1
of
5
UNITED
STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WASHINGTON,
D.
C.
20460
OFFICE
OF
PREVENTION,
PESTICIDES
AND
TOXIC
SUBSTANCES
May
24,
2005
Memorandum
SUBJECT:
AD's
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Chapter
for
the
Triethylene
Glycol
Reregistration
Eligiblity
Decision
(
RED)
Document
(
Case
No.
3146).
PC
Code
083501.

FROM:
Tim
Leighton,
Environmental
Scientist
Regulatory
Management
Branch
II
Antimicrobials
Division
Through:
Winston
Dang,
Senior
Scientist
Antimicrobials
Division
TO:
Michelle
Centra,
Science
Coordinator/
TEG
RED
Killian
Swift,
Chemical
Review
Manager
(
CRM)
Regulatory
Management
Branch
II
Antimicrobials
Division
Attached
is
a
review
of
the
occupational
and
residential
exposure
chapter
for
triethylene
glycol.
This
review
was
initially
completed
by
Versar,
Inc.
on
May
12,
2003,
under
supervision
of
AD.
It
then
underwent
a
secondary
review
in
the
branch
on
September
26,
2003
to
reflect
Agency
policies
and
has
since
been
revised
to
account
for
recently
cancelled
registrations.

Executive
Summary
Triethylene
glycol
(
TEG)
is
mainly
used
as
an
air
sanitizer
in
various
end
use
products.
One
product,
EPA
Reg.
No.
44446­
20,
bears
the
public
health
claim
of
a
surface
disinfectant.
This
claim,
however,
is
attributed
to
the
other
active
ingredients
in
the
product
(
e.
g,
ammonium
chloride),
not
TEG.
The
potential
for
dermal
and
inhalation
exposures
occurring
in
commercial/
institutional
premises,
residential/
public
access
premises,
and
medical
premises
and
equipment
can
not
be
estimated
at
this
time
because
of
the
lack
of
application
rate
information
and/
or
representative
exposure
data.
Nonetheless,
this
RED
chapter
can
be
completed
based
on
the
Antimicrobials
Division
Toxicological
Committee
(
ADTC)
conclusion
that
there
is
no
toxicological
endpoints
identified.
Based
on
a
review
of
available
toxicity
data,
there
is
no
evidence
of
dermal
toxicity
and
the
inhalation
toxicities
observed
in
repeat
inhalation
exposure
studies
occurred
only
at
doses
that
exceeded
the
limit
dose
established
by
the
Agency.
Incident
2
of
5
data
are
being
reviewed
in
a
separate
document.

The
Occupational
and
Residential
Exposure
Chapter
of
the
Triethylene
Glycol
Reregistration
Eligibility
Decision
Document
(
RED)
addresses
potential
exposures
and
risks
to
humans
who
may
be
exposed
in
"
occupational
settings"
and
the
general
population
in
"
residential
settings."
An
occupational
and/
or
residential
exposure
risk
assessment
is
required
for
an
active
ingredient
if
(
1)
certain
toxicological
criteria
are
triggered
and
(
2)
there
is
potential
exposure
to
handlers
(
mixers,
loaders,
applicators,
etc.)
during
use
or
to
persons
entering
treated
sites
after
application
is
complete.
For
triethylene
glycol,
there
is
potential
exposure,
but
there
are
no
toxicological
endpoints
of
concern,
according
to
a
review
of
the
available
toxicity
data
by
the
Antimicrobials
Division
Toxicological
Committee
(
ADTC)
(
EPA,
2003).

Triethylene
glycol
is
currently
used
in
two
applications:
air
sanitizers/
hospital
disinfectants
and
pest
control
on
caged
birds.
Currently,
triethylene
glycol
is
only
formulated
as
a
pressurized
liquid
and
is
used
only
in
applications
where
the
risk
of
incidental
ingestion
may
be
considered
as
minimal.
For
each
use
category,
Table
1
lists
the
active
EPA
registration
numbers
of
the
products
containing
triethylene
glycol.

Table
1.
EPA
Registration
Numbers
for
Triethylene
Glycol
Products
Use
Category
Formulation
EPA
Registration
Numbers
Air
Sanitizer/
Disinfectant
Pressurized
Liquid
4822­
293,
­
531
9444­
19,
­
136
10807­
24,
­
37,
­
43
44446­
20
51838­
1,
­
2
Mite
and
Lice
Control
Pressurized
Liquid
11715­
20
The
potential
handler
scenarios
identified
are
illustrated
in
Table
2.
These
scenarios
were
selected
based
on
examination
of
product
labels.
Because
air
disinfectants
can
be
applied
in
a
wide
variety
of
rooms,
the
list
of
possible
application
scenarios
is
exhaustive.

Table
2.
Triethylene
Glycol
Handler
Scenarios
Antimicrobial
Category
Scenario
Commercial,
institutional
and
industrial
premises
and
equipment
°
Spraying
disinfectant
in
rooms
of
institutions,
offices,
schools,
motels,
hotels,
etc.
Antimicrobial
Category
Scenario
Page
3
of
5
Medical
premises
and
equipment
°
Spraying
disinfectant
on
surfaces
in
hospitals
and
nursing
homes.
°
Spraying
disinfectant
in
hospital
rooms.

Residential
and
public
access
premises
°
Spraying
disinfectant
in
rooms
such
as
lobbies,
theaters,
reception
rooms,
sleeping
rooms,
bathrooms,
etc.
°
Spraying
pest
control
spray
on
caged
birds
Food
Handling/
Storage
Establishments
Premises
and
Equipment
°
Spraying
air
sanitizer
in
rooms
such
as
dining
rooms
and
serving
areas
No
chemical­
specific
handler
data
were
submitted
to
estimate
the
potential
exposures
associated
with
these
uses
of
triethylene
glycol
(
nor
are
they
required
at
this
time).
Specifically,
exposure
data
associated
with
spraying
an
aerosol
can
indoors,
away
from
any
surfaces
(
i.
e.,
air
sanitizer),
or
with
spraying
pets,
are
unavailable.
However,
similar
exposures
associated
with
spraying
surfaces,
such
as
crack
and
crevice
treatments,
are
available
from
data
provided
by
the
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
(
CMA)
Antimicrobial
Assessment
Study
(
EPA,
1999)
and
the
Pesticide
Handlers
Exposure
Database
(
PHED).
The
PHED
exposure
data
for
aerosol
can
spraying
is
deemed
more
appropriate
then
the
CMA
data
(
e.
g.,
more
replicates,
better
analytical
recovery
values,
etc).
Application
rates
are
difficult
to
assess
for
triethylene
glycol
because
not
enough
information
is
provided
on
product
labels.
For
spraying
an
aerosol
in
the
air,
most
labels
did
not
specify
the
quantity
of
product
that
should
be
used
for
a
given
room
size,
but
rather
state
the
length
of
time
the
aerosol
should
be
sprayed
for
a
given
room
size.
For
spraying
surfaces,
none
of
the
labels
provided
enough
information
to
calculate
an
application
rate,
due
to
the
lack
of
data
such
as
the
volume
of
room
air
and
the
counter
top/
floor
surface
area.

In
addition
to
potential
dermal
and
inhalation
handler
exposure,
there
is
the
potential
for
postapplication
exposure
to
individuals
reentering
treated
rooms
and/
or
contacting
sprayed
surfaces.
OPPT/
EETD
has
developed
a
model,
EFAST
(
Exposure
and
Fate
Assessment
Screening
Tool),
to
estimate
air
concentrations.
More
information
and
access
to
the
EFAST
model
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
opptintr/
exposure/.
In
summary,
EFAST
bases
its
estimates
on
physical/
chemical
properties.
Modeled
results
using
the
aerosol
paint
scenario
in
EFAST
and
a
vapor
pressure
of
0.00132
mmHg
at
25
°
C
indicate
a
screening­
level,
high
end,
peak
concentration
of
8.54
mg/
m3.
No
estimates
of
spray
deposition
on
surfaces
are
available
to
estimate
potential
dermal
contact.
4
of
5
Based
on
the
lack
of
toxicological
concerns
for
triethylene
glycol,
a
quantitative
risk
assessment
is
not
necessary
at
this
time.
If
inhalation
toxicological
endpoints
are
identified
in
the
future,
a
screeninglevel
occupational
and/
or
residential
inhalation
exposure
estimate
is
available
using
EFAST.
If
dermal
toxicological
endpoints
are
identified
in
the
future,
potential
dermal
exposure
estimates
from
treated
surfaces
will
need
to
be
developed.
5
of
5
References
USEPA.
1999.
Evaluation
of
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
Antimicrobial
Exposure
Assessment
Study.
Memorandum
from
Siroos
Mostaghimi,
Ph.
D.,
to
Julie
Fairfax;
dated
November
4,
1999.

USEPA.
1997.
Pesticide
Handler
Exposure
Database
(
PHED,
Version
1.1),
Surrogate
Exposure
Guide;
Estimates
of
Worker
Exposure,
May
1997.
