|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Burnt Exposure Assessment
for Airborne Polluicmis
Advances and Opportunities
Cornmidee on Advances in Assessing
Humcrn Exposure to Airbome PoDut~nts
Boarc3 on Environments Studies
ca ~d Toxicology
Comlrussion on Geosciences,
Environment, fact Resources
Ncrtion~ Resec~ch Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 1991
/
OCR for page R2
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Aver, N.W. Washington, I).C ~418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Goveming Board
of the National Research CounciL whose members are drawn from the councils of the National
Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The
members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies
and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures
approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of
Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
Ibe National Academy of Sciences is a private, non-profit, self-perpetuating society of
distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the further-
ance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of
the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it
to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is presi-
dent of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the
National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autono-
mous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Acade-
my of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy
of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages
education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M.
White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to
secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy
matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given
to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal
government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and educa-
tion. Dr. Samuel O. Thier is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916
to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of
furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with
general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating
agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in
priding services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities.
The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine.
Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the
National Research Council.
The project was supported by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act Trust Fund through cooperative agreement with the Agency for Toxic Sub-
stances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, Department of Health and Human
Services.
Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 9~63324
International Standard Book Number ~309 042844
S245
First Printing, November 1990
Second Paining, September 1991
Third Printing, June 1992
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitu-
tion Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.G 20418
Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
Committee on Advances in Assessing
Human Exposure to Airborne Pollutants
PAUL J. LIOY (Chairman), University of Medicine and Dentistry of New
Ier= - Robert Wed I:ohr~son Med~ School, Pis~tawa:,r, N]
JOAN M. DAISEY, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
NAIHUA DUAN, The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA
FRED De HILEMAN, Monsanto Company, St. Louis
PHILIP K HOPKE, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY
MICHAEL A. JAYJOCK, Rohm & Haas Company, Philadelphia
BRIAN P. LEADERER, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven
MARSHAL S. LEVINE, NASA, Washington, DC
CARL D. PFAFFENBERGER, Department of Environmental Resources
Management for Metro Dade County, Miami
JOHN P. ROBINSON, University of Maryland, College Park
JERRY M. SCHROY, Monsanto Company, St. Louis
JOSEPH R. STElTER, Transducer Research, Inc., Naperville, IL
CHARLES J. WESCHLER, Bell Communications Research, Red Bank, NJ
JEROME J. WESOLOWSKI, California State Department of Health Services,
Berkeley
Project Staff
RAYMOND A. WASSEL, Project Director
LEE R. PAULSON, Editor
RUTH E. CROSSGROVE, Copy Editor
ANNE M. SPRAGUE, Information Specialist
FELINE S. BUCKNER, Project Secretary
. . .
UZ
OCR for page R4
Board on Environmental Studies
and Toxicology
GILBERT S. OMENN (C~nai~man), University of Washington, Seattle
FREDERICK R ANDERSON, Washington School of Law, American University
JOHN C. BAILER, III, McGill University School of Medicine, Montreal
LAWRENCE W. BARNTHoUSE, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge
CARRY D. BREWER, Yale University, New Haven
JOANNA BURGER, Nelson Laboratory, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ
YORAM COHEN, University of California, Los Angeles
JOHN L. EMMERSON, Lilly Research Laboratories, Greenf~eld, IN
ROBERT L. HARNESS, Monsanto Agricultural Company, St. Louis
ALFRED G. KNUDSON, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia
GENE E. LIKENS, The New York Botanical Garden, Millbrook
PAUL J. LIOY, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway
JANE LUBCHENCO, Oregon State University, Corvallis
DONALD MATIISON, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh
NATHANIEL REED, Hobe Sound, FL
F. SHERWOOD ROWLAND, University of California, Irvine
MILTON RUSSELL, University of Tennessee, Knoxville
MARGARET M. SEMINARIO, AFL/CID, Washington, DC
I. GLENN SIPES, University of Arizona, Tucson
WALTER J. WEBER, JR., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Staff
JAMES J. REISA, Director
DAVID J. POLICANSKY, Program Director for Natural Resources
and Applied Ecology
ROBERT B. SMOTE, Program Director for Exposure Assessment
and Risk Reduction
RICHARD D. THOMAS, Program Director for Human Toxicology
and Risk Assessment
LEE R PAULSON, Manager, Toxicology Information Center
IV
OCR for page R5
OCR for page R7
OCR for page R8
OCR for page R9
OCR for page R10
OCR for page R11
OCR for page R12
OCR for page R13
OCR for page R14
OCR for page R15
OCR for page R16
Commission on Geosciences,
Environment, and Resources
M. GORDON WOLMAN (Chairman), The Johns Hopes University
ROBERT C. BEARDSLEY, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
B. CLARK BURCHFIEL, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
~PH J. CICE:~ONE, University
Preface
Exposure assessment has been integrated into attempts by governmental
agencies and other organizations to examine the contact of an individual or
population with contaminants released in environmental media. As part of its
attempts to understand better human exposures to hazardous substances, the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) sponsored this
study of advances in assessing exposure to airborne contaminants.
Numerous techniques have evolved concurrently to qualitatively and quanti-
tatively establish exposure profiles. In industrial hygiene practice, assessments
of worker exposure during a work shin have been conducted for many years
In attempts to comply with guidelines or standards. The techniques industrial
hygienists have used are now being refined and introduced with other new ad-
vanced techniques to study the community environment, where contaminant
concentrations are usually much lower than those observed in the workplace.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has provided a starting point
from which exposure assessors can consider the priorities among environmen-
tal media or contaminants as it develops guidelines for conducting exposure
assessment for use in risk assessment. An important point made by EPA is
the need to develop exposure-assessment strategies a need identified by
scientists who are developing programs on human exposure.
As evidenced by the EPA guidelines and by engineers and scientists in the
field, awareness is increasing of basic principles that place exposure assess-
ment prominently within a continuum, starting with an emission from a con-
taminant source to the occurrence of subcellular changes and an expression
of a biological effect within an exposed individual. The awareness provides
an opportunity to link exposure assessment with the practical application of
risk reduction and exposure-mitigation strategies.
In the context of the present report, the committee focussed on human
exposure to contaminants that can be inhaled and potentially cause an adverse
health or nuisance effect. The committee did not cover air contaminants
. .
V11
viii PREFACE
transferred to other media or other routes of entry into the body. The report
emphasizes that inhalation must be placed in the context of total exposure
assessment, which requires consideration of all pertinent environmental media
and all routes of entry into the body.
The committee addressed the specific points in the charge from ATSDR
and placed exposure assessment in the context of an evolving scientific disci-
pline within the scope of environmental health. The committee used its judg-
ment in choosing the amount of attention given ire the report to specific expo-
sure-assessment methods. It considered numerous techniques, which are in
different states of development and have different extents of application.
The committee also critically analyzed specific case studies of exposure as ~
sessment. The studies are in different stages of completion or design, but
each point to areas of achievement or need for continued research. The
committee was not charged with providing, nor does it provide, a "how to" man-
ual on exposure assessment, or an encyclopedic accounting of all the impor-
tant contaminants and the best technique for assessing exposures to those
specific contaminants.
The committee's efforts were facilitated by an information-gathering work-
shop hosted by the John B. Pierce Laboratory, Yale University, October 19-20,
1988. Individuals who also assisted our efforts were Fredrica Perera (Colum-
bia University), Paul Schulte (National Institute for Occupational Satcty and
Health), and Bruce Stuart (Brookhaven National Laboratory) who contributed
to Chapter 4; Devra Davis (National Research Council) who contributed to
the lead case study; Demetrios Moschandreas (Illinois Institute of Technology)
and Lance Wallace (EPA), who contributed information for the VOC case
study; and Timothy Larson (Washington University), who contributed to the
acidic particulate matter case study; and Barry Ryan (Harvard University),
who provided details on NO2 exposure. We are indebted to Karen Hulebak
(Environ Corp.), who was the original program director of this project, for
many insights and comments during the development of the report.
We wish to give special thanks to Raymond Wassel, project director, who
guided the report through the review process, provided valuable comments,
and diligently ensured that the document was complete. Others of the BEST
staff who contributed to the effort are James Reisa, director; Robert Smythe,
program director; Lee Paulson and Norman Grossblatt, editors; and Felita
Buckner and Sharon Smith, project secretaries.
Paul J. Lioy
Chairman
6 November 1990
Con ten is
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 PRINCIPLES OF EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
Introduction, 17
Background, 19
Exposure Assessment in Environmental Epidemiology, 23
Exposure Assessment in Occupational Epidemiology
and Risk Management, 26
Conceptual Framework for Human Exposure Assessment, 26
Types of Studies, 30
Summary, 35
2 FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING EXPOSURES TO
AIR CONTAMINANTS
Introduction, 37
Mathematical Relationships, 39
Measurement and Estimation Techniques Employed in
Exposure Assessment, 42
Direct Measures of Exposure, 42
Indirect Measures of Exposure, 46
Mitigation Measures, 49
Integration of Exposure-Assessment Techniques, 50
Summary, 51
1
17
37
3 SAMPLING AND PHYSICALCHEMICAL MEASUREMENTS 53
Introduction, 53
LX
x CONTENTS
Quality Assurance, 55
Errors, 55
Site-Selection Errors, 57
Collection Errors, 57
Analytical Errors' ~
Data-Handlirlg Errors, 59
Airborne Analytes, 60
Criteria for Method Selection, 62
Sensitivity, 62
Selectivity, 64
Rapidity, 65
Comprehensiveness, 65
Portability, 66
Cost, 66
Metholodology, 68
The Measurement Process, 68
Sampling, 69
Separation, 75
Detection, 86
Microsensors, 99
Electron Microscopy, 101
Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis, 103
Radon and Radon Progeny Measurements, 104
Chemometrics, 107
Summary, laS
Quality Control/Quality Assurance, 108
Sampling Techniques and Strategy, 109
Instrumental Techniques, 110
Field-Study Instruments, 113
4 USE OF BIOLOGICAL MARKERS IN ASSESSING
HUMAN EXPOSURE TO AIRBORNE CONTAMINANTS 115
Introduction, 115
Prom Exposure to Health Effects:
Kinds of Markers, 116
Applications of Human Biological Markers, 120
Markers of Exposure, 120
Markers of Effect, 122
Utility of Biological Markers, 126
CONTENTS xz
Advantages, 126
Disadvantages and Limitations, 129
Criteria Governing the Validation and Use of
Biological Markers, 134
Validation and Selection of Biological Markers, 135
Study Design, 139
Analysis, 140
Ethical Issues, 141
Summary, 141
Sit RESEARCH METHODS AND
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
Introduction, 143
Sample Selection, 147
Target Population, 148
Response Rate, 149
Sampling Error, 150
Other Features, 151
Measurement Approaches, 151
Direct Approach, 152
Indirect Approach, 153
Integrating Personal-Monitor and Diary Information, 157
Questionnaire Approach, 159
Questionnaire Framing and Wording, 160
Improving Survey Questions, 163
Incorporating Survey-Research Methods into Exposure
Assessment, 164
Summary, 165
6 MODELS
Introduction, 169
Important Model Characteristics, 173
Concentration Models, 174
Outdoor Models~ontaminant Source Emissions, 174
Validation, 176
Contaminant Dispersion, 176
Atmospheric Chemistry, 179
Receptor Models, 181
Indoor Contaminant Concentrations, 184
143
169
xii CONTENTS
Industrial Environments, 184
Nonindustrial Environments, 188
Variability in Emission Rates, 191
Mr~nug Within and Between Rooms, 192
Deposition, 193
Air CleaniT g, 194
Recent Advances, 195
Exposure-Assessment Models, 197
Individual Exposures, 197
Population Exposures, 199
Temporal Aspects, 201
Summary, 202
Concentration Models, 203
Exposure Models, 205
Source Models, 205
Validation, 206
7 CURRENT AND ANTICIPATED APPLICATIONS
Introduction, 207
Volatile Organic Compounds, 2a8
Introduction, 208
Current Approaches to Exposure Assessment Under the
Clear Air Act, 208
Total Exposure-Assessment Methodology Study, 209
Benzene, 212
Recommendations, 214
Environmental Tobacco Smoke, 215
Introduction, 215
Air-Contaminant Measurement, 216
Biological Markers, 217
Questionnaires, 217
Future Applications, 218
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, 218
Introduction, 218
Hypothesis and Study Design, 2=
Measurement Methods, X
Biological Markers, 224
Questionnaires, 225
Models, 225
Future Needs, =5
207
CONTENTS X7lt
Lead, ;126
Introduction, 226
Lead from Gasoline, 278
Airborne Lead from Stationary Sources, 228
Ad In Dust and Soils, 231
Outdoor-Air Measurements, =2
Biological Markers, =2
Questionna~resj~3
Models, 233
Conclusions, =3
Acidic Particulate Matter, 236
Introduction, 236
Hypothesis, =7
Measurements, 237
Methods, 238
Conclusions, 239
Sick-Building Syndrome, 240
Introduction, 240
Hypothesis and Study Design, 243
Measurement Techniques (Analytical and Sampling), 243
Biological Markers, 244
Questionnaires, 245
Models, 246
Conclusions, 246
Toxics Release Inventory, 246
Introduction, 246
Applications to Exposure Assessment, 247
Implications, 249
Radon, 249
Introduction, 249
Hypothesis and Study Design, 251
Measurement Methods, 253
Models, 253
Advances, 254
GLOSSARY
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A: BASIC STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL
INVENTORY QUESTIONNAIRE
257
259
311
xiv CONTENTS
APPENDIX B: EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP
PARTICIPLES ED P"SE=ATIONS
APPENDIX C: COMMISSION ON PHYSICAL SCIENCES,
MATlIEMATICS, ED "SOURCES
317
321
Tables and Figures
TABLE 3.} Spatial Considerations: Summary of Sampling Designs and Men
They are Most Useful, 56
TAB" 3~ Analytical Method Selection, 63
TABLE 3~ Status of Personal Monitor Development, 67
TABS SA Microsensors Potentially Applicable to Airborne Contaminants, 1
TABLE 35 Summary of Attributes of Different Measurement Techniques, 111
TABLE S. ~ Methodological Factors in E~osure-Assessment Surveys, 145
TAME ~ Categories of Estimation Methods for Children Exposed to Lead
by Source, 234
FIGURE ~ Elements of human exposure Ad their relationship to the process
of risk assessment and risk management, 6
PIGURB I.] Time fine of health outcomes and measures of exposure for out-
door-air-pollution epidemiology, 24
PIGURB ~ ~ Contaminants sources and effects continuum, D
FIGURE A] Possible approaches for analysis of air contaminant exposures, 43
FIGURE 3.1 Steps in the measurement process, 69
AGUE 4.] Ends of biological markers, 117
AGUE 6.] Schematic diagram of models used in exposure assessment, lye
EfGU;~ 7.] Benzene emissions versus closures, 213
GUM Gasoline lead emissions and outdoor lead concentrations, 1975-
1984, 229
AGUE 73 Parallel decreases in blood lead values observed in the NHANES
IT and amounts of lead used in gasoline during 1976-1980, ~0
xv
