This paper presents a quantitative method for the risk-based evaluation of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) in vapor intrusion investigations. Vapors from petroleum fuels are characterized by a complex mixture of aliphatic and, to a lesser extent, aromatic compounds. These compounds can be measured and described in terms of TPH carbon ranges. Toxicity factors published by USEPA and other parties allow development of risk-based, air and soil vapor screening levels for each carbon range in the same manner as done for individual compounds such as benzene. The relative, carbon range makeup of petroleum vapors can be used to develop weighted, site-specific or generic screening levels for TPH. At some critical ratio of TPH to a targeted, individual compound, the overwhelming proportion of TPH will drive vapor intrusion risk over the individual compound. This is particularly true for vapors associated with diesel and other middle distillate fuels, but can also be the case for low-benzene gasolines or even for high-benzene gasolines if an adequately conservative, target risk is not applied to individually targeted chemicals. This necessitates a re-evaluation of the reliance on benzene and other individual compounds as a stand-alone tool to evaluate vapor intrusion risk associated with petroleum.

Generic indoor air:subslab soil gas attenuation factors (SSAFs) are important for rapid screening of potential vapor intrusion risks in buildings that overlie soil and groundwater contaminated with volatile chemicals. Insufficiently conservative SSAFs can allow high‐risk sites to be prematurely excluded from further investigation. Excessively conservative SSAFs can lead to costly, time‐consuming, and often inconclusive actions at an inordinate number of low‐risk sites. This paper reviews two of the most commonly used approaches to develop SSAFs: (1) comparison of paired, indoor air and subslab soil gas data in empirical databases and (2) comparison of estimated subslab vapor entry rates and indoor air exchange rates (IAERs). Potential error associated with databases includes interference from indoor and outdoor sources, reliance on data from basements, and seasonal variability. Heterogeneity in subsurface vapor plumes combined with uncertainty regarding vapor entry points calls into question the representativeness of limited subslab data and diminishes the technical defensibility of SSAFs extracted from databases. The use of reasonably conservative vapor entry rates and IAERs offers a more technically defensible approach for the development of generic SSAF values for screening. Consideration of seasonal variability in building leakage rates, air exchange rates, and interpolated vapor entry rates allows for the development of generic SSAFs at both local and regional scales. Limitations include applicability of the default IAERs and vapor entry rates to site‐specific vapor intrusion investigations and uncertainty regarding applicability of generic SSAFs to assess potential short‐term (e.g., intraday) variability of impacts to indoor air.

The authors wish to add the following amendments and corrections to their paper published in IJERPH [1]. [...]