Human Indoor Exposure to Airborne Halogenated Flame Retardants: Influence of Airborne Particle Size

Inhalation of halogenated flame-retardants (HFRs) released from consumer products is an important route of exposure. However, not all airborne HFRs are respirable, and thus interact with vascular membranes within the gas exchange (alveolar) region of the lung. HFRs associated with large (\u3e 4 mu m), inhalable airborne particulates are trapped on the mucosal lining of the respiratory tract and then are expelled or swallowed. The latter may contribute to internal exposure via desorption from particles in the digestive tract. Exposures may also be underestimated if personal activities that re-suspend particles into the breathing zone are not taken into account. Here, samples were collected using personal air samplers, clipped to the participants\u27 shirt collars (n = 18). We observed that the larger, inhalable air particulates carried the bulk (\u3e92%) of HFRs. HFRs detected included those removed from commerce (i.e., polybrominated diphenyl ethers (Penta-BDEs: BDE-47, -85, -100, -99, and -153)), their replacements; e.g., 2-ethylhexyl 2,3,4,5-tetrabromobenzoate (TBB or EH-TBB); bis(2-ethylhexyl) 3,4,5,6-tetrabromophthalate (TBPH or BEH-TEBP) and long-produced chlorinated organophosphate-FRs (ClOPFRs): tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP), tris(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TCPP or TCIPP), and tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP or TDCIPP). Our findings suggest estimates relying on a single exposure route, i.e., alveolar gas exchange, may not accurately estimate HFR internal dosage, as they ignore contributions from larger inhalable particulates that enter the digestive tract. Consideration of the fate and bioavailability of these larger particulates resulted in higher dosage estimates for HFRs with log K-oa \u3c 12 (i.e., Penta-BDEs and ClOPFRs) and lower estimates for those with log Koa \u3e 12 (i.e., TBB and TBPH) compared to the alveolar route exposure alone. Of those HFRs examined, the most significant effect was the lower estimate by 41% for TBPH. The bulk of TBPH uptake from inhaled particles was estimated to be through the digestive tract, with lower bioavailability. We compared inhalation exposure estimates to chronic oral reference doses (RfDs) established by several regulatory agencies. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) RfD levels for several HFRs are considered outdated; however, BDE-99 levels exceeded those suggested by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) by up to 26 times. These findings indicate that contributions and bioavailability of respirable and inhalable airborne particulates should both be considered in future risk assessments

Flame Retardant Transfers from U.S. Households (Dust and Laundry Wastewater) to the Aquatic Environment

Levels of flame retardants in house dust and a transport pathway from homes to the outdoor environment were investigated in communities near the Columbia River in Washington state (WA). Residential house dust and laundry wastewater were collected from 20 homes in Vancouver and Longview, WA and analyzed for a suite of flame retardants to test the hypothesis that dust collecting on clothing and transferring to laundry water is a source of flame retardants to wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) and subsequently to waterways. Influent and effluent from two WWTPs servicing these communities were also analyzed for flame retardants. A total of 21 compounds were detected in house dust, including polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), 2-ethylhexyl-2,3,4,5-tetrabromobenzoate (TBB or EH-TBB), bis­(2-ethylhexyl) 3,4,5,6-tetrabromophthalate (TBPH), 1,2-bis­(2,4,6,-tribromophenoxy)­ethane (BTBPE) and decabromodiphenylethane (DBDPE), hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD or HBCDD), tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), and three chlorinated organophosphate flame retardants (ClOPFRs), tris­(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl)­phosphate (TDCPP or TDCIPP), tris­(1-chloro-2-propyl)­phosphate (TCPP or TCIPP), and tris­(2-chloroethyl)­phosphate (TCEP). Levels ranged from 3.6 to 82,700 ng g^–1 (dry weight). Of the 21 compounds detected in dust, 18 were also detected in laundry wastewater. Levels ranged from 47.1 to 561,000 ng L^–1. ClOPFRs were present at the highest concentrations in both dust and laundry wastewater, making up 72% of total flame retardant mass in dust and 92% in laundry wastewater. Comparison of flame retardant levels in WWTP influents to estimates based on laundry wastewater levels indicated that laundry wastewater may be the primary source to these WWTPs. Mass loadings to the Columbia River from each treatment plant were by far the highest for the ClOPFRs and ranged up to 114 kg/yr for TCPP