EPA/600/R-09/033 

March 2009 

Perfluorocarboxylic Acid Content 

in 116 Articles of Commerce 

Zhishi Guo, Xiaoyu Liu, and Kenneth A. Krebs
 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development 

National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

and 

Nancy F. Roache
 

ARCADIS, 4915 Prospectus Dr., Suite F, Durham, NC 27713 

National Risk Management Research Laboratory 

Office of Research and Development 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 
Notice 

This report has been subjected to the Agency‘s peer and administrative review 

and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or 

commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 

ii 
Contents 

Notice.................................................................................................................................. ii 

Contents .............................................................................................................................iii 

Abstract.............................................................................................................................. iv 

Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................. v 

Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. vi 

1. Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1 

2. Conclusions..................................................................................................................... 3 

3. Recommendations........................................................................................................... 4 

4. Materials and methods .................................................................................................... 5 

4.1 Sample collection...................................................................................................... 5 

4.2 Verifying the presence of fluorine ............................................................................ 5 

4.3 Sample preparation, handling, and storage............................................................... 6 

4.4 Sample extraction and analysis................................................................................. 6 

4.5 Quality assurance and quality control....................................................................... 8 

5. Results............................................................................................................................. 9 

5.1 Statistics of AOC samples ........................................................................................ 9 

5.2 Data quality of the analytical results......................................................................... 9 

5.3 Extractable PFCA content in AOC samples ........................................................... 10 

5.4 Statistics by sample category.................................................................................. 31 

6. Discussion..................................................................................................................... 38 

6.1 Source strengths...................................................................................................... 38 

6.2 Comparison with literature values .......................................................................... 40 

6.3 Relative abundance of PFCAs ................................................................................ 40 

6.4 Domestic versus imported articles.......................................................................... 43 

6.5 Market trends .......................................................................................................... 43 

7. References..................................................................................................................... 45 

Appendix........................................................................................................................... 48 

iii 
Abstract 

Several recent studies have found elevated levels of perfluorocarboxylic 

acids (PFCAs) in house dust, suggesting strongly the presence of indoor sources 

of these compounds. The main goal of this study was to identify and rank 

potentially important indoor sources by determining the PFCA content in articles 

of commerce (AOCs). We analyzed 116 AOC samples purchased from retail 

outlets in the United States between March 2007 and May 2008 by using a newly 

developed extraction/analytical method. For these 116 samples, the content of 

perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA-C8) ranged from non-detectable to 6750 ng/g, 

whereas the content of total PFCAs (the sum of C5 to C12 acids) ranged from 

non-detectable to 47100 ng/g. Given the quantities of articles found in typical 

homes, it is clear that professional carpet-care liquids, pre-treated carpeting, 

treated floor waxes and sealants, and treated home textile products and upholstery 

are likely the most important PFCA sources in non-occupational indoor 

environments. The perfluorochemical-containing AOC market has been in a 

transition period. Limited data suggest that the PFCA content in AOCs has shown 

a downward trend overall. However, definitive confirmation of such a trend will 

require long-term monitoring. More studies are needed to better understand PFCA 

transport, exposure routes, and ways to reduce exposures in indoor environments. 

iv 
Acronyms and Abbreviations 

AOC articles of commerce 

CAS# chemical abstract service registration number 

HPLC high-performance liquid chromatography 

IAP internal audit program 

LC/MS/MS liquid chromatography / tandem mass spectrometry 

PFC perfluorochemical 

PFCA perfluorocarboxylic acid 

PFOA perfluoroocanoic acid 

PTFE polytetrafluoroethylene 

RCS recovery check standard 

RSD relative standard deviation 

TPFCA total perfluorocarbonyl acids (the sum of C5 to C12 PFCAs) 

WD wavelength dispersive 

XRF X-ray fluorescence 

v 
Acknowledgments 

We thank Andrew Lindstrom, Mark Strynar, Shoji Nakayama, and Ed Heithmar 

of the U.S. EPA and Timothy Begley of the U.S. FDA for technical consultation and 

assistance; Robert Wright of the U.S. EPA for QA support; Shirley Wasson (retired) and 

Dean Smith of the U.S. EPA and David Natschke of Arcadis for operating the X-ray 

fluorescence spectrometer; and Ivan Dolgov of the U.S. EPA for laboratory support. 

vi 
1. Introduction 

Although man-made perfluorochemicals (PFCs) have been widely used for 

several decades, their potential impacts on human health and the global environment did 

not draw much attention until the turn of the century when evidence of their widespread 

presence in various environmental media, wildlife, and human tissue became clear [1-3]. 

Toxicological studies indicate that perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and 

perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) – the two most extensively studied perfluorinated 

compounds so far – can cause developmental and systemic toxicity in laboratory animals. 

Reviews of the existing toxicological data can be found in references 4-6. The potential 

health risks associated with perfluorocarboxylic acids (PFCAs) have promoted intensive 

research on the sources, transport, transformation, and distribution of these chemicals and 

their precursors in environmental media, as well as research related to ways to reduce the 

health risks. Despite the significant progress that has been made so far, researchers are 

yet to reach a consensus on what are the most important routes by which the general 

population is exposed to these chemicals. In particular, there are different opinions on 

whether PFCA-containing AOCs are significant contributors to the total exposure. For 

instance, a study conducted by Washburn, et al. in 2005 concluded that exposures to 

PFOA during consumer use of the articles evaluated in their study were not expected to 

cause adverse health effects in infants, children, adolescents, and adults, nor result in 

quantifiable levels of PFOA in human serum [7]. A more recent study by Fromme, et al. 

used the data from indoor measurements in Canada and Norway and estimated that, for 

the general population in Western countries, the inhalation of house dust contributed only 

0.6% of the mean PFOA daily intake and 8.2% of the high PFOA daily intake [8]. By 

contrast, Tittlemier, et al. identified treated carpeting as the second most important source 

of exposure for PFOA after ingestion of food [9]. A study by Trudel, et al. found that the 

consumption of contaminated food is the most important pathway causing exposure to 

PFOA, followed by ingestion of dust and inhalation of air in low- and intermediateexposure scenarios. Their study also found that direct, product-related exposure is 

dominant in high-exposure scenarios, in which consumers regularly use PFC-containing 

products, such as impregnation sprays, or have treated carpets in their homes [10]. Trudel 

and his co-workers also observed that product-related exposure tends to be more 

important for PFOA than for PFOS, most likely because PFOS is no longer used in 

consumer products. It is, therefore, apparent that the paucity of indoor source and 

exposure data contributes to the significant uncertainty and differences of opinion about 

the most prevalent exposure routes for these compounds. 

The fact that elevated levels of PFCAs have been detected in house dust in Japan 

[11], Canada [12], and the United States [13] strongly suggests the presence of indoor sources. 

It is well known that fluorotelomer and fluoropolymer products are sources of PFCAs 

and that PFCAs may exist in fluorotelomer products as unwanted by-products and in 

fluoropolymer products as residuals [14]. Because a broad range of AOCs either contain or 

are treated with fluorotelomer and fluoropolymer products [15,16], they can be potential 

sources of PFCAs. Given that AOCs are often used in close proximity to humans, it is 

1 
hypothesized that they can contribute to human exposure to PFCAs either directly (e.g., 

by dermal contact and hand-to-mouth transfer) or indirectly (e.g., inhalation of suspended 

particles from treated carpet and other interior surfaces). 

There have been several studies of the PFCA content in AOCs, but most of them 

report a single compound – PFOA. In 2005, Washburn and his colleagues reported the 

PFOA content in 14 article groups based on theoretical calculations and analytical 

measurements. Of these groups, pre-treated carpeting and carpeting treated with carpetcare solution had the highest PFOA loadings: 0.2 to 0.6 and 0.2 to 2 mg of PFOA per kg 

of article, respectively [7]. Studies by other researchers reported PFOA content in nonstick cookware, food contact paper, thread sealant tape, and dental floss [17-20]. Data for 

other PFCAs in AOCs are rather scarce. One study by Sinclair, et al. reported the C5 to 

C12 PFCA content in three brands of popcorn packaging paper [20]. 

The main goal of this study was to identify the major PFCA sources in nonoccupational, indoor environments by determining the content of these chemicals in a 

variety of AOCs and rank them in terms of source strengths. Policy-makers and 

manufacturers can use the data for risk management purposes. The results also provide a 

snapshot of the current uses of PFCAs on the market and may serve as baseline data for 

future, long-term monitoring. 

2 
2. Conclusions 

We analyzed 116 AOC samples purchased from retail outlets in the United States 

between March 2008 and May 2008 to determine the extractable content of C5 to C12 

PFCAs using a newly developed extraction/analytical method. To the authors’ best 

knowledge, this is the first time that the C5 to C12 PFCA contents in a wide variety of 

AOCs are been reported. The PFCA contents in these samples cover a broad range, from 

nondetectable to as high as 6750 ng/g for PFOA and from non-detectable to 47100 ng/g 

for total PFCAs (i.e., the sum of C5 to C12). In typical American homes with carpeted 

floors, pre-treated carpet and commercial carpet-care liquids are likely the most 

significant PFCA sources among the 13 article categories studied. For homes without 

carpeting, floor waxes and stone/tile/wood sealants that contain fluorotelomers products 

are important sources of PFCAs. Other potentially important indoor sources include 

treated home textile, upholstery and apparel, and household carpet/fabric care liquids and 

foams. The data presented in this report may help explain why PFCAs are frequently 

detected in house dust. While the exact mechanisms by which PFCAs are transferred 

from sources to dust are not well characterized, existing data strongly suggest that AOCs 

may contribute to indoor human exposures to PFCAs either directly (dermal contact and 

hand-to-mouth activities) or indirectly (inhalation of dust). 

3 
3. Recommendations 

Further research is needed in the following areas to better understand the effect of 

PFCA-containing AOCs on human exposure: (1) PFCA transfer from sources to indoor 

air and surfaces; (2) the relationship between AOCs and inhalation exposure; (3) the 

significance of dermal exposure; (4) risk management measures for reducing PFCA 

levels in polluted homes; and (5) monitoring of the market transition on a global scale 

over an extended period of time. 

4 
4. Materials and Methods 

4.1 Sample Collection 

AOC samples were purchased from retail outlets in the United States. Before 

collecting samples, a survey was conducted to determine the availability of AOCs that 

contained or were treated with fluorinated chemicals. Sample candidates were identified 

based on one of the following claims by the vendors: (a) the article contains fluorinated 

chemicals identifiable by their trade names (e.g., Scotchgard, GoreTex, and Teflon); (b) 

the article contains fluorinated chemicals identifiable by the chemical names (e.g., 

polytetrafluoroethylene or PTFE); or (c) the article was identified as having certain 

properties that are common for articles treated with fluorinated chemicals (e.g., stain 

resistant, water repellent, and anti-grease). Sample candidates were purchased from local 

stores in the Raleigh and Durham areas of North Carolina, in Atlanta and New York City, 

and from on-line stores. While it was not the goal of this study to obtain statistically 

representative samples for the entire U.S. market, efforts were made to maximize the 

representativeness of the samples by considering the following factors whenever 

applicable: article category, trade name of the fluoropolymer or fluorotelomer product, 

brand name of the article, price range (high, medium, and low), store type (chain stores, 

high-end stores, low-end stores, and specialty stores), and country of origin. 

4.2 Verifying the Presence of Fluorine 

Sample articles obtained from the market were first screened for the presence of 

fluorine to exclude those with false claims and those that achieved certain surface 

properties (e.g., anti-grease) without using fluorinated chemicals. Sample articles 

containing less than 0.01% fluorine by weight were discarded. Typically, 0.05 to 0.5% of 

the fluorochemical by weight of the article is used to ensure durable repellency [15]. For 

articles made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), such as thread sealant tape and some 

dental floss, the fluorine content can be greater than 70%. Thus, the 0.01% cut-off 

provided an adequate safe margin to ensure that all sample articles treated with 

fluorinated chemicals were included for further analysis. The fluorine content was 

determined by wavelength dispersive (WD) X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometry. 

Instrument and operating parameters are provided in Table 4-1. 

5 
Table 4-1. Analytical instrument and operating parameters for screen-testing AOC 

samples for the presence of fluorine by the XRF method a 

Panalytical PW2404 Wavelength Dispersive (WD) X-ray 

Instrument Fluorescence (XRF) Spectrometer equipped with the 

PW2540 Sample Changer 

Software SuperQ (Panalytical) for instrument control 

IQ+ (Panalytical) for calibration and quantification 

Power of X-ray tube 4000 watts 

Measurement atmosphere Vacuum (<10 mb) or under helium atmosphere 

A continuous scan mode followed by fluorine-specific data 

Scan method collection at the peak fluorine wavelength for an additional 

10 second measurement. a

 Liquid samples were tested on filters by wetting a 47-mm paper filter (Whatman) with 

approximately 0.5 mL sample, and then air drying the filter under an aluminum foil cover. 

4.3 Sample Preparation, Handling and Storage 

Upon receipt, solid articles (except cookware) were cut into smaller subsections 

for storage or extraction. Each AOC was divided into at least three subsections with a 60­

mm, tungsten carbide steel, rotary cutter and stainless steel scissors. These subsections 

were used to cut specific-sized coupons (e.g., 4 ×4, 6×6, and 10×10 cm, depending on 

sample weight per unit area) as needed for extractions. Subsections for extraction were 

placed in a desiccator for a minimum of eight hours and then weighed prior to extraction. 

Non-stick cookware remained in its original package until extraction. 

Liquid samples in bottles were subdivided into at least three 30-mL 

polypropylene vials. For aerosol cans, the liquids were shaken and then collected in a 50­

mL beaker by gently pressing the release button. The liquids were then divided into 

aliquots and stored in polypropylene vials. Samples for extraction were stored in the 

refrigerator until needed for analysis. 

All archived samples were individually wrapped in three layers of aluminum foil, 

placed in a sealed plastic bag, and stored in a climate-controlled room. 

4.4 Sample Extraction and Analysis 

Coupons of solid samples (approximately 1 g) were weighed and placed in a 50­

mL, polyethylene, centrifuge vial with 45 mL of HPLC-grade methanol spiked with 100 

μL of recovery check standard {RCS, 2 ng/μL perfluoro-n-[1, 2-13C2] decanoic acid} and 

then extracted for 24 hours with a Nutating Mixer (Model VSN-5, PRO Scientific, Inc., 

CT, USA). The extract was transferred to a 170-mL borosilicate glass tube and 

concentrated to approximately 1 mL under a nitrogen atmosphere by using a RapidVap 

6 
N2 Evaporation System (Model 791000, LabConco, MO, USA), which was modified at 

the factory to remove all Teflon parts and coatings. The blow-down sample was 

transferred from the tube to a 10-mL volumetric flask through a 0.1 μm Anotop syringe 

filter (Whatman International, Madestone, England); the tube was rinsed five times with a 

solution consisting of 60% (v/v) methanol and 40% (v/v) 2 mN ammonium acetate 

aqueous solution (hereafter referred to as the 60:40 solution). The rinse liquids were 

filtered and combined with the blow-down sample. After adding 100 μL of the internal 

standard {0.5 ng/μL perfluoro-n-[1, 2, 3, 4-13C4] octanoic acid}, the sample was brought 

to10-mL with the 60:40 solution and sonicated for 10 minutes before LC/MS/MS 

analysis. 

A different extraction procedure was used for cookware, because the interior 

coatings were difficult to remove from the metal base. Cookware was extracted by 

covering the entire cooking surface with 100 to 150 mL of methanol spiked with 100 μL 

of the recovery check standard to a depth of approximately 0.3 mm. To minimize solvent 

evaporation during extraction, the opening of the cookware was tightly sealed with 

aluminum foil by compressing the foil to the inside and outside walls of the cookware 

edge to a depth of approximately 0.5 cm. The static extraction was conducted at room 

temperature. After 24 hours, the extract was collected from the cookware and 

concentrated to 1 mL by the procedure described above. 

All solid AOC samples were extracted by a single-step, 24-hour extraction, and 

the extraction efficiency, as determined by consecutive extractions, ranged from 70% to 

100% except for non-stick cookware, which had an extraction efficiency of 46% for 

PFOA. The analytical results were reported as “extractable PFCAs.” 

For liquid samples, approximately 1 mL of sample were weighed, spiked with 100 

μL of 2 ng/μL of the recovery check standard, and diluted to 25 mL with the 60:40 

solution. The diluted samples were sonicated for 10 minutes and then filtered with a 50­

mL tube-top filter (Corning, Inc., NY, USA; 0.22-μm pore size). Ten milliliters (10 mL) 

of the filtrate were transferred into a 10-mL volumetric flask and spiked with 100 μL of 

the internal standard. The final solution was sonicated for 10 minutes before LC/MS/MS 

analysis. For samples with high levels of PFCAs, a second dilution was needed before 

adding the recovery check standard. 

Sample quantification was conducted using an Agilent 1100 HPLC equipped with 

an Applied Biosystem API 3200 Triple Quadrupole Mass Spectrometer with a Turbo V 

ion-spray interface. The instrument was calibrated for eight PFCA homologues (Table 4­

2) plus the recovery check standard at eight concentration levels in the concentration 

range of 0.3 to 100 ng/mL with triplicate injections. The instrument detection limits for 

individual PFCAs in the injection sample were ≤0.05 ng/mL. The method detection limits 

were 1.0 to 3.9 ng/g for solid AOCs and 1.1 to 6.8 ng/g for liquid AOCs. The practical 

quantification limit for the injection sample was 0.3 ng/mL, which is equivalent to 3 ng/g 

for solid AOCs and 7.5 ng/g for liquid AOCs. 

7 
The extraction and analytical methods described above have been evaluated and 

are reported elsewhere [21]. 

Table 4-2. Analyte names, chemicals formulas, and chemical abstracts service 

registration numbers (CAS#) 

Analyte name Chemical formula CAS# 

perfluoropentanoic acid C5F11COOH 2706-90-3 

perfluorohexanoic acid C6F13COOH 307-24-4 

perfluoroheptanoic acid C7F15COOH 375-85-9 

perfluorooctanoic acid C8F17COOH 335-67-1 

perfluorononanoic acid C9F19COOH 375-95-1 

perfluorodecanoic acid C10F21COOH 335-76-2 

perfluoroundecanoic acid C11F23COOH 2058-94-8 

perfluorododecanoic acid C12F25COOH 307-55-1 

4.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 

A quality assurance project plan (QAPP) was developed before the start of the 

project. The acceptance criterion for the calibration curve was that the coefficient of 

determination (r2

) be no less than 0.99. The internal audit program (IAP) standard, which 

contains at least four of the calibrated PFCAs using a different chemical source, was 

prepared by someone other than the person who prepared the calibration standards. The 

analyst who conducted the calibration received the IAP standard without knowing the 

concentrations. IAP standards were analyzed after each calibration as a measurement of 

calibration verification. The criterion for acceptance was that the calculated concentration 

and measured IAP standard using the calibration had to be within 15% of each other. 

Daily calibration check (DCC) standards, approximately 5 ng/mL for each analyte, were 

analyzed to evaluate the LC/MS/MS performance. Analytical results of a sample batch 

were considered acceptable only if the percent recovery of the DCC was within 100 ± 

15% and the percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) of DCCs was within ± 15%. All 

samples and standards were injected in triplicate. 

Solvents, glassware, gloves, and the HPLC system were routinely checked for 

PFCA contamination. A solvent blank was prepared with each set of standards and 

samples to assess the solvent and the HPLC system. 

Each AOC sample was extracted in duplicate for LC/MS/MS analysis. The 

analytical results were considered acceptable when the measured concentrations were in 

the calibration range, the RSD for duplicates was within 20%, and the recovery of the 

recovery check standard was within 100 ± 20%. 

8 
5. Results 

5.1 Statistics of AOC Samples 

A total of 130 AOC samples containing at least 0.01% (w/w) fluorine were 

obtained between March 2007 and May 2008. The dates the samples were manufactured 

were unknown, because the product labels did not include that information. Breakdowns 

of these samples by article category are given in Table 5-1. Sample descriptions and 

conversion factors are presented in the Appendix (Table A-1). 

Table 5-1. Sample breakdowns by article category 

Category ID Category name Samples 

A Pre-treated carpeting 9 

B Commercial carpet-care liquids 9 

C Household carpet/fabric-care liquids and foams 12 

D Treated apparel 16 

E Treated home textile and upholstery 14 

F Treated non-woven medical garments 5 

G Treated floor waxes and stone/wood sealants 11 

H Treated food contact paper 5 

I Membranes for apparel 10 

J Thread sealant tapes and pastes 10 

K Non-stick cookware 14 

L Dental floss and plaque removers 8 

M Miscellaneous a 7 a

 Includes four car-care products, two boat-care products, one deck cleaner, and one dry 

sack for outdoor use. 

The samples were divided approximately equally between domestic and imported 

products: United States − 58, China − 35, Thailand − 5, Dominican Republic − 3, France 

− 3, Malaysia − 3, Mexico − 3, Bangladesh − 2, Canada − 2, Indonesia − 2, Ireland − 2, 

Sri Lanka − 2, Vietnam − 2, Brazil − 1, Colombia − 1, England − 1, Italy − 1, Nicaragua 

− 1, and Pakistan − 1. The origins of two samples could not be identified. According to 

the product labels, six imported articles used materials or contain components made in 

the United States, and one domestic product used imported material. 

5.2 Data Quality 

Samples were analyzed in batches. Each batch included four to seven AOC samples in 

duplicate, one solvent blank, one field blank, and two daily calibration check standards. 

For individual analytes, the relative standard deviation for duplicate samples had to be 

9 
within 20% to be accepted. The estimated precision of the results was 100 ± 20% based 

on duplicate samples, and the accuracy was 100 ± 20% based on the recovery of RCS. 

The data presented were not adjusted for recovery of RCS. The RCS recoveries for 

individual samples are available in the last column in Tables 5-2 through 5-14. Of the 130 

AOC samples, 116 were analyzed successfully. For the 116 sets of valid data, the average 

percent recovery of RCS was 97.9%. The results of the remaining 14 samples failed to 

meet the data quality requirements after three or more trials, and the data were discarded. 

Low recovery (i.e., <80%) for the recovery check standard was the common cause of the 

failures. These samples are identified in the footnotes of Tables 5-2 through 5-14. They 

belong to eight article categories, and no obvious trends could be identified. 

5.3 Extractable PFCA Content in AOC Samples 

Complete data for PFCA content in individual samples is presented in Tables 5-2 

through 5-14, in which the following abbreviations and fonts are used: 

BDL = result below instrument detection limit, 

NR = not reported (i.e., the result does not meet data quality requirements), 

RCS = recovery check standard; RCS percent recovery is the average of duplicate 

or triplicate samples, and 

Italics = result below practical quantification limit. 

Figure 5-1 shows the distribution of the total amount of PFCAs (TPFCA, the sum of C5 

to C12 PFCAs) for the 116 samples. Note that, for data comparability, the results for nonstick cookware have been converted from (ng/cm2

) to (ng/g) by assuming an average 

coating thickness of 50 μm and a PTFE density of 2.2 g/cm3 [17]. 

10 
Table 5-2. Extractable PFCAs in pre-treated carpeting (ng/g fiber) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

A-1 NR 3.98×101 1.41×101 1.04×101 6.31×100 5.29×100 2.34×100 BDL 

A-2 BDL BDL NR BDL BDL BDL 6.17×10-1 BDL 

A-3 BDL BDL NR 8.39×100 NR 7.26×100 NR 5.19×10

A-4 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 6.59×10-1 BDL 

A-5 b NR NR 7.46×101 4.62×102 7.26×101 8.84×101 2.01×101 NR 

A-6 c BDL NR NR 5.77×100 6.56×100 BDL 3.64×100 2.10×10

A-8 b 2.16×102 2.42×102 5.16×102 2.98×102 2.92×102 1.46×102 5.22×101 6.35×10

A-9 1.15×101 1.92×101 4.30×101 1.99×101 2.07×101 1.84×101 1.23×101 4.20×10

a Results for sample A-7 failed to meet data quality requirements; b This sample was extracted in triplicate; c According to the vendor, sample A-6 is a replacement of A-5. 

11 
Table 5-3. Extractable PFCAs in commercial carpet-care liquids (ng/g) 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

B-1 1.73×103 5.20×103 1.41×104 6.75×103 8.86×103 4.38×103 4.00×103 2.15×10

B-2 1.61×101 1.75×102 5.18×101 5.96×102 NR 1.67×102 2.80×101 NR 

B-3 2.19×101 4.48×101 4.95×101 5.01×101 5.61×101 NR NR NR 

B-4 a 1.23×102 1.00×103 7.47×101 5.99×102 NR NR NR NR 

B-5 1.14×101 3.09×101 1.98×101 1.91×101 6.38×100 BDL NR NR 

B-6 1.94×103 5.25×103 1.3×104 5.01×103 8.46×103 2.93×103 3.05×103 9.57×10

B-7 b 3.63×102 9.28×102 2.56×103 1.84×103 NR 1.33×103 8.44×102 NR 

B-8 a 3.77×102 1.84×103 1.48×103 1.72×103 1.30×103 8.41×102 5.07×102 4.43×10

B-9 b NR 2.20×101 1.42×101 2.55×101 1.75×101 2.10×101 1.62×101 8.52×10

a Samples B-4 and B-8 are of same brand, but were purchased 1 year apart; b Samples B-7 and B-9 are of same brand, but were purchased 1 year apart; 

18
 
Table 5-4. Extractable PFCAs in household carpet/fabric care liquids and foams (ng/g) 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

C-1 BDL BDL 1.14×101 6.97×100 3.09×100 1.14×100 BDL NR 

C-2 BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.63×101 3.25×101 4.29×101 BDL C-3 1.40×102 1.09×103 2.50×103 1.18×103 1.71×103 6.76×102 8.01×102 3.28×10C-4 NR 7.55×101 NR 6.66×102 NR 1.04×102 BDL BDL 

C-5 NR 1.95×102 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 

C-6 NR 3.90×101 BDL 1.09×101 BDL BDL BDL BDL 

C-7 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 

C-8 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 

C-9 BDL 1.73×102 BDL 7.07×102 1.99×101 2.89×102 4.51×101 BDL 

C-10 BDL 4.18×101 BDL 8.79×101 2.15×101 3.36×101 1.21×101 1.69×10C-11 1.84×101 5.61×101 1.21×101 1.37×102 5.70×100 4.00×101 BDL 7.91×10

C-12 NR BDL BDL 6.64×101 NR 1.86×101 BDL BDL 

19
 
Table 5-5. Extractable PFCAs in treated apparel (ng/g) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

D-1 b 

D-2 D-3 D-4 D-5 D-6 D-7 D-8 

D-10 D-11 D-12 D-13 D-14 D-15 

7.26×101 5.41×10-2 1.64×101 

NR NR 

1.08×100 

3.94×100 6.77×100 

NR NR 

BDL 

1.75×100 

4.26×100 3.55×100 

1.53×102 

1.43×100 

4.32×101 

2.70×101 2.72×101 

2.71×100 3.83×101 2.91×101 

6.37×101 2.83×101 4.21×100 

1.40×101 2.61×101 4.61×100 

2.21×102 

1.08×100 6.49×101 8.96×100 

NR 

3.11×100 

8.05×100 1.27×101 1.87×101 4.92×100 4.73×100 4.66×100 7.12×100 8.58×100 

1.14×102 

NR 

1.61×102 3.80×101 3.20×101 5.44×100 5.55×101 8.55×101 1.09×102 4.43×101 2.76×101 6.93×101 

NR 

1.31×101 

7.72×101 

2.86×10-1 

2.35×102 3.85×100 5.97×100 2.59×100 4.13×100 8.73×100 1.36×101 3.55×100 6.54×101 6.28×100 

NR 

5.86×100 

5.37×101 

NR 

6.92×101 2.20×101 1.35×101 3.26×100 2.83×101 3.93×101 4.68×101 2.39×101 1.66×101 2.32×101 2.30×101 8.06×100 

3.94×101 5.04×10-1 6.15×101 1.39×100 3.60×100 

NR 

1.94×100 

3.61×100 5.17×100 1.81×100 2.14×101 2.00×100 2.03×100 1.38×100 

4.10×10

4.27×10

2.12×101.45×108.04×10

NR 

1.30×10

6.47×10

NR 

9.42×10

NR 

5.36×10

NR 

3.67×10

a Results for samples D-9 and D-16 failed to meet data quality requirements; b This sample was extracted in triplicate. 

20
 
Table 5-6. Extractable PFCAs in treated home textile and upholstery (ng/g) 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 E-6 E-7 E-8 

E-9 a 

E-10 E-11 E-12 E-13 E-14 

BDL BDL 

3.09×101 

BDL BDL BDL 

2.16×101 

BDL 

9.47×101 

BDL BDL BDL 

1.43×100 

BDL 

BDL 

1.19×100 

6.22×101 

BDL BDL 

2.96×100 

6.80×101 

1.05×101 

2.38×102 

BDL 

8.56×100 

BDL 

3.87×100 

1.59×100 

NR 

1.22×100 9.46×101 1.80×100 

4.09×10-1 

1.76×100 9.66×101 

NR 

5.15×102 1.11×100 3.14×100 7.96×101 6.03×100 1.23×100 

5.83×100 3.26×100 2.93×102 3.49×100 

6.12×10-1 

2.18×100 3.30×102 1.88×101 4.38×102 

NR 

2.75×101 8.50×101 1.17×101 3.83×100 

BDL 

1.36×100 

3.18×102 2.01×100 

3.96×10-1 

NR 

2.13×102 

7.15×100 4.37×102 

NR 

3.95×100 

3.41×101 

4.37×100 1.78×100 

2.66×100 

BDL 

1.80E×102 

BDL BDL 

2.20×100 1.25×102 8.99×100 2.47×102 2.42×100 8.37×100 

BDL 

6.55×100 2.29×100 

NR 

BDL 

9.80×101 

BDL BDL 

6.80×10-1 

4.57×101 

NR 

1.86×102 

BDL BDL BDL 

5.63×10-1 

1.09×100 

NR NR NR NR 

BDL 

7.78×10

4.30×10

NR 

1.10×10

9.34×10

BDL 

3.73×10

NR 

1.13×10

a This sample was extracted in triplicate. 

21
 
Table 5-7. Extractable PFCAs in treated non-woven medical garments (ng/g) 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

F-1 4.31

×100 1.45

×101 2.05

×101 4.62

×101 7.82

×101 2.90

×101 2.74

×101 1.05

×10

F-2 4.26

×100 NR 1.84

×101 4.71

×101 8.21

×101 2.00

×101 2.48

×101 8.72

×10

F-3 BDL NR 9.03

×100 6.07

×101 6.33

×100 1.74

×101 NR 5.30

×10

F-4 7.86

×102 5.98

×102 5.06

×102 3.69

×102 3.34

×102 2.18

×102 1.73

×102 8.89

×10

F-5 6.02

×100 1.43

×101 2.24

×101 8.42

×101 1.08

×102 6.42

×101 4.17

×101 2.69

×10

22
 
Table 5-8. Extractable PFCAs in floor waxes and stone/tile/wood sealants (ng/g) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

G-1 NR 4.83×101 6.39×101 4.48×101 5.04×101 1.91×101 2.21×101 1.41×10

G-2 b 7.19×100 1.53×101 2.14×101 7.50×100 4.19×100 3.56×100 1.65×100 2.97×10G-3 b 8.19×100 1.41×101 2.75×101 1.32×101 1.23×101 5.32×100 2.12×100 3.33×10G-4 b 8.62×100 1.91×101 2.73×101 1.56×101 1.17×101 NR 2.10×100 NR 

G-6 BDL 4.07×101 6.25×101 3.69×101 4.76×101 2.38×101 2.22×101 2.37×10G-7 NR 1.17×103 1.05×102 8.05×102 3.31×101 3.30×102 BDL BDL G-8 1.12×102 7.72×102 3.13×102 4.77×102 1.55×102 2.65×102 BDL NR G-9 BDL BDL BDL 4.35×101 3.30×101 3.44×101 BDL BDL 

G-10 3.15×102 5.38×103 5.46×102 3.72×103 2.60×102 1.58×103 4.15×101 4.70×10G-11 3.73×102 1.16×103 1.56×103 1.21×103 9.39×102 6.32×102 3.75×102 2.84×10

a Results for sample G-5 failed to meet data quality requirements; b Samples G-2, G-3, and G-4 could not be filtered after dilution. They were applied on aluminum foil as a thin lacover. The dry films were then extracted as solid samples. The potential PFCA loss during the curing period was expected to be insignificant. 

23
 
Table 5-9. Extractable PFCAs in food contact paper (ng/g) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

H-2 BDL BDL BDL BDL 2.25

×100 BDL BDL BDL 

H-3 BDL 1.17

×101 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 

H-4 BDL NR BDL 1.04

×102 BDL 7.02

×101 BDL 5.40

×10

H-5 2.21

×102 4.43

×103 2.85

×103 4.64

×103 1.53

×101 BDL BDL BDL 

a Results for sample H-1 failed to meet data quality requirements. 

24
 
Table 5-10. Extractable PFCAs in membranes for apparel (ng/g) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

I-1 BDL 1.72×101 1.15×101 7.70×101 5.95×100 2.43×101 3.24×100 NR 

I-2 BDL NR 3.23×100 9.15×100 1.84×100 4.33×100 1.10×100 3.26×10

I-4 BDL NR NR 2.96×101 1.06×101 7.59×100 6.01×100 NR 

I-5 8.23×100 5.09×101 1.21×101 1.63×102 1.28×101 7.22×101 NR 2.36×10

I-7 BDL NR 1.09×101 4.35×101 8.08×100 1.35×101 NR 6.29×10

I-8 3.33×100 3.03×101 5.46×100 8.26×101 5.97×100 2.77×101 2.02×100 NR 

I-9 b BDL NR 4.66×100 1.04×102 5.37×100 4.19×101 3.41×100 8.59×10

I-10 BDL 2.05×101 5.02×100 7.30×101 5.95×100 2.92×101 3.03×100 9.82×10

a Results for sample I-3 and I-6 failed to meet data quality requirements. b This sample was extracted in triplicate. 

25
 
Table 5-11. Extractable PFCAs in thread seal tapes and pastes (ng/g) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

J-1 BDL BDL 2.85×100 4.43×100 2.82×100 BDL 1.69×100 NR 

J-2 BDL BDL BDL 5.35×100 2.31×100 BDL 1.42×10 NR 

J-3 BDL BDL 7.32×10-1 NR NR NR BDL NR 

J-4 BDL BDL NR NR NR NR BDL NR J-5 BDL BDL NR 2.30×101 2.28×100 BDL 1.38×100 2.14×10

J-6 BDL NR NR 1.44×103 2.80×100 BDL BDL BDL J-7 BDL 1.97×101 2.87×101 3.49×103 4.56×100 BDL BDL BDL J-9 BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.67×101 BDL 9.86×100 1.25×10

J-10 9.50×101 3.26×101 3.24×101 3.89×101 4.06×101 3.62×101 4.06×101 3.75×10

a Results for sample J-8 failed to meet data quality requirements. 

26
 
Table 5-12. Extractable PFCAs in non-stick cookware (ng/cm2 coated surface) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

K-1 K-3 K-4 K-5 K-6 K-7 K-8 K-9 

K-10 K-11 K-12 K-13 K-14 

BDL 

1.30×10-2 

NR NR 

BDL BDL BDL BDL 

NR 

BDL BDL 

1.87×10-2 

NR 

BDL BDL 

NR NR 

BDL BDL 

3.71×10-3 

BDL BDL BDL BDL 

1.31×10-2 

7.02×10-3 

BDL 

1.55×10-3 

NR NR 

BDL BDL 

BDL 

2.55×10-3 

4.01×10-3 

NR 

8.69×10-3 

1.72×10-2 9.00×10-3 

BDL 

NR 

2.09×10-2 

4.74×10-2 

BDL BDL 

BDL 

4.02×10-3 

BDL 

7.57×10-3 

BDL 

1.21×10-2 

1.25×10-2 

4.89×10-3 2.47×10-3 

NR NR 

BDL BDL 

BDL 

4.31×10-3 8.50×10-3 

5.66×10-3 

BDL 

9.85×10-3 2.67×10-3 

BDL BDL 

NR NR 

BDL BDL 

BDL 

BDL BDL BDL BDL 

9.56×10-3 

BDL 

2.89×10-3 1.48×10-3 

NR NR 

BDL BDL 

BDL 

2.55×10-3 

3.89×10-3 3.12×10-3 

BDL 

9.95×10-3 

2.60×10-3 

3.70×10

1.88×10

NR NR 

1.37×10

1.07×103.63×10

3.23×104.81×103.96×10

8.57×10

1.85×10

9.06×10

a Results for sample K-2 failed to meet data quality requirements. 

27
 
Table 5-13. Extractable PFCAs in dental floss and plaque removers (ng/g) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

L-1 BDL BDL BDL NR 9.39×10-1 BDL BDL NR 

L-2 2.50×100 NR 6.30×100 5.48×100 NR BDL 2.87×100 NR 

L-4 BDL BDL 6.20×10-1 NR 7.02×10-1 BDL BDL 1.43×10L-5 BDL BDL BDL 9.67×101 BDL BDL BDL BDL L-7 BDL BDL 3.99×100 BDL 5.81×100 BDL 3.43×100 4.40×10L-8 BDL BDL 1.71×100 4.58×101 2.25×100 BDL 1.33×100 1.69×10

a Results for sample L-3 and L-6 failed to meet data quality requirements. 

28
 
Table 5-14. Extractable PFCAs in miscellaneous AOC samples (ng/g) a 

Sample 

ID C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 

M-1 1.08×101 2.09×101 6.01×101 2.49×101 3.28×101 1.44×101 1.47×101 1.09×10

M-2 BDL BDL BDL BDL 8.26×101 BDL BDL BDL 

M-3 BDL 1.73×102 2.05×102 1.25×102 6.95×101 BDL BDL BDL M-5 BDL BDL 0 2.98 10 × BDL BDL BDL BDL 

2.97 10 × 

a Results for sample M-4, M-6 and L-7 failed to meet data quality requirements. 

29
 
0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

Sample Number

 >104 103-104 102-103 101-102 100-101 <100 

TPFCA Range (ng/g) 

Figure 5-1. Distribution of total extractable PFCAs for 116 AOC samples. 

30
 
5.4 Statistics by sample category 

The ranges, arithmetic means, and medians of PFCA content for individual article 

categories are presented in Figures 5-2 through 5-14. The overall TPFCA range is from 

non-detectable to 47100 ng/g; the range for PFOA is from non-detectable to 6750 ng/g. 

For most article categories, the means were greater than the medians in most cases, 

indicating that the PFCA content in a small number of samples was significantly higher 

than in the rest of samples. 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-2. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in the fiber of pre-treated 

carpeting (N = 8). 

31
 
0 

4000 

8000 

12000 

16000 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-3. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in commercial carpet-care 

liquids (N = 9). 

0 

500 

1000 

1500 

2000 

2500 

3000 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-4. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in household carpet / 

fabric care liquids and foams (N = 12) 

32 
0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

300 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 
 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-5. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in treated apparel (N = 14) 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-6. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in treated home textile 

products and upholstery (N = 14). 

33
 
0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1000 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

Figure 5-7. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in non-woven medical 

garments (N = 5) 

0 

1000 

2000 

3000 

4000 

5000 

6000 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

Figure 5-8. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in floor waxes and 

stone/tile/wood sealants (N = 10). 

34
 
0 

1000 

2000 

3000 

4000 

5000 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-9. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in food contact paper (N = 

4) 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-10. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in the membranes for 

apparel (N = 9). Note that the means are invisible because they are superimposed by the 

medians. 

35 
0 

1000 

2000 

3000 

4000 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-11. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in thread seal tape and 

pastes (N = 9) 

0 

0.01 

0.02 

0.03 

0.04 

0.05 

0.06 

Content (ng/cm2

)

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-12. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in non-stick cookware 

(N = 13) 

36 
0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-13. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in dental floss and 

plaque removers made from PTFE (N = 6) 

0 

60 

120 

180 

240 

Content (ng/g) 

Range 

Mean 

Median 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

PFCA Carbon Number 

Figure 5-14. Ranges, arithmetic means, and medians for PFCAs in miscellaneous articles 

(N = 4) 

37
 
6. Discussion 

6.1 Source Strengths 

A recent study by Strynar, et al. [13] reported that the house dust samples collected 

from 102 home and 10 daycare centers in the United States showed higher PFOA content 

and greater prevalence compared to samples collected from Japan [11] and Canada [12]. 

These authors also find that 96.4% of their samples have quantifiable levels of PFOA, 

suggesting widespread PFCA contamination in American homes. In simplified terms, the 

strength of a PFCA source can be expressed as the product of the PFCA content in unit 

weight (or area) and the quantity of the article in a given microenvironment. Table 6-1 

compares the source strengths by using the arithmetic means for different AOC 

categories and the estimated quantities of articles in a hypothetical “typical” American 

home. Among the 13 article categories, professional carpet-care liquids, pre-treated 

carpeting, floor waxes and stone/tile/wood sealers and household textiles and upholstery 

are likely the largest PFCA sources in American homes. 

38
 
Table 6-1. Comparison of source strengths for total amount of PFCA (TPFCA) in a hypothetical, “typical” Amer

TPFCA Article TPFCA in Group ID Article category in article quantity b home (mg

2 A Pre-treated carpeting c 48.4 ng/cm2 150 m 72.6 

B Commercial carpet-care liquids 12000 ng/g 6 kg d 71.8 

C Household carpet/fabric-care liquids and foams 953 ng/g 1 kg 0.95 

D Treated apparel 198 ng/g 2 kg 0.40 

E Treated home textile and upholstery 336 ng/g 5 kg 1.68 

F Treated non-woven medical garments 795 ng/g 0 kg 0 

G Treated floor waxes and stone/tile/wood sealants 2430 ng/g 1 kg 2.42 

H Treated food contact paper 3100 ng/g 0.01 kg 0.03 

I Membranes for apparel 124 ng/g 1 kg 0.12 

J Thread seal tapes and pastes 603 ng/g 0.02 kg 0.01 

2 K Non-stick cookware 0.028 ng/cm2 1 m 0.0003 

L Dental floss and plaque removers 31.3 ng/g 0.005 kg 0.0002 

M Miscellaneous 69.5 ng/g 0 0 

a The average, single-family home size in the U.S. in 2004 was 2330 ft2 (http://www.nahb.org/). b The quantities estimates. c Assuming 70% of floor area is carpet; conversion factors for total PFCA are given in supporting infor

application; dilution factor is considered. 

39
 
6.2 Comparison with literature values 

Comparison between the results of this study and those of other reported studies 

can be made only for PFOA, because data are unavailable in the literature for other 

PFCAs. As shown in Table 6-2, which compares the ranges of PFOA content in different 

article categories, the results from this study appear significantly higher than the literature 

values for treated non-woven medical garments, stone/tile/wood sealants, membranes for 

apparel, food contact paper, and dental floss/tape. The opposite appears true for treated 

apparel and treated home textiles. Washburn, et al. did not detect PFOA in any treated 

medical garments samples [7], but PFOA was detected at relatively high levels in all five 

samples in this study (Table 5-7 and Figure 5-7). Further statistical comparisons are 

impossible due to the lack of details about the literature values. 

Table 6-2. Comparison of PFOA content ranges between this study and literature values 

(in ng PFOA/g sample, unless indicated otherwise) 

Article category Literature a This study a 

Pre-treated carpeting 

Carpet-care liquid treated carpeting 

Treated apparel 

Treated upholstery 

Treated home textiles 

Treated non-woven medical garments 

Industrial floor wax and wax removers 

Stone, tile, and wood sealants 

Membranes for apparel 

Food contact paper 

Dental floss/tape 

Thread sealant tape 

PTFE cookware 

200 to 600 b 

200 to 2000 b 

ND (<20) to1400 b 

ND (<34) b 

ND (<20) to 1400 b 

ND (<34) b 

0.5 to 60 b 

ND (<100) b 

0.008 to 0.07 ng/cm2 b 

6 to 290 d 

3 to 4 d 

1800 d 

4 to 75 d 

ND (<1.5) to 462 

0.6 to 224 c 

5.4 to161 

0.6 to 293 

3.8 to 438 

46 to 369 

7.5 to 44.8 

477 to 3720 

0.1 to 2.5 ng/cm2 

ND (<1.5) to 4640 

ND (<1.5) to 96.7 

ND (<1.5) to 3490 

ND (<1.5) to 4.3 a

 ND: not detected (detection limit in parentheses). b Data source: ref 7 (based on 

theoretical calculations). c Calculated by using the recommended coverage and assuming 

the area density of the carpet is 0.25 g/cm2

. d Data source: ref 17. 

6.3 Relative Abundance of PFCAs 

For fluorotelomer-treated articles (categories A to H in Table 5-1), three patterns 

are recognizable: (a) the distribution of the relative abundances resembles, to a certain 

degree, a log-normal distribution (Figure 6-1); (b) PFCAs with even numbers of carbons 

are predominant (Figure 6-2); and (c) PFCAs with odd numbers of carbons are 

predominant (Figure 6-3). The frequencies of occurrence for the three patterns are (a) > 

(b) > (c). Case c is rare. Depending on the article categories, the relative abundance of 

PFOA (C8) ranges from 15% to 38% (Figure 6-4). The large value for category H (food 

40 
contact paper) was the result of a single sample that had the highest PFCA content. The 

previous study on popcorn packaging paper gave the PFOA abundance of 34% in total 

(C5 to C12) PFCAs [20]. For articles containing or made from fluoropolymers 

(categories I to L), PFOA (C8) was the most abundant PFCA species. Its relative 

abundance ranged from 38% to 93%. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

Relative Abundance (%)

5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 

PFCA Carbon Number

Figure 6-1. Relative abundance of PFCA in floor wax G-11. 

41 
0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

Relative Abundance (% )

5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 
 

PFCA Carbon Number

Relative Abundance (%)
 40
 

30
 

20
 

10
 

0
 

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 
 

PFCA Carbon Number

Figure 6-2. PFCA relative abundance in sample D-7 (treated apparel). 

Figure 6-3. PFCA relative abundance in sample B-1 (commercial carpet-care liquid). 

42 
0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50

PFOA Abundance (%) 

A B C D E F G H 

AOC Category 

Figure 6-4. Relative abundance of PFOA (C8) in fluorotelomer-treated AOC samples (i.e., 

article categories A to H in Table 3-1). 

6.4 Domestic versus Imported Articles 

Side-by-side comparison between U.S. domestic products and imported products 

was difficult because they were unevenly distributed among the 13 article categories 

studied. For instance, pre-treated carpeting, carpet-care liquid, and floor wax categories 

are dominated by domestic products. On the other hand, treated apparel, treated home 

textile and upholstery, treated non-woven medical garments, and membranes for apparel 

categories are dominated by imported products. The articles with the highest PFCA 

content in each category were divided approximately evenly between domestic and 

imported products. Domestic products have the highest PFCA content in categories A, B, 

C, G, H, and M, while imports have the highest PFCA content in categories D, E, F, I, K, 

and L. The sample with the highest PFCA content treated non-woven medical garments 

(category F) was an imported product using materials made in the U.S. Because of the 

globalization of the world economy, it is obvious that international collaboration will be 

necessary to reduce further the PFCA content in consumer articles in the world market. 

6.5 Market Trends 

In recent years, government agencies, chemical companies, the research 

community, and environmental groups have been working to reduce the production of 

PFCAs and the use of PFCAs and their precursor chemicals in fluorotelomer and 

fluoropolymer products. For example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

initiated the PFOA Stewardship Program in 2006, in which the eight major companies in 

the industry committed voluntarily to reduce facility emissions and product content of 

43 
PFOA and related chemicals on a global basis by 95 percent no later than 2010 and to 

work toward eliminating emissions and product content of these chemicals by 2015 

(http://www.epa.gov/oppt/pfoa/pubs/pfoastewardship.htm). During the process of 

collecting samples for this study, the application of fluorinated chemicals in AOCs had 

been undergoing a transition aimed at reducing the PFCA content. The availability of 

treated AOCs in certain categories, such as treated apparel and food contact paper, had 

been reduced. The limited data from this study seem to suggest that some fluorinated 

surface-modifying agents have been re-formulated to lower the PFCA content. The first 

two cases in Table 6-3 show such changes. The trends are uneven, however, and 

significant numbers of articles with high PFOA content are still on the market. In one 

case, the PFOA content even increased significantly (the third case in Table 6-3). The 

data in Table 3-3 are very limited in scope and the two sampling times are only one year 

apart. It takes a much longer period of time (e.g., several years) and a much wider range 

of sampling to confirm any trends. 

Table 6-3. Changes in PFOA content for three AOC samples 

PFOA content (ng/g)a

 Product p-Valueb 

Apr-May 2007 May 2008 

Pre-treated carpet 462 ± 51.6 5.88 ± 0.444 <0.001 

Commercial carpet protector 1838 ± 92.7 24.5 ± 1.21 <0.0001 

Commercial carpet protector 599 ± 65.1 1722 ± 89.2 <0.001 

a

 Mean and standard deviation for duplicate extractions; b For one-sided student test. 

44 
7. References 

[1] Renner, R. Growing concern over perfluorinated chemicals. 

Environmental Science & Technology 35: 154A-160A (2001). 

[2] Giesy, J. P., and K. Kannan. Perfluorochemical surfactants in the environment. 

Environmental Science & Technology 36: 146A–152A (2002). 

[3] Kannan, K., J. Newsted, R. S. Halbrook and J. P. Giesy. Perfluorooctanesulfonate 

and related fluorinated hydrocarbons in mink and river otters from the United 

States. Environmental Science & Technology 36: 2566–2571 (2002). 

[4] Kennedy Jr., J. L., J. L. Butenhoff, G. W. Olsen, J. C. O'Connor, A. M. Seacat, R. 

G. Perkins, L. B. Biegel, S. R. Murphy and D. G. Farrar. The toxicology of 

perfluorooctanoate. Critical Review of Toxicology 34, 351-384 (2004). 

[5] Lau, C., J. L. Butenhoff and J. M. Rogers. The developmental toxicity of 

perfluoroalkyl acids and their derivatives, Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. 

198: 231-241 (2004). 

[6] U.S. EPA. Draft risk assessment of the potential human health effects associated 

with exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid and salts, U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution 

Prevention and Toxics, http://www.epa.gov/oppt/pfoa/pubs/pfoarisk.pdf (2005). 

[7] Washburn, S. T., T. S. Bingman, S. K. Braithwaite, R. C. Buck, L. M. Buxton, H. 

J. Clewell, L. A. Haroun, J. E. Kester, R. W. Rickard and A. M. Shipp. Exposure 

assessment and risk characterization for perfluorooctanoate in selected consumer 

articles. Environmental Sciences & Technology 39: 3904-3910 (2005). 

[8] Fromme, H., S. A. Tittlemier, W. Völkel, M. Wilhelm and D. Twardella, 

Perfluorinated compounds – exposure assessment for the general population in 

western countries. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health 

(in press). 

[9] Tittlemier, S. A., K. Pepper, C. Seymour, J. Moisey, R. Bronson, X. L. Cao and R. 

W. Dabeka. Dietary exposure of Canadians to perfluorinated carboxylates and 

perfluorooctane sulfonate via consumption of meat, fish, fast foods, and food 

items prepared in their packaging. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55: 

3203-3210 (2007). 

[10] Trudel, D., L. Horowitz, M. Wormuth, M. Scheringer, I. T. Cousins, and K. 

Hungerbühler. Estimating consumer exposure to PFOS and PFOA. Risk Analysis 

28: 251-269 (2008). 

45 
[11] Moriwaki, H., Y. Takatah, and R. Arakawa. Concentrations of perfluorooctane 

sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in vacuum cleaner dust 

collected in Japanese homes, Journal of Environmental Monitoring 5: 753-757 

(2003). 

[12] Kubwabo, C., B. Stewart, J. Zhu and L. Marro. Occurrence of perfluorosulfonates 

and other perfluorochemicals in dust from selected homes in the city of Ottawa. 

Journal of Environmental Monitoring 7: 1074-1078 (2005). 

[13] Strynar M. J., and A. B. Lindstrom. Perfluorinated compounds in house dust from 

Ohio and North Carolina, Environmental Science & Technology 42: 3751-3756 

(2008). 

[14] Prevedouros, K., I. T. Cousins, R. C. Buck and S. H. Korzeniowski. Sources, fate 

and transport of perfluorocarboxylates. Environmental Science & Technology 40: 

32-44 (2006). 

[15] Rao, N. S., and B. E. Baker. “Textile Finishes and Fluorosurfactants.” In 

Orgaofluorine Chemistry, ed. R. E. Banks, B. E. Smart and J. C. Tatlow, Plenum 

Press, New York and London, 1994. 

[16] Kissa, E. Fluorinated Surfactants and Repellents, 2nd ed. Marcel Dekker Inc. New 

York and Basel, 2001. 

[17] Begley, T. H., K. White, P. Honigfort, M. L.Twarski, R. Neches, R. and R. A. 

Walker. Perfluorochemicals: potential sources of and migration from food 

packaging. Food Additives and Contaminants 22: 1023-1031 (2005). 

[18] Powley, C. R., M. J. Michalczyk, M. A. Kaiser and L. W. Buxton. Determination 

of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) extractable from the surface of commercial 

cookware under simulated cooking conditions by LC/MS/MS. Analyst 130: 1299­

1302 (2005). 

[19] Bononi, M. and F. Tateo. Identification of perfluorooctanoic acid release from 

commercial coated cooking pans by liquid chromatograpgy coupled to electospray 

ionization tandem mass spectrometry, American Journal of Agricultural & 

Biological Science. 2: 191-194 (2007). 

[20] Sinclair, E., S. K. Kim, H. B. Akinleye and K. Kannan, Quantitation of gas-phase 

perfluoroalkyl surfactants and flurotelomer alcohols released from nonstick 

cookware and microwave popcorn bags, Environmental Sciences & Technology. 

41: 1170-1175 (2007). 

[21] Liu, X., K. Krebs, Z. Guo and N. Roache. Method development for liquid 

chromatography/triple quadrupole mass spectrometer analysis of trace level 

46 
perfluorocarboxylic acids in articles of commerce. Journal of Chromatography A 

(in press). 

47 
Appendix 

Description of AOC Samples 

Table A-1. Sample description and conversion factor a 

Sample 

ID Description Conversion Factor 

Units Value 

A. Pre-treated carpeting 

A-1 Nylon Carpet 1 g of fiber/cm2 1.41×10-1 

A-2 Renewably sourced polymer g of fiber/cm2 8.57×10-2 

A-3 Polyester carpet g of fiber/cm2 9.33×10-2 

A-4 Berber 94% Olefin/6%Nylon carpet g of fiber/cm2 1.13×10-1 

A-5 Nylon Carpet 2 g of fiber/cm2 1.31×10-1 

A-6 Frieze nylon carpet g of fiber/cm2 7.15×10-2 

A-7 Nylon Carpet 3 g of fiber/cm2 6.61×10-2 

A-8 Textured carpet g of fiber/cm2 1.45×10-1 

A-9 Nylon Carpet 4 g of fiber/cm2 7.44×10-2 

B. Commercial carpet/fabric care liquids (not applicable) 

B-1 Carpet and upholstery protector N/A N/A 

B-2 Carpet protector concentrate 1 N/A N/A 

B-3 Fabric protector solvent based N/A N/A 

B-4 Carpet protector concentrate 2 N/A N/A 

B-5 Carpet/upholstery protector concentrate N/A N/A 

B-6 Carpet protector concentrate 3 N/A N/A 

B-7 RTU Carpet protector N/A N/A 

B-8 Carpet protector N/A N/A 

B-9 RTU Carpet protector N/A N/A 

C. Carpet/fabric care liquids for spot treatment 

C-1 Household carpet shampoo N/A N/A 

C-2 Carpet spot and stain remover N/A N/A 

C-3 Spot removal kit N/A N/A 

C-4 Fabric protector 1 N/A N/A 

C-5 Fabric protector 2 N/A N/A 

C-6 Household carpet protector N/A N/A 

C-7 Household carpet/upholstery cleaner N/A N/A 

C-8 Household spot & stain remover N/A N/A 

C-9 Wash-in waterproofing N/A N/A 

C-10 Spray-on water repellent N/A N/A 

C-11 Wash-in waterproofing N/A N/A 

C-12 Spray-on water repellent N/A N/A a

 N/A = not applicable. 

48 
Table A-1. Sample description and conversion factor (cont.) 

Sample 

ID Description Conversion Factor 

Units Value 

D. Treated apparel 

D-1 Man's pant g/cm2 2.06×10-2 

D-2 Man's short pant g/cm2 2.50×10-2 

D-3 Girl's uniform shirt g/cm2 2.28×10-2 

D-4 Boy's dress shirt 1 g/cm2 1.60×10-2 

D-5 Boy's dress pant 2 g/cm2 2.61×10-2 

D-6 Lady's dress pant g/cm2 2.35×10-2 

D-7 Girl's uniform pant g/cm2 2.30×10-2 

D-8 Woman's hiking shoe g/cm2 2.35×10-2 

D-9 Woman's knee pant g/cm2 1.23×10-2 

D-10 Man's dress pant g/cm2 2.93×10-2 

D-11 Man's polo shirt g/cm2 2.18×10-2 

D-12 Man's nylon shirt g/cm2 1.10×10-2 

D-13 Man's dress shirt 1 g/cm2 1.14×10-2 

D-14 Man's dress pant 2 g/cm2 2.78×10-2 

D-15 Man's dress pant 3 g/cm2 2.65×10-2 

D-16 Lab coat g/cm2 1.68×10-2 

E. Treated home textile and upholstery 

E-1 Microfiber fabric 1 g/cm2 2.43×10-2 

E-2 Microfiber fabric 2 g/cm2 2.45×10-2 

E-3 Loveseat slip cover 100% cotton g/cm2 1.80×10-2 

E-4 Loveseat slip cover 100% polyester g/cm2 2.49×10-2 

E-5 Loveseat slip cover 60% cotton/40% 

polyester g/cm2 2.00×10-2 

E-6 Loveseat slip cover 100% polyester g/cm2 1.40×10-2 

E-7 Mattress pad 1 g/cm2 1.35×10-2 

E-8 Mattress pad 2 g/cm2 1.95×10-2 

E-9 Mattress pad 3 g/cm2 1.38×10-2 

E-10 Table cloth g/cm2 1.60×10-2 

E-11 Ironing board cover g/cm2 1.18×10-2 

E-12 Table cloth g/cm2 2.19×10-2 

E-13 Upholstery fabric, 57% cotton/43% polyester g/cm2 4.75×10-2 

E-14 100% Cotton throw g/cm2 2.20×10-2 

F. Treated non-woven medical garments 

F-1 Lab coat g/cm2 6.00×10-3 

F-2 Surgical gown 1 g/cm2 6.00×10-3 

F-3 Surgical gown 2 g/cm2 5.00×10-3 

F-4 Surgical gown 3 g/cm2 7.50×10-3 

F-5 Reuseable pillow g/cm2 1.10×10-2 

49 
Table A-1. Sample description and conversion factor (cont.) 

Sample 

ID Description Conversion Factor 

Units Value 

G. Treated floor waxes and stone/tile/wood sealants 

G-1 Household floor wax 1 N/A N/A 

G-2 Household floor wax 2 N/A N/A 

G-3 Commercial spray and buff N/A N/A 

G-4 Commercial floor sealer 1 N/A N/A 

G-5 Commercial floor sealer 2 N/A N/A 

G-6 Commercial floor sealer 3 N/A N/A 

G-7 Stone & tile sealer N/A N/A 

G-8 Granite sealer N/A N/A 

G-9 Household floor polish N/A N/A 

G-10 Marble & granite sealer N/A N/A 

G-11 Stone, tile & wood sealant N/A N/A 

H. Treated food contact paper 

H-1 French fry bag g/cm2 3.25×10-3 

H-2 French fry carton g/cm2 2.41×10-2 

H-3 Popcorn bucket g/cm2 1.99×10-2 

H-4 Popcorn bag g/cm2 3.87×10-3 

H-5 Microwave cooking bag g/cm2 8.60×10-3 

I. Membranes for apparel 

I-1 Women's rain jacket g/cm2 9.83×10-3 

I-2 Men's rain jacket g/cm2 9.39×10-3 

I-3 Men's jacket g/cm2 8.64×10-3 

I-4 Women's insulated pant g/cm2 1.59×10-2 

I-5 Men's parka g/cm2 1.82×10-2 

I-6 Woman's rain jacket g/cm2 1.90×10-2 

I-7 Sombrero (hat) 1 g/cm2 1.30×10-2 

I-8 Sombrero (hat) 2 g/cm2 1.40×10-2 

I-9 Man's rain parka g/cm2 9.00×10-3 

I-10 Ball cap g/cm2 1.83×10-2 

J. Thread seal tapes and pastes 

J-1 1/2" Tape 1 g/cm2 2.97×10-3 

J-2 1/2" Tape 2 g/cm2 2.86×10-3 

J-3 1/2" Tape 3 g/cm2 2.66×10-3 

J-4 1/2" Tape 4 g/cm2 2.71×10-3 

J-5 1/2" Tape 5 g/cm2 2.89×10-3 

J-6 1/2" Tape 6 g/cm2 1.01×10-3 

J-7 1/2" Tape 7 g/cm2 9.49×10-3 

J-8 Pipe thread sealant 1 N/A N/A 

J-9 Pipe thread sealant 2 N/A N/A 

50 
Table A-1. Sample description and conversion factor (cont.) 

Sample 

ID Description Conversion Factor 

Units Value 

J. Thread seal tapes and pastes (cont.) 

J-10 Pipe thread sealant 3 N/A N/A 

K. Non-stick cookware 

K-1 10" Fry pan N/A N/A 

K-2 10" Fry pan w/lid N/A N/A 

K-3 5 qt Sautesse w/lid N/A N/A 

K-4 12" Fry pan w/lid N/A N/A 

K-5 14" Untility pan w/lid N/A N/A 

K-6 10" Camp fry pan N/A N/A 

K-7 Child's mess kit N/A N/A 

K-8 Cookie sheet N/A N/A 

K-9 11" Skillet N/A N/A 

K-10 2 qt Sauce pan N/A N/A 

K-11 22-cm Fry pan N/A N/A 

K-12 10" Skillet N/A N/A 

K-13 10" Skillet N/A N/A 

K-14 4 qt 10.5" Sauteuse pan N/A N/A 

L. Dental floss and plaque removers 

L-1 Unflavored floss g/m 1.75E-01 

L-2 Mint floss g/m 1.30E-01 

L-3 Satin floss g/m 9.91E-02 

L-4 Satin tape g/m 1.21E-01 

L-5 Flosser g/m 4.67E-02 

L-6 Deep clean floss g/m 1.42E-01 

L-7 Micro-mint flosser g/m 4.67E-02 

L-8 Angle flosser g/m 1.53E-01 

M. Miscellaneous 

M-1 Tire shine N/A N/A 

M-2 Car spray wax N/A N/A 

M-3 Car wheel cleaner N/A N/A 

M-4 Dry sack g/cm2 1.00E-02 

M-5 Deck cleaner N/A N/A 

M-6 Boat polish 1 N/A N/A 

M-7 Boat polish 2 N/A N/A 

51