|Home |Kontakt |Impressum |Sitemap |Login|
Presse/ Termine
Mitglieder
Orientierungswerte
Schadstoffe
Forschung
Service
AGÖF Guidance Values for Volatile Organic Compounds in
Indoor Air(10 October 2008 Edition)
1. Introduction
In Germany, a joint federal and state commission1 has issued indoor
air guideline values since 1993. These are toxicologically based values for
individual chemical compounds or compound groups. These guideline values can be used
to assess indoor air testing results. However, up until 2007 hardly more than 10
such guideline values could be published. Thus, the assessment of the large majority
of compounds measurable in indoor air remained uncertain. Based on their decade-long
testing experience, the members of the Association of Ecological Research Institutes
(AGÖF) developed a knowledge base about the presence of VOCs and health imbalances
associated with them. Empirical observations were complemented with medical and
toxicological references. To assist in the assessment of indoor air measurements,
statistically derived attention values were determined for indoor air and house dust;
and in 2004 they were, for the first time, presented to peers in Germany as the AGÖF
Guidance Values. The guidance values allow classifying testing results according to
their statistical probability; consequently, their relevance can also be weighted
when searching for causes of health complaints. However, the guidance values cannot
be used to evaluate the health impact of individual chemical compounds.
The publication attracted great interest and, among other venues, was hotly debated at
the AGÖF seminar on "Indoor Air Standards" in Bremen in 2005. This debate
spawned a joint research project between the AGÖF and the Federal Environment
Agency (UBA) with the title "Bereitstellung einer Datenbank zum Vorkommen von
flüchtigen organischen Verbindungen in der Innenraumluft [Provision of a Database
for the Presence of Volatile Organic Compounds in Indoor Air]". From the results
of this research project, AGÖF presented a revised edition of its guidance values for
over 150 volatile compounds in the fall of 2007.
In addition to the 50th and 90th percentile, the list also
provides a guidance value. It is this guidance value that indicates the threshold,
above which the indoor air concentration of a compound must be considered a problem
based on statistical significance, or toxicological or olfactory knowledge.
Still in actualization are the "AGÖF-Orientierungswerte für mittel- und
schwerflüchtige organische Verbindungen und Schwermetalle im Hausstaub [AGÖF
Guidance Values for semivolatile organic compounds and heavy metals in household dust]",
the provisional German edition
from the year 2004 can be found here.
2. Exposure Assessment of Indoor Air Pollutants
Within the framework of the above-mentioned research project, six important reasons
for the investigation of indoor air were identified. Besides investigating ill-health
symptoms, pure prevention, odor nuisance, and suspicion of exposure, there were also
legal reasons and real estate transfers listed. Adverse health effects and odor
pollution can be said to be the two dominating causes.
In practice, however, the reasons for indoor air investigations vary greatly, and
sometimes individual situations are rather complex. Consequently, it is very important
that the professional indoor air quality consultant—in cooperation with the client—first
defines the objective of the investigation in order to select the required testing and
assessment strategies accordingly.
For the assessment of volatile organic compounds (VOC)2, there are mainly
two types of assessment guidelines that have gained relevance:
- Toxicologically derived assessment concepts;
- Statistically derived assessment concepts.
Both assessment concepts are based on conventions.
Toxicologically derived assessments result in guideline values that are meant to
answer health-related questions. In experiments, laboratory animals are exposed
to different concentration levels of a compound in order to find the concentration
level, at which observable effects are not triggered. An alternative approach to
the development of guideline values is based on the observations from occupational
studies, in which employees are exposed to relatively high concentrations. In order
to evaluate the effects of low-emission indoor exposures in susceptible population
groups (infants, sick people), so-called uncertainty factors are applied. A detailed
discussion about how the guideline values of the so-called Ad-hoc-AG [Ad Hoc Working
Group] were derived was published in 19963.
With a toxicological approach, it remains open to what extent non-specific health
symptoms such as headaches, concentration problems, etc. can be recognized in
animal experiments, or investigations of laboratory workplaces. The health problems
that are most frequently mentioned in the context of indoor air problems are
non-specific symptoms. Furthermore, indoor air usually contains compound mixtures
that cannot be evaluated by toxicological reasoning alone. The definition of
uncertainty factors, e.g. a factor of one hundred, cannot be justified anymore
by toxicological reasoning and is based on conventions. The rather high cost of
generating toxicological data is an important reason why there is only such a small
number of guideline values available. This approach is not adequate for establishing
verified assessments for the myriad of chemical compounds occurring in indoor air.
However, it is an important tool for answering questions regarding threats to public
health.
In the statistically derived assessment concept, reference values are developed.
From a large number of representative investigations, a "usual, average"
level of indoor air pollutants is established and defined as "normal". In
many cases, the so-called 90th or 95th percentile is chosen
as the concentration
threshold whereby any value exceeding the latter indicates an unusual exposure.
It is impossible to use these reference values for health assessments. With regard
to new chemical compounds or compound groups released into indoor air, no reference
values will be available at first. In the event of an increased application of known
compound groups due to a change in production (e.g. when solvents in paints were
replaced), established reference values can consistently be exceeded. Updating the
reference values on a regular basis can counteract both occurrences.
Both concepts need to respond to a changing environment. New medical and
toxicological knowledge helps keep the toxicological approach up-to-date. In case
of the statistically derived values, changes in VOC concentrations in indoor air,
which are associated with new product formulas and consumer habits, need to be tested.
A complete and user-specific assessment of indoor air problems needs to rely on both
concepts. Only by considering statistical relationships as well as toxicological data,
health risks can be weighted and the sources of indoor air problems identified.
Odor problems, however, are not satisfactorily addressed by either one of the two
concepts.
From testing experiences, it is known that, depending on the problem and situation,
both assessment guidelines are important and need to be utilized by the professional
indoor air consultant with different weighting strategies. Additional guidelines or
assessment tools such as the TVOC concept, information on odors and the consultant’s
personal experience complement both. It is the consultant’s responsibility how to
apply and weight the various assessment guidelines, presenting his or her reasoning
in a clear and comprehensible manner in a report. The published AGÖF Guidance Values
below support consultants in their work. On the one hand, they represent an up-to-date
compendium of statistical reference values, and beyond that, they also show
toxicologically relevant guideline values of other authors, experiences by AGÖF
members, and odor threshold values known so far. With their help, it is possible
to achieve preventive health care through minimizing VOC problems in indoor spaces
as recommended by the AGÖF.
3. Data Collection and the Procedure How AGÖF Guidance Values Are Established
The new guidance values are based on an updated database from the years 2002
through 2006, which was generated as part of the research project "Bereitstellung
einer Datenbank zum Vorkommen von flüchtigen organischen Verbindungen in der
Innenraumluft [Provision of a Database for the Presence of Volatile Organic Compounds
in Indoor Air]". Sample taking procedures and methods will only be summarized
here. For more detailed information see the project report of the German Federal
Environment Agency4.
For sample taking, the procedures set out in the VDI Guideline 4300 sheet 1 and
sheet 6 were followed, most of which were adopted into DIN EN ISO 16000. In general,
samples were taken after a space had not been ventilated for a minimum of eight hours.
Active sampling techniques were used to collect air samples. In addition to thermal
desorption techniques, methods based on solvent desorption (activated carbon or
Anasorb) with the corresponding set of two samples for analyzing compounds with
different polarity were also permitted for identification. In the analysis of
the desorbent compounds, mostly gas chromatography with a mass-selective detector
was used, but in some cases flame ionization and electron capture detectors were also
used.
In addition, data on aldehyde and ketone concentrations were also collected, samples
were taken with impingers (formaldehyde) and DNPH-based methods and analyses were
performed (desorption with acetonitrile, analysis based on high-pressure liquid
chromatography with UV detector).
To ensure quality of the various analytical methods, the participants of the research
project conducted comparative laboratory measurements over the past years5.
Guidance values are only given for those compound concentrations, for which, on the
one hand, a sufficient number of indoor air measurements is available and, on the
other hand, whose measurement data come from four or more different laboratories.
The measurement data available are derived from testing situations, for which there
was a reason and, therefore, elevated values for one or more parameters were to be
expected. Consequently, the measurement results cannot directly reflect the real
concentration levels in problem-free indoor spaces. It would be more likely to expect
that some values of those measurements are to be elevated. Within the framework of
the research project, it was possible to show that, in fact, the collected data do
not follow a normal distribution. For this reason, AGÖF maintains its approach
to choosing the 90th percentile as the threshold limit for potential
problem areas. When the measurement of a compound’s concentration value was below
the limit of quantitation, it was not equated to zero, but the imputed one-half of
the limit of quantitation was taken into consideration for deriving the statistical
values (percentiles).
4. Guidance Values for Odorous Compounds
After health complaints, odors are the second most frequent reason for indoor air investigations. The reason for ca. 22% of the indoor air investigations conducted by AGÖF institutes is noticeable or unpleasant odors (see graph 1).
|
|
Graph 1: Reasons for Indoor Air Investigations |
This high percentage of odor-related investigations shows that the measurement
and assessment of odors in indoor spaces has great priority.
In contrast to volatile organic compounds, however, there are—as of yet—no proven
testing methods and also no established assessment procedures for odors in indoor
spaces.
Sensory methods, in which the human nose functions as the testing probe, are
sufficiently sensitive to detect odors. Even though different people perceive
the same compound at an identical concentration differently. Furthermore, odor
perceptions are interpreted in the brain and, based on an individual’s stored
memory values, are evaluated differently. For an objective measurement, therefore,
it is essential that the range of odor perceptions among the inspectors corresponds
with the existing distribution in the total population. Naturally, a single inspector
would be unable to accomplish this goal. This is why sensory odor measurements are
usually conducted with a minimum of eight to ten inspectors. For indoor spaces, this
testing method can be used in exceptional cases only.
Even though it is possible to chemically analyze some odors in indoor air with
sufficient detection sensitivity, common odors are often caused by a complex
mixture of several—sometimes hundreds of—individual compounds. Many of these
compounds can already be perceived at concentrations of only a few nanograms per
cubic meter air, but analytically they are hardly detectable. When assessments
are based on odor thresholds, it is important to consider that aromatic compounds
interact with each other in mixtures. Interactions such as synergisms can have a
substantial impact on the odor characteristics of compound mixtures. Often the
chemical analysis of odorous compounds in indoor air is not sufficient to
completely measure odor problems and evaluate them accordingly.
For many indoor air pollutants, we lack the data of their odor thresholds. The
pollutant exposure profile of indoor air is subject to constant changes, and for
many volatile organic compounds that have only been recently detected in indoor
air very little information is available. The AGÖF is convinced that it is essential
to establish odor threshold values for additional compounds. The List of AGÖF
Guidance Values reflects the currently available exposure profile of indoor air
conditions, which, therefore, makes it a suitable priority list for identifying
odor thresholds.
The quality of existing odor threshold values varies. Alongside up-to-date odor
thresholds established by well-documented procedures, we also find quotes of
rather old odor thresholds in the literature that were established by incompatible
methods.
Despite all these limitations, guidance values for individual compounds that are
derived from odor thresholds can, in many cases, be an important tool for the
assessment of indoor odor problems. Thus, when the chemical analysis shows that
the odor threshold value for one or several individual compounds is exceeded in a
given indoor air, this would be proof of a non-normal odor. However, when all
individual compounds analyzed meet the respective odor threshold values, for the
reasons cited above, this would not constitute proof of a normal or problem-free
odor in the indoor air.
The AGÖF, therefore, has decided to include more guidance values based on odor
thresholds in its current list. The standardized odor thresholds published by Devos et
al. serve as knowledge base6.
Odor threshold values usually correspond with the 50th percentile of the
perception distribution. This means that even below the odor threshold of a given
substance 50% of the population can still perceive its odor.
The odor threshold of hydrogen sulfide, for example, is 6.6 µg/m3. 16%
of the population can still detect the odor of hydrogen sulfide at a concentration
of only ca. 3 µg/m3, which is even less than half of the odor threshold
(see graph 2).
Through establishing guidance values on the basis of odor thresholds, the AGÖF
pursues the goal of including the odor perception of at least 90% of the population
as a guideline for assessing odors in indoor spaces. Basing a guidance value on
odor thresholds is done in order to ensure that at least 90% of the population will
not detect this compound.
|
|
Graph 2: Odor Threshold Curve of a 42-person Group for Hydrogen Sulfide 7 |
The guidance value derived from odor thresholds is based on the following convention: The AGÖF guidance value is derived by taking the odor threshold value according to DIN EN 13725 or a similar procedure and by applying a safety factor of 3. This approach is based on the assumption that the odor threshold distribution in the population for a given compound matches a distribution similar to the odor threshold curve for hydrogen sulfide. When a value, which was calculated from odor thresholds and had a safety factor of 3 applied, falls below the statistically derived attention value (90th percentile) of a given compound, according to the understanding of the AGÖF, this would represent a non-normal situation that should be considered separately when assessing indoor air measurements. At concentrations above the guidance value, this compound could actually contribute to the olfactory impairment of respective sensitive individuals even though the compound may neither be detectable by the majority of occupants nor the inspector.
5. Explanatory Notes for the List of Guidance Values
Column 1: Name of chemical compound
Column 2: Corresponding CAS number for accurate identification
Column 3: Number N
It provides the number of data values the statistical analysis is based on.
Column 4: Normal value
The normal value represents the "average" exposure situation in a
given group. It is equivalent to the 50th percentile. Even indoor
air concentrations within the normal-value range are usually the result of
one or several emission sources, but in general, it is not considered
sufficient evidence for an urgent call to action to minimize the exposure.
Column 5: Attention value
The attention value refers to the 90th percentile value. It shows
that common indoor air concentrations are exceeded, and thus, indicates that
a respective emission source must exist.
Column 6: AGÖF guidance value
In addition to the attention value, the column of the guidance value may also
list toxicologically derived values or odor threshold values provided that those
fall below the 90th percentile value.
It is the opinion of the AGÖF that whenever a guidance value is reached or
exceeded, it should be checked whether additional preventive actions are called
for to minimize VOC exposures even further. Its relevance to health and the
necessity for remediation should also be reviewed. The extent and procedure of
the testing must—as far as possible—be left to the expert’s judgment. In addition
to the local conditions during testing, there should also be attention paid to the
fact that:
- Procedural uncertainties exist for VOC measurements. Additional information on this topic can be learnt from the round robin tests and comparative measurements conducted by the AGÖF;
- Fluctuations in indoor VOC concentrations are to be expected as a function of climatic conditions and users’ habits;
- Depending on the emission source, a reduction of the exposure may follow an attenuation pattern.
Column 7: Notes
In this column, relevant notes on additional assessment guidelines for individual
compounds are offered, for example, the toxicological guideline values of the
so-called Ad-hoc-AG. They are listed as guideline value pair (GV II and GV I).
Within the region of the State of Hamburg, various levels of government issued
guideline values for indoor air assessments, using the same terminology as the
Ad-hoc-AG, which are also listed in the table below and, following the notation
of the original authors, provisional guideline values are indicated with a "p"
.
Only recently, both institutions also issued guideline values for compound
mixtures whose analytical definition and identification is not conclusive
(C1-C4 alkylbenzene, aliphatics C9 to C14, aldehydes C3 to C6, bicyclic and
monocyclic terpenes). In the table below, the AGÖF always adds a note for each
compound, which can be assigned to any of these sum total values. Also, in the
last column of any such compound the sum total values are listed, which result
from the addition of the respective compounds.
Likewise the effect-based indoor guideline values (WIR) of the Indoor Air
Working Group from the Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry,
Environment and Water Management as well as toxicological guideline values or
concepts from additional single authors were also listed.
Furthermore, a few notes on compound characteristics particularly relevant
to assessment issues or commentaries by other organizations were also included.
The AGÖF is dedicated to up-to-date information; when in doubt, however, the
up-to-dateness of a given guideline value should be checked at the link listed
or the original paper, respectively.
1"Ad-hoc-Arbeitsgruppe [Ad Hoc Working Group]" with experts
from the "Innenraumlufthygiene-Kommission (IRK) [Indoor Air Hygiene
Commission]" of the Federal Environment Agency and the Indoor Air Working
Group of the Environmental Health Committee of the "Arbeitsgemeinschaft
der Obersten Landesgesundheitsbehörden (AOLG) [Working Group of the State-Level
Health Authorities]" |
6. List of Guidance Values
| Chemical Compound (Synonym) | CAS | N | Normal- Value P 50 [µg/m3] |
Attention- Value P 90 [µg/m3] |
Guidance- Value [µg/m3] |
Notes (see chapter 6.1) |
| Alkane | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n-Hexane | 110-54-3 | 2288 | 2.0 | 11.0 | 10 | |
| n-Heptane | 142-82-5 | 2358 | 3.0 | 13.0 | 14 | |
| n-Oktane | 111-65-9 | 2343 | 1.0 | 7.1 | 7 | |
| n-Nonane | 111-84-2 | 2344 | 1.0 | 7.6 | 8 | Ad-hoc-AG: Sum total of aliphatics
C9-C14 GV I = 200µg/m3 ; GV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
| n-Decane | 124-18-5 | 2349 | 2.0 | 20.1 | 20 | |
| n-Undecane | 1120-21-4 | 2362 | 3.0 | 29.0 | 30 | |
| n-Dodecane | 112-40-3 | 2363 | 2.0 | 16.0 | 16 | |
| n-Tridecane | 629-50-5 | 2364 | 1.0 | 5.0 | 5 | |
| n-Tetradecane | 629-59-4 | 2358 | 1.1 | 5.0 | 5 | |
| n-Pentadecane | 629-62-9 | 2352 | 1.0 | 3.4 | 3 | |
| n-Hexadecane | 544-76-3 | 1991 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 3 | |
| n-Heptadecane | 629-78-7 | 926 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| n-Octadecane | 593-45-3 | 838 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| n-Nonadecane | 629-92-5 | 831 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| n-Eicosane | 112-95-8 | 831 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| 2-Methylpentane | 107-83-5 | 863 | 1.7 | 6.1 | 6 | |
| 3-Methylpentane | 96-14-0 | 869 | 0.7 | 5.0 | 5 | |
| 3-Methylhexane | 589-34-4 | 662 | 1.0 | 8.9 | 9 | |
| 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane (Isooctane) | 540-84-1 | 1993 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| 2,2,4,6,6-Pentamethylheptane | 13475-82-6 | 1560 | 0.7 | 6.4 | 6 | |
| 2,2,4,4,6,8,8-Heptamethylnonane | 4390-04-9 | 1281 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Cycloalkanes | ||||||
| Cyclohexane | 110-82-7 | 2365 | 2.0 | 13.0 | 13 | BWG: pGV I = 400µg/m3 ; pGV II = 4,000µg/m3 |
| Methylcyclopentane | 96-37-7 | 2356 | 0.9 | 4.1 | 4 | |
| Methylcyclohexane | 108-87-2 | 2330 | 1.0 | 9.0 | 9 | |
| Alkenes | ||||||
| 1-Octene | 111-66-0 | 1403 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 2 | |
| 1-Nonene | 124-11-8 | 1110 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 2 | |
| 1-Decene | 872-05-9 | 1105 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 2 | |
| 1-Undecene | 821-95-4 | 1101 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 2 | |
| 1-Propene, 2-methyl-, trimer (Triisobutylene) | 7756-94-7 | 2077 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| 4-Vinylcyclohexene | 100-40-3 | 2032 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| 4-Phenylcyclohexene | 4994-16-5 | 2323 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| Aromatic Hydrocarbons | ||||||
| Benzene | 71-43-2 | 2361 | 1.7 | 4.0 | 4 | |
| Toluene | 108-88-3 | 2402 | 12.0 | 49.0 | 50 |
GV I = 300µg/m3; GV II = 3,000µg/m3 pGV I = 300µg/m3; pGV II = 3,000µg/m3 |
| Ethylbenzene | 100-41-4 | 2395 | 2.0 | 13.0 | 4[NB 7] | BWG: Sum total of C1-C4 alkylbenzenes pGV I = 300µg/m3; pGV II = 3,000µg/m3 |
| 3,4-Xylene | 108-38-3/ 106-42-3 |
2396 | 5.0 | 38.,4 | 40 | |
| 2-Xylene | 95-47-6 | 2375 | 2.0 | 14.0 | 14 | |
| n-Propylbenzene | 103-65-1 | 2362 | 0.5 | 3.0 | 3 | |
| 1-Methylethylbenzene (Cumene) | 98-82-8 | 2112 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Benzene, 1-ethyl-2-methyl-(2-Ethyltoluene) | 611-14-3 | 1944 | 0.5 | 4.0 | 4 | |
| Benzene, 1-ethyl-3-methyl-(3-Ethyltoluene) | 620-14-4 | 1144 | 1.4 | 10.0 | 10 | |
| Benzene, 1-ethyl-4-methyl-(4-Ethyltoluene) | 622-96-8 | 1124 | 0.9 | 5.7 | 6 | |
| 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene (Hemimellitene) | 526-73-8 | 2153 | 0.5 | 4.2 | 4 | |
| 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene (Pseudocumene) | 95-63-6 | 2375 | 2.0 | 16.0 | 16 | |
| 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene (Mesitylene) | 108-67-8 | 2359 | 1.0 | 5.0 | 5 | |
| 1,2,4,5-Tetramethylbenzene (Durene) | 95-93-2 | 1371 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1 | |
| n-Butylbenzene | 104-51-8 | 1114 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Benzene-1-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl) (4-Cymene) | 99-87-6 | 1661 | 0.5 | 3.6 | 4[NB 7] | |
| 1,3-Diisopropylbenzene | 99-62-7 | 917 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1 | |
| 1,4-Diisopropylbenzene | 100-18-5 | 784 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1 | |
| Naphthalene | 91-20-3 | 1615 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2[NB 1] | GV I = 2µg/m3; GV II = 20µg/m3 |
| Styrene | 100-42-5 | 2374 | 2.0 | 12.1 | 12 | GV I = 30µg/m3; GV II = 300µg/m3 |
| Phenol | 108-95-2 | 1507 | 0.5 | 3.0 | 3 | |
| 2,6-Di-tert.-butyl-4-methylphenol (Butylated hydroxytoluene BHT) | 128-37-0 | 834 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| Benzothiazole | 95-16-9 | 601 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2 | |
| Indan | 496-11-7 | 542 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Halocarbons | ||||||
| Carbon tetrachloride | 56-23-5 | 999 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (Methylchloroform) | 71-55-6 | 2325 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Trichloroethylene | 79-01-6 | 1618 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| Tetrachloroethylene | 127-18-4 | 2330 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| 1,2-Dichlorobenzene | 95-50-1 | 1121 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 1 | |
| 1,4-Dichlorobenzene | 106-46-7 | 2283 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 1 | |
| Alcohols | ||||||
| 2-Propanol (Isopropyl alcohol) | 67-63-0 | 869 | 15.0 | 74.2 | 75 | |
| 1-Butanol | 71-36-3 | 2284 | 11.0 | 45.7 | 45 | |
| Isobutyl alcohol (2-Methyl-1-propanol) | 78-83-1 | 1277 | 3.0 | 21.7 | 20 | |
| Isoamyl alcohol (3-Methylbutan-1-ol) | 123-51-3 | 729 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 1 | |
| n-Pentanol (1-Pentyl alcohol) | 71-41-0 | 462 | 1.8 | 6.6 | 7 | |
| 1-Hexanol | 111-27-3 | 445 | 0.4 | 2.1 | 2 | |
| 2-Ethylhexanol (2-Ethyl-1-hexanol) | 104-76-7 | 2283 | 2.4 | 12.8 | 12 | |
| 1-Octen-3-ol | 3391-86-4 | 746 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 1 | |
| Benzyl alcohol | 100-51-6 | 746 | 0.5 | 4.2 | 4 | |
| Terpenes | ||||||
| alpha-Pinene | 80-56-8 | 2395 | 8.0 | 93.0 | 95 | Ad-hoc-AG: Sum total of bicyclic terpenes GV I = 200µg/m3; GV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
| beta-Pinene | 127-91-3 | 2362 | 1.0 | 12.0 | 12 | |
| 3-Carene ((+-)-delta3-Carene) | 13466-78-9 | 2379 | 2.5 | 34.0 | 35 | |
| Limonene | 138-86-3 | 2394 | 6.0 | 33.3 | 35 | BWG: Sum total of monocyclic terpenes pGV I = 200µg/m3; pGV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
| Linalool (beta-Linalool) | 78-70-6 | 748 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| Camphor | 76-22-2 | 1321 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 2 | Ad-hoc-AG: Sum total of bicyclic terpenes GV I = 200µg/m3; GV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
| Camphene | 79-92-5 | 1455 | 0.7 | 3.0 | 3 | |
| Eucalyptol | 470-82-6 | 1334 | 1.0 | 2.3 | 2 | |
| Racementhol (Menthol) | 89-78-1 | 796 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| alpha-Terpinene | 99-86-5 | 999 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| gamma-Terpinene | 99-85-4 | 718 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1 | |
| Borneol | 507-70-0 | 615 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | Ad-hoc-AG: Sum total of bicyclic terpenes GV I = 200µg/m3; GV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
| 2H-2,4a-Methanonaphthalene, 1,3,4,5,6,7-hexahydro-1,1,5,5-tetramethyl- (Isolongifolene) | 1135-66-6 | 1227 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 2 | |
| (1(1alpha,3Abeta,4alpha,8abeta))-decahydro-4,8,8-trimethyl-9-methylene-1,4-methanoazulene (Longifolene) | 475-20-7 | 2047 | 0.9 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Bicyclo(3.1.1)hept-3-en-2-one, 4,6,6-trimethyl-, (1S,5S)- (Verbenone) | 1196-01-6 | 539 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | Ad-hoc-AG: Sum total of bicyclic terpenes GV I = 200µg/m3; GV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
| Caryophyllene (beta-Caryophyllen | 87-44-5 | 1190 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 2 | |
| Citronellol | 106-22-9 | 731 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| Aldehydes | ||||||
| Formaldehyde | 50-00-0 | 446 | 32.5 | 84.5 | 30[NB 6] | |
| Acetaldehyde | 75-07-0 | 297 | 23.0 | 72.2 | 70 | B.A.U.CH. (b): Sum total of C2-C10 n-aldehydes GV = 60 ppb |
| Propionaldehyde (Propanal) | 123-38-6 | 274 | 4.0 | 17.7 | 18 | pGV I = 100µg/m3; pGV II = 1,000µg/m3 |
| Butyraldehyde (Butanal) | 123-72-8 | 1742 | 3.0 | 11.0 | 9[NB 7] | pGV I = 100µg/m3; pGV II = 1,000µg/m3 |
| Pentanal (Valeraldehyde) | 110-62-3 | 2297 | 5.0 | 24.2 | 7[NB 7] | pGV I = 100µg/m3; pGV II = 1,000µg/m3 |
| n-Hexanal (Capronaldehyde) | 66-25-1 | 2318 | 14.0 | 67.0 | 19[NB 7] | |
| n-Heptanal (Heptanal) | 111-71-7 | 2109 | 2.0 | 7.8 | 8[NB 7] | |
| n-Octanal (Caprylic aldehyde | 124-13-0 | 2100 | 3.0 | 9.0 | 2[NB 7] | |
| n-Nonanal (Pelargonic aldehyde) | 124-19-6 | 2309 | 7.0 | 21.0 | 4[NB 7] | |
| n-Decanal (Caprinic aldehyde) | 112-31-2 | 2051 | 2.0 | 7.5 | 2[NB 7] | |
| Benzaldehyde | 100-52-7 | 1564 | 3.5 | 10.0 | 10 | |
| 2-Furaldehyde (Furfural) | 98-01-1 | 358 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Ketones | ||||||
| 2-Butanone (Methylethyl ketone MEK )) | 78-93-3 | 2285 | 5.0 | 42.2 | 40 | |
| 2-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone MBK) | 591-78-6 | 830 | 0.2 | 1.4 | 1 | |
| 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (Methyl isobutyl ketone MIBK) | 108-10-1 | 2433 | 1.0 | 7.7 | 8 | |
| 2-Heptanone (Methyl pentyl ketone) | 110-43-0 | 771 | 0.5 | 1.9 | 2 | |
| 3-Heptanone (Ethyl-n-butyl ketone) | 106-35-4 | 862 | 0.4 | 1.5 | 2 | |
| 3-Octanone (Ethyl pentyl ketone | 106-68-3 | 763 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 1 | |
| Acetophenone (Methyl phenyl ketone) | 98-86-2 | 1252 | 1.6 | 4.0 | 4 | |
| Cyclohexanone | 108-94-1 | 2412 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 4 | |
| 1-Methyl-2-pyrrolidinone (N-Methylpyrrolidone) | 872-50-4 | 2003 | 1.0 | 5.0 | 5 | BWG: vRW I = 40µg/m3; vRW II = 400µg/m3 |
| Esters of monohydric and dihydric Alcohols | ||||||
| Ethyl acetate | 141-78-6 | 2371 | 4.0 | 38.0 | 40 | |
| n-Propyl acetate | 109-60-4 | 1250 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 2 | |
| Isopropyl acetate | 108-21-4 | 1501 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 2 | |
| n-Butyl acetate | 123-86-4 | 2371 | 3.1 | 49.8 | 10[NB 7] | |
| Isobutyl acetate | 110-19-0 | 2143 | 0.5 | 4.0 | 4 | |
| 1-Butanol, 3-methoxy-, 1-acetate (3-Methoxybutyl acetate or Butoxyl) | 4435-53-4 | 865 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 1 | |
| Formic acid, butyl ester (n-Butyl formate) | 592-84-7 | 818 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Benzoic acid, methyl ester (Methyl benzoate) | 93-58-3 | 606 | 0.5 | 2.5 | 3 | |
| Acrylic acid, methyl ester (Methyl acrylate) | 96-33-3 | 862 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1[NB 7] | |
| Acrylic acid, ethyl ester (Ethyl acrylate) | 140-88-5 | 819 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| Acrylic acid, butyl ester (n-Butyl acrylate) | 141-32-2 | 896 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| Methacrylic acid, methyl ester (Methyl methacrylate) | 80-62-6 | 1828 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | BWG: pGV I = 100µg/m3; pGV II = 1,000µg/m3 |
| Ethylenglykole mono methyl ether acetate (EGMEA, 2-Methoxyethanol acetate) | 110-49-6 | 1958 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 1 | |
| Ethylene glycol monoethyl ether acetate (EGEEA, 2-Ethoxyethyl acetate) | 111-15-9 | 2228 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 2 | |
| Ethylene glycol monobutyl ether acetate (EGBEA, 2-Butoxyethyl acetate) | 112-07-2 | 2022 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 1 | |
| Propylene glycol mono methyl ether acetate (PGMEA, 1-Methoxy-2-propanol acetate) | 108-65-6 | 2035 | 1.0 | 12.0 | 12 | |
| Propanol, (2-methoxymethylethoxy)-, acetate (Propanol, 1(or 2)-(2-methoxymethylethoxy)-, acetate) | 88917-22-0 | 735 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | |
| Diethyleneglycol monobutyl ether acetate (Butyl carbitol acetate) | 124-17-4 | 1948 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| 2,2,4-trimethyl-1,3-pentanediol diisobutyrate (TXIB) | 6846-50-0 | 2165 | 0.9 | 4.0 | 4 | BWG: pGV II = 1,000µg/m3 |
| Texanol | 25265-77-4 | 2176 | 0.7 | 4.0 | 4 | |
| Dimethyl succinate | 106-65-0 | 763 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 2 | |
| Dimethyl glutarate | 1119-40-0 | 766 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 2 | |
| Dimethyl adipate (Hexanedioic acid, dimethyl ester) | 627-93-0 | 793 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 2 | |
| Dibutyl maleate | 105-76-0 | 1392 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1 | |
| Dimethyl phthalate | 131-11-3 | 1277 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Diethyl Phthalate | 84-66-2 | 821 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 3 | |
| Dibutyl phthalate | 84-74-2 | 738 | 0.5 | 3.0 | 3 | |
| Diisobutyl phthalate | 84-69-5 | 727 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 4 | B.A.U.CH. (c): 2,8 µg/m3 |
| Bornyl acetate | 76-49-3 | 621 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 2 | |
| Polyhydric Alcohols and Their Ethers (Glycols and Glycol Ethers) | ||||||
| Propylene glycol (1,2-Propylene glycol) | 57-55-6 | 1965 | 2.5 | 17.0 | 18 | |
| Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether (2-Methoxyethanol, Methyl cellosolve) | 109-86-4 | 2190 | 2.5 | 3.0 | 4 | |
| Ethylene glycol monoethyl ether (2-Ethoxyethanol) | 110-80-5 | 2238 | 0.5 | 2.5 | 3 | |
| Ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (n-Butoxyethanol) | 111-76-2 | 2096 | 2.3 | 18.1 | 18 | |
| Ethylene glycol monophenyl ether (2-Phenoxyethanol) | 122-99-6 | 2240 | 1.0 | 9.2 | 9 | B.A.U.CH. (d): GV = 300 µg/m3 (toxicity), GV = 100 µg/m3 (odors) |
| Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether (2-(2-Methoxyethoxy)ethanol, Methoxydiglycol) | 111-77-3 | 1842 | 3.0 | 8.5 | 8 | |
| Diethylene glycol monoethyl ether (2-(2-Ethoxyethoxy)ethanol, Ethoxydiglycol) | 111-90-0 | 1888 | 2.5 | 8.5 | 9 | |
| Diethylene glycol mono-n-butyl ether (2-(2-Butoxyethoxy)ethanol, Butyl diglycol) | 112-34-5 | 2194 | 1.5 | 13.9 | 14 | |
| 1-Methoxy-2-hydroxypropane (PGME, 1-Methoxy-2-propanol) | 107-98-2 | 2239 | 3.0 | 23.0 | 25 | |
| 1-Butoxy-2-propanol (1,2-Propylene glycol monobutyl ether) | 5131-66-8 | 1531 | 1.3 | 3.0 | 3 | |
| 1-Phenoxypropan-2-ol (Propylene phenoxetol) | 770-35-4 | 1152 | 0.6 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| Dipropylene glycol monomethyl ether | 34590-94-8 | 1278 | 0.5 | 7.0 | 7 | |
| Dipropylene glycol monobutyl ether (2-Propanol, 1-(2-butoxy-1-methylethoxy)-) | 29911-28-2 | 1932 | 1.0 | 4.7 | 5 | |
| Tripropylene glycol n-butyl ether (Propanol, (2-(2-butoxymethylethoxy) methylethoxy)-) | 55934-93-5 | 1911 | 1.0 | 6.0 | 6 | |
| Siloxanes | ||||||
| Hexamethylcyclotrisiloxane | 541-05-9 | 1659 | 1.0 | 9.0 | 9 | |
| Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane | 556-67-2 | 1728 | 1.5 | 9.8 | 10 | |
| Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane | 541-02-6 | 1646 | 4.3 | 30.4 | 30 | BWG: pGV I = 300µg/m3; pGV II = 3,000µg/m3 |
| Others | ||||||
| Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) | 1634-04-4 | 890 | 1.7 | 2.5 | 3 | |
| Tetrahydrofuran (THF) | 109-99-9 | 1414 | 0.5 | 2.5 | 3 | |
| 2-pentyl Furan | 3777-69-3 | 954 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2 | |
| 1,4-Dioxane | 123-91-1 | 893 | 1.0 | 5.0 | 5 | |
| Sum Total Values | ||||||
| TVOC (total volatile organic compounds) | 382 | 380 | 1,636 | 1,000 [NB 8] |
Seifert: TVOC assessment concept [NB 8] Ad-Hoc-AG: "Handout" [NB 5] |
|
| ∑ C1 – C4 Alkyl aromatic hydrocarbons | 1929 | 30 | 168 | 170 | Ad-hoc-AG: Sum total of C1-C4 alkyl aromatic hydrocarbons GV I = 300µg/m3; GV II = 3,000µg/m3 |
|
| ∑ Bicyclic terpenes | 2351 | 12 | 150 | 150 | Ad-hoc-AG: Sum total of bicyclic terpenes
GV I = 200µg/m3; GV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
|
| ∑ Monocyclic terpenes | 2381 | 6 | 34 | 35 | BWG: Sum total of monocyclic terpenes pGV I = 200µg/m3; pGV II = 2,000µg/m3 |
|
| ∑ C3 – C6 Alkanals | 1737 | 21 | 96 | 95 | BWG: Sum total of alkanals C3-C6: vRW I = 100µg/m3; vRW II = 1,000µg/m3 |
|
6.1. Abbreviations:
Ad-hoc-AG:Ad-hoc Arbeitsgruppe Innenraumrichtwerte der
Innenraumlufthygiene-Kommission (UBA) and AG der Obersten Landesbehörden (AOLG)
[Ad Hoc Working Group for Indoor Guideline Values from the Indoor Air Hygiene
Commission of the Federal Environment Agency and the Indoor Air Working Group
of the State-Level Health Authorities in Germany]
In particular: Ad-hoc-Arbeitsgruppe der Innenraumlufthygiene-Kommission des
Umweltbundesamtes und der AGLMB [Ad Hoc Working Group of the Indoor Air Hygiene
Commission of the Federal Environment Agency and the AGLMB] (1996): Richtwerte
für die Innenraumluft: Basisschema [Indoor air guideline values: basic scheme].
Bundesgesundheitsblatt 39: 422-426. German
B.A.U.CH.: Beratung und Analyse – Verein für Umweltchemie [Consulting and
Analysis – Association for Environmental Chemistry]
- Sachbericht: Vorkommen von Estern und Ethern mehrwertiger Alkohole in der Raumluft [Technical report: presence of polyvalent esters and ethers in indoor air] (1994) German
- Sachbericht: Analyse und Bewertung der in Innenräumen vorkommenden Konzentrationen an längerkettigen Aldehyden [Technical report: analysis and assessment of longer-chain aldehyde concentrations in indoor air] (1993) German
- Sachbericht: Analyse und Bewertung der in Raumluft und Hausstaub vorhandenen Konzentrationen der Weichmacherbestandteile Diethylhexylphthalat (DEHP) und Dibutylphthalat (DBP) [Technical report: analysis and assessment of concentrations of the plasticizer components diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) and dibutyl phthalate (DBP) in indoor air and house dust] (1991) German
- Marchl, D. (1998): Raumluftbelastungen durch Glykolverbindungen [Indoor air pollution due to glycol compounds]. In Diel, Feist, Krieg und Linden: Ökologisches Bauen und Sanieren [Ecological building and remediation]. C.F. Müller Verlag. ISBN 3-7880-9901-1. p. 71-77. German
BGA: Bundesgesundheitsamt [Federal Health Office in Germany];
(in the meantime part of it merged into the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment)
In particular: "Zur Gültigkeit des 0,1-ppm-Wertes für Formaldehyd
[On the validity of the 0.1 ppm value for formaldehyde]".
Bundesgesundheitsblatt 35 (1992) p. 482-483. German
BImSchV: Bundesimmissionsschutzverordnung [Ordinances to the Federal Immission
Control Act in Germany]
In particular: 2. BImSchV (1990): Verordnung zur Emissionsbegrenzung von
leichtflüchtigen halogenierten organischen Verbindungen [Ordinance limiting
emissions of volatile halogenated organic compounds] German
In particular: 22. BImSchV (2002): Verordnung über Immissionswerte für Schadstoffe
in der Luft [Ordinance on limit values for ambient air] German
BMLFUW: Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und
Wasserwirtschaft [Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment
and Water Management in Austria]
In particular: Indoor Air Working Group at the BMLFUW and the Austrian Academy
of Sciences Refer to the link: http://www.innenraumanalytik.at/
BUI: Bremer Umweltinstitut [Bremen Environmental Institute]
In particular: ZORN, C.; KÖHLER, M.; WEIS; N.; SCHARENBERG, W (2005): Proposal
for assessment of indoor air polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH). 10th
International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate. Beijing, China
See also
www.bremer-umweltinstitut.de
BWG = Hamburger Behörde für Wissenschaft und Gesundheit (BWG) [Hamburg Office
for Science and Health],previously Hamburg Office for Environment and Health
or Health and Social Affairs, respectively
In particular: VOC-Tabelle 1:
http://www.hamburg.de/contentblob/122306/data/voc-tab1.pdf and
VOC-Tabelle 2:
http://www.hamburg.de/contentblob/122308/data/voc-tab2.pdf.
GV = guidelines value[in German documents: RW = Richtwert]
pGV = provisional guideline value[in German documents: vRW = vorläufiger Richtwert]
WHO: World Health Organization
In particular: WHO air quality guidelines for Europe, second edition, 2000
http://www.euro.who.int/eprise/main/WHO/Progs/AIQ/activities/20050222_2
WIR = Wirkungsbezogene Innenraumrichtwerte [effect-based indoor guideline values]
6.2. Annotations:
[NB 1]: An exposure to naphthalene can indicate the presence of a more complex
exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. It is recommended to check for the
latter and to adjust the assessment accordingly.
[NB 2]: To a great degree, formaldehyde concentrations are dependent on the
climatic conditions of a given space or emission source, respectively. When
formaldehyde concentrations of 60 µg/m³ are exceeded at climatic conditions that
are associated with a low rate of emissions from materials, we know from experience
that, when the emission sources stay the same but the climatic conditions change,
this can result in exposures within the range of WHO or BGA guideline values
(e.g. winter/summer effects). This fact can be accounted for by a test value that
is meant to encourage retesting formaldehyde exposures at other climatic conditions
where applicable.
[NB 3]: Precautionary value based on odor nuisance according to Marchl, D. (1998):
Raumluftbelastungen durch Glykolverbindungen [Indoor air pollution due to glycol
compounds]. In Diel, Feist, Krieg und Linden: Ökologisches Bauen und Sanieren
[Ecological building and remediation]. C.F. Müller Verlag. ISBN 3-7880-9901-1.
p. 71-77. German
[NB 4] In a recent statement, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment
confirmed that formaldehyde is considered carcinogenic when inhaled. However, the
effect is said to be dependent on the concentration and in this assessment the
currently valid guideline value of 0.1 ppm (124 µg/m³) is reconfirmed, at which
virtually no carcinogenic effect is to be expected.
[NB 5]: Ad-hoc-AG: Beurteilung von Innenraumluftkontaminationen mittels Referenz-
und Richtwerten [Ad-hoc-AG: Assessment of indoor air contaminations through
reference and guideline values]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt 7 (2007) German
[NB 6]: See notes; BWG
[NB 7]: Attention value due to low odor threshold see chapter 4
[NB 8]: The Indoor Air Hygiene Commission of the Federal Environment Agency in
Germany (IRK) suggests that in indoor spaces, where humans are intended to spend
longer periods of time, the TVOC value between one and three milligrams per cubic
meter should not be exceeded in the long term; also see: Seifert, Bernd (1999):
Richtwerte für die Innenraumluft. Die Beurteilung der Innenraumluftqualität mit
Hilfe der Summe der flüchtigen organischen Verbindungen (TVOC-Wert) [Indoor air
guideline values: indoor air quality assessment by means of the sum total of
volatile organic compounds (TVOC value)]. In: Bundesgesundheitsblatt -
Gesundheitsforschung- Gesundheitsschutz, vol. 42, p. 270–278. German
© AGÖF Stand: 10.10.08