.; Fisk, W.; Nazaroff, W.W.;
Nero, A.V.; Revzan, K.L.; Yater, J. (1984) Control of
respirable particles and radon progeny with portable
air cleaners. Report No. LBL-16659, Lawrence
Berkley Laboratory, Berkley, CA.
Pandian, M.H.; Behar, J. V; Thomas, J. (1993) Use of a
relational database to predict human population
exposures for different time periods. Proceedings of
Indoor Air '93, Helsinki 3:283-288.
Persily, A.K.; Linteris, G.T. (1984) A comparison of
measured and predicted infiltration rates. ASHRAE
Transactions 89(2):183-199.
Relwam, S.M.; Moschandreas, D.J.; Bilhck, I.H. (1986)
Effects of operational factors on pollutant emission
rates from residential gas appliances. J. Air Poll.
Control Assoc. 36:1233-1237.
Roberts, J.W.; Budd, W.T.; Ruby, M.G.; Bond, A.E.;
Lewis, R.G.; Wiener, R.W.; Camann, D.E. (1991)
Development and field testing of a high volume
sampler for pesticides and toxics in dust. J. Exposure
Anal, and Environ. Epidemiol. (1)2:143-155
Ryan, P.B. (1991) An overview of human exposure
modeling. J. Exposure Anal, and Environ. Epidemiol.
(1)4:453-474.
Sandberg, M. (1984) The Multi-chamber theory
reconsidered from the viewpoint of air quality studies.
Building and Environment (19)4:221 -23 3.
Sextro, R.G. (1994) Radon and the natural environment.
IN: Nagda, N.L. Ed., Radon — Prevalence,
Measurements, Health Risks and Control, ASTM
MNL 15, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA, pp. 9-32.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-27
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Shaughnessy, R.J.; Levetin, E.; Blocker, I; Sublette, K.L.
(1994) Effectiveness of portable air cleaners: sensory
testing results. Indoor Air 4(3): 179-188.
Sherman, M.H. (1989) Analysis of errors associated with
passive ventilation measurement techniques. Building
and Environment 24(2): 131 -13 9.
Sherman, M.; Dickerhoff, D. (1996) Air tightness of
U.S. dwellings. In: The Role of Ventilation 15th
AIVC Conference Proceedings. Buxton, Great
Britain, September 27-30, 1994.
Siegrist, R. (1976) Characteristics of rural household
wastewater. J. Environ. Eng. 1:533-548.
Sinden, F.W. (1978) Multi-chamber theory of infiltration.
Building and Environment. 13:21 -28.
Sparks, L.E. (1988) Indoor air quality model version 1.0.
Report No. EPA-600/8-88-097a.. Research Triangle
Park, NC. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Sparks, L.E. (1991) Exposure - Version 2., U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Swope, A.D.; Goydan, R.; Reid, R.C. (1992) Methods for
assessing exposure to chemical substances Volume
11: Methodology for Estimating the Migration of
Additives and Impurities from Polymeric Substances.
EPA 560/5-85-015, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention, Pesticides,
and Toxic Substances, Washington, DC.
Thatcher, T.L.; Layton, D.W. (1995) Deposition,
resuspension, and penetration of particles within a
residence. Atmos. Environ. 29(13):1487-1497.
Thompson, W. (1995) U.S. Department of Energy (U.S.
DOE) and Energy Information Administration.
Personal communication on distribution of heated
floor space area from the 1993 REGS.
Tichenor, B.A.; Guo, Z.; Dunn, I.E.; Sparks, L.E.;
Mason, M.A. (1991) The interaction of vapor phase
organic compounds with indoor sinks. Indoor Air
1:23-35.
Tucker, W.G. (1991) Emission of organic substances
from indoor surface materials. Environ. Internal.
17:357-363.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1992) Statistical abstract of
the United States: 1992 (112th edition). Table No.
1230, p. 721. Washington, DC.: U.S. Department of
Commerce.
U.S. DHUD. (1984) Residential water conservation
projects: summary report. Report Number HUD-
PDR-903. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy
Development and Research.
U.S. DOE. (1995) Housing characteristics 1993,
Residential Energy Consumption Survey (REGS)
Report No. DOE/EIA-0314 (93), Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information
Administration.
Page
17-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Versar. (1990) Database of perfluorocarbon tracer (PFT)
ventilation measurements: description and user's
manual. USEPA Contract No. 68-02-4254, Task No.
39. Washington, D.C: U.S.Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Toxic Substances.
Wallace, L.A. (1996) Indoor particles: A review. J. Air
and Waste Management Assoc. (46)2:98-126.
Walton, G.N. (1993) CONTAM 93 User Manual.
NISTIR 5385. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute
of Standards and Technology.
Wilkes, C.R.; Small, M.J.; Andelman, IB.; Giardmo,
N.J.; Marshall, J. (1992) Inhalation exposure model
for volatile chemicals from indoor uses of water.
Atmospheric Environment (26A) 12:2227-2236.
Wolkoff, P. (1995) Volatile organic compounds: sources,
measurements, emissions, and the impact on indoor
air quality. Indoor Air Supplement No. 3/95, pp 1-73.
Wolkoff, P.; Wilkms, C.K. (1994) Indoor VOCs from
household floor dust: comparison of headspace with
desorbed VOCs; Method for VOC release
determination. Indoor Air 4:248-254.
Zinn, T.W.; Cline, D.; Lehmann, W.F. (1990) Long-term
study of formaldehyde emission decay from
particleboard. Forest Products Journal (40)6:15-18.
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1997 17-29
-------
Table 17-29. Volume of Residence Surveys
Study
Kev Studies
U.S. DOE, 1995
(RECS)
Versar, 1990
(PET database)
Murray, 1996
Number of
Residences
Over 7,000
Over 2,000
7,041 (RECS)
1,751 (PET)
Survev Tvpe
Direct measurement of floor area;
estimation of volume
Direct measurement and
estimated
Direct measurements and
estimated
Areas Surveyed
Nationwide (random sample)
Nationwide (not random sample); a
large fraction located in CA
RECS-Nationwide (random
sample); PET - Nationwide (not
random sample); a large fraction
located in CA
Comments
Volumes were estimated assuming 8 ft.
ceiling height. Provides relationships
between average residential volumes and
facilities such as housing type, ownership,
household size, and structure age.
Sample was not geographically balanced;
statistical weighting was applied to develop
nationwide distributions
Duplicate measurement were eliminated;
tested the effects of using 8 ft. assumption on
ceiling height to calculate volume; data from
both databases were analyzed.
I
I
&!
1=
Table 17-30. Air Exchange Rates Surveys
Study
Versar, 1990
(PET database)
Koontz & Rector, 1995
(PET database)
Murray and Burmaster, 1995
(PET database)
Nazaroffetal., 1988
Number of
Residences/Measurements
Over 2,000 residences
2,971 measurements
2,844 measurements
255 (Grot and Clark, 1981)
312(Grimsrud, 1983)
Survev Tvpe
Measurements using PET
technique
Measurements using PET
technique
Measurements using PET
technique
Direct measurement
Direct measurement
Areas Surveyed
Nationwide (not random sample); a
large fraction located in CA
Nationwide (not random sample); a
large fraction located in CA
Nationwide (not random sample); a
large fraction located in CA
255, low-income families in 14
cities
321, newer residences, median age
<10 years
Comments
Multiple measurements on the same
home were included.
Multiple measurements on the same
home were included. Compensated for
geographic imbalances. Data are
presented by region of the country and
season.
Multiple measurements on the same
home were included. Did not
compensate for geographical
imbalances. Data are presented by
climate region and season.
Sample size was small and not
representative of the U.S.
Sample size was small and not
representative of the U.S.
Q
Q
Si
2
ri
X
ri
ri
.
ri
<*>
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-31. Recommendations - Residential Parameters
Volume of Residence
Air Exchange Rate
369 m* (central estimate)"
0.45 ACH (median)8 .
217m3 (mean)*
0.18 ACH (10th percentile)".
a Same mean value presented in two studies (Table 17-1) - recommended to be used as the central estimate.
b Mean of two 25th percentile values (Table 17-1) - recommended to be used as the mean value.
c Recommended to be used as a typical value (Table 17-10).
d Recommended to be used as a conservative value (Table 17-10).
Table 17-32. Confidence in House Volume Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
• Accessibility
• Reproducibility
• Focus on factor of
interest
• Data pertinent to U.S.
• Primary data
• Currency
• Adequacy of data
collection period
• Validity of approach
Study size
• Representativeness of the
population
• Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
All key studies are from peer reviewed literature.
Papers are widely available from peer review journals.
Direct measurements were made.
The focus of the studies was on estimating house volume
as well as other factors.
Residences in the U.S. was the focus of the key studies.
All the studies were based on primary data.
Measurements in the PFT database were taken between
1982-1987. The RECS survey was conducted in 1993.
Not applicable
For the RECS survey, volumes were estimated assuming
an 8 ft. ceiling height. The effect of this assumption has
been tested by Murray (1996) and found to be
insignificant.
The sample sizes used in the key studies were fairly large,
although only 1 study (RECS) was representative of the
whole U.S. Not all samples were selected at random;
however, RECS samples were selected at random.
RECS sample is representative of the U.S.
Distributions are presented by housing type and regions;
although some of the sample sizes for the subcategories
were small.
Selection of residences was random for RECS.
Some measurement error may exist since surface areas
were estimated using the assumption of 8 ft. ceiling height.
There are 3 key studies; however there are only 2 data
sets.
There is good agreement among researchers.
Results were consistent; 1 study (RECS) was
representative of residences in the whole U.S.; volumes
were estimated rather than measured in some cases.
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
High
Medium
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
Page
17-31
-------
Volume III - Activity Factors
Chapter 17 - Residential Building Characteristics
Table 17-33. Confidence in Air Exchange Rate Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
• Level of peer review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
Focus on factor of
interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data
collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the
population
Characterization of
variability
• Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
• Measurement error
Other Elements
• Number of studies
• Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
The studies appear in peer reviewed literature. Although
there are 3 studies, they are all based on the same database
(PFT database).
Papers are widely available from government reports and
peer review journals.
Precision across repeat analyses has been documented to
be acceptable.
The focus of the studies was on estimating air exchange
rates as well as other factors.
Residences in the U.S. was the focus of the PFT database.
All the studies were based on primary data.
Measurements in the PFT database were taken between
1982-1987.
Only short term data were collected; some residences were
measured during different seasons; however, long term air
exchange rates are not well characterized.
Although the PFT technology is an EPA standard method
(Method IP-4A), it has some major limitations (e.g.,
uniform mixing assumption).
The sample sizes used in the key studies were fairly large,
although not representative of the whole U.S. Not all
samples were selected at random.
Sample is not representative of the U.S..
Distributions are presented by U.S. regions, seasons, and
climatic regions; although some of the sample sizes for the
subcategories were small and not representative of U.S.
The utility is limited..
Bias may result since the selection of residences was not
random.
Some measurement error may exist.
There are 3 key studies; however there are only 1 data set.
However, the database contains results of 20 projects of
varying scope.
Not applicable
Sample was not representative of residences in the whole
U.S., but covered the range of occurrence.
PFT methodology has limitations. Uniform mixing
assumption may not be adequate. Results will vary
depending on placement of samples and on whether
windows and doors are closed or opened.
High
High
Medium
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
Low
Page
17-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 199 7
------- |