Analysis Of Soil And House Dust For
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
by
Jane C. Chuang
Battelle
Columbus, OH 43201-2693
Contract Number 68-D4-0023
Work Assignment 01
Project Officer
Nancy K. Wilson
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Work Assignment Manager
James Heidman
Sustainable Technology Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
EPA Disclaimer
The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the United
'States Environmental Protection Agency under EPA Contract Number 68-D4-0023 to Battelle
Memorial Institute. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
n
-------
Foreword
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's
land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency
strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human
activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate,
EPA's research program is providing data and technical support for solving environmental
problems today and building a science knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological
resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and prevent or reduce
environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for investigation of
technological and management approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and
the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on methods for the
prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of
water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated sites and ground water; and
prevention and control of indoor air pollution. The goal of this research effort is to catalyze
development and implementation of innovative, cost-effective environmental technologies;
develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to support regulatory and policy
decisions; and provide technical support and information transfer to ensure effective
implementation of environmental regulations and strategies.
Human exposure to multimedia contaminants, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons is
an area of concern to EPA because of the possible mutagenicity and carcinogenicity of these
compounds. These compounds originate from industrial processes and combustion and are
present in a variety of outdoor and indoor environments. The efforts described in this report
provide an important contribution to our capability to measure and evaluate human exposure to
air toxics.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan.
It is published and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the
user community and to link researchers with their clients.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
m
-------
Abstract
It has been conjectured that jet turbine exhaust near airplane flight paths may result in
significant human exposure to PAH. The fallout from the aerosol plume could be introduced
into the residence directly as drafts through the interior of the house or through accumulation of
PAH in soil and subsequent track-in to the residence. The EPA Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory (RREL)1 arranged access to a household located approximately eight miles from the
end of a runway at the Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky Airport, and collected soil,
wipe, and dust samples in and around the household. Battelle analyzed the collected samples for
target polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). The objective of this study was to determine if
abnormally high PAH concentrations existed in and around the selected household.
The analytical method for the determination of PAH in soil and dust samples consists of
sonication with 10 ml of hexane for two 30-min extractions, and analysis of the hexane extract
by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). The analytical method for determining
PAH in wipe samples is comprised of Soxhlet extraction with dichloromethane (DCM), silica
gel column chromatography, and analysis of the target fraction by GC/MS. Quantitative
recoveries (greater than 80 percent) of spiked perdeuterated PAH were obtained from these
samples.
A total of 19 PAH ranging from naphthalene (2-ring) to coronene (7-ring), were
measured. The sums of concentrations of the 19 PAH ranged from 0.13 to 0.88 ppm in soil
samples, from 1.4 to 3.1 ug/m2 in wipe samples, and from 0.97 to 4.0 ppm in dust samples. The
PAH concentrations in dust samples were higher than those in soil samples.
This report is submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-04-0023, Work Assignment
No. 1, by Battelle under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This
report covers a period from July 1995 through January 1996, and work was completed as of
January 1996.
1 For all references in this report to the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) the
RREL is now the National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL).
IV
-------
Contents
Disclaimers ii
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vi
Acknowledgment vii
1. Introduction . . . 1
2. Conclusions 2
3. Recommendations 3
4. Experimental Procedure 4
Sampling Procedures 4
Analytical Procedures 6
5. Results and Discussion 8
References . 15
Appendices
A. PAH data in soil samples 16
B. PAH data in wipe samples 17
C. PAH data in house dust and entryway dust samples 18
-------
Figures
Number . Page
1. Sampling locations of soil, wipe, and dust samples 5
Tables
Number Page
5.1. Summary of PAH concentrations (ppm) in soil samples . 9
5.2. Summary of PAH concentrations (j^g/m2) in wipe samples . . / 10
5.3. Total and fine fraction house dust loading 11
5.4. Summary of PAH concentrations (ppm) in house dust and
entryway dust samples 12
5.5. Recovery data for perdeuterated PAH in soil, wipe, and
dust samples 13
5.6. Levels of target PAH found hi method blanks . . . 14
VI
-------
Acknowledgment
We thank Dr. Jim Heidman and Mr. James Bond of the U.S. EPA for establishing the
sampling design and conducting field sampling for this study. Technical assistance provided
by Ms. Mary Pollard at Battelle in preparing samples is greatly appreciated.
Vll
-------
Section 1
Introduction
There is little known about possible exposure of individuals living near airports to polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Very little data are available through traditional literature
searches on the aerosol/smoke components of jet turbine exhaust. At major airports there are
corridors or discrete pathways through which aircraft are routed. The use of these corridors
significantly localizes the distribution of any fallout subject to meteorologic effects. There is
potential for human exposure from fallout of the aerosol plume. The plume could move
directly to the ground as a cohesive unit due to electrostatic charge or saturation effects and
pass through open windows or be deposited on soil with subsequent track in to residences and
pose a risk of PAH exposure beyond that which might arise from contact with soil outdoors.
One household, which is located approximately eight miles from the end of runway 27 Left at
the Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky International Airport, was selected for
preliminary evaluation. The homeowner volunteered to allow sampling in and around his
home for measuring PAH in soil, dust, and wipe samples. According to the homeowner,
since the extended runway opened in the summer of 1995, 72 to 80 turbine equipped aircraft
fly oyer the residence each day. Approximately 25 to 40 fly over between sunset and sunrise
depending on the season. The airport began using this path as a corridor hi February 1991.
There was a slight hiatus from February through July of 1995 as the runway was extended
2200 feet toward the west.
The objective of this study was to investigate the possibility that jet engine exhaust near
airplane flight paths may result in significant human exposure to PAH. The EPA Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) arranged access to the subject property and
residence. In this study, the RREL developed a sampling design to collect soil, dust and wipe
samples at different locations. Battelle prepared and furnished sampling media and procedures
for collection of dust, soil, and wipe samples to RREL. The RREL conducted the sampling
and provided the collected samples to Battelle for analysis for PAH. The collected samples
were prepared and analyzed for PAH. This final report summarizes the analytical procedures
and the PAH results.
-------
Section 2
Conclusions
The concentrations of each target PAH found hi soil and hi dust samples varied over a range
from < 0.001 to 0.58 ppm. The general concentration trend for the 19 PAH is house dust >
entryway dust > soil. The house dust samples were collected inside the household and the
entryway dust and soil samples were collected outside the household. The concentrations of
each target PAH hi the wipe samples ranged from 0.007 to 0.54 /ig/m2. In general, higher
PAH concentrations were found hi the indoor wipe samples as opposed to the outdoor
composite wipe sample. The sums of 19 PAH ranged from 0.13 to 0.88 ppm hi soil samples,
from 1.4 to 3.1 /*g/m2 in wipe samples, and from 0.97 to 4.0 ppm in dust samples. Seven of
the target PAH are ranked as probable human carcinogens (B2) in the U.S. EPA's Integrated
Risk Information System. The concentrations of B2 PAH account for roughly half of the
concentrations of the sums of 19 PAH in most soil and dust samples but not hi wipe samples.
The spiked perdeuterated PAH were quantitatively recovered from the soil, wipe, and dust
samples. The average recoveries ranged from 81 to 92 percent hi soil samples, from 92 to 96
percent in wipe samples, and from 91 to 100 hi dust samples.
-------
Section 3
Recommendations
We recommend that additional samples be collected to investigate the effect of aircraft exhaust
emissions on exposure to PAH through deposition and through accumulation of PAH in soil
and subsequent track-in to residences. The sample locations should consider the following
factors: proximity to airports, flight patterns, prevailing wind, other relevant meteorological
parameters such as temperature, indoor PAH sources, the influence of particle size on the
PAH distribution, assessment of the extent to which the HVS3 sampling protocol recovers
particle laden PAH's representative of the actual dust laden PAH distribution in the carpet,
and the distribution and concentration of PAH's remaining hi the carpet after sampling with
the HVS3 protocol. The collected samples will be analyzed for target PAH. If justified by
the results from this sampling campaign, a thorough pilot field study may be desirable to
determine the temporal and spacial effects on PAH concentrations in soil and dust and the
effect of jet engine exhaust on PAH exposure.
For a pilot study, one of the criteria for selection of households is to have similar indoor
sources for these households so that the effect of proximity to airports can be better estimated.
Any pilot field study should probably be carried out during four sampling campaigns: spring,
summer, fall and whiter. This approach will enable us to better understand the seasonal
variation of climatic conditions.
-------
Section 4
Experimental Procedure
Sampling Procedures
The sampling design was established by RREL. Figure 1 displays the sampling locations of
the soil, wipe, and dust samples of the subject household. Prior to the sampling, Battelle
provided RREL the sampling media and reviewed the sampling procedures. A training
session was held at Battelle to demonstrate the use of the High Volume Small Surface
Sampler (HVS3) for designated areas in the carpet.
The sampling was conducted on September 27, 1995 by RREL staff members. The subject
household was located on Belleview Road, Petersburg, Kentucky which was west of the
Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky airport. As shown in Figure 1, soil, wipe and dust
samples were collected from a variety of locations. A total of 10 soil samples, 5 wipe samples
and 4 dust samples was collected.
Soil samples #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 were collected at designated locations (Figure
1). At each sampling site, soil was scraped from the top 2 cm surface with an area
approximately 20 cm by 20 cm. When there were leaves or vegetation litters, these materials,
generally about 0.5 cm deep, were carefully scraped away before taking the soil sample.
Wipe samples #25, 26, 27, 28, and 29 were taken from various locations as shown in Figure
1. Wipe samples #25, 28, and 29 were taken by quartz fiber filters thoroughly wet with
hexane and sample #26 and 27 were taken by dry quartz fiber filters. The unused hexane and
filters were sent back to Battelle for use in preparation of a wipe blank. Samples #25, 26, and
27 were taken from the top of the west barn roof. Sample #25 was taken by a hexane-wet
filter with a wipe area of 30.5 cm by 61 cm on the southeast corner of the west barn roof.
Sample #26 was taken by a dry filter with the same area (30.5 cm by 61 cm) at a different
location of southeast cornet of the west barn roof. Sample #27 was taken by a dry filter from
the southeast gutter of the west barn. The area wipe was approximately 39 cm length of metal
gutter which was about 10 cm wide. Sample #28 was a hexane-wet filter wipe from a wood
floor area (30.5 cm by 61 cm) in the dining room. Sample #29 was a hexane-wet filter wipe
along the door jam and the door edge in an upstairs bedroom. The wipe area was
approximately 7.5 cm by 200 cm.
-------
•s
a
o
o
0)
-------
The High-Volume Small Surface Sampler (HVS3) was used to collected samples of carpet-
embedded house dust from designated areas (samples #31, 32, and 33). The HVS3 consists of
a high-powered vacuum cleaner equipped with a sampling nozzle that can be adjusted to a
specific static pressure within the nozzle, a cyclone which according to theoretical calculations
will separate particles 5 /mi mean diameter and larger (1), and a bottle to catch the sample.
Previous studies (2) in which a polyurethane foam (PUF) filter was positioned after the
cyclone hi the HVS3 indicated that less than 3 percent of the PAH and 5 percent of the PCB
were found on the PUF filter compared with the cyclone catch. However, neither the degree
to which the HVS3 sampler removes the total dust load in the carpet nor the distribution of
PAH's as a function of particle size were quantified hi this study. It is known that deep dust
can be exceedingly difficult to remove by vacuuming (3).
Prior to the sampling the HVS3 was disassembled and cleaned. The HVS3 was operated
according to the manufacture's instruction (4) and an ASTM standard guide (5). A 76 cm by
100 cm rectangle was marked out with masking tape at the designated area and the width was
subdivided into 10 7.6-cm wide segments. The HVS3 was run slowly forward and backward
across the 100-cm length of the rectangle a total of eight times along each 7.6-cm width.
After the eighth pass, the unit was gradually moved over to the next segment, and the
procedure was repeated until all 10 segments had been sampled, for a total area of 0.76 m2.
Samples #31 and 32 were collected from the home office and the dining room, respectively
each with one standard area (0.76 m2). Sample #33 was collected from the top of the stairs
with two standard areas (1.52 m2). Sample #34 was collected from a outdoor entry way door
mat. The sample was collected by turning over the entryway mat and placing it on a clean
sheet of aluminum foil. The back of the mat was the beaten for several minutes before it was
removed from the foil. The loose particles on the foil were poured into a clean bottle. The
collected soil/wipe/dust samples were stored at <,4 °C hi the dark and transported to Battelle
for analysis.
Analytical Procedures
Soil samples #1 and 2 were combined as one sample because these samples were taken within
a few inches of the falling runoff from the barn roof. According to the ASTM method (5),
the dust samples were separated into fine ( < 150 /mi) and course fractions and only the fine
fractions were subject to extraction. The dust and soil samples were prepared by the
analytical method validated hi a previous study (6). An aliquot of each dust and soil sample
was spiked with known amounts of perdeuterated PAH, and each sample was extracted twice
with 10 mL of hexane hi a sonication bath for 30 min. The hexane extracts were combined,
filtered, and concentrated for subsequent gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)
analysis. A method blank for dust and soil samples was prepared by the same method
described above.
Wipe samples #25, 26, and 27 were combined as one composite sample because of the small
amount of material visible on the wipes. Known amounts of perdeuterate PAH were spiked
6
-------
into each wipe sample and extracted with dichloromethane (DCM) by Soxhlet technique. The
DCM extracts were concentrated to 1 mL and were fractionated using prepacked 1 g silica gel
columns. Two elution solvents, hexane and hexane/DCM (1:1) were applied to the columns.
The target hexane/DCM fractions were concentrated to 1 mL for subsequent GC/MS analysis.
A hexane-wet filter was used as the method blank for wipe samples and was prepared by the
same method.
The sample extracts and hexane/DCM fractions were analyzed by GC/MS using 70-eV
electron ionization (El). A Finnigan TSQ-45 GC/MS/MS instrument, operated in the GC/MS
mode, was used. Data acquisition and processing were performed with an INCOS 2300 data
system. The GC column was a DB-5 fused silica capillary column (30m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 ^m
film thickness, Supelco), and the column outlet was located in the MS ion source. Helium
was used as the GC carrier gas. Following injection, the GC column was held at 70 °C for 2
mm and temperature-programmed to 290 °C at 8 °C/min. The MS was operated in the
selected ion monitoring (SIM) mode. Masses monitored were the molecular ions (M) and
their associated characteristic fragment ions including M+l ions and doubly charged ions.
Identification of the target compounds was based on their GC retention times relative to those
of the internal standards pHuJphenanthrene, and 9-phenylanthracene. Quantification of target
compounds was based on comparisons of the respective integrated ion current responses of the
target ions to those of the corresponding internal standards using average response factors of
the target compounds generated from standard calibrations.
-------
Section 5
Results And Discussion
The PAH concentrations measured in the soil samples are summarized in Table 5.1. The data
for individual samples are given in Appendix A. A total of 19 PAH, consisting of two 2-ring
PAH, five 3-ring PAH, four 4-ring PAH, four 5-ring PAH, three 6-ring PAH, and one 7-ring
PAH, were measured. Of these, seven are ranked as probable human carcinogens B2 in the
U.S. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). These data provide values for the
individual target PAH, for the sums of B2 PAH, and for the sums of all target PAH. The
PAH concentrations are expressed in units of ppm (/Ag/g). The reported PAH concentrations
are based on the dry weight which was corrected for moisture content of each sample. These
reported data are also corrected for the background PAH levels found in the method blank.
The sums of the concentrations of B2 and total target PAH in soil samples ranged from 0.036
to 0.42 and from 0.13 to 0.88 ppm, respectively. The concentrations of the well-known
carcinogen, benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) in the soil samples ranged from 0.001 to 0.53 ppm. In
general, the highest PAH concentrations were found in the composite soil sample (soil #1, 2)
whereas the lowest PAH concentrations were found in sample #10. With few exceptions, the
sums of the concentrations of B2 PAH is approximately half of the total target PAH
concentrations hi these soil samples. Levels of PAH found in the soil samples of this study
are lower than that hi the soil samples collected at Columbus, Ohio from a previous study (6).
The PAH concentrations measured in the wipe samples are summarized hi Table 5.2. The
data for individual samples are given in Appendix B. The reported PAH values are corrected
for the background levels found hi the blank wipe sample. The sums of the concentration of
B2 and total target PAH hi wipe samples ranged from 0.25 to 1.1 and from 1.4 to 3.1 /-tg/m2,
respectively. The concentrations of BaP in the wipe samples ranged from 0.019 to 0.095
/ig/m2. In general, higher PAH concentrations were found in indoor wipe samples (#28, and
#29) as opposed to the outdoor composite wipe samples (#25, 26, and 27). The sums of the
concentrations of B2 PAH account for approximately 20 to 35 percent of the total target PAH
concentrations.
-------
Table 5.1 Summary Of PAH Concentrations (ppm) In Soil Samples
Compound
Naphthalene
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Cyclopenta[c , d]pyrene
Benz[a]anthracene*
Chrysene*
Benzofluoranthenes*
Benzo[e]pyrene
Benzo[a]pyrene*
Indeno[l ,2,3-c,d]pyrene*
Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene*
Benzo [g ,h, i]pery lene*
Coronene
Sum of B2 PAH
Sum of target PAH
Maximum
0.05
0.008
0.01
0.055
0.021
0.092
0.028
0.12
0.077
0.017
0.063
0.073
0.13
0.038
0.053
0.044
0.015
0.038
0.024
0.42
0.88
Minimum
0.001
< 0.001
<0.001
0.016
< 0.001
< 0.001
0.005
0.005
< 0.001
< 0.001
0.008
0.004
0.012
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.004
0.001
0.002
0.036
0.13
Average
0.010
0.004
0.001
0.025
0.007
0.023
0.010
0.030
0.017
0,005
0.020
0.02
0.038
0.012
0.016
0.012
0.008
0.011
0.010
0.13
0.28
* These PAH compounds are ranked as probably human carcinogens (B2) in the U.S.
EPA's Integrated Risk Information System.
-------
Table 5.2 Summary Of PAH Concentrations Og/m2) In Wipe Samples
Compound
Naphthalene
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Cy clopenta [c , d]py rene
Benz[a] anthracene*
Chrysene*
Benzofluoranthenes*
Benzo[e]pyrene
Benzo[a]pyrene*
Indeno[l ,2,3-c,d]pyrene*
Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene*
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene*
Coronene
Sum of B2 PAH
Sum of target PAH
Maximum
jig/m2
0.48
0.54
0.11
0.038
0.20
0.41
0.12
0.094
0.16
0.078
0.17
0.25
0.21
0.12
0.095
0.27
0.032
0.063
0.11
1.1
3.1
Minimum
/ig/m2
0.097
0.14
0.066
0.034
0.078
0.15
0.031
0.072
0.093
0.012
0.023
0.037
0.067
0.030
0.019
0.081
0.007
0.016
0.016
0.25
1.4
Average
/ig/m2
0.29
0.32
0.084
0.036
0.12
0.25
0.066
0.081
0.12
0.041
0.091
0.14
0.15
0.077
0.062
0.15
0.023
0.041
0.059
0.66
2.2
* These PAH compounds are ranked as probably human carcinogens (B2) in the U.S.
EPA's Integrated Risk Information System.
10
-------
The collected house dust samples (#31, 32, and 33) were sieved into course and fine
(< 150 pun) fractions. The fine fractions were used for PAH analysis. The house dust
loadings of sample #31, 32, and 33 are summarized in Table 3. The fine dust loadings
represented 66.7 to 80.3 percent of the total dust loadings. The total and the fine dust
loadings ranged from 4.915 to 12.898 and from 3.279 to 10.354 g/m2, respectively. The
house dust loadings, and the percent of fine dust loadings are similar to the data from the
previous study (3). Higher dust loadings were found in dust in the first floor (samples #31
and 32) compared to that in the second floor (sample #33).
Table 5.3 Total And Fine Fraction House Dust Loading
Dust Loading, g/m2 Percent of Fine
Sample Code(a) ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ Fraction (%)
Total Fine Fraction (< 150 pun)
#31
#32
#33
9.641
12.898
4.915
7.032
10.354
3.279
72.9
80.3
66.7
(a) Samples #31 and 32 were collected from the first floor home office room and dining
room, respectively. Sample #33 was collected from the area of the top of the stairs at the
second floor.
The PAH concentrations measured in the house dust and entryway dust are summarized in
Table 5.4. The data for individual samples are given in Appendix C. The reported PAH
values are corrected for moisture content in the dust samples and for background levels of
PAH in the method blank.
The dust samples #31, 32, and 33 are house dust samples collected from various locations
inside the household. The dust sample #34 is entryway dust sample collected from a doormat
placed outside the household. The sums of the concentrations of B2 and total target PAH in
these dust samples ranged from 0.25 to 1.8 and from 0.97 to 4.0 ppm, respectively. The
concentrations of BaP in dust samples ranged from 0.035 to 0.19 ppm. In general, levels of
PAH found hi house dust samples (#31, 32, and 33) were higher than that in entryway dust
(#34). The sums of the concentrations of B2 PAH are approximately half of the total target
PAH concentrations hi house dust samples but not hi the entryway dust sample. The
concentrations of PAH found hi the house dust and entryway dust samples hi this study are
lower than those in the house dust and entryway dust samples collected at Columbus, Ohio
from the previous study (6).
11
-------
Table 5.4 Summary Of PAH Concentrations (ppm) In House Dust
And Entryway Dust Samples
Compound
Naphthalene
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Cyclopenta[c,d]pyrene
Benz[a]anthracene*
Chrysene*
Benzofluoranthenes*
Benzo[e]pyrene
Benzo[a]pyrene*
Indeno[l ,2,3-c,d]pyrene*
Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene*
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene*
Coronene
Sum of B2 PAH
Sum of target PAH
Maximum
ppm
0.093
0.047
0.19
0.043
0.069
0.29
0.58
0.33
0.27
0.073
0.22
0.36
0.52
0.23
0.19
0.21
0.098
0.23
0.13
1.8 '
4.0
Minimum
ppm
0.012
0.009
0.002
0.011
0.018
0.064
0.042
0.055
0.030
0.044
0.009
0.043
0.095
0.036
0.035
0.032
0.005
0.029
0.012
0.25
0.97
Average
ppm
0.049
0.028
0.072
0.019
0.046
0.20
0.28
0.25
0.19
0.058
0.14
0.21
0.36
0.14
0.13
0.14
0.056
0.15
0.072
1.2
2.6
* These PAH compounds are ranked as probably human carcinogens (B2) hi
the U.S. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System.
12
-------
The recovery data for perdeuterated PAH spiked onto the soil, wipe, and dust samples are
summarized in Table 5.5. Quantitative recoveries of perdeuterated PAH were obtained for all
the soil, wipe, and dust samples. The recoveries of perdeuterated PAH were 80.8 ± 4.3 to
91.6 ±7.1 percent in soil samples, 91.6 ± 4.8 to 95.8 + 4.0 hi wipe samples, and
87.8 ± 7.0 to 97.4 + 5.2 hi dust samples. The precision for measuring these spiked PAH
was within 10 percent (relative standard deviation).
Table 5.6 summarizes the results of target PAH found hi the method blanks. Only trace
amount of target PAH were found in the blanks. Higher levels of PAH were found hi the
blank wipe sample compared to those hi the method blank for dust and soil. These findings
demonstrated that there was no significant contamination due to sample handling and sample
preparation.
Table 5.5 Recovery Data For Perpeuterated PAH In Soil, Wipe, And Dust Samples
Compound
Fluorene-d10
Pyrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Benzo [k] fluoranthene-d12
Perylene-d12
Soil
85.1 ± 4.5
88.5 + 7.4
91.6 + 7.1
86.6 + 5.7
80.8 + 4.3
Recovery(a), %
Wipe
92.5 + 9.6
93.6 ± 5.7
95.2 ±5.1
95.8 ± 4.0
91.6 ±4.8
Dust
97.4 ±5.2
87.8 ± 7.0
97.3 ± 3.7
93.6 ± 2.3
96.6 ± 4.8
(a) The data are the values of averages and standard deviation of the recoveries of the spiked
compounds hi the same type of samples.
13
-------
Table 5.6 Levels Of Target PAH Found In Method Blanks
Compound
Naphthalene
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluoranthene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Total Amount, ng
Dust/Soil
3.6
1.8
1.6
<1
3.5
29
<1
6.2
7.2
Wipe
14
4.0
3.2
12
19
130
3.6
35
16
Cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene <1 <1
Benz(a)anthracene* < 1 < 1
Chrysene* < 1 < 1
Benzofluoranthenes* < 1 < 1
Benzo(e)pyrene < 1 < 1
Benzo(a)pyrene* <1 <1
Indeno(l,2,3-c,d)pyrene* <1 <1
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene* < 1 < 1
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene* < 1 < 1
Coronene <1 <1
* These PAH compounds are ranked as probably human carcinogens (B2) in the U.S.
EPA's Integrated Risk Information System.
14
-------
References
(1) Roberts, J. W., Engineering Plus, Inc., personal communication, February 29,
1996.
(2) Chuang, J. C., Gordon, S. M., Roberts, J. W., Han, W. and Ruby, M. G.,
Evaluation of HVS3 Sampler for Sampling Fob/cyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and
Polychlorinated Biphenyls, EPA/600/R-94/199, NTIS PB95-123931, 1994.
(3) Roberts, J. W., Glass, G. L. and Spittler, T. M., Measurement of Deep Dust and
Lead in Old Carpets, Measurement of Toxic and Related Pollutants, Air and Waste
Management Association, Pittsburgh, PA, May, 1995, in press
(4) High Volume Small Surface Sampler HVS3: Operation Manual. Cascade Stack
Sampling Systems(CS3), Inc., Bend, Oregon, January 13, 1992.
(5) Standard Practice for Collection of Dust from Carpeted Floors for Chemical
Analysis. Draft Standard Method D.5438-93, Annual Book of ASTM Standards
Volume 11.03, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1994.
(6) Chuang, J.C., Callahan, P.J., Menton, R.G., Gordon, S.M., Lewis, R.G., Wilson,
N.K. Monitoring methods for poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and then-
distribution in house dust and track-in soil.- Environ. Sci. Technol. 29(2), 494-500,
1995.
15
-------
PM
<
I
o
o
2 J ||8g88|i88°o-2^<-^<^^00
oo'=>o<=><=oo<=<=j o o' ooooooooo
S oncSot>c<"lVOONl/")lr)
r3 O. OO-OOOOOOS So O OOO^OOO
^ oo^ooooooooo ooooooooo
tNcstNvooounenvovooocsen'—loooen'——< '—iCSOO'—IT—<(N'—i »—i «—i O *—i *—•O'—'
^ CU o^OOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOO'—'
^ o'Pooooooooooo'oooooo'oo
C3 ^"^ . . ^^ ^^ ^> ^^
SloOOO'—(OO'—•'—|CSO'—i '—i »—lr—' '—'
^•ioooooooooooooooo
^ o'o'Rooooo'ooo'ooooo'o o* o" o o
c ^t* 10 ^5 *^t" ^^ vo os 10 ^5 en c^ c^ ^5 vo ^5 vo o o o c-i '•—< d '—< »—i en »—< »—i o o — — — . .
oo-oooooooopoooooooooj
jjjj oo^ooo'o'ooooo'ooo'oooooo
2 "^j* 10 ?^ en c^ un vo ^st* vo *o oo vo oo os en oo f~" t*^ oo vo en
aOOr^CSOOO*—lOO'—i-—i CS O •«—lOOOOOSOO
oo"ooooooooooo_oooooo
£ oo'Pooo'ooooooooooo o o o" o
S *—i vo *—< vo 10 *o C5 os «—t vo t^* *o en en os c^ "^t* c^ c^l en os
SOO'-i-'-'^l-'-'cnClOCSCS'^'-i'-'^HO'-i^^-.C^
oooooooooo ooooooooo en
^ oooooooooooooo'ooooooo
M^ f4 ^^ _ «^\ .
j^ cu t i oo <*^ oo '"M c*^ oo c^* t^** ^** en en vj oo en *>j i^i oo vj ^ ^
i—i o. ^—i «*""s T—t i—i c^ cis c^i ^~M r*^ *—< vo t*^ en en *o "^i* ^"^ en oi c^ oo
S] oOOOOOO'-iOOOOoOOOOOO-^OO
OOOOOOOOOC3OOOOOOOOC5OO
o
CO
*0
£
phthalene
e
c^.& V §J| I
& m < < t^ S <
.
l
(C
>>
A
^
cT
^
I
I
I
^^
I «
•*i g 8
£B §
PM
•s
CO CO
8
I
p
3
(D
-------
ON **
R. s
c^ ;j_
m
loen^-in
Oi— iOO»-vovo
t-~»-i»— icNenvoen'— loooi— ii— i
Oi-iOOOOOOOOOO
ooooooooo'ooo
•^-i-^l-CNVOOOOlOOri-OinONVO
oooooooooooo
c3ooc5ocJoooooo
oooNvoin^cNinenovbooo
i— icsoi— 'fNeni— ii— 'csooi— !
oooooooooooo
oooooooooooo
i— , 0 g
>**o % Bt 2 ^
ex c £ * -o '£ >*
*& $ J g c " 1 &
g £>, ja |^^cn^.^
M rt^^iO^^^if-C-^o
Isllllfltl^l
lit its 1 i|| ii
SpVOPQOpnwm^Qpqu
rj-
8
A
VO
O
1
O
2
o
VO
o
§
o
.,
*
I
">i
C/3
G
0*
-------
w
II
CO
P
C3
f§
8 &
T: ex
to
P
%
o
ffi
II
-4—*
c/a
C3
p
CO
3
O
ffi
si
to
p
£
§
ffi
Compound
C*4 ON C1^ *"*"* oO *^i" *^" ^"i
T— i o o ••— i *— i vo co *n
oooooooo
co co co co co co co co
i/-j co ^~~< co *--i I**- *~~< co
VD CO O\ ^" VD OO IO O\
O O *-H O O 04 O CN
oooooooo
t"*1 CO T~^ ^~~< V^ C^ CS ^d"
C^ Oi ^" 1(~H CO C? "^ O4
r**i e~2 e^ C1 O1 C^ O5 CO
C2 ^5 ^5 CD ^5 ^D ^^ CO
co f"- *o ^— i ON O OO CN
<*" ^ f"^ f^> C™1? *^> CM *O CO
oooooooo
g
S g 0 0
D »^i « c c3
§ ^ ^ -g Jj g ^
1 Iff I 111
f SB § l^jl
^pq^^fcpM^tL,
en'*O't*ONeneneno
O O O O O O O O O
ooooooooo
O^ *~H 1^^ ^^^ ^^ ^slj" .*•••( ^^N Q^P
^-H 1^1 ^f ^^1 O^ s t CO **sj" ^^3
CN o *-i '— i en -«— i <— i ^ O
oooooooc>o
^3\ ^^ ^^ ^^? O4 ^T-3 t**** ^d" i"H
^^* ^^5 OO C""* ^^N ^^ C*** OO ^^?
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^J ^^ ^P ^w^ t^3
(^^ co co ^o CM c*1* ^TN ^^ oo
t*** C*™1* 0^4 ^^l C*^ C**4 OO **"4 CJN
f*1^ ^^ OJ CO tjO C^ ^^ O*i tr^p
ooooooc>oo
* *
^^ Q^
c * 8 S
£> * tj gj g
ex c g * ^ •£
^8 ^ 8 S « S
>» S § § '' , ,
i_j £2 c3 fc" fc* •» »c
C^ i^ ** i— ( ^> ^^ /*O _fv
lA^|ft2f
| f-S a | •g'g | |
ON CN oo TJ-
Si— i n- t>
O CN ON
O O O O
•'—I IO CM ON
10 oo ^—i ON
T— 1 O '— < »O
O O '— i CN
VO ^r- 1 \f) CN
oo vo >o en
*-H O !O 00
O O ^ CN
oo o «n oo
cs en cs >n
CSJ ^H 00 ON
o o ••— < en
*«
c^ ( .
(U p^]
% HH <
s 5 ^
d. "^ <»-»
r=J CU <0
CT W>
•^ g M S
£2 g ^ ^
0 G 0 0
S g S S
0033
PQ U co co
cs"
a
CO
§
txD
§
3
CQ
gi
G ^
5 CO
S
•O ^4
_^
G (5
« 1
^O i^
G G
O co
cx -.,
G •<
o cu
o W
5 °^
PM P
(U
*
------- |