Overview of the Technology and Best Practices

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Analyze Immediately Residual Chlorine. Topics…. Background: Chlorine Chemistry Industrial Application NJAC Regulations Summary.
Advertisements

Urban Air Toxics. The UAT Monitoring Network Urban Sites Asheville Charlotte Winston-Salem Raleigh Research Triangle Park Wilmington Rural Site Candor.
Analytical Chemical Sensing using High Resolution Terahertz/Sub-millimeter Wave Spectroscopy Benjamin L. Moran, Alyssa M. Fosnight, Ivan R. Medvedev Department.
PURGE & TRAP Training Commercial July, 22th 2010 Saint-Antoine - France.
Air, Water and Land Pollution Chapter 2: Basics of Environmental Sampling and Analysis Copyright © 2010 by DBS.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE ANNUAL 2011 RCRA Hazardous Waste Training.
Office of Water PittCon 2001 Status of EPA Method 1631 for the Determination of Low-Level Mercury Maria Gomez-Taylor Analytical Methods Staff U.S.
1 Preparazione del campione per l’analisi cromatografica.
MSW LANDFILL MACT STANDARD DEVELOPMENT SWANA’s 22nd Annual Landfill Gas Symposium March 22-25, 1999 Michele Laur Emission Standards Division US Environmental.
Health Hazards of Organic (mostly) Vapors a review of the toxicities of vapors from substances that are liquids under normal conditions of use.
Lecture 9 Volatiles. Determination Various GC techniques.
Chemistry 2633 Techniques of Organic Chemistry James S Chickos Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Missouri-St. Louis Louis MO
QA/QC Considerations for Sampling and Analysis Associated with EPA Method 1631 Chuck Wibby Wibby Environmental Seminar on Low Level Mercury Data and Analyses.
Post-Katrina Water Quality Assessment: Lake Pontchartrain and Surrounding Water Bodies Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Assessment.
1 Vapor Intrusion Guidance Update Gerard Martin, MassDEP BWSC LSPA Meeting
Experiment 4 Thin Layer Chromatography. Silica gel (SiO2) glass or aluminum plate edge view.
Detection of Copper in Wastewater Seth Holm Chem4101 December 2009.
Quality Control In Measurements Tom Colella CLAS Goldwater Environmental Lab.
Gerstel 頂空進樣 Headspace MPS 三合一系統 ( 液體,頂空, SPME) Page 2.
Tradechem International FZE Confidential Tradechem International FZE., Dubai.
Jeff J. Dauzat LDEQ Southeast Regional Office New Orleans, Louisiana (504) Bonnet Carre’ Spillway Opening
CONFIDENTIAL Applications for Field Service Engineers.
A Single Calibration for Waters and Soil Samples Performing EPA Method 8260 Anne Jurek – Applications Chemist.
Air Quality Monitoring Networks Maine DEP 2015 Annual AQ Monitoring Meeting MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Protecting Maine’s Air, Land and.
Citizen Air Monitoring in the Houston Area Jane Laping, Executive Director Mothers for Clean Air
PHOTOVAC, Inc. Voyager Gas Chromatograph Concept.
William Telliard U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology
Performance Based System for Determining Post Closure Care (PCC) at Florida MSW Landfills Southwest Landfill, Alachua County, Florida Dr. Debra Reinhart.
Providing comprehensive scientific resources to environmental clients worldwide. Dissolved Gas Analysis: A Review and Comparison.
Debbie Miller Water Quality Standards Toxic Criteria Coordinator.
UNEXPECTED VOCS IN SOIL GAS ASSESSMENT RESULTS James M. Harless, PhD, CHMM Vice President / Principal Cheryl Kehres-Dietrich, CGWP Principal Paul Roberts.
High Resolution Site Characterization Approach: Rapid Sample Collection with High Quality Analyses Targeting VOCs/SVOCs Presented by: Harry O’Neill, President.
1 Urban Community Air Toxics Monitoring Project, Paterson City, NJ UCAMPP Update 5/07 Charlie Pietarinen (609)
The Natural Environment MGMT 491 Management Ethics in a Global Environment Jeffery D. Smith.
SIMULTANEOUS ADSORPTION OF 11 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY AN ACTIVATED CARBON MADE FROM POLYSTYRENE SULFONIC ACID-BASED ORGANIC SALT.
Field Efficacy of VBTTM
James Byrd, Marta Kozak 28 Apr 2011
Setting Specification Limits for Impurities in Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API’s) January, 2015.
Optimization of 1,4-Dioxane and Ethanol Detection
Determination of Algae Compounds in Drinking Water
TOGA (Trace Organic Gas Analyzer)
Status of EPA Method 1631 for the Determination of Low-Level Mercury
Overview of EPA Method 1631, Revision E By Roy W
Polarity index Sohim M.Pharma 1st year Presented to Jayanta Kumar Maji
alkane alkene alkyne arene
GSFED Data & Result seni.
EPA Method A Summary of the Changes in the Newly Promulgated GC/MS Method for Volatile Organics in Wastewater Harry McCarty and Kevin Roberts CSRA,
Silicon-Lined Canister Cleaning Practices and Blank VOC Concentrations
William Lipps Analytical & Measuring Instrument Division August 2017
EPA Method Equivalency
Solvent Selection Preferred Useable Undesirable Water Cyclohexane
Taryn McKnight – Client Relations Manager
Developing a Consensus Test Method for Measuring Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Water utilizing Headspace Analysis with Gas Chromatography and Mass.
Added Monrovia and South Bend to the slide.
The Analysis of Soils and Waters in Accordance with U. S
524.3 Purge Flow Study Anne Jurek – Sr. Applications Chemist
Update on ASTM and Standard Methods method development activities
HPLC Applications Training
EPA Method Equivalency
How to Meet the Analytical Requirements of NJ Low Level TO-15
Data Collection, Reporting, and Communication
Director of Quality Assurance
Best Practices for Calibration and Calibration Verification
Best Practices for Identification and Quantitation
Historical Review of Data Qualifiers and QC Formulation
4. Prelab Radical Bromination of p-Toluic acid
Alkanes C H n 2n+2 all C are sp3 hybridized 4  bonds 109.5o n root
GL18 (R) – Impurities: Residual Solvents in New Veterinary Medicinal Products, Active Substance and Excipients.
Damiana Gentili Qualified Person/QU Director 09/05/2019
EPA/OAQPS Pollutant Emissions Measurement Update 2019
Presentation transcript:

Overview of the Technology and Best Practices for Sample Collection and Preservation Judy Morgan VP, CCO 8260 524.2 SOM02.4 624.1 SM6200

Six Methods…..Four Programs RCRA 8260B, C, D SDWA 524.2 SOM02.4 VOA Trace & Low/Med CWA 624.1 SM6200

Just Imagine…..if there were only ONE Method Weighted? Not Weighted? 2nd Source? Primary Source? LFB? LCS? LOQ? CRDL? RL? MRL? RSD? 15%, 20%, 30% RF? Linear? Options??? Tune? There’s more than 1 way? MDL? LOD? In-house limits? Method limits? Suggested? Recommended? Required? Qualify? Okay? Not Allowed? Recalc curve pts back to ICAL? % D, Recovery? Etc. Verify ICV, CCV, LCS, MS/MSD 12 hour? 24 Hour? QUESTIONS Standardized terms One set of criteria Performance Appropriate Holding time..3,7,14 Cal Points - 5 Cal Conc – Range established for use Internal Stds Surrogates (not DMCs) Batch Criteria – set Time (12 or 24 hr) - set QC Frequency – set Sensitivity Ck - Set ANSWERS VOA by GCMS

WAKE UP! …..You’re Dreaming CLP 524.2 SM6200 ONE NEW METHOD 8260 624.1

Finding the Foundation Goal of VOA Analysis and GCMS Technology Common PURPOSE To identify purgeable organic pollutants in all types of water, including but not limited to the following: ground water, surface water, industrial (permitted) discharge, waste water, storm water, drinking water, estuaries, rivers, streams, lakes, etc. Many contamination issues are traceable to any of the following: leaking underground fuel or solvent storage vessels, landfills, agriculture practices, and wastewater disposal. The most probable cause for the contamination of some aquifers and surface waters has never been firmly established.

Finding the Foundation Goal of VOA Analysis and GCMS Technology Summary of Methods Inert gas is bubbled through a known volume of water via a purging chamber. Target analytes are efficiently transferred from aqueous to vapor phase Vapor enters a sorbent trap where the purgeables are trapped The trap is heated & backflushed with the gas to desorb the purgeables onto a gas chromatographic column. The column is temperature programmed to separate the purgeables which are then detected with a mass spectrometer. Common technique…

Water Related Programs & Methods Environmental Protection Agency Est. 1970 by Exec Order Clean Water Act 1948, 1972 Specific Methods: EPA and SM VOA – 624.1, 6200 Safe Drinking Water Act 1974 VOA 524.2 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 1976 Guidance Methods: EPA SW846 VOA 8260D Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 1980 Specific Methods: EPA SOM 02.4 Trace VOA & Low/Med VOA

Sample Collection - Field Method Blank Required Container # 524.2 (2) Field Reagent Blanks 40mL vial* w/TFE septum 2 624.1 NA 25–40mL vial* w/TFE septum NS 6200 8260 D Trip Blank Recommended CLP Trace Storage Blank Required 40mL vial 3 CLP Low Med * Wash vials, caps, and septa with detergent, rinse, and dry at 105°C for 1 h, before use in an area free of organic vapors.

Sample Preservation Method Unpres Pres <2 HCl Chlorinated 524.2 24 hour 14 d Dechlorinate * prior to adding acid 624.1 7 d (Acrolein – 3 d) “ 6200 NA 8260C, D 7 d (2-CEVE ASAP) CLP Trace 10 d from rcpt. CLP Low/med 24 hr * Ascorbic Acid, Sodium thiosulfate

Blank Criteria Method Detection Levels Purge Volume 524.2 <MDL 25mL 624.1 <MDL, 1/3 Reg Limit, <1/10 conc of spl 5-25mL 6200 <MQL 8260 D <1/2 LLOQ or <10% of conc of spls 5mL CLP Trace <CRQL CLP Low Med

Sample Processing Method Batch Processing Calibration Levels 524.2 3 QC is per 12 hour Shift 3 624.1 5 6200 8260C, D CLP Trace CLP Low Med

Total Analytes Represented =139 Method Analytes 524.2 84 624.1 93 6200 61 8260D 128 CLP Trace 51 CLP Low Med

38 Analytes appear in ALL Methods 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 1,1-Dichloroethene (Vinylidene chloride) 75-35-4 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) 96-12-8 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB, Ethylene dibromide) 106-93-4 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 Benzene 71-43-2 Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 Bromoform 75-25-2 Bromomethane 74-83-9 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 Chlorodibromomethane (Dibromochloromethane) 124-48-1 Chloroethane 75-00-3 Chloroform 67-66-3 Chloromethane 74-87-3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 Dichlorodifluoromethane 75-71-8 Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 Methylene chloride (DCM) 75-09-2 o-Xylene 95-47-6 Styrene 100-42-5 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 Toluene 108-88-3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 Trichloroethene (Trichloroethylene) 79-01-6 Trichlorofluoromethane 75-69-4 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4

6 More Analytes are Common to at least 5 Methods CAS 624.1 6200 524.2 4.1 8260D CLP Low Med CLP Trace 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 1 2-Butanone (MEK) 78-93-3 Acetone 67-64-1 Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) 1634-04-4

17 More Analytes are Common to at least 4 Methods CAS 624.1 6200 524.2 4.1 8260D CLP Low Med CLP Trace 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 1 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108-67-8 1,3-Dichloropropane 142-28-9 2-Chlorotoluene 95-49-8 4-Chlorotoluene 106-43-4 Bromobenzene 108-86-1 Dibromomethane 74-95-3 m-Xylene 108-38-3 n-Butylbenzene 104-51-8 n-Propylbenzene 103-65-1 p-Xylene 106-42-3 sec-Butylbenzene 135-98-8 tert-Butylbenzene 98-06-6 2-Hexanone 591-78-6 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 108-10-1

15 More Analytes are Common to at least 3 Methods CAS 624.1 6200 524.2 4.1 8260D CLP Low Med CLP Trace 1,1-Dichloropropene 563-58-6 1 2,2-Dichloropropane 590-20-7 4-Isopropyltoluene 99-87-6 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 Naphthalene 91-20-3 1-Chlorobutane 109-69-3 Acrylonitrile 107-13-1 Allyl chloride 107-05-1 Propionitrile (ethyl cyanide) 107-12-0 trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene 110-57-6 m+p- Xylene 179601-23-1 Cyclohexane 110-82-7 Methyl acetate 79-20-9 Methylcyclohexane 108-87-2 1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 76-13-1

Analytes Analyte CAS 624.1 6200 524.2 4.1 8260D CLP Low Med CLP Trace 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 526-73-8 1 2-Chloroethanol 107-07-3 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether 110-75-8 2-Nitropropane 79-46-9 Acetonitrile 75-05-8 Acrolein (Propenal) 107-02-8 Allyl alcohol 107-18-6 Benzyl chloride 100-44-7 Bromoacetone 598-31-2 Chloral hydrate 302-17-0 Chloroprene (2-chloro-1,3-butadiene) 126-99-8 cis-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene 1476-11-5 Crotonaldehyde 123-73-9 Diethyl ether 60-29-7 Ethyl methacrylate 97-63-2 Ethyl t-butyl ether (ETBE) 637-92-3 Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 Iodomethane (Methyl iodide) 74-88-4 Methacrylonitrile 126-98-7 Methyl acrylate 96-33-3 Methylmethacrylate 80-62-6 n-Butanol (1-Butanol, n-Butyl alcohol) 71-36-3 Nitrobenzene (NB) 98-95-3 n-Propylamine 107-10-8 o-Toluidine 95-53-4 Pentachloroethane 76-01-7 Pyridine 110-86-1 t-Amyl ethyl ether (TAEE, 4,4-Dimethyl-3-oxahexane) 919-94-8 t-Amyl methyl ether (TAME) 994-05-8 t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) 75-65-0 Vinyl acetate 108-05-4 Chloroacetonitrile 107-14-2 Tetrahydrofuran 109-99-9 33 More Analytes are Common to at Least 2 of the 3 Most Common Methods (624.1, 524.2, 8260D)

The FINAL 30 are unique to only 1 Method Analytes Analyte CAS 624.1 6200 524.2 4.1 8260D CLP Low Med CLP Trace 1,2,3,4-Diepoxybutane 1464-53-5 1 1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol 96-23-1 1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 1-Chlorohexane 544-10-5 1-Propanol (n-Propyl alcohol) 71-23-8 2-Pentanone 107-87-9 2-Picoline (2-Methylpyridine) 109-06-8 2-Propanol (Isopropyl alcohol) 67-63-0 Diisopropyl ether (DIPE) 108-20-3 Epichlorohydrin 106-89-8 Ethanol 64-17-5 Ethyl acetate 141-78-6 Ethylene oxide 75-21-8 Isobutyl alcohol 78-83-1 Malononitrile 109-77-3 Methanol 67-56-1 N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine (N- Nitrosodibutylamine) 924-16-3 Paraldehyde 123-63-7 Pentafluorobenzene 363-72-4 Propargyl alcohol 107-19-7 β-Propiolactone 57-57-8 1,1-Dichloropropanone (1,1-Dichloro-2-propanone) 513-88-2 1,3-Butadiene 106-99-0 1-Chlorohexanone 20261-68-1 3-Chloropropionitrile 542-76-7 bis (2-Chloroethyl) sulfide 505-60-2 Chlorodifluoromethane 75-45-6 Cyclohexanone 108-94-1 m+o- Xylene 179601-22-0 o+p- Xylene 136777-61-2 The FINAL 30 are unique to only 1 Method

Similarities & Coverage More similarities than differences…….. Summary of Comparison Methods were developed by the individual programs to meet the needs of that program……but there are numerous targets that are common to all programs Enough similarities exist to form a good basis for a single method The comparison of collection and handling requirements show that the methods have enough similarity that a best practice could easily be determined The differences could easily be addressed by sample type: Common sense would disallow using the method for the analysis of a trace or DW sample and known contaminated samples in the same analytical run

There is enough interest to support further exploration…….. Conclusion There is enough interest to support further exploration…….. FUTURE FOCUS Fit for Use Flexibility to meet compliance needs Sensitivity Technology Quality

Questions? Thank you!