United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response
Washington, DC 20460
Office of
Research and Development
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Superfund
EPA/540/S-92/012
November 1992
Engineering Bulletin
Design Considerations for Ambient
Air Monitoring at Superfund Sites
Purpose
Section 121(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) mandates
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to select remedies
that "utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment
technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maxi-
mum extent practicable" and to prefer remedial actions in
which treatment "permanently and significantly reduces the
volume, toxicity, or mobility of hazardous substances, pollut-
ants and contaminants as a principal element." The Engineer-
ing Bulletins are a series of documents that summarize the
latest information available on selected treatment and site
remediation technologies and related issues. They provide
summaries of and references for the latest information to help
remedial project managers (RPMs), on-scene coordinators, con-
tractors, and other site cleanup managers understand the type
of data and site characteristics needed to evaluate a technology
for potential applicability to their Superfund or other hazardous
waste site. Those documents that describe individual treat-
ment technologies focus on remedial investigation scoping
needs. Addenda will be issued periodically to update the
original bulletins.
Abstract
Ambient air monitoring (AAM) may be useful or necessary
for determining the air migration of toxic contaminants from
Superfund sites. Emissions may be from point or area sources
and may be gaseous or particulate in nature.
There are three basic approaches to air monitoring at
hazardous waste sites: 1) integrated sample collection using a
network of point monitors; 2) monitoring using continuous,
realtime instruments or monitors using a network of point
monitors; and 3) comprehensive fenceline monitoring using
continuous, line source instruments (open-path, optical remote
sensing). Selection of an appropriate air monitoring approach
will require consideration of relevant project factors in the
course of designing the air monitoring program. These basic
approaches and the applicable monitoring technologies will be
discussed.
This Engineering Bulletin is intended to help the RPM
design the site-specific air monitoring program needed before,
and during site remediation. The types of AAM activities of
interest at Superfund sites are selecting the most appropriate
approach, establishing the data quality objectives, and selecting
the proper sampling and analytical techniques. Key design
considerations, limitations, a procedure for designing the air
monitoring program, and other relevant technical information
regarding AAM at Superfund sites are presented. This bulletin
also provides a point of contact for further information.
Air Monitoring System Design
Toxic air emissions may originate from the site: in the
undisturbed state; waste handling; or onsite waste treatment
and preparation processes (point source) such as solidification,
separation activities, waste mixing/shredding, pyrolysis, incin-
eration, stripping, etc. Some of these processes may be in situ
treatment processes such as soil flushing, vitrification, etc., which
may further be uncontrolled, generating point and fugitive
emissions. Due to potential emissions of air toxics, an appropri-
ate air monitoring system must be considered in order to assess
harm to the public and environment.
It is essential to conduct a proper Air Pathway Analysis
(APA) in order to design a proper air monitoring program [1]*.
The APA method is outlined in a four volume series [2, 3, 4, 5].
State and local regulations may require AAM at the fenceline.
The air monitoring program used need not be elaborate, tech-
nically sophisticated, or require a significant share of the project
resources. In fact, if the air monitoring program is properly
designed and implemented, the data generated may be used to
maintain contractor schedules and even reduce costs of several
aspects of the program, such as onsite personnel level of protec-
tion (by avoiding shutdown, reducing cost of health/safety
supplies and worker break time). The application of air emission
control technologies such as area, point, or operational controls
can also result in significant net cost savings by avoiding project
shutdowns. The primary benefit to the program is the execu-
tion of a successful site restoration program that avoids an
adverse impact on the local community and air surrounding
the site.
The proper design of air monitoring programs at hazard-
ous waste sites is also dependent on the site characteristics,
properties of the waste, and other project factors (Figure 1).
* [reference number, page number]
-------
FIGURE 1. KEY SITE FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE OR CONTROL THE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
OF AIR MONITORING PROGRAMS
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Available Utilities
Access to Monitoring Locations
Site Terrain
Local Meteorological Conditions
PROJECT FACTORS
Program Objectives
Availability of
Applicable Sampling Methods
Project Resources
WASTE PROPERTIES
Range of Waste Types
Volatility of Contaminants
Toxicity of Contaminants
Homogeneity of the Waste
Site Characteristics
Available utilities may influence the choice of monitors
used Some programs can utilize battery-powered instruments
or integrated sample collection techniques; others require line
or generator power if many stations are needed or if the
program will operate for several months. A water supply is
generally needed only for decontamination and worker conve-
nience. Caution needs to be taken in order that emissions from
the power generator are not monitored inadvertently.
Access to monitoring locations is also a consideration.
Ideally, the perimeter of the property (where most monitoring
takes place) will have a road that allows for vehicle access to aJI
fixed and mobile monitoring locations. Access roads save time
and effort required to hand-carry equipment and supplies over
rough terrain for large sites.
Site terrain directly influences the extent and the design of
the air monitoring program. If the site terrain is complex, the
migration of contaminants via the air contaminant pathway will
be complex and highly variable. In addition, air dispersion
modeling for such terrain is difficult and modeled results are
often less precise and nonrepresentative. This means that
there is an increased likelihood that point source monitors will
not measure true site emissions. This situation can be addressed
by: 1) increasing the number of point monitor stations and
selecting locations to transect the downwind plume, and in
some cases 2) using line monitoring techniques such as optical
remote sensing (Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) or ultraviolet
differential optical adsorption spectroscopy (UV-DOAS)) [3] [6].
Local meteorological conditions also influence the design
of the monitoring system. Dominant meteorological condi-
tions should be considered so that monitors are properly lo-
cated and can provide representative site samples.
Waste Properties
The range of waste types will dictate the number of com-
pounds to be monitored. Although monitoring may be consid-
ered for each type of waste, it may be acceptable to select
target compounds based on effective risk. This approach is
common and can reduce complexity. If individual compounds
are of interest, the number of analyses can increase the com-
plexity and cost of the program.
Physical state or volatility of contaminants will affect the air
sampling and analysis technique selection. Volatility of con-
taminants ranges from volatile (found mostly in the gaseous
state), semivolatile (found as a gas and solid), to nonvolatile
(particulate matter found mostly in the solid state).
The relative toxicity of contaminants will affect the deci-
sion as to which compounds will be monitored in the program.
It is important to monitor those compounds that dominate the
health risk assessment given equivalent receptor exposure.
Homogeneity of the waste will generally reduce the com-
plexity and cost of the air monitoring program. The air moni-
toring program can be simplified to monitor for one or more
indicator compounds.
Project Factors
Program objectives serve to direct and focus the air moni-
toring program. Available and applicable methods determine if
program objectives can be achieved.
The availability of applicable sampling and analytical
methods may limit the monitoring effort There are several
sources that provide current reference methods [3] [7] [8] [9]
[10]. However, the method available may not be compatible
Engineering Bulletin: Design Considerations for Ambient Air Monitoring at Superfund Sites
-------
with the project needs: for example, if the need arises to
continuously monitor a contaminant and have realtime data
available onsite, but the proposed method is integrated sample
collection and analysis with a 36-hour turnaround. This situa-
tion is encountered frequently when there is a need to monitor
a semivolatile or nonvolatile compound found as particulate
matter. The standard approach is to use high- volume collec-
tion on filters or foam with offsite laboratory analysis. The
appropn'ate project strategy would be to correlate onsite realtime
analysis, such as monitoring with a dust analyzer (screening
level monitoring), with high volume sampling and assume a
percentage of screening level monitoring response as the con-
taminant concentration. By combining screening and in-depth
approaches and assuming loading, data can be obtained for
situations where there are no sampling techniques available to
meet the program needs.
Project resources affect what type and level of air monitor-
ing can be conducted at any given site. The amount of
resources allotted to the air monitoring program should pro-
vide for the selection of methods and how they are to be
applied. Resource restrictions may influence the application of
methods by limiting frequency (representativeness) or repeat-
ability of the monitoring effort, or it may influence which
methods are selected and used.
Limitations
Selection of an air monitoring method involves consider-
ation of both the application of the method and its limitations.
Limitations that may affect most air monitoring approaches
include:
1) Frequency of monitoring affects data representative-
ness, regardless of air monitoring approach or method. A well-
defined program must monitor at sufficient frequency for the
data to be representative.
2) Monitoring of large numbers of specific compounds is
costly and time intensive. The requirement for this level of
surveillance must be supported at the onset of the program.
3) General class or broad-band monitoring of contami-
nant species also has advantages and limitations. The advan-
tage of broad-band monitoring is that most of the emissions
from the site are monitored. These data can be used with
composition data to estimate individual species or types of
compounds (i.e., total hydrocarbons as aromatics, or total aro-
matics as benzene). However, broad-band monitoring is often
a conservative estimate and therefore the site may be consid-
ered more toxic or to carry a greater risk than is the case.
4) A limited number of monitoring stations affects the
coverage at the fenceline. Line source monitoring versus point
monitoring should be considered if fenceline coverage is an
issue.
5) Meteorological conditions greatly influence the air moni-
toring program and may affect the design of the program or
result in limited data capture. Climate characteristics like a
marine environment (i.e., moist, salty air), diurnal wind pat-
terns, and seasonal conditions should be factored into the
design to avoid poor data capture.
Design Procedures
The important tasks in designing an air monitoring pro-
gram for a hazardous waste site restoration activity are: select-
ing the most appropriate approach, establishing the data qual-
ity objectives, and selecting the proper sampling and analytical
techniques. Since no two hazardous waste sites are alike, the
best way to assist the RPM to design an air monitoring program
specific to a site is to develop a protocol that can be applied to
any site and to provide useful information that will result in
effective air monitoring programs. Figure 2 lists the twelve steps
for designing an AAM program. They are described in the
following subsections.
Program objectives must be defined so that they are
specific and detailed. A reviewer of these objectives must have a
clear understanding of all major aspects of the program. It will
be necessary to review these objectives at various times in
designing and implementing the program to ensure the pro-
gram objective will be met. If there is a need to modify the
program objective, all parties involved should concur and ap-
prove of the program redirection.
Identifying the feasibility of air monitoring is critical at
this early stage before significant time and effort is expended
pursuing a conceptual program that is not feasible. This should
include an analysis of the site characteristics, the properties of
the waste, and key project factors. Although this initial analysis
does require some prior knowledge of later stages, it is impor-
tant to take some time to consider what is known and whether
or not the project objectives are feasible.
Historical data collection and review will provide some
of the information needed for evaluating applicability of air
monitoring. Site scoping may include researching the site record,
site manifest files, and operating permits; locating regulatory
involvement documentation; collecting odor/nuisance com-
plaints; conducting interviews with involved parties; evaluating
historical site characterization data; and reviewing historical
aerial photography of the site (if available). The objective is to
identify the type, physical state, and likely emissions from the
site in the undisturbed and disturbed states. Waste composi-
tion data and predictive modeling may be used to estimate
emission rates of contaminants [3]. These estimates can be
used with empirical factors and simple models [4] to estimate
emissions from disturbed waste. These data are then used with
a dispersion model like the Industrial Source Complex Short
Term model (ISCST) to predict contaminant concentration at
the fenceline for different meteorological conditions. These
estimates of contaminants and their concentrations provide
excellent data for planning the air monitoring program.
Site investigation is an opportunity to collect specific and
useful data from the site for designing the air monitoring
program.
Engineering Bulletin: Design Considerations for Ambient Air Monitoring at Superfund Sites
-------
FIGURE 2. FLOWCHART OF ACTIVITIES FOR DESIGNING THE AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
STEP1
DEFINE PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
STEP 2
IDENTIFY FEASIBILITY OF AIR
MONITORING
STEP 3
HISTORICAL DATA COLLECTION AND
REVIEW
STEP 4
SITE INVESTIGATION
STEPS
SELECT THE INDICATOR SPECIES
STEP 6
SELECT APPLICABLE SAMPLING
TECHNIQUES/MONITORING AND
ANALYTICAL METHODS
SELECT APPLICABLE EQUIPMENT/
INSTRUMENTATION
STEPS
ESTABLISH MONITORING CRITERIA
STEP 9
DESIGN THE MONITORING NETWORK
STEP 10
DESIGN THE FREQUENCY OF
MONITORING
STEP 11
IDENTIFY THE METEORLOGICAL
MONITORING NEEDS
STEP 12
DESIGN THE QUALITY ASSURANCE
PROJECT PLAN
Engineering Bulletin: Design Considerations for Ambient Air Monitoring at Superfund Sites
-------
Screening technologies include head space analysis of a
sample in a bottle, upwind/downwind air sampling, realtime
instrument survey, and the use of predictive models. These
technologies are recommended for determining if the waste
has the potential for air emissions [3]. In-depth technologies
include the surface flux chamber, soil vapor probes, down hole
flux chamber, and fenceline monitoring and modeling. The
advantages and limitations of these preferred screening and in-
depth level technologies are discussed in the AP'A Engineering
Bulletin [1]. These technologies are recommended for deter-
mining undisturbed and disturbed waste emission rate esti-
mates from the site and may be useful to emphasize air moni-
toring techniques if a pretest site screening is needed to support
the air monitoring program design. One approach is to pre-
view one or more of the candidate techniques for air monitor-
ing at a "first alert" station so that their performance can be
evaluated. Information for identifying candidate sample collec-
tion and analytical/monitoring techniques is found in refer-
ences 1, 3, 9 and 10. Emission rates from the disturbed waste
are likely to increase significantly during waste disturbance, and
applicable monitoring techniques must be able to detect maxi-
mum and minimum concentrations.
The site investigation data are critical in selecting sampling
and analytical techniques, establishing contaminants and the
likely contaminant concentration range, and evaluating candi-
date monitoring approaches and/or sampling and analytical
technologies.
Selecting the indicator species is important to the selec-
tion of air monitoring techniques and will determine the repre-
sentativeness of the air monitoring data. Indicator species are
used to represent the type, range, and concentration of all air
contaminant release from the site. The emissions from the
waste must be relatively homogeneous for the indicator species
concept to be useful. Usually, there are many types of air
contaminants released from the site, and it is often not possible
to monitor all species. It is often necessary to rely on indicator
species monitoring. Further, even if there were resources avail-
able to monitor all of the species released, it would probably
not be technically feasible, since there are only a handful of
valid sampling/analytical methods.
The overall objective of selecting candidate indicator spe-
cies is to find species that are common to the waste and can be
sampled and analyzed using conventional techniques. The
ideal indicator species should be found uniformly in the waste
and at a relatively constant ratio to other contaminants in the
downwind plume; a relatively nonreactive or a stable air con-
taminant, found in the downwind plume well above the detec-
tion limit of the sample collection/analytical technique or air
monitoring approach selected; unique to the site and not
found in the upwind air at significant levels. Representativeness
of the indicator(s) should be demonstrated at the onset and
perhaps throughout the program. This is accomplished by
collecting samples using techniques that identify and quantify
the indicator as well as other dominant and significant com-
pounds. This verification of indicator species is critical for the
air monitoring program to properly function.
Selecting applicable sampling and analytical techniques
or monitoring methods is the central issue in designing the air
monitoring program. The project objective will provide guid-
ance as to the type of contaminant (volatile organic compound
(VOC), volatile inorganic compound (VIC), semivolatile organic
compound (SVOQ, particulate matter (PM)) and which ap-
proach is most appropriate (i.e., continuous monitoring, line
versus point monitoring, integrated point monitoring, emission
measurement and modeling). The project objective should be
developed with knowledge of the project needs, site character-
istics, waste properties, and project factors. Without this direc-
tion, it is not possible to select applicable sampling and analyti-
cal techniques or monitoring methods. Table 1 lists general
guidance on monitoring, collection, and analysis.
References 8 and 9 contain information that is applicable
to many sites and is specific for toxic organic compounds. They
provide data on sampling technique, sample collection, and
analytical technique for general classifications of compounds
commonly found at hazardous waste sites. These approaches
are relevant for point monitoring using integrated sample col-
lection and are common for sites that need low level detection,
where realtime data is not part of the project objective. Table 2
lists the toxic organic compendium methods.
Selecting applicable equipment/instrumentation follows
after the sampling and monitoring method has been selected.
Several tables have been assembled to assist in selecting appro-
priate sampling and analytical methods as well as selecting
applicable equipment and instrumentation. These tables pro-
vide vendor information, product nomenclature, analyte detec-
tion data, and 1991 cost estimate information for field survey
and air monitoring techniques and instruments. This informa-
tion was too extensive to be included in this document, but can
be obtained from the EPA contact. This listing is not compre-
hensive or meant to serve as an endorsement of these products.
It is intended as supportive information for the air monitoring
design steps that involve identifying, evaluating, and selecting
air monitoring approaches and specific technologies.
There are several considerations, however, that will be a
part of the selection process: 1) range of detection for the
technology in comparison to the project objectives; 2) dura-
tion of the sampling period and the capability of the technol-
ogy; 3) portability of the technology and required support
functions; 4) data turnaround time and the project needs; 5)
technical expertise needed to operate the technology properly;
6) cost and availability of the technology from the vendor.
Establishing monitoring criteria may happen early in the
design process or be part of the program objectives; however,
these criteria should be established when air monitoring meth-
ods are being evaluated. Project-specific criteria must be
established using available health data, site factors such as
distance to receptors, exposure criteria such as threshold limit
value (TLV) and permissible exposure limit (PEL) data, and a
health risk assessment. This process should be used to develop
a time-weighted set of criteria that will protect the health of the
public and allow for restoration of the site [11 ] [12].
Designing the air monitoring network and siting moni-
toring stations involves considering needs for representative-
ness of these air monitoring data and project resources. In
addition to the standard fenceline surveillance, it may be ad-
tngmeenng Bulletin: Design Considerations for Ambient Air Monitoring at Superfund Sites
-------
TABLE 1. GENERAL GUIDANCE FOR INTEGRATED, POINT MONITORING, SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
CLASSIFICATION
VOLATILES
SEMI-VOLATILES,
INCLUDING
PESTICIDES AND PCBs
METALS
SAMPLING TECHNIQUE SAMPLE CONDITIONING
TENAX ADSORBENT THERMAL DESORPTION, CYROGENIC
TRAPPING AND FOCUSING
SUMMA CANISTER NAFION DRYER
CRYOGENIC TRAPPING (OPTION)
MODIFIED WATER PURGE TO
ADSORBENT TRAP, THEN THERMAL
DESORPTION
FILTER FOLLOWED BY COMBINATION 1 0% ETHER/HEXANE
PUF/XAD-2 ADSORBENT TRAP SOXHLET EXTRACTION,
USING HIGH-VOLUME SAMPLER: SILICA GEL CLEAN-UP
FILTER MICROWAVE EXTRACTION
USING HNO3/HCI ACID SOLUTION
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
ICAP
GC/MS - GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/MASS SPECTROMETRY
PUF-XAD-2 - POLYURETHANE FOAM - XAD-2 RESIN
ICAP - INDUCTIVELY COUPLED ARGON PLASMA SPECTROSCOPY
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF TOXIC ORGANIC (TO) COMPENDIUM METHODS
COMPENDIUM METHOD
TYPE OF COMPOUND
SAMPLE COLLECTION
ANALYTICAL METHOD
TO-1
TO-2
TO-3
TO-4
TO-5
TO-6
TO-7
TO-8
TO-9
TO-10
TO-11
TO-12
TO-1 3
TO-14
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
PESTICIDES
ALDEHYDES/KETONES
PHOSGENE
AMINES
PHENOLS
DIOXINS
PESTICIDES
ALDEHYDES/KETONES
NON-METHANE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
POLYAROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
TENAX SOLID SORBENT GC/MS
MOLECULAR SIEVE SORBENT GC/MS
CRYOTRAP GC/FID
POLYURETHANE FOAM GC/ECD
IMPINGER HPLC
IMPINGER HPLC
ADSORBENT GC/MS
IMPINGER HPLC
POLYURETHANE FOAM GC/MS
POLYURETHANE FOAM GC/ECD
SEPELCO-PAK HPLC
CANISTER PDFID
POLYURETHANE FOAM GC/MS,HPLC
CANISTER GC/MS
GC/MS - GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/MASS SPECTROMETRY
GC/FID - GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/FLAME IONIZATION DETECTION
GC/ECD - GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/ELECTROLYTIC CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR
HPLC - HIGH PRESSURE LIQUID CHROMATGRAPHY
PDFID - PRECONCENTRATION AND DIRECT FLAME IONIZATION DETECTION
vantageous to add a downwind work-zone monitoring station
that could serve two purposes: worker protection and adher-
ence to the health and safety plan and a "first-alert" station that
could provide rapid response data and valuable information to
the site manager regarding site restoration activities. This
information could assist in controlling site activities or the source
of fugitive emissions and could potentially reduce the threat of
impact at the fenceline.
Most air monitoring programs that use point monitoring
have at a minimum one station located at the daytime upwind
(dominant) position and two or more at downwind positions.
The sector approach uses 8 to 12 stations located in each major
compass direction for coverage in all dominant wind directions.
The selection of number and position of stations will depend on
the program objectives and resources. The choice of line
monitoring versus point monitoring addresses this issue of
Engineering Bulletin: Design Considerations for Ambient Air Monitoring at Superfund Sites
-------
representativeness in the data. Line monitoring using optical
remote sensing (FTIR, UV-DOAS) can provide complete fenceline
monitoring which would be equivalent to placing point moni-
tors (integrated sample collection or instrumental monitors)
side-by-side along the fenceline of concern. The other advan-
tage of line monitoring is that data may be processed onsite
and essentially realtime [13]; these two features distinguish line
monitoring from all other methods. Project needs, detection
limits, and detectability will determine if optical remote sensing
is appropriate for the air monitoring approach.
Designing the frequency of AAM can range from limited
monitoring on selected days to monitoring at all locations every
day. Frequency of sampling may be comprehensive, but analy-
sis of samples of data collected may reflect wind direction or
site activities. For instance, sector monitoring with 8 to 12
monitoring locations could involve 24-hour monitoring. How-
ever, the dominant upwind and 2 or 3 downwind monitoring
station samples may be selected for analysis thus preventing
the analysis of useless sample media. Frequency of monitoring
will reflect the program AAM objectives.
Identifying the project meteorological monitoring needs
usually involves designing a micro-meteorological network for
onsite monitoring and/or arranging for data collection from a
local airport and/or meteorological monitoring network, Onsite
data are recommended so that fenceline concentrations can be
evaluated considering site factors such as terrain. Typically, site
meteorological monitoring consists of at least one station with
a 10-meter tower and sensors for wind speed, wind direction,
and temperature. Data are typically collected and stored on a
data logger and processed as 5-minute and hourly averages.
Designing the Quality Assurance Project Plan involves
defining the type and level of program quality assurance, qual-
ity control, and independent auditing. The Quality Assurance
Project Plan (QAPP) elements include project description and
objectives, all field sampling/monitoring direction, all analytical
procedures, data quality objectives, data evaluation procedures,
system and performance auditing, and corrective action proto-
cols. This document serves two purposes: 1) provides a com-
plete guidance document for project implementation and ex-
ecution, and 2) specifies the level of data quality and provides a
program for attaining the specified level of data quality. Every
air monitoring program needs a site-specific QAPP.
Site Requirements
Site requirements for air monitoring will vary according to
the objectives of the air monitoring program and the specific
monitoring techniques used. A screening type program may
only require minimum support facilities. A more detailed air
monitoring program may require weatherproof shelters pow-
ered by 110-volt service for each fixed monitoring station and
may include data transfer by line or radio to a data processing/
computer center. Support needs including utilities and access
to monitoring locations should be considered when designing
the air monitoring program.
EPA Contact
Technology-specific questions regarding air monitoring
during Superfund remediation may be directed to:
Michelle Simon
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
(513)569-7469
Or to one of the Regional Air/Superfund Coordinators:
Rose Toscano, Region I
Boston, MA
(617) 565-3280
Alison Devine, Region II
New York, NY
(212)264-9868
Patricia Flores, Region III
Philadelphia, PA
(215)597-9134
Lee Page, Region IV
Atlanta, GA
(404) 347-2864
Charles Hall, Region V
Chicago, IL
(312)886-9401
Mark Hansen, Region VI
Dallas, TX
(214)655-6582
Wayne Kaiser, Region VII
Kansas City, KS
(913)551-7603
Norm Huey, Region VIII
Denver, CO
(303) 293-0969
Kathy Diehl, Region IX
San Francisco, CA
(415)744-1133
Chris Hall, Region X
Seattle, WA
(206)553-1949
Acknowledgments
This bulletin was prepared for the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Office of Research and Development (ORD),
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL), Cincinnati, Ohio,
by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIQ under
contract no. 68-C8-0062. Mr. Eugene Harris served as the EPA
Technical Project Monitor. Mr. Gary Baker (SAIC) was the Work
Assignment Manager. Dr. Charles E. Schmidt was the primary
author. The following other Agency and contractor personnel
contributed their time and comments by participating in the
expert review meetings and/or peer review of the document:
Mr. Eric Saylor SAIC
Mr. George Wahl SAIC
Mr. Bart Eklund Radian Corporation
^^^^^^^^^^^HM^HMi^HMHMHHHH^HBHH^^H||^^H||^_g^^gp|j|^^ggg||^jg|^^^^^^g||^ggg^MH|^^^H^^^MMH^MM^^M|^^^p-
Engineering Bulletin: Design Considerations for Ambient Air Monitoring at Superfund Sites
'U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993 — 750-071/60162
-------
REFERENCES
1. Engineering Bulletin: Air Pathways Analysis. EPA/540/S-
92/01 3, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincin-
nati, Ohio, November 1992.
2. Air Superfund National Technical Guidance Study Series,
Volume 1: Application of Air Pathway Analysis for
Superfund Activities, Interim Final. EPA/450/1-89/001,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC, 1989.
3. Air Superfund National Technical Guidance Study Series,
Volume 2: Application of Air Pathway Analysis for
Superfund Activities, Appendix, Interim Final. EPA/450/1 -
89/002, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, 1989.
4. Air Superfund National Technical Guidance Study Series,
Volume 3: Estimation of Air Emissions from Cleanup
Activities at Superfund Sites, Interim Final. EPA/450/1 -89/
003, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, 1989.
5. Air Superfund National Technical Guidance Study Series,
Volume 4: Procedures for Dispersion Modeling and Air
Monitoring for Superfund Air Pathway Analysis, Interim
Final. EPA/450/1-89/004, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1989.
6. Spellicy, R. L, Spectroscopic Remote Sensing: Addressing
Requirements of the Clean Air Act. 24, Spectroscopy, 6(9)
Nov/December1991.
7. Technical Assistance Document for Sampling and Analysis
of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient Air. EPA/ 600/
4-83/027, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC, 1983.
8. Compendium of Methods for the Determination of Toxic
Organic Compounds in Ambient Air (Supplement to EPA/
600/4-84/041). EPA/600/4-87/006, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, Septem-
ber 1986.
9. Second Supplement to Compendium of Methods for the
Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient
Air. EPA/600/4-89/018, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, June 1988.
10. Lodge, j. P., Editor, Methods of Air Sampling and
Analysis, 3rd Edition, Lewis Publisher, Inc., Chelsea Ml,
1989.
11. Gravitz, N., Derivation and Implementation of Air Criteria
During Hazardous Waste Site Cleanups, Journal of the Air
Pollution Control Association, 35(7), July 1985.
12. Estimation of Air Impacts for Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)
Systems. EPA450/1-92/001, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, January 1992.
13. Hudson, J., et al. Remote Sensing of Toxic Air Pollutants at
a High Risk Point Source Using Long Path FTIR, 91-57.1,
Presented at the 1991 Air and Waste Management
Association Annual Meeting, Vancouver, BC, June 1991.
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/540/S-92/012
------- |