Lorillard
Review of: Environmental Tobacco Smoke A Compendium of Technical Information
Fields
- Author
- Turner, S.
- Alias
- 88772482/88772494
- Type
- REPT, OTHER REPORT
- Area
- CROUSE,WILLIAM/BASEMENT GMP
- Site
- G10
- Named Organization
- Ashrae
- Astm
- Coast Guard
- Customs + Excise
- Epa, Environmental Protection Agency
- Faa
- Government Services Administration
- Healthy Buildings Intl
- Hhs, Dept of Health and Human Services
- Imperial College London
- Niosh, Natl Inst for Occupational Safety & Health
- Social Security Administration
- Supreme Court
- Theodor D Sterling + Associates
- Un, United Nations
- Univ of Ut
- American Conference of Governmental Ind
- Astm
- Named Person
- Dzubay
- Eatough, D.
- Kirk
- Lowry
- Repace, J.
- Sterling
- Stevens
- Eatough, D.
- Date Loaded
- 12 Feb 1999
- Master ID
- 88772371/2597
Related Documents:- 88772371-2597 United States Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information Comments of the Tobacco Institute 900205 Reviewers' Statements
- 88772372-2379 Comments on Chapter 3
- 88772380-2396 Review of: Environmental Tobacco Smoke A Compendium of Technical Information
- 88772397-2403 Reactions to Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information Chapter 4: Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Cancer
- 88772404-2418 Comments on Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information Chapter 4: Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Cancer
- 88772419-2433 Chapter 4: Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Cancer - Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information
- 88772434-2442 Statement
- 88772443-2466 Critique of the Report Entitled Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chapters 5-8
- 88772467-2481 Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information Technical Review
- 88772495-2500 Comments by Dr. Guy B. Oldaker III on Chapter 5 Measuring Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke
- 88772501-2504 Comments with References on 'measuring Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke'
- 88772505-2512 Comments by Dr. Guy B. Oldaker III on Chapter 6 Exposures to Air Pollutants
- 88772513-2530 Comments by Dr. Guy B. Oldaker III on Chapter 7 Exposure Assessment in Passive Smoking
- 88772531-2533 Comments on Chapter 7: Exposure Assessment in Passive Smoking
- 88772534-2540 Review of Chapter 8 by D. Hoffmann, K.D. Brunnemann, and N. J. Haley of the Draft Compendium of Technical Information on Ets Edited by the Environmental Protection Agency
- 88772541-2553 Critique of Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information Chapter 9: the Effects of Passive Smoking and Day Care on Respiratory Illnesses in Children
- 88772554-2572 Evaluation of Appendix 10: Economic Justification for No Smoking Policies at the Worksite
- 88772573-2584 Economic Justification for Worksite Smoking Policies
- 88772585-2596 Review of: Environmental Tobacco Smoke A Compendium of Technical Information
- Author (Organization)
- Healthy Buildings Intl
- Litigation
- Stmn/Produced
- Characteristic
- EXTR, EXTRA
- UCSF Legacy ID
- yfh30e00
Document Images
REVIEW OF:
ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
A COMPENDIUM OF TECHNICAL INFORMATION=
by
Simon Turner,
Healthy Buildings International, Inc.
L
LI
Introduction
Healthy Buildings Internationa:l, Inc. (HBI) is a
company that specializes in the study and assessment of indoor
air pollution. Since we incorporated in 1981, we have studied
in excess of 80 million square feet of buildings throughout
the world, perhaps confirming us as the most experienced
private company in that field. HBI seeks to identify the
causes of indoor air quality problems -- the "sick
syndrome" -- and to recommend remedial s~=eps. Our
building
experiences
are attracting widespread interest in the professional arena
of those truly interested in indoor air quality. Clients
include major banks, insurance companies, property developers,
hospitals, colleges, and government agencies, including the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security
Administration, Longworth Congressional Building, Supreme
Court, Government Services Administratioi Regional Head-
quarters, United Nations Buildings in New York, Customs and
Excise and Coast Guard Buildings.
We were asked to comment upon the document entitled
"Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical rX
Information" based upon our extensive experience with indoor ~
.1
air quality problems. In addition to a number of specific N
~
~
substantive flaws contained in the document, this compendium t~

rI
L
on environmental tobacco-- smoke ( ETS )- --sarrc:t-ionedr-by-a body°- such -
as the U.S.. Environmental Protection Agency--(EPA)-concerns us -
in that this single-minded focus on one pollutant, unique in
EPA's policies on indoor air, will give t:he public the
impression that its removal will solve a].1 indoor air
problems, thus giving an entirely false sense of security.
We frequently investigate buildings on account of
complaints from occupants with symptoms such as eye and nose
irritation, fatigue, coughing, rhinitis, nausea, headaches,
sore throats and general respiratory problems. It is
frequently assumed by our clients that these symptoms are due
to ETS. However, it is clear that identical symptoms may be
found in individuals exposed to formaldehyde, sulphur oxides,
ammonia, oxides of nitrogen, and ozone. In addition, similar
symptoms are reported by those individua:ls with allergies to
specific fungi such as aspergillus, cladosporium, and
penicillium, among others, as well as to miscellaneous
bacterial aerosols. Overlapping symptom;3 also can be caused
by exposure to household dusts, cotton fibers, fiberglass
fragments, etc. Low relative humidities create similar
problems and are on the increase.
Surprisingly, after a detailed, scientific
evaluation of these buildings, we have determined high levels-
of environmental tobacco smoke to be the immediate cause of
indoor air problems in only three percent of the 412 major
U.S. buildings investigated by HBI between 1981 and 1989.
This result has.been corroborated. In a similar study of 203

buildings from-1-978 to 1983,_-the Nationa-1--Insti=tube=-for -- ~
Occupational Safety and Hea-lth- ( NIOSH} _ found that -.onl.y. four of-.
the buildings studied (two percent) had indoor air quality
problems attributable to high concentrations of ETS.
Significantly, in those few cases where we found high
accumulations of ETS, we also discovered an excess of fungi
and bacteria in the HVAC system. These microorganisms usually
are found to be the primary causes of the complaints and acute
adverse health effects reported by building occupants.
Dirt in Duct Systems
We have also found that HVAC systems are often
poorly designed and negligently maintained. Excessive dirt
accumulations are common in ductwork, even in hospitals.
Following the inspection of a number of buildings, hundreds
pounds of fungi, dust, and dirt have been removed from such
ductwork. Bird, insect, and rodent carcasses and excess
amounts of dust have been found in many buildings where
of
employees have complained of eye irritation, headaches,
fatigue, nausea, allergies, and general respiratory problems.
Of course, since the ductwork is out of sight, it is also
invariably out of mind. Thus, it is common for the blame for
these types of problems to be laid elsewhere.
Energy Conservation
Indeed, the complex of symptoms that we have
mentioned - the "sick building syndrome" - may result
primarily from energy conservation efforts to seal buildings
and reduce the i-nfiltration/exfiltration of air. Such efforts

1J
U,
have reduced -the. natural -infiltration--of~ Eresh--air- that
previously existed in:many buildings-,-exacerbating.the oftem-
undiscovered problem of a poorly designed or maintained HVAC
system.
In addition to tightening buildings and sealing
windows, building managers have shut down air conditioning
systems at night and on weekends in an effort to lower energy
costs. When the air conditioning is shut down in humid
climates, condensation builds up and settles inside the
ductwork. If dirt is present in damp ductwork, spores and
microbes can flourish, only to be spread throughout the
building once the HVAC system is turned on the next morning.
This often results in Monday morning complaints of building
odors or building sickness that disappear during the week,
only to recur the following Monday morning. To save more
energy, automatic temperature controllers are used to cycle
fans on and off during the day. Vibrations from the start-up
of these fans can cause dirt and microbes trapped inside
ductwork to be dislodged and carried into occupied areas.
Another energy conservation effort that may
contribute to sick building syndrome is the recirculation of
indoor air, at the expense of fresh outdoor air. This may be
the result of either a deliberate policy or shortsightedness
on the part of the designers. This results in the continuous
redistribution of infectious microbes, allergenic dusts and
spores from office to office and floor tc floor. Improper
ventilation can sometimes be-carrit-d to extremes. Typically

we find the_ fresh.-ai-r :.damper%.:-we-re .closed-_ completely-- in- over -
35% of those buildingsd studied by. HB:I. One misguided engineer-
actually had bricked up the fresh air vents to save energy.
All of these buildings were operating wil:h 100% recycled
indoor air. The lack of an adequate fre;3h air supply, coupled
with dangerously low air exchange rates, has led to hazardous
ventilation conditions in many of the buildings evaluated by
HBI. Similarly, over 50% of the investigations conducted by
NIOSH from 1978-1987 attributed the indoor air quality
problems to inadequate ventilation.
Poor Air Filtration
Modern filter technology can easily cope with the
numerous particulate matter that is routinely carried in the
indoor air. Unfortunately, however, there is far too much
ignorance in this area. Frequently good filters are poorly
installed allowing air bypass, but more frequently we see a
move to cheaper, less efficient filters. Many buildings
attempt to clean the air with filters no better than butterfly
nets. Compound this with the lack of maintenance given to the
filter systems and the infrequent changes of filters and it is
hardly surprising that airborne pollutants accumulate.
Methodology of Dealing with Indoor Pollution
Instead of a single-minded focus on specific
pollutants, we believe very strongly in a generic engineering
approach to deal with all pollutants~at the same time. In our
U.S. experience of over 80 million square feet of building
studies, the maJor contributors.to poor air were threefold:

(1) Poor Ventilation
Inadequate ventilation 62%
Zero fresh air intake 33%
(2) Poor Filtration
Inefficient air filters 43%
(3) Dirt in Ventilation Systems
Conta nated air handlers 36%
Contaminated ductwork 22%
I
We are convinced that improving ventilation rates,
upgrading filters, and cleaning up the air handling system .
will eliminate over 80% of indoor pollut.Lon problems.. Such'
changes will improve worker productivity, enhance staff
morale, and reduce absenteeism however, inany managers have
decided to ban smoking as an apparently cheap and easy way to
solve indoor air quality problems. Unfortunately, this simply
does not work.
HBI has determined that the presence of high
concentrations of tobacco smoke indicates that a much more
serious problem exists. Poor ventilatioz and improperly
maintained ventilation systems are the primary causes of poor
indoor air. When such conditions.prevail, all the invisible
and odorless pollutants are also trapped. Many of these are
potentially far more
Persistent
can be resolved only
pr-epared to focus on
appropriate manner.
not a cause of these
no cure.
dangerous than ETS.
indoor air quality complaints therefore
if building managers and operators are
building air handling systems in an
High concentrations o.f ETS are sumptom,
complaints. Its elimination can effect

r+)
i
c
CRITIQUE.OF COMRENDIUM.
There follows specific comments on selected chapters
of this compendium, either where we feel there are flaws or
misconceptions, or where we have constructive contributions to
make.
General
We feel that in many areas of ttiis compendium the
list of papers and authors referenced to tends to be
selective; there is a broad range of research, findings and
conclusions on this topic and we feel the compendium needs to
reflect this breadth of information. Suggestions for
additional authors are made where relevant in each chapter.
Chapter 5
We do not have any major philosophical.bones of
contention with this chapter, except that a better author who
has published extensively in this specific field might have
been Delbert Eatough, of the University of Utah.
One technical point where we would take issue is the
contention that 2.5 µg/m3 should be used as the cutoff point
for respirable sized particles. The American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) clearly specify
that collection devices for respirable particulate mass should
have a medium cutoff size of 3.5 um. (AFpendix D, Threshold
Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices for 1989-90).
Thef use of 2.5 µg/m3 instead of a commonly accepted
value of 3.5 µg/m3 will artificially increase the percentage
of ETS derived particulate present.in incoor RSP, since ETS

particles are almost ail.be_low-.2:5 µg/m3 in size:----There is a
t
t.
Ii
4 .
large body ofa data on indoor_RSP taken-at 3.5 um,.including
Repace and Lowry's own work with piezobalances. A portion of
the size fraction between 2.5 µg/m3 and 3.5 µg/m3 does indeed
enter the respirator tract, and there is no evidence to
suggest this size fraction is ,physiologically-significant.
Of the nicotine sampling method, Healthy Buildings
International (HBI) has been using the XAD-4 sorbent method
for the past two years and has collected over 500 nicotine
samples this way. It has proven robust, sensitive and
reproducible; we support the acceptance of this method.
Finally, the statement concerning the lack of health
standards for controlling exposures to nicotine (p. 58) is not
entirely true.' There are indeed health standards specifically
meant for controlling airborne nicotine levels, published both
by the ACGIH and by the British Health and Safety Executive of
500 µg/m3.
Chapter 6
The paragraph on page 66 and 67 (size distribution
and composition of particulates) is flawe-d -- the data they
refer to on both size distribution and composition refers
specifically to the outdoor case. One large area of research
still to be explored in indoor air quality science is particle
characterization. There is very little ].ikelihood that
particle size distribution indoors is the~ same as outdoors,
and even less likelihood that elemental composition of
--particles indoors and outdoors.. is. the same. For instance,

there are more sources of.-:iron, fibers-;.= aotton__dus-t:,..paper-;:.
r
In
,
mites, and organic mat-erial-s..indoors:.than outdoors.- -
Specifically, Dzubay and Steven's work on particle size
fractionating was primarily on outdoor air samples.
ASTM are.currently exploring the possibility of
developing a dust which more accurately approximates indoor
particles for calibration of particle mass monitoring
equipment. EPA will be asked to assess the feasibility of
developing such a dust.
Much of the remainder of the chapter concerns
particle measurement results from different authors. Many of
these samples were taken using the piezomicrobalance, and HBI
has much experience using this instrument in thousands of
locations,in the hundreds of buildings across the world. For
instance, in 1989, in 26 office buildings in Switzerland, HBI
found mean RSP values from between 26 and 63 µg/m3
(Environmental Technology Letters; in preparation). Smoking
was discretionary in most of these buildings. Examining the
data presented in this review, we find that in general this
range is consistent with other workers' findings for this type
of building. The chapter is confusing, however, because under
the heading of "particulate concentraticn in offices" (in
which much of the debate on control of ETS is currently
centered) we find reference to Repace ard Lowry's work ten
years ago in'non-smoking libraries and churches, compared to
premises allowing smoking, namely bars and grilles, bowling
alleys, cocktail lounges, barbecue restaurants,. all areas

-which by their nature_are-heavily-polluted.:env:ironments.--(Table' -
5). Not surprisingly,.-RSP values--measured-by the-same
piezobalances tend to be an order of magnitude higher in these
environments. Yet this data is presented as evidence of high
levels of RSP to be found as a result of smoking i.n offices.
Given recent measurements made in offices at today's levels of
office smoking, it should be accepted that RSP levels, even
where smoking is allowed, do not reach levels claimed by
Repace et al.
The selection of nicotine levels quoted in Table 7
is also not representative of most workplace environments.
HBI Inc. has over the last three years been measuring nicotine
in some six hundred office locations and the mean value to
date approximates to 4.0 µg/m3.
Overall, the chapter is selective in its choice of
references; once more, Eatough's work should have been
referenced in this section. Furthermore, other more recent
work on measurement of ETS exposure in offices apart from our
own is available which has been ignored - this includes
authors such as Sterling (Theodor D. Sterling & Associates
Ltd., Vancouver, Canada) who has published extensive data on
ETS levels in buildings and Kirk (Imperial College, London)
who has data on British ETS levels.
Chapter 7 .
The estimation of human exposure levels of a
pollutant based either on modelling or measurements of some
supposedly rep.resentative parameter depends-crucially on -the
