United States
                    Environmental Protection
                    Agency
                    Research and Development
  Atmospheric Research and Exposure
  Assessment laboratory
  Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
  EPA/600/S3-91/052 Feb. 1992
«rEPA       Project Summary
                    Laboratory and  Field
                    Evaluations  of a  Methodology for
                    Determining  Hexavalent
                    Chromium  Emissions from
                    Stationary Sources
                   Anna C. Carver
                     Development of methodology for
                   sampling and analysis of chromium to
                   support stationary source regulations
                   was initiated in 1984. This study was
                   initiated to determine whether chro-
                   mium emissions should be regulated
                   under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act
                   National Emissions Standards for Haz-
                   ardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). To
                   support stationary source regulations,
                   it is important that (1) the sampling
                   procedure  not change the chromium
                   valence state during sampling and (2)
                   an analytical technique for measuring
                   low concentration levels of chromium
                   be available. These goals are achieved
                   with the current EPA "Draft Method for
                   Sampling and Analysis of Hexavalent
                   Chromium at Stationary Sources.*
                    The draft method utilizes  a recirc-
                   ulating system to flush impinger re-
                   agent into the sampling nozzle during
                   sample collection. Immediate contact
                   of the stack gas with impinger reagent
                   "fixes" the chromium valence state. .
                    Ion chromatography coupled with a
                  post column reaction system and an
                  ultraviolet visible detector is used to
                  analyze Cr(VI) in the parts per trillion
                  range.
                    Field tests were conducted at metal
                  plating facilities, industrial cooling
                  towers, municipal waste incinerators,
                  sewage sludge  incinerators, and haz-
                  ardous waste incinerators.  It was at
                  the hazardous waste  facility that the
                  new method was proven to have ac-
                  ceptable precision and essentially no
                  conversion in the sample train.  Stan-
 dard deviations for the sampling runs
 were determined.
   This Project Summary was developed
 by EPA's Atmospheric Research and
 Exposure Assessment Laboratory, Re-
 search Triangle Park, NC, to announce
 key findings of the research project
 that is fully documented in a separate
 report of the same title  (see Project
 Report ordering information at back).

 Sampling and Analytical
 Procedures
  A "dry" test method was developed for
 collection of Cr(VI) with intended applica-
 tion at stationary sources with  filterable,
 dry emissions. This method involved col-
 lection of particulate emissions by use  of
 Method 5 (Appendix B, 40 CFR Part 60).
 Under Method 5, stack gas is isokinetically
 drawn through a sampling probe and glass
 fiber filter. Colorimetric analysis using  a
 spectrophotometer with and  optimum
 wavelength of 540 nm was used to detect
 the specific  wavelength generated by
 diphenylcarbazide when complexed with
 Cr(VI) in the filter digest. Tests employing
 this  method  were conducted at  a
 ferrochrome smelter, a chemical plant, and
 a refractory brick plant.
  Testing of the Method 5 sampling train
 continued in various studies at coal fired
 boilers, municipal waste combustors and
 chrome plating facilities. It was determined
 that this method was unable  to effectively
 collect chromium from these sources, thus
 an impinger technique (MethodlS-type
train) was developed to collect the mist or
droplets containing  soluble chromium.

         ?§g> Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
Twelve paired test runs were performed
at a chromium plating facility to compare
the two test methods.
  The impinger train consisted of a stain-
less steel  nozzle, a heated glass  lined
probe, fitter bypass, two reagent impingers
containing 0.1  N  sodium hydroxide
(NaOH), an  empty  impinger, filter,  and
silica gel impinger.  Further studies  and
data comparisons allowed the elimination
of  the  filter. The  train  was  operated
Isokinetfcally using  Method  5 sampling
procedures. Sample was recovered using
a deionized water rinse. Analysis for Cr(VI)
was the same as that described for the
Method 5 sampling technique.  The
impinger method sampling train corrected
some of the problems  associated  with
chromium  determinations at facilities with
effluent  streams containing  mist or aero-
sols. Documented  results from chrome
plating facilities indicated that the method
was acceptable. Questions remained,
however, concerning Cr(VI) conversion.
   Further  field studies of the stationary
sources with potential Cr(VI)  emissions
 included a series of cooling towers. It was
 at cooling  tower facilities that the need for
 a low level analytical technique for  mea-
 surement  of hexavalent chromium was
 critical.  Methods of reducing sample vol-
 ume for better detectability with the colori-
 metric method proved to be unacceptable.
 Also, reducing sample volume  increases
 the chances of chemically altering the va-
 lence form of the collected chromium be-
 fore Cr(VI) determinations  have  been
 achieved.
    A second series of cooling tower test
 incorporated the following changes to the
 sampling technique: (1) the collection me-
 dia was changed from deionized water to
 0.1 N NaOH, and (2) an additional rinse
 of the  sampling train with nitric acid was
 added  to the  recovery  process. These
 rinses were included to determine how
 much chromium.remained in the impingers
 after the  first rinse, and to loosen any
 insoluble  chromium from the walls of the
  impingers.
    A very important aspect of this series of
  cooling tower tests was the realization that
  chromium is converting somewhere  be-
  tween the tower and the sampling train.
  Efforts  to determine where the conversion
  was occurring and to identify an analytical
  technique with acceptable detection limits
  were undertaken in a series of laboratory
  and field  tests.
    The  analytical technique  selected for
  evaluation was ion chromatography  (1C)
  coupled with a Cr(VI)-specific post column
  reaction.  The Cr(VI)-specific post column
  reaction  employs the  diphenylcarbazide
  chromophor identical to the colorimetric
procedures used in the earlier tests.  1C
however provides much greater sensitiv-
ity. A preconcentration technique extends
the sensitivity of this system to the parts
per trillion  range. This 1C procedure  al-
lows separation of Cr(Vl) in the basic col-
lection media, eliminating potential biases
from sample preparation.
   The development of this analytical tech-
nique revolutionized the development of a
stationary source test method for mea-
surement of Cr(VI).  It was now possible
to directly measure Cr(VI) at levels as low
as 100 parts per trillion.
   The development of a sampling train
which would prevent the conversion of
Cr(VI) was necessary to obtain represen-
tative  measurements of stack gas.  Be-
cause laboratory studies showed that the
potential exist for conversion of Cr(VI) to
Cr(lll) in the glass-lined  probe of the
Method  13-type train,  a sampling device
which eliminated the "dry" probe surface
area was  designed.  Employing this  de-
sign allows immediate contact of the Cr(VI)
with  the basic  impinger reagent as  the
stack gas enters the sampling train. This
immediate contact  allows the reagent to
dissolve the chromium and  stabilize  the
Cr(VI) in the gas stream. The recirculating
 reagent also provides continuous  rinsing
 of the sample  line.  To minimize  back-
 ground contamination often noted with the
 glass components  of  the impinger train,
 the new recirculating (RC) train was con-
 structed  of  Teflon.  Conventional  glass
 impingers were used for the nitric acid
 and silica gel impingers.  A schematic of
 this recirculating sample train is presented
 in Figure 1.
    Following the development  of the  RC
 sampling  train,  laboratory  studies were
 conducted to select the most suitable col-
 lection reagent. Several series of  labora-
 tory and field studies were conducted. To
 trace the chromium during the experimen-
 tal procedures, a  radioactively labeled
 chromium isotope,  (51Cr(VI)) was  em-
 ployed.  This radioisotope has a  half-life
 of 27.7 days, which provides ample analy-
 sis time yet relatively fast disposal.  The
 isotope is also  available with high specific
 activity (high radioactivity) from a minute
 concentration of Cr(VI)  which is  not de-
 tectable by the ion chromatographic tech-
 nique.
    Employing this  radioisotope,  the  first
 series of laboratory studies was conducted
 and  based on the results of the study,
 isopropyl alcohol/sodium hydroxide (I PA/
  NaOH)  solution was selected for  field
  evaluation.
    Following field tests of the IPA/NaOH
  reagent and analytical difficulties associ-
  ated with analyzing the samples collected
in  this reagent, a second series of test
were conducted to evaluate other reagents.
In  this series of test, the  NaOH reagent
was found to be acceptable for preventing
conversion of Cr(VI).
  A third laboratory experiment was con-
ducted when it was discovered that the
effects of dissolved gases, which can bring
about the  reduction of Cr(VI),  could  be
removed by purging the sample train with
nitrogen following the test  run.
   The newly  design RC  sampling train
does not include  a filter. Paniculate mat-
ter is collected in the impinger  portion of
the sampling train during  sample collec-
tion. The presence of this particulate mat-
ter can generate  a positive  or negative
bias in Cr(VI) determinations.  Because of
the  potential  conversion  an immediate
post-run filtration  was conducted.
   Finally, field evaluations to compare the
new RC sampling train with the previous
impinger train were conducted.  Two field
tests were  performed at a cooling tower
facility. In both tests, the RC train and the
Method  13-type  train were  operated si-
multaneously.
   During the  initial  field test, four collo-
cated trains (two RC and two Method 13-
type) were operated at two separate loca-
tions. This test was conducted to com-
 pare the conversion percentages for each
type of train.
   The second field  test was designed to
 determine  the extent of conversion of
 Cr(VI) to Cr(lll) in the RC train. The ra-
 dioactive tracer, 51Cr(VI), was added to the
 impinger reagent prior to sampling.  The
 isotope  would be  exposed  to the same
 conditions  as the native  Cr(VI) collected
 from  the cooling  tower.  If  any 51Cr(VI)
 converted to  Cr(lll) during sampling then
 the train  would most likely be responsible
 for the conversion.        j
    In conjunction with efforts to develop
 procedures for sampling  and analysis  of
 chromium and nickel species from sewage
 sludge incinerators, another field study was
 conducted. Two types of sewage sludge
 incinerators were visited,  a multiple-hearth
 facility and a fluidized bed facility. Chro-
 mium determinations were difficult at these
 facilities due to  the high organic content
 of the effluent stream.
    The final study was an emissions field
 test performed at a hazardous waste in-
 cinerator.  The facility included a rotary
 kiln, secondary combustion  chamber,
 electrostatic  preciprtator  and packed col-
  umn scrubber.  The  procedures followed
 were those of the current "Draft Method
 for Determination of Cr(VI)  at Stationary
  Sources."
    For  developmental  purposes, the
  impinger reagent was again spiked with

-------
the radioisotope 51Cr(VI). The radioisotope
data was used to determine recovery effi-
ciency of the  method and the amount of
conversion that occurred in the sampling
train.

Results and Discussion
   The  original  hexavalent  chromium
method was limited to stationary sources
with filterable dry emissions. Also, the limit
of detection for the colorimetric technique
was determined to be 0.1 ppmv,  but the
concentration  of the samples had to be
above 10 ppmv due  to a series  of  dilu-
tions  required  during sample preparation.
When the test method was evaluated at
the three facilities mentioned earlier, it was
assumed that trivalent and hexavalent
chromium were collected on the.filter and
in the probe rinse in the  same ratio as
emitted from the stack. Later testing re-
vealed  that collection procedures  can
cause changes in the  valence state of the
chromium compound.
   To compare the new Method  13-type
sampling procedures  with the Method 5
sampling procedures  12 paired test runs
were  performed at two separate locations
of a  chrome  plating  facility.  The data
indicated that the dry filter method  re-
sulted in values 10 to 25  percent lower
than the Cr(VI) values obtained from the
impinger trains.  At this time, the  Method
5-type sampling procedures for collecting
chromium were deemed unacceptable.
   The Method 13 evaluations at chromium
plating facilities indicated that, in almost
all cases, the  amount of Cr(VI) collected
appeared to be over 80 percent of the
total catch. Trivalent chromium however,
was determined as the difference between
total  chromium and  Cr(VI).   Based on
these results  the  Method  13-type sam-
pling techniques were acceptable for the
determination of chromium.  This  type  of
sampling train corrected  some  of  the
problems associated  with  chromium de-
terminations at facilities  with  effluent
streams containing mist or aerosols.  The
question  of chromium conversion re-
mained.
  The first set of Method  13-type data
obtained at a cooling tower resulted  in
highly variable data.   The  restrictions  of
the analytical detection limits coupled with
the use of deionized water as the collec-
tion media rather  than a  basic solution
may have contributed to the variable re-
sults.  Possible conversion in the sampling
train during sampling may have also added
to biased results.
  At the facility hosting the second series
of cooling tower  tests, as much as  90
percent of  the chromium  collected was
trivalent. The chromium in the recirculating
cooling water at the facility was typically
99 percent Cr(VI).  These data lead to the
conclusion that conversion of Cr(VI) to
Cr(lll) was occurring in the cooling tower,
in the Method  13-type sampling train, or
in both.  This conversion  phenomenon
and the inability to directly analyzed for
Cr(VI) in low concentration levels  were
possibly the key  factors  in  the Cr(VI)
method development studies.
   Finally, an analytical method was  iden-
tified for direct low-level Cr(VI) analyses.
The limit of detection for measurement of
Cr(VI) using an ion chromatographic post
column reaction (IC/PCR) system was de-
termined to be 0.16 parts per billion (ppb),
with a quantifiable  limit of 0.5 ppb. When
preconcentration was employed, the limit
of detection  was  lowered to  0.05  ppb.
The upper range of detection without dilu-
tion  of the samples was determined  to be
1 ppm.
   The IC/PCR was linear over two orders
of magnitude! Precision, in terms of rela-
tive  standard deviation, was 5.2 percent
based on analysis  of 10 samples. Accu-
racy, determined by analysis of a suitably
diluted  EPA  audit  sample averaged 6.7
percent for 7 analyses over a  one month
period.   With the addition of an insitu
preconcentration technique it was deter-
mined that up to  30 mL  of  a  0.5 ppb
standard solution could be loaded on the
preconcentration column before significant
breakthrough occurred. With the injection
of a 20 ml sample, the sensitivity of the
technique  was increased over 60-fold,
yielding a  limit of quantification of less
than  100 ppt. Accuracy at this  level, in
terms of percent error, was determined to
be ± 9.5 percent.
   Laboratory studies conducted to select
the most suitable collection  reagent yielded
data which  indicated  that an  IPA/NaOH
solution would be the most effective col-
lection  media.  However,  the  anion ex-
change column used  in sample analysis
was not designed for use  with organic
compounds and the  capacity of the col-
umn was decreased over the course of
the sample analyses.  Also, the IPA was
evaporating at extremely rapid rates dur-
ing field sampling, thus resulting in loss of
impinger solution before the end of the
sample  run.
   In the second series of tests, NaOH
was  found to be acceptable. In two sepa-
rate  test  runs, recovery  of Cr(VI)  was
above 97 percent.
  The third laboratory test conducted in-
cluded the use of a posttest nitrogen purge.
Sodium hydroxide  and sodium bicarbon-
ate reagents had  favorable results  with
over 90 percent Cr(VI) recovery. As shown
in  Table 1, these  data indicate that the
 trains purged with nitrogen have a higher
 final pH than those not purged. The purge
 helps to reduce dissolved gases in the
 collected sample which may lead to oxi-
 dation of the Cr(VI) ion.
   Results from the initial field test of the
 new RC train (compared with the Method
 13-type train) indicated that conversion
 was  still occurring in  either the cooling
 tower or the sample trains. The RC train,
 however,  did show  an average  conver-
 sion  20 percent  less  than  that  of the
 Method 13-type train.
   The data collected from the second field
 evaluation of the RC train  revealed Cr(VI)
 to Cr(lll) conversions of 71 percent for the
 RC train and 81  percent for the  Method
 13-type train. The probe  of  the  Method
 13-type train was recovered separately
 and revealed conversions of 88 percent.
 (Conversion of Cr(VI) to Cr(lll) was deter-
 mined by ratios of Cr(VI) to total chro-
 mium.)  Following the cooling tower tests,
 all further studies were conducted only
 using the RC sampling system.
   Results of testing conducted at the
 sewage sludge incinerator indicated that
 this  method  may  not  be  acceptable at
 facilities with high  organic content.  Con-
 version of the chromium was as  high  as
 45 percent at one  of the facilities.  Analy-
 sis of inlet sample was impossible due to
 loss of column capacity.
   The final  field study, at a hazardous
 waste incinerator, was the first field test to
 indicate essentially no sample bias from
 the sampling procedures. The radioactive
 data  indicated that  100 percent  of the
 radioactive spike was accounted for when
 all components of the train were collected.
 The  impinger solution however, only ac-
 counted for 75 percent of the total.
   Analysis of the filter digestion solutions
 and  1C eluant indicated that  only 1 per-
 cent of the Cr(VI) spiked into the train was
 reduced during sampling.
   Hexavalent chromium and total chro-
 mium determinations were made for each
 sampling train, and means and standard
 deviations were  calculated for each run.
 The results are shown in Table 2.
  The variance  of the  Cr(VI) measure-
 ments were  tested using the  Bartlett test
 and  was found to be homogeneous
throughout the entire six runs. Therefore,
 it was possible to calculate standard devia-
tions  from the combined  variances that
were more representative of the data than
the standard deviation  of any run. Thus,
the standard deviations of the Cr(VI) mea-
surements for Runs 1-3 and 4-6 were
 0.9 and 9.5  u.g/dscm,  respectively. The
value for the total chromium measurements
was 27 ng/dscm.

-------
Ttbto 1, Media Collodion Experiment Using Nitrogen Purge
        Solution
Initial
   Posttest
(without purge)
  Posttest
(with purge)
  Ammonium acetate

        pH Level

        Average (% )Conversion

  Sodium Bicarbonate

        pH Level

        Average (%)Conversion

  Sodium hydroxide

        pH Level

        Average (%)Conversion

  Sodium acetate

        pH Level

        Average (%)Conversion
 13
     5.5

   -22.12



     8.0

     6.59



     8.0

    16.71



     5.5

     100
   6.00

 -10.49



   9.00

   1.00



   9.00

   9.70



   6.00

   100
  Test results from this field evaluation
Indicated that the RC train performed ad-
equately.  The collection efficiency of the
Impingers was improved from 75 percent
to 95+ percent with the addition of a fourth
deionized water rinse.

Conclusions and
Recommendations
  The major goals of the methods devel-
opment program were (1) to develop the
sampling procedures that do not change
the oxidation state  of chromium during
sampling  and (2) to identify a readily
available analytical technique for measur-
ing low-concentration  levels of Cr(VI).
These goals have been achieved.
  Many years of challenging work have
resulted in a draft test method  for chro-
mium that does not  affect the valence
state  of the compound as rt enters the
sample train, and the identification of an
analytical technique with the  ability to
analyze concentrations of Cr(VI) in the
ppt range.
  Several major discoveries were  made
during the development of the draft
method:
     It was determined that conversion of
     Cr(Vl) to Cr(lll) was occurring in the
            sample collection system.  Until this
            sample collection  bias  was  elimi-
            nated, no accurate data could be
            obtained.
            When an  investigation of a surro-
            gate compound for chromium was
            evaluated,  it was  discovered that
            emissions ratios and cooling  tower
            water ratios were not the same. This
            assumption  had  been  applied  to
            chromium for  several earlier cool-
            ing tower tests. Calculating a value
            for Cr(VI) was no longer possible
            based on these assumptions. A di-
            rect analysis technique was neces-
            sary.
            Poor precision between sampling
            trains  during the  test evaluations
            generated questions about the re-
            covery process.   It  had been  as-
            sumed that the collected chromium
            was water soluble.  In truth, the vari-
            ability between sampling runs was
            caused in part by the poor recovery
            of insoluble chromium. An acid rinse
            was added to  remove the insoluble
            chromium from the glassware.
            A recirculating sample train was de-
            veloped to "rinse" the sample  probe
     continuously during sample collec-
     tion.  This design allowed immediate
     contact of the stack gas  with the
     impinger reagents.
     A low-level analytical technique for
     analyzing  Cr(VI) was utilized. Ion
     chromatography with a post column
     reaction (IC/PCR) allowed detection
     of Cr(VI) in the ppt range. The avail-
     ability of this  technique increased
     the variety of sources to which the
     sampling method could be applied.
     The  use  of  a radioactive tracer
     greatly increased knowledge of the
     behavior of chromium in the  sam-
     pling train.  For the first time, the
     chromium could   be  "followed"
     through the collection procedure.
     Use of the tracer ultimately allowed
     accurate determination of conversion
     caused by sampling.
     A study of the  effects of sulfur diox-
     ide (SO2) on Cr(VI) was conducted.
     This  study generated  information
     which (1)  led  to better choices of
     collection media and (2) emphasized
     the  need  to remove SO2from the
     collected sample.
     A nitrogen purge following sample
     collection was added to the method.
     The  nitrogen  purge removed dis-
     solved gases  that may  react  with
     chromium. The solutions were then
     recovered and filtered,  which re-
     moved insoluble Cr(NI) compounds
     that may be slowly oxidized.
  Many of the discoveries mentioned
above may have invalidated data that had
been collected  prior to correction of the
sampling or analytical problems. Thus ex-
cept for  data obtained using the  draft
method, any data should be regarded with
caution.
  Further studies to optimize and confirm
the validity of this method should be con-
ducted:
     Because the analytical technique (IC/
     PCR) of this  draft method is not
     commonly available to most labora-
     tories, alternative techniques would
     be desirable.  It is possible that a
     preconcentration technique, coupled
     with colorimetric spectrophotometric
     analysis, could be  an alternative to
     IC/PCR, although  no studies  have
     been conducted to date.
     Comparisons of a glass recirculating
     sample train with the Teflon RC train
     should be conducted. Some data has
     been generated to indicate that glass
     components are not acceptable when

-------
 Table 2.  Measurement of Cr(VI) from Hazardous Waste Incinerator


 Condition 1. Aqueous Cr+3 fed into process.
                Condition 2. Aqueous Cr+6 fed into process.
Isokinetic Moisture Total Total
Sampling Content Cr+6 Chromium
Sample Rate fag/dscm) (\ig/dscm)
Run Train (%) (%)
1 A 97.9 19.2 0.357 116.259
B 100.3 21.8 0.415 187.124
C 95.4 21.7 0.367 153.084
D 100.1 21.9 0.179 110.081
Average 21.2 0.330 141.637
RSD 6.1% 31.4% 25.3%
2 A No results
B No results
C 98.8 23.0 0.305 138.288
D 98.2 21.7 0.355 87.611
Average 22.4 0.330 112.950
RSD 3.4% 8.8% 25.9%
3 A 99.7 23.2 0.410 42.196
B 95.2 23.3 0.440 47.199
C 93.3 22.7 0.575 48.737
D No results
Average 23.1 0.475 46.044
RSD 1.4% 17.5% 7.0%

^^^\
// Teflon — * i—
// r- Lines
^ 	 Aspirator \ ^\
Wo"/o ^ ^ ^ V 'VV'
^\r-^i^ BjJ

£- Recirculating n \5°'
Liquid °'1NK
Cr+6/
Total
Chromium
0.3%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
24.7%
0.2%
0.4%
0.3%
35.5%
1.0%
0.9%
1.2%
1.1%
11.4%

Isokinetic Moisture Total Total Cr+6/
Sampling Content Cr+6 Chromium Total
Sample Rate fag/dscm) fog/dscm) Chromium
Run Train (%) (%)
4 A 105.7 21.8 89.828 114.150 78.7%
B 102.8 22.5 107.569 132.319 81.3%
C 99.2 23.3 106.129 126.789 83.7%
D 103.6 23.4 120.440 127.646 94.4%
Average 22.8 105.991 125.226 84.5%
RSD 3.5% 11.8% 6.2% 8.1%
5 A 104.6 24.1 76.618 117.440 65.2%
B 106.0 25.4 76.666 00.136 76.6%
C 102.6 24.4 74.534 160.521 46.4%
D 103.8 23.7 76.729 99.606 77.0%
Average 24.4 76.137 119.426 64.2%
RSD 3.0% 1.4% 24.0% 22.3%
6 A 102.8 20.6 43.426 56.117 77.4%
B 91.1 24.7 57.280 129.892 44.1%
C 95.0 24.0 50.419 59.788 84.3%
D 92.5 24.1 52.977 72.414 73.2%
Average 23.4 51.025 79.553 71.8%
RSD 8.0% 11.4% 43.1% 24.7%

Glass Impinger __
Teflon Impingers (7~~}\ I
p u nr i r f i f . — -
nl 75m
'OH 0.1NK(
Wi
IT! I IlP
f *'"" 75 ml * Empty Silica
OH 0.1NKOH Gel
tier and Ice Bath



5-type
Meterbox
J
I
(
Figure 1. Schematic of recirculating sampling system.
     quantifying  Cr(V\); however, glass
     coupled  with  recirculation  has not
     yet been investigated.
     Laboratory studies should  be con-
     ducted to document that C-flex tub-
ing does  not  cause oxidation of
Cr(VI). Because this  material is not
inert,  it is  possible that off-gassing
during heating releases compounds
that could convert the chromium.
And evaluations are needed if the
draft method is to be  applied at lo-
cations with  temperatures above
400°F and with high SO2 concentra-
tions.
                                                                             •&V.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992 - 648-080/40161

-------

-------

-------
   Anna C. Carver is with Entropy Environmentalists, Inc. Huntington Beach, CA 92649
   Joseph E Knoll is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
   The  complete report, entitled "Laboratory and  Field Evaluations of a Methodology for
     DeterminingHexavalent Chromium Emissions from Stationary Sources, "(Order No. PB92-
     101336AS; Cost: $26.00 (subject to change) will be available only from:
           National Technical Information Service
           5285 Port Royal Road
           Springfield, VA 22161
           Telephone: 703-487-4650
   The EPA Project Off her can be contacted at:
           Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory
           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
           Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental
Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
         EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/600/S3-91/052

-------